I believe this is in line with "contact theory", the naive version of which Putnam's statistics seem to refute. Unsegregated areas usually have lower trust, at least in the short term.
But.
Categorizations change over time, and many lines that used to be important no longer are. So he holds out hope that the same blurring can occur to the lines that matter today.
He suggests that the formation of higher identity -- perhaps a civic nationalism like we see in Ukraine -- is the way forward. The main positive example he can point to that spans current lines, and not obsolete ones, is the Army, which arguably does just that. To a lesser extent, he also mentions the Catholic Church, which -- like Islam, I will add -- provides a higher identity that spans ethnicities.
I've heard some other authors make similar calls, e.g. Francis Fukuyama.
As a generality, I'm wary of leaning too heavily on a single author's philosophy, especially in social sciences. In that regard, I don't agree with everything Putnam puts forward.
But.
Categorizations change over time, and many lines that used to be important no longer are. So he holds out hope that the same blurring can occur to the lines that matter today.
He suggests that the formation of higher identity -- perhaps a civic nationalism like we see in Ukraine -- is the way forward. The main positive example he can point to that spans current lines, and not obsolete ones, is the Army, which arguably does just that. To a lesser extent, he also mentions the Catholic Church, which -- like Islam, I will add -- provides a higher identity that spans ethnicities.
I've heard some other authors make similar calls, e.g. Francis Fukuyama.