Amazon.com Widgets
  • Two heads are better than one

    Should be yes. Most of the time, collectivism is better than individualism. As different people have different strengths and point of view. Therefore, more people share their ideas that must concern more dimensions and aspects. Two people working together have a better chance of solving a problem than one person working alone.

  • I agree collectivism is better

    Collectivism first of all allows for more jobs, a better consensus of what is needed in society. After all we do live in a society or else go and live in the wild and grow your own food is you want individualism!! The more individualist the world is the colder it gets.

  • Yes

    It is better to have a consensus of what is better than just one persons opinion. This is even more true if it will affect more people than the one that is making the decision. A lot of times the more people that give ideas than the better chance of it being a good idea.

  • Collectivism is better than individualism.

    It makes sense that the welfare of a large group should be more important than any individual member. Collectivist societies are generally stronger than ones that value individuality. Teams can work better and do more than any one person. Although a person's individuality is still important, the interests of a group are usually more important.

  • Collectivism vs. Individualism

    Collectivism, which emphasizes group success has lots of advantages. If a group successes, better product will be produced, and brings to better outcome. If people just act individually, they will probably make the wrong dicission, or miss something. However, if we cooperate, the process of supporting and helping others will lead you to success.

  • Individualism is survival of the fittest. We are no longer savages and should become civilized.

    Individualism is survival of the fittest. We are no longer savages and should become civilized, which includes helping all people reach prosperity, not just the few lucky ones with the inherited genes or wealth for success in capitalism. With Automation set to eliminate jobs, there will be no other option than Collectivism. To deny, or fight it is savagery and stupidity.

  • Individualism is survival of the fittest. We are no longer savages and should become civilized.

    Individualism is survival of the fittest. We are no longer savages and should become civilized, which includes helping all people reach prosperity, not just the few lucky ones with the inherited genes or wealth for success in capitalism. With Automation set to eliminate jobs, there will be no other option than Collectivism. To deny, or fight it is savagery and stupidity.

  • It benefits the whole

    Collectivism works to benefit the entire group, where as individualism is a selfish idea, where one seeks to improve themselves without thinking about others. In the end, Collectivism helps the individual, as everyone is working to help everyone, not just a few selfish individuals pushing themselves ahead of everyone else.

  • It is a cycle

    We are approaching a radical individualist society with too much difference of opinion and conflict. Individualism in ideal is a good thing but humans have always exploited it. Their egos they have surpass their abilities and they have a very Xenophobic, judgmental and biased point of view of other humans of different castes, religions and races. Poverty, Corruption and Wars are all a result of radical individualism and that this why it's time for the great rebirth. It is time to build a collectivist society again.

  • Collectivism is better in long term.

    Collectivism is better, here is 2 old sayings, "2 heads think better than 1", and "the union of the parts is more valuable, than the sum of the parts", collectivism agrees on common sense norms and regulations that can make the society more balanced, and retain that balance, and hence maintain a measure of economic equitably, reinforcing the democratic process as each one has comparable wealth, comparable material situations, and hence no capacity to overpass everyone else, destroy by hidden means the quality of democracy, creating a monopolist wave, that can lead him to owing the media, and bribing lawmen and polititians for its own gains.
    In economic terms as technology becomes much more complex, a individual alone even if genial cannot be decisive, he can lead the process, but he requires a healthy and stable society able to provide him with a competent workforce, and the final product can even be better.
    Also and very importantly as there is little corruption and lobbiysm, the most modern technologies tend to be applied, and not held back for profit motives, such societies also tend to be more developed as they have more people learning and reaching higher education.
    A good collectivist society, reinforces the individual, a individualist society becomes dysfunctional over time, and tends to destroy the society itself, and things end in misery and anarchy, and then it is the will of the strongest.

  • No Collectivism isn't better than Individualism

    Collectivism and individualism are just two different approaches to culture and society; one is not better than the other. Collectivism has its advantages, but individualism does, too. Personal freedom is certainly something to be appreciated and enjoyed. There's less shame and judgment in individualism, and more ability to feel free. Collectivism may take better care of society, though. They both have their benefits and detractions.

  • Collectivism degrades responsibility with the individual.

    When a society disregards its responsibilities, it begins to rot. A group is made up of individuals, and a healthy group is made up of individuals that push each other to improve. Being altruistic is a virtue, but depending and expecting such things not only devalues the act but puts a massive strain on those individuals. When they break, the rest of society falls. Ironically, an individualist society is one that resembles the collectivist ideal.

  • Collectivism leads to group-think and conformity.

    Ultimately both harm society as group think makes people dumb husks and conformity leads to loss of individuality. While collectivism and Individualism are both needed in a society and our lives Individualism is much better. But group-think is bad because:

    "Groupthink, a term coined by social psychologist Irving Janis (1972), occurs when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of “mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment” (p. 9). Groups affected by groupthink ignore alternatives and tend to take irrational actions that dehumanize other groups. A group is especially vulnerable to groupthink when its members are similar in background, when the group is insulated from outside opinions, and when there are no clear rules for decision making." http://www.psysr.org/about/pubs_resources/groupthink%20overview.htm

    While certainly collectivism can be helpful it is most certainly usually detrimental to society, and used frequently in communism and Fascism, as everything is done for the state rather than people themselves.

  • Collectivism makes people into idiots

    Imagine hundreds of millions of people all concerned about everyone but themselves.
    How do they know what everybody needs?
    They don't. And this is why they will be running around like headless chicken not knowing what to do and for whom to do it.

    You have 4 eggs from a chicken you take care of. Where do you put them? You can't divide them up into millions. You can give it to the government, who then redistributes it. But then you need money. How does the government knows how many eggs do people need every day? How does it know when to stop collecting too many eggs, and when to produce more eggs?

    The thing is, that's too much work, even for a dictatorship. And when people get more than they need of one thing, and not what they need of the other thing, they are the ones who get the short end of the stick. It is not the government. They will happily rule away in their mansions at the expense of everybody else, all the while patting themselves on the back thinking "we're doing the greatest good for the greatest number of people".

    And this was a charitable argument. Who wants to give their eggs up when they need it? Nobody. So they go to the gulags instead
    That is collectivism

  • People are People not groups

    In a collectivist society people are "we" not "I". However everyone is an "I" and multiple individuals are a "We". Everyone should get to make their own choices in life because other people shouldn't decide what someone else wants to do in their personal life. I believe this and others may disagree but this is what i think.

  • The principles of collectivism make no sense.

    There is no sense in trying to make everyone work for a common good, but there is good in collectivism. I live in America, a very individual country, but that doesn't cloud my view of affairs outside of the states. The book "Anthem" by Ayn Rand Is about a collectivist society. Read it and you will understand this side of the battlefield .

  • A well functioning society needs both to be acknowledged as equally important and dangerous.

    Extreme collectivism is fascist and authoritarian.
    Extreme individualism is anarchy.
    Society itself is a collectivist idea. Give up some of your rights to live in a society where it is illegal for others to kill you, rape your wife, enslave you children and take your property. Also enable business to function under a set of laws with a non-biased judiciary to settle disputes. And societies can build a military to protect their way of life, anarchy can't.
    Individualists believe in a personal moral compass and the practicality of limited government and society and are willing to give up a few rights for the aforementioned benefits, while retaining individual rights and the understanding that people invented society and can dismantle it, the States invented the United States and can dismantle it, the nations invented the United nations and can dismantle it.
    Collectivists believe that the "greater good" justifies any means to get there. Most Good vs Evil stories involve a group of individualists (the good guys) fighting an evil that wants to bring "order" to the world. A well written story will show the good guys fighting each other a bit because each has his own individual agenda and their group seems slightly chaotic.
    Conservatives are EXTREMELY collectivist on social issues and individualistic on fiscal issues.
    Neo progressive Liberals are EXTREMELY collectivist on fiscal issues and individualistic on social issues.
    Classical Liberals are Fiscal individualist and Social Individualist
    Libertarians are Fiscal individualist and Social Individualist, but far more extreme than Classical Liberals.

    To achieve great things and build great wealth, people must work together toward a common goal with common laws and a solid infrastructure. When the government oversteps its bounds on an issue is a constant source of debate between the individualist and the collectivist.

  • We need both to achieve a functioning society. Extreme individualism is anarchy, extreme collectivism is authoritarian fascism.

    Extreme collectivism is fascist and authoritarian.
    Extreme individualism is anarchy.
    Society itself is a collectivist idea. Give up some of your rights to live in a society where it is illegal for others to kill you, rape your wife, enslave you children and take your property. Also enable business to function under a set of laws with a non-biased judiciary to settle disputes. And societies can build a military to protect their way of life, anarchy can't.
    Individualists believe in a personal moral compass and the practicality of limited government and society and are willing to give up a few rights for the aforementioned benefits, while retaining individual rights and the understanding that people invented society and can dismantle it, the States invented the United States and can dismantle it, the nations invented the United nations and can dismantle it.
    Collectivists believe that the "greater good" justifies any means to get there. Most Good vs Evil stories involve a group of individualists (the good guys) fighting an evil that wants to bring "order" to the world. A well written story will show the good guys fighting each other a bit because each has his own individual agenda and their group seems slightly chaotic.
    Conservatives are EXTREMELY collectivist on social issues and individualistic on fiscal issues.
    Neo progressive Liberals are EXTREMELY collectivist on fiscal issues and individualistic on social issues.
    Classical Liberals are Fiscal individualist and Social Individualist
    Libertarians are Fiscal individualist and Social Individualist, but far more extreme than Classical Liberals.

  • Both have their extremes and NO ONE is purely one or the other.

    Extreme collectivism is fascist and authoritarian.
    Extreme individualism is anarchy.
    Society itself is a collectivist idea. Give up some of your rights to live in a society where it is illegal for others to kill you, rape your wife, enslave you children and take your property. Also enable business to function under a set of laws with a non-biased judiciary to settle disputes. And societies can build a military to protect their way of life, anarchy can't.
    Individualists believe in a personal moral compass and the practicality of limited government and society and are willing to give up a few rights for the aforementioned benefits, while retaining individual rights and the understanding that people invented society and can dismantle it, the States invented the United States and can dismantle it, the nations invented the United nations and can dismantle it.
    Collectivists believe that the "greater good" justifies any means to get there. Most Good vs Evil stories involve a group of individualists (the good guys) fighting an evil that wants to bring "order" to the world. A well written story will show the good guys fighting each other a bit because each has his own individual agenda and their group seems slightly chaotic.
    Conservatives are EXTREMELY collectivist on social issues and individualistic on fiscal issues.
    Neo progressive Liberals are EXTREMELY collectivist on fiscal issues and individualistic on social issues.
    Classical Liberals are Fiscal individualist and Social Individualist
    Libertarians are Fiscal individualist and Social Individualist, but far more extreme than Classical Liberals.

  • Never the "greater good".

    Collectivism is such a bad idea. It's mostly the use of force against a free individual. Collectivists don't believe you should be a free individual. They don't believe you should have your own money or property. They believe that you should give up all of "yours" for "everyone".
    Collectivism is displayed through taxation which is basically extortion or through other methods like legislation that robs people of their civil and constitutional rights. Collectivism is bad. Why do you want to be a figurative slave? Be an individual.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.