Page 8 | To be frustrated that people don't understand that individualism is not compatible with a collectivist mindset?

Original poster

User09678 · 18/01/2025 21:21

CraftyNavySeal · 18/01/2025 16:52

Rolling back the state. The state took over a lot of things that people, families and communities used to do themselves.

Would probably be very painful and might not even work now though since everyone is atomised. The fact is most people don’t have kin networks now which is how humans worked for most of history.

You would help someone in your village because a) they are probably related b) you would depend on them for help one day and c) loss of social standing if you didn’t.

Now? I don’t even know who my neighbours are, if I didn’t help them nothing would happen as I might not even see them again.

If societies collapse then the people that will survive are the ones who help each other so this problem might resolve itself.

Show quote history

Most based MN comment

OP posts:

NordicwithTeen · 18/01/2025 21:15

Gymnopedie · 18/01/2025 16:34

What the individualists don't think about is that most of the time they can only get away with it because the rest of us follow social norms and constructs (and no, that doesn't make us sheep, as they claim).

Take something simple like parking on double yellow lines, because it's more convenient for them and that's all they care about. They can only do that because the rest of us don't. If we all ignored the lines the space wouldn't be there for them.

When indiviualism rather than concern for others takes over, that's when structures collapse. Margaret Thatcher and her 'there's no such thing as society' didn't help.

Show quote history

This is the same as the vaccine debate; those who risk their kids by not protecting them do so safely in the knowledge the rest of society will protect them with herd immunity. Now that is breaking down which seems to be reflective of wider societal issues.

CraftyNavySeal · 18/01/2025 16:52

User09678 · 18/01/2025 16:25

Is there any way back from this level of individualism?

Show quote history

Rolling back the state. The state took over a lot of things that people, families and communities used to do themselves.

Would probably be very painful and might not even work now though since everyone is atomised. The fact is most people don’t have kin networks now which is how humans worked for most of history.

You would help someone in your village because a) they are probably related b) you would depend on them for help one day and c) loss of social standing if you didn’t.

Now? I don’t even know who my neighbours are, if I didn’t help them nothing would happen as I might not even see them again.

If societies collapse then the people that will survive are the ones who help each other so this problem might resolve itself.

CraftyNavySeal · 18/01/2025 16:34

It doesn’t help that much of the left are the largest proponents of individualism though.

Rights to everything but no responsibilities. We need collectivism, as long as it does not require me to do anything basically, someone else needs to do something.

Gymnopedie · 18/01/2025 16:34

helpfulperson · 18/01/2025 14:28

Agree. The need for something to be right for an individual is now seen to trump what is right for the group. And that is damaging progress forward.

What the individualists don't think about is that most of the time they can only get away with it because the rest of us follow social norms and constructs (and no, that doesn't make us sheep, as they claim).

Take something simple like parking on double yellow lines, because it's more convenient for them and that's all they care about. They can only do that because the rest of us don't. If we all ignored the lines the space wouldn't be there for them.

When indiviualism rather than concern for others takes over, that's when structures collapse. Margaret Thatcher and her 'there's no such thing as society' didn't help.

Original poster

User09678 · 18/01/2025 16:25

helpfulperson · 18/01/2025 14:28

Agree. The need for something to be right for an individual is now seen to trump what is right for the group. And that is damaging progress forward.

Is there any way back from this level of individualism?

OP posts:

Original poster

User09678 · 18/01/2025 16:24

andIsaid · 18/01/2025 14:23

I am interested.

Expand please?

Show quote history

In what direction... what's your starting point?

OP posts:

Original poster

User09678 · 18/01/2025 16:23

Jasnah · 18/01/2025 14:54

Agreed, but collectivism with a focus on what is good, overall, for society would take us into very dark corners of human ethics and morality.

I once had a history teacher who was fully convinced and vocal that a dictatorship is better for a country in the long run than democracy with a multi-party system.

A benign dictatorship - why not?

OP posts:

Original poster

User09678 · 18/01/2025 16:21

Distressedmumteacher · 18/01/2025 14:20

Agreed but to cut the root of the issue would be to create an alternative to capitalism which is not communism.
You can empathise with the apathy of often good people enjoying their little crumbs.

Distributism?

OP posts:

NordicwithTeen · 18/01/2025 15:08

Jasnah · 18/01/2025 14:54

Agreed, but collectivism with a focus on what is good, overall, for society would take us into very dark corners of human ethics and morality.

I once had a history teacher who was fully convinced and vocal that a dictatorship is better for a country in the long run than democracy with a multi-party system.

There was something on the radio earlier about 1 in 5 wishing we were in a dictatorship in UK. If the recent democratically elected idiots are anything to go by that is quite concerning.

I do think jobs and pay would be a good place to start restructuring society. Jobs that care for others should be given highest pay, while sales and less ethically clear jobs should be paid on a sliding scale of over all net benefit to society. The economic model that profit for board members trumps all has encouraged societal greed and an ethical vacuum. I don't know why but males seem to be less likely to think of others meaning women are doing the majority of the care roles. Hearing social care described as "low skill" all of last week was really revolting to me.

Jasnah · 18/01/2025 14:54

Agreed, but collectivism with a focus on what is good, overall, for society would take us into very dark corners of human ethics and morality.

I once had a history teacher who was fully convinced and vocal that a dictatorship is better for a country in the long run than democracy with a multi-party system.

MrsSchrute · 18/01/2025 14:32

Totally agree. I think the rise of individualism has had a terrible effect on society.

EmeraldRoulette · 18/01/2025 14:30

Can't we just have a mixed economy?

helpfulperson · 18/01/2025 14:28

Agree. The need for something to be right for an individual is now seen to trump what is right for the group. And that is damaging progress forward.

NordicwithTeen · 18/01/2025 14:25

Was having this debate with DC in the car last weekend as we talked about AI and how the UK has changed over the last 30 odd years into consumerism and need for "stuff" trumping progress.

andIsaid · 18/01/2025 14:23

User09678 · 18/01/2025 14:12

Which we need to solve most of our most critical and existential issues?

I am interested.

Expand please?

Distressedmumteacher · 18/01/2025 14:20

Agreed but to cut the root of the issue would be to create an alternative to capitalism which is not communism.
You can empathise with the apathy of often good people enjoying their little crumbs.