A Social Capitalist Take on the Gates/Crowley Incident

We talk a lot here at SCI about the value of knowing our neighbors. To suggest why crime rates are lower in neighborhoods where people know each other, I've often used the hypothetical example of seeing someone climb into the window in a home across the street--if we know our neighbors, we know whether to call the police or go help our neighbor get into his home. Now, in the incident with Professor Gates and Sergeant Crowley (no known relation!) we have an unfortunate example of what can happen when we don't know our neighbors.

With good reason, race has been the dominant theme in the dialog that has followed last week's incident, but I'd like to explore the neighborhood angle along with the racial dimensions. Let me start with the obvious point that this incident could have simply avoided had the person who called the police had known Professor Gates was a neighbor. We aren't talking about being over for regularly for butter or bagels here, but even having met a few times and exchanged hellos walking in the neighborhood would have done the trick. Simple, right? Hold on...

Professor Robert Putnam's work tells us that saying we should know our neighbors is not such a simple thing. In particular, his 2006 study on diversity and community reported the discomforting findings that in diverse neighborhoods, residents of all races tend to "hunker down" and participate less in all forms of community life. While diversity has many positive benefits, in the short-run it poses challenges to social capital, according to this study. The probability of Professor Gates knowing his neighbors is lower living in a diverse Cambridge neighborhood.

The reasons people tend to hunker down in diverse neighborhoods are complex; this Putnam study certainly generated its own swirl of debate. Some of the more thoughtful commentary on the Gates/Crowley episode have suggested that this situation be an opportunity to have a "national conversation about race". Unfortunately, we have had far too many incidents that have provided the "opportunity" for such conversations.

Recognizing that national conversations can too quickly backslide into vitriolic sound bites, let me suggest a more modest proposal. Let's have the incident prompt us to reflect on our own neighborhoods. If I saw someone trying to force their way into a home on my street, would I be able to tell if he's a neighbor or intruder? If I answer negatively, there's some work to be done. The good news is, it doesn't have to be hard work. It's summer time (at least that is the rumor, looking out at more cold rain!), a perfect time for getting out for a stroll in the neighborhood. Is there someone on the street you've nodded casually to a few times but never met? Pause this time, say something like, "Hi, I've passed by a few times but haven't taken the chance to say hello. I live a few houses down and I've admired your garden as I've walked by...". (commenting on yard/gardens/flowers with any neighbors you've seen out there working in the yard is a great conversation starter!)

Does your neighborhood have any standing traditions like a block party or neighborhood yard sale? If so, make a point of participating, and reaching out to meet people you don't know. If you don't already have such an event, consider working with a few neighbors to plan one. Do it any time you like of course, or consider organizing something around a standing national event such as National Neighborhood Day (Sept. 20) or Invite Your Neighbors to Dinner Day (a holiday in PA but encouraged anywhere!). The first link has a lot of helpful tips for organizing a neighborhood gathering.

Block parties and neighbors over for dinner are fun, but I want to come back around to the serious issue of race surrounding the recent controversy. Underlying Putnam's study is the real fact that we are uncomfortable with difference, that it's easier to spend time with people who are more like us--"birds of a feather". The growing diversity of our neighborhoods means that while the array of food at the neighborhood block party may be more interesting, the inclination of people to organize that gathering goes down a bit as neighborhoods evolve and become more diverse.

I'll leave it to others do more research on the underlying causes of "hunkering down" effect Putnam reports. A core premise at SCI is that there are things we as "Social Capitalists" can do proactively in our neighborhoods and communities to buck the trends that have us hunkering down. We can take the simple steps I've mentioned about reaching out to neighbors and organizing events. But as we take these steps, we should be aware of the issues of diversity and race that are wrapped up in the story of why we know our neighbors less today. Being a Social Capitalist means being aware of newcomers to the neighborhood who are not of the historic racial or ethnic majority of the neighborhood. Go out of your way to make sure these newcomers are welcomed, and encourage them to come to that block party. When they do come, be the connector who introduces the new neighbors to those that have been around longer.

I'd certainly welcome an authentic national conversation on race following this incident in Cambridge. But I'd settle for local initiatives to get to know our increasingly diverse neighbors.