progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

The Telmarc Group
PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC
INTELLECTUAL
"Equality does not signify that kind of mathematical or physical equivalence in virtue of
which any one element may be substituted for another. It denotes effective regard for
whatever is distinctive and unique in each. It is not a natural possession but it is a fruit of
the community when its action is directed by the character of the community."
This is a statement of what we now call multi-culturalism, relativism, and
communitarianism. Dewey states effectively that we are what we are only as reflected by
our community, the society we belong to. We have no individuality at all. There is not
natural possession of our person as a single unique individual but only as a cog in a
wheel, albeit a slightly different cog, but recognizable only as the whole, namely the
wheel.
Boisvert also states: 89
""Individuality" identifies the distinctive manner in which someone participates in
communal life. It signifies uniqueness, irreplaceability. "Individualism" connotes both
isolation and self interestedness. It assumes the opposition of self and community.
"Individuality" …suggests a mode of participation. It recognizes the irreducibility of
community and the multiple interest associated with it."
Individualism is more than what Boisvert states and less than what he presents.
Individualism is the recognition that the individual, each person, has to themselves
certain rights, rights to free speech, his own religion, protection from Government
oppression, and more. The individual does not have to belong to some group, as long as
he is a citizen. He does not have to be an Elk, a Mason, and a Democrat, to have the
rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. Locke guaranteed rights to property to the
individual. Winthrop was seeking a bond to preserve a threatened community.
Fott describes Dewey and the individual in contrast to Locke as follows:
"His (Dewey's) view of the origin of the state is directly opposed to the tradition of liberal
individualism and the social contract. The state does not arise "by direct conscious
intent". He (Dewey) continues "the idea of a natural individual in his isolation possessed
of full-fledged wants of energies to be expended according to his own volition and of a
ready-made faculty of foresight … is as much a fiction…as the doctrine of the individual
in possession of antecedent political rights …"" 90
This is a direct rejection by Dewey of the individual and the rights that apply to that
individual. It must be so since Locke and the Founders stated clearly that those rights
accrue from God and as an avowed atheist there is thus no source for those rights so they
89 Boisvert p. 68.
90 See Fott p. 33.
Page 80