Collectivism is cancer

Societies usually in a macro sense are divided into two, individualistic societies and collectivist societies. The former are usually rooted in more developed societies and the latter in "third world" countries. In individualistic societies, there is a power gap between the different figures in a hierarchy system that is based on the merit that an individual brings to society, without giving way to an exclusion by belonging to a different stratum of society, a boss and his employee sit and interact without a necessary protocol.

Meanwhile, in collectivists, we are made to see that there is no such thing as hierarchy and that any distinction or difference between individuals does not exist. Merit is not the central premise but mediocrity. It is not, therefore, curious that in collectivist societies we see more problems with respect to economic, social and political development. With respect to the latter, it is almost certain that the incumbent president will be considered a political leader who is compared to God. Something characteristic of these societies is the denunciation of that which is wrong or erroneous since the cosmovision that was implanted is the cosmovision of what is corrupt and what goes against virtue. Malevolent acts, therefore, become the norm.

Fear of exclusion and the desire to fit into a social group are greater than a commitment to institutions and homeland.

The justification conceived by those who want to impose a collectivist vision of life is justice, which for some reason can only be achieved if we are all equal. The truth is that this justification is nothing more than a trap of an ideal that demands but does not offer a solution to the problems, let alone its morality. Its great trap consists in forgetting that it is impossible to achieve something using contradictory means, and collectivism believes that force can put an end to oppression, with any difference. Such a paradox is possible because within collectivisms the first victim is reason, wisdom, and freedom, like almost everything abstract and superior.

Reason disappears from the very moment when the principle of unanimity begins to prevail, which is what gives strength to the collective because it serves to exclude the one who does not belong, the traitor and the guilty. No exceptions are allowed, any dissent is pernicious, criminal, and that is why we have been able to read, not without surprise, that capitalism is responsible for the oppression of any minority group, that is to say, that any minority is by definition oppressed.

As a consequence of the expulsion of the critical sense, collectivism is a tool to exempt from responsibility, since, by definition, it is a mechanism to externalize guilt and to flatter the supposedly oppressed, freeing them from any duty of their own, from any personal commitment alien to the collective: all responsibility is reduced to putting oneself at the orders of whoever commands.

Nietzsche wanted to see resentment as the origin of morality, and he was right to consider that the transmutation of higher values would frequently be the objective of the masses that feel oppressed; it is not necessary to be a genius to see the implicit risk in nodding to such simple approaches, but neither is it too intelligent to dispense with that kind of criticism when we try to understand the instruments that collectivism uses.

If we look back, what is certain is that we will be able to verify that nothing of what is especially valuable to us has been enlightened by the masses, that this force can be used for almost everything, except to find even a truly liberating way of life. Creativity does not come from the masses, nor from the myth of genius, but from intelligent collaboration, something that can only be articulated in groups in which conversation is possible, in which there are no slogans or orthodoxy.

It is something that should give us food for thought. We need to find ways to prevent collectivism, with its uniform and orderly impetus, from ruining essential values of the free world, such as dissidence, pluralism, and critical thinking, and we need to find ways to prevent collectivism, with its uniform and orderly impetus, from ruining essential values of the free world, such as dissent, pluralism, and critical thought.

The technological society offers us many means to live something less tied by the means of what has been traditional, but there already abound those who want to put doors to the field, those who aspire to protect us from what, supposedly, idiotizes us, or causes us it is not known that enormous damages, from cancer to oligophrenia.

Everyone can sign up for whatever they want, but asking a mass coup for liberation or freedom is quite contradictory, because the only thing the masses can do, the only thing they have always done, tightens controls, imposed by the force of the state a single thought and has exterminated any form of foreign thought. Today we are freer than ever, and more controlled than ever.

---

_{Posted from my blog with SteemPress : Here}

---