The biology of social relationships… The social is physical. Without physical contact, social regulation mostly doesn't work. Google advertises the lie of deep, meaningful connections via technology. It's bogus but people take it at face value, because they mistake social connections for the short term advantages of "networking" with people in their profession.
But real social connectedness is multi-level and it doesn't exist for self-advancement but to defend a physical community. The biology is that of a superorganism. That it is a physical community with a bounded geography is the biggest truth our technocrat elite can't see (it's anathema to multiculturalism, globalism, everything they hold dear).
I keep pushing the idea of looking at man as just another animal because I think it is our biological limitations that create these physical boundaries, that set the rules that result in tradition-based societies. It extends from our deepest level of cognition and social "processing", so it's not a problem we can technocratically solve. There's no sign that the managerialist/globalist power structure is capable of accepting this.
My guess is that Calhoun was right--our last chance to do something about our scale was around the early 80s. Since then, rapidly growing technological complexity, the end of the cold war, people movement, and immigration have completely obliterated what was left of healthy organic communities. Now we have generations that have never known anything but atomization. It's going to be difficult to make them see that the key problems are not "marriage equality" or bullying or whatever the latest stupid fad is, but the loss of coherent physical communities (the anti-Internet). They drink the Google koolaid and actually think that linking to their friends on Facebook is a form of social interaction. No, it's a form of social gaming. It bears as much resemblance to real social interaction as my playing Call of Duty does to serving in Afghanistan.
More at My Posting Career.