Which is more important: the individual or the collective?

>>336523
In an ethnically homogeneous community, the collective is valued more than the individual.

In an ethnically/racially diverse community, the individual is worshiped while the collective is ignored.

The individual is the heart and the collective is the lungs

There is no such thing as the individual. People do not live in a vacuum.

>>336545
Neither do collectives.

>collective
>other people

Nice spooks you got there.

Collectives are more important, because they are made up of countless individuals.
But the Collective should never step in the Individual to achieve a means to an end either. It will only be hurting itself, after all.

>>336537
The joke being that in practice its the opposite.
Communities stay homogeneous if individualism is practiced, and become diverse where collectivism is employed.

Dont ask how or why, just making observations.

>>336545
t. Marx

>>336545
There is no such thing as a collective, it's just a spooky way of describing more than 1 Egoist being in the same room.

>>336523
The "collective" is just a meme.

There exists only the individual.

File: 1448903619008.jpg (15KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 225x225px

>>336523
It depends on the individual and collective.

>>336523
define ''individual''

>>336912
Marx never denied the individual, though.

Naturally, the collective is more important as we are social animals.

But morally, it's completely subjective as everyone has different morals.

On four legs, Individual
On two legs, a balance between the two
On three legs, the collective

>>336523

the population is a organic entity that physicaly produces all individual humans

as such a organised population is biologicaly immortal