Selfishness and the collective

We are told that it takes a village. Takes a village to what? To raise our kids? To live our lives? To make a living? In the mind of a collectivist, the answer is all of the above.

The collectivist believes that each person depends upon the works of the collective to live his or her daily life, that each individual has an impact upon his or her neighbor. In collectivist thought, each person has a responsibility to look out for his or her neighbor.

Hundreds of years ago when our forefathers stepped foot on our country, while it was the land of plenty, they still had to work for everything. Fast forward to today, and the land of plenty busts at the seams. One no longer need to sweat or blister to eat good food, live in a nice home, drive a decent car, own an advanced cell phone, etc. Our society places all these technological developments and more into the hands of consumers through tools such as credit and government programs.

In the beginning, in the wilderness, self sufficiency and self reliance were two qualities that equated to survival, yet time advanced to the point that one no longer needed to depend upon himself or herself to survive or even to have nice things. Most, if not all, amenities are now attainable even to average people, so lack of scarcity in society may be our own downfall.

Advance more changes in society governing politically correct thinking, and it ought no longer surprise anyone to find why we are where we are today. A prevailing wisdom is that selfishness is wrong and that when one thinks of oneself first, that person ought to be ashamed. Selfishness now equates to being miserly. By making people feel guilty for thinking of themselves, collectivists hammer home the thought that society is more important than the individuals who make up the community. The problem with their logic is that self sufficiency gets hammered at the expense of easy living. In a land with no scarcity, how important can it be to do anything oneself? You don't have to work, just let the collective provide it.

If people stop working for themselves, for whom will they work to support and to whom will they turn for the things they want to buy? In the collective, everybody works and everybody receives, right?

The idea that collectives are the best way to exist undercuts the idea that many people crave independence and that subjugation to the collective means forfeiture of total independence. The next question asked ought to be about how much independence must get forfeited? Well, that depends upon those in charge of the collective in that they make the rules.