Collectivism and Individualism by Academy of Ideas transcript
Collectivism and Individualism
Philosophers have long debated over rather it is the collective or the individual who should be viewed as superior and of more value. But rarely has a consensus been met.
This unresolved debate is important because the prevailing views on this issue often determined how a society organizes itself and thus the quality of life for its citizens. In this lecture we are going to examine a critique of collectivism by one of the most prolific philosophers of the 20th century, Ludwig von Mises.
Mises was born in 1881 in the Austro-Hungarian Empire and is best known for his contributions to the field of economics. However, he also made important contributions to many other fields, including epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, social theory and history. Throughout his life, Mises always showed a concern for defending individual freedoms as he saw them as essential for lasting peace and prosperity. Consequently, he was also concerned with combating collectivism.
The meanings of the terms collectivism and individualism like many of the terms used in political discourse are quite ambiguous. However, when discussing them the issue which is usually of most concern is whether the goals of the collective should be seen as more important than the goals of the individual which would be the collectivist position or whether the goals of the individual should be viewed as supreme.
The individualist position integral to Mises' critique of the collectivist position was methodological individualism, a doctrine which holds that only individuals act. To Mises, the truth of this was obvious only individuals act and any action by a collective can ultimately be reduced to the actions of various individuals. In the ultimate foundations of economic science, Mises has this to say about methodological individualism:
"In denying... independent existence of their own to the collectives, one does not in the least deny the reality of the effects brought about by the cooperation of individuals. One merely establishes the fact that the collectives come into being by the thoughts and acts of individuals and that they disappear when the individuals adopt a different way of thinking and acting."
While not denying the existence of collectives, methodological individualism denies the ability of any collective to exist in an autonomous manner independent of the individuals who compose it. Mises stressed the importance of methodological individualism because he believed that often people who favor the collectivist position will try to assert some form of independent existence to their collective in order to justify the elevation of its goals. Mises has two main criticisms for those who want to elevate the supposed goals of a collective above those of the individual.
Firstly, Mises stressed a point which is easily overlooked. That being that the creation of a collective is always arbitrary. in other words, because collectives virtually never include the entirety of mankind, criteria must be established to distinguish between who is to be included and who excluded from the collectives. But there is no set way to determine such criteria and this is why throughout history collectives have taken so many forms whether it be collectives determined by race, religion, wealth, or country of birth. As such, any given time, there always exists a plurality of collectives, and each collective believes their goals are superior, not only to those of the individual, but also those of all rival collectives.
In his work, Theory and History, Mises emphasizes this point by saying 'There is no uniform collectivist ideology but many collectivist doctrines. each of them extols a different collectivist entity and requests all decent people to submit to it. Each sect worships its own Idol and is intolerant of all rival idols.
The second criticism Mises put forth was that the goals which are elevated over those of the individual are never actually the goals of an autonomous collective, as no such thing exists but rather are merely the goals of those who exert power or influence over the collective at any given point in time. Mises believed that this was why countries which become increasingly collective also become increasingly unstable as he puts it in his monumental work Human Action:
"It is true that every variety of collectivism promises eternal peace starting with the day of its own decisive victory... However, the realization of these plans is conditioned upon a radical transformation in mankind. Man must be divided into two classes: the omnipotent godlike dictator on the one hand and the masses which must surrender volition and reasoning in order to become mere chess men in the plans of the dictator... There is no need to point out that such designs are unrealizable."
In opposition to collectivist doctrines, Mises was in favor of individualism, or in other words, the ability of each individual to choose his or her own goals and act accordingly. Whether that led to the starting of a charity to help the poor, work in construction or just sitting on the couch all day contemplating the meaning of lif,e however in executing ones plans, Mises believed that each individual should respect the rights and freedoms of others.
It is important to stress that Mises did not promote individualism because he was somehow against society or other collective entities rather his strong support for individualism was based on his belief that the individualist position was essential for long-term peace and prosperity. Mises believed that when individuals work to achieve their own goals they readily recognize the mutual benefits that arise from cooperation voluntary exchange and the division of labor and that these social phenomena are not at all incompatible with the individualist position but rather incompatible with collectivism.
Mises conveys this by saying the customary terminology misrepresents these things entirely the philosophy commonly called individualism is a philosophy of social cooperation and the progressive intensification of the social Nexus on the other hand the application of the basic idea of collectivism cannot result in anything but social dissenter and the perpetuation of armed conflict.
Another philosopher who was strongly against collectivism but likely for different reasons than Mises was Frederick Nietzsche. Nietzsche believed that only autonomous individuals are of any worth and that those who are bound up in the ideals and goals of a collective or what he called a herd are really individuals too weak to create their own goals and meaning for life.
To conclude this lecture we will quote a short passage by Nietzsche from his work Thus Spoke Zarathustra, which in a much different style puts forth a somewhat similar view to that of Mises:
"Somewhere there are still peoples and herds but not where we live my brothers. Here there are states. State? What is that? Well then open your ears to me for now I shall speak to you about the death of peoples.
State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters coldly it tells lies too and this lie crawls out of its mouth: I the state, am the people." That is a lie!
Behold how it lures them they all to many and how it devours them, chews them, and ruminates..."
I want to thank YouTube Transcript for helping me make this by reducing the amount of typing that I needed to do. Note that this does not mean that YouTube Transcript endorses this content.