I have come to the conclusion that a belief that is embodied in the American psyche that has harmed all of us, especially men, is the mythology of “rugged individualism.” Rugged individualism, in the context of U.S. history, is a philosophy emphasizing individual self-reliance, personal liberty, and the belief that individuals can succeed on their own with minimal government intervention. It was popularized by Herbert Hoover, who used the term to describe the spirit of America, where individuals are responsible for their own well-being and government plays a limited role in private and commercial affairs.
I certainly won’t dispute that self reliance and personal liberty are important values, however, extending these attributes to the notion that we succeed entirely on our own is both false and destructive. It leads to the self-serving philosophy of Social Darwinism which attributes a lack of success to a function of personal inferiority and that privilege is purely a result of personal achievement. An individual who receives millions of dollars from his family does not become a multi-millionaire solely based on merit and is hardly the poster child for rugged individualism.
Rugged individualism is commonly attributed to men who show strength by solving problems entirely on their own. In addition, if they mess up, asking for help is a sign of weakness. Those who deny that collective cooperation and compassion are essential for a just society use rugged individualism as an excuse to dismiss the idea that a social safety net is a function of government. Contrast Herbert Hoover with Franklin Roosevelt. Hoover’s rugged individualism brought us the hardships of the great depression while Roosevelt rescued America with his government funded recovery programs.
Throughout human evolution we have relied on cooperation and sharing within a defined tribe or community. The worst punishment one could face was banishment from the tribe which ultimately would lead to death. The banished individual could not survive without the support and cooperation of the community. Rugged individuals did not survive, and their genes were not passed on to future generations. The question then is where did the rugged individual mindset come from?
The concept of “rugged individualism” in the United States has its roots in the American frontier experience, particularly during westward expansion. The frontier environment, characterized by its vastness and limited infrastructure, fostered a culture where individuals were often forced to fend for themselves, leading to a hyper belief in individual initiative and a distrust of centralized authority. The idea was the foundation of Hoover’s 1928 presidential campaign and further reinforced by Hollywood westerns with their fictional depictions of cowboy heroes who almost single handedly beat the bad guys and rode off into the sunset alone. Vestiges of the rugged individual ideal still remain in modern culture and have become an excuse for those in power to defend shrinking government efforts to erase poverty and close the wealth gap.
Some men still believe rugged individualism is part of an outdated man code. The myth is reinforced by movie and television fictional superheroes. The misguided thinking is that a real man must also be a rugged individual. Fortunately, women have not bought in to rugged individualism. Females realize that working with others cooperatively achieves the best outcomes. Women have evolved with better social skills then men and realize that sharing life’s journey with other women is better strategy for happiness than sucking it up and going at it alone.
3 responses to “Rugged Individualism”
Sooo many strawmen in this argument! “Rugged individualism, in the context of U.S. history, is a philosophy emphasizing individual self-reliance, personal liberty, and the belief that individuals can succeed on their own with minimal government intervention.”. Yep. Fair enough. “It was popularized by Herbert Hoover, who used the term to describe the spirit of America, where individuals are responsible for their own well-being and government plays a limited role in private and commercial affairs.” Yep. Fair enough. But now let’s take an Olympic-sized jump from those positions to “… the notion that we succeed entirely on our own”. Classic rhetorical sleight of hand! Which inevitably leads to the hyperbolic excess embodied in “Those who deny that collective cooperation and compassion are essential for a just society”. Who are these people and what exactly did they say? As long as you’re maligning Hoover while simultaneously polishing the hagiography of Roosevelt, feel free to toss this Hoover quote into the mix: “My country owes me nothing. It gave me, as it gives every boy and girl, a chance. It gave me schooling, independence of action, opportunity for service and honor.” Or do you interpret those words as “everyman for himself”?
Thanks for taking the time to respond. Let me begin with Hoover. His tariffs and policies led to the Great Depression with little government intervention to protect hard working Americans from the massive layoffs and poverty that resulted. I agree that the government does not owe you anything and as Kennedy said, ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.” However, for those who are temporarily or permanently unable to fend for themselves (disability, discrimination, unemployed, etc,) what is wrong for a government to provide a safety net? In addition, Hoover’s statement about every boy and girl having a chance during segregation demonstrates his lack of understanding about conditions in the country he is leading.
Those who deny that collective cooperation and compassion are essential for a just society”. Who are these people and what exactly did they say? My answer is Trump (Captain bone spurs) – who made fun of people with disabilities, cut essential medical research, maligned the reputation of John McCain, abandoned those migrants who are honest and seek legitimate asylum, pardoning rioters responsible for assaulting Capitol police. Mike Johnson and his supporters who want to cut Medicaid with false statements about wholesale abuse. Elon Musk making a fascist gesture and eliminating crucial government jobs because doing it the right way would be time consuming. I could give more examples of those currently in power who articulate policies which favor the rich at the expense of the middle class because they think they are better because they made a great deal of money.
My hope & faith are with the future appeal of empathy, sympathy and love of a fellow human are realized among the swing voters.
This reveal of unforced errors by the leaders we seem to have now on handling these matters reach national attention will be experiential.
History/lessons seem to repeat itself.
Remember trickle down economics didn’t work. Took 3 republican presidential terms to prove that.
So the 5% indecisive swing voters move the needle are watching these actions. The stories of failures will rise and the pendulum will swing. That is my hope.
I don’t want to see people self reliant on the government tax dollars that don’t deserve so. But to throw the baby out with the bathwater may have to run its course and enough criticism will allow the swing voters to rethink.