[BowBun]

> The US is a country of immigrants who for the most part came here because they valued the individual over the community

I disagree with that statement, despite agreeing with the following:

> The individualism lives in the deepest roots of our culture.

There's a plethora of reasons people come here: freedom to express themselves, security, financial opportunity because they're literally living in squalor elsewhere, etc. I don't think a majority of people came because they _wanted_ individualism. They wanted to improve their situation and came to a country that had a pretty good marketing spiel.

Also if you look at immigrant communities in the US, they tend to be much closer than ones that have been here for generations (with exceptions). They create the community you claim is rejected when they come to the USA. The most active communities I've witnessed here are the Asian, Hispanic, and African social circles built around the culture that they left behind in their home countries. So I don't think your argument about immigrants leaving = individualism holds.

[notmindthegap]

"There's a plethora of reasons people come here: freedom to express themselves, security, financial opportunity because they're literally living in squalor elsewhere, etc. I don't think a majority of people came because they _wanted_ individualism. They wanted to improve their situation and came to a country that had a pretty good marketing spiel."

All these reasons are examples of valuing the individual over the community.

[BowBun]

I disagree, I think you're oversimplifying complex decisions to represent an individual's value system.

I can think the community is more important than the individual, but still leave to protect my children from starvation. Reducing human behavior to any single statement like you have done leaves many factors out, which is why solving these social issues is so insanely difficult.

[notmindthegap]

"I can think the community is more important than the individual, but still leave to protect my children from starvation."

You can think that, but your actions demonstrate otherwise. In that scenario, you valued your children's health over remaining within your community. What is special about those specific children? They are yours towards whom you feel a duty you must fulfill as their parent. And yet, there are others who would choose to stay. I'm not passing judgement on either.

[mxkopy]

> What is special about those specific children?

Ostensibly, they're part of the community. I'd argue it's not impossible, but even necessary, for the needs of a community to align with the needs of an individual. Reducing it to a "You benefit the community xor yourself" binary is engaging with black and white thinking.