Looking+Backward+Response

Structured Freedom: Individualistic Nationalism //A Response to Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward 2000 - 1887//

The term nationalism brings to mind feelings of patriotism, cohesiveness, and unity all for the betterment of a nation. All of these sentiments seem support a community focused on the common good, leaving any idea of the individual behind. However, in the novel //Looking Backward 2000-1887//, Edward Bellamy describes a socially focused community that still caters to personal needs and wants, arguing that nationalism can, in fact, protect true individualism. This way of life is difficult for the modern American to understand, having lived in a world that has been centered around capitalism for so long. However, Bellamy is able to illustrate that individualism can be achieved through nationalism by creating a labor force, wage system, and shopping facility that allows citizens to make individual choices while maintaining the well-being of the nation.

Bellamy first described this unusual tendency of nationalism when he explained to Julian West the intricacies of the labor system. Citizens are given their choice of occupation with the understanding that all citizens are given the same annual salary. This raised a few problems that the society resolved in a very eloquent manner. In order to assure that jobs viewed as undesirable were filled properly, the society used workday hours as an equalizing element. Jobs that were more strenuous and demanding were accompanied by shorter workdays while the more effortless jobs saw longer hours. In this system, a person could fit their work habits to meet their needs or preferences. If spending time with family is important to a person, they may elect to do a more difficult job for a shorter period of time so that they can get home earlier. This way, everyone continues to be expected to serve the community and support the population, but the individuals are given the freedom to fit their occupation to their unique preferences.

This is directly related to the next example of how nationalism and individualism can work hand-in-hand. It has often been said that capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth, while socialism is the equal distribution of poverty. However, in this futuristic society that theory is greatly disproved. While it is true that citizens are paid the same annual salary, their spending habits are not greatly limited. Goods are bought based upon personal preference with the understanding that excessive purchases lead to sacrifice of another good. For example, someone who has an affinity for expensive jewelry may have to give up steak dinners, but that choice is left to the individual to make. Edith very carefully explains this process to Julian, saying, “the income is the same, [but] personal taste determines how the individual shall spend it.”

This society defies our modern understanding of nationalism. It is hard to fathom a culture that once stress the human need to “make your own wealth” ever becoming a nation that supports each individual equally (and sufficiently, at that). Bellamy, however, believed it was possible to break the capitalistic chains that had been controlling the country for decades. In his vision, society is able to thrive because it does not simply promote the well being of the nation, it caters to the needs of each individual uniquely. Consequently, all freedom is not lost, and in that, the people of Boston 2000 are able to live happy and successful lives.

Alyson, You concisely lay out Bellamy's view of individualism and how he reconciles it with his version of socialism. Some have argued that Bellamy was trying to make socialism seem palatable to middle class Americans, which seems to fit with what you say here. What do you think of Bellamy's theory? Do you agree that individualism is compatible with nationalism? Does his definition of individualism (the ability to choose your own career and what you buy) fit with your own sense of what it means to be an individual?
 * Comments: **

MSH