• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Individualism or Collectivism?

Individualism or Collectivism?

  • Individualism

    Votes: 25 78.1%
  • Collectivism

    Votes: 7 21.9%

  • Total voters
    32

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If forced to choose one way or the other in establishing the primary foundation of a government, which one would you pick?
 

other

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
1,473
Reaction score
587
Location
VA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Individualism, hands down.
 

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,491
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If forced to choose one way or the other in establishing the primary foundation of a government, which one would you pick?

You need to be more descriptive and define your terms, before I feel I can answer. Also, neither is an absolute; I doubt that there are many of any governments that do one or the other.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I think a mix of both would be the sound decision, since no society exists without the work of individuals, yet collective agreements must be set in order to maintain some kind of order and health.
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
To make it more user-friendly, perhaps I should modify the poll to ask, which one would you prioritize over the other?
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
To make it more user-friendly, perhaps I should modify the poll to ask, which one would you prioritize over the other?

Still not that simple. It depends on what area of civilization you are talking about. Military? Health care? Education? Social spending? etc etc...
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why can't one take precedence over another? The military is there to protect the collective good, but always must adhere to guidelines intended to protect the right of individuals. So, there's a mixture of both. But throughout history, there are no guesses. Regimes are often for one thing or the other. When they're for collective good, they almost inherently are totalitarian at the core, and the public good is just an excuse to control individuals. Far fewer are the regimes that strive to protect individual rights above all else, for the protection of these rights is the only protection from public tyranny.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The totalitarian regimes were trying to be completely collectivist, and failed. No one system in the developed world reigns supreme, but there's a mix. We don't have just free markets or just centralized economies, we have a mix of both because there are strengths and weaknesses to both.
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You know if you're too centrist, you end up doing a complete 360.

Ultimately, no one regime is completely centrist in this regard.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,307
Reaction score
29,046
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Neither one would work without elements of the other.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If forced to choose one way or the other in establishing the primary foundation of a government, which one would you pick?

One that provides a good balance of both so people can enjoy individual freedoms but maintain collective security.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,307
Reaction score
29,046
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Come on guys- it was a very simple question. :D

Are we talking absolutes? We have to choose either anarcho capitalism or communism? If I had to choose it would be communism because for all of its problems and death it would be responsible for, it wouldn't immediately deteriorate into feudalism or warlordism.
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,552
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Are we talking absolutes? We have to choose either anarcho capitalism or communism? If I had to choose it would be communism because for all of its problems and death it would be responsible for, it wouldn't immediately deteriorate into feudalism or warlordism.

Yeah, much better to have all that feudalism and warlordism all drawn out over the long term rather than immediately.:D

Now putting on my serious face-
The question was collectivism vs individualism as the basis for establishing the foundation for a government. If you have adequate laws to protect the rights of the individual and his property, individualism is far superior imo, for it allows greater individual freedom.
 
Last edited:

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,307
Reaction score
29,046
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yeah, much better to have all that feudalism and warlordism all drawn out over the long term rather than immediately.:D

I think it would do less harm and would be easier to recover from and have a government worth having. Russia has some issues but its less of a problem compared to somolia or other places with no government. They are also having a better time making a transition, even if it is problematic.
 

Civil1z@tion

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2010
Messages
247
Reaction score
105
Location
US
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Are we talking absolutes? We have to choose either anarcho capitalism or communism? If I had to choose it would be communism because for all of its problems and death it would be responsible for, it wouldn't immediately deteriorate into feudalism or warlordism.

There's a valid answer. Of course most people want a mix, but that is completely missing the point of the question. For all those who are still whining about wanting a mix we get that but the point is if extremes are the only option which extreme do you choose?
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
81,571
Reaction score
49,823
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
In general, it is best to follow the side of individualism. While realistically there is some need for understanding collective arguments and seeing how collectivism can be implemented on a limited scale, individualism should be touted as more important. For it is the individual whom possesses rights, not the collective.
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,552
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I think it would do less harm and would be easier to recover from and have a government worth having. Russia has some issues but its less of a problem compared to somolia or other places with no government. They are also having a better time making a transition, even if it is problematic.

That's because of the cultural makeup of the population which is Russia. In a country where the individuals are capable of self-governing without declining into destructiveness (due to education, culture, values etc), personal freedom facilitates success and personal/societal growth. It all depends on the population one has to work with.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,307
Reaction score
29,046
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
In general, it is best to follow the side of individualism. While realistically there is some need for understanding collective arguments and seeing how collectivism can be implemented on a limited scale, individualism should be touted as more important. For it is the individual whom possesses rights, not the collective.

There's a valid answer. Of course most people want a mix, but that is completely missing the point of the question. For all those who are still whining about wanting a mix we get that but the point is if extremes are the only option which extreme do you choose?

In general, I agree that individualism should be the primary thing as I think people are sovereign. But you do need some sort of mix or else you have a horrible situation at either end. Maybe I don't understand the point of the thread?
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,552
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
There's a valid answer. Of course most people want a mix, but that is completely missing the point of the question. For all those who are still whining about wanting a mix we get that but the point is if extremes are the only option which extreme do you choose?

Thanks. You said it much better than I.:)
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,307
Reaction score
29,046
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
That's because of the cultural makeup of the population which is Russia. In a country where the individuals are capable of self-governing without declining into destructiveness (due to education, culture, values etc), personal freedom facilitates success and personal/societal growth. It all depends on the population one has to work with.

Thats the same argument people make about communism (the marx kind, not the russian kind). All we need is better people.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,342
Reaction score
52,457
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
If forced to choose one way or the other in establishing the primary foundation of a government, which one would you pick?

I think that picking one or the other is the wrong strategy in forming a government. You take what you need from both and don't worry about the label.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
81,571
Reaction score
49,823
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
In general, I agree that individualism should be the primary thing as I think people are sovereign. But you do need some sort of mix or else you have a horrible situation at either end. Maybe I don't understand the point of the thread?

The thread wanted to know which extreme you wanted. I think most people agree that to some degree there should be mixing of the two, but of the end points which one would you take sort of thing.

IMO, individualism wins out every single time. While both extremes, complete socialism or complete anarchy, would in reality lead to bad things; the emphasis on the individual is philosophically greater. Thus in they hypothetical such as that which was proposed, I would endorse individualism over collectivism.

It's sort of like what is your ideal government? If you didn't have to worry about human nature, or the reality of implementing certain bureaucracies, etc. what form of government would you choose? My pipe dream of a government is anarchy. If humans weren't humans and any system would perform exactly to theory, I'd push for anarchy; it's the ideal.
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,552
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Thats the same argument people make about communism (the marx kind, not the russian kind). All we need is better people.

Yes, but individualism allows for success and growth, whereas a Marxist mindset seems to encourage status quo and blind obedience. Success and growth is the very basis for the evolution of every living thing that we know of.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,307
Reaction score
29,046
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yes, but individualism allows for success and growth, whereas a Marxist mindset seems to encourage status quo and blind obedience. Success and growth is the very basis for the evolution of every living thing that we know of.

Well that about sums up our discussion. Personally, I don't think people will ever be as moral as you think that they will. I don't think such a system could ever work. Like I said, better people, in the sense that they are better than they could ever possibly be given human nature.
 
Top Bottom