Cultural stuff that go way back

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

To add to my previous post - another reason that I think that you are an American is that only an American would think Sweden, or any other Scandinavian nation, is socialist. They are certainly more free and more individualistic than USA.
Another example of American collectivism is their obsession with Christian identity, and identity politics in general, and the cancel culture engaged in by the right-wing that seeks to deny everyone else rights and access to things like books, proper education and alternative ideas.
America has a narrow cultural perspective, and wants to put all their citizens into identical mold of behaviour and beliefs (when I say America I am of course talking about the dominant culture created by right-wing, whose views are given priority by mainstream media).

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

An additional note; this debate shouldn't be framed in terms of collectivism vs individualism, but of conformity vs individualism.
It is a well known fact that right-wingers are conformist.
It is also known that USA has a high proportion of right-wingers.
Therefore, USA has high level of conformism.

 

[bilby]

Americans are genuinely constrained by their rules, and their myriad police forces tame a zero tolerance attitude towards any transgressions, however trivial; So Americans attempt to have fewer rules, in order to preserve a little freedom.

By contrast, in Australia we have ruled for everything; If something is not prohibited, it is mandatory. Australians preserve their freedom by ignoring those rules that don't make sense; Even the cops ignore most minor transgressions, on the understanding that they are mostly harmless.

It shouldn't work, but somehow it does.

 

[Swammerdami]

An additional note; this debate shouldn't be framed in terms of collectivism vs individualism, but of conformity vs individualism.
It is a well known fact that right-wingers are conformist.
It is also known that USA has a high proportion of right-wingers.
Therefore, USA has high level of conformism.

I just checked in to say the thread should avoid ambiguous terms like "individualist" or even "collectivist." Earlier I used "self-reliant" in lieu of "individualist," but should also have substituted "cooperation-oriented" for "collectivist."

 

[Swammerdami]

By contrast, in Australia we have ruled for everything; If something is not prohibited, it is mandatory. Australians preserve their freedom by ignoring those rules that don't make sense; Even the cops ignore most minor transgressions, on the understanding that they are mostly harmless.

It shouldn't work, but somehow it does.

Sounds almost not unlike Thailand. But here, the line between palm-greasing and licencing fees is thinnish.

 

[DrZoidberg]

To add to my previous post, if we look at some recent (over the last several decades) major cultural and social effects/events, we can see the following:
Universal health care - USA is decades behind most First World nations and also some less advanced nations.
Gun control - ditto.
Abortion health sense - ditto.
Voting laws and procedures - over one hundred years behind Australia.
Minimum wage -USA way behind Australia (and also with working conditions).
Metrication - USA behind most of world.
Plastic (polymer) banknotes - Australia first in 1988; dozens of other countries since then, but not the USA.
Home pool safety fence laws - 1990 in Australia; in a few states in USA.
Vehicle mandatory seat belt laws, and laws against smoking in public places - Australia and USA both have comparable laws.

So your argument is that the lack of government regulation is evidence of USA being collectivists?

I'd say it proves the exact opposite

Individualism leads to greater social stress, but also greater social dynamism

I don’t think anyone thinks freedom is easy. Nietzsche's spiel about slave morality is that being a slave is easier and more comfortable than being free. Most people just use their freedom to chose a master to submit to. Americans certainly prove that hypothesis

There is no correlative nor causative relationship between government regulations and collectivism. A chaotic mob is not individualistic but highly collective. Nor is there any relationship between fake individualism and social dynamism.
Your last statement (the bolded bit) admits that USA is a slave culture, which is opposite your initial claim of fawning admiration for American "individualism"
There is one social innovation that America is well known for, and it shows that innovations aren't always positive, and this is evangelism, specifically fundamentalist prosperity gospel, which has the offshoot of MAGA. The adherents of these often have the moniker of sheeple applied to them, as they are the opposite of individualistic.

No, they are very individualistic. Thinking you have it all figured out is a mark of individualism. That's exactly what evangelical Christianity is.

Collectism means that you are unsure about what you want and trust that others know better what is good for you than you do.

In a collectivistic culture other people's business is your business. And vice versa.

I think you haven't understood what I mean.

Collectivism also extends love and care to the whole in-group. Which can be an entire nation.

In Scandinavia we think socialism is so obviously good we can't even imagine a scenario without it.

The problem with understanding collectivism vs individualism is that you really need to have lived and worked in both types of cultures to get it

We're all blind to our cultures peculiarities

I used to work with Indians (in Sweden, at IKEA). Another collectivist culture. Endless culture clashes.

The nice thing about individualistic cultures is that culture mixing has relatively low friction

Overall, individualistic cultures is better imho. But both have pros and cons

There is an obvious thing that I missed mentioning before. Americans are amongst the most indoctrinated people in the world. An example is the pledge of allegiance, which they mindlessly utter all the time. Many of them march in lockstep to the tune of the media (which is mainly right-wing) and populist leaders.
Thinking you have it all figured out is not individualism, especially as regards false or unproven beliefs, but another example of non-rational, brainwashed behaviour and "thinking".
As regards the bolded bit, the US has a weird identity issue in that people identify as Republican or Democrat, truly individualistic peoples such as Australians do not indulge in this peculiarity. In the USA they love being in other people's business, hence the Republican Party interfering in private issues such as abortion, gerrymandering, and many other things that are evidence of anti-individual proto-communist behaviour.
Sweden is not socialist, it is like every civilized nation a combination of what can be labelled socialist and capitalist ideas, but they are just labels and not totally accurate. Tribal peoples from tens of thousands of years ago weren't socialist, but many of the ways they lived by were communal. It was why they managed to become the dominant species.

Your total admiration of the USA is not individualistic itself, and is typical of what Americans think of themselves, without critical self-examination. There is no such thing as an individualistic culture, and if there were the USA is one of the furthest from it, being one of the most collectivist cultures in the world.
You say that one has to have lived in both types of cultures to "get it". As far as individualistic cultures go, Australia is much closer to that "ideal" than USA is. Your statement has at least confirmed for me the previous thought that I have had that you are an American living in Sweden. Most Americans have been brainwashed to believe that their nation is the best in the world, and so much better at everything than everyone else. That is the opposite of individualism. Yes, truly Americans are blind to all the peculiarities and faults of their own nation. That strong identification with their nation is another example of their collectivism - "USA, USA, USA".


EDIT: In my list comparing USA and rest of world I mentioned abortion. The laws and regulations in other countries aren't designed to restrict human rights regarding this but to enhance it. My state of Western Australia recently passed new laws improving already existing rights for women. See following quote:
Western Australia's new abortion laws are now in effect, cementing access to equitable and improved healthcare for women across the State. The new laws decriminalise abortion, remove clinically unnecessary barriers for women and bring Western Australia in line with other Australian jurisdictions.
Quite a contrast to "individualistic" America.

I still don’t think you understand what I mean. None of that is evidence for collectivism.

Indoctrination is a fundamental necessity for making nation states hold together at all. The more individualistic the culture the more forcefull that indoctrination needs to be. Just to make a country function at all

Here's a concrete example of what I mean. I like Burning Man. Not only the big one in America but also regional burns.

It's interesting to compare Burning Man USA with Borderland, the Scandinavian regional burn.

Burning Man USA is run by a professional organisation. Borderland has no leaders. It's self organised and self organising. It works really well. There's been studies on how it is organised and attempts to export it to other burns. I don't think it's possible. I think it's linked to the culture.

In American culture people compete in taking as much space as possible and getting to put their mark on things. Getting the most attention is both important for people as well as getting a lot of attention has high status.

In Scandinavian culture being in the background and letting other people take space, has high status.

In USA getting your way, has high status.

In Scandinavian culture cooperation and and mutually beneficial compromise has high status.

And evaluating who has high status at a burn, is incredibly easy, becuase those are the guys (and girls) who are getting laid and are the most visible in sex orgies and stuff.

The burns are also very different. Not just for size. But of the stuff that people do. American culture clearly promotes excellence. The art at Burning Man is mindblowing. The stuff people build and organise are on a completely different level. But Burning Man is a chaotic mess. Borderland is sharply geared toward workshops and activities to help people relax and connect. Rather than the big art pieces. Why? Because collectivism makes people anxious and insecure. That's the price we pay for making society run smoothly.

 

[Bomb#20]

The Church of England completely dominated ALL education in England, from its establishment by Henry VIII, up until the 1662 Act of Uniformity, which for the first time permitted other Protestant Christian sects to establish schools.

All of the great figures of the enlightenment in England were educated in the CofE tradition, in CofE institutions.

Few of them abandoned the CofE, though many had some pretty outlandish and contrary views about how reality worked.

The most individualistic people in England (at least prior to the eighteenth century) were almost entirely devoted to the CofE, and even after that, they were the vast majority amongst English individualists until the twentieth century.

I am not buying the idea that any influential non-CofE individualists held any sway over English society or politics before the C20th.

Oliver Cromwell was infamously individualist on religious matters and is generally considered to have become an Independent by the 1630s.

 

[bilby]

The Church of England completely dominated ALL education in England, from its establishment by Henry VIII, up until the 1662 Act of Uniformity, which for the first time permitted other Protestant Christian sects to establish schools.

All of the great figures of the enlightenment in England were educated in the CofE tradition, in CofE institutions.

Few of them abandoned the CofE, though many had some pretty outlandish and contrary views about how reality worked.

The most individualistic people in England (at least prior to the eighteenth century) were almost entirely devoted to the CofE, and even after that, they were the vast majority amongst English individualists until the twentieth century.

I am not buying the idea that any influential non-CofE individualists held any sway over English society or politics before the C20th.

Oliver Cromwell was infamously individualist on religious matters and is generally considered to have become an Independent by the 1630s.

Sure; And by the 1650s he had had the head of the Church literally decapitated; But his influence was short-lived and non-persistent (and ultimately strengthened the stranglehold of the CofE post-restoration).

The interregnum spawned a vast number of competing protestant sects, some hugely divergent from the mainstream. But these did not retain much by way of power or influence beyond the mid-1660s.

The 1662 Act to which I referred above is one of the few long-term effects of this brief period of revolutionary religious thinking, passed as a sop to the nonconformists to keep them from further disrupting the CofE's 'education' system, by allowing them to step outside (while the bishops quickly bolted the doors behind them). "Nice school you've got there. Be a shame if nobody would help you fund it...".

And the royalist backlash against that revolution put the CofE and the crown into a position of power in education that lasted until well into the twentieth century, and which still persists in many respects today in England and Wales.