Not all collectivism is bad

[Christian Liberty]

I've heard some people on here say things like "You can't throw all police (or military) in the same category, because that would be collectivist." (That's not an exact quote, but I've seen something with that spirit multiple times.

Now, I don't completely disagree with this comment. Some cops are certainly worse than others, and I'm sure some of them are, for the most part, decent people (I don't say good because nobody is "Good".) I'd say the same for some soldiers in the military.

That said, the comment in question is most certainly not correct regarding the assumption that collectivism is always wrong.

Let's not even take a contentious group of people like the cops or the army. Let's get simpler, and go with murderers.

Now, legal definitions of murder varies on jurisdiction. Whether truly justified or not, killing a police officer who breaks into your home on a drug bust is not "Murder" even though it legally qualifies as such. I don't condone it, but its the cop who broke the NAP, not the drug user. It isn't murder, in my mind. Let's not discuss this at length since its not the topic of my thread, but I will say, I don't condone this action, its pragmatically a bad idea, it is probably immoral, but it isn't "Murder" if that makes sense.

That said, the traditional definition of murder is to kill an INNOCENT man.

To be a murderer in this sense is ALWAYS immoral.

Is this a collectivist viewpoint. That ANYONE who kills an innocent person is wrong? Sure, but I don't have a problem with that. Collectivism isn't always wrong. I just showed a case where its correct.

Now, regarding cops, IF all cops violate the NAP, than ALL cops are committing immoral actions. They may not be "Horrible people" in the sense of the word, heck, one of the strongest Christians I know is a cop and I have no doubt he does his job with as much integrity as he can. I've done plenty of things that are immoral, I am not perfect, nor am I anywhere close.

That said, its not necessarily wrong to condemn cops with a broad brush, for their career choice, if they all violate the NAP. It might be "Collectivist" to do that, but its not wrong.

And I seriously doubt its possible for a cop to completely follow the NAP in today's world.

I'll grant that there are a few cases where I would say that it is moral to break, although not institutionalize such a break (of) the NAP. But those cases are few and far between, and would deal with truly radical situations like someone about to jump off a bridge, not someone quietly smoking pot in his own home. Yet cops HAVE TO kidnap (pc is "arrest") people who do that (smoke pot) in this country. And that doesn't even mention all the other ridiculous laws cops are REQUIRED to enforce at gunpoint.

I only hold people fully accountable for that which they are aware. I don't condemn most cops or soldiers to the same extent that I'd condemn myself if I decided to become one. If I was made King tomorrow, I'd let most of them walk. But that doesn't make what they do acceptable. Its still wrong.

So is it really "Collectivist" to condemn police or soldiers with a broad brush? Sure. Is it wrong? Well, depending on what you say, maybe, but I think there are things you can say that apply across the board, and its not wrong just because its "collectivist." You need a better, more nuanced argument than to just drop the c-bomb and expect every libertarian to agree with you. It doesn't work that easily:p

[heavenlyboy34]

It seems you're engaging in categorization, not collectivism. (x is evil, y is not, etc) Wiki's definition of "collectivism" is quite good- Collectivism is any philosophic, political, religious, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdependence) of every human being in a society (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society) or civilization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization). Collectivism is a basic cultural element (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture) that exists as the reverse of individualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism) in human nature (in the same way high context culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_context_culture)exists as the reverse of low context culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_context_culture)). Collectivist orientations stress the importance of cohesion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cohesion) within social groups (such as an "in-group", in what specific context it is defined) and in some cases, the priority of group goals over individual goals. Collectivists often focus on community, society, nation or country. It has been used as an element in many different and diverse types of government and political, economic and educational philosophies throughout history and most human societies in practice contain elements of both individualism and collectivism. Some examples of collectivist cultures include India and Japan.

[PaulConventionWV]

It seems you're engaging in categorization, not collectivism. (x is evil, y is not, etc) Wiki's definition of "collectivism" is quite good- Collectivism is any philosophic, political, religious, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdependence) of every human being in a society (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society) or civilization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization). Collectivism is a basic cultural element (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture) that exists as the reverse of individualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism) in human nature (in the same way high context culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_context_culture)exists as the reverse of low context culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_context_culture)). Collectivist orientations stress the importance of cohesion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cohesion) within social groups (such as an "in-group", in what specific context it is defined) and in some cases, the priority of group goals over individual goals. Collectivists often focus on community, society, nation or country. It has been used as an element in many different and diverse types of government and political, economic and educational philosophies throughout history and most human societies in practice contain elements of both individualism and collectivism. Some examples of collectivist cultures include India and Japan.

Then the problem is that the people he is referring to in the OP are mistaking categorization for collectivism. Either way, he has a valid point.