Response 9: Well, this sure is a pickle...

The authors of Habits of the Heart state that modern individualism is "neither individually nor socially viable, yet a return to traditional forms would be to return to intolerable discrimination and oppression" (Bellah et. al., p. 144). Modern individualism is dangerous because it puts the self over everything else, including the betterment and functionality of society. It would be like today's cliquey Congress; politicians are well-known for looking out for their self interests over compromising to pass effective legislation. If the whole world was this way, then we would live in constant competition with one another and all trust would dissolve. It could parallel realist World Politics, in which anarchy (the lack of a world government) creates a self-help system Anarchy is not a stable social system because people need to be governed by some form or else there is no order. Therefore, the possible future created by modern individualism is not "socially viable". There is no way to be completely individual and be apart of society.

In fact, you can't really escape society. Unless you live in a hovel in godknowswhere middle America, you will always be apart of some form of community. Whatever choice you make in life, whatever niche you put yourself into, you will always connected to other "individuals". For example, let's say you want to be the total indie non-conformist (as my friend was for his Halloween costume today). You really aren't a true non-conformist because there are a bajillion people like you also trying to go against the system. You can't be purely unique because your environment binds you in as well. You may be the only vampire-zombie-indie-ballerina-fruitloops dieting-zionist in New Jersey, but you're IN NEW JERSEY. As we demonstrated in class on last week, there is a "community memory" all New Jerseyans share that no one else could really understand. There was definitely and Us and a Them (us being Jerseyans and them being non-cool people). In fact, creating an Us and Them defines two different societies in and of itself.

Holding onto, or going back to the traditional forms as Habits talks about is definitely hard. Our complex society has created a need for people to go through change. The possibility for different ideas and lifestyles causes conflicts with family members along generation lines. Separation from your parents is necessary to resolve tension and pursue your own goals for self improvement. Getting to the next level of success yields more growth for our country than watching over your parents would. Going back to old traditions is unrealistic because we have already tasted individual freedom, and such a thing cannot just be taken away. We can long for the return to our "roots" but this would lead to the "intolerable discrimination and oppression" mentioned earlier. Take the example of Joe Gorman's town. Homogeneous, small town traditions let the townspeople boycott lower-income housing because it would let in minorities. This is discrimination and oppression at its core.

Personally, I don't find our current state of modern individualism all that bad. Having control oneself is the key to democracy, where the people are the government. Our needs and wants are vitally important, so we should have the freedom to do as we please. Of course, we cannot take this to the extreme. Anarchy is out of the question if we are to have a stable society. As long as we keep modern individualism to a happy medium, society shouldn't fall on its rear end.