The Paradox of American Individualism

Individualism and Collectivism by Pecardenass (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0)

One of the keys aspects of the  psychotherapy paradigm I write about is that family member often sacrifice part of themselves if the kin group seems to need them to. Americans can have trouble seeing that since it contradicts a common world view that they have.  

 American history is the story of an immigrant nation forged in a new world with ever-expanding frontiers. Because of this history, the prevailing outlook of Americans throughout much of their development has been a rather individualistic one. Particularly since the American Revolution, the majority of Americans have tended to value independence, freedom of thought and expression, and economic competition with a profit motive. We are less willing to make sacrifices for the collective good, and the circumstances in which such sacrifices are made are more circumscribed.

 However, the forces of togetherness have not disappeared. In fact, the idea that a collectively held ethical system should champion the individual is inherently paradoxical. Those of us who like to view ourselves as free to pick and choose which collective norms we will adhere to and which we will reject must face the fact that this freedom is granted to us by the group. It can also be taken away by the group. In addition, we learn how to be self-sufficient only through training given to us by our family system.

 Our world says to us, "We will make you independent." How are you that independent if you got that way because the group told you that you could.

This creates an internal contradiction which is characteristic of dialectical systems. As individuated as we are, we are all still part of a collective.

 To illustrate, let us look at the example of the young American radicals as they existed in the late 1960’s when "radical" ideas were in vogue on high school and college campuses. The case of the modern, young, campus Communist indeed proves the point that, as independent as Americans like to think of themselves, we cannot successfully divorce ourselves completely from the collective of which we are a part.

A Communist is, by definition, an individual who has accepted an egalitarian variant of collectivism as a personal philosophy. That is, he or she believes that the needs of society are more important than personal ambition and that everyone should be an equal partner. For instance, after the theoretical demise of the "dictatorship of the proletariat," all decisions in a factory are supposed to be made collectively by the workers for the "greater good." No one would work "for" anyone else. In taking a position against personal aggrandizement, the Communist is taking a position in which the balance between the individual and the group tilts more towards the later than does the prevailing American ethic.

But can an American act out this philosophy successfully? Two characteristics of the campus radicals were revealing. First, they often touted their own ideas as being superior to the ideas of the American "establishment." Most of the Communists that I encountered were the most elitist people I had ever met. They thought they knew more about what is right and wrong than anyone else. Paradoxically, elitism is contrary to Communist philosophy! Another interesting characteristic of the leftists was that they frequently praised the rather individualistic ethic of "doing your own thing." This last often included rock music and sexual freedom, two commodities which were rare in Communist countries, precisely because of their individualistic nature. In fact, most American Communists have done rather poorly in communist countries, which is why so few of them actually defected.

 The collectivism of the campus radical was in reality a rebellious response, and therefore tied to the prevailing individualistic ethic rather than truly separate from it. By becoming a Communist, it is clear that they were setting themselves apart from the mainstream of American thought, since the vast majority of Americans consider Communism as either totalitarian or unrealistic, and therefore best avoided. 

By distancing themselves from their own culture, which is the collective to which they themselves belonged, these students were for all intents and purposes more individualistic than the Americans they criticized.

 By being individualistic, they were just as American as apple pie, despite their attempts at being something different. Their attempts to reverse the trend of cultural evolution were doomed to failure. However, they were certainly not without influence.  And their attitudes towards authority, sex, and self-expression helped to propel the culture of individualism to new heights.

The balance between the forces of individuality and togetherness that is prevalent in the United States colors everything we do and, without a doubt, colors our ideas about what drives people to do the things they do. For example, Freud's psychoanalysis found a ready market within the more liberal segments of American society in the early part of this century. One of the reasons may have been its initial emphasis on the pleasure principle and on intrapsychic rather than interpersonal factors in neurotic behavior. 

Americans like to think of themselves as somehow responsible for their own problems and motivated by a strong self-interest. Even those persons who are diagnosed as character-disordered and seem to blame everyone but themselves for their own problems often ultimately blame themselves for not being able to cope with the problem behaviors of others. We are not, unfortunately, as free from collective obligations as we might like to think.

 

Themes of This Blog Seen In Newspaper Advice Columns – Part II

This is the second in series of posts showing how several of the issues I discuss in this blog show up in letters to newspaper advice columnists. Advice columnists must bring us problems that resonate with a fairly wide readership, and they therefore provide us with another source of information about human behavior and cultural trends.

I follow Jeanne Phillips (Dear Abby), Carolyn Hax, Amy Dickinson (Ask Amy), and Marcy Sugar & Kathy Mitchell (Annie’s Mailbox).

I will highlight each theme with a title preceding each letter to the columnist that I've reproduced, reflecting the blog subject that seems to be discussed. The title will also be a link to a related post. I am not including the columnist’s responses to the letters. 

"In relationships, if you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got." ~ Amy Dickinson.

Whenever a family member has somewhat compulsively behaved in a certain manner for a very long time, and then decides to change, the change often does not go over well with the rest of the family. The others seem determined to force the changer to go back to his or her old ways. 

In this post, I am emphasizing the above process rather than the particular role described in these letters, which I have not previously discussed directly as a separate entity. In the following three letters, the writers all had served in various incarnations of the same role, and complain about the reactions of the rest of their families when circumstances changed. The role might be called the “family support person,” or in a more extreme form, the “family servant” or even “the enabler.”

6/7/13.  Dear Carolyn: I’ve always been the one in my family to give whenever possible. When I went to college, I took on student loans so my sister wouldn’t have to. A few years later, when her car died, I purchased a new one and gave her mine. When family needed help, I was always there. Now I’m trying to purchase a house, and no one seems the least bit interested in helping me. I swallowed my pride and asked for financial assistance, even if it was a “loan,” and was told tough toenails. Would it be wrong for me to cut my family out of my life? I feel as if I was the great son whenever I went out of my way to help, but now I’m just some annoyance. - Always the Giver

6/18/13. Dear Amy: I've spent most of my life being a support system for various friends and relatives through one crisis or another. I've always been proud of the fact that I'm someone they can rely on when they need to. Recently, I learned that I may have a debilitating disease for which there is no cure. No firm diagnosis has been reached, but at this point it doesn't look great. Since I received the last batch of test results, I have witnessed my friends and relatives pull away from me, dismiss my symptoms and change the subject if I bring it up. I understand that everyone has their own lives and problems, but I desperately need some support right now. — Lost

June 24, 2013.  Dear Annie: My husband and I both work 18-hour days at a hospital. When we get home, we are exhausted. Since our schedules are irregular, however, our siblings seem to think it means we are always available for free babysitting. My husband's sister (a stay-at-home mom) is forever dropping off her toddler, saying she needs to "de-stress." She never calls ahead. We've tried locking the door, but she has a key. My brother has dropped off his young sons multiple times without warning and with no indication of when he'd be back. He stopped when I told him I was going to start charging him $12.50 an hour.  

The last straw was when my oldest brother's wife arrived one weekend in a van with seven little girls and stated that these kids were staying overnight with us because she and her girlfriend were going to a spa. I was just getting off a 24-hour shift, and I told her politely that since she hadn't checked with me beforehand, she'd have to make other arrangements because I was too exhausted to care for her girls and those of her friend. She became angry and told my nieces that I don't love them. Her girlfriend, whom I had never met, screamed at me from the passenger window. After they left, I got nasty phone calls from my brother and parents. The friend sent me an itemized bill and asked that I reimburse her for the spa trip they missed. Instead of responding, my husband and I sent our family members an email outlining that we love them and our nieces and nephews, but we would no longer be available for babysitting unless it was an emergency. We apologized for being rude or for causing them any trouble. The email was much kinder and more polite than they deserved, but we hoped it would allow us to start over. It was not received well. Currently, the only person speaking to us is my father-in-law. We considered moving in order to have boundaries, but I resent being forced out of a house I love.  I miss my family. What can we do? — Not the Nanny

Your Spouse’s Secret Mission 

Wherein one’s spouse plays the villain to take the heat off a husband or wife who cannot stand up to his or her own family.

8/19/12. Dear Annie: My daughter-in-law tends to go to her family. She says she is uncomfortable with my son's side. She has been rude to us since she married my son, and she controls him. She threatens him if he does not do what she wants. My daughter had a fight with my daughter-in-law four years ago, and I just woke up to the fact that my daughter-in-law blames us for my daughter's actions. My husband and I tried therapy with my son and daughter-in-law, but it made things worse. I left, saying that I am not happy with either of them and I just want to see my grandchildren. My son said that if I don't continue with therapy, I won't see the kids again. They are using the children as weapons to control us. I told her she didn't like us from Day One. She told me she doesn't trust me. My new granddaughter had a baptism, and my daughter-in-law told us it was an occasion only for her family. We were insulted and hurt. I'm thinking of going to court and suing for grandparents' rights. — Trustworthy

Tag, you’re it 

Despite the protestations of heritability study authors across the universe, parents do not treat all of their children the same.

9/21/13.  Dear Annie: I'd like to add my two cents about whether parents treat their children the same. Mom, Sis and I live equidistant from one another. Sis still lives near the place where we grew up. Mom moved to a warmer climate. We call each other every weekend to catch up and stay in touch. Sis and I fly to visit Mom about once a year. Mom visits Sis and her family a few times a year. But despite the many invitations I have extended, she will not visit me. When I had heart surgery five years ago, Mom did not come. When I was hospitalized for pancreatitis, Mom did not come. Of the 25 stage plays I've appeared in, Mom came to see exactly one. She will never see the home my wife and I remodeled. It seems the things that are important to me don't matter much to her. I suppose there is a certain amount of validity in her excuse that there's nothing that interests her in my city, but when we visit our son and his family, we don't care whether there is anything to do. We are simply glad to be with them. Does Mom love me? Certainly. Does she love me as much as my sister? Probably. Does she treat us the same? Judge for yourself. — That's My Lot in Life

Your Spouse's Secret Mission

On October 4, 2009, newspaper advice columnist Carolyn Hax printed a letter that said:

“Three years ago, during my senior year of high school, my parents divorced. My dad has quite a bit of money and I was worried that he might get involved with gold diggers. I go to college out of state, so I haven't had many opportunities to get to know Joan. But the other day, my brother told me Joan had, unasked, told my dad: "I just want to go on record that I don't think you should pay for your daughter's law school. I don't approve.

Unfortunately, this isn't her first comment like that. … More important, I think it's horrible that she would position herself to cause a rift between my father and me over issues that are none of her business. I don't care how my dad chooses to spend his money, but I'm furious that she is nice to my face while making these comments behind my back.

...I'm going home for a visit soon, and I think I should give my dad a heads-up. What should I say? He doesn't know I know about the law school comment, and I don't want to drop my little brother in the grease.”

Carolyn Hax wisely advised the writer not to pre-judge the matter before confirming what she heard.

I of course do not know what is true in this particular family, but I would like to share a pattern I have frequently come across as a therapist who works with individuals on family systems issues, and which possibly might apply here.

Sometimes a spouse "volunteers" to appear to be the villain in a family drama so parents will not be angry at grown children or vice versa in cases in which the parent and adult child cannot be honest with one another about their real feelings.

Using this family as a hypothetical case, perhaps it is Dad who is feeling overburdened financially - maybe he also plans to put the writer's brother through school - but feels too guilty to say no to her, or feels obligated to put her through law school.

Hearing her husband's complaints about this in private, and to shield the father, the step mother makes it sound as though she is the one who objects. She says this in front of the writer's brother, knowing it will get back to her. This way, the writer gets angry with her and not with the father, and if he does decide not to pay, it appears as if he is not to blame but that he is totally under her gold digging thumb.

It may be hard to believe anyone would sacrifice themselves like this for a spouse, but I find it happens with surprising frequency. I e-mailed Ms. Hax about this, and she replied that she did not find it surprising at all, as she has done it herself.