/l/ - The Lounge

Off-topic discussion

[Make a Post]
[X]





Individualism vs Communitarianism Nanonymous No.11205 [D][U][F][S][L][A][C]
File: 000bca8910b3a58d6107ed0c40d2e7fe43b4cd31dd45d7a6a0e4fc4d2991d861.svg (dl) (3.03 MiB)

As the title states this i'd like to have a debate about these two kinds of political philosophies.

In my journey to become an Übermensch i highly value individualism and disregard philosophies that put the collectivity before the individual, the collectivity usually dumbs everything down, brings the up worst ideas and puts up idiotic rules made to manage the retards in the community, if you look at history most great men had strong charisma and personalities and they were able to influence others instead of being influenced by the collective or in other words the had strong individual traits, you can easily conclude that communitarianism or community-first ideologies are malicious for you and you should not fall for them just for a false sense of belonging.

If you have no idea what i'am talking about read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communitarianism

Note i'm using "communitarianism" as an antithet to individualism, as pic related implies this is beyond right and left.

Nanonymous No.11207 [D] >>11209 >>11210

>In my journey to become an Übermensch i highly value individualism
What a selfish way to live. To get rid of any thought of helping your family, community, and race. Your lifetime is just a spec in the grand scheme of things. Helping your people before your self will have a larger effect than what it would have had on your short life.
>dumbs everything down, brings the up worst ideas, and puts up idiotic rules made to manage the retards in the community
A counter example to that is communism in which society would have no laws. I do not agree with you that having laws are a bad thing though. There will always be people who will naturally want to do bad things. Having and enforcing laws can allow your society to have a way to handle these people. Laws allow there to be a societal consequence to being immoral. Allowing immoral people to reign free will just allow them to spread the immortality to other people further corrupting your society.
>if you look at history most great men had strong charisma and personalities and they were able to influence others instead of being influenced by the collective
Take another look at that. The fact that they are great men is because they did something for their people instead of themselves. There's a reason why men who die protecting their community are treated as heroes and those who run away to save their life are treated as cowards.
>false sense of belonging
The feeling of belonging that you feel with your family, community, and race is in no such way false. It is a very real sensation.

Nanonymous No.11209 [D]

>>11207
>What a selfish way to live. To get rid of any thought of helping your family, community, and race.
There's a big difference between being an egoist and an individualist that you clearly don't understand.
>Your lifetime is just a spec in the grand scheme of things.
No that's the opposite, being a small part of a big collective is being a spec in the grand scheme of things, when you are replaceable and your presence/absence doesn't make a difference you are not even a human anymore, you are just an expendable resource, putting the collective before the individual is what gave birth to abominations such as utilitarinism(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism).
>muh laws
Laws are for niggers and subhumans, i'm not sure about you but i'm neither.
>The fact that they are great men is because they did something for their people instead of themselves.
I already pointed out that individualism and egoism are two different things, you can put the individual first and still help others you care, anyway you're missing my point which is that people follows individuals(leaders) with strong defined traits that distinguish them from the average tard.
>The feeling of belonging that you feel with your family, community, and race is in no such way false.
The bigger the group becomes the falser it gets, already in your community level there are for sure people that given the chance would off you for profit, at the race level there is no cohesion at all or are you telling me that you would put your life in a random person of your race hands? Trusting your emotions over rationality is animal-tier.

Nanonymous No.11210 [D]

>>11207
You can work exclusively for your own interest and simply share your work. That's what Linus Torvalds did with Linux and Git.

Nanonymous No.11213 [D][U][F]
File: 3569859de08cd54bf68de9f5de4c298558517b499557961f5a4b6fe8967b444e.jpg (dl) (105.88 KiB)

>Übermensch
stopped readin' right there

Nanonymous No.11224 [D] >>11228

>being a small part of a big collective is being a spec in the grand scheme of things
Either way you are a spec. You will only live for a fraction of the duration of human kind.
>when you are replaceable
You are replaceable in an individualistic society too. It's not like the entirety of mankind will stop functioning the moment you die. Life will go on and eventually forget about you.
>birth to abominations such as utilitarianism
How is it an abomination for a nation to try to help its people as much as it can? The collective will live much longer than you will, so improving the collective over yourself will have a longer lasting effect.
>Laws are for niggers and subhumans
I'm not sure where you got that idea considering European countries have had laws for hundreds of years.
>you would put your life in a random person of your race hands
That's correct. I can trust people to not randomly kill me for no reason.

Nanonymous No.11228 [D] >>11229

>>11224
>Either way you are a spec. You will only live for a fraction of the duration of human kind.
>You are replaceable in an individualistic society too.
Now you're talking about the human condition, my point was that fromn the point of view of the collective you're just an expendable resource and instead from the point of view of another individual you're on the same level as them, being respected and treaded like a human is only possible at the individual level.
>How is it an abomination for a nation to try to help its people as much as it can
Cause first utilitarianism puts everyone on the same level regardless of individual differences, therefore is anti-meritocratic and second an utilitarian approach would gladly sacrify a good person to save 10 bad persons and therefore is anti-justice, if this kind of reasoning seems logical to you well no wonder the world is going to shit, also consequentialism in general is retarded.
>I'm not sure where you got that idea considering European countries have had laws for hundreds of years.
Yeah and at the time laws were for peasants which were the same as today subhumans, different kind of laws were applied for the aristocracy(de facto), before aristocracy became hereditary it was based on merit(in ancient Greece), my original point was that applying the same laws to everybody without aknowledging individual differences will result in laws made for retards cause the average is low, quoting myself >puts up idiotic rules made to manage the retards in the community
>That's correct. I can trust people to not randomly kill me for no reason.
If people could benefit from your death for example receiving a big sum of money or social recognition and could do it without consequences a big percentage of your loved community would agree to kill you, so much for your sense of belonging. Do you know how many cases there are of people killing their old parents to get heredity?

Nanonymous No.11229 [D]

>>11228
>my point was that from the point of view of the collective you're just an expendable resource
This is just not true. You will still at least have family and friends who care about you.
>Utilitarianism puts everyone on the same level
It is not necessary to make everyone social equals in order to improve the quality of life of the nation.
<laws are for dummies
Without laws you will allow witchhunts to take place. Additionally, there won't be a common reference on what is allowed in society. Should stealing from others be allowed, if not what is the punishment for doing so? These are questions which need to be answered and having them in a written form is useful.
<If people wanted you dead they could kill you
I won't deny that. Anyone who really wants me dead would be able to kill me. Your individualistic society suffers from the same problem that you can benefit yourself by killing others. While you brought up egoism, individualism and egoism go hand in hand. The same people I hear wanting individualism are the people who think they should be able to drive without a seat belt, not follow the speed limit, and smoke weed which are activities which damage the community.