Monday, August 11, 2008

collectives vs. individuals

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/opinion/12brooks.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

"Relationships are the key to happiness. People who live in the densest social networks tend to flourish, while people who live with few social bonds are much more prone to depression and suicide."

S Gurumurthy also has a book on the theme of a collectivist (i.e. eternal) India vs. the Anglo-Saxon based individualistic constitution.

I don't know if the present Chinese collective is as harmonious as Brooks says it is - it is based on lots of repression and brain-washing

Perhaps a reformed caste system is the best form of harmonious collective. Individuals - and indeed entire castes - would be free to change their collective characteristics, while continuing to bind themselves to the rules of the collective - and collectives binding with each other. All with the glue of a duties-based Dharma

Just the right balance between rights-based democratic individualism and duty-based collectivism

2 comments:

TambiDude said...

I am not sure whether this article of Ramachandra Guha was mentioned in this blog.

http://www.outlookindia.com/fullprint.asp?choice=1&fodname=20080630&fname=AGuha&sid=1

Even though I consider Guha to be a Nehruvian idiot, I have to give it to him for writing this very well and indeed making good points.

murali said...

Ghost,

Food for thought.