Once again, if collectivism is beneficial to humanity, why does it have to be forced? Most people accept living in a family setting, in a town, in a state, even within a national governmental system. Collectivism has its benefits. It reduces workloads while increasing quality of life. But at what point does it become unacceptable to us?
If we're honest, nobody would say they'd be perfectly content to live their entire lives in complete isolation. In fact, if someone said they would be, I'd suspect they have a mental disorder. And as such, it's incumbent upon us to be able to live in community with each other.
In community, we've learned that it's more efficient if we each specialize in something to meet a specific need for the entire community as opposed to having to meet every one of our own needs by ourselves. One of us is able to produce all the food needed, another all the shelter needed, and another all the clothing needed.
But what happens when someone decides to take a day off? Or a week? Or forever? Some people are simply lazy. Even productive people get lazy sometimes. The collectivist system breaks down when the community guarantees everyone's needs will be met, even if they don't produce anything for the community.
Selfishness is the default setting of human nature. If you don't believe me, look at a baby. There's no one more selfish than a baby, crying when he's hungry or soiled or just plain sleepy. And he won't be quieted until his needs are met, without regard for others.
On the other hand, selflessness has to be learned. And no collectivist society can long survive unless all members know and exercise complete selflessness.
No comments:
Post a Comment