Let's talk about individualist ethos

[deezee]

I would argue that most human societies are individualist as defined by the game because even actions like restrictions of freedom must be framed in terms of benefiting individuals - for example, the Patriot act was supposed to improve safety.

As framed by the game, Individualist/Collectivist doesn't relate directly to political freedoms. Rather, a collectivist society is one where it is normal for individuals to put the good of the group before themselves ("Society has long since evolved past the insignificant rivalries and concerns of the individuals. We are numerous but one, and the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. We stand truly equal."), while an individualist society is one where the needs of the individual come first ("Community is a means to an end, not the end itself. Only by empowering the individual to reach their maximum potential do we achieve true freedom. Freedom of thought, of speech, of movement, of trade.")

Even in human societies like Communist countries which are frequently cited as Collectivist, community is viewed as a means to benefit individuals rather than a goal in itself; the Communist ideal promises to improve people's material well-being and liberate them from the "wage-slavery" of capitalism. The closest human societies to Collectivism would actually be fascism; idealizing sacrifices for the good of the many tends to be associated with Nationalism, not Communism, and only the fascists took it to such an extreme that it might be described as Collectivist. But that said, the rarity of Collectivist societies probably suggests that humans as a whole are non-fanatic Individualists, I think.

 

[barny]

Ehhhh.. you might want to read up about scientific and technological history.

Rather you might want to do that.

And yes, during the last 60 to 70 years we got larger research programs, but before that, it was mostly individualists speaking out against the majority of their field (if their field even existed yet) or against the conventions of society in general: Darwin, Einstein, Galileo, Diesel and so on and so forth...

 

[macd21]

That doesn't mean western societies aren't individualistic. Smoking bans for example don't infringe the individual right of a person to smoke, they restore the individual right of a person NOT having to inhale poisonous smoke. Collectivism means individuals have no rights and their leaders can sacrifice thousands or even millions, if it serves the nation or the planet, for example. There are no human rights here, no save guards towards the power of the government and so on.

Agreed. What's more, a society having a few 'collectivist' laws doesn't mean it's not individualist, it just means it's not fanatic individualist (likewise a collectivist society might have a few individualist protections). Such exceptions can also be representative of factional conflict within a society - different 'pops' advancing their agenda. And when they do happen, they're often controversial (and sometimes temporary).

 

[Lollius Palican]

Yeah it doesn't make any sense at all, don't worry about it. The devs have dug themselves in on this issue. It has been argued by many that either the 'bonuses' and the names or the descriptions and the names should be changed. The bonuses, for instance, look more like a 'conformist - liberal' differentiation or something of the sort.

 

[Henry 43]

Wiz has said that Collectivists value the state before themselves, while Individualists value themselves before the state. Its nothing more complex than that. I would have put Wiz's quote about it, but the relevant thread he said it in was locked so I can't seem to quote him, so you will have to settle for a link.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...g-about-communism.920635/page-4#post-20977251

 

[barny]

Wiz has said that Collectivists value the state before themselves, while Individualists value themselves before the state. Its nothing more complex than that. I would have put Wiz's quote about it, but the relevant thread he said it in was locked so I can't seem to quote him, so you will have to settle for a link.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...g-about-communism.920635/page-4#post-20977251

Yes, most of those descriptions are vague on purpose, so the players can interpret them as they want.

Collectivism might mean a society were everybody sacrifices himself for the greater good out of his own free will if need be or it could mean a brutal regime that just trounces the rights of individuals. It is up to the players to make up their races however they want.

 

[vyshan]

Yes, most of those descriptions are vague on purpose, so the players can interpret them as they want.

Collectivism might mean a society were everybody sacrifices himself for the greater good out of his own free will if need be or it could mean a brutal regime that just trounces the rights of individuals. It is up to the players to make up their races however they want.

and individualism can mean something like a dystopian cyberpunk world or Objectivist world. Ie letting your house burn down because you didn't get the fire insurance from fire department B as you got your fire insurance from Fire department A.

 

[Aquilegia]

Rather you might want to do that.

And yes, during the last 60 to 70 years we got larger research programs, but before that, it was mostly individualists speaking out against the majority of their field (if their field even existed yet) or against the conventions of society in general: Darwin, Einstein, Galileo, Diesel and so on and so forth...

1. Most inventions were small improvements upon an existing design. Humans like hero worship, which is why history likes to focus on 'single genius people'. But even people like Einstein worked upon the achievements of other people and institutions (See for instance the discovery that the speed of light is absolute, which was needed for Einsteins theories).
2. Many of these inventions were invented by different people in different times. The reason that some of those caught on and some didn't was that inventions need an existing infrastructure, other technologies and economical need and population to be actually efficient. Without the work of all these people in a society, the value of an invention is zero. For example see the development of powered flight and steam engines.
(Same also applies for advances in other fields than engineering. Darwin's evolution theory wouldn't have happened without advances in geology, taxonomy and an empire which could support for instance scientific voyages over the world)
3. As you say most current research is done by groups of people in scientific institutions.

 

[Iviker]

You are completely misunderstanding what Individualist represents.

Virtually every nation on Earth is varying degrees of 'Individualist' with extremely rare exceptions because it is how we evolved physiologically, psychologically, and society-wise as a species. Collectivism as depicted in the game is a trait found in other species, such as Ants and other Hive species.

Individualism and collectivism are actual sociological terms, and by that terminology, the majority of non-Western human societies are collectivist, especially Neolithic and earlier. Some modern examples include non-Western, indigenous cultures in Oceania and the Americas, East Asian countries such as Japan, Korea, etc, and 20th century communist states. Widespread individualism is only a few hundred years old, and actually probably not how humans evolved psychological and society-wise as collectivism likely significantly predates individualistic ideals. "Hive" species are also more correctly described as fanatically collectivist, rather than just collectivists for this reason.

In Stellaris, however, the terms are likely more comprehensive, and individualism can represent anything from individualistic societies, to objectivism, to egotism, to anarchy, to post-scarcity utopic communist societies like in Star Trek, or any degree you want. All of these uses still differ very significantly from collectivism, though.