Thoughts on Individualism

America runs on the idea of individualism, freedom for its citizens. However, what does this mean for a culture? Individualism, as seen in any student government textbook, sets forth the idea that what is best for the individual will ultimately be best for the whole. Our founding fathers wrote the Constitution to preserve this right, to avoid an oppressive power that might dictate personal freedom. Ayn Rand develops this view in Anthem, the quest for individualism, I, after the main character battles collectivism. 

Our system of capitalism that has been America's foundation since its birth is almost invariably beneficial. We know, from history, that the noble concept of socialism does not work for a country. We saw this in the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and the transition of Asian markets to a free enterprise system. 

What I want to talk about is the morale behind individualism, which has been the backbone and main justification for almost all our economic and political systems. It would take an additional essay to argue the role of morality in economics and politics, but I believe it should and does play a substantial role in the socioeconomic realm. 

Currently, the US is suffering from one of the largest wealth gaps ever, perhaps unprecedented. Most have probably heard the "1%" speech, and it's true. Capitalism, backed by individualism, has allowed some to become extremely wealthy, while others not so much. Personally, I think this is great. In the US, if you work hard, and play the system right, you can make a lot of money. That is what capitalism's job is, and it does it well. However, we take the notion too far, and burn into out minds, "Every man for himself." 

I myself come from a wealthy family, my father owns his own wholesale business. I am a testament to America's dream. The interests of big companies, big names, has become dominating though. Millions of people are living in poverty unheard of. Meanwhile, the wealthy have their hands on the controls, influencing the system to maximize their own wealth. This means tax loopholes, subsidizing companies to foreign countries, pushing for legislation that will allow them to do as little as possible for the greater good. Socialism is not the answer, but individualism has become skewed. It should not mean, "For the greater me, in my best interests." It should mean having the freedom to advocate for yourself, and in that, the obligation to follow the rules and give what is due. 

Once you acquire the world's money and can say with truth, "I am truly free of others' burden," are you actually happy? 

Reviews

[Zeitgeist Manifesto]

This is a subject that could lead to a book of its own, in terms of how it is received. Economics are somewhat driven by morality. Every company has to have goals. Those goals are created by morality and so are our laws. I can see how you take the two and make them intersect. The problem that this piece creates for some readers is that one has to make a serious decision about what direction their moral compass is going to go in. If that kind of possible change is big enough to make anyone uncomfortable, then you have done your job here. Hopefully we can find a balance somewhere at these crossroads. That's all I have to say about your piece. With this subject, a long conversation could easily end with us throwing punches. lol. Nice work. I like the balance of intellect and emotion.

[Madeline]

I agree with you, and I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that your moral compass is something that can be vulnerable sometimes. I think it takes a lot of growing up and maturing to figure out your direction.

[Wolfwind]

I would say that one can't confuse Capitalism with Democracy, one is a political system, the other is a financial ideology. One can say that Communism doesn't work, as proven by the fall of the USSR and the trends of the asian country to become more lienient in their politics. Yet, Socialism, is not Communism, nor is it Democracy. There are a few places that have seen Socialism work, when mixed with certain Democratic and Capitalistic traits. No system is perfect in my opinion, they are all flawed to a degree.

Wouldn't it be better to use a term such as individual freedom, verses individualism? I think the simple form of the term has a much broader meaning as it can include individual expression, which is a far removed from the actuall topic.

I'm curious as to the statement, "I am a testament to America's dream." Since it's seems to be based off of your comment about your fathers success, would it not be better to say that you are a result of that dream, which your father's business venture is part of?


Over all I kinda felt like you are trying to say that one needs to work for what they get, but at the same time, they have a responsibility to give back to those below, because without those below, one may never have earned the wealth one might by working hard. In other words, it's a cycle and the wealthy should be hording and causing the cycle to go out of balance.

[Madeline]

Yes, very interesting thank you for your comments. I am a "beneficiary" of the American dream, a witness standing close by that can see it at work in my father. That's what I meant. I can see what capitalism has allowed to happen for an individual who works hard, that is my father. And yes, I like your thoughts on "individual freedom," it is a different topic but it's certainly a defining character of democracy that is wonderful. My main point was that I think it's wrong to assume a position of "me, and only me." People argue that they work so hard to acquire wealth, and that they should be able to do with it what they want. And this is true, this is individual freedom. But I think it's wrong to think in that sense, because there is a loss of compassion for fellow human beings and their well being. Wealth is great, but the way we look at it has become skewed and evolved over time to become more and more of an isolation of self from society and it's needs; maybe a little more selfish

[~Artemis~]

Wow, you were able to tackle such a complex and pressing issue with clarity, respect, and poignancy. Well done. I agree withe everything you say. I would like to add that socialist type policies, since they are difficult to implement, led to many people starving in China. It also requires severe limitation of personal liberties in order to function. I also agree that hating someone because of their wealth is extremely unfair and dangerous. However, you are right in saying that individualism does not me it's only about you. It should be the responsibility of those with wealth to help lift up other's around them. I believe in the American Dream, but I believe it requires charity, as well as hard work. Anyway, thank you for posting this! You have ideas that need to be heard.

[Madeline]

Thank you for reading! I love politics and economic theory, it's so interesting, so significant. I agree with you about the charity element, ideally everyone would be charitable with no welfare needed from and by the government, but that's in a utopian society! But charity is important nonetheless, and it needs to become part of our everyday thinking. Thank you again for taking the time to read, I love your comments!:))