Social capital is underrated

Few explicitly discuss how social capital is a big driver of inequality. I think that’s because this would require thinking about and creating new systems; far easier to throw out a proposal for a new tax or demand spending more money on an already-existing budget line.

It’s probably also because the importance of social capital is underrated. Consider the abstract from this paper however:

We argue that low levels of social capital are conducive to the electoral success of populist movements. Using a variety of data sources for the 2016 US Presidential election at the county and individual levels, we show that social capital, measured either by the density of memberships in civic, religious and sports organizations or by generalized trust, is significantly negatively correlated with the vote share and favorability rating of Donald Trump around the time of the election.

A key priority for Metasophism must be creating a high level of social capital. I think I partly deal with this issue in the chapters on Societal Identity, and the discussion on forming a new elite. And I will discuss it further in the final chapter on providing meaning for the individual.

What is the link to individual meaning? I suspect high trust causes high social capital (though there may be some causation in the other direction as well). But to trust other people, you must sense a high degree of commonality i.e. broadly aligned interests, pursuing a common mission, and parrticipation in similar rituals.