The Radical Individualism Raging Throughout America

Wearing a piece of cloth over your face seems like a reasonable request in exchange for saving hundreds of thousands of lives. Not so in the U.S., where an effective coronavirus prevention tactic (wearing a mask) has become a point of political and sometimes deadly contention, dividing Americans into two distinct groups: those who rail against being told what to do by state and local governments and those willing to suffer a minor inconvenience for the greater good.

When the CDC recently updated their mask guidelines to include new data that shows masks protect the wearer from coronavirus, too, it was celebrated as an opportunity to increase mask use.

Katherine White, a professor in Consumer Insights, Prosocial Consumption, and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia was quoted in The Washington Post as believing these new guidelines are a step forward in messaging, especially for those more motivated by a responsibility to take care of themselves than others.

“Overall, this seems like a win in terms of messaging that would appeal to Republicans,” she said. This was because “conservatives are strongly motivated by a personal responsibility to care for themselves.”

Masks have emerged as a microcosm for the burgeoning discord between two factions of our great nation: collectivists and individualists. America was founded on personal freedoms that evolved into a pull yourself up by your bootstraps idea that anyone can succeed without the help of others if they work hard enough.

And while that individualistic, freedom-loving streak has long sustained a democratic society that values liberty and justice for most, some have begun to view our self-absorbed nature as teetering on self-destructive selfishness.

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, in a piece titled The Cult of Selfishness Is Killing America, espouses that too many Americans now subscribe to the positive power of greed and the innate belief that everyone is better off when they pursue their own self-interest.

Brené Brown, in a pre-election podcast interview with President-elect Joe Biden, proclaimed that America’s tombstone would be inscribed with the phrase, “Death by rugged individualism.”

This summer, groups in Nevada protested against the mask mandate.

BRIDGET BENNETT

//

Getty Images

It’s an issue she identified in a 2017 article for Fast Company, writing, “As members of a social species, we derive strength not from our rugged individualism, but from our collective ability to plan, communicate, and work together. Our neural, hormonal, and genetic makeup support interdependence over independence.”

It’s easy to demonize the worst aspects of individualism, but as in all things, balance is key.

How to achieve that balance, to encourage more concern for the greater good in a polarized society founded on an every-man-for-himself strategy, requires all of its citizens to understand the better angels and worse demons of human nature.

A primer on individualism vs. collectivism

Individualism is a social theory that elevates the freedom of the individual over the collective. While some have taken to flying the Gadsden flag and living the “don’t tread on me” ideal to the extreme, most individualistic societies value uniqueness, independence, self-sufficiency, and autonomy.

Individualistic cultures like the U.S. place individual rights and self-reliance above all else. We celebrate and honor personal achievements, often assuming that success comes chiefly to those who wanted and worked harder for it than others. Personal relationships and the needs of friends and family trump the needs of strangers.

Collectivism is a social theory that elevates the value of relationships and the connection between people – known or unknown – as guiding factors in individual identity. Collectivists adhere to a “we’re all in this together” mentality, believing that the needs of the group supersede the needs of each individual member. When one person wins, we all win. Collectivists generally value selflessness, working as a group to solve problems, always doing what’s best for society, and placing community above all else.

Thomas Talhelm, associate professor of Behavioral Science, University of Chicago, says that the enormous geographic footprint of the U.S. lends itself to the ideals of an individualistic society. Any time you have a scarce population where there are not as many cities, he says, people generally rely on themselves rather than institutions. Individualism is more prevalent in rural areas. Collectivism is more prevalent in urban areas.

“So that, for example, explains part of the differences within the United States,” he says. “You see higher rates of individualism in places like Montana and Wyoming than you do in Virginia or Pennsylvania, because you’ve got denser populations with institutions.”

In celebration of two competing ideas

Neither collectivism or individualism is inherently better, nor are the two ideas mutually exclusive, says Luis D. Medina, director, Collaborative on Aging Research and Multicultural Assessment, University of Houston. He refers to the U.S. as a W.E.I.R.D population – western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic – and while he says that as a whole the U.S. is characterized as an individualistic society, it’s an incomplete conclusion.

“When we draw generalizations regarding Americans, we’re usually talking about this very limited W.E.I.R.D group that is not representative of everyone,” he says. “You can still identify a lot of folks who are high on collectivism within the U.S.”

He points to diverse areas in major metropolitan areas such as Los Angeles, where pockets of collectivism still thrive.

Individualism in America has made masks seem like a way for the government to control its citizens instead of a tool to combat the spread of the coronavirus.

Education Images

//

Getty Images

“You go to East L.A. where you have a lot of folks of Chicano descent or Mexican-American descent or Central American descent, a lot of them are still holding on to some of the collectivist ideals that their family has passed on from generation to generation, despite being in the United States for a long time,” he says. Oftentimes it’s in regards to finances, such as offering short-term loans or gifts to relatives, or having everyone in the family regularly contribute to a pot of money and then, if anyone has an emergency, they can use that money no questions asked .

Both societies have their admirable qualities, says Talhelm, who admires collectivist societies for one of their most defining characteristics – the ability to rely on one another in times of need.

“One of the things that always sticks out to me when I’m in China is that among my close friends there, if I need anything, I don’t need to even say why I need it. I just tell them that I need something and it’s done,” he says. “In America, if somebody needs help from me, I want them to first explain the situation, explain to me why it’s necessary, and why they couldn’t solve this some way on their own.”

In individualistic cultures, Talhelm says communication tends to work a lot better, in large part due to the ability to confront conflict head-on. “One of the things I really like about living in the United States is that when conflict arises, we are good at resolving it, at least on a very micro, person-to-person level.”

Everything all the time

Collectivism and individualism aren’t fixed states of being. According to both Talhelm and Medina, we all have proclivities toward both depending on the setting and situation.

Politically, conservatives are often seen as individualists that long for a smaller government, fewer regulations, and lower taxes. Liberals generally are viewed as the collectivists, working to enact large, government-led programs and legislation – such as universal health care and environmental regulations – that benefit populations most in need.

In our personal lives, however, the small towns and rural areas in which the majority of conservatives live are the same places where neighbors and family members are more likely to come together to help one of their own in a time of crisis. In cities and suburbs, which trend more liberal politically, people are more likely to live at a distance from their families and less likely than their rural counterparts to know all of their neighbors, let alone help them in a time of need.

Collectivism and individualism aren’t fixed states of being.

Talhelm says it all boils down to how each society views relationships, and both social constructs have their pitfalls.

“Part of what makes societies collectivist is tight relationships,” he says, pointing to countries such as Japan, Korea, and India, where people often feel stuck in relationships when their social world is fixed and tight. “These are cultures where people are dependent on each other, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that they like each other.”

Talhelm says that these tight relationships in collectivist cultures often report liking their friends less than people in individualistic cultures. Part of what makes individualistic cultures so unique, he says, is the freedom to leave relationships we don’t find fulfilling.

“Individualistic societies offer freedom of movement in relationships. If you don’t like your friends, you leave them. If your friends don’t make you happy, you find new friends. It sounds shitty, but it makes things function better in a way.”

It’s something to which most people, he says, liberal and conservative, can agree is a positive.

Individualism in the time of coronavirus

The downside of individualism, however, can be a lack of concern for the “other” – those we don’t know and to whom we have no personal connection.

Perhaps no moment in modern history has made it clearer that America’s individualistic nature is out of balance that the coronavirus pandemic.

Anti-lockdown protests took place in more than 30 states as people demanded the freedom to live life as normal despite a deadly pandemic that has killed more than 240,000 Americans. Many states refused to issue mask mandates. Others, even some that initially shut down, opened bars, restaurants, and gyms while the pandemic raged on.

It’s not simply a matter of whether a country is individualistic or collectivistic that determines success in the battle against the pandemic.

Other individualistic countries, such as New Zealand and Iceland, performed remarkably well during Covid-19, enacting safety protocols, lockdowns, and virus testing and tracing that all but stopped the pandemic in its tracks. Many collectivist countries, such as Greece and Portugal, have begun to struggle as the pandemic shows no signs of slowing.

In America, if somebody needs help from me, I want them to first explain the situation, explain to me why it’s necessary, and why they couldn’t solve this some way on their own.

One stark difference detached from outcomes, according to Medina, is that most collectivist cultures – and even many individualistic ones – have been willing to go along with government and public health mandates to protect others.

“It’s funny,” laughs Medina, “because especially with the pandemic, collectivist cultures are laughing at the United States, because in collectivist cultures, when you are ill, you don’t want to make other people ill, so putting on a mask or staying home is what you do by default. Here in the U.S. we’re so individualistic that the idea of putting on a mask of being forced to stay home feels like a violation of our independence and our rights to be these independent individuals living within a society.”

Is balance possible?

Medina points to two moments in recent history in which our individualistic society came together in a collectivistic manner.

“After 9/11 in New York City, the way that the city pulled together was consistent with what we would expect a collectivist culture to do,” he says. “Here in Houston, after Hurricane Harvey, the city pulled together to ensure recovery for all of its citizens. I moved here two years ago, and I’ve seen that some of that still resonates with a lot of individuals today, but the notion is that when things got better, most communities reverted back to their individual default mode.”

It’s not simply a matter of whether a country is individualistic or collectivistic that determines success in the battle against the pandemic.

ThomasShanahan

//

Getty Images

Oftentimes, Talhelm says, that when it comes to the stark differences between collectivists and individualists, it all comes down to a difference of motivation. One study found that individualists and collectivists volunteered at almost the same rates, but individualists did so because they saw career-related potential while collectivists were more drawn to the identity of being a volunteer. Achieving balance, he says, may look more like finding that type of common ground despite inherent differences.

“I’m definitely open to the idea that humans have mindsets that we can get into or not,” Talhelm says. “I think at a cultural level, though, you kind of have to do one or the other.”

Medina agrees, but believes we should strive for balance.

“In the context of behavioral and social situations, balance in general, I think is easily defensible and justifiable,” he says. “The body seeks balance. In medicine, it’s either too much of something or too little of something, and in the end, it creates some sort of physiological disruption or problem. So, societally, if we were to use that same framework, I can see that a balance would be something that would help us progress.”

More important than balance, Talhelm says, is respect and understanding.

“I think we can and should strive to have the flexibility to understand and adapt to both ways of thinking,” he says.

If we can respect that others have different needs than our own, he says, even individualistic societies like the U.S. can achieve some level of concern for the greater good.

As coronavirus cases continue to soar to new and more dangerous heights, perhaps that concern and respect for each other can begin with everyone wearing a simple face mask.

Not because we have to, but because we care.

Matthew M. F. Miller is a freelance writer and author of Dad’s Guide to Pregnancy For Dummies. He is currently writing a weight loss book that tells the stories of people who have lost half their body weight and kept it off for more than 10 years.

Get Shondaland directly in your inbox: SUBSCRIBE TODAY