I agree with what your saying, but I'll contest one thing:
Quote:
|
If a turtle and a hare are in 40 yard race, and the turtle gets a 20 yard head start, which one wins? Most people will say the hare wins because it can run much faster than the turtle. However, before the hare can catch up to the turtle, he has to get half-way there. Right? By that time, the turtle has moved forward a step or two. The hare is starting to catch up, but before he reaches the turtle, he has to get to the next half-way point. Again, the turtle has moved forward slightly. The hare always has to reach a new half-way point before he reaches the turtle. He never catches up, because the turtle is able to move forward a little bit each time.
|
That would only be the case if the Turtle and the Hare were travelling at the same speed.
Collectivism & Individualism, well if you want to judge which is best, just look at History. Collectivist governments of the past (USSR, Medieval Kingdoms etc etc) they were unable to match the economic growth of societies with which had implemented Individualism.
Purely economically and in terms of
Realpolitik then Individualism is the best. However Individualism simply does exactly what it says, it is Individualistic encouraging people to rely on no one. The problem is, is that if everyone in a society is looking after number one, then how can any progress be made to implement social harmony?