16 ms·

Well we've rooted our political thought in individualism for decades. Politicians and market actors have viewed people as atomistic and so society has been shap

Well we've rooted our political thought in individualism for decades. Politicians and market actors have viewed people as atomistic and so society has been shaped to reflect that view. Perhaps we are now far enough away from the threat of communism that we can realize there is a balance to be had between the individual and the collective.

oh_sigh 8y ago
'American individualism' has always been focused on the community, but in a peer to peer connected sense versus a top-down hierarchical sense. It's not like we consider been who just trudge into the woods and live like a hermit to be living the American dream.
- Mediterraneo10 8y ago
  > 'American individualism' has always been focused on the community, but in a peer to peer connected sense versus a top-down hierarchical sense. Considering how much brutal treatment workers coming together to form unions have faced from their employers and the state alike over the last century-plus, I wouldn’t say that American society is entirely fine with community provided that they are grassroots, peer-to-peer efforts.
- frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
  That's my point though, it's a view of community as composed of the atomistic unit: the individual. Even your language, 'peer to peer' portrays the community as composed of individuals. I think that individuals are just as composed of their communities as their communities are composed of individuals, there is no 'atomistic' unit to society. Even Tocqueville wrote about it: there are more and more people who though neither rich nor powerful enough to have much hold over others, have gained or kept enough wealth and enough understanding to look after their own needs. Such folk owe no man anything and hardly expect anything from anybody. They form the habit of thinking of themselves in isolation and imagine that their whole destiny is in their hands. and later: Each man is forever thrown back on himself alone, and there is danger that he may be shut up in the solitude of his own heart. The hermit isn't just someone who lives in the woods. It's someone who lives in the woods and doesn't come down. A hermit is someone who opts out of the obligations of community. To that extent I think most of us are hermits now. How many groups other than family and the closest friends does the average person now feel a strong obligation to? I'd say very few.
TangoTrotFox 8y ago
I'd go in the opposite direction. I think people are so afraid to be themselves nowadays that it's making interpersonal interactions increasingly fake, which are unlikely to result in anything but the most superficial of relationships. And I think this fear of being yourself is in part driven by the fact that society is splitting itself into groups. Think of the vehement antagonism there is now based on nothing but "I have a different opinion about [insert political topic.]" People seem to be more and more identifying as members of some group or another, as opposed to individuals. And in turn they adapt their personal views to the views of the group rather than expressing their own 'real' personal views. Of course I could be conflating the direction here and it could be that people are engaging more in 'groupthink' type behavior in a misguided effort to form social bonds, but in either case - I am curious why, in more detail, you think social relationships are suffering for some excess of individualism.

oh_sigh 8y ago

'American individualism' has always been focused on the community, but in a peer to peer connected sense versus a top-down hierarchical sense. It's not like we consider been who just trudge into the woods and live like a hermit to be living the American dream.

Mediterraneo10 8y ago
> 'American individualism' has always been focused on the community, but in a peer to peer connected sense versus a top-down hierarchical sense. Considering how much brutal treatment workers coming together to form unions have faced from their employers and the state alike over the last century-plus, I wouldn’t say that American society is entirely fine with community provided that they are grassroots, peer-to-peer efforts.
frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
That's my point though, it's a view of community as composed of the atomistic unit: the individual. Even your language, 'peer to peer' portrays the community as composed of individuals. I think that individuals are just as composed of their communities as their communities are composed of individuals, there is no 'atomistic' unit to society. Even Tocqueville wrote about it: there are more and more people who though neither rich nor powerful enough to have much hold over others, have gained or kept enough wealth and enough understanding to look after their own needs. Such folk owe no man anything and hardly expect anything from anybody. They form the habit of thinking of themselves in isolation and imagine that their whole destiny is in their hands. and later: Each man is forever thrown back on himself alone, and there is danger that he may be shut up in the solitude of his own heart. The hermit isn't just someone who lives in the woods. It's someone who lives in the woods and doesn't come down. A hermit is someone who opts out of the obligations of community. To that extent I think most of us are hermits now. How many groups other than family and the closest friends does the average person now feel a strong obligation to? I'd say very few.

TangoTrotFox 8y ago

I'd go in the opposite direction. I think people are so afraid to be themselves nowadays that it's making interpersonal interactions increasingly fake, which are unlikely to result in anything but the most superficial of relationships. And I think this fear of being yourself is in part driven by the fact that society is splitting itself into groups. Think of the vehement antagonism there is now based on nothing but "I have a different opinion about [insert political topic.]" People seem to be more and more identifying as members of some group or another, as opposed to individuals. And in turn they adapt their personal views to the views of the group rather than expressing their own 'real' personal views. Of course I could be conflating the direction here and it could be that people are engaging more in 'groupthink' type behavior in a misguided effort to form social bonds, but in either case - I am curious why, in more detail, you think social relationships are suffering for some excess of individualism.