Requiring Uniformity and Creativity

ALBERT EINSTEIN once remarked that when he was a child, he would witness parades consisting of pre World war One German military units marching in lock step, and that the sight of this, upon his later reflection, caused him to question the intelligence of its participants. He never changes this opinion, and much later in life suggested that that if every man of military service age in the world simply refused military service of any sort, mankind could put an end to all war. That falls into the category of "easier said than done". I felt something similar when in high school I took R.O.T.C. class, only to avoid the alternative, gym class. I have never liked conforming, to anything, and as I age, I dislike it more. Social conformity is necessary to a degree, under certain conditions, but beyond that becomes stifling, turning thinking, inherently creative creatures into mere robotic drones. Recognizing the sheer necessity of the military in our current world, I approve of uniforms. However, I have a far greater preference for more frivolous, non essential uniforms such as those worn by sports teams. Those iconic Yankee pinstripes make my heart race and leap with joy. Humans are no more capable of surviving and thriving individually than bees or ants. Man, as Aristotle said, is a social animal. Our evolutionary need for social conformity as an expedient to societal organization and cohesion, however, needn't be an impediment to creative individuality. Difficult though it is in 2026 to find a human being without a smart phone glued to its nose, once you succeed in finding one, if you do, you potentially unlock a treasure trove of individuality unique in all the universe, within a wrapping of social conformity which, it turns out, is only a few layers deep. Is outward conformity wrapped around inner individuality, or individuality wrapped around strict inner conformity? Stipulate that both both metaphorcal constructs have merit. They are, let us stipulate, mixed togethr. When Einsein moved to America he said he was amazed at the basically cheerful, creative American personality, full of optimism based on an enduring optimistic belief that all achievements are possible.This he juxtaposed against German European social and mental rigidity, predicated on an attitude of social hierarchy and limitiations. Nonetheless, he said that on balance he preferred the ways of old Europe, to which he was long acccustomed. What Einstein missed was that we Americans are actually far more conventional and conformist than he thought. Our salvation is our ability to strike a balance between conformity and individual creativity, to allow the individual spirit to take flight, while requiring that each creative inidividual constrain his or her personal behavior and creative urges within acceptable limits, acceptable to the broader society. Einsein argued that the Eurpoean system of education stifled the growth of the mind and stifled its inherent curisoty by confining it, imprisoning it with rote, mass assembly line learning. He flourished intelleectually in spite of rather than because of his formal education. The American model has always been based on the European, with much the same results; creativity wasted and lost. But somehow, against these odds, Einstein flourished mentally, and so do milllions of other creative people. Our salvation is our ability, to whatever extent we use it, to organize societies and cultures while allowing individual creativity to flourish. But what other choice do we really have?