American beliefs and values

American Beliefs

According to his text American Beliefs, John McElroy suggests that America is a nation that is dependant upon a creed where individual success is valued. Rather than seeing society as a collective organism, where certain personal rights must be sacrificed so that the nation can function as a whole, Americans see society as a collection of individuals, for whom every person's investiture in society should be valued as equal. For example, in Europe, the rights of the lower classes were often 'necessarily' sacrificed, through heavy taxation upon the peasants to support the sovereign's lifestyle or through the feudal system, so that the nation as a whole could presumably be stronger while serfs tilled the land for the lords. The system was unequal, but deemed necessary so that the nation was not weak, and so that the society could remain functional and not fall into anarchy or be overtaken by a stronger power.

America, rather than beginning with a collective focus on society in its social legislation and the perspective of its people, according to McElroy, sees unity within the nation's society and government as merely a means to an end, a way to facilitate the creation of a loosely federated system that protects individual rights and liberties. The creation of more powerful persons in the form of politicians is merely an unfortunate symptom of the political process; it is not assumed that these persons deserve to be more wealthy and privileged than other Americans.

America's early sense of frontier individualism partly gave birth to its focus upon capitalism, and the belief that capitalism is an absolute good, because, as society is composed of individuals, every person's success improves society. Again, in a context where heredity confers a title and wealth upon a person, the have-nots are likely to look with resentment upon those who have more than they possess. In America, this attitude is frowned upon, because there is an assumption that every person who succeeds deserves his or her success. On one hand, this assumption has been a positive force, as there have genuinely been self-made men and women in America. However, on the other hand, this also leads to a tendency to look down upon persons who are not as financially successful, because it is assumed that these poor persons essentially deserve their lot in life, as they presumably had the same opportunity to succeed as other persons in America. Also, it can cause Americans to turn a blind eye to the abuses of industry. If every American's lot is improved by success, then why, for example, should the laborers in the steel mills see their lives as poorer rather than better because of the success of their capitalist employers?

McElroy's analysis is convincing in light of the fact that unions are far less powerful in America than they are in Europe, and how even today, after America adopted some programs to help the indigent, so many successful American corporations like Wal-Mart are still able to avoid unionization, and celebrate the company's success as a gift to society and its employees, as well as the corporation's founders. It also explains the assumption that achievement as the main determinant of social rank in America, rather than birth. This belief is the result of the American creation of a more socially mobile society. Thus, the underlying reason for the assumption that the success of the individual is to be equated with the success of society as a whole -- if society is full of opportunity, persons who are wealthy and successful are assumed to deserve their success, and are deserving of their higher status.