My instinct is that the first (hero complex) would tend to lead someone to adventurism, but I’m not super clear on what the second (collectivist mindset) looks like in practice. Having grown up in the US, where individualist seems to be pushed to an extreme degree and collectivism equated to being a hivemind, it’s a bit difficult sometimes for me to understand what collectivism looks like in practice.

Where it gets especially difficult for me, and why I thought to come ask here where people may be able to help with the distinction, is that I have people-pleasing tendencies to a degree that seems unhealthy; in the sense of not valuing my own needs and boundaries to the extent that it’s difficult for me to be properly equipped to help others in the first place. In the vague land of hypotheticals, I get that difference; ok, I make sure I am taken care of to the extent that I can function effectively and then I can help others, right?

But in practice, where does this line make sense for a more collectivist effort, is I think the question I’m trying to get at so that I can point in an effective direction in practice, without either: 1) Slipping toward individualist thinking in order to satisfy criteria of being “less of a people-pleaser” or 2) In the other direction, using collectivist goals as a means to feed existing people-pleasing tendencies (and forgetting to value myself in the process).

As it is, conditions are not always as clean as in the hypothetical. Getting needs met can be multifaceted and take significant time. Could the problem here be that I’m just lacking strong examples to learn from in my life? I don’t know.

But I put the question to you. Hope this makes sense.

  • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
    0·
    7 months ago

    This is a very good question and imo the first step to overcoming the individualist mentality is having the humility to ask questions like this. That being said i don’t think that “people pleasing” has much to do with either individualism or collectivism, i think it’s just something that those of us with personal insecurities can sometimes fall into. Still, it doesn’t need to be a bad thing if channeled into doing good things for others.

  • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
    0·
    7 months ago

    I agree with lil_tank and cfgaussian. Individualism is almost entirely a meme. Individuality isn’t.

    No one is truly an island, and almost all humans rely on others to varying extents, and there is nothing fundamentally wrong with that.

    Individuality has value in moderation, but just like anything taken to the extreme, it can make people become isolated, selfish, or actively harmful. Though I loathe the term “natural”, humans are naturally a social species. Humans are naturally communists, going back hundreds of thousands of years, if not millions from our direct ancestors.

    I think it’s good that you recognize complete individuality as a problem, and that you recognize that bending over backwards to help others can cause you to devalue yourself or harm others. I’m 26, and I’ve found that no one has the right answer to questions like this, or a happy medium, because perfection of anything is hardly possible. Don’t overthink it, but deep reflective thought is helpful.

    Capitalist bootlickers view communism as being a hivemind with no individuality, but that is almost always an exaggeration or complete projection from capitalism. Capitalism is summed up as “fuck you I got mine”.

    Even the most “author-onion-tar-elon-izuhm” socialist projects aren’t even a speckle in the dirt compared to the Mt. Everest-sized tower of oppressive authority as capitalism is.

  • lil_tank@lemmygrad.ml
    0·
    7 months ago

    My take on the “individualism vs collectivism” debate is that there’s no such a thing as an individualistic mode of production and there is no such a thing as a collective mind

    Our bodies are unable to survive alone, our species has evolved to focus entirely on language and dexterity. We can’t hunt and sustain ourselves while defending ourselves while taking care of our stupidly weak offspring. We’re materialistically extremely dependent on one another, there’s no such a thing as an individualistic system of production. Capitalism is and extremely large collective structure, thousands of people worked to make everything that you have around you

    On the other hand no one can read the thoughts of someone else. Everyone has a unique experience of life therefore everyone has different thoughts. Liberals would say that collective structures make us lose our individuality, but look at the effects of loneliness (extreme case being solitary confinement) and compare to how much “mob mentality” is making us different from just our regular life. Looks like it’s isolation that destroys individuality. Looks like even mob craze is pretty harmless compared to its opposite

    So basically, the economy is already a super collective, it’s just designed by the people who arrived first at the nicest spot. And the mind is already unique so everyone will always remain an individual even within a super collective structure.