|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
|
|
|
+# Introduction
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+A book on collectivism? Is this just a capitalist grift to squeeze some blood from unsuspecting consumers? Wouldn't it be easier to fall in line with those who are on the right side of history and simply trying to make the world marginally more fair so that it works better for everyone?
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+I've always been a stickler for definitions, and when it comes to matters of ethics, morality and social prescriptions, the definitions are everything. In fact, the entire process of human life and social interaction is one of defining, both through the action of what we are, what we do, and what this realm of existence is.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+For many years I've been a bit perturbed by the supposing that moving towards more collective and "fair" solutions is put forward as the obvious way forward, not because I don't want fair solutions, but because of the language employed when discussing these solutions and their moral implication. What I found was that collectivist solutions are put forward but the language used to explain why they are needed, how they will work, and why it's the best path forward had always left me dissatisfied and distrustful of those advocating for them. Was this because I don't want fair solutions? Do I simply not understand how difficult it is to manage complexity? Am I not culurally sensitive enough, or harbouring a secret death wish for myself and all of mankind?
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Somehow, whenever attempting to push back on the rationale of a collectivist solution, it's always responded to as though there is bad faith on my part and that if I don't recognize it, it's because I'm somehow blind with my cognitive biases, which have made me mindlessly controllable by only the worst interests out there, and there's no other possible explanation for my position because, even if I am able to express something, the fact that I'm already not advocating for the collectivist solution means that I'm not a person who's able to intelligently determine what a good solution is and, worse, I somehow despise solutions and am lashing out or making determinations on the basis of a very primitive mind.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+I spent a long time trying to understand whether those who allege such things truly believe the things they say, are speaking in good faith, and are somehow correct in supposing that along every partisan divide there is one side which is more intelligent and morally robust, with the other side being somehow its opposite, and though many have worked through these sorts of problems before, one thing that stood out to me most of all was that the qualities associated with each side of the partisan divide didn't really make sense to me, given that, for example, all of those around me who proclaimed themselves as the most progressive tended to have very conservative personalities. This just didn't jive with everything I'd heard about partisan differences and the corresponding personalities which go along with them.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Though I spend time trying to work out a better understanding of people's political dispositions and what it meant for the world we live in, I eventually came to try and do my best to ignore the political divide and simply focus on my work in the tech industry. We can, after all, make life better through technology and eventually yield conditions that are more favourable. Surely if we improve outcomes for people with technology, they'll be less politically radical and eventually relinquish their political concerns in favour of living good lives and providing good lives to their children.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+But then the "Covid era" began, and I found myself feeling guilty. Guilty that I was now seeing a move towards a more totalitarian system, with behaviours and messaging whose implications are utterly dehumanizing. Guilty that some terribly consequences are very realistic, and that if we were to incur them they would be my own damn fault.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+For this reason, I set out to lay down my definitions, describe the partisan divide to the best of my understanding, and examine the conflict of collectivist initiatives with principles of individualism which I had always found to be more representative of what it means to be of a liberal disposition.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
