What's the problem with individualism?

What's the problem with individualism?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=m01cUkTSOc4
jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Because every ethnic group other than whites reject individualism. So we need to think of ourselves as a group to defend ourselves against other races and white genocide.

Fair point-- does Spencer's definition of "individualism" exclude market entreprenurialship?

The inevitable rise of resentment among the lazy which spawns all manner of abject collectivism.

It promotes at worst and tolerates at best the following things:

>Degeneracy
>Capitalism and Consumerism
>Destruction of Social fabric and norms
>Selfishness
>Globalism

I don't think Spencer is totally antithetical to Capitalism. In everything I've heard, he supports a blended socialist and capitalist market.

Yep, a basic free market regulated so that businesses can't fuck over the nation at large for short term profits. Entirely reasonable.

Ryan Faulk will explain it. Writing original arguments is too tiresome for topics that should be known already.
youtube.com/watch?v=m01cUkTSOc4

...

...

I am in favor of personal responsibility and equality in terms of the market. It's sad how collectivism promotes this tribal nature that for one group to win, another one has to lose. Look at Affirmative Action for example. Collectivism is bad imo but we need to play the game they're playing if we wanna win.

Thanks anons

>Lots of Richard Spencer Threads
>Lots of Blacked threads
>lots of White Boi U mayyddd threads

Listen you nigger learn how to converse or you will wind up in the pile.

It’s gay

Individualism can be picked up later but right now its Collectivism or bust

If we could kill all the other collectives we'd have a shot at individualism but until then...

The problem with individualism is that most people are brain-plants. They have no interest in dominating others, they're just miserable when they're streaking along seeing what they can get away with, and they react spectacularly poorly to being told to harm others - when they're reacting as individuals. It makes people tremendously unsuitable for warfare.

>poorfag mad he doesn't have stuff

stop using white nationalism as a vehicle for complaining you baby

...

Biggest problem is that you can't use the "blame others for your problems" card

it's a suicidal evolutionary strategy

jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Where did you get this idea that anti-individualists don't like personal responsibility? Hard-righters talk about duty all the time. You don't get a strong family and strong community without first becoming a strong and respectable individual.

Sometimes one group simply has to lose for another to win. Universities have a limited amount of open positions. Do you understand why it is my benefit to have 10k Finns studying in a Finnish university and not 10k imported Chinese? The chinks lose when they can't get into my university with Finnish taxpayer money. We absolutely do need to get whites to act in a more tribal role, or else we're destined to wither away.

Np brah.

That's the heart of my question. Spencer is using a more specific definition of "individualism". He's not referrring to rote "I am an free-agent individual capable and free to exercise my Will." He's using "toxic individualism" and "individualism" interchangeably, which was my confusion.

There's a lot of validity to incentivizing our community, but I don't want to sacrifice our inginuity and the social rewards that come with being an innovator.

I also have a bit of a problem with borrowing Marxist language/terms like "collectivist v individualist". These terms have some baggage that seems to confuse rather than illuminate...No sure--haven't thought about this exact problem very much.

>When the heart gives way, it’s a Turkish bazaar. Freedom is all or nothing. With the likes of this would-be heartrending rabble, these pseudopathetic peons beating his battering rams against the gates, Dio knew that, in time, he was sure to smash them down. When freedom expands to mean freedom of instinct and social destruction, then freedom is dead.

- Jean Raspail, The Camp of the Saints

This. Why do you think racial bastards and our enemies always encourage it in us?

it kills the NEETs, which is 80% of Sup Forums

Should I blame myself when I feel anger when I see hopelessly lonely elderly people? Maybe if I just sorted myself out, the world would be sunshine? Maybe I should blame the elderly for not going out and finding new friends when all their old ones are dead?

I want solutions. Putting all responsibility on individuals clearly hasn't made this society a great place for everyone. Not for babies, children, teens, adults or the elderly.

>jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html
Exactly.

Emphasizing the individual's autonomy forgoes the responsibilities and moral virtues that each individual has to one another. Promoting individual autonomy is basically teaching the person that they are an island onto themselves and are unique to the point of being only capable of self-maintenance, which is silly given the uniformity we see in the hard and social sciences.

But these issues are dealing with post-hoc rationalizations to individualism. It mainly came about as a political compromise to end institutions telling or caring what other people do because conflict there has a history of leading to violence. As such the Enlightenment era chose peace over whether something was true. To overcome this we would need reason to motivate people towards understanding what is truly best for people. Doing this would require much work on our philosophical and scientific front. The Enlightenment has been a massive failure for the former and the latter is a mixed bag.

This is an excellent quote. Through promoting individual autonomy you sever people from seeing much beyond themselves and their desires.

He seems pretty much third position, and i agree, free market and private innitiative, but very important sectors somehow protected

>muh collectivism
fuck off

>this amount of disingenuousness

it makes commies a bigger threat because they dont have to kill a collective

>What's the problem with individualism?
Potatoes are not individuals, therefore anarchy cannot work.

>What's the problem with individualism?

It leads to free thought.

0/10

Y'all need to read some Kierkegaard.

collective goals are one thing, collectivised movements and especially groups are very different.

any form of centralisation leads to compromise, gatekeeping and is open to manipulation. a collective goal can never be subverted

> muh white genocide
Just because women dont want to fuck you does not equal genocide . You are just unfit to breed.

>same retard who makes the same false premise strawman as this post appears

cuz everyone NEEDS to wear a matching pink jumpsuits get a state mandated haircut and live on a hydroponic farm growing potatos for all eternity.

...

...

lol
I get it
thats not his real head
lol

What joke? His head didn't fit