Where Is the World Headed? Individualism vs Collectivism, Objectivism vs Religion

Here is a podcast I did last month in which we discuss these things.

 https://www.stitcher.com/show/living-outside-the-matrix/episode/ep-146-individualism-versus-collectivism-ideas-that-can-either-save-us-or-destroy-us-87832744

If you listen to the podcast I want to explain something that I don't think is very clear: For me, humanity flourishes under individualism. I define "human flourishing" by the incredible things we have invented. The ultimate in human flourishing, in my opinion, would be getting off planet Earth, so that our eggs aren't all in one basket. There is no social system that has been invented in the history of humanity that encourages this better than individualism and capitalism, and therefore I support those things. I support meritocracy in which the best and brightest are propelled to the top and encouraged to build their visions. I support inequality of outcomes in which the best and brightest get extra resources to build their visions which often better the lives of all humans. To me, "bettering the lives of all humans" means inventing awesome new things and getting us off this planet. 

What I am arguing in this podcast is that the majority of the people on Earth do not agree with me. The majority of people on Earth are collectivists. They define human flourishing as their group being on top, whatever that takes and whatever that means and however much suffering is required of other groups to get their group there.

Collectivists play a game in which they pretend that they care about all of humanity. They acquire more power for their group by defining human flourishing as equality of outcomes. They claim--and get many to believe--that human flourishing means harnessing the power of the best and brightest to care for the worst and weakest. It means taxing to death the high earners and using that money to support the lazy and the stupid. It means equality in lifestyles, in outcomes. It means that no one should work harder than anyone else because that makes things unfair. 

They make all these claims while they funnel money from the top producers to their group. When they have weakened the top producers enough, when they have acquired enough power, their real colors show. Suddenly, those people who believed in equality of outcomes really believe that their group should be the rulers and everyone else should be peasants. This is the collectivist human social game that has gone on for millennia. The group plays the, "I'm just a nice little dog, an innocent victim of a big bad dog" game until they have the power. And then they are the big, bad dog, and HA HA YOU ALL FELL FOR IT! They don't feel bad. They won. You were stupid.

That is one of the major lessons I learned in the third world country where I have spent a considerable amount of time over the last ten years. In that country, if you get robbed, it's your fault and everyone laughs at you. If you get robbed, you weren't careful. You deserved it. Same with cheating you, with convincing you to donate all your money or change your laws to support my tribe to the detriment of yours--if you are stupid enough to fall for that, you deserve to be enslaved.

That is just how collectivists think. They do not believe in objective truth. They believe that whatever serves their group best IS the truth. They don't believe in humanity flourishing. They think that individualists are not sincere when they talk about caring about all people on Earth. They think the individualists are just playing a sneakier game than they are. They do not genuinely believe that individualists are, in fact, individualists.

Most people in the world are collectivists. Will you convince them through logic, rationality, and truth that  the best way to "human flourishing" is individualism and capitalism? No, you will not, though they may pretend to agree with you if they think that benefits their group. They cannot agree with you because, in reality, they do not believe in logic, rationality, or truth as concepts separate from whatever serves their group. They can't even have that discussion with you for real since they think you are just saying those things to trick them into letting your group stay on top. They can only have a pretend discussion with you in which they try to conquer with their rhetoric what they believe is your rhetoric.

And human flourishing? No, they don't care. Humanity flourishing means their group is on top and everyone else is a peasant. Any discussion they have with you about human flourishing is really a manipulation/rhetoric game. So while you sit around frustrated because they are "irrational" they are laughing because you are an idiot. They are perfectly rational. You just don't understand what they really want.