Do you consider yourself individualistic or Collectivist?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Martyn*
Collectivist with an individualist outlook; or that could work vice-a-versa.
That made me wonder: Why the Nietzsche avatar? He was an individualist through and through.
Collectivist. And let me explain.
I'm aware collectivism is - even to my eyes - a brutal and terrible thing. To brush someone with a 'class', 'clan' or any other denomination is arbitrary, and as also a Nietzschean I'm not too fond of the idea of right and wrong, especially that of a 'greater good' which usually takes the form of nationalism or something else. But I think, also, that there's a big difference between what we perceive ourselves and what the government of the day makes us do; a collectivist government is scary and bad in my eyes.
But being able to assemble ourselves into groups and work towards a particular goal out of choice is fundamentally different. Whilst collectivism is and always will be the coagulation of individual expression, those individuals can together form a goal or good together and I believe work towards it more beneficially than someone on their own.
Thus if we had, say, a group of 50 or so people who chose to set up their own commune together, each bringing something new to the table and valuable with a particular goal in mind, that would be collectivist in my opinion.
To that end I support a small state which gives people the ability to form these independent organisations. It is just a shame this form of anarcho-Communism is almost a utopia.
I'm aware collectivism is - even to my eyes - a brutal and terrible thing. To brush someone with a 'class', 'clan' or any other denomination is arbitrary, and as also a Nietzschean I'm not too fond of the idea of right and wrong, especially that of a 'greater good' which usually takes the form of nationalism or something else. But I think, also, that there's a big difference between what we perceive ourselves and what the government of the day makes us do; a collectivist government is scary and bad in my eyes.
But being able to assemble ourselves into groups and work towards a particular goal out of choice is fundamentally different. Whilst collectivism is and always will be the coagulation of individual expression, those individuals can together form a goal or good together and I believe work towards it more beneficially than someone on their own.
Thus if we had, say, a group of 50 or so people who chose to set up their own commune together, each bringing something new to the table and valuable with a particular goal in mind, that would be collectivist in my opinion.
To that end I support a small state which gives people the ability to form these independent organisations. It is just a shame this form of anarcho-Communism is almost a utopia.
Original post by Mequa
That made me wonder: Why the Nietzsche avatar? He was an individualist through and through.
Maybe my post above will explain his view, but I don't propose to be explaining on his behalf.
Both. Collective freedom facilitates individual freedom
Lean to individualism.
Original post by Mequa
That made me wonder: Why the Nietzsche avatar? He was an individualist through and through.
I admire Nietzsche's individualism.
Other - Specifically, rejecting the false dichotomy presented here.
Original post by wikiellie
Collectivist: I am a highly family-orientated and personal individual, and I've always held the view that individualism is associated with the desire for self-gratification and hedonistic shallowness, rather than valuing the needs of others.
Your views are wrong.
Original post by JCC-MGS
Both. Collective freedom facilitates individual freedom
Wrong way around mate.
Individualist. Collectivism is evil in theory and practice. The root of all great evils of mankind is collectivism.
Original post by Classical Liberal
Individualist. Collectivism is evil in theory and practice. The root of all great evils of mankind is collectivism.
'Collectivism' defined here as?
Original post by anarchism101
'Collectivism' defined here as?
Rights derive from the group.
Original post by Classical Liberal
Rights derive from the group.
Rights don't derive from the group or from individuals. Rights are social relations between individuals.
Original post by anarchism101
Rights don't derive from the group or from individuals. Rights are social relations between individuals.
Yes. But the basis of these "social relations" is either collectivist or individualist. Do we torture somebody because it serves the common good or do we respect the dignity of individuals and not torture. Do poeple at large think the ends justifies the means or do they think that it is the means that is important.
Original post by Classical Liberal
Yes. But the basis of these "social relations" is either collectivist or individualist. Do we torture somebody because it serves the common good or do we respect the dignity of individuals and not torture.
There isn't a 'common good'. There's only an individual good. Sometimes people come together to better achieve their individual desires, and sometimes people impose things on others for the sake of their individual desires, but in both cases they are still individual desires.
Do poeple at large think the ends justifies the means or do they think that it is the means that is important.
I don't see how that relates to the issue at hand, explain?
Original post by lulubel
individualists must see themselves as defenders of the collective that allows them to be individuals.
individualists must see themselves as defenders of the collective that allows them to be individuals.
You mean freedom? I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Obviously nobody is entirely self-reliant, but if they believe in civil liberties etc. then surely they are individualists, regardless of the political implications.
Individualism = everyone gets to choose what they want for dinner so we suffer the unplanned 'chaos' of 60,000,000 seperate meals eaten at varying times.
Collectivism = we take a vote on what's for dinner and everyone is bound by that decision.
For some unknown reason leftists believe that option 2 is more democratic because we've had the opportunity to put an X on a ballot form, despite the fact that under individualism everyone is much more likely to get exactly what they want.
Collectivism = we take a vote on what's for dinner and everyone is bound by that decision.
For some unknown reason leftists believe that option 2 is more democratic because we've had the opportunity to put an X on a ballot form, despite the fact that under individualism everyone is much more likely to get exactly what they want.
(edited 11 years ago)
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
