AP Syllabus focus:
‘Core values include individualism—people can shape their lives through choices—and equality of opportunity—everyone should have an equal chance to compete.’
Americans often evaluate government through shared core values. Two of the most influential are individualism and equality of opportunity, which shape expectations about freedom, fairness, and when government should intervene.
This thematic world map situates the United States within a broader cross-national pattern of individualistic versus collectivistic political culture. It helps explain why U.S. debates often begin from assumptions about personal responsibility, autonomy, and limited interference. Seeing the U.S. in comparative perspective clarifies that “individualism” is a cultural orientation that varies across societies, not a universal baseline. Source
Core values as political “filters”
Core values function like default assumptions that help people decide:
what citizens owe one another
what government should do (or avoid doing)
whether outcomes are seen as earned or unfair
Because citizens interpret these values differently, the same policy can be praised as protecting freedom or criticised as violating fairness.
Individualism
Meaning and political significance
Individualism: The belief that individuals are primarily responsible for their own success and should be free to make choices with limited interference from government or other people.
In American political culture, individualism supports the idea that:
people can improve their lives through effort, talent, and choice
government should protect personal freedom and remove barriers to self-determination
citizens should be cautious about policies that seem to reward “dependency” or restrict choice
How individualism shapes attitudes toward government
Individualism commonly leads to preferences for:
limited government in personal and economic life, except to protect rights
policies that emphasise work, merit, and self-reliance
suspicion of programs perceived as picking “winners and losers,” even if intended to help
At the same time, many Americans hold individualism alongside support for certain public responsibilities (for example, enforcing anti-discrimination rules), showing that values can coexist in tension.
Equality of opportunity
Meaning and political significance
Equality of opportunity: The belief that everyone should have a fair chance to compete and succeed, regardless of background, with rules applied consistently.
This value focuses less on guaranteeing equal results and more on ensuring that competition is open and fair.
This illustration contrasts “equality” (identical support for everyone) with “equity” (support adjusted to overcome unequal starting conditions). In U.S. politics, debates about equality of opportunity often turn on this distinction: whether fairness requires the same rules only, or also targeted efforts to remove barriers that prevent genuinely open competition. The image helps connect abstract claims about “fair chance” to concrete policy choices about what government should do. Source
It reinforces beliefs that:
social mobility should be possible through ability and effort
government may need to prevent unfair barriers (such as discrimination)
institutions should apply standards consistently so people can compete on “level ground”
How equality of opportunity shapes attitudes toward government
Equality of opportunity can increase support for government actions that:
enforce equal access and non-discrimination
invest in “starting points” that affect life chances (for example, schooling access)
regulate practices that distort competition or exclude groups unfairly
Disagreements often arise over what counts as an “unfair barrier” versus a “natural” outcome of individual choices.
The balancing tension: freedom vs fairness
Many political debates reflect a recurring question: when does government action protect fair opportunity, and when does it violate individual freedom?
The Nolan Chart maps political beliefs along two dimensions—personal freedom and economic freedom—highlighting that disputes are not always captured by a single left–right line. It provides a visual way to discuss how Americans can endorse “freedom” yet disagree about whether freedom is mainly economic (markets, regulation) or personal (civil liberties, lifestyle choices). This helps frame why the same policy can be praised as protecting liberty or criticized as an unacceptable government intrusion. Source
Policies expanding access can be framed as promoting equal chances
The same policies can be framed as restricting choice or shifting responsibility away from individuals
These core values are stable features of American political culture, but their meaning is constantly contested in debates about the proper role of government and the responsibilities of citizens to one another and to the state.
FAQ
It is often linked to frontier experiences, liberal philosophical traditions, and economic development that rewarded mobility and self-reliance.
No. Opportunity focuses on fair starting conditions and rules.
Outcome focuses on similar end results, regardless of starting point.
Disagreements stem from different views about which inequalities reflect choice versus structural barriers, and which institutions should correct those barriers.
Yes.
Many people favour personal responsibility while also supporting targeted rules that prevent discrimination and keep competition fair.
Speakers often frame proposals using value cues:
“freedom,” “choice,” “self-reliance” (individualism)
“fair shot,” “equal chance,” “level playing field” (opportunity)
Practice Questions
(2 marks) Identify two ways the core value of individualism can influence a citizen’s attitude towards the role of government.
1 mark for identifying one valid influence (e.g., preference for limited government; emphasis on personal responsibility; scepticism of welfare programmes).
1 mark for identifying a second valid influence.
(6 marks) Explain how equality of opportunity and individualism can lead citizens to support different policy approaches, even when both values are widely shared.
1 mark for defining or accurately describing equality of opportunity (fair chance to compete).
1 mark for defining or accurately describing individualism (personal responsibility/choice).
2 marks for explaining how equality of opportunity can justify government action to remove barriers (e.g., anti-discrimination enforcement; expanding access).
2 marks for explaining how individualism can justify limiting government intervention (e.g., protecting choice; concern about dependency), creating differing policy preferences.
