..
I'm going to disagree on several counts, summarized as this:
1. The term "mechanical society" is actually being used opposite its real meaning. In classic sociology the term "mechanical" is used for older, more traditional tribal societies in which the connections between individuals were comparable to a "well-oiled machine", always working cyclically and never growing.
"Organic Society" refers to the bureaucratic society we've been moving toward for the last couple centuries. In an organic society, institutions act as organs do in the human body with specialized tasks.
My memory is lousy with details. I belive this was Durkheim's work... but it could have been Weber.
2. The shift you are complaining about is not related to religion nor is it comp[letely related to the shift in the mode of society from "mechanical" to "organic" (which is for most intents and purposes, a good thing). Rather it is partially based on a huge population that makes peoples' votes and voices seem less powerful, as well as the switch in capitalism toward a consumerist bend which focuses on creating "needs" rather than solving them. Such an economic shift, actually a philosophical shift, not only impairs our ability to progress, but it makes Americans more complacent and apathetic- while at the same time making them more angry about not getting things exactly their way.
3. We're not exactly slaves. We have the power to force the hands of corporations and the government... if only we can learn to compromise, form coalitions, and be active. Powerful institutions need only keep us divided in order to win (or to do things in secret... so we must call for transparency) to triumph. We who have only our votes have the burden of building coalitions... but it means that we have to give up the delusion that all of us will get exactly what we want.
On these things I agree:
1. There is a lot of power in the hands of large corporate entities... however, I think it's always been that way. Occasionally the people do something to assert dominance when they're really pissed off... but normally the elites have disproportional control.
2. I agree there is a problem with too much divorce (though often the woman is a victim of it as well... and it is way more common for the poor than the well-off). People often break their vows from the start... by entering into the institution of marriage lightly. I do not consider this to be a problem of religion or tradition. Rather it seems to be another manifestation of the ultra-individualist consumer culture. People are always shopping around for what's "best for them"... People no longer see marriage as a relationship of mutual benefit that requires compromise... but as a unique stage in the "individual's" life.
3. I agree community is falling apart. But I disagree that this is because of multiculturalism or lack of religion. It is another aspect of extreme individualism and consumerism. People do not see themselves as part of a larger society. They live under the delusion that everything they do and everything they get is their own work. The interdependence we have is largely invisible in the modern world and people are raised to be far too self-centered... regardless of religion (quite often people use their religious tags as another aspect of themselves... another reason to be self-righteous).
So I do agree that the loss of community is one of the great challenges of our modern age. But I think its time we put aside religious and cultural labels and start working for what is beneficial to all groups... even if that means we must compromise.
The biggest problem with the modern age is that we are unwilling to compromise. That is a double-edge sword. It makes us feel like we are more individualistic... but that's just a feeling. It's by this vanity we are "enslaved". It breaks us apart and keeps our minds diverted.
