Liberalism vs Individualism
Growing up, I can remember my Social Studies teacher telling us that her class was going to give us an introduction to democracy. I thought the word itself must have a simple definition, but class and life experience later revealed how multi-layered and complex it is.
My definition of democracy was linked to a form of government that allows Americans rights and privileges that aren’t extended worldwide. More particularly, the right to participate in governmental affairs and the participation of such comes through the voting process as eligible voters are given the unrestricted right to exercise this at ballot boxes nationwide.
From my perspective, democracy is rooted in freedom and equality coupled with the foundational principles of fairness, justice, and respect for human rights. My deeply held convictions about liberal democracy stem from its ability to balance collective decision-making with individual rights, creating a framework for justice and accountability.
At the heart of my belief in liberal democracy is its respect for individual liberties. Freedom of speech, religion, and association are cornerstones of American human dignity, allowing people to express themselves without fear of persecution. These freedoms are called to be protected by the law, ensuring no one, including the government or its officials, can be above the law. This principle resonates deeply with my belief in fairness and equality, as it provides a stopgap against abuse of power.
Deneen argues our political and economic system is facing a self-inflicted crisis. From his vantage point, liberal ideology is premised on a change in the way we think about liberty. He walks a fine line in his description of Democrats and Republicans by introducing that both are divided but united by the same ideology. This was eye-opening as I wrestled with the fact that, in many ways, all political parties can quickly and unintentionally become an anti-community.
One point that resonated with me was Deneen’s take on the need for community, which individualism has deeply impacted. He claims that people have never been more lonely. Citing Americans have grown to become more unhappy through loneliness, he says, ” More than any other people, Americans have pursued a living arrangement that promotes the conception of ourselves as independent and apart. [1] Speaking to autonomous liberty, he says it expands without limit. Liberty, so defined, requires liberation from all forms of associations and relationships, from family to church, from schools to village and community. [2]
As America must contend with a multitude of issues, such as populism and authoritarian tendencies, inequality and social division, as well as political polarization, no one can deny liberalism is under attack. Deenan affirms my beliefs when he states nearly every one of the promises that were made by architects and creators of liberalism has shattered. [3]
Liberalism was founded on the principle of inclusiveness. The rights of minorities and a platform for diverse voices to contribute to public discourse are inherent to liberal democracy. This inclusivity fosters unity within diversity, a value that aligns with my belief in mutual respect and coexistence. Additionally, liberal democracy promotes accountability and transparency. Free and fair elections and a free press ensure that leaders remain answerable to the people. This system empowers citizens to challenge corruption and advocate for their rights.
As Deenan calls for a shift in our understanding of liberalism, I cannot fully wrap my mind around or endorse his political method of superior ideology for countering the flaws held by liberalism. Deneen has some map-making of his own; he weaves between statism and individualism and how they advance together as powerful forces of liberalism. Another point that paused me to ponder was his look at the loss of liberty and technology. Deneen highlights the increasing anxiety tied to technological development. Our anxiety arises from the belief that we may no longer control the technology that is supposed to be the primary tool of our liberty… an inevitability to technological advances that no amount of warnings about their dangers can prevent. [4]
The role of technology and our reliance upon it has become near mandatory. If one does not have an e-mail, website, and arguably a social media presence in some form, an individual can be defined as antiquated. Gen Z has now become the first digitally native generation serving as the pioneers of the digital demographic. How technology further impacts liberal democracy is now something I will keep my eyes out for.
[1] Patrick J. Deneen, Why Liberalism Failed, Kindle (New Haven ; London: Yale University Press, 2018), 3.
[2] Deneen, 37.
[3] Deenen, 2.
[4] Deenan 109.
About the Author
Daren Jaime
12 responses to “Liberalism vs Individualism”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Daren,
There are days when I would love to give up my smart phone. While the group texts with family and co-workers create a sense of community, sometimes my phone vibrating constantly annoys me.
I digress, but speaking of community, have you processed liberalism’s role in the problem of the lack of youth involvement within the church?
Jeff, I am laughing because I know the feeling. Second, the liberal democracy Deenan speaks to is tied tothe community. In church, we are focusing on building young adult spaces to create their own community and finding meaningful ways to interconnect them within the local church structure that promotes value and belonging.
Hi Daren, I am curious about two things.
1. Do you think there is a way for the ideals of liberal democracy to return rather than be dismantled?
2. Do you see the loneliness that Deneen spoke about?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Hi Diane, Liberal democracy can return, but I am somewhat skeptical. An eye-opener was Deenan’s take on Democrats and Republicans as they differ but also have the same ideology of sorts. That would take intentionality that I fear some would resist. Also, I can resonate with Deenan’s perspective on loneliness; we have more technology and resources yet remain more fragmented.
Hi Daren, I, too, resonated with Deneen’s take on the need for community. I was disturbed by the gap between liberalism’s promises and our reality. He left me with a lot to think about. As a pastor, do you sense the congregants where you lead have a “finger to the pulse” regarding the concerns Deneen emphasizes about liberalism and its broken promises?
Daren,
I appreciate the way you highlight how both conservative and liberal proponents have taken a part in the dismantling of the liberal democracy. I wonder, as a pastor, if you see any lessons our churches might learn from the dying of liberal democracies?
Hey Adam! There is an abandonment, that is. Consequence of failing to create a liberal democracy. The church has become more apathetic and gravitates in the opposite direction. As I mentioned earlier, if community and inclusiveness can really become a priority, we may be able to shift the tide.
Daren, there are two points of special interest to me in your article. First, you write, “all political parties can quickly and unintentionally become an anti-community.” I’m curious to know what you mean by “anti-community.” What examples can you point me to and how might that have affected you?
Second, I’m also disturbed – with you – about the loss of control of technology. How might this affect you and your ministry in the near future?
Daren, I appreciate how you highlight Deneen’s critique of liberalism, its impact on community and individualism, and the role of technology in shaping modern liberal democracy. How can we strike a balance between fostering strong communities and respecting individual autonomy in an increasingly digital and polarized age? Additionally, how might technology be harnessed to strengthen, rather than erode, the foundational principles of liberal democracy, such as inclusivity and accountability?
Democrats and Republicans by introducing that both are divided but united by the same ideology. This was eye-opening as I wrestled with the fact that, in many ways, all political parties can quickly and unintentionally become an anti-community.
Hey Debbie as I thought of your question this came to mind. Democrats tend to lead to liberalism while Republicans lean conservative. Both sides can be so content on putting their individualistic stake in the ground that everyday people suffer from the benefits of bi-partisanship.
The problem of economic inequality is huge and there are many people who are lost in this area. Politicians have worked hard to be stringent gatekeepers in this area in a partisan fashion. Meanwhile many are lost, they are elected to help build community, but the partisanship is also killing and dividing community.
In DC Shirley Hoogstra taught us a great example of how working together works. We need people who are committed to putting the work in for the benefit of all.
To your technology question, i feel as though we have all the resources to build community through technology. If we cannot get a handle on it, the individualism Deenan speaks to will further the gap in church. I am in full support of technology, but there must be a guarded balance that we don’t become lost to it.
Hi Daren, thanks for your thinking about democracy and liberalism. How do you think technology has changed liberalism (or the successful implementation of it)? Individualism, by nature, produces loneliness and how much more with technology?
Hi, Daren, thank you for your post. You mentioned that how Deneen has a map-making of his own. In light of liberalism, what would be a map-making of a leader?