Collectivism and Individualism

0:00philosophers have long debated over whether it is the collective or the

0:04individual who should be viewed as superior and of more value but rarely

0:08has a consensus being met this unresolved debate is important because

0:13the prevailing views on this issue often determined how a society organizes

0:17itself and thus the quality of life for its citizens in this lecture we are

0:23going to examine a critique of collectivism by one of the most prolific

0:27philosophers of the 20th century Ludwig von Mises Mises was born in 1881

0:33in the austro-hungarian Empire and is best known for his contributions to the

0:38field of economics however he also made important contributions to many other

0:44fields including epistemology ethics political philosophy social theory and

0:48history throughout his life meeseeks always showed a concern for defending

0:53individual freedoms as he saw them as essential for lasting peace and

0:58prosperity consequently he was also concerned with combating collectivism

1:03the meanings of the terms collectivism and individualism like many of the terms

1:09used in political discourse are quite ambiguous

1:11however when discussing them the issue which is usually of most concern is

1:16whether the goals of the collective should be seen as more important than

1:20the goals of the individual which would be the collectivist position or whether

1:24the goals of the individual should be viewed as supreme the individualist

1:29position integral to meeseeks critique of the collectivist position was

1:34methodological individualism a doctrine which holds that only individuals act to

1:40meeseeks the truth of this was obvious only individuals act and any action by a

1:45collective can ultimately be reduced to the actions of various individuals in

1:50the ultimate foundations of economic science Mises has this to say about

1:55methodological individualism in denying independent existence of their own to

2:01the collectives one does not in the least deny the reality of the effects

2:05brought about by the cooperation of individuals one merely establishes the

2:10fact that the collectives come into being by the thoughts and acts

2:13of individuals and that they disappear when the individuals adopt a different

2:18way of thinking and acting while not denying the existence of collectives

2:24methodological individualism denies the ability of any collective to exist in an

2:30autonomous manner independent of the individuals who compose it me see

2:36stressed the importance of methodological individualism because he

2:40believed that often people who favor the collectivist position will try to assert

2:45some form of independent existence to their collective in order to justify the

2:49elevation of its goals meeseeks has two main criticisms for those who want to

2:55elevate the supposed goals of a collective above those of the individual

3:00firstly me see stressed a point which is easily overlooked that being that the

3:06creation of a collective is always arbitrary in other words because

3:10collectives virtually never include the entirety of mankind criteria must be

3:15established to distinguish between who is to be included and who excluded from

3:20the collectives but there is no set way to determine such criteria and this is

3:25why throughout history collectives have taken so many forms whether it be

3:29collectives determined by race religion wealth or country of birth as such at

3:35any given time there always exists a plurality of collectives and each

3:39collective believes their goals are superior not only to those of the

3:44individual but also those of all rival collectives in his work theory in

3:49history meeseeks emphasizes this point by saying there is no uniform

3:54collectivist ideology but many collectivist doctrines each of them

3:59extols a different collectivist entity and requests all decent people to submit

4:04to it each sect worships its own Idol and is intolerant of all rival idols the

4:12second criticism meeseeks put forth was that the goals which are elevated over

4:16those of the individual are never actually the goals of an autonomous

4:20collective as no such thing exists but rather are merely the goals of those who

4:25exert power or in it's over the collective at any given

4:29point in time meeseeks believed that this was why countries which become

4:33increasingly collective also become increasingly unstable as he puts it in

4:38his monumental work human action it is true that every variety of collectivism

4:44promises eternal peace starting with the day of its own decisive victory however

4:49the realisation of these plans is conditioned upon a radical

4:53transformation in mankind man must be divided into two classes the omnipotent

4:59godlike dictator on the one hand and the masses which must surrender volition and

5:03reasoning in order to become mere chess men in the plans of the dictator there

5:08is no need to point out that such designs are unrealizable in opposition

5:14to collectivist doctrines meeseeks was in favor of individualism or in other

5:19words the ability of each individual to choose his or her own goals and act

5:24accordingly whether that led to the starting of a charity to help the poor

5:28work in construction or just sitting on the couch all day contemplating the

5:32meaning of life however in executing ones plans meeseeks

5:36believed that each individual should respect the rights and freedoms of

5:40others it is important to stress that meeseeks did not promote individualism

5:45because he was somehow against society or other collective entities rather his

5:50strong support for individualism was based on his belief that the

5:55individualist position was essential for long-term peace and prosperity meeseeks

6:00believed that when individuals work to achieve their own goals they readily

6:04recognize the mutual benefits that arise from cooperation voluntary exchange and

6:09the division of labour and that these social phenomena are not at all

6:13incompatible with the individualist position but rather incompatible with

6:17collectivism meeseeks conveys this by saying the customary terminology

6:22misrepresents these things entirely the philosophy commonly called individualism

6:28is a philosophy of social cooperation and the progressive intensification of

6:33the social Nexus on the other hand the application of the basic idea of

6:37collectivism cannot result in anything but social dissenter

6:41and the perpetuation of armed conflict another philosopher who was strongly

6:47against collectivism but likely for different reasons than Mises was

6:51Frederick Nietzsche Nietzsche believed that only autonomous individuals are of

6:55any worth and that those who are bound up in the ideals and goals of a

6:59collective or what he called a herd are really individuals too weak to create

7:04their own goals and meaning for life to conclude this lecture we will quote a

7:08short passage by Nietzsche from his work thus Spoke Zarathustra which in a much

7:14different style puts forth a somewhat similar view to that of meeseeks

7:18somewhere there are still peoples and herds but not where we live my brothers

7:23here there are States state what is that well then open your ears to me for now I

7:29shall speak to you about the death of people's state is the name of the

7:33coldest of all cold monsters coldly it tells lies too and this lie crawls out

7:38of its mouth I the state and the people that is a lie behold how it lers them

7:44they all to many and how it devours them choose them and ruminates