What started as an urge to comment on Cassie Craven’s take on Zohran Mamdani, turned into a much broader commentary on individualism, collectivism, and the quiet beauty of federalism.
This is about three things: why New York isn’t a threat to Wyoming and vice versa, where Craven’s argument doesn’t quite hold up, and what we actually mean when we use words like individualism and collectivism.
When I started graduate school, I found myself in the orbit of the Federalist Society.
So while I was studying trees at the School of Environment, I also absorbed more constitutional law than expected.
Most of the people in those conversations are now in various stages of morphing into the next JD Vance.
Meanwhile, I took a different route — heading West to move cattle and help manage Wyoming’s landscapes.
Before going further, precision matters:
Federalism divides power between states and the federal government.
Individualism treats the individual as the primary moral unit.
Collectivism prioritizes the group and shared obligation.
Capitalism relies on private ownership and markets.
Communism seeks common ownership and a classless society.
Socialism centralizes or nationalizes major economic activity.
Socialized public services are collectively funded services within a market economy.
Blurring these terms is a reliable way to manufacture fear.
Which brings us back to Mamdani and Craven.
I understand why collectivism triggers fear in the reddest state. I recall the fall of the Berlin Wall. I was born in the Soviet Union, but grew up in Germany, where capitalist markets coexist with socialized public services.
My father helped capitalistic German firms like Siemens expand into Kazakhstan, while I attended public schools and used public healthcare. None of that abolished markets or individual freedom. That nuance matters and it’s where Craven’s argument falls apart.
She claims “rugged individualism is the embodiment of our collective,” citing military members who helped capture Nicolás Maduro. But the example proves the opposite.
The U.S. military is one of the most effective collectives on earth precisely because it suppresses rugged individualism through uniforms, rank, standardized pay, and centralized command.
Craven also argues that shared burdens can only come from the Creator. But religion is itself a form of moral collectivism. It works because people submit to shared beliefs and authority, which is why it doesn’t scale to a pluralistic nation like the United States.
And this is where the beauty of federalism comes into play.
Federalism exists precisely because humans disagree, dividing power so no single moral vision dominates everywhere at once.
So maybe it isn’t individual liberty alone that makes the U.S. exceptional, but the constitutional architecture that allows liberty without moral consensus.
Federalism turns disagreement into coexistence, letting New York ban rodeos in Manhattan and Wyoming allow concealed carry without either threatening the other.
Which is why Mamdani’s warmth of collectivism isn’t headed West and why Carven’s column reads less like a warning grounded in reality and more like fear aimed at the wrong place.
Sincerely
Jamila Jaxaliyeva, Big Piney
