We all know that there is a tremendous impact on our culture from emerging social networks...yet older generations are largely absent from this sphere.
One application I use when discussing this impact is in the realm of workers' unions...my argument is, simply, that Facebook makes a continuous union entirely irrelevant. With real-time group updates, any employee can communicate en mass with all other employees; if there is a perceived abuse (lets say a contract violating staff meeting OMGrsh!!), the employee that feels strongly about it could contact all others and organize resistance against said staff meeting very quickly...and for *free.* This bypasses all need of and all use for union personnel which have classically been committed to doing said organizing for a living. Further, this decentralizes 'the union' to the point where it not only gets back to caring about the workers, it is composed entirely of small, voluntary efforts directly from professionally equal workers. The most recognizable flaw in that framework is human laziness and the will to $pay$ a bit to have someone else make your career decisions. Regardless, this is a small-scale example of the greater decentralization of American culture.
Our nation began as one focused as much as possible on decentralization of power and culture. As we "progressed," we happened upon a little guy named FDR and the trend was reversed until, as technology has progressed, we return to the upward course toward a generally decentralized culture (not government....in a democracy, political changes always follow cultural changes). We can use television as an illustration: in the 50's, you have 5 shows to watch at any given time; today you have (in my household) over 900. The difference isn't just the amount of channels, of course, its what is on: today's shows/songs/entertainment are much more tailored to specific demographics and lives where people will be most comfortable with them...this is at direct opposition to the beginning days of TV where, if you were to watch television, you had to accept culture you weren't used to...this socialized a more monolithic cultural unity.
Today, I don't have to watch MTV or other liberal stations. I can watch a Fraiser re-run every night, be entirely content and fully secure in my cultural identity. This disassociates me with Monica Conyers, Hank Williams Jr., Pierre from Montreal, Adolf from Germany, Abib from Saudi Arabia, etc. etc. With our type of selective data accessibility, we don't have to see outside our adopted norms nor do we have to even speak with people from our colleges.
My Blackberry Pearl allows me to just speak with Katelyn and a handful of pre-existing friends; if I choose, I don't ever have to 'make' friends again and it's not even necessary that I speak to my Laker peers. I can block all but an isolated group of peers from my Facebook StalkerFeed (a list of news on what your 'Friends' are doing). Effectively, we can cut ourselves off from any and all socialization beyond that which has already occurred...and we do.
As stated above, this is nothing new: geographically-based social isolation is in our American blood! The post-war rise of the 'sub-division,' small towns ('nuff said), pop-culture-famous neighborhoods in New York City, lifestyle based isolation (Saugatuck/Douglas), immigrant communites (Holland, Chinatown): these all have existed for hundreds of years and all are based around the cultural pluralism that existed at the Founding. Now, the current trend is nothing bad...you cant stop it, I cant stop it, and the government surely cant stop it.
The latter point destroys hope for a D.C. central government with anything above basic power: decentralization of culture MUST be followed by a return to the wells of democracy at the local and state levels. If you don't, you end up with the USSR's premiership in the Oval Office...someone (like Obama is now) who presses ideas based on the President's perceptions (which are vastly different than, say, mine) leading to totalitarian domination of segments of the population (i.e. what is typicalized as the the "white middle class" but is actually made up of all races, nationalities, religions, etc. It is the achievement class, a group centered around personal drive and capitalism, that is being targeted by this administration in favor of those Obama thinks inherently 'deserve' to be bettered.)
The threat is not that Obama is doing things "wrong" (we simply see them differently...the money is going away from us to those "deserving," but for Democrats, the money always comes from benevolent and kind government officials) but that he's being powerful, period. It's not right to force your norms and mores upon anybody, a decentralized system prevents this type of oppression. With Facebook generating 'artificial towns' and the economy being more and more online, we are shuffling to be with those we're comfortable with in settings of our liking. Socialism doesnt work because it overrides fundamental differences and dismantles productivity (See: France). The only sustainable answer is returning to localities/states, where government stays with people already on my Contact list, that think along the same lines as 'me,' and are right down the street/highway.