PEACE CORPS IN THE 21 ST CENTURY: A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

18ever less connected with one another and with collective life. We voted less, joined less,gave less, trusted less, invested less time in public affairs, and engaged less with ourfriends, our neighbors, and even our families. Our ‘we’ steadily shriveled.” 53However,our individual acts of service and kindness remain steady, which is a major point oftenoverlooked by Putnam.Additionally, Putnam found that fewer Americans are investing in “socialcapital,” which he defines as “social networks and norms of reciprocity betweencitizens.” 54Putnam argues that social capital is fundamental to a functional democraticsociety because social networks are a powerful asset in relationships among individualsand communities. 55Putnam argues that as our belief in social networks declines, we loseour sense of democratic responsibility. We, in turn, do not turn out to vote or join.Putnam is interested in what constitutes civic engagement based on quantifiableacts of service; however, many scholars opposed this claim, arguing instead that someacts of service are not considered within his definitional framework. Determining how tocount acts of service is in question. Often, individual acts of service are not considered apart of civic engagement because they are not seen as contributing to a community atlarge. However, this is limiting because, as we will see, individual acts of service oftendo contribute to the greater society. The question over how and what constitutes serviceis to be the dividing line in this complex debate about whether or not our civic society isin decline.Robert Asen argues that one of the major problems with Putnam’s theory ofdeclining citizenship is that it defines civic engagement in terms of specific acts. 56Putnam has based his research on asking people if they belong to a certain club or