ircles of friends, and the like.” And, in fact, this primary group influence tends to be stronger than secondary-group influences (the local PTA, church group, or union, for example). An individual’s personal views regarding an issue, then, will be strongly influenced by the “environmental” stimuli provided by family, friends, and organized groups, most successfully through indirect, as opposed to overt, influence. It is not difficult to see how the spread of such cynicism atrophies into what Elshtain refers to as a “spiral of delegitimation.” Cynicism is no longer a “belief” but takes on a life of its own – it becomes “fact”. It is, therefore, no longer “cynical” to believe that all politicians are out to get only what benefits them, but it is a certain truth, the “proof” of which is readily revealed through scandal after scandal, the delight of which is indeed that “we” are better than “they”. Tension is heightened as individuals struggle with the balance between individual needs and desires (“we”) and those of society (“they) – why shouldn’t our needs take precedence over the needs of others. This mentality leads to Elshtain’s second concern. Translating ‘Wants’ into ‘Rights’. Individualism, as expressed in the previous sections, is both a negative, as well as a positive notion. In the positive sense, individualism expresses courage to challenge the status quo and expression of unique individual identity (positive non-conformity). 21st Century individualism, however, has developed what Tocqueville warned would be the inevitable conflict between the principles of individualistic self-interest and public good. The foundation of this development seems to be the rapidity with which America has grown from a powerless colonial state to a fully industrialize...
