Warren reading

This may seem a bit off-base, but I am curious as to what role the internet and some of today's social networking tools (i.e., blogs, meetups, messageboards, etc.) could play in the IAF's structure, if any. This book was obviously written before the rise of netroots activism, and my guess is that Warren would view such interactions as the domain of small groups, but it seems that there is more potential in them to restore the community foundations for democracy than the types of traditional, location-based small groups that he described. (Just think of the ability of the netroots, working with local groups, to mobilize over 20,000 attendees at last Friday's rally for Barack Obama, not to mention many churches and schools have their own web sites and/or blogs now.)

It is even possible that the internet may be able to help with the problem of isolation that many organizers face, as described on p. 86 and 97, by providing a way for organizers to daily interaction without having to travel long distances. (This is not to take away from the benefits of the seminars, but even some of the seminars could be web-based, so that people who can't make it in person can view them later.) What do you all think? (I'm curious, because I participate in several netroots-based groups and I'm interested in the role that they can play in the type of community activism that we've been talking about.)

I am also wondering wheter part of the reason why citizens have abandoned traditionl community institutions is due to problems with the institutions themselves. For example, the churches, with the problem of pedophile priests, and the very unsatisfactory way that the Vatican and the local bishops dealt with the problem. Not to mention the rise of so-called prosperity Christianity and megachurches, which one can argue, create communities that are, according to Warren's definition, "very isolated, inward-looking and even anti-democratic" (p. 19). Maybe the institutions are contributing to the problem, and need to be fixed themselves before they can be turned to as resources to restore the foundations for democracy. Until then, maybe disaffected persons like myself have no other recourse but to turn the support of small groups* (in my case, the blogs and meetup groups) for community attachments. They may not be lifelong nor a substitute for other attachments, but perhaps they are better than nothing.

*On page 18, Wuthnow defines small groups as being "narrowly constituted" and "seldom rooted in, or concerned about the well-being of any community. " Wurther further says on page 19, "In my view, neither small groups nor national social movements...have helped to restore the community foundations for democracy." This part really struck me, as I participate in a number of political blogs and meetup groups that would probably fit into the category of a small group. Warren mentions that if applied to a number of liberal litmus tests, the IAF would probably fail, yet hasn't he in effect created a litmus test of his own for what counts as legitimate community engagement?