SUPERHEROES AND PATHOLOGHICAL INDIVIDUALISM
Part 1: Sovereign Individualism
This might get me cancelled, but I really don’t like superheroes. I never have, even as a kid I would pick up US comics from the bottom shelf (I don’t know why they were always on the bottom shelf), flick through them and feel nothing. Even the art style didn’t impress me. I had grown up with UK war comics, where the art was gritty and less stylised, where humans looked like humans instead of weird primates with giant fists. The standard superhero costume always struck me as gaudy and ostentatious, rather than striking or cool. I mean, what’s the deal with capes? Who in their right mind would wear a cape to fight baddies? Attention-seeking narcissists, that’s who!
Look, this is a little tongue in cheek and if you love superhero comics great, keep loving them. But I won’t be joining you.
I have long tried to understand what is that I dislike about ‘supes’, apart from the silly outfits. I think I could point you to Pat Mills, who has not only written about his personal resentment of supes, but even wrote an entire comic series that parodied superhero tropes. Marshal Law is about a “Cape Killer” whose catchphrase tells you everything you need to know about Mills’ antipathy towards the genre:
“I hunt heroes, I haven’t found any yet.”
It’s possible that between Mills, Alan Moore (Watchmen) and Frank Miller’s Dark Knight (my first ever Batman comic) that they radicalised me against these god ol’ all American boys an’ gals. But I think what really irks me about supes is that, well, they just remind me of some of the least savoury members of the establishment.
So, let’s discuss why I think radical individualism is a problematic concept. But before I can discuss how this is reflected in superhero comics; we need to take a look at society itself.
The Sovereign Individual
The term "Sovereign Individual" comes from the 1997 book The Sovereign Individual: Mastering the Transition to the Information Age by James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg (yes, the daddy of that Rees-Mogg). The book argues that as technology advances, individuals will increasingly be able to free themselves from state control and the conventional systems of governance, taxes, and regulation. The "Sovereign Individual" therefore is a person who takes full control of their economic and personal freedom, rejecting traditional state structures in favour of self-determination and digital empowerment.
Key Concepts of the "Sovereign Individual" Idea:
Digital Economy: Individuals will be able to earn and store wealth digitally (cryptocurrencies, for instance), bypassing traditional banks and governments and, of course, taxes.
Decentralization of Power: Technology, particularly the internet, enables people to operate outside of state systems, giving them more personal power and autonomy.
Geographic Freedom: Sovereign individuals can move freely across borders, choosing jurisdictions that suit their needs (e.g., low taxes, minimal regulation).
Self-Reliance and Minimal State Interference: Individuals take responsibility for their own security, wealth, and education without relying on state-provided systems. Or indeed paying back into society.
Mainstream Adoption in Western Culture:
Cryptocurrency and Blockchain Technology: The rise of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin is the most explicit example of the "sovereign individual" concept. Cryptocurrencies allow individuals to conduct transactions, store wealth, and engage in commerce without relying on traditional financial institutions or being subject to government control.
Remote Work and Digital Nomadism: The shift towards remote work, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, has enabled a growing number of people to live as "digital nomads." This lifestyle aligns with the sovereign individual philosophy, allowing individuals to live and work from anywhere in the world, choosing locations that best suit their economic or lifestyle preferences.
Private Cities and Special Economic Zones (SEZs): Some proponents of the sovereign individual model promote the creation of private cities or SEZs, where governance is handled by corporations or independent entities rather than traditional states. Examples include cities like Prospera in Honduras, or projects like Seasteading, which aim to create autonomous, floating communities outside of state control. Kind of like gated communities for the super rich.
Minimalism and Financial Independence: Movements like FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) encourage people to achieve financial independence by saving aggressively and living minimally. The idea is to minimize reliance on state-provided social safety nets, thereby taking control over one's time and economic future. Which sounds great, but most people cannot save aggressively because all their income is spent on the ever increasing costs of basic living expenses, so it’s a concept that only works for the very well-off.
Decentralized Media and Free Speech Advocacy: Platforms like Substack or Mastodon represent decentralized alternatives to mainstream media and social networks. These tools provide greater autonomy over content creation and distribution, promoting a philosophy of self-determined publishing without reliance on corporate or state-controlled platforms.
Self-Improvement and Sovereignty in Lifestyle: Mainstream culture has increasingly promoted the idea of self-reliance through trends like the pseudoscience of biohacking, the gig economy, and homesteading. These movements emphasize personal control over one’s health, wealth, and environment, further resonating with the sovereign individual ethos.
In many cases, while the term "sovereign individual" may not be directly mentioned, the values of autonomy, decentralization, and personal sovereignty are increasingly reflected in Western culture, particularly through technology-driven solutions and capitalist economic systems that privatise profits but socialise debts. It aligns with many advocates of neo reactionism, or ‘Dark Enlightenment’ where the idea is to deconstruct liberal democracy in order to effectively gatekeep the wealth for the wealthiest in society. But individualism isn’t a new concept, the whole ‘American Dream’ ideal is based around being a go-getter, fuck everyone else, squash the little man, just do whatever it takes to make your own fortune, by any means necessary. Don’t worry about rules or laws, the only rule is ‘don’t get caught!’ No wonder any hint of collective responsibility gets washed away in a sea of red scare propaganda.
Pros and Cons
I’m sure you’re confused already about how any of this relates to superheroes. I don’t blame you and, let me be clear, these articles are a method for me to explore the intricacies of modern society and understand the world we live in, so that I can tell more compelling stories within that world. But it helps to analyse comparisons in popular culture, where stories reflect the world that we live in, whether that’s to satirise or parody politics, or where story ideas have been, perhaps, unconsciously influenced by societal tropes. Here in the UK we live in the shadow of high society, upper class twats in fancy hats, or our media’s fascination with the Royal Family (wretch). So it’s easy for any of these mainstream concepts to leak into popular fiction, often by cultural osmosis.
Concepts such as fiscal elitism.
Increased sovereign individualism, as defined by the concepts explained above, could significantly reshape various aspects of society. To understand its potential impact, especially considering the financial status of the majority, it's essential to examine both the positive and negative ramifications across key aspects of society, such as; education, healthcare, welfare, and standards of living.
So in the interest of balance, let’s assess the Ying and the Yang of these concepts. I’ll leave you to make your own mind up.
1. Education
Positive Impacts:
Personalized Learning: Technological advancements enable customized educational experiences tailored to individual learning styles and paces. Online platforms like Coursera, Khan Academy, and personalized tutoring apps empower individuals to take control of their education.
Access to Diverse Resources: Sovereign individualism promotes access to a wide range of educational materials beyond traditional curricula, fostering lifelong learning and skill diversification.
Flexibility and Autonomy: Individuals can design their own educational paths, integrating various disciplines and practical experiences that align with their personal and professional goals.
Negative Impacts:
Inequality in Access: High-quality personalized education often requires significant financial resources and access to technology, potentially widening the educational gap between the affluent and the economically disadvantaged. Some might argue this is the whole point.
Lack of Standardization: Without a standardized educational framework, ensuring consistent quality and accreditation becomes challenging, potentially devaluing educational credentials and destroying the noble role of teachers in society.
Socialization Concerns: Traditional educational institutions play a crucial role in social development. A shift towards individualized learning might reduce opportunities for social interaction and collaborative skills development. While also narrowing the students’ world view and increasing prejudice against those who are different.
2. Healthcare
Positive Impacts:
Telemedicine and Digital Health: Sovereign individualism encourages the use of telemedicine, wearable health tech, and personalized health management apps, increasing access to healthcare services, especially in underserved areas.
Preventative Care: Individuals can take more proactive roles in managing their health through technology-driven monitoring and wellness programs, potentially reducing the burden on healthcare systems.
Cost Efficiency: Direct access to healthcare services and information can lead to more cost-effective healthcare choices, bypassing intermediaries and reducing expenses.
Negative Impacts:
Access Disparities: High-tech healthcare solutions may be inaccessible to lower-income populations, exacerbating existing health inequalities. Not to mention that many health tracking apps and tech devices are demonstrably unreliable.
Data Privacy Risks: Increased reliance on digital health platforms raises concerns about the security and privacy of personal health data, as seen with the ZOE app, which is little more than an elaborate data mining scam, that provides feedback which basically boils down to: “move more, eat more vegetables!”
Reduced Comprehensive Care: Fragmented, individualized healthcare may lead to gaps in comprehensive care, as coordination between various healthcare providers becomes more complex. Private health insurance systems tend to result in a lack of basic healthcare accessibility to the majority of the population housed under such a scheme. How anyone can be priced out of receiving basic healthcare is beyond me, but many seem to be at peace with this.
3. Welfare
Positive Impacts:
Empowerment and Self-Sufficiency: Emphasizing personal responsibility can lead to increased self-sufficiency, reducing dependence on state welfare programs and fostering a culture of initiative and innovation.
Community-Based Support: Sovereign individualism can encourage the development of alternative support networks and mutual aid communities, offering assistance without relying on governmental systems.
Negative Impacts:
Diminished Social Safety Nets: A shift away from state-supported welfare systems risks leaving vulnerable populations without essential support, increasing poverty and social instability. With an ever widening wealth gap this can only get worse for those in the bottom 50% of earnings.
Increased Inequality: Without robust welfare programs, economic disparities could widen, as those unable to achieve self-sufficiency due to systemic barriers may fall through the cracks. This generally leads to increased crime rates, making society less safe for everyone. No wonder authoritarian governments spend billions on militarised police forces!
Fragmentation of Support Services: Reliance on decentralized and community-based welfare solutions may lead to inconsistencies in the quality and availability of support services. Again, less community support equals more criminality.
4. Standards of Living
Positive Impacts:
Enhanced Autonomy and Freedom: Individuals may experience greater control over their lifestyles, work environments, and personal choices, potentially leading to higher satisfaction and well-being.
Innovation and Economic Growth: Sovereign individualism can drive innovation, as individuals pursue entrepreneurial ventures and adopt new technologies, contributing to economic dynamism. Such as with the current space race funded by certain billionaires.
Flexible Work Arrangements: The rise of remote work and gig economy opportunities can offer more flexible and potentially fulfilling work-life balances. A happier workforce is a more productive workforce.
Negative Impacts:
Job Insecurity: The gig economy and freelance work often lack the stability and benefits of traditional employment, leading to financial uncertainty for many individuals – poor job security, low wages and high stress working conditions do not promote productivity.
Cost of Living Disparities: While some individuals may thrive in a decentralized economy, others may struggle with rising costs of essential services that are no longer subsidized or regulated by the state. What if everyone had to pay refuse collectors or street sweepers directly out of their own pockets?
Social Fragmentation: Increased individualism can weaken communal bonds and social cohesion, potentially leading to a sense of isolation and decreased collective well-being. There is strength in numbers.
Broader Societal Considerations
Sovereign individualism tends to benefit those with the resources and knowledge to leverage technology and decentralized systems effectively. Therefore, economic inequality may get worse, as the financially disadvantaged find it harder to access the tools and opportunities that enable sovereign lifestyles. Essentially, a wealthy, corporate aristocracy own all the assets, the bricks and mortar and means of production, while the rest of us become expendable cogs in the corporate machine. Which is basically where we, as a society, are at today.
2. Governance and Regulation: A shift towards individual autonomy challenges traditional governance structures, potentially leading to decreased state revenue from taxes. This could undermine the state's ability to provide public goods and services, further impacting social welfare and infrastructure. The tax burden on the ordinary working population is currently higher than at any time since the second world war, because corporations are paying less taxes than ever, while the richest 10% have seen their asset wealth more than double over the past few years. Assets that earn them millions in untaxed dividends each month. Basically, we are paying taxes, to bankrupt governments who outsource our public services to private corporations who filter out their profits into off-shore bank accounts while providing substandard services in return.
3. Technological Dependence: While technology is a cornerstone of sovereign individualism, increased reliance on digital systems makes society more vulnerable to cybersecurity threats, digital divides, and technological failures, which can have widespread repercussions. With the rise of A.I. this will only get worse as the kinds of jobs traditionally done by working class and middle class individuals will be outsourced.
4. Cultural Shifts: The emphasis on individualism may clash with collective cultural values, potentially leading to generational divides and conflicts over societal priorities and responsibilities. We are social creatures, with a pack mentality. We need close knit communities. Certainly, there may be benefits to having smaller communities within larger societies, rather than a single ‘hive-mind’ population of state-controlled automatons. But as is always the case with these kinds of ideas, there are more than two options available to us, but the nuance is always ignored.
We are rapidly moving towards the dystopian future that Sci-Fi has always warned us of.
Wait, What About the Supes?
I’m getting to that.
We live in a capitalist society that encourages individualism and personal accountability, where it’s potentially possible for almost anyone to succeed, given the right set of circumstances. But that also relies heavily on the exploitation of people and finite resources, while rewarding the narcissistic inclinations of conscientious high-achievers. Political parties, the media and now, social media CEOs deceive us with false narratives about the threat from ‘the other’. They tell us that foreigners, gays, transgender individuals, people who worship different Gods, or no Gods at-all are the reason that our lives are hard. But in reality, our lives are hard because of corporate greed and the radical economic individualism that sinks its fangs into our jugular and sucks us dry.
Throughout our history there have always been individuals in privileged positions who dictated the destiny of the majority. From Pharaohs and Emperors, to Kings, Queen and Presidents. Since the late 19th century, the traditional aristocracy have been replaced by corporate elites. A sort of Billionaire master race, if you will.
Although capitalist governments often talk about ‘small government’ and decentralisation in positive terms. What they invariably end up doing is centralising the needs of the corporations, while decentralising the needs of the masses.
Now, in the 21st century corporate billionaires have become aspirational celebrities, who embody everything that those of us who actually have to work for a living yearn for. It’s a form of Stockholm Syndrome, where the captor abuses the captive so much, the captive becomes conditioned to expect the abuse and even see it as love.
It’s this sense of pathological aspiration that makes me feel uncomfortable with the concept of superheroes. A handful of all-powerful, superior elites that the everyday people in the stories have come to rely on to solve all their problems. One might say it’s these narratives, driven by the corporate establishment, that creates a sense of learned helplessness that permeates through much of society.
But you’ll have to read part 2 if you want to see me unpack that one.
Troy
Part Two: https://sweetnightmaresuk.substack.com/p/superheroes-and-pathological-individualism