It may even be genetic. So many of the original Euro settlers in the US were the type that could come to a wild land to better themselves (which I read as "get rich") or to escape persecution, or as prisoners, leaving family, community, and culture behind. We are the descendents of such independent types and our heritage and its stories and songs have long lauded such independent spirits, which continues with the romanticism of our founding father's fight for independence, cowboys, mountain men, and outlaws. There is something in us that responds so strongly, even right up to the end, when we find it a horror to be a burden to our loved ones.
> I think that's one
> very big reason we don't have a guaranteed income, or national
> health care. We USers are throughly indoctrinated to believe that
> to be in any way dependent on others is the ultimate horror.
> Europeans in general don't seem to feel that way, rather, they
> accept that dependency is a normal part of life...we are dependent
> when we are very young and again very old, or infirm, and anyway,
> we are all interdependent thruout our lives.
I see it as another polarity within human societies, say with the Japanese cutlure at the one extreme of collectivism and the US at the other extreme of individualism, with most other cultures somewhere in between.
> How can you be in
> favor of a guaranteed income yet make not being "dependent" on
> others a point of great pride?
Mainly because I see the large corporations getting their guaranteed income from the gov't and I think if they get it, so should we. But the anarchist side of me doesn't want a huge central gov't providing either one, and would prefer that it were a very localized community thing.
> What is so intrinsically admirable
> about hyper-individualism?
For me its about loving the freedom and security of independence, feeling that no matter what happened, I could find ways through it on my own if necessary, needing to rely on no one. I'm a survivalist who would continue to persevere if everything fell to pieces on the planet, like others I know who wouldn't wish to live if things got too bad. The most complete sense of it that I can think to describe is while backpacking, knowing everything I need for the next week is resting comfortably on my back and I can go anywhere my legs can take me, and the whole time I can eat, sleep, and play joyfully. Nothing like the exhiliration of such freedom, though riding a motorcycle without a helmet comes close... damn spring anyway, with bike fever hitting yet again, after all these years of being sensible.
But that is just me. I don't expect everyone else to be that way. I know the flaws it means in me, made ever more glaring by how they contributed to the failure of my marriage. But I can't help it. Its the way I am and I like me that way.
My question is does this trait or any other non-pathological trait make a person or their views unacceptable if they oppose your own traits or views?
--tully