Individual’s Quest for His Individual Interest and in the Equal Expression of His Struggle for Conservation

thumbnail

Its uniformity lies in the individual’s quest for his individual interest and in the equal expression of his struggle for conservation. The members of the mass are individuals. but they are easily redirected against weaker competitors and against the most obviously foreign individuals (Jews, foreigners and national minorities). The mass does not claim a new order but a larger part of the one that prevails. By its action, it strives to rectify in an anarchic way the injustices of the competition. Its uniformity lies in the individual’s quest for his individual interest and in the equal expression of his struggle for conservation. The members of the mass are individuals. Its uniformity lies in the individual’s quest for his individual interest and in the equal expression of his struggle for conservation. The members of the mass are individuals. Its uniformity lies in the individual’s quest for his individual interest and in the equal expression of his struggle for conservation. The members of the mass are individuals.

 The individual within the crowd and the personal interest of the latter certainly do not correspond to the individual and to the rational interest, the principle of individualism urged development. The principle of individualism changed its meaning at a time when the individual’s daily social performance opposed his “real interest”. The protagonists of individualism were aware that “individuals can develop only by trusting them beyond what they can actually do right now.”

WE Hocking, The Lasting Element of Individualism, New Haven, …Today, we trust the individual only in the exact limit of his current capabilities. The philosophy of individualism conceived of the “essential freedom” of the self as “a decisive moment outside the sphere of material goods to determine whether the primary interest of this subject is in terrestrial interests, or rather in those of a possible and ideal “Kingdom of God”. “

Ibid., P.23.Although this possible and ideal realm has been defined in many ways, it remains that its content was always characterized in opposition to the terrestrial realm that it was to transcend. Today, the individual in his dominant form is no longer able to grasp this decisive moment that defines his freedom. He changed his function: from a unit of resistance and autonomy he moved to a unit of docility and adaptation. It is precisely this function that associates individuals in the mass.

30The emergence of the modern masses, far from endangering the efficiency and coherence of the apparatus, rather facilitated the increasing coordination of society and the development of an authoritarian bureaucracy, thus refuting the theory of the individualism on an essential point. Technological progress seemed to lead to the conquest of scarcity and, correlatively, the slow passage from competition to cooperation. The philosophy of individualism conceived of this mutation as the differentiation and gradual liberation of human potentialities, that is, the abolition of the “crowd”. Even for Marxism, the masses are not the spearhead of freedom. The Marxist proletariat is not a crowd, but a class, defined by its determined position in the process of production, the maturity of his “conscience” and the rationality of his common interest. Critical rationality, in its most accentuated form, is a necessary precondition for its liberating function. In one aspect at least, this accords with the philosophy of individualism: the rational form of human association is indeed seen as produced and maintained by the autonomous decision and action of free men.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back To Top