Rugged individualism

{{significantly problematic}}[[File:YeomanFarmerIntro.jpg|thumb|right|165px|"Venerate the Plough", yeoman farmer]]
{{economics}}
{{cquote|Asked for comment, the ghost of Horatio Alger said he found Paul’s economic ideas “a bit of a stretch.”|||Marty Kelley<ref>[http://wonkette.com/592756/rand-paul-says-hard-work-and-tax-cuts-will-make-everyone-rich-especially-the-rich#v1IS1H5qPJLBlX3j.99 "Rand Paul Says Hard Work And Tax Cuts Will Make Everyone Rich, Especially The Rich"], Wonkette.</ref> on [[Rand Paul]]}}
'''Rugged individualism''' was the phrase used often by [[Herbert Hoover]] during his time as [[president]]. It refers to the idea that each individual should be able to help themselves out, and that the [[government]] does not need to involve itself in people's [[economic]] lives nor in national economics in general. It is often associated with [[Social Darwinism]] or an "up-by-the-bootstraps" philosophy.

However, the idea behind rugged individualism preceded Hoover, mainly in the highly-[[myth]]ologized fictions of first yeoman farmers (who would be called family farmers or subsistence farmers today) in the 18<sup>th</sup> century, and later cowboys in the American West dating back to the 19<sup>th</sup> century. In 1778-1779, plantation owner [[Thomas Jefferson]] proposed that "the yeoman farmer was the ideal citizen of an ideal republic".<ref>''The Age of Federalism'' by Stanley M. Elkins & Eric McKitrick (1993) Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195068904.</ref>{{rp|198}}

Those fictions suited the needs of [[oligarch]]s' divide-and-rule strategies.<ref>[https://crosscut.com/opinion/2021/06/how-confederacy-shaped-american-west-and-cowboy-culture How the Confederacy shaped the American West and cowboy culture: In arguing that the South won the Civil War, historian Heather Cox Richardson points to the paradox of the cowboy and how it presents an enduring dilemma for our democracy.] by Knute Berger (June 3, 2021) ''Crosscut, PBS''.</ref><ref name=richardson>''How the South Won the Civil War: Oligarchy, Democracy and the Continuing Fight for the Soul of America'' by Heather Cox Richardson (2022) Oxford University Press. ISBN 019758179X.</ref>{{rp|xvii}} The myth was that the yeomen were self-sufficient, and did not require any government support or intervention.<ref name=hofstadter>[https://www.americanheritage.com/myth-happy-yeoman The Myth Of The Happy Yeoman] by Richard Hofstadter (1956) ''American Heritage'' 7(3).</ref> The mythology of the yeoman actually became more ingrained as it became more unrealistic as farm-born youth fled to cities in large numbers to seek economic opportunities in the first half of the 19<sup>th</sup> century.<ref name=hofstadter/> The reason why the myth was able to persist was because it served the purposes of the [[elite]], who in the South owned most of the [[Slavery|enslaved people]] and most of the land; therefore, the elite class did [[Propaganda|everything in their power]] to reinforce it.<ref name=richardson/>{{rp|xvii}} The myth of the cowboy originated during the period of [[Reconstruction]] following the end of the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]. The cowboy was portrayed as "a hardworking white man who started from nothing".<ref name=richardson/>{{rp|87-88}} Contrary to the mythology, a third of cowboys who worked the trails during this time were [[African American]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://digpodcast.org/2018/12/16/black-cowboys-people-of-color-in-the-american-west/|title=Black Cowboys: People of Color in the American West|last=Masarik|first=Elizabeth|date=December 16, 2018|publisher=Dig History Podcast}}</ref> They worked for low wages under dangerous conditions, and little chance at upward mobility. Their bosses were to some extent also dependent on government contracts and land grants.<ref name=richardson/>{{rp|88-89}}

Hoover emphasized that rugged individualism was not ''[[laissez-faire]]'', though many modern rugged individualists have ignored that. His idea of "rugged individualism" reflected his idea of how the federal government should not interfere with the American people during the [[Great Depression]]. Providing large-scale humanitarian efforts, Hoover feared, would [[Bullshit|injure]] "the initiative and enterprise of the American people."<ref>Arthur W. McMahon. [http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1946614?uid=3739832&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=47699051377217 Third Session of the Seventy-First Congress, December 1, 1930 to March 4, 1931.] ''The American Political Science Review'' Vol. 25, No. 4 (Nov., 1931), pp. 932-955</ref> Post-[[World War I]], rugged individualism appealed to fiscal conservatives who were dismayed by the regulatory bureaucracy built up by the [[Woodrow Wilson|Wilson administration]]. As [[Calvin Coolidge]] said, "After all, the chief business of the American people is [[Great Depression|business]]."<ref>Calvin Coolidge: [http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24180#axzz1wQTVR7xo Address to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Washington, D.C., Jan. 17 1925]</ref>

When the Depression started, Hoover insisted that the [[free market|market]] would right itself. However, further into his term, Hoover felt that he was forced into action by the dire circumstances of the Depression, but still believed that the government should play a limited role in the American economy. (In other words, "Do something, but ''not too much!''") Unfortunately, when he did intervene, it either {{wpl|Smoot-Hawley tariff|made things worse}} or was so ineffective as to be the {{wpl|Reconstruction Finance Corporation|equivalent of doing nothing|.}}<ref>[http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-plank/herbert-hoover-still-not-liberal Herbert Hoover, Still Not a Liberal], Jonathan Chait, ''The New Republic''</ref>

==Americans vs. Europeans==

According to the World Values Survey, a significant majority of Americans believe the poor could become rich if they tried hard enough, whereas a significant proportion of Europeans disagree.<ref>[https://economics.mit.edu/files/335 Fairness and Redistribution By Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos]</ref> In a 2014 Pew survey, a majority of Americans disagreed that “success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside our control,” whereas a majority of non-Americans concurred.<ref>[https://www.marketwatch.com/story/religion-hard-work-are-just-2-areas-where-americans-and-europeans-diverge-2016-04-19 Hard Work & Religion are just 2 areas where Americans and Europeans diverge]</ref> “Americans believe that poverty is due to bad choices or lack of effort; Europeans view poverty as a trap from which it is hard to escape,” argue the
economists Alberto Alesina of Harvard and George-Marios Angeletos of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “Americans perceive wealth and success as the outcome of individual talent, effort, and entrepreneurship; Europeans attribute a larger role to luck, corruption, and connections.”<ref>[https://economics.mit.edu/files/335 Fairness and Redistribution By Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos]</ref> Ironically, however, social mobility in Europe is, on average, higher than in the US.<ref>{{wpa|Global Social Mobility Index}}</ref>

==See also==
*[[Banking crisis]]
*[[Just world hypothesis]]
*[[Vulgar libertarianism]]
*[[Protestant work ethic]]
*[[Survivalism]]

==External links==
*[http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=953 Hoover's "Rugged Individualism" speech, Oct. 22 1928]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
__NOTOC__
[[Category:Economics]]
[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Libertarianism]]

Categories: Economics, Sociology, Libertarianism