Individualism and Collectivism cover society’s lives conduct and attitudes. They seem people’s choices and arise suddenly and instantly. Indeed, people have been obliged to adopt these approaches by the culture, government, and rulers. Both attitudes are the practice or the pattern of serene stewardship and prospered development in society. Distinctly, they’re fighting with each other devastatingly. At this point, we should ask which one is better to sustain our life in peace? These ideologies sharply separate the east and the west in terms of cultural, sociological, and economic aspects, and individualism pictures the western side. And, collectivism pictures the eastern side.
Before we get started, I’d like to demonstrate my new wallpaper on the computer. It seems it’ll be my favorite painting this year. It’s “On Strike, 1891” and the designer is Sir Hubert von Herkomer. Every time I look at this painting I recall a book that Germinal by Emilie Zola. Let’s dive into our actual concerns regarding individualism and collectivism.
All attributes toward the society should be related to the individuals who forged the society. It is an approach that considers individual rights and freedoms as the basis of order. It expects the absence of state intervention, managing the economy in the liberal condition, the equality of all in front of the law, the non-restriction of property rights, and respect for the personal privilege. It is a product and output of the enlightenment process in Europe. Individualism tells people will exist in a more civilized and comfortable way in an environment where they feel free and can develop themselves without restrictions. It is associated with liberalism and capitalism which takes place importance on individual freedom which was recognized especially since the Enlightenment. The sharp incident is French Revolution. Because it promoted individualism. Property and individual rights are prioritized. Thus, justice was produced by the free market.
The idea of collectivism, which develops an authority-based social control mechanism; might be an economic system that aims to use the means of production jointly at the regional, national or universal level. Any philosophical, political, religious, economic, or social view that emphasizes the interdependence of human nature. It advocates removing personal ownership from the means of production and using them in common and advocating common behavior in all kinds of movements in society. It is the opposite of individualism. It is one of the answers to a philosophical question. Is there really such a thing as freedom? If so, how is this pure freedom achieved? The individual cannot achieve pure freedom without the emancipation of society. For this, there must be a collective system for the comfort of society. Each person is different from the other; perspective on life, way of doing business, method of learning… Since the individual is unimportant in collective movements, a person cannot exist with his own character. It is society, not people, that is governed. For this reason, pressure, imposition, and uniformization are inevitable.
Collectivism is related to communism while individualism is associated with liberalism and capitalism. In my opinion, individualism provides an inevitable improvement in every subject as it will increase the awareness and personal prestige level in the society. However, it’s for the person. Yes, we are free but we are as free as our money. The dominant world system is where you are alone if you have no money. I can recommend Martin Eden-Jack London as a good critique of individualism. Producing together rather than consuming together. It’s a nice feeling. Now we just tend to consume, only to run out…