>
> Any shrinks on this list? When did social inter-dependence become such a
> deep object of shame?
>
> Joanna
>
Shrink, no, sociological speculator, yes... my guess is that social inter-dependence becomes a deep object of shame (not just an object of shame) when it becomes clear that it was effectively impossible for anyone to really make it as a local independent entrepreneur or politico. So long as Adam Smith could sound about right - what we need is a minimal government intended to maintain law and order and level playing fields within the economy, within the polity and within the culture, then everything else'll take care of itself - then Populist Americans, left and right, could think they saw genuine prospects for balancing genuine independent cowboy individualism with authentic Christian communitarian identification. For these folks social inter-dependence is just fine so long as it is face-to-face, intimate, and Real American (rightish or leftish), because a major part of that that we're-all-in-this-togetherism is fostering individual entrepreneurial creativity and profits - short of monopoly, of course.
The superabundant reality, today, is that even Reaganite exhortations to aggressively pursue entrepreneurial creativity and freedom are horse poop; that our very lives - everything from economics to culture, politics to technology (and all four of these are running together, more and more) - are fundamentally and completely dependent on commodified forms of need satisfaction satisfied with globally-sourced goods purchased at national, if not global, chain stores... the very national chains and global sources that have destroyed BOTH our genuine independent cowboy individualism AND out authentic Christian communitarian collective self-identification... in short, the groups that have robbed us of our freedom and indentification with place.
Of course, this gets staggeringly weird and contradictory in its expression as it gets mixed with Evangelical Tea Party and Pro-corporate Republican talking points...