The Myth of Western Universal Values

The notion of Western universal values presents itself as a moral framework suitable for all societies, promising fairness, freedom, and progress. Yet beneath this universalist façade lies a set of assumptions that are neither universally shared nor universally beneficial. When examined closely, these values reveal internal contradictions and practical consequences that often undermine the very ideals they claim to uphold. Rather than serving humanity as a whole, they frequently privilege a narrow elite while intensifying division, inequality, and conflict.

Individualism: Freedom That Fragments Society

At the core of this value system is individualism, which elevates personal rights above collective well‑being. Protecting individual dignity is a genuine achievement, but the absolutization of individual rights produces a fragmented social order. When individuals are encouraged to prioritize personal gain over communal responsibility, society becomes an arena of competition rather than cooperation. Those with greater resources inevitably dominate, while the disadvantaged majority struggle to secure even basic rights. The result is not equality, but hierarchy disguised as freedom. (See The Freedom in Tango.)

Liberalism: Autonomy Without Obligation

Liberalism extends this logic by opposing constraints on individual action. It celebrates autonomy and creativity, yet often ignores the relational nature of human existence. Freedom detached from social obligation becomes self‑serving. When personal liberty is pursued without regard for its impact on others, inequality widens and social tension deepens. A society in which individuals are free to seek personal gain at the expense of others—through economic domination, exploitation, exclusion, or ideological manipulation—cannot be considered truly free. (See Tango and Equality.)

Social Movements That Deepen Division

Western approaches to social justice frequently manifest in movements that unintentionally reinforce antagonism. Modern feminism, for example, often frames relations between men and women as inherently conflictual. While it seeks to correct historical injustices, it can also entrench hostility by portraying the sexes as opposing camps with irreconcilable interests. This risks replacing one imbalance with another rather than fostering mutual understanding and harmony. A healthy society requires cooperation and complementarity, not perpetual struggle. (See Femininity and Feminism in Tango (I).)

Similarly, multiculturalism claims to celebrate diversity and protect identity. Yet by rejecting shared moral standards and common cultural foundations, it dissolves distinctions between right and wrong, truth and falsehood, beauty and ugliness. Without shared values, people are increasingly fragmented into narrow identity groups rather than united as a community. The result is not harmony but intensified conflict and atomization. (See Pluralism vs. Monism.)

Darwinism: Competition as Destiny

When Darwinian concepts are extended beyond biology into social theory, they reinforce this worldview. Emphasizing competition, natural selection, and survival of the fittest justifies the dominance of the strong over the weak and legitimizes inequality. This perspective neglects the essential role of interdependence, cooperation, and ecological balance in human survival. A society governed by the “law of the jungle” normalizes exploitation and aggression, eroding the cooperative foundations of civilization. (See Darwinism and Confucianism.)

Realism and Pragmatism: Utility Over Principle

Realism and pragmatism further weaken moral grounding by prioritizing outcomes over principles, represented by Machiavellianism and the saying "There are no permanent friendships, only permanent interests." When success is measured solely by outcome or personal gain, ethical considerations become secondary. This reduction of human behavior to utility encourages opportunism and undermines trust. Relationships become transactional, and social cohesion deteriorates as individuals pursue self‑interest at the expense of others.

Economic Liberalism and Capitalism: Markets Above People

Economic liberalism translates these ideas into material reality. Privatization and marketization weaken the state’s ability to regulate the economy for the public good. Essential services—healthcare, education, housing, infrastructure—become subject to market forces, limiting access for those with fewer resources. The economy comes to serve capital rather than the public, undermining equity and stability.

Capitalism elevates capital accumulation as an end in itself. Economic activity becomes detached from human well‑being. Relentless competition widens inequality, depletes resources, and accelerates environmental degradation. Short‑term profit seeking fosters opportunism, outsourcing, and financialization, hollowing out the economy and prioritizing rapid capital returns over sustainable development. (See Mammonism.)

Electoral Democracy: Politics of the Wealthy

Electoral democracy, often presented as the political embodiment of Western values, also reveals significant limitations. Although “one person, one vote” appears fair, the system is in fact shaped by the influence of capital. Western politics has largely devolved into a politics of the rich, where elite interests dictate policy while the needs of the masses are sidelined. Electoral competition encourages short-term thinking, ideologization, populist rhetoric, and polarization. Rotation of power makes long-term planning impossible, while party strife undermines effective governance. (See Democracy vs. Plutocracy.)

A System Built on Contradiction

Taken together, these elements form a system whose apparent universality conceals structural biases. The rhetoric of freedom and equality masks mechanisms that maintain elite dominance. By emphasizing competition over cooperation, autonomy over responsibility, and personal gain over collective well‑being, Western universal values create conditions in which a small elite prospers while the majority faces growing insecurity. The fundamental flaw of this system is its deceptive nature: it promises freedom and equal rights for all, yet allows the privileged to dominate the disadvantaged under that guise.

Toward a More Integrated Human Future

Human society is not a collection of isolated individuals but a network of relationships shaped by interdependence and shared destiny. A truly civilized society ensures the well-being of all, not just the powerful. It protects the weak from being abused by the strong. It integrates individuals into a harmonious whole rather than fragmenting them into competing units. A sustainable model for humanity must prioritize cooperation over competition and the collective good over unchecked self‑interest. Only by recognizing the limitations of these “universal” myths can humanity begin to build a more just, cohesive, and sustainable future. (See A Dance That Challenges Modern Ideologies.)

The Dancer's Dilemma: Intimacy vs. Personal Boundaries

Do tango partners need physical distance? In the vast majority of cases, no. Tango is an intimate dance. Most of its movements are designed for close embrace, where connection—not space—is the medium through which the dance exists. Intimacy is not an optional quality in tango; it is its defining condition.

There are, of course, movements that require distance—colgadas, ganchos, and back sacadas among them. But these are not foundational. They are largely products of the stage, created to capture attention rather than deepen connection. They belong to spectacle more than to social tango. Movement-oriented dancers often rely on them; feeling-oriented dancers rarely do. (See Social Tango and Performance Tango.)

Do such movements enhance the artistry of tango? Rarely. They are visually striking but often aesthetically shallow. They dazzle the eye but leave the heart untouched. Spectacle can entertain and impress, but it cannot replace the deeper beauty that defines tango. The tango that endures—the tango remembered years later—is not the one that astonishes, but the one that connects. (See The Conceptual Beauty of Tango.)

Timeless tango is always rooted in close embrace. Within intimacy, the essential qualities of the dance emerge: connection, harmony, feeling, subtlety, and emotional depth. These qualities cannot be amplified by distance; on the contrary, they are weakened by it. The closer the embrace, the richer the communication, and the more profound the experience.

If distance is not necessary, and the artistry of tango does not depend on it, why do so many dancers maintain distance while they dance?

The answer is not technical, but psychological.

Most dancers are not avoiding closeness for the sake of the dance, but for the sake of themselves. Close embrace requires trust, vulnerability, and a willingness to share space—physically and emotionally—with another person. These are not merely technical skills; they are human capacities, and for many, they are underdeveloped or guarded.

In Western societies shaped by individualism, personal boundaries, autonomy, and self-expression are highly valued. While these values have their strengths, they also foster a subtle discomfort with closeness. Intimacy can feel intrusive, even threatening. Distance, by contrast, feels safe. It preserves control and allows one to dance without fully surrendering to connection.

At the same time, individualism encourages the pursuit of distinction—the desire to stand out. In tango, this often manifests as an inclination for visible, impressive movements over subtle, internal ones. Spectacle becomes a means of self-assertion, a way to be seen and recognized. Intimacy, which dissolves the boundary between self and other, offers no such reward. (See A Dance That Challenges Modern Ideologies.)

This creates a quiet paradox. Many Western dancers, even experienced ones, understand that close embrace produces deeper, more authentic tango. They may admire it when they see it. Yet in their own dancing, they unconsciously maintain distance—not because the dance requires it, but because their psychology does.

The real challenge, then, is not artistic or technical, but psychological.

To dance tango as it is meant to be danced requires breaking down personal boundaries, overcoming fear of intimacy, discomfort with vulnerability, and habits of emotional self-protection. It requires moving beyond the reflex to perform and toward the capacity to connect. This is not a simple adjustment of technique, but a transformation of orientation.

Tango asks for courage—not the courage to impress, but the courage to surrender. It asks dancers to move beyond individualism and into relationship, to replace spectacle with sincerity, distance with presence, and movement with meaning. (See The Courage to Surrender in Tango.)

When this barrier is overcome, a deeper truth becomes clear: the real spectacle of tango is not what is seen, but what is felt and shared. Intimacy itself is the highest expression of the dance.

A Dance That Challenges Modern Ideologies

The study of tango demands more than mechanical mastery. While precision in steps, musicality, and technique is indispensable, the deeper challenge lies in reshaping one’s orientation toward human relationships and social values. Tango is not merely an aesthetic performance; it is a structured practice of interdependence, teamwork, cooperation, and mutual responsibility. Because of this, it stands in stark contrast to many of the ideological currents that dominate modern Western thought.

At its core, tango is a dialogue between the sexes—a physical and emotional interplay that honors difference and mutual expression. In contrast, modern feminism—especially in its more radical forms—champions women's self-awareness, independence, empowerment, and the dissolution of gender distinctions, framing gender relations as power struggles. Tango resists this antagonistic framing and embraces gender harmony. It treats gender not as a construct to be dismantled, but as a meaningful polarity: a unity of opposites rooted in nature. It celebrates the interdependence and complementarity of masculine and feminine energies, inviting dancers to embody these roles with nuance, dignity, and grace. (See Tango and Gender Equality.)

Individualism, another hallmark of modern ideology, elevates autonomy and self-expression above collective well-being. It encourages the pursuit of personal success and recognition, often at the expense of shared experience and the common good. Tango resists this fragmentation. It demands the subordination of ego to the embrace, where mutual presence matters more than personal display. In tango, teamwork outweighs individual impressions. True tango requires humility, adaptability, and surrender—qualities individualistic culture often dismisses as weakness. Here, self-expression is a collective endeavor, made possible through the cooperation of others and realized in the ability to listen, to yield, and to move as one with another. (See Tango and Individualism.)

Liberalism, with its relentless pursuit for novelty and freedom, also stands at odds with the ethos of tango. Liberal thought tends to treat tradition as a hindrance and rules as limitations—favoring perpetual innovation, the rejection of established forms, and rebellion against convention. Tango, by contrast, reveals the necessity of harmonizing innovation with preservation. It teaches that freedom, when divorced from discipline, devolves into chaos and ultimately undermines itself. The freedom expressed in tango is not the isolated liberty of the individual, but the freedom of an integrated and harmonious whole—a higher form of liberty. Its improvisational spirit flourishes not in the absence of structure, but within it: guided by shared etiquette, mutual awareness, and moral restraint. In tango, creativity is cultivated within boundaries. Its beauty lies in the balance where improvisation honors form, and freedom remains inseparable from discipline. (See The Alienation of Tango.)

Darwinism, in its popular social form, emphasizes the struggle for existence among individuals and the survival of the fittest. It legitimizes self-interest and frames human life as a zero-sum contest, fostering the "law of the jungle" and "might makes right" mentality. Tango, by contrast, proposes a vision of interdependence and harmony. It is built not on conquest but on cooperation; not on devouring the weak but on sustaining each other. Its essence lies in peaceful coexistence, where human beings form a community of shared interests, and individuals, through solidarity and collaboration, become greater than themselves. Tango epitomizes the idea that cooperation and sharing are more beneficial to a species' success than brutal competition (see Darwinism and Confucianism).

The imprint of these modern ideologies is visible in many Western tango scenes, where the dance is often distorted by coldness, arrogance, and excessive self-display. The obsession with novelty, eccentricity, and personal branding undermines the spirit of tango as a shared ritual of connection. These distortions are not just stylistic—they are philosophical. They reflect a failure to grasp tango’s deeper ethos, which cannot be mastered through mechanics alone.

For beginners, the greatest challenge is not technical but ideological. Tango requires unlearning much of what modern culture teaches about gender, individuality, freedom, and human relations. It demands a shift from self-centeredness to relational awareness, from individualism to collectivism, from display to presence, from control to surrender. This inner transformation is harder than perfecting steps—but it is essential. Without it, tango becomes hollow—a form without soul.

In this light, tango is not merely a dance but a countercultural practice. It calls us back to truths modern ideology obscures: that individuals are interdependent rather than independent, that men and women are different yet complementary, that freedom cannot exist without restraint, that harmony outweighs self-assertion, and that human flourishing depends more on cooperation than on competition. For those who accept its discipline and wisdom, tango becomes more than movement—it becomes a way of living more fully, humanly, and together. (See Tango: A Quiet Revolution of Connection.)

Pluralism vs. Monism

Pluralism holds that the universe consists of discrete, self-contained entities, each possessing its own independent essence. Monism, by contrast, maintains that what appear to be separate elements are in fact interconnected expressions of a single, unified reality grounded in an underlying coherence. Where pluralism foregrounds diversity and differentiation, monism emphasizes unity and interdependence. These opposing metaphysical views reflect broader intellectual traditions: pluralism aligns with the atomistic, analytical orientation of Western thought, while monism resonates with the holistic, integrative philosophies long cultivated in the East.

At the social and political level, pluralism champions individual distinction, self-determination, personal liberty, individual rights, private ownership, competition, and free-market economics. Monism, on the other hand, conceives of individuals as interrelated members of a larger social organism, prioritizing communal interests, cooperation, equality, fraternity, social responsibility, and collective well-being. These philosophical paradigms have profoundly shaped economic systems, political institutions, and social values across civilizations. The central question, however, remains unresolved: which worldview better serves humanity’s long-term interests and leads toward a sustainable and flourishing future?

Aristotle famously observed that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” For much of human history, monistic thinking prevailed, as early societies intuitively understood that unity and cooperation were essential for survival. With the rise of modern science, technology, and industrialization, individuals gained unprecedented autonomy, fostering self-reliance and accelerating a shift toward individualism and pluralism. These developments elevated personal liberty and diversity, contributing to the emergence of multiculturalism and the embrace of nonconformity, including LGBTQ+ rights, same-sex marriage, and other iconoclastic values. At the same time, these trends have been accompanied by broader philosophical shifts: relativism, which blurs distinctions between truth and falsehood, right and wrong, or beauty and ugliness; skepticism toward intellectual authority, reason, and even science; and policy frameworks such as affirmative action aimed at redressing historical inequities. While these developments have expanded inclusion and stimulated creativity, they have also intensified social fragmentation, eroded shared moral standards, and fueled ideological polarization, partisan conflict, and civic decline (see Tango and Individualism).

Rooted in a Darwinian logic of competition and survival of the fittest, individualism and pluralism often neglect the values of equality, morality, and the common good. The result has been growing social instability—not only within societies that champion these ideologies but also globally. This is evident in the moral decay, political dysfunction, and rising lawlessness within the United States, the erosion of integrity among its political elites, and the destabilizing effects of its hegemonic and coercive foreign policies abroad (see Darwinism and Confucianism).

At their core, these ideologies overlook a fundamental truth: human beings are inherently interconnected and interdependent. Our survival and progress depend on solidarity and cooperation. A healthy society must be grounded in philosophies that cultivate cohesion, shared moral principles, social stability, and effective governance. When individuals are set against one another in relentless pursuit of personal gain, division and hostility inevitably follow.

This pattern is evident in the aftermath of many U.S.-led interventions carried out in the name of “liberation,” which have frequently produced domestic instability, humanitarian crises, and mass displacement. These consequences are further compounded by open-border policies and the growing challenges of multicultural integration at home. If radical liberalism continues to advance—privileging absolute personal freedom over collective responsibility, rejecting all authority as oppressive, framing democracy as “the tyranny of the majority,” intensifying gender antagonisms, politicizing education, media, and law, and fragmenting society into ever-narrower identity groups—the social fabric will continue to unravel.

To be clear, liberalism has historically played a vital role in unlocking human potential and enabling capitalism’s rise in the West. Yet its excessive emphasis on individualism has increasingly become counterproductive. As one perceptive reader noted: “Freedom and human rights movements have placed an intensified focus on individuality. This inflated sense of self diminishes our ability to perceive the world as a unified whole and may underlie many modern psychological struggles—loneliness, depression, and mental distress. If we can zoom out and recognize ourselves as small parts of a vast universe, a fact unchanged since the Big Bang, we may rediscover the beauty of ancient natural laws and adopt a healthier perspective on ourselves and the world” (see A Wise Voice).

Although freedom is a legitimate human aspiration, radical liberalism has paradoxically resulted in the reconcentration of wealth, resources, and political power in the hands of a few—no longer under monarchies or aristocracies, but under the guise of free competition.

Observing the West’s historical success, the East—while remaining rooted in holistic philosophy and Confucian ethics—has increasingly encouraged human initiative and creativity, producing remarkable gains in recent decades. While the East has selectively integrated Western strengths, the West has largely refused to learn from the East, clinging to the belief that its past success validates its ideological supremacy. Rather than confronting its structural and moral contradictions, it has doubled down on neoliberalism. Enormous resources are devoted to media propaganda, NGOs, military expansion, and cognitive, trade, technological, and financial warfare to preserve its system and impose its values globally. This reaction is understandable given that capitalism has a vested interest in sustaining these ideologies—without them, plutocracy risks losing its legitimacy (see Democracy vs. Plutocracy).

Yet the global balance of power is shifting. While the pluralistic West once held clear advantages, the monistic East—having integrated Western strengths—has rapidly closed the gap and, in many areas, surpassed it. Individuality and sociality are both intrinsic dimensions of human nature and must be held in balance. Neither authoritarianism, which suppresses individual freedom, nor individualism, which denies humanity’s shared destiny and interdependence, can sustain a cohesive society. A successful society is built on fraternity, solidarity, cooperation, and a willingness to subordinate narrow self-interest to collective purpose. This is how families function (see Tango and Family Values). This is how tango is danced. This is how China has grown strong. And this is how America can regain its strength.

In this context, tango offers a powerful counterpoint to modern individualism. It reminds us that we are not isolated actors but participants in an intimate, responsive human partnership. Through its emphasis on mutual accommodation, trust, and cooperation, tango reveals a profound truth: genuine progress arises not from competition, but from collaboration. In this sense, tango confirms that equality, cooperation, mutual benefit, and sharing are not merely aesthetic ideals, but the true foundations of a better world (see Understanding China: Philosophies That Separate Two Worlds).

Tango and Individualism

In life, we all inhabit a range of roles—husband and wife, father and mother, president and vice president, center forward and linebacker, leader and follower. For any team to function well, these roles must be understood, respected, and fulfilled. When boundaries blur or are ignored, partnerships falter—whether in marriage, family, politics, sports, or tango.

True teamwork requires cohesion. Agreeableness was once celebrated as a virtue because it fostered unity and mutual understanding. Though each of us has personal preferences and perspectives, thriving as a team means prioritizing the common good, practicing empathy, and setting aside ego. A collective flourishes when its members see themselves not as isolated individuals but as integral parts of a greater whole. This calls for a shift from self-centeredness to shared awareness.

When individualism dominates a culture, the collective begins to suffer. In today’s America, self-interest and entitlement often take precedence over communal responsibility, leading to division and stagnation. Political gridlock reflects a deeper cultural shift—one marked by rigid ideologies, inflated egos, and a fading sense of shared purpose.

Liberalism, with its emphasis on personal freedom, has undeniably expanded human potential. But when individuals are seen as wholly independent and self-contained, we lose sight of our essential interdependence. Human rights should include not only individual liberties but also shared values like coexistence, equality, and cooperation. Unchecked individualism, however, elevates personal gain above social harmony, fostering rivalry, exploitation, and cultural fragmentation.

This trend is increasingly evident in our tango, where many dancers see themselves as independent performers rather than partners in a shared experience. Freedom is mistaken for a refusal to surrender; equality is confused with sameness. Traditional gender roles are often dismissed, leaving men hesitant to lead and encouraging women to emulate men. The classic close embrace gives way to open holds, prioritizing self-expression over connection. Inflated egos breed rivalries, and those seeking partners often find aloofness instead of camaraderie.

Yet despite our obsession with independence, we remain human—vulnerable, interdependent, and in need of one another. That’s why we return to tango: to reconnect, to experience intimacy and partnership, to co-create something greater than ourselves. But too often, these deep human needs are undermined by pride, self-absorption, and an unwillingness to compromise.

Tango places us in a relationship that challenges us to reconsider what it means to be human. It asks us to move beyond ego, to collaborate, to dance in harmony by respecting roles and embracing mutuality and agreeableness. These lessons extend far beyond the dance floor. We need political leaders who embody them—leaders who can unify us, bridge divides, rekindle a spirit of solidarity, and restore our ability to work as a team.

Only by embracing the spirit of tango—choosing connection over isolation and cooperation over self-interest—can our milongas and society become better places to dance and live—not only more harmonious, but more deeply human.

A Wise Voice

Anna: Hi, Paul, I totally agree with you on "Good human values are based on what is beneficial to the humanity rather than an individual person or gender." It is so beautifully said and so wise. Freedom and human rights movements led people to put a lot of emphasis on individuality and as a result, the inflated self-image lessens our ability to view the world as a connected whole. This inflated self-image is also probably the root cause to many modern psychological ailments and problems: loneliness, depression, and mental disorder. If we can zoom out and see ourselves as a tiny one, rather than the one, in this big universe, a fact that has not changed a bit since the big bang, we may again find the beauty in the ancient natural law and adopt the right perspective towards the self and the rest of the world.

I had a few Tango lessons by now and was deeply touched by this beautiful dance. I am a woman with strong characters in other people's eyes. When I first started, I experienced a lot of struggle, questioning, and doubt. As you have explained in your excellent blog, unless we adopt the appropriate values and mentality for this dance, we cannot dance the real Tango. As a matter of fact, unless the man and the woman take the right role, they cannot even get the dance going. They will be constantly on each other's toes. No agreement, no harmony, no beauty. Then one day luckily I met a partner who did all the things you mentioned that a good leader should do, he guided me, protected me and let me shine. And without me knowing I surrendered all my wariness and entrusted myself to him. The steps followed naturally. At that moment, I knew how Tango should be done and how beautiful it can be when it is done right, when a man is a man and a woman is a woman. Looking forward to more of your sharing.

Paul: Dear Anna, I appreciate your comment deeply because it summed up so well an important theme throughout this blog, and you did it with such simple elegance. When I started this blog, I thought it was just about tango as a dance. But I soon discovered that in fact I was in search of the lost humanity in ourselves, without which tango lost its soul. Tango awakens our humanity because it forces us to zoom out and see ourselves as part of the whole, to understand our smallness, loneliness, vulnerability and interdependence, as reflected in the “ancient natural law,” and to appreciate the beauty of Creation from a macro or cosmological perspective, as you eloquently put it. The individual is trivial. The strength of mankind comes from our connection, solidarity and cooperation. This truth, as attested by tango, must not be forgotten no matter how much we have achieved individually. Please write and let your voice be heard! My best wish to your tango!

The Freedom in Tango

The freedom in tango transcends the mere liberty of isolated individuals; it is the freedom of the whole unity in a higher sense (see Pluralism vs. Monism).

In America, freedom is frequently interpreted as the sovereign right of the individual—an inherent entitlement bestowed by the Creator, encompassing life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This understanding prioritizes personal autonomy and self-interest, thereby legitimizing competition as a natural and necessary force. American laws support and protect this competitive ethos, while the education system aims to enhance individuals' abilities to succeed against others. Economic structures harness competitive drive to fuel growth, often at the expense of responsible resource use, social cooperation, and equitable wealth distribution. The political landscape prioritizes partisanship that serves special interests, fostering division rather than unity, and leaving pressing social issues—such as poverty, homelessness, substance abuse, gun violence, unaffordable healthcare, failing education, and deteriorating infrastructure—unresolved for decades (see Understanding China: Philosophies That Separate Two Worlds).

This civilization, founded on self-interest, competition, predatory development, and excessive consumption, is now facing a significant crisis. On one side lies unchecked greed; on the other, the depletion of natural resources. We witness extravagant lifestyles and monumental waste contrasted with a rapidly deteriorating environment. Economic indicators such as surging GDP coexist with widening inequality, where a privileged few enjoy immense wealth while the majority struggle to get by. The philosophical foundations of this system are evidently flawed, providing little consideration for justice, fairness, coexistence, equality, cooperation, and shared prosperity. It has given rise to a tiny minority of winners and a vast population of losers (see America Is in Big Trouble).

The Declaration of Independence articulates, “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

These words merit renewed contemplation. Do we truly grasp their meaning? Is it time to reevaluate the foundational principles of our society? It seems clear that the hyper-individualistic interpretation of the Constitution has neither brought, nor likely will it bring, the safety and happiness it promised to the American populace.

When tango arrived in America, it introduced a fresh perspective that few recognized. Unlike individualism, tango perceives individuals not as isolated, self-interested beings, but as interconnected and interdependent contributors united by a shared purpose. Without other human beings, an individual alone is incomplete, no matter how important they may see themselves from their own perspective. In tango, no dancer can excel alone; success is not an individual triumph, but the result of mutual cooperation. Relationships in tango do not stem from competition, control, or power struggles; rather, they are anchored in surrender, collaboration, accommodation, and complementarity.

Resting in her partner's arms, entrusting herself to him, feeling his masculine strength, sharing his emotions, enjoying his support and protection, following him freely without worry, moving with him in harmony, and letting her femininity and beauty shine to attract and satisfy him—these, for the woman, bring pleasure, security, and a realization of her value as a woman. Conversely, being with her, earning her trust, relishing in her affection and allure, feeling her feminine body moving in his arms, pampering her, protecting her, and showcasing her beauty—these, for the man, bring pleasure, comfort, and a realization of his value as a man. Tango revitalizes the essence of partnership, unmarred by power, greed, or personal gain. It creates a space where every participant, regardless of background, experiences the same dignity and grace as those in nobility.

The allure of tango lies in its shared intimacy, connection, unity, and cooperation. In stark contrast to radical ideologies like individualism, feminism, neoliberalism, and power politics, tango champions values such as love, fraternity, kindness, submission, and collaboration. Although tango is a non-economic endeavor, as an act of cooperation its joy is shared. This principle has broader applications. What is not based on self-interest does not submit to the control of the invisible hand of capital and greed. We might envision a world where wealth, akin to the joy of tango, is shared fairly among all who contribute to its creation. Just as the victory of a sports team results from the cooperation of its players, so the honor is given to all team members rather than just the one who scored. Shareholding, therefore, seems to be a better way of distributing wealth than minimum wages.

How we view ourselves determines how we shape our political, economic, social, and cultural realities. Rousseau famously stated, “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” We have created our own chains, and it is up to us to unchain ourselves. Sadly, our civilization has not yet matured to this understanding, as evidenced once again by recent reports of torture and other injustices. To be a truly free people, we must first understand what freedom means. There is still a long way to go before we achieve the kind of freedom envisioned in our Constitution. I can only hope that tango may help accelerate this process (see Tango and Equality).