Individualism and Collectivism
Junaid Alam
“The rights of the individual must be subordinated to the needs of the society in order to ensure the welfare of the collective whole.”
Human beings, the most intelligent of all creatures, have been living in societies since time immemorial. Their lifestyle, culture, economics, dynamics and various other aspects are constantly evolving as they tend to look for a life that is advanced both culturally and intellectually. This sense of socialization is inherent in human beings, because living in societies makes life easier and better: it gives life a meaning and purpose. To live in societies, one looks for laws that ensure the collective welfare of a society. If human beings work for the combined betterment, they will make their societies as well as individual lives the epitome of progress and advancement. The settlement of humans in these societies, however, has also created a debate as whether the rights of an individual must be preferred over the welfare of the society or vice versa: individualism or collectivism. Although, individualism regards the autonomy of an individual as an inalienable right, however, collectivism’s purpose of holistic well-being as to ensure the protection of rights of all and the cumulative emphasis on a higher moral standard places the collective welfare of a society above that of the rights of an individual.
Individualism is a political philosophy which holds that human beings, on the basis of their rationality, are free to make their own decisions, and that an individual is the building block of any society’s indispensible affairs such as economics, lifestyle and politics. For individualists, goal orientation is through self-realization and coercion or the use of brutal physical force on individuals in order to impose a particular ideology is totally unacceptable. Moreover, the basis of individualism rests upon the moral belief that one is free to strive for one’s own happiness. It believes that the rights of an individual must not be jeopardized in a society which prioritizes the collective welfare over the rights of an individual.
Collectivism, on the other hand is another theory of political philosophy which seeks the welfare of a society in general. For the sake of overall utility, it keeps individual rights subservient to the collective interests of the society. For collectivists, a group’s interests and goals are more important than those of the individual and that the welfare of a group supersedes the welfare of an individual. The underlying political philosophy demands a particular moral righteousness on the part of individuals, and requires people to live a life not only for themselves but also for others. This attitude ultimately results in a sense of brotherhood within the members of a society and uplifts the overall virtue-value system.
As far as the inalienable rights of an individual are concerned, they are inherent and must not be taken away. All the civilized and socially advanced societies concede to the notion of human emancipation from the shackles of subservience and subordination. Freedom to choose a particular lifestyle for example is one’s own choice, and nobody is allowed to coerce an individual into following another. In a similar vein, freedom to stick to certain set of beliefs and ideologies is also an irrefutable right, so is freedom for the struggle of one’s rights. All of these are a must in a society which considers itself to be civic in nature, has evolved over a particular time frame and has gone through many oscillations on the wave of intellectual upbringing. Thus, individuals have all these rights because the law of a particular society guarantees them. Nevertheless, one has to be able to draw a clear line between the principle of individualism and that of exploitation. Individualism, in terms of the indispensable prerogative of freedom does not simply imply that if by some way or the other an individual’s rights are under attack, one should indulge in exploitation, because, doing so would result in many socially repulsive and negative implications. For example, one of the basic human rights is freedom of speech. This right is useful for individuals in many ways, but if left unchecked can cause more harm than good. In the recent past, using freedom of expression, some journalists published cartoon images of the Prophet (P.B.U.H) of Islam. It led to violent protests and resulted in the grand damage of lives and property. Thus, if the collective welfare of society is not given priority, it will not only harm the well-being of a society, but it can be the cause of misery and agony for many individuals.
The greater good policy dictates that the collectivist approach must be central for policy making as compared to the individual rights. If individual rights are not made subordinate to the collective welfare of a community, then there is a fair chance that it will lead the society into division of classes. There is a lot of diversity within human beings in physical, educational, economical, and racial terms. If we do not take this into account and follow the individualist approach as a hard and fast rule, then the laws made under the light of such an ideology will advantage the mighty over the weak. This condition of exploitation is very common in various countries where dictatorship and authoritarianism are prevalent. Thus, following the individualist approach will not only be disastrous for any society as a whole, but it will also inflict damage upon the individuals for whom the individual rights were given precedence. Hence, the individual rights must be subordinated in order to have an equal society. Peace and harmony prevails in the society where people are not being exploited by the ones in power. It will in turn be the main driving force for the prosperity of individuals. Thus, a collectivist society takes care of the overall welfare and needs of a group by invoking selfless ambitions and in this way results in brotherhood in addition to social acceptance of the principles of diversity and pluralism.
Human beings are not included in the category of animals. They are distinct, because of the unique qualities that they posses. One of these qualities includes morality. Morals and ethics have been very important for even the earliest of human beings, and that is the reason why one finds abundance of discussion about morality in the writings of ancient Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. This emphasis on holistic good of society by subordinating and sacrificing some of the individual rights reflect the high morality on the part of individuals. On the basis of morality, focusing on collective interests is way more constructive than the individual interests, as it results in the upgradation of the moral and ethical standards of any society. The collectivist approach teaches humanism and focuses on altruism for the betterment of the humanity. Furthermore, by creating a sense of selflessness, collectivism uplifts the bar of human ethical and moral standards, and results in another transition from egotistical motives to selfless ambitions, as the focal point of the ideology no more becomes an individual, but the society itself.
Individual rights are very important, and it is not that all the individual rights come in conflict all the times with the collective welfare. The argument is not about restricting all the individual rights. However, if and only if the individual rights come in conflict with the collective welfare of a society, then individual rights must be ignored for the greater good, otherwise it can lead to disruption of a society which will also have serious implications on the individuals.
The contributor is a studying Law and Policy at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS). He can be reached at akhss05@gmail.com
very well, this is some thing which will INSHALLAH, help those people in Hunza thinking for their own, and adopting things which are actually not part of our culture..