Individualism Vs Collectivism

[El Cid 213]

3 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

There are no altruistic politicians, anywhere.

I would like to be a local councillor, to make my local area better, not for the power kick.

I pick litter all year round, the councillors do it more prior to the local elections. But their must be councillors that are altruistic. Teachers don't become teachers just for the money, so why would a politician be just doing it for the money?

Yes, their are a lot of poor politicians, how can they follow their partys 'line' and also follow their own beliefs.

Before I can run for election, I need to become financially secure and stop working for the local authority. Because local authority workers are not able to stand for election, they don't make it easy.

 

[Anna B 1,401]

Not sure that I agree with the original definitions but maybe that's just me. 

 

I believe that human beings always benefit from working together, in fact their survival depends on it, and has done since prehistoric times.  That doesn't mean that within this structure their isn't room for individualism, certainly an important part of the human experience.

 

In good times we may believe we have the luxury of individualism, but in fact it is an illusion. We all benefit from the work and experience of others, and when times turn bad (as they suddenly have in this current pandemic,) we return to depending on others for our wellbeing.

 

Humans are by and large sociable animals. 

As John Donne said, 'No man is an island.' 

Edited October 15, 2020 by Anna B

[Flanker7 20]

On 04/10/2020 at 14:06, tinfoilhat said:

There are no altruistic politicians, anywhere.

Sweeping generalisation like the above are ALWAYS wrong . . . . . .😉

[El Cid 213]

51 minutes ago, Anna B said:

I believe that human beings always benefit from working together, in fact their survival depends on it, and has done since prehistoric times.  That doesn't mean that within this structure their isn't room for individualism, certainly an important part of the human experience.

I agree; but the state over recent decades has encouraged individualism.

I am sure someone will come up with some examples. These days mostly paid carers look after children, in my day it was relatives, the same with old people nearing the end of their life.

Councillors and MPs were once paid a pitance or nothing, these days its just a job, where people do it to add £xx to their income.

[Anna B 1,401]

2 hours ago, El Cid said:

I agree; but the state over recent decades has encouraged individualism.

I am sure someone will come up with some examples. These days mostly paid carers look after children, in my day it was relatives, the same with old people nearing the end of their life.

Councillors and MPs were once paid a pitance or nothing, these days its just a job, where people do it to add £xx to their income.

Well, that's the ethos of the Conservatives isn't it, (and I would include Tony Blair in that.) 

 

The world has changed considerably over the last 40 years, and not always for the better. The welfare state is being eroded and we now have more hunger, poverty and homelessness than ever before. It takes 2 incomes to pay the bills and now both parents usually have to work. Worshipping money has taken the place of worshipping God. Social mobility is grinding to a halt, and IMO people have become more selfish.

 

Globalisation should have been to the benefit of all people, but seems to have been hijacked by Multinationals, Oligarchs and the super-rich; the Neoliberals. There is no longer room for the small guy.  Environmentalists struggle against the large Corporation's demand for profits. The gap between rich and poor is getting wider. Politicians of both parties are no longer trusted or respected. Wars continue across the planet, and nations are becoming more fragmented. A lot of young people are almost without hope.  Suicide is the biggest killer of young men. For many, I don't think the world has ever seemed so miserable.

 

Sorry to seem so negative, but we really do need to start thinking more about returning to our core values, and pay attention to what's happening to our fellow man, women and children.  Isn't the sign of a decent civilisation how we treat our poorest and most vulnerable in our society? That requires us all working together for the common good.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Anna B

[tinfoilhat 11]

24 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Well, that's the ethos of the Conservatives isn't it, (and I would include Tony Blair in that.) 

 

The world has changed considerably over the last 40 years, and not always for the better. The welfare state is being eroded and we now have more hunger, poverty and homelessness than ever before. It takes 2 incomes to pay the bills and now both parents usually have to work. Worshipping money has taken the place of worshipping God. Social mobility is grinding to a halt, and IMO people have become more selfish.

 

Globalisation should have been to the benefit of all people, but seems to have been hijacked by Multinationals, Oligarchs and the super-rich; the Neoliberals. There is no longer room for the small guy.  Environmentalists struggle against the large Corporation's demand for profits. The gap between rich and poor is getting wider. Politicians of both parties are no longer trusted or respected. Wars continue across the planet, and nations are becoming more fragmented. A lot of young people are almost without hope.  Suicide is the biggest killer of young men. For many, I don't think the world has ever seemed so miserable.

 

Sorry to seem so negative, but we really do need to start thinking more about returning to our core values, and pay attention to what's happening to our fellow man, women and children.  Isn't the sign of a decent civilisation how we treat our poorest and most vulnerable in our society? That requires us all working together for the common good.

I think if you live in a fair chunk of the developing world and even bigger hitters like India or Brazil, globalisation has done a huge amount for millions, billions maybe.

 

Huge cost, particularly environmental but you can't ignore the great strides in standards of living for many.

[Anna B 1,401]

45 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

I think if you live in a fair chunk of the developing world and even bigger hitters like India or Brazil, globalisation has done a huge amount for millions, billions maybe.

 

Huge cost, particularly environmental but you can't ignore the great strides in standards of living for many.

I have to agree, but Imperialism and Empire building is what made many of these countries poor in the first place.

 

We have however been giving aid to developing countries for years with little to show for it except some dictator somewhere being able to buy himself a new jet. We also claim most of it back in third world debt which has diminished these countries and kept them poor. We give with one hand and take back with the other. 

 

Now China (and other communist countries?) have got involved and do things differently.  Instead of giving money they actually build the infrastructure, create jobs, and provide people to oversee it. Now I'm not naive enough to think all this is pure altruism, but China, in 10 years, has made more progress in helping people out of poverty, than we have made in 50. 

[Lex Luthor 10]

Great topic.

 

I'd like to think I was a mixture of both but I guess other people may be better judges of that.  Or are they?  We're so quick to judge others these days without having much of a clue of what it must be like to walk in their shoes.

[El Cid 213]

14 hours ago, Anna B said:

The welfare state is being eroded and we now have more hunger, poverty and homelessness than ever before. It takes 2 incomes to pay the bills and now both parents usually have to work. Worshipping money has taken the place of worshipping God. Social mobility is grinding to a halt, and IMO people have become more selfish.

I very much support helping vunerable people, but the welfare state now takes care of the poor, instead of local people getting together and helping them. We have lost that connection.

Whose job is it to look after the elderley, I am not sure. Is it the family or is it the state, or perhaps when we get older we should have our own money?

Inheritence should be what is left, as a reward for the people that have cared for that person.

[Anna B 1,401]

6 hours ago, Lex Luthor said:

Great topic.

 

I'd like to think I was a mixture of both but I guess other people may be better judges of that.  Or are they?  We're so quick to judge others these days without having much of a clue of what it must be like to walk in their shoes.

I think everybody is a mixture of both, we are all capable of both good and evil. However we have been given freewill, and can choose how we behave and that's not always easy. The pitfalls are many;  doing the wrong thing for the right reasons, and vice versa, acting wrongly through fear of repercussions, self delusion and spite, judging others unfairly, following orders that are wrong, selfishness disguised with dodgy excuses, following the herd even though you know it's going in the wrong direction,  etc etc, - we're all guilty of some  of these at some time. We have a moral compass, we just have to be aware of it and strive to do the best we can. 

 

But people can also be incredibly kind and caring too. Love, sharing and altruism abounds. Much more so than we know, in all kinds of small ways that never hits the headlines. The human being is always a work in progress, and we should never forget that, and always aspire to be the best we can be.

:

Edited October 16, 2020 by Anna B

[tinfoilhat 11]

14 hours ago, Anna B said:

I have to agree, but Imperialism and Empire building is what made many of these countries poor in the first place.

 

We have however been giving aid to developing countries for years with little to show for it except some dictator somewhere being able to buy himself a new jet. We also claim most of it back in third world debt which has diminished these countries and kept them poor. We give with one hand and take back with the other. 

 

Now China (and other communist countries?) have got involved and do things differently.  Instead of giving money they actually build the infrastructure, create jobs, and provide people to oversee it. Now I'm not naive enough to think all this is pure altruism, but China, in 10 years, has made more progress in helping people out of poverty, than we have made in 50. 

I'm not entirely sure you know what China actually does. It might put in infrastructure in but the rest is unabashed capitalism free of many of the checks and balances the West has. The communism bit is just the control of the population.

[Waldo 96]

2 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

I'm not entirely sure you know what China actually does. It might put in infrastructure in but the rest is unabashed capitalism free of many of the checks and balances the West has. The communism bit is just the control of the population.

The CCCP seem more like a ‘mafia running a country” type of affair, their number one interest is maintaining their own position of authority and control over the masses.