"Society is a wave. The wave moves onward, but the water of which it is composed does not. The same particle does not rise from the valley to the ridge. Its unity is only phenomenal."
"Nothing can bring you peace but yourself. Nothing can bring you peace but the triumph of principles."
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
Individualism is the idea that individuals should have the freedom and ability to choose their own way in life, to create meaning and value in the way that they see fit for themselves. The type of individualism that I am describing is not about greed, or or doing whatever one desires. Rather, individualism is about properly measuring the worth of individual freedom and respecting the individual above the collective. The individual and his goals are more important than the society in which he lives. The form of individualism I am referring to has been accurately described by the economist Friedrich Hayek in the following passage:
It does not assume, as if often asserted, that man is egoistic or selfish or ought to be. It merely starts from the indisputable fact that the limits of our powers of imagination make it impossible to include in our scale of values more than a sector of the needs of the whole society,... scales which are inevitably different and often inconsistent with each other. From this the individualist concludes that the individuals should be allowed, within defined limits, to follow their own values and preferences rather than somebody else's; that within these spheres the individualist's system of ends should be supreme and not subject to any dictation by others. It is this recognition of the individual as the ultimate judge of his ends, the belief that as far as possible his own views ought to govern his actions, that forms the essence of the individualist position. (Hayek, "The Road to Serfdom")
Now, who would disagree with this? Well, I would argue that many people knowingly and unknowingly perpetuate another idea that goes completely against individualism, and that is the idea of the collective. The latter idea is the underlying reality in socialism and communism and is distinct from classical liberalism, capitalism, and even democracy. Democracy, as Tocqueville said, is opposed to the collective, as represented in socialism. And so for him, the idea of democratic socialism was flat out wrong and contradictory. Democracy, as being majority rule, must first be subordinated to individualism, so that the majority cannot get together and vote against the violation of one's individual rights.
Despite the terminology, individualism is actually the true principle of proper social organization and cooperation. It is not about advocating for people to exist on an island, since individuals do not exist as isolated beings. Individuals work and live together and they do so best when their society recognizes the individual's supreme importance.
Collectivists misunderstand the reality of society. The collective, the society, the nation, are all illusions in a fundamental sense. They don't have an independent existence apart from individuals. They can all be reduced to individuals because they are all merely collections of individuals. Only individuals have values and goals. The individuals are the fundamental reality, and not the collective. The individual is the one that eats, sleeps, and above all, thinks, not the society. And it turns out that when societies are based on individualistic ideas and principles, everyone in the society flourishes. When societies are based on collectivistic ideas and principles almost everyone in the society does worse, such as the socialist and communist countries in the 20th century. In fact, in many of these collectivist countries millions of people die, not just because they were ruled by evil and crazy dictators, but because the principles at the heart of communism and socialism are antithetical to human nature and progress. In such nations, individuals can be, and in fact were sacrificed for the "greater good" of the society.
An example where the philosophical ideas of individualism and collectivism conflict with each other is on the topic of equality, which is such a popular topic today. I would argue that individualism holds individual freedom to be the most important value and that individuals are equal only in terms of being equal under the law. Individuals should be free to pursue their own interests in life, to be and do whatever they want as long as it doesn't violate another's rights. This does not mean that individualism calls for equality of opportunity, or equality of outcome. I would argue that it doesn't call for these things precisely because equality of these forms necessitates a loss of individual freedom. In a free society there is necessarily going to be inequalities of all sorts of forms. In addition, a fact of existence is that we are all unequal in terms of skills, talents, and abilities and so we all cannot have the same opportunities to have and attain what we want in life. I argue that individualism holds freedom as a first principle and forbids the use of force to limit human freedom even if the goal is equality.
