CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Collectivist Perspective VS Individualist Perspective
A friend recently told me that she thinks most of the socio-political-economic divide can be explained by the differences in these two perspectives. She equates collectivism with most left leaning positions and individualism with most right leaning positions.
So which perspective do you most often alone with? Which direction do you lean? Which perspective is better, more realistic, or more practical?
Economic individualism as we understand it today is something which has been purposefully indoctrinated into society as a direct result of the development of merchant capitalism. It is less than a millennium old. Individualism is a necessary prerequisite of the validation of ideology which puts people into competition with one another for the acquisition of finite resources. For the other ninety nine thousand years, humanity organised its resources on a considerably more collective basis. On a socio-cultural level, people must have identity in order to feel socially self-aware and/or valued, but this logic unequivocally does not extend to economics. One can prove this by simplifying juxtaposing both positions:-
A) Work with your fellow man to distribute resources to the things most important and/or beneficial to the species.
B) Work against your fellow man to distribute resources to yourself and/or your own pleasure.
I am in no way a religious man, but if you'll forgive the analogy then one is the road to epiphany and the other is the road to hell.
What would you say to arguments that self-interest is a powerful motivator for success and drives innovation? Or to arguments that societies which grant their citizens greater autonomy are more prosperous? Further, what would you say in response to the statement that freedom itself is a moral good that societies should strive toward?
I'm a liberal. I'm VERY liberal. But, I'm NOT a collectivist.. Oh, we need to band together for SOME things, like how to defend our country and how we allocate our resources...
But, the context in which the word collectivist is used here smacks of socialism, and I'm NOT a socialist.. I am very much a capitalist.. Am I a fan of your local fire department, which is a PERFECT example of how a touch of socialism WORKS in a capitalist society?? I AM!!
I agree, excon. I am a liberal and NOT a "collectivist". I think BOTH capitalism and socialism are good, but, neither one is AS good without the other. BOTH need to be balanced. Runaway capitalism is as bad as runaway socialism. BOTH are in danger in the hands of radical conservatives. They would destroy any semblance of socialism, destroy any restrictions on capitalism, both acts leading U.S. into an oligarch, a two class system which can NOT be a democracy!
How do we need band together to allocate resources? If you don't believe resource allocation is the purview of the free market, you may not be as capitalist as you suppose.
I think this is an oversimplification and unintentionally demonstrates what is wrong in the USA. All of life is a balance, including government. The rights and needs of individuals have always had to balance with the overall needs of society. Sewer systems and roads come from what you call collectivist and there is no doubt that we need them. Ultimately, people need to be active citizens of their nation, meaning they need to advocate for themselves but also understand and respect what is needed for their society to succeed. A strong individual who advocates or votes for good public schooling is not a collectivist, s/he is a "citizen." Start being citizens and stop being ideologists. Her rationale explaining what is wrong is proof she is not really thinking like a citizen. What the heck is the point of even belonging to a society if all you want to do is get yours and not give a crap what happens to anyone or anything else?
An individual cannot simply "get theirs" if they do not live in a society that is conducive to the that pursuit. Thus, an individualist would rationally have an interest in a functional society. The individualist would also have an interest in not paying for other people to free ride on necessarily collective endeavors, such as national security, police, or sewers. Which means the individualist may promote taxation. The point is that the same issue can often be viewed in terms of collective good or individual good, and one need not necessarily be sacrificed for the other. But the perspective you tend to hold will shape the policies you tend to promote.
The point is that the same issue can often be viewed in terms of collective good or individual good, and one need not necessarily be sacrificed for the other.
This is nicely worded bullshit. In a collectivist society individuals work together for a common purpose. In an individualist society individuals work against each other for individual ends. These two ideologies contradict one another quite fundamentally, and one need not be a genius to figure out which of the two will give the human species a future.
Capitalism has warped the minds of Americans to the point that they either can't or won't acknowledge simple common sense. It simply will not work out in the long term to create a common goal by brainwashing all the individuals to think the same way.
In a collectivist society individuals work together for a common purpose
If a common purpose is not also in the conscious interest of each involved, then the common work is forced and the common goal is the goal of the slaver. Individualism recognizes that humans are individuals first, and team members second.
In an individualist society individuals work against each other for individual ends
This is false. Rational and legal goals of individuals do not conflict with the interests of others in a society devoted to protecting individual rights. When I buy a coffee, I want coffee more than my money and the salesman wants my money more than the coffee. We both walk away better off.
These two ideologies contradict one another quite fundamentally, and one need not be a genius to figure out which of the two will give the human species a future
An individualist society allows for individuals who willingly belong to collectivist sub-cultures. It's within their individual rights. Collectivist societies cannot abide individualist enclaves as they undermine the collective goals of the individuals setting those goals. While one need not be a genius to observe the history of individualist success, one cannot be a genius if blind to the extensive history collectivist failure.
It simply will not work out in the long term to create a common goal by brainwashing all the individuals to think the same way.
Indeed, capitalism is not useful for brainwashing individuals into a single mold. That's collectivist work.
You deliberately missed out the most important word in the sentence you quoted, which demonstrates from the outset that you are a dishonest piece of shit.
If a common purpose is not also in the conscious interest of each involved, then the common work is forced and the common goal is the goal of the slaver.
And how exactly is the survival and/or benefit of the species not in the "conscious interest of each involved"? The very fact that the goal is common implies that everyone will benefit from it, otherwise how could it be reasoned to be a common goal in the first place?
Your (il)logical quagmires are, as always, completely devoid of anything remotely resembling reason, honesty or truth.
This is false.
No it isn't you retard. The very basis of individualism is that the individual is the most important thing. If every individual's goal is their own wealth and power then clearly everybody is working toward a different goal.
Rational and legal goals of individuals do not conflict with the interests of others in a society devoted to protecting individual rights
This sentence is self-contradictory, stupid and self-evidently false. If everybody is interested in themselves instead of the public good, then CLEARLY when the economic interests of those individuals clash their goals are going to conflict with one another. If you and I both have an interest in a particular job, then that is a conflict since there are two people and one job.
If I wave a bag of bones in front of a pack of hungry dogs and run them all off a cliff, I cannot then say the incentive I gave them did not conflict with their own interests. If everybody is interested in themselves instead of the collective good, then CLEARLY the collective good is going to suffer as a result. If the dominant incentive is individual wealth and power then when that incentive clashes with the public good (e.g. climate change) then CLEARLY people are going to do what they have the incentive to do, not what they don't have the incentive to do.
Literally everything you say is stupid, dishonest and false. You are a crooked, deceitful, extremely dislikeable Zionist bell-end.
how exactly is the survival and/or benefit of the species not in the "conscious interest of each involved"?
People are concerned with the survival and benefit of their selves and of those close to them. Just as total quality control of individual parts of manufacturing lead to the best final product, individualism has historically lead to a better society.
No individual is in a position to direct humanity to their benefit, though collectivists pretend to be, and have repeatedly directed humanity to their deficit.
And The very fact that the goal is common implies that everyone will benefit from it
The common goal is not common if the individuals involved haven't personally chosen those goals. Assuming leader/s of the collective know what will benefit ever individual better than the individual is the fatal conceit that has repeatedly doomed humanity. Individualism is the reason the world is exponentially better that it has been for the previous "ninety nine thousand years" wherein "humanity (has) organised its resources on a considerably more collective basis"
If every individual's goal is their own wealth and power then clearly everybody is working toward a different goal.
The only way wealth is created is by individuals who want it. Once created, the parasitic collective spreads it around among the unproductive and ultimately destroys it. Individuals with power over the collective are at odds with other individuals who want that power, but most individuals only want the power to determine their own affairs. It's called Liberty and it is a societal and individual benefit.
If everybody is interested in themselves instead of the public good, then CLEARLY when the economic interests of those individuals clash their goals are going to conflict with one another
No Individual is interested in the public good but for the benefit it brings to them as an individual (except for the individual at the top making the decisions "for the public good") If you had even a middle school understanding of economics, this would come a little easier to you. The fact that everyone ultimately IS interested in themselves cannot be ignored. When it is ignored or demonized, via collectivism, the individual is sacrificed to someone's idea of the greater good. Ultimately everyone is sacrificed to the "greater good" and the true ends of collectivism are realized.
If everybody is interested in themselves instead of the collective good, then CLEARLY the collective good is going to suffer as a result.
This is a common lie of tyrants. If you believe it, it is likely due to your ignorance of history and economics. Since a collective is composed of individuals, and since individual rights are protected, individuals bettering their circumstances and the expense of no ones rights creates a better collective than the philosophy of sacrificing individual rights for the supposed sake of the greater good.
you are a dishonest piece of shit
No it isn't you retard
This sentence is self-contradictory, stupid and self-evidently false
Literally everything you say is stupid, dishonest and false. You are a crooked, deceitful, extremely dislikeable Zionist bell-end.
The extensive ignorance and intellectual impotence at the root of your base insults is surpassed only by loathsome quality of your core principles.
People are concerned with the survival and benefit of their selves and of those close to them. Just as total quality control of individual parts of manufacturing lead to the best final product, individualism has historically lead to a better society.
This deflective bullshit has absolutely no relevance to the question. You made a baseless attack against collectivism, and when challenged to support that attack, you have responded by defending individualism. This is bullshit, not debate. Furthermore, the analogy you have used to defend individualism you know full well actually describes collectivism, since all parts in a machine are working for the COMMON PURPOSE of making the machine work. In an individualist society all parts are working for their own individual benefit and do not give a shit about the machine.
You are a disgustingly dishonest, beak nosed little shit stain who lies about literally everything. You cannot support your position with truth and you banned Quantumhead for exposing the stupidity of your own argument.
You are a disgustingly dishonest, beak nosed little shit stain who lies about literally everything. You cannot support your position with truth and you banned Quantumhead for exposing the stupidity of your own argument.
I'll stop banning you quantum when you start using evidence and reason, as I have, rather than simple baseless insults. Of course if you did that you would, for the most part, agree with me.
The common goal is not common if the individuals involved haven't personally chosen those goals.
The survival and prosperity of the species is a common goal whether you choose to admit it or not, you lying Jew cunt.
Assuming leader/s of the collective know what will benefit ever individual better than the individual is the fatal conceit that has repeatedly doomed humanity
Predictably, the complete opposite of the truth. For the first ninety five thousand years humanity lived as part of a collective effort to survive. Then, when humanity began to dominate the planet, the leaders decided that individualism was better because there was no longer any profit in collectivism. In his natural state man is very demonstrably a pack animal, not a lone wolf.
Individualism is the reason the world is exponentially better that it has been for the previous "ninety nine thousand years" wherein "humanity (has) organised its resources on a considerably more collective basis"
Clearly false. The recent domination of the planet by humanity is the reason the world is "exponentially better for humanity" you ridiculous piece of shit. Individualism has nothing to do with it, you have no evidence that individualism has anything to do with it, and you are just outright making things up, as per fucking well usual. You are a complete and utter liar. Individualism has made people greedy, self-centred and dishonest and you are the proof of the fucking pudding. Nothing you say can be trusted and that is a direct result of individualism, since you consider your individual desires to be more important than honesty or truth.
No Individual is interested in the public good but for the benefit it brings to them as an individual (except for the individual at the top making the decisions "for the public good") If you had even a middle school understanding of economics, this would come a little easier to you.
This is another textbook deflection of the fact that he PROVED YOU WRONG. You claimed: Rational and legal goals of individuals do not conflict with the interests of others in a society devoted to protecting individual rights. He proved that they DO conflict, in about a million different ways. Every time we want the same job. Every time we want superior status to the other. Every time we want more money than the other. Every time we want the same girl. Every time we want the better car, or house or holiday. They conflict directly and frequently, it has been proven with examples, and your long wall of spectacularly dishonest, backward nonsense deducts absolutely nothing from this fact.
This is a common lie of tyrants.
It is not a lie you infuriating piece of shit. It is a self-evident fact. It has real world examples like climate change and tobacco, where the public good has suffered because taking action against these things has contradicted the economic interests of powerful individuals.
I am extremely tired of your filthy lies. It is people like you Amarel, which caused the rise of the Nazis.
The survival and prosperity of the species is a common goal whether you choose to admit it or not
Fortunately nature does not share your sentiment. The well-being of the individual is the individuals goal. The well-being of the species is the outcome of this nature.
you lying Jew cunt
Crying "liar" doesn't make your position true, and the fact that I am more intelligent than you doesn't make me a Jew.
For the first ninety five thousand years humanity lived as part of a collective effort to survive
For most of human history we lived as small groups of collectives who stole from and murdered other collectives (just as collectivists do today). As people developed their reason, individuals began to create wealth rather than simply take it. Collectivism was observed to be inferior to individualism, not only for the well-being of each, but for the well-being of all. From there it was inevitable that the age of reason would lead to individualism and ultimately to capitalism, thus maximizing the wealth creating ability of each individual.
Collectivism is an unfortunate remnant of our primitive, animalistic origins, and communism is a primal backlash against progress.
The individualist is social. He works with his fellow man rather than being forced to work for his fellow man.
The recent domination of the planet by humanity is the reason the world is "exponentially better for humanity"
Our population could only expand with the wealth created by the individualism that preceded the population boom. Prior to the enlightenment, man lived in a state of chronic starvation. Just like collectivists today.
Individualism has made people greedy, self-centred and dishonest
Some are always going to be these things. Collectivism puts the masses in one noose for the greedy and dishonest. Individualism protects each from that noose.
Nothing is more greedy than the collectivist who demands the fruits of another's labor and nothing is more dishonest than that same collectivist pretending the other is the one who is greedy. Like a slave owner calling his slaves lazy.
It is people like you Amarel, which caused the rise of the Nazis
The Nazis and Fascists were collectivists.
"It is thus necessary that the individual should come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole ... that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual. .... This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture .... we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow man"-Adolf Hitler
"The day of individual happiness has passed"-Adolf Hitler
"The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the State, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the State is absolute, individuals and groups relative." -Benito Mussolini
"The truth is that men are tired of liberty" -Benito Mussolini
All of life is a balance, including government. The rights and needs of individuals have always had to balance with the overall needs of society.
Good post, Grenache. I would put it slightly differently and say capitalism has always been a war between individuals and society, played out upon a battleground of culture. Your wording makes the process sound a bit too peaceful. The benefactors of capitalism have fought hard to keep their power, riches and influence their own, and the role of public servants (i.e. politicians) should have been to ensure some of it was recycled back into society. However, over time the inevitable has happened, public servants have been bought, blackmailed and broken, and -- in America at least -- the system has continued to be pushed further and further to the right, and become more and more biased to the rights of individuals and corporations over the rights of collective society.
Insofar as is feasible individualism is the goal to strive for. One can see that countries which focus on the individual as the smallest constituent part of the group are the most successful. Western nations prioritized individualism first and were therefore more prosperous.
Part of this prosperity and dominance also came from innovations and inventions. Individualist societies are better at generating such technological and social advancements because achievements are better incentivized. Hard work is also better incentivized under individualism. Self-interest is perhaps the most powerful motivator, and as we know motivated individuals create and attain more.
Aside from the pragmatic, there is also the philosophical or moral side. It is obviously morally preferable to grant as much freedom as is practical to the individual. On the other hand we do need to co-operate with those in our nation to achieve certain goals and so pure individualism is unlikely to work just yet.