Collective Acton vs. Collectivism



Technologies that enhance the speed and scale of networks don't lead to collectivism, they lead to enhanced independence so long as coercion is forbidden. It increases the diversity of opinions and information available to each because there is access to distant distributed sources not tainted by local consensual views arrived at with limited information.

The threat of collectivism, consensual tyranny, is always present. It always has been and occurs at each social level - family, tribe, village, city, nation etc. But it only thrives in coercive environments. So long as dissent is at least protected from the tyranny of the majority, better yet celebrated as a social good, then collectivism will not occur. It's unnatural - if there is more than one way to make a living there will be many ways livings are made. Anything that works will change.

Making our peace with these natural tendencies - truths if you will - instead of fighting them will help the social mind in all its distributed diversity flourish in the age of large scale networks. It is to every individual's benefit as well as society as a whole to support diversity and prevent the collectivist bullies from ever gaining power. They will always be with us, it is a never ending task to be wary of them, and they can't be educated or purged in some way since they are natural too. The tension between collectivists and independents is evolutionarily stable. If it ever comes into existence, and it has, it will endure.

-- "back40" of the excellent blogs Muck and Mystery and Crumb Trail

Share this

"It is to every individual?s

"It is to every individual?s benefit as well as society as a whole to support diversity and prevent the collectivist bullies from ever gaining power."

Uh huh, and why is it to the tyrant's benefit?