Individualism in the United States

Stephanie M. Walls

• Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781623563486
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Política y relaciones internacionales
• Subtopic: Gobierno estadounidense

Of the many ideas that inspired and shaped the American Founding Fathers' thought, individualism and a commitment to individual rights were primary among them. The American emphasis on the individual in politics and society and the protection he receives in the US Constitution established the United States as an ideological trailblazer in this regard. However the individualism that inspired the Founders, has transformed over time to reflect the changing economic and social landscape in the United States. Individualism in the United States provides a comprehensive introduction to the idea of individualism in American political development, and a well-grounded argument about the social and political implications of our current understanding of this alleged ideal.

Part one

The background

While the topic of individualism may seem straightforward, it is actually quite complex in its history, its meaning, and its application. The conclusion one arrives at about individualism derives in large part from one’s perception of the history of the individual, how the individual has been established and defended in life and in the literature, and how one is able to reconcile the individual with the world around him. Thus, my conclusion is based on my perception of all of these issues. Therefore, it is critical to give the reader a tour of the landscape as I see it so that we may speak the same language in the chapters ahead. In order to do this, we will look at the background of individualism from a number of angles. In Chapter 1, I introduce the concept of individualism and ideology, and differentiate these concepts from others that are closely related and sometimes confusing. Then, in Chapter 2, I establish some of the political theories that had a great impact on the American Founding Fathers when creating the political system we have in the United States. Finally, Chapter 3 contains a historical overview of the colonial era and what life was like for the individual during this time. This chapter is intended to establish how hospitable an environment the early United States was for the concept for individualism. These first three chapters lay the groundwork for the typology and transformation of individualism I will explain in Part 2.

Chapter ONE

Introduction to individualism

Chapter summary

The individual, individuality, and individualism are independent concepts, though the individual and individualism are far more linked than individuality and individualism. We understand individuality to mean the difference between one person and a group of people with regard to personal preferences and characteristics, that is, one person is entitled to be distinctive from the group. We understand individualism to mean a “theory of society” in which the well-being of individuals is an always prominent, usually primary, and often the only politically relevant value; and the value of things is largely consequent to their value for human individuals. This approach opens up a world of possibilities and problems, as it is uncertain what happens to individualism if individuals choose to value the group. Matters are further complicated when one considers the role of the state in promoting or restricting individual rights. While individualism has been conceptualized in many ways, the terms “negative” and “positive” aptly cover these variations and categorize them on the basis of intervention or nonintervention as a way of preserving the individual. These conceptions, together with a historical overview and three-pronged ideal-based framework, will aid the reader in understanding individualism in the United States.

Chapter objectives

1. 1 To become acquainted with the concept of individualism and understand how it relates to other “individual” words such as individuality.
2. 2 To begin consideration of the tensions within individualism and the competing schools of thought with regard to the individual.
3. 3 To explore ways in which the individual relates to society and the state.

The scholarship on individualism is as diverse and varying as the individuals who have created it. An acceptance of individuality and a belief in its promotion leads one to expect and desire this variance of thought, though it makes our job as student and scholar far more difficult. The topic of individualism has been evaluated through a number of lenses by members of varying disciplines, including psychology, sociology, philosophy,¹ and political science. Despite this variance, one theme is common: the concept of the individual self.

The individual self refers to the way each person identifies and defines himself or herself that is distinct from his or her membership in any group.² The acknowledgment that this self exists, as opposed to the collective or social self, is significant to establishing individualism as a viable social theory.³ We have to believe in the ability of an individual to exist, at least in theory, as an entity distinct from other individuals, groups, and institutions in his or her society in order to buy into individualism. Beyond that, we need not agree on much, and scholars have found many ways to disagree on how important this distinction is to individuals and how that self-perception affects individual expectations of the state and society.

For instance, what do we expect of the relationships among and between citizens? What is the natural tendency here? Are we naturally compassionate? Are we naturally selfish? What is in our own best interest? These answers are not nearly as clear cut, even among those who would agree that individual primacy is a natural condition.

The political discussion requires us to consider the individual in concert with others, and working toward the creation and maintenance of a functional state. We must determine what the needs of the individual are in this regard, and how best to meet those needs in the context of the society we live in. For example, does the ideal political system have a citizenry that serves its government or a government that serves its citizenry? Are individuals intelligent and reasonable enough to retain some inborn desire to control themselves and their destiny? Or are there others who are more capable of making these choices for them?⁴

From an American perspective, some things are clear regarding the relationship between the people and the state. American individualism promotes and protects the individual’s rights and abilities to control his or her own destiny free of unreasonable governmental intervention.⁵ It can also be consistent with the creation of a government, given that such a government reflects and protects those individual desires. Thomas Jefferson’s Lockean defense of revolution, which he documents in the Declaration of Independence, together with the Constitution’s commitment to a separation of powers and checks and balances, supports a founding commitment to protecting the individual from an oppressive government.

There are two main circumstances in which this discussion begins: in the course of the education of American-born children, or in the civic education of those wishing to become American citizens. In both cases, it appears that the topic of the individual comes up early and often. From a social standpoint, children are taught and encouraged to share, to be considerate, to think of the group. However, as their political socialization progresses, the emphasis in this realm focuses on the individual, what rights he or she has, how other people (especially the government) might deprive him or her of these rights, and what recourse he or she has in the event that this occurs. Likewise, when immigrants wish to become US citizens, confusing messages abound. On the one hand, the need to conform to the ideological unity of this country is stressed, along with the need for each person to reject other ideological perspectives. In accordance with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, applicants for citizenship are asked if they have been members of a communist party, and will be denied citizenship if they answer yes. On the other, people are taught that our society is oriented around the individual and not the group, and that it is constitutionally supportive of freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. The meaning of these freedoms can seem somewhat diluted when they are delivered in a rather limited ideological package. This new ideological orientation can be an adjustment for those favoring a more socialist or a more conservative perspective.

To illustrate these educational experiences, I need look no further than my bookshelf, which is replete with American government textbooks. In a sampling of American government textbooks, the subject of individualism is approached in a number of ways. Some approaches root their definition in founding intent, and some speak of it in modern terms. From a historical perspective, students are taught that “. . . Americans highly value the idea of individualism, a belief that goes back to the earliest days of our republic.”⁶ Individualism is defined as “a commitment to personal initiative, self-sufficiency, and material accumulation;”⁷ and as “a belief that one’s fate is (and ought to be) in one’s own hands, rather than the product of impersonal social and economic forces beyond one’s own control.”⁸

These approaches have a set of assumptions in common. First, they all believe that individualism is a core concept in a discussion of American political principles, and that American students need to understand the importance of autonomous individual action in American society. One textbook goes as far as to say that “no political value has been more widely held in the United States than individual liberty.”⁹ Another text lists individual freedom as a principle of American democracy and defines it as “the greatest amount of freedom possible without interfering with the rights of others.”¹⁰

A second assumption is that it requires protection from societal interests. One textbook teaches the student that individual liberty is preserved through a rejection of the whole, and that any “ideas, practices, and institutions that submerge individuals into a larger whole” serve to “deprive them of their dignity.”¹¹ Another uses the example of health insurance to demonstrate how individualistic tendencies lead Americans away from group-based decisions to problems: “Certainly, we Americans would like for everyone to have health insurance, but for the most part we do...