Isolated and alone

In the last third of the 20th century, various commentators began to express concerns about a phenomenon known as social atomization. The idea was that human beings throughout history had existed in a rich and satisfying web of relationships including families, churches, guilds, and local communities. In The Quest for Community, Robert Nisbet observed that the various associations that meaningfully connected people (such as church and family) were declining, while massive institutions that dominated individuals (such as corporations and governments) were growing in power and influence. The erosion of personal ties threatened social atomization that would leave people increasingly isolated. If Nisbet and others hoped to bring about change through their well-reasoned and masterfully crafted warnings, it appears now those arguments failed to counter the forces of modernity.

When Daniel Patrick Moynihan completed his famous report on the black family in the 1960s, it contained his deep concern over the fact that as many as a quarter of black children were being born to unmarried mothers. Moynihan’s worry now seems quaint by comparison. Today, we are near the point of having a majority of all births in the United States occurring outside of marriage. One might be tempted to assert that such concerns are purely moralistic, but the simple truth is that social statistics have long confirmed that children born to and raised by married parents perform far better as a group than their peers who do not share such benefits. These benefits constitute a kind of “social capital” that may be of greater benefit than the financial kind. A recent book even argued that traditional upbringing constitutes a kind of privilege.

While earlier concerns had to do with the impact of fatherlessness on children, there is a new story that demonstrates further unraveling of the social fabric. The University of Virginia sociologist Brad Wilcox and his co-author Alysse ElHage recently drew attention to a shocking new indicator of vast change in the lived experience of Americans. When I was born over five decades ago, approximately 54% of all Americans between 18 and 55 were married with children. Today, that number is a mere 32%. During the same period, the number of Americans between 18 and 55 who are neither married nor have children has nearly doubled from 20% to 38%.

As with concerns over the decline in the numbers of women bearing children in the bonds of wedlock, there may be a temptation to view the shift in gravity from households characterized by marriage and childbearing to those without either feature as a kind of sentimentalism or even anti-feminism. The potential ramifications, however, go far beyond mere issues of preference. Having children or not having them, getting married or remaining alone, these are not matters of taste as with choosing vanilla or chocolate ice cream. Such choices will meaningfully shape the contours not only of Americans’ personal lives, but also their political expectations.

When President Obama ran for a second term in 2012, his campaign famously included a web-friendly ad on “The Life of Julia.” Julia’s entire life is a story of partnership with government and notably includes no mention of a husband or marriage. Based on current trends, the campaign was probably more savvy in moving with the lives of Americans rather than trying to lead them somewhere. The more families decline and the more alone Americans are in their lives, the more they will naturally turn to government to care for them and to facilitate their life plans.

We already have a pretty good sense of the reality that government is not a good substitute for parents, siblings, churches, and tight-knit neighborhoods. But for the purposes of argument, let’s just imagine government is technocratic and efficient and largely achieves its stated goals. Even if we were able to manage all the outcomes, what kinds of lives can people look forward to? Large numbers will likely never marry nor have children. It would be one thing if these individuals were abstaining from marriage in pursuit of some noble goal such as ministry or service, but it seems likely that the changes are simply due to the increased isolation that makes dating apps indispensable.

Disconnected individuals will look for a partner. This is especially true of the women targeted by the “Life of Julia” logic pushed by political progressives. We will either find our support in families, churches, and local communities, or we will find it in a combination of government and consumerism. For decades now, the drift has been away from organic bonds and toward the succor of the comforts of state and capital (as Nisbet observed). We may end up as lonely people who conduct conversations with artificial intelligence partners tended by robots in our old age. That is the path of “kinlessness.” Better to go with the grain of Scripture to find husbands and wives and to be fruitful and multiply.