Outsiders appear only too ready to offer their own diagnosis of Lebanon’s problems. Many are more than willing to propose solutions. Such talk usually centers on the failure of the country’s institutions to deliver services to the people. While there may be some truth in such commentaries, critics would sometimes do well to recognize that there is good as well as bad. Among the former is a Lebanese institution Westerners could, and should, learn from: the family.
Those who are quick to criticize should appreciate that there is much to envy here. Gurus of new social democratic political thinking in Europe and the United States trumpet the need to safeguard “social capital” ­ the stock of benefits that flow from trust, reciprocity and cooperation associated with social networks. Their concerns arise from a pervasive individualism that has come to dominate social organization in post-industrial societies. The degradation of the “community” has negative repercussions on standards of living; it diminishes one’s sense of “belonging.” By contrast, communities here ­ relations across sectarian divides aside ­ experience levels of trust and cooperation that are considerable. Social networks based around parents, sisters, brothers, cousins, aunts and uncles are stronger than those in Northern Europe and America.
Lebanon’s personal safety nets arising from such networks have a real bearing on people’s lives, though it is perhaps taken for granted. Petty crime, homelessness and anti-social behavior are virtually non-existent in Beirut, and the strong family unit and high levels of social capital must be at least partially to thank for this.
Perhaps the most important lesson the West could learn however, is how to treat one of the most marginalized groups in its societies: the elderly. Across Northern Europe old peoples’ homes are full to over-flowing. In 2001, there were 11,500 retirement homes registered in England. Countless families are simply “too busy” to care for their relatives, seemingly content with the idea that grandparents should spend their last years in glum surroundings, in the company of others who are waiting to die.
This remains an alien concept in Lebanon, where the responsibility of caring for the family is not shunned. Estimates suggest that the number of retirement homes does not exceed 150. In a majority of families, parents are cared for by children. And even if older generations do not live out their last years under the same roof, they live in close proximity, where they can be visited after work and on weekends. While the family structure in Lebanon has changed since the 1950s and 60s, with more women working, family solidarity has been preserved.
The success of the family as an institution in Lebanon is, of course, not without its problems. There is a sense in which “the family” functions too well here, to the extent that it impedes nation-building and the development of citizenship. The locus of political power in the country remains the family. And nepotism in the job market obscures many prospective workers from gaining the employment that they merit.
Notwithstanding such significant concerns, communities here should be mindful of societal structures that should be protected. As Lebanon faces change and economic development, and the pressures on time and resources that inevitably go with that, family solidarity must kept as a priority.

Ned Staple is a member of The Daily Star staff