Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Cultural theorists debate whether different moral languages or repertoires can explain why certain people participate in civic efforts that promote the public good while others do not. On the one hand, there are the so-called “communitarians,” most notably the Bellah group ([1985] 1996), who argue that languages grounded in the civic republican or the biblical tradition are more likely to mobilize people to get involved in civic engagement than individualist languages. On the other hand, scholars such as Lichertman (1995, 1996) argue that the language of “individualism” or “personalism” is sufficiently capable of motivating individuals to participate in public action. Analyzing survey data based on a national probability sample of Americans, we find that, controlling for other important factors associated with civic engagement, the language of civic responsibility (but not religious duty) is more likely to promote volunteer efforts in communities than the language of personal fulfillment.