This is a chicken and egg question here. Do societies that value a certain set of human rights succeed? Or is it that if a society is successful they come to value human rights?
So, I think more individualistic societies will over time out compete more collectivist ones, ending at what I consider the most individualistic, ancap.
If allowed, they will. You will always get power hungry people making crazy promises to the poor to get votes. The system then starts to break down. Bastiat's solution is best.
The trick seems to be, finding the sweet spot where you have individual autonomy within concentric circles of family, neighborhood, city, nation, world. All in proper balance.
The reality seems more like a cycle. As we get more individualistic we wake up and become more successful, then we get arrogant and lazy, then fall asleep back into collective tribes.
It’s like each country tends towards collectivism during its life, but when it hits one of these sharp turning points a new level of individualism is reached.
I think on the whole the trend is towards more individualism. Especially if you look from Ancient societies where everyone interacted with the same race, religion, government, class.
Yeah there’s definitely a cycle. Was talking with kokansei here somewhere about how states just grow until there is some sharp turning point back to a smaller state.
So I think the fallacy is when you assume that individualism will reach some kind of escape velocity. This sounds a lot like the Soviet Man. It's just another "substitute for Jesus".
Most people when they taste freedom (which I think more individualism would be more freedom) they crave more of it. (E.g. people liberated from oppressive regimes)
Agree it sounds like Soviet man. Not sure it needs to reach an escape velocity and then everything is a peaceful utopia, likely more of a gradual trend toward freedom and individualism