Libertarian Individualist here, redpill me to collectivism, /pol

Libertarian Individualist here, redpill me to collectivism, /pol.

Other urls found in this thread:

theamericanconservative.com/articles/announcing-the-death-of-classical-liberalism/
archive.is/UYRVM
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

What do you even mean by this?

The individual betters themselves for god and their brothers and sisters so that the collective can rely on the individual in time of need. The collective are your brothers and sisters by blood, you should not think of it as taking credit for what your ancestors accomplished but More of preserving the torch that your ancestors once carried and protecting the traditions they bled for.

Do you mean individualist collectivism?

there is no such a thing as collectivist vs individualist dichotomy. "individualism" is just a fancy name for consumerism now. collective is made up from individual, therefore you can't increase collective rights without increasing individual rights.

it's an evolutionary strategy.

>libertarian Individualist here, redpill me to collectivism

China will surpass the West within 5 years due to collectivism.

They'll collapse faster than their hastily built apartment complexes

A nation can be built via contract. also see Division of labor.

>Sharing a photo almost 10 years old
Yeah, a lot has changed since then you faggot. You'll rip each other a part due to marxism, and unironically Communist China will surpass you.

Collectivism is just a bunch of weak people ganging up together to try to take down the strong

If you are a strong person, collectivism will only drag you down

Save the white race.

We don't take kindly to Nietzscheans here, boy.

That's scary.
Juat think, people are living in the buildings that didn't fall over....yet.

Spbp

That's not he's saying. A group of individualists pushing individualists values doesn't fundamentally make them a collectivists.

I know they are a literal collective, but the idea that they're preaching is contrary to the very idea of collectivism as an ideal. While yes it's ironic, it's not the same thing.

Pure individualism and pure collectivism don't exist and have never existed as far as I can see. It's where your ideology fits on the spectrum between these two that matters. The west is more on the individualist side compared to other parts of the world, but it doesn't mean the west doesn't have collectivist parts. Indeed, the protection of individual rights requires a collective entity.

What traditions???, you fat Canadian fuck are literary sitting behind a computer or touch pad, or whatever, shitposting and imagining you have something in common with Englanders from hundreds of years ago? What exactly? And traditions change, you cetranily are not larping as a victorian cunt in 21.century Canada.

The only reason China has any growth whatsoever is because of their economic liberalization efforts anyway. The more they move away from collectivist ideology the better off they will be. Their refusal to go all the way will be what holds them back.

>redpill me to collectivism
An individual wants the society he lives in to be a better place
An individual may take actions that go against his most immediate benefits to have a better society to live in and comparatively more benefits in the long run than the ones he gave up for
More than one individuals are likely to want their society a better place to live in and take action for it
Compared to a group of individuals all taking their own actions individually, a group of individuals taking action in concert is more likely to get more results
>Said group of people is a collective

Why not?

Sticking together is a good idea if you want to defend your freedom.

The level of individualism or collectivism should be matched according to the natural racial proclivities of the race of the host nation. So for example Europeans have a society more to the individualist end of the spectrum while Asians are more on the collectivist side. Also note the subtle differences between social and economic collectivism. Generally people are more favorable to social collectivism (unity/consensus) rather than economic collectivism (equal opportunity/outcomes).

You consider yourself an individual and work alone, your enemies are a collective and they want to destroy you.

collectivism isn't a monolith. feminism is harmful garbage but it's definitely collectivist. anglo-catholicism is a collective that fitted western civilization. good and evil exists. individualism is reactionary, to when shit gets too authoritarian and you get tired of being told what to do regardless of any moral ethos

People have a naive understanding of evolution. It's more complex than simply survival of the fittest individuals. There is also Group Selection as well as Sexual Selection.

The most strongest man in the village would probably die from a Lion attack, however if other men in the village helped protect and save him it would be (genetically) beneficial to the tribe in competition with other tribes.

Feminism is a good example:

Let's say men earn 30k a year on average and women earn 20k a year on average. If the average man took a 10k pay cut, feminists would call this a success and call it equality.

They haven't helped improve a single life. In fact, they've helped make some lives harder, especially for families. Yet this to them is a success worth celebrating.

They're not concerned with improving the lives of individuals, but ensuring two groups of people have the same averages on a spread sheet. Whether that’s achieved by pulling one group up or one group down is irrelevant to them.

This is the type of collectivism that should be demonised.

Now compare it to the state focusing on their own citizens rather than some natives of a shithole somewhere. That's the type of collectivism that's good. Same with prioritising your family over some random stranger you don't know.

Individualism vs Collectivism is a false dichotomy. The real challenge is between the Community and the Managerial Elite.

theamericanconservative.com/articles/announcing-the-death-of-classical-liberalism/
archive.is/UYRVM

>The two liberal parties in America compete by pointing to two seemingly opposed but factually reinforcing trends. The right-liberal Republicans warn against the dominance of society by the state, while the left-liberal Democrats point to the tyranny of the market as the greatest threat to human freedom. Thus each party inspires its partisan members by fear of the threat the other party represents. But despite appearances, both parties, in fact, jointly work to expand both the state and the market.

>As Deneen writes, “The insistent demand that we choose between protection of individual liberty and expansion of state activity masks the true relation between the state and market: that they grow constantly and necessarily together… modern liberalism proceeds by making us both more individualist and more statist.”

>Anyone of a religious bent would surely object to the idea that humans only get along with each other because they realize output will be higher if they do so. But one need not be religious to see that Mises is spouting nonsense: humans (and proto-humans) lived together in tight-knit social groups long before they could have been calculating the advantages of the division of labor. There never were “isolated…self-sufficient individuals” with which they could compare their “output” as members of a group. Isolated humans were dead humans, not self-sufficient humans. And our chimpanzee, bonobo, and gorilla relatives also live in tight-knit social groups, as do many other animals.

This guy still thinks China is communist and not corporatist.
China relies on not letting people know how bad they have it. Not the rich who are buying up Canada but the poor who are even prevented from committing suicide.
Turn on uncensored social media for a month and they will have a revolution. The gap between rich and poor based on actual “material” is fucking huge. If they could see that blood would flow.

would it. we have a pretty big gap here too but all you get is bunch of liberal whining and the occasional chimpout

There are degrees of collectivism. Not everything is absolute. Your family is a collective with common interests. It doesn't mean that it is a fucking cult.