Are Humans inherently collectivists?

To an extent. We do love having group identity but it can manifest in a group of like minded individualist. Not just libertarians are like that, even anarchist like Stirner are similar to that

>>2847247
collectivists? No. Communitarian? Yes.

Humans are inherently social; Without a social group (complete isolation), our brains actually don't develop essential functions (learning through reproduction/mimicry, language, communication, etc) and you wouldn't even survive childhood.

>>2847247
Yes and no. Humans compete to cooperate and cooperate to compete.

collectivism was self-driven.

Most simple example: Chimp documentary... 2 small tribes, 12 males altogether. One male was superior and did fight any other male, fuck any female. What a nice guy, right?
But those 11 losers of the two clans banded together, drove this poor lad on a tree, and there they got him, threw him on the ground, while some did hold his hands, they started to rip his neck bloody-open. He died, they went back and fucked the females.

Being social is important when you have to get down alpha-males. And fuck.
Next stage of "getting down alpha males" is to make them be ashamed of themselves, be afraid of showing their superiority and basically pushing them to the outskirts of social circle.

Normies were and are and always will be afraid and as they cannot handle being afraid, they turn it into hate. Hate is strong with normies.

>>2848061
Hi /r9k/

File: Peter_Kropotkin_circa_1900.jpg (60KB, 498x674px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 498x674px

>>2847247
There is no difference between collectivism and individualism since the collective is made up of individuals.

>>2848249
Nope, a group of individuals is just a bunch of hermits. The fundamental unit of a collective is the interpersonal relationship between individuals, not the individuals themselves.

>>2848249
I pretty much read quite firm theory that a collective mind is as stupid as is the most stupid member of the crowd.

Unless, you can base-prove the equation, by stating, that you never ever disagreed with your parent(s), brother/sister (pointing family members out, as family is the most natural and common collective unit known)

>>2848061
you absolute retard, read a book once about humans, not chimps

>>2848249
There will be, once you have to go against you best interest and sacrifice for the good of the collective.

When a single person have to account for something, he isn't likely to commit stupid crap, so under libertatianism even communities will have a single representative.>>2848473

File: Group Behaviour.jpg (112KB, 854x825px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 854x825px

>>2848492
as I was just proven - learning / reading about chimps totally suffices in order to evaluate and understand people.

Anyway - during the natural process of deindividuation - what kicks in, is something very simple. Smarter individuals can imagine and understand what would impress others, the less smart cannot -> so there is a constant shift of smarter people towards the stupidity of the idiotic members, but no shift of the simple members towards the smarter individuals => end result is that the groups finally acts as one (mind/body) and the level of reaction/planning/action is basically copying the least intellectual members.
In contrary to the exceptionally good advice, I feel I should actually study more about chimps, to be able to argue with em...

>>2849439
That attitude won't get you very far in discussion, to say nothing about getting laid

Individualism/Collectivism is a false dichotomy. Any time you're talking about how society should be organized you are talking about "collectivism", even if it's extreme AnCap.

That said, our nature is not cut and dry. We're both incredibly cooperative and incredibly competitive, usually depending on which is best for the individual at any given time.

>>2849509
I agree. That's why it isn't possible, at least until the majority of people would agree with it's values. It will also not work if people wouldn't want to cooperate voluntarily.

>>2849439
>Smarter individuals can imagine and understand what would impress others, the less smart cannot -> so there is a constant shift of smarter people towards the stupidity of the idiotic members, but no shift of the simple members towards the smarter individuals => end result is that the groups finally acts as one (mind/body) and the level of reaction/planning/action is basically copying the least intellectual members.
That is wrong and you are stupid

File: 1487722243710.jpg (108KB, 640x632px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 640x632px

If they were the Soviet Union would've worked

As empirical proof, try to take a toddler's candy

File: mutual_aid.jpg (28KB, 324x500px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 324x500px

>>2848432
>>2848473
>>2849309
>>2850538
unironically lrn2.

>>2850584

>retarded speak that I had to search on urban dictionary
>commie

who would've thought

File: 1472363955654.jpg (85KB, 672x456px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 672x456px

yes, Humans are biologically tribal. However the optimal number for a cohesive group is between 200-500. However the idea of collectivist nation of 100 million is stupid.

>>2850601
Nice argument there pal
Read the fucking bread book

>>2847260
This. Humans are social animals but its not the same as collectivism although the first humans were collectivist right?

>>2853403
>i blindly support this dumb ideology because it's cool to be edgy
>read this book because i'm to dumb to explain my arguments

Humans have inherent ingroup preferences. This is an evolutionary trait needed for survival. If we couldn't distinguish ourselves from, lets say a bear we'd be pretty much screwed. This extends to human groups with a favor towards are family, tribe and ethnicity.

I don't mind sharing and working on the behalf of people I love and care about. I don't feel used, because I know they appreciate me and do what they can to support me in return. This feeling doesn't extend very far past my circle of family and close friends. There's plenty of people out there happy to exploit me and my family for their own benefit without ever giving anything in return. I don't owe that person anything, I have no incentive to provide for them, so I won't.

>>2847247
Sorta.

We do tend to work together, it's sort of our thing as a species, but we're also more than willing to bail if the group's about to throw the individual under the bus.

We're collectivists as long as the individuals involved feel cool with the collective.

File: leftunity.png (284KB, 3555x2198px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 3555x2198px

Yes

>>2856018
Fuck off, fucking Tankies

>>2856018
>Red white and black hammer and sickle
subtle

>>2857629

The hammer and sickle aren't red, white and black.

>>2850538
the failure of the soviet union had more too do with planned economy then collectivism tho

>>2847315
explain