Ooops...
.
No International Heral Tribune:

"It has become increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger.
But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings.

(...)

Putnam claims the US has experienced a pronounced decline in "social capital," a term he helped popularize. Social capital refers to the social networks -- whether friendships or religious congregations or neighborhood associations -- that he says are key indicators of civic well-being. When social capital is high, says Putnam, communities are better places to live. Neighborhoods are safer; people are healthier; and more citizens vote.
The results of his new study come from a survey Putnam directed among residents in 41 US communities, including Boston. Residents were sorted into the four principal categories used by the US Census: black, white, Hispanic, and Asian. They were asked how much they trusted their neighbors and those of each racial category, and questioned about a long list of civic attitudes and practices, including their views on local government, their involvement in community projects, and their friendships. What emerged in more diverse communities was a bleak picture of civic desolation, affecting everything from political engagement to the state of social ties. (...) Putnam realized, for instance, that more diverse communities tended to be larger, have greater income ranges, higher crime rates, and more mobility among their residents -- all factors that could depress social capital independent of any impact ethnic diversity might have."

De um ponto de vista pessoal, estas conclusões deixam-me tão desconfortável como ao seu autor. De um ponto de vista pessoal, todavia, sei que existem dois momentos:

(i) o momento científico de natureza descritiva, que é o que emerge nos resultados do estudo: no âmbito de certas variáveis, (A) - neste caso, maior diversidade social - leva a (B) - menor capital social;

(ii) o momento político, em que a comunidade deve decidir qual o caminho a adoptar e qual a melhor forma de o percorrer.

.

Mas também sei que existe um perigo: esquecer-mo-nos que não podem ser logicamente obtidas conclusões não resultantes das premissas; e que, como tal, que de proposições descritivas não pode logicamente resultar uma conclusão/proposição valorativa.

.

Ou seja, existe o perigo muito real de os resultados do estudo serem alvo de críticas de teor político, nomeadamente por via de ataques ad hominem (o que apenas o prestígio e as tendências políticas do seu autor terão impedido até agora); e que, por outro lado, as soluções políticas adoptadas e o objectivo pretendido podem vir a ser legitimados por via de pretensões de cientificidade que, na realidade, não têm - nem podem ter.

.

Apenas navegando com cautela redobrada por entre estes escolhos se podem conhecer os baixios que se escondem no caminho e escolher a melhor rota para uma sociedade melhor.