Is supporting collectivism over individualism a sign of lower IQ?

submitted by 8thmonitor from self.debatealtright

I support collectivism because I think it is the only way to keep the race and nation together. Individualism and letting people do whatever they want will never work.

Isn't collectivism a sign of low IQ, and individualism is a sign of high IQ? I don't think I have a low IQ for knowing that individualism is not possible with nationalism.

What do others think? Is it like that bell curve meme where low IQ nonwhites and leftists support collectivism, but very high IQ nationalists and third positionists also support collectivism? In the middle are most apoliticals and independents that support individualism.

all 5 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Countries like Japan and Korea have millions of high IQ citizens but they're still very nationalist/collectivist.

Whereas Somalia and other African states are the complete opposite (no stable/unified government, just various warlords killing each other).

Not to mention, all the biggest empires in history required some form of teamwork. There has never been an Ancapistan that made other nations tremble...

[–]Nombre27 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Interesting thought experiment.

Reality: neither type of society exists in a pure state.

However, competition does create fitness, so competing for resources/status/etc., should result in the cream rising to the top. However, nepotism exists, so this isn't wholly true either. Also oligo/monopolization of resources in such a society also occurs, so people can be gatekept out of opportunity.

A balance of the two is obviously ideal. Without one's parents we'd all die as infants, so sharing of resources is a pre-requisite to growth. The problem of mediocrity occurs when brakes are applied to those trying to go beyond their station. This happens in both individualistic societies (boot straps, you're on your own, etc.) and collectivistic societies (communism, no one permitted to rise above the lowest common denominator).

Ultimately it's what rules and opportunities are in place to allow someone to flourish as these rules can apply and result in successful outcomes in either an individualistic or collectivist society.

It's kind of funny, allowing people to become the best version of themselves should be a goal of a collectivist (greater good-oriented) society, e.g. Nazi Germany and the results of aligning the state and the individual towards common and mutually beneficial outcomes, but what we see since that ideology was snuffed out of existence in it's crib is that collectivist in Western countries means equal misery (the communist form of collectivism).

Modern outliers to that for the time being are Scandinavian countries, where resources are properly managed and the higher relative racial homogeneity allows for better outcomes than in other Western countries where resources are misallocated under the guise of social justice and equity.

It's unfortunate.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's kind of funny, allowing people to become the best version of themselves should be a goal of a collectivist (greater good-oriented) society, e.g. Nazi Germany and the results of aligning the state and the individual towards common and mutually beneficial outcomes,

That's pretty much it, and the crux of what I was debating another user about.

The smartest people in Germany put their differences aside so they could create a society where every citizen could help advance the state. The result was a country that excelled in every genre. I.e Science, Math, the Olympics, Healthcare, Entertainment, Safety, Social Trust, Infrastructure etc.

[–]Nombre27 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, it's very interesting sociologically.

There is a class warfare aspect amongst this, both in the capitalistic "keep up with the Joneses" (spend spend spend, i.e. waste your life on bullshit) and communistic (the state has to take your property to redistribute to people that hate you cuz reasons).

Because of the consequences of WW2, we're (most Western countries) literally living in the worst of both worlds when it comes to the benefits and consequences of capitalism and socialism.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

we're (most Western countries) literally living in the worst of both worlds when it comes to the benefits and consequences of capitalism and socialism.

Shrewd observation. Very accurate. Here we both waste our lives on bullshit while simultaneously, the government wants to take my money and give it to niggers.