##Atomization and Social Capital##

The relationship between social atomization and social capital is something that hasn’t been so firmly established, if at all. Surely, at first glance they seem to be similar, almost exactly the same but they’re not. Atomization, in a sociological sense, is the breaking down of society into smaller pieces; in scientific terms to atomize something is to spray it, like gasoline into the cylinder of a car. Diffusion is a synonym to both uses.

Social capital, though, is a much slippery term. I think it is most succinctly defined as: the networks of relationships among people who live and work in a particular society, enabling that society to function effectively.

We have entered a burgeoning era in western society where there is less and less social capital needed between people for the society to continue to function. For example, most of us don’t need to trust a farmer to deliver food that isn’t poisoned because in the US we have the FDA which sets qualifications for producers to meet so that the food in the grocery store doesn’t harm anybody. There are numerous agencies and technologies that have the sole purpose of existing in order to lessen the amount of trust that we need in each other. I don’t think this is a bad evolution in society, to the contrary, I think it’s a net benefit for all involved.

Therefore, the declining amount of social capital needed in our society for it to function is good for our economic production and physical well-being (at least at face value, but that’s a topic for another time.) On the other hand, what this allows for is further societal atomization without any harmful effects to economic production and/or physical well-being. The danger instead is shifted to our personal lives. Belonging to a community that has no other interest other than getting together with people that have similar ideologies, the amount of people growing a family, public recreation, and many other pro-social activities are all declining.

The most recent development is in the workplace. Many workers have been operating remotely since the onset of the pandemic and the organizations they work for have been realizing that productivity has not been dramatically affected. Jack Dorsey recently announced that most Twitter employees would not be required to come into the office even after the pandemic slows, and in general the ability to work from home is being sold to us as a perk. But in the long run “Working from Home Post-Coronavirus Will Give Bosses Greater Control of Workers’ Lives” as mentioned by Luke Savage in his article of the same name as well as essentially abolish casual co-working socialization and further diminish social capital in the work place.

Frankly, we don’t need these social aspects in life to have our basic necessities met but it’s well known that most are beneficial, sometimes critical, for psychological growth and well-being.