I enjoyed reading “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century,” and Putnam’s skeptical take on immigration and how cultural diversity can branch out and express itself in really different ways. Though it is nice to read about an extensively positive outlook on immigration and diversity, Putnam’s meticulous divisions, namely in the form of his scrutiny regarding “contact theory vs. conflict theory”, came to me as very realistic and sensible criticisms on how the influx of mass cultural variety in one area can be interpreted.
Contact theory is the more recent and progressive one of the two, and it suggests that diversity lowers ethnocentrism by promoting “out-group solidarity” (144). Conflict theory, in contact, suggests that diversity promotes “out-group distrust and in-group solidary” (142). Essentially, those who support contact theory believe that cultural diversity encourages people to mix well with those outside their culture and in consequence, results in a cooperative mix of different ethnicities. Those who support conflict theory believe that the more people are exposed to different backgrounds, the more they are drawn to their own.
Putnam elaborates on social networks and community and how important such environments are for new immigrants. Based on his studies and conclusions, he seems to conclude, from various statistics and data collection, that diversity promotes isolation and a distrust of neighbors.
I personally think that both theories are plausible and such phenomena and ultimate aftereffects depend almost entirely on the culture, as well as individual people within that culture. Even within my own family, I have relatives who’ve come here from Bangladesh that have been more than eager to mix with those of other cultures and learn the ways of life outside the Bengali culture. Likewise, I also have relatives who intractably adhere to their own traditions, with no interest to live a life outside of what they’ve always known.
I found Putnam’s comprehensive approach to this issue, by methodically describing both viewpoints, to be very effective in sending a message to the reader, as well as allowing the reader to formulate his or her own opinion. He presents varying standpoints without partially shoving any one perspective down our throats.
– Nadera Rahman
