3 ms·

The US elite have been waging total war on (domestic) collectivism for the past half century. An atomized populace buys more products and services than one that

The US elite have been waging total war on (domestic) collectivism for the past half century. An atomized populace buys more products and services than one that shares and cooperates freely. This is good for business but disastrous for society, as we are seeing in the 21st century. Capitalists want the worker ants without the ant colony.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
This is a pretty vague claim. Can you go into more detail on who the elite are and which kinds of collectivism they've been fighting against?
- pphysch 6y ago
  Elite: corporations, financiers, and their media and military arms. The "successful" capitalists. On collectivism: Gutting organised labor wherever possible, gutting education & social programs in general, pushing identity issues to divide the population, "war on drugs", terrorism & FUD, ideological war on socialism/communism/Marxism. I guess the anti-war and adjacent movements of the 70s is what really set them off.
tathougies 6y ago
This is ridiculous, because what the author describes here is not 'collectivism' in the sense that free marketers are against. Nowhere in the post is there anything about needing to get rid of private property or even to socialize ownership of goods. What is discussed is individuals collectively taking responsibility for their own lives and those of their neighbors -- as demonstrated in the highway and obstacle example. That is not an instance of 'big government collectivism'. Quite the opposite, and one not only compatible with, but encouraged by the libertarian free market capitalists you decry. In reference to the highly authoritarian European regimes, Toqueville states that Americans are different: > This detachment from his own fate becomes so extreme that, if his own safety or that of his children is threatened, instead of trying to ward off the danger he folds his arms and waits for the entire nation to come to his rescue. This sounds like something a 'far-right', liberty obsessed gun afficionado may say as he points out the importance of the second amendment and self-defence and the importance of a small government
- pphysch 6y ago
  So we're not allowed to discuss the elephant in the room i.e. the tremendous faults of unbridled late-stage capitalism and the extreme individualism it requires? I'm not sure what your point is here. I mean it makes sense given the demo here on HN, but come on.
  - antepodius 6y ago
    It's not individualism, it's infantilism. Everyone's waiting for daddy government/daddy employer to save them.
    - pphysch 6y ago
      Individualism and infantilism are not mutually exclusive

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

This is a pretty vague claim. Can you go into more detail on who the elite are and which kinds of collectivism they've been fighting against?

pphysch 6y ago
Elite: corporations, financiers, and their media and military arms. The "successful" capitalists. On collectivism: Gutting organised labor wherever possible, gutting education & social programs in general, pushing identity issues to divide the population, "war on drugs", terrorism & FUD, ideological war on socialism/communism/Marxism. I guess the anti-war and adjacent movements of the 70s is what really set them off.

tathougies 6y ago

This is ridiculous, because what the author describes here is not 'collectivism' in the sense that free marketers are against. Nowhere in the post is there anything about needing to get rid of private property or even to socialize ownership of goods. What is discussed is individuals collectively taking responsibility for their own lives and those of their neighbors -- as demonstrated in the highway and obstacle example. That is not an instance of 'big government collectivism'. Quite the opposite, and one not only compatible with, but encouraged by the libertarian free market capitalists you decry. In reference to the highly authoritarian European regimes, Toqueville states that Americans are different: > This detachment from his own fate becomes so extreme that, if his own safety or that of his children is threatened, instead of trying to ward off the danger he folds his arms and waits for the entire nation to come to his rescue. This sounds like something a 'far-right', liberty obsessed gun afficionado may say as he points out the importance of the second amendment and self-defence and the importance of a small government

pphysch 6y ago
So we're not allowed to discuss the elephant in the room i.e. the tremendous faults of unbridled late-stage capitalism and the extreme individualism it requires? I'm not sure what your point is here. I mean it makes sense given the demo here on HN, but come on.
- antepodius 6y ago
  It's not individualism, it's infantilism. Everyone's waiting for daddy government/daddy employer to save them.
  - pphysch 6y ago
    Individualism and infantilism are not mutually exclusive