Fitting into a Box (part II)

At the core of Western culture is a contradiction: Be an individual—like everyone else.

Before you begin, you might want to go back and read my first post on this topic. I knew when I wrote it that I had more to say on the topic, but other ideas took precedence. (Plus, I think it’s more out-of-the-box to put some distance between parts I and II.)

I didn’t watch the third movie, but the Divergent trilogy inspired me to comment more on individualism vs. collectivism. If you haven’t watched any part of the series, all you need to know is that it’s set in a post-apocalyptic, dystopian future where the survivors are divided into five factions based on biology and personality. For example, the strongest, fastest, and fittest make up the “Dauntless” faction, while the smartest are members of “Erudite.” (There are three other factions that are less concrete: Abnegation, Candor, and Amity.) The purpose of this strict factionalism is to avoid further war and maintain what’s left of humanity.

A problem occurs, however, when the protagonist—played by Aaron Rodgers’s former squeeze—submits to her compulsory exam (which determines which faction she’s most aligned with) and discovers that she fits three of the five factions. This makes her “divergent” and thus a risk to the stability of the factional divide.

It’s not worth spoiling what happens next or explaining the bizarre intricacies of a fictionalized system of governance. My point is the modern West is seemingly the antithesis of the Divergent model: We’ve decided that hyper-individualism and precarity are preferrable to providing our citizens with clear roles, structure, and boundaries. Whether we believe it consciously or not, we operate as if the Smithian “invisible hand” will provide for everyone willing to work hard enough and that only the bare minimum of welfare or social support should be made available. For example, it doesn’t matter that certain college majors lead to few job opportunities—we allow our young people to go into debt up to their knees to pursue their “passion," and then we scoff at the idea of debt forgiveness. It’s a major contradiction.

To be fair, I’m undermining my argument from part I by implying that it’s preferrable to be in a box than outside it. This is intentional. If fitting into a box is considered a virtue by mainstream culture and comes with obvious benefits—such as in the context of the Divergent series—then I can understand it, even if I don’t like it. But I cannot, for the life of me, understand what the fuck is going on right now in real time.

My problem isn’t with the ideals of Western culture: My problem is with the hypocrisy of Western culture—which prides itself on individualism but punishes the very people who diverge the most from the norm. In this narrow way, the Divergent series echos that current milieu. If you go to law, business, or medical school, you’ll fit easily into a box and be celebrated for it. You won’t have to explain your choices to anyone, and if you’re motivated and talented enough, there will likely be scholarships available.

But if you decide you want to be an artist (for example), you’re on your own: If you fail, it’s your fault. The government will deny you benefits because you never had a “proper job” to begin with. There’s no faction for you. And no one has any fucks to give. It’s a real shame.

I’m tired of the negative individualism of the West. If we want our citizens to flourish, we should recognize their unique talents and dedicate resources to ensure their success—for their individual benefit and for that of the collective. Instead, we allow a few to flourish and many to waste away in dead-end jobs, long-term unemployment, and generational poverty.