Pronoun Troubles

Contrary to what you may think, this is not an article about Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck. Instead, it's about the concept of social capital.

"What is social capital?" I hear you, dear Reader. Social capital is the wealth that is generated from the relationships between people, those networks that enable society to work better, more fluidly.

A recent study looked at the relationship between the common use of pronouns and the social capital in a community. Its findings were intriguing enough for me to write a bit about it, and share how it might relate to the Baha'i writings.

The use of pronouns can tell us a lot about social perspectives. When the first person singular, "I", is used a lot more than the average, it shows a focus on the individual. When the first person plural, "we", becomes dominant in use, it shows a greater tendency towards awareness of the group, or the society.

Seems basic, right?

Well, this remarkable study I mentioned scoured the recent plethora of archives that have been put on the internet and studied just that issue. What they found really surprised me. (I'm sure it surprised others, too, but I can only speak for myself.)

What they noticed was that the use of "we" was prevalent in the US up until the late 1800s, when the use of "I" began to take over. The reasons and implications of this are numerous. For starters, this was the time of the so-called robber barons, who amassed tremendous wealth at the expense of the workers. There was also a general belief in social Darwinism, which held that we shouldn't help the poor, as that would just stave off the natural development of humanity. By letting the poor starve, they believed we were helping advance humanity. Crazy, right? "Let the poor starve and the average wealth goes up." "Let the sick die, and the stronger, healthier genes will win out." It totally overlooks that many advantages of diversity and interconnectedness. But hey, this was the US in the late 1800s. What do you expect?

As you can imagine, though, there were other reasonable people who saw the world differently. They understood that we need to arise to help others. They saw the value of community. And they began to write articles that focused more on the "we".

This is when social clubs, libraries, charities, and all sorts of other community groups really began to take off in great numbers. (Before you go there, yes, we had them before this, but the sheer numbers began to skyrocket at this point.) And you know what? They held out until the mid-1950s. This was when the number of people involved in these activities began to decline. By the 50s, in the US, joining Elks or Rotary, or hanging out at your local community centre began to be seen as uncool. Only nerd went to the library, or so the thinking went.

Interestingly enough, this is also the time when more and more companies began to look at ever-increasing profits. It was only the beginning, mind you, but it was starting.

As we move forward, we can see the number of references to the first person singular begin to jump at an alarming pace.

Oh, one more example. When they were advertising the polio vaccine in the 1950s, that heyday of communal social settings (racism within those settings aside), the ads all talked about helping "protect your neighbours" or "the children in your community". Contrast that to the many ads regarding Covid-19 vaccines, which mostly spoke about the dangers to yourself. You see the problem, right? "Help others" versus "you might get hurt". My, how things have changed.

Today, as you may have guessed, the use of "I" is significantly higher than it was even in the late 1800s. At this point I can just imagine the robot from Lost in Space swinging his arms wildly shouting out "Danger! Danger, Will Robinson." (The old series, not the new one.)

Anyways, more and more of us are becoming aware of the implications of this study, and doing what we can to shift the conversational style back to the "we".

Back around 1900 there was an awareness of the dangers of amassing this great wealth at the expense of others, thinking only about yourself and neglecting the community. More and more people wrote about the importance of community, began studying the benefits of a strong community, focused on the true meaning of social Darwinism that helps the whole community grow, instead of just a few select. After all, Darwinism is not, as commonly believed, survival of the fittest. It is the survival of the species best able to adapt, and community connection helps the whole society adapt more easily.

Today, we are seeing this shift once again.

While there is a significant portion of the population that rabidly believes in the supreme importance of the individual, even at the expense of others, there is a growing awareness of how dangerous this view is. More and more people are beginning to realize that social growth comes from a healthy balance between the rights of the individual, the rights of the society, and the rights of the institutions. And they see that the greatest challenge before us is to find that healthy balance.

There is a reason that the focus of the Baha'i community has moved from individual teaching to the  teaching of communities. As the entire community becomes aware of these teachings, overall conditions improve. As we learn how to work with and encourage each other, to help us all through our many problems and difficulties, the entire society will be on the rise.

But when we live in fear, and focus only on ourselves, then we weaken the bonds of society.

All of this to say that the statement reported by Howard Colby Ives (Portals to Freedom, page 71), now makes far more sense to me

"Any reference to the ego, ('Abdu'l-Baha) once remarked to a small group of the New York friends, any use of "I," "Me," "Mine," will in the future be considered as profanity.

Now I feel like I need to watch some Bug and Daffy cartoons just to lighten the mood a bit.