Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit 1 Share on StumbleUpon 1 Tell A Friend 6 (9 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   37 comments

Exclusive to OpEdNews:
Life Arts

The Right's Sham Religion of Rugged Individualism

      (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Valuable 4   Well Said 3   Must Read 2  
View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H2 12/12/12

Become a Fan
  (31 fans)
- Advertisement -

Behold the damning paradox that bedevils the dazed rightwing. While strictly-scrutinized party factions toe strict ideological lines, every freedom-loving GOP gang glorifies the absurd, frontier badge of rugged individualism. "The great and abiding lesson of American history, particularly the cold war," declares Rand Paul, "is that the engine of capitalism, the individual, is mightier than any collective."

Right, one great champion drives every mighty, corporate colossus, doubtlessly a willful, Ayn Rand superman. Columnist Marilyn von Savant only adds fuel to the folly, "The freedom to be an individual is the essence of America." That so? The apex of radical individualism isn't found in America, no longer the world's leader in socio-economic mobility but more likely resides within some all-powerful warlord whose tyranny lasts as long as his lifespan.

The right talks individualism and freedom yet practices the politics of punitive submission, extorted by Tea Party primaries, boorish FOX newscasters, loutish televangelists, Rovian political operatives, and unelected Grover Norquist enforcers. "Don't tread on me" sounds a great war cry but doesn't advance a country of 300 million. No wonder, with widening agendas, roughly five GOP cliques squabble like hungry chickens:  

1)    the predatory corporate crowd, from Wall Street banksters to reactionary billionaires rigging the system;

2)    close-minded, Tea Party haters of all government programs that share goodies outside their tribe;

3)    faith-alone fundamentalists, keyed to Biblical literalism, End of Days, or defiance of abortion rights;

4)    belligerent, neo-con marauders, boasting pre-emptive invasions to affirm our imperial destiny; and

5)    the residual strays, fairly inconsequential, spanning distraught moderates to plumb-crazy conspiracy nuts, secessionists, armed militias and back-to-the-boonies cultism.

Yet, all Republican differences dissipate when the right invokes its transcendent, irrational leap of faith: that American prowess wholly reflects our worship of go-it-alone, "I-built-it-my-way" manias, revering the lone gunman blasting all foes. Why, just study history. Did not "collectivist" Puritans season their theocracy with individual freedom for all? Was not our revolution gained by one great hero, not the one-third of insurgent colonists working together? 

Did not lonely frontiersmen carve out homes from the wilderness, oh, except for families, neighbors, and cheap (slave, Native American, Irish, Italian, Asian) labor? Lincoln alone freed the slaves and won the Civil War, just like great individuals must have won both world wars, built our infrastructure, and now defend global commerce. 

In short, thanks to willful ignorance that demeans the essential co-operation that defines America, babble that the individual is "mightier than any collective" goes on. Name one, Mr. Paul? This country is at heart communitarian, not authoritarian, not libertarian.  

GOP Triumph of the Will

Yet, if every conservative has the god-given right to liberty and conscience, why are there so few party rebels (or true "rogues") that defy lockstep obedience to a rigid party line? And why is disagreement, even challenge to one group's holy crusade, vilified by great thinkers like Norquist or birdbrain Rush Limbaugh? What bizarre notion of freedom induces extremists to primary into oblivion minor divergence from their fixations? Had not Tea Partiers "expressed their individualism" by defeating five electable candidates since 2010, they'd control the Senate. Of course, they'd then have to forego this William Godwin rant, "Above all we should not forget that government is an evil, a usurpation upon the private judgment and individual conscience of mankind."

In fact, do not warped notions of individualism, implying total mastery over one's life, represent the motherload for every hot button social wedge issue since 2000? On gun control, what heroic individualist can protect his home and family against bad guys without commanding his own arsenal? Since "evil government" eyes the truest, most independent thinkers, freedom-loving, paranoid militias would betray their essence by not preparing for the enemy. Let's not forget those gun-loving, manly hunters, decimating all those blood-curdling wild animals, like rabbits, game birds and deer. For stalkers of the innocent, it's munitions, not clothes, that make the man. Or gay marriage: what self-respecting, individualist he-man "chooses" the "homosexual life style," let alone publicizes it to the world by marrying one's buddy?

The Certitude of the Rigid

Certainly, every rugged individualist scrutinizes birth control methods and reigns in appetites so he or she never needs abortion doctors. What model of self-reliance would ignobly drug a date or assault a relative or child?  That deserves getting skinned alive. Does not similar, hard line thinking justify capital punishment as just accountability, fitting ultimate punishment to the individual's willful crime, like in good Old Testament days. Bring on the fire and brimstone, hell's a'waitin' for miscreants who choose wickedness.  

Just last week, a throng of freedom-loving senators trumped a U.N. treaty for daring to apply American standards to overseas discrimination against the disabled. Pretty rugged stuff. What a brave bunch, shuddering in terror against the mighty wrath of primary challenges by know-nothings! Observe the fierce irony: any conservatives who think on their own, who deviate a smidgeon, face political blackmail, from all the usual suspects:

  • libertarians outraged against those who insufficiently despise government;
  • fundamentalists outraged at the failure to despise abortion, secularism, or gay rights;
  • greedy capitalists outraged at those who don't despise taxes or regulation; and
  • belligerent, neo-con conquistadores outraged at those who don't despise perpetual war.

Except for militarists, reliant on government-sponsored war machines ("peace after all depends on constant war"), all endorse Godwin's take on government as evil and the individual as the highest, if not only good. All these zealots are so vehement they continue to shoot themselves in the head by equating "freedom" with obstructive filibustering of whatever the majority supports. If God is really on that side, the world withers without a new theology.

All for One, One for All  

Finally, for lovers of high irony, here's a zinger. The Democrats are in fact a far more diverse, undisciplined, and independent-minded community, yet they share a much higher consensus about community values, the value of government and where the country should go. With the Obama re-election, liberals regained strength simply by asserting this radical idea, "the greatest good for the greatest number," while reinforcing both Elizabeth Warren's campaign and Republican, ex-justice Sandra Day O'Connor, "We don't accomplish anything in this world alone . . . and whatever happens is the result of the whole tapestry of one's life and all the weavings of individual threads form one to another that creates something" (of worth). 

To end, here's compelling etymology: the word "liberal" comes from the root "liber," as in free, thus informing "liberty" and "liberation" (even "libertine"). For over a century, "liberal" buttressed the inalienable rights of all men, plus FDR's Four Freedoms. A "liberal" benefactor was a hero with positive connotations of compassion, humanity, tolerance and openness to change.

Let us restore "liberal" to its root origins, with brave defenses of liberty alongside tolerance, individualism alongside "collective" teamwork. What's wrong with pulling together, "all for one and one for all," the recipe for job creation, health delivery, and critical ecological balances? For that simple, communitarian creed separates us from both know-nothing yokels and scheming fat cats who mouth individualism while funding inquisitions to insure lockstep obedience.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -


For a decade, Robert S. Becker's rebel-rousing essays on politics and culture analyze overall trends, messaging and frameworks, now featured author at OpEdNews, Nation of Change and RSN. He appears regularly at Dissident Voice, with credits (more...)

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -
Google Content Matches:

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Summer in the GOP Asylum: "Who are these guys?"

Trickle-down Gulf Wreck-onomics

"Apocalypse Now' Vogue Engulfs Chicken Littles

Moses Kaput -- Rightwing Ten Commandments To Serve Looming Theocracy

Deadline Looms To Fund Critical Ocean Plastic-Trash Film

"God Particle' Refudiates the Religious Right


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
15 people are discussing this page, with 37 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

I wonder how long it takes a national political pa... by Robert S. Becker on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:12:49 PM
"Rugged individualism" is just one of the propagan... by Derryl Hermanutz on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:05:33 PM
to Pettigrew, which I will check out.  I can ... by Robert S. Becker on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:49:32 PM
Robert, I fixed my picture. I'm not much of a tec... by Derryl Hermanutz on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 6:31:39 PM
Bain destroyed decades of intellectual capital at ... by Wendy Temple on Friday, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:52:01 PM
Thanks very much for sharing the link to the Petti... by manifesto 2000 on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 7:15:48 PM
Ali Velshi said very clearly on CNN yesterday, tha... by Wendy Temple on Friday, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:57:52 PM
I really don't want to appear to be intolerant.&nb... by Mike Stewart on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:30:51 PM
 Really? I thought Robert's breakdown of the ... by Jack Shneidman on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:48:11 PM
"I pity the young intellectual, if they may even e... by BFalcon on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:59:49 AM
"I really believe you would have to be clinically ... by Robert S. Becker on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:42:10 AM
First, in my quote from his comment above, he seri... by BFalcon on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:10:19 PM
in his own rugged individualist style.  Look,... by Robert S. Becker on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:59:43 PM
He got lost long before that spavined, humpbacked ... by Paul Kibble on Friday, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:44:30 PM
You would think that someone who complains about t... by Paul Kibble on Friday, Dec 14, 2012 at 1:05:59 PM
Robert constructed one sloppy straw man for... by KurtB on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:57:14 PM
And I don't want the government small or big, just... by BFalcon on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:57:21 AM
Where is this infamous straw man argument?  A... by Robert S. Becker on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:56:28 AM
Of course I believe that you understand that we ar... by BFalcon on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:27:57 PM
I object to your lumping all who distrust a large ... by KurtB on Saturday, Dec 15, 2012 at 4:11:20 PM
Our values overlap but not our terms or generaliza... by Robert S. Becker on Saturday, Dec 15, 2012 at 6:08:29 PM
When they say "small government," what they really... by Wendy Temple on Friday, Dec 14, 2012 at 5:10:38 PM
And this so called small government can still cont... by BFalcon on Saturday, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:50:58 AM
I want a small FEDERAL Government, not a priva... by KurtB on Sunday, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:30:01 PM
Education, welfare and healthcare where they were ... by BFalcon on Sunday, Dec 16, 2012 at 5:51:37 PM
Interstate highways are a legitimate functio... by KurtB on Sunday, Dec 16, 2012 at 6:37:30 PM
That the interstate highways are somehow in the Co... by BFalcon on Sunday, Dec 16, 2012 at 7:36:57 PM
and without federal intervention, where would civi... by Robert S. Becker on Sunday, Dec 16, 2012 at 6:54:43 PM
About the states being "competitive" with the neig... by BFalcon on Sunday, Dec 16, 2012 at 7:38:51 PM
If all breaks down and you do not grow your own fo... by Steven G. Erickson on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:16:38 PM
"Finally, for lovers of high irony, here's a zinge... by Amos Burritt on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:40:04 PM
Thanks for the article.   The only shams h... by Libertarian International on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:23:27 PM
Over a thousand readers, high up in the two day mo... by Robert S. Becker on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:50:39 AM
has anyone else noticed that both sides of the pol... by Mrt Baggins on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:22:31 PM
And who on the left is pushing the "religion" of c... by Robert S. Becker on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:28:28 PM
The late Jerry Falwell, the Founder of the "Moral ... by E. J. N. on Thursday, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:24:14 PM
Just look at Reagan's promise to get government of... by Gustav Wynn on Monday, Dec 24, 2012 at 8:10:43 AM