Americans Love Individualism. So Why Does Hollywood Demonize It?
"When it comes down to it, my life belongs to me," says Timothy Sandefur, author of the new book, You Don't Own Me.
Many popular movies make a constructive point: If you work hard enough and push through tough times, you can achieve your dreams.
In The Pursuit of Happyness, a struggling father tells his son, "Don't let anyone tell you, you can't do something." The movie is a true story about a man who overcomes homelessness and gets his dream job.
In Rocky Balboa, Rocky says, "It's not about how hard you hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward."
These are good messages.
They fit my libertarian philosophy. We libertarians believe people try harder and do best when individuals are free to pursue their own dreams.
In my new video, I interview libertarian Timothy Sandefur, author of the new book, You Don't Own Me. He says, "The title comes from the famous song by Leslie Gore, saying, I'm in charge of my own desires, dreams. I'm responsible for my own self."
"That's kind of obvious," I point out.
"It should be," he replies. "Unfortunately, a lot of people ignore this and say, 'You're responsible for other people, or other people must be responsible for you.'"
He gives examples from Hollywood.
"The original Wizard of Oz movie is this optimistic, joyful film about somebody who always had the strength within her to accomplish her dreams."
But the recent Wizard of Oz, Wicked, focuses on the Wicked Witch, who is a victim because she's green. Her dream isn't to do anything; it's for others to accept her.
"Very different from a film in which the character wants to accomplish something," says Sandefur.
She rejects the wizard's offer of a seat by his side, instead asking him to help society.
Sandefur says the message is, "We should not pursue our own dreams. Instead, curtail our own behavior for the benefit of society."
Likewise, in the latest Wonder Woman sequel, the villain grants individuals' wishes, but that threatens the world. So Wonder Woman tells everyone to give up their wishes. That saves the day.
As Sandefur puts it: "We should not want things, not desire or dream things, and that will save the world."
The flop Strange World is a kid's movie about a society that relies on a power source called Pando. Leftist scriptwriters, selling climate hysteria, have the hero say: "If we want to survive, Pando has to go."
The good guys happily destroy their main source of energy.
Sandefur mocks the stupidity: "Living without today's energy technology doesn't just mean doing without warm coffee. It means doing without ambulances when you have a heart attack, doing without an airplane to carry people's organ transplants. Doing without today's energy technology would be a colossal disaster for the human race. Yet the movie kind of ridicules that concern."
When woke movies fail, Hollywood often blames the audience.
After remaking Charlie's Angels, director Elizabeth Banks said, if this movie doesn't make money, it's because "men don't go see women do action movies."
But that's just dumb.
Didn't Banks notice that men helped make the original Charlie's Angels TV series a hit? Did she not notice Kill Bill, Aliens, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil—lots of successful action movies feature female leads.
"The reality," says Sandefur, "is that people are not interested in another lame remake that satisfies all the politically correct tests."
"Films that are individualistic," he adds, "tend to be very successful." But "Hollywood wants to propagandize to us about the evils of individualism."
To Sandefur, the best message is: "My life is mine. I don't exist to make other people happy."
"Sounds selfish," I say.
"It is, but it's also true that I might want to spend my life helping other people that I love, my wife and my kids. When it comes down to it, my life belongs to me."
COPYRIGHT 2026 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
"Americans Love Individualism. So Why Does Hollywood Demonize It?"
Gee, I don't know, John.
Maybe because Hollywood is anti-American?
Democrats aren’t Americans.
Democrats aren't people.
""But "Hollywood wants to propagandize to us about the evils of individualism."""
Appealing to the democrat socialist. Some people think that's the future of America.
I love you, Stossel, really I do... but to be in 2026 and say, "Like, what's up with this cuckoo bananas stuff going on in Hollywood?" is like starting your entertainment career doing impressions of Jimmy Stewart and Jack Nicholson.
In Stossel's defense, my Dad totally would start an OpEd show lambasting the current state of Hollywood by doing a Jack Nicholson impression... because he just set foot in a movie theater for the first time in 30 yrs.... and Stossel has a couple of years on him.
The rest of Reason, OTOH...
Not really a movie, but my 13 year old son is pissed off that, in the final season of Stranger Things, Will spent 15 minutes coming out as gay, which was much longer than the final battle scene with Vecna. I know being gay was a much bigger deal in the 1980s than now, but still. It had nothing to do with the plot, just woke virtue signaling.
It was disgusting. Just more grooming.
Story-destroying grooming. A "who cares if we're a bunch of misfit losers, we've got to save the world." speech would've been pitch-perfect both for the plot and for the period.
Instead, we wound up with a gay superpower affirmation session from a bunch of cartoon characters, a third of whom should've been "W.T.F...?" about Will's coming out to them even in the modern day.
The freedom to be gay. The ultimate individualism. The collective Christians and their Biblical morality might say otherwise.
So does the book the NYC Mayor was sworn in with.
People have the individual right to whatever form of sex without propagating it to the world for attention...
Only whores try to sell themselves and gain attention with sex.
Noting to do with religion...
He'd hate Romeo and Juliet. The entire play was about a couple of young teenagers coming out as heterosexuals, and falling in love. They dominate the action and get all the best lines. Even Shakespeare has to demonize the non woke couple by [SPOILER ALERT] killing them in the final scenes.
Mr. Stossel, 2020 should have disabused you of the notion that many Americans still “love individualism”.
It is not impossible that selfish people end up serving the common good through no particular intention to do so. Any assertion to the contrary is an example of reasoning backwards. There is also a common flaw in collectivist sloganeering that says that you must be evil - and wrong - if you don't start out with the intention of helping everyone; and that the common good will somehow appear if only everyone works together for the common good. The flaw is that there is no connection between working towards an undefined and unmeasured goal and achieving it.
"After remaking Charlie's Angels, director Elizabeth Banks said, if this movie doesn't make money, it's because "men don't go see women do action movies.""
Yeah, or maybe WOMEN won't go see women do action movies?
I'm sick of hearing about how it is men's fault that women sports and women movies fail. Woman outnumber men, and they are increasingly getting the higher education, which will increasingly earn them more money. So if the WNBA or Woman Boss Grrrl Movie doesn't make it, it is because their fellow sheelas are not supporting them.
You’re exactly right. The Marvels, one of the first major flops in the MCU, paying audience split something like 60/40 to men. I bet most action-adventure movies do as well (if not more skewed).
But hey, it can’t possibly be that these writers/directors/actors are hacks that are bad at their jobs, it’s totally the fault of racist/misogynist/homophobic men.
"men don't go see women do action movies."
It depends on how tight the hero costumes are; and how brief.
I believe that one area of Hollywood where women dominate is the position of Casting Director, the person in charge of choosing which performer fills which role. There are male casting directors, of course, but women really do seem to have taken up this role with gusto. Can you offer us any insight why this is the case?
Less pay?
I don't know about that. According to figures I found on the Internet, Hollywood casting directors are paid, on average, more than double that of Idaho casting directors.
That's possibly true of Jack in the Box workers.
Perhaps because of Weinstein and others like him?
A prophylactic against the casting couch? Makes sense.
Individualism is Selfish because the [WE] Identify-as special mob-of-Guns demanding ?free? sh*t isn't. /s
The world wouldn't look so confusing if the leftarded/criminal didn't spend every waking hour projecting exactly their own mentality onto everyone else.
It seems to me that individualism is a mainstay of Hollywood. The hero often fights their way through to truth and victory. In Erin Brockovich, the heroine takes on corporate greet that is killing people. In the 1975 movie Rollerball, Jonathon E. (James Caine) threaten the corporate masters with his individual achievements. Not sure where Stossel is coming from here.
Parody. No one's this obtuse.
Totally out of touch with the modern world.
""In Erin Brockovich, the heroine takes on corporate greet that is killing people. ""
To the benefit of the collective.
Hollywood likes individuals that fight the collective fight. They love to show individuals sacrificing themselves for the collective.
Erin Brockovich did not [SPOILER ALERT] sacrifice herself. She sued the company and [Spoiler ALERT] won. It's all about an individual's refusal to be a victim. I would have thought that even a MAGA cultist would find something admirable here.
I wasn't referring to Brockovich sacrificing, but that Hollywood likes the individual that does.
But she was doing it for the greater good. Not just herself.
Any individual who wants to achieve something must involve sacrifice. That's true whether in fact or fiction. Think of the character Rocky, the boxer. He had to sacrifice plenty to achieve his goals, his time and undergo enormous suffering. And not for others, but purely for selfish reasons. Hollywood rewarded Rocky with multiple academy awards including Best Picture.
Those who achieve something without sacrifice, think lottery winners, don't tend to do very well, in fact or fiction.
""He had to sacrifice plenty to achieve his goals, his time and undergo enormous suffering.""
Yes and that benefits himself. That doesn't do very well today. Focusing on himself (individual) he is committing a "trait of white supremacy" (individual over collective). Don't believe me? Look it up.
Today is about sacrificing for others for the better good. You know, the warmth of collectivism. This is what the left is pushing and Hollywood supports the left.
"That doesn't do very well today. "
Stories of heroes acting on behalf others have been central to the Western Canon since the beginning. Achilles and Jesus Christ are characters I've already brought up.
Stories about characters who act out out of selfish motives are also common. Romantic movies, where personal desires drive the story. Revenge is also a Hollywood staple. Sports movies, or those where the hero overcomes challenges, illnesses, rags to riches etc.
The difference these days is that groups that were previously not depicted are now front and center. Gays, women, etc etc. Gays and women are still individual and not just an undifferentiated stereotype, and that is something that Hollywood takes pains to depict. I see nothing wrong with that. Stossel's entire column seems like a whiny tantrum more than anything else.
""Hollywood rewarded Rocky with multiple academy awards including Best Picture.""
It was a different world a half century ago.
Things change. The cruelest law of the universe.
It was also a sham. "American rule" run amok. Brockovich found a bunch of people who were sick, went about looking for the witch that made them sick, found PG&E standing over what looked like a cauldron to her, and worked backwards from there.
Chromium is believed to *increase the risk of* cancer (mostly intestinal and digestive) above 100 ppb. The EPA even *raised* the limit to this number between the beginning of the trial and the settlements. There was back-and-forth in California as to whether the standard should be lowered to 50 or even 10 ppb (including an abandoned effort to lower it to 0.02 ppb). The study cited by Brockovich from China was allegedly published under protest by its author and was retracted and re-printed. In any event the single highest measured contamination was 20 ppb and the average reading was closer to 1.2 ppb. Even *California* *to this day* maintains the limit at 50 ppb.
Additionally, the majority of cancers and illnesses in Brockovich's lawsuit weren't cancerous or were other cancers with more common known *causes*. This includes her own immune-collapse which, while absolutely a medical condition, has not been linked to cancer and is in no way linked to Chromium.
Full disclosure: The industrial form (which was under contention), Chromium 6, is insoluble. It was hypothesized at the time that it could reduce to Chromium 3 in the body and be absorbed. Chromium 3 was a common dietary supplement at the time and I, personally (as well as tens, if not hundreds of thousands of other people) had consumed on the order of hundreds of grams of it (the equivalent of drinking billions of gallons of Hinkley's groundwater assuming 100% 3-to-6 conversion). No explosion of cancer has been noted.
Don't get me wrong. Inhaling any/all inert metals is absolutely bad for you, including causing cancer. Even eating them is not a good idea. But the idea that PG&E did hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to the health people of Hinkley with Chromium is utterly bunk.
Hollywood believes that they are better than the common person. They are wildly out of touch with real life and live in a bubble. It's not much different from the corporate media and elected officials in Washington DC.
When illegal immigrants were deposited at Martha's Vineyard, they were swiftly removed to other locations. 100% NIMBY, but very vocal that other people must be compassionate and subsidize the illegal immigrants needs for housing, food, health care. These elites cast aspersions at the working poor and middle classes that simply can't afford to subsidize illegal immigrants.
Hollywood is comprised of elitists that demand special treatment and considerations for themselves that they loudly oppose for the common person. Hollywood largely spews uninspired garbage and even when something interesting created, they find the need to inject some meaningless woke dribble.
Most people don't care if there are people of all races, all sexual preferences if it doesn't contribute to the story. Hollywood is constantly attempting to push a square peg in a round hole which only distracts from the story.
Some stories are better if there is a gay character, but other times it only destroys the story. A movie asks to to suspend real life, but when the movie is cast with actors that comprise a family with a mixture of races where there is no chance that the children could be conceived from the parents, it blows up the believability. If there isn't an explanation then the movie will be pure garbage even if the actors do a fantastic job.
Simply if it does not advance the story, it's worthless and just a distraction. There are to possible scenarios, create and develop a believable back story and develop the complex characters, or skip the wokeness. Unfortunately, they typically don't develop the characters and lay the wokeness extra thick.
You may like the movie Parasite. Authentic working class heroes with the upper middle class mercilessly pilloried. No gays or mixed racial couples. It's not Hollywood but Korean and the director/writer is a Socialist.
You rarely go wrong with a Russian film. The Fool is about a man, a plumber, who discovers a poorly built apartment block is about to collapse, potentially killing 1000s. This puts him at odds with the residents, who are mostly dead beats, the builders, the politicians, and the mafia. No gays, no mixed race couples
"Hollywood believes that they are better than the common person. They are wildly out of touch with real life and live in a bubble."
While Hollywood culture is one of the most morally degenerate in human history.
Hollywood doesn't demonize individualism. It runs on it. They call it the star system, where where films are written, shot and marketed around certain individuals, who are paid up to $US 20 million for a few weeks work.
Hollywood, if anything, lionizes individualism. In ancient times the hero of the story met a tragic end. Think Achilles or Jesus Christ. In today's Hollywood, a tragic end for the hero is the exception, and a happy ending is the rule.
Remember when much of Hollywood was investigated and some were accused of being communists?
Well the communists know how to infiltrate and push their messages and we simply let them without even realizing it.
Covid. We were mandated to: Wear a mask, Take the jab, Stand 6' apart or better yet, Stay home, FOR THE PROTECTION OF OTHERS.
Enemies of the west have pushed "the collective" and "anti individualist" propaganda in advertising and entertainment to new levels.
Especially because of Trump. Since he has taken a big stick and stuck it in the cogs of the leftist bureaucratic machine and directly removed income from enemies of America.
Trump ripping up the IPCC and the 500 billion dollar check to China I believe led to Covid with the help of the democrats aligning with enemies of their enemy to remove their enemy at any cost.
Biden signed the check and removed the sanctions and provided billions to Iran upon taking the seat in Jan 2021. Countering Trump began immediately not benefitting Americans but benefitting the enemies of America most of whom are leftist dictators.
"We were mandated to: Wear a mask, Take the jab, Stand 6' apart or better yet, Stay home, FOR THE PROTECTION OF OTHERS."
We? You mean the collective?
FOR THE PROTECTION OF OTHERS? You mean other individuals?
Whose side on you on, anyhow?