Political Theory

Re: Collectivist myths

Alice — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:47:38 GMT

since human equality is literally false (human beings are not the same), all interpretations of 'equality' always devolve into 'what I think people ought to be like' without any apparent connection to any real equiproportionality.

Re: Collectivist myths

DanielMuff — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:40:10 GMT

Division of labor is a form of collaboration.

Re: Collectivist myths

nirgrahamUK — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:36:58 GMT

competition is just the mode of cooperation through which the freemarket operates. the free market is nothing but self-organised collaboration. division of labour could have no meaning otherwise.

as contrast; the mode of cooperation through which the socialised community operates is slavery.

there are no un-collaborative 'societies'. since on what grounds are we calling it a society and not just a mere collection of individuals with zero relationships between them...(if we are trying to find a non-collaborative society...)

Re: Collectivist myths

twistedbydsign99 — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:32:49 GMT

Someone who doesnt cooperate with others is ignorant in their own self interest.

Collectivist myths

tmeyer — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:24:03 GMT

States socialist author Richard Wilkinson on his book Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better, "In a lot of different subjects there's a move towards a fundamental recognition of how social people are. In neurology, epidemiology, social psychology, child development, there's lots of evidence that humans do better if they're collaborative."

It seems to me that people will only choose to do what they perceive to be best for themselves at any time, not what's best for society. Collaboration and cooperation are vehicles for self-interest.