There aren't really any negative words in the comment though. It's correlating individualism with "atomized," "alone" and shallow family ties. To the extent th

There aren't really any negative words in the comment though. It's correlating individualism with "atomized," "alone" and shallow family ties. To the extent that one fits into this so-called "rugged individualist" trope (which I agree is a little hackneyed, but also not totally unfounded), I would think those would all be and sound like positives. Because every friend, every relative - everyone you could possibly get into any kind of mutually non-hatred-based relationship with - is someone you have to please. You're no longer doing whatever you want; you're balancing that against what the other person wants, or what you might owe them, or what you might someday want from them (Golden Rule) etc. Relationships survive on mutual interest and mutual aid. It's about cooperating with people and doesn't have much to do with freedom. [Because hey, you're free to abandon those relationships. You can completely ignore those people and their concerns, desires and interests. But they'll soon start ignoring yours, and there you go, the units that were joined are now separate, but since they can't themselves be divided they are how do I say this, atomized.]