[March 29, 2018] Riding my horse in the backcountry of West Virginia, one day I ran upon a man living alone in a shack by himself. I stopped to water my horse and speak with the man who looked to be one of the toughest men on the face of the Earth. From him, I learned more about rugged individualism that I thought possible.
My challenge has been to square my values of a strong military defense and the associated organizational strength necessary to protect the country with the rugged individual who possesses enormous personal strength in body and soul. Can I, as a military officer, be both a soldier (trained and disciplined) and a rugged individual (“up by the bootstraps” philosophy)?
I have always been captivated by the individualism of the American pioneer as we learned about their exploits across the country. From the gold miners in California to the early explorers who move westward, to the families in wagon trains throughout the Midwest, the people who showed that they didn’t need help from others but held to the philosophy that to succeed all you needed was your own two hands.
“When the war closed we were challenged with a peace-time choice between the American system of rugged individualism and a European philosophy of diametrically opposed doctrines; doctrines of paternalism and state socialism.” – Herbert Hoover, 31st U.S. President
But are these ideas compatible? I always thought there was some incompatibility here but that is not the case. My conversation with this backwoodsman showed me that, yes, you could be both a soldier and leader of men as well as a sturdy, independent individual. Most folks would think them irreconcilable but that is not necessarily the case.
It turns out that those folks who make the best military leaders are themselves, the most likely to be independent, strong of mind, a creative problem solver, and firm in one’s personal values. Those values (like loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and courage) are the same values that are most desired whether the person is a soldier or whether one is a pioneer or a backwoodsman.
The West Virginia backwoodsman taught me to think about living alone and taking those skills to teach others the way of independent thinking and how that will improve your leadership on the battlefield. A backwoodsman is not where I thought I would learn much of anything. I was wrong and happy I stopped to water my horse.
Ya gotta love it when our betters lecture us on how to do things. That is why being a rugged individual appeals to so many.
I too remember the Marlboro cigarette commercials and the “rugged” cowboy. To be a great leader, I believe it takes a certain level of individualism; otherwise, how can such a leader be creative, innovative, problem solver, and all those things that make an outstanding leader.
We’re dating ourselves.
Yes, many had no idea that this would be the case. Those folks simply lack the executive level leadership experience necessary to fully understand what is being argued here.
The main point here is that leadership (as in the military) is not incompatible with rugged individualism. Many I talk to are surprised by this. I am not. Long ago I realized that to be a highly successful leader, a person must be a bit of a loner (my term) and highly independent.
Douglas MacArthur, Ulysses S Grant, Nathan B Forrest, George Washington, etc. All were self-made heroes and each were rugged individuals. Today there are no true rugged individuals. However, I don’t deny some get close to this ideal leader. If you want to see a good example of how NOT to be a rugged individual then just look at past President Barack Obama. He was our first sissy president! Or maybe that was Jimmie Carter. I can’t decide but both were very poor leaders.
Yes, both lead from behind.
Thank you Janna for some common sense. Obama and Carter were the worst presidents in our nation’s history. Yet, they were loved by many because they “felt our pain” (reflecting what Bill Clinton managed to do while he was also getting a little extra sex on the side).
John Wayne always played a rugged individual and usually as a “cowboy.” While growing up he was my hero but more important, I saw how to act because he always did the right thing in the end and was able to look a bad guy in the eye and sock him a good one.
All good points here and another good blog post. I will add that it is rare that a person can successfully achieve the pinnacle of leadership and yet possess the characteristics of a rugged individual. World War II produced a number of these; for example, George S. Patton and Winston Churchill.
Leadership comes in many forms; as we all well know. But contrary to public understanding, you can be a “rugged individual” or just your own person and still be a great leader. These are not incompatible. It’s a difficult lesson and perhaps non-commonsensical yet that is the way of true leadership.
Folks never seem to understand the link between being a strong man and all the characteristics that go with it and with a strong national defense. That is why strength (of mind and body) is such an important trait in men.
Yes. I see plenty of these men in Australia. They are what makes our country great. Cheers.
Rugged individualism is still the goal for any man; no matter what the PC-breed, effeminate little twerps say.
You got it on target today Joe. And a little humor goes a long way when we stand up to the PC crowd.
🙂 No surprise here for the weak! Move along. Reminds me of the Marlboro Man. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/296885800407663904/
In my street friends growing up we all understood that if you were not willing to fight your own battles, then you were a wimp (not the word we used). We never called it “rugged individualism” but that is what it is. For those other boys whose parents were on welfare, we rejected them as somehow tainted with the stain of lacking the strength to be independent and free.
I always knew that being both a rugged individual and a soldier were compatible but never could put together a decent argument. Thanks for today’s article as it helps build that logic. On a similar note, there is not one truly good military leader that I know that didn’t have a bit of rugged individualism in their personality. That is not necessarily incompatible with being a follower; in fact it makes you a better leader.
Manly man! Oh, the days where men were men and women were women are behind us in this brave new PC world where we can self-identify as anything we want … or be several genders at once. /sarc off