Individualism

The Western Worldview is centered on the individual. This individualistic lens guides the way we structure and understand our society–leading us to blame individuals for systemic problems and celebrate individuals for collective achievements.

• We blame chronic disease on a lack of self-control. Individuals are at fault when they consume sugary drinks, eat candy, don’t exercise, smoke, or do drugs.
• We blame climate change on individual consumption choices. Individuals are at fault when they fly, commute, eat meat, and use disposable products.
• We blame the degradation of privacy on individuals trading privacy for convenience. Individuals are at fault when they accept opaque TOU’s in return for online services.
• We celebrate entrepreneurs when they succeed. Individuals are responsible for their brilliance when they build profitable businesses.

Context Matters

This simplistic worldview fails to take context into account and is, therefore, incomplete. Individuals are molded by their community and environment. Consequently, most of their beliefs and actions fit within the narrow band that their culture defines as acceptable. An individual can’t be understood without first taking their context into account and, as a result, an individualistic worldview fails to perceive the world accurately.

Individualism’s Limits

Not only is individualism incomplete it’s also limiting and we reinforce it to our collective detriment.

• Individualism limits our collective imagination. We fail to find the best solutions when we see systemic problems, such as climate change, through an individualistic lens–systemic problems inevitably require systemic solutions.
• Individualism inclines us to rely on solutions that use “more choice and freedom” to affect change. Unfortunately, more choice often makes the problem worse by creating an exhausting paradox of choice and information gap that can be exploited by the wealthy and powerful.
• Individualism drives us to search internally for the source of our problems when we should instead look externally. It makes us ask what are we doing that makes us fat, unhealthy, or unhappy when we should be asking what are other places doing that makes them thin, healthy, and happy.
• Individualism asks what is wrong with the individual instead of asking what is wrong with the environment. It makes us ask what is wrong with us that makes us fat, unhealthy, or unhappy when we should instead ask what is wrong with our surroundings that does so.
• Individualism drives us to devalue community. We readily move across the country for a raise, thinking of the individual benefits while neglecting all the difficulties that will arise with the loss of our community.
• Individualism leads us to blame our own failures on a lack of willpower when we should first take account of the surrounding context. We might want to start exercising but, without a community to support our choice, we fail to make the habit stick.
• Individualism devalues the role of government. Government and politics are the primary way we make collective decisions and affect systemic change but the individualistic worldview sees no role for government in the life of the individual.

Contextualism

A better worldview sees the world, not through the lens of the individual, but through the lens of the context that shapes the behavior of the individual. We should view the world contextually, not individualistically.

• When we learn of an individual’s failings, we should not ask “what is wrong with that individual?” Instead, we should ask “what is wrong with their environment?”
• When we hear about challenges facing a society. We should not ask “what is wrong with that society’s people?” Instead, we should ask “what about that society’s culture drives its people to behave as they do?”
• When we hear about the success of an individual, we should not ask “what makes that person special?” Instead, we should ask “what special circumstances enabled that person’s success?”

To demonstrate the value of a contextual worldview, I contrast it with an individualistic world view for two areas where we love to blame individuals for systemic problems: Diet and Climate Change.

Diet

Discussions of public health are full of lamentations that blame Americans for eating a low-quality diet. The question is, are individual Americans the problem or is it their context? To illustrate, let’s explore a day trying to eat healthily.

A Day in the Life: Trying to Eat Well

Charlie wakes up,  full of determination to turn over a new leaf. Today is the day they’re going to begin eating healthily.

They start their day by searching the kitchen for breakfast. It needs to be quick so they can make it to work on time. Nothing in the fridge looks appealing so they settle for some cereal their significant other picked up yesterday. The box says “high in fiber!” so it must be healthy, right? (Spoiler: it’s also high in sugar and devoid of real nutrition.)

There’s nothing interesting on the news but an ad for Coca-Cola does drum up a craving before they remember their commitment to eating well.

They head off to work where they soon find themselves hitting a mid-morning slump, that cereal didn’t last long. Fortunately, a coworker brought in some cookies. Charlie knows they shouldn’t but they’re really struggling to concentrate so they give in–it’s only one, and after all, they did resist grabbing a Coke out of the vending machine.

Later, at lunch, they head down to the cafeteria where they’re offering pizza or a grain bowl. They pick the latter thinking it’s a healthy choice but they have no idea the dressing has so much sugar that it’s as bad as the pizza.

After work, they realize they need to go grocery shopping. Normally, they’d just grab some convenience items at the corner store but it doesn’t have vegetables and they’re trying to be healthy. As a result, Charlie gears up for the half-hour bus ride to the nearest full-sized grocery store.

At the store, they’re dismayed by the price of vegetables. How is it that carrots are so much more expensive than frozen pizza? In another isle, they buy low-fat yogurt thinking they’ll have a healthy breakfast, not realizing that it’s full of sugar. In yet another isle they buy low-carb tortillas thinking to make a healthy lunch, not realizing these are using hydrogenated vegetable oil.

Exhausted from a long day trying to stick to their new diet, Charlie succumbs to the pervasiveness of Coke and picks up a bottle at the cash register for the return trip home. Why is eating healthily so difficult?

Individual vs Contextual Interpretation

Looking at this story, it’s easy to blame the individual for their failure to eat well.

• They shouldn’t have had cereal for breakfast, they should have made eggs.
• They shouldn’t have eaten a cookie, they should have brought veggies to snack on.
• They should know that cafeteria food is unhealthy and should have brought their own lunch.
• They should be better educated and know that yogurt is full of sugar.
• They ought to have resisted that Coke.

That perspective seems limited, however, when contrasted with a view that considers the context in which their choices were made.

• If their significant other had purchased eggs instead of cereal they would have had a healthier breakfast that didn’t cause a pre-lunch sugar crash.
• If the cereal didn’t have misleading labeling, their significant other might have chosen a healthier product.
• If it was culturally acceptable to bring healthy food for sharing, their coworker might have brought a veggie tray instead of cookies.
• If their workforce considered the impact of unhealthy food on their workers, they would provide high-quality food in their cafeteria.
• If food policy emphasized producing high-quality food instead of a large quantity of food, local grocery stores might be sufficiently incentivized to provide high-quality food.
• Etc.

Our Context

This story is just a sample of the unhealthy food environment in which most American’s operate.

• Unhealthy food is cheaper than healthy food. The corn used to produce sugar is an order of magnitude cheaper than broccoli. With ~12% of the U.S. population below the poverty line and the average American with barely a month of savings, the unhealthy but cheap calories are a natural choice.
• Food deserts. Even if they can afford healthy food, another 20 million people in the U.S. live in food deserts. Can we really blame busy people for buying food at the corner store when the nearest grocery store is so far away?
• Advertising. The food industry spends billions of dollars advertising their products. The less healthy it is, the more heavily it’s promoted. I see ads for Coke constantly but I don’t know if I’ve ever seen an ad for broccoli. Advertising manipulates our most primal urges and gives food companies an opportunity to convince us their junk food is healthy–if it didn’t work, companies wouldn’t use it. It’s hardly a wonder that people buy junk food when they’re constantly bombarded with messages about it.
• Food availability. Grocery stores are full of sugary, processed junk. From T.V. dinners to fast food to candy, it’s hard to avoid. People will buy what’s easily available. If that’s junk, junk is what they’ll buy.
• Community. Eating differently than friends and family can be ostracizing. If someone’s community has poor dietary habits, it’s completely natural for that person to pick up those same bad habits.
• Education. It’s a full-time job to build a nuanced understanding of ever-changing nutritional best practices. Expecting individuals to keep up is a tall order. Furthermore, many American’s don’t know how to cook. How are people supposed to eat healthily if they’re never taught how to cook healthy food?
• Etc.

For further evidence that the system, not the people, is the problem, consider immigrants.  New immigrants arrive in the U.S. with an obesity rate of 8% but, after 15 years, that number jumps to 19%[1]. The people didn’t change, their environment did.

Contextual Solutions

This is all to say: changing the context will change the results. There are obvious ways to make improvements if we stop blaming individuals for failing to eat well and look at the bigger picture.

• Limit advertising of junk food, especially to children [2].
• Create programs that encourage local grocery stores to sell healthy food.
• Tax unhealthy food and subsidize healthy food.
• Teach people to cook.
• Be a cultural change agent and bring good food to your community.
• Incentivize healthy food programs at schools and workplaces.
• So many more…

Climate Change

As with diet, society loves to blame individuals for the impact their choices have on climate change. Climate change is often moralized as an issue of individual choice, but a day in the life of a well-meaning citizen demonstrates the challenge poised by our circumstances.

A Day in the Life: Trying to Be Carbon Neutral

Sidney woke up motivated. Today is the day they’re going to eliminate their carbon impact.

As Sidney is preparing for work, they notice a draft coming through their apartment’s old windows. The extra heating that requires certainly isn’t helping their carbon footprint but their landlord refuses to replace them–after all, heat isn’t included in the rent so what does their landlord care if there’s waste?

Ready for work, Sidney pulls out their phone with the intention of taking public transit to work for the first time. However, they’re dismayed to discover that doing so takes a full hour (two buses and a train) compared to 20 minutes by car. It’s cold out and work starts in less than an hour so Sidney heads out to their car instead.

On the way to their car, Sidney can’t help but be frustrated. They wanted to live near a train station but it’s too expensive thanks to NIMBY’s blocking high-density construction pretty much everywhere in the city. 

As Sidney starts their car they’re frustrated again. They want to get an electric car but they street-park, which would make it ridiculously difficult to keep the car charged.

During the drive to work, Sidney passes road construction and is left wondering how much of the CO2 emissions of that construction they’re responsible for. After all, they use the roads so they must be responsible for some portion of it. Likewise, what about their office and apartment building?

At lunch, the cafeteria has burgers or a pathetic salad. Sidney knows that beef has a far greater climate impact than vegetables but this salad wouldn’t satisfy a rabbit so they grab the burger instead.

In the evening, back at home, Sidney receives a call from mom letting them know that the family will be having a re-union this summer. Sidney assures mom they’ll attend but feels guilty doing so with the knowledge that their flight will be the most climate impacting thing they’ll do this year.

Looking back at the day, Sidney is dismayed. How are they supposed to live a carbon-neutral lifestyle when their surroundings make it so hard?

Individual vs Contextual Interpretation

Once again, it’s easy to blame the Sidney for failing to eliminate their carbon impact.

• They should sacrifice and rent a more efficient apartment, even if it’s more expensive.
• They should deal with the long public transit commute instead of driving.
• They should bring a sustainable lunch to work.
• They should find a 100% remote employer to eliminate commuting and the impact of having an office building.
• They should skip the reunion to avoid flying.

From this perspective, climate change is all about individual sacrifice–individuals must make choices that eliminate their carbon impact.

Looking beyond the individual, however, demonstrates both how difficult it is for an individual to eliminate their impact and how much of their impact is caused by forces outside of their control. In another world, Sidney’s impact would be much lower thanks to more conducive circumstances.

• High-efficiency housing standards, ground sink heat pumps, and 100% renewable electricity would mean Sidney’s heat is entirely 0 impact.
• High-quality public transit covering the majority of the city, like in many European and Asian cities, would eliminate the need to commute by car.
• An extensive public charging infrastructure would make owning an electric vehicle feasible.
• Construction regulations would ensure infrastructure is built sustainably.
• A network of electric bullet trains would enable cross country travel without the need for flying or driving.

Our Context

The majority of Americans recognize the importance of climate change but they live in a context that makes it difficult to live sustainably. In this context, no amount of personal sacrifice will bring an individual’s impact to 0. There’s simply too much outside of individual control.

• Electricity: Less than 20% of U.S. electricity generation is renewable which results in many individuals having no option for sustainably produced electricity.
• Housing: Millions rent their home and few have options for sustainable housing. For those that own their homes, making them fully sustainable takes heroic levels of research and they can often be impeded by local regulations (such as historic preservation codes that disallow upgrading windows).
• Transportation: Transportation generates more greenhouse gasses than any other sector but there’s no easy way to eliminate it as an individual. For starters, public transit is dismally inadequate across the entire U.S. Furthermore, electric car infrastructure is still too limited to justify the switch for most individuals.
• Construction and Industry: Essential products and infrastructure are almost never produced sustainably. Individuals can attempt to only use things that are sustainable but there’s often no sustainable alternative, including for essentials such as roads or buildings.
• Food: Food production supply chains are long and complex. As a result, it’s possible (unintuitively) for food transported across the country to be more sustainable than the locally grown option. Additionally, even the lowest impact options, such as legumes, are not 0 emissions unless they’re farmed using sustainable techniques.
• Etc.

Further elevating the importance of a contextual view is that the impact of CO2 emissions is communal. As with smoking, if one person pollutes, everyone suffers.

Contextual Solutions

Climate change is a systemic problem and it requires systemic solutions. Changing our lightbulbs isn’t going to achieve much but there’s a lot we can do if we think about systemic change.

• Convert electricity generation to renewables and modern nuclear.
• Build trains, buses, and car charger networks.
• Implement carbon taxes to disincentivize pollution.
• Promote regenerative agriculture through subsidization and training.
• So many more…

More

It’s not just diet and climate change. We love to blame individuals for systemic problems and in every case the best solutions are systemic, not individual.

• Is low voter turnout the fault of “voter enthusiasm” or voter suppression and political gridlock?
• Is the failure to suppress Covid-19 the fault of individuals or weak governments?
• Are the rich responsible for their wealth or are were they enabled by their community, employees, and existing infrastructure (roads, law, grants)?
• Are individuals responsible for eroding online privacy or have web giants accrued so much power that avoiding them is nearly impossible?
• Is mental health declining because more individuals are ill or have we created a society that simultaneously devalues community while expecting too much of individuals?
• So many more…

Concluding Thoughts

The context in which we operate shapes the way we behave. It’s easy to blame individuals for their apparent failings but it’s a mistake to do so without first considering the context that incentivizes their behavior.

I say this, not to absolve people of individual responsibility, which does matter, but to point out that individual responsibility is an inadequate way to view the world. It does not reveal the whole story–or even the most important part.

A contextual view, in contrast, provides a holistic view of the situation. It encourages empathy and enables problem-solving.

So, the next time you find yourself blaming an individual (yourself or others) for their circumstances or behavior, ask yourself: “What context created these circumstances or encouraged that behavior?” You might be surprised by how much of the accountability lies elsewhere, in the context surrounding the individual.