Who among us does not want to be a bright individuality? At least, to consider oneself as such. However, not everyone is capable of that. Modern developed society of triumphant freedom of conscience encourages the desire of each individual for individuality, leading these unfortunate individuals to psychologists, coaches, psychiatrists, and antidepressants.
Who might be attracted to the slogan “All for one and one for all”? Only weaklings and idlers, cowards and sycophants, a compliant herd. Those who hide in the crowd, afraid to express and have their own opinion different from the group’s opinion, keep quiet, and always vote “Yes!” Those who are afraid to face difficulties alone, so they support and help others, hoping for mutual help in difficult times. Those who have no talents or life forces; they are uncertain, in need of protection and support of the collective. Collectivists!
A strong and integral personality is much closer to “Every man for himself!” This is the slogan of talented, brave, adventurous, ambitious, and self-confident people. Those who are willing to take risks and are not willing to simply share their success. Those who know how to achieve what they have planned, even at the expense of others. Those who are hardworking, clever, greedy, and daring. Those who are indifferent to the opinion of the crowd. Those who are interested in the result of their work and personal gain. Individualists!
If we believe Vilfredo Pareto, in any society (as well as in a herd or pack) there are significantly more collectivists than individualists. After all, with a collective, there is more reliability, fewer risks, enough guarantees of security and minimal comfort — the whole collective, company, or country is unlikely to perish immediately. “One way or another, the group will survive, and therefore, I will survive,” thinks the collectivist. The individualist, on the other hand, is indifferent to what will happen to the collective, company, or country; they bet on personal success, often at the expense of others’ losses.
However, the main value for an individualist is not material goods, but the freedom of their personality: the ability to think differently, to disagree, to wear red boots and a purple top hat, to deny norms, rules, and taboos, to have their own conscience, often in defiance of laws, traditions, and social morality.
This very conscience is the main pride of the individualist. Each of them has their own, with its individual reservations and allowances. Often, it can forgive theft, betrayal, and even murder with aggravating circumstances. As long as the individualist’s skin is not harmed. The conscience of the modern individualist is their ally, assistant, and accomplice.
For collectivists, everything is different — they are conformists. Their conscience is external, not internal. They care about what people will think of them, what they will say, how they will be judged; whether they will be approved or condemned. A collectivist cannot sleep if they borrowed money from a neighbor and did not return it. An individualist can. Although, of course, there are exceptions.
It is good to be an individualist when you are intelligent, kind, and noble — like Montaigne or Cervantes. Then your conscience will not only educate and control you but also shed light on the lost souls of your brethren, like the heart of Danko. It is good to be a passionate person with firm individual beliefs that not only contradict societal norms but also dare to correct these norms for the better. However, there are few heroes of conscience among us. And among medieval humanists, I think they were also not common.
A society where individualism is the exception and collectivism is the rule seems to me to be the most stable and productive society. On the other hand, a society where individualism becomes the norm and the mantra “Love yourself!” is presented as a remedy for all ailments seems to me a society of chaos.
Give them freedom, and they will quickly turn into LGBT activists, oppositionists, punks, feminists, anti-feminists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, mediums, and anyone else. They will simply go crazy, losing external control over their moral image. They will feel uncomfortable and uneasy, but public propaganda, which has long and firmly stigmatized societies of collectivism as territories of fear and violence, will not allow them to return to the format of “I am like everyone else!”
So, what do we have? Innate conscience dystrophy in the majority with almost complete absence of external control mechanisms. Where does this lead? To mass schizophrenia and, as a result, to social instability. Who do you think could benefit from this?
Translated by ChatGPT gpt-3.5-turbo/42 on 2024-04-20 at 17:50
