|This is not a forum for general discussion about Collectivism. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Collectivism at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.|
|WikiProject Philosophy||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Politics / Corporatism / Fascism / Oligarchy||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
|Threads older than 30 days may be archived by.|
- 1 USSR and collectivism
- 2 "Right-wing libertarians"
- 3 Problems with this statement and its source: "Left-wing libertarians, such as libertarian socialists and most anarchists, embrace democracy, especially direct democracy and/or participatory democracy specifically because it can be a form of horizontal collectivism."
- 4 Relationship between collectivism and corporatism
- 5 socialists are not necessarily collectivists
- 6 Collectivism is not related to Government
USSR and collectivism
How can USSR or the other stalinist states be described as "collectivist" when they were ruled by regimes and crime families unaccountable to and unalterable by the vast majority. These states could be better desrcribed as extreme individualist, sacrificing the rights of all individuals for the privileges of the concentrated few.
Ayn Rand and Ron Paul are referred to as "right-wing libertarians". I changed this to remove "right-wing" for a basis of neutrality (even though Rand did not categorize herself as a libertarian and was fairly critical of the libertarians), and it was reverted seemingly on the basis of an opinion. Point being, many commentators have said that Rand was not right-wing, citing her being in favor of abortion, and being an atheist, and it seems to me that the ones who consider Rand to be right-wing are usually critical of her. Her exact political views don't exactly fit the description "right-wing", except perhaps economically, if you consider favoring capitalism to be a right-wing position, which I do not. Libertarianism doesn't go hand-in-hand with right-wing politics, either, as libertarianism is usually a mix of being in favor of businessman's rights and social rights. --WTF (talk) 19:36, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. Unless a reliable source can be found that characterizes both Ayn Rand and Ron Paul as "right-wing libertarians", this is original research and violates Wikipedia's OR and POV policy. I will remove it and it should be reinserted only if it is referenced by reliable sources. Please do not revert without doing so. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:49, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
"Collectivism is discussed extensively by Objectivists." I took this out of the introduction, because it does not really belong there, if someone wants to add objectivist views of collectivism let it be so elsewhere; but simply stating that objectivism discusses it with no citations and no explanation is not informative. From my point of view obectivists elide collectivism and totalitarianism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 06:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
In the sentence in the title of this section, the assertion that "most" anarchists embrace democracy is completely unsupported and I will change "most" to "some". It can be reverted if someone can provide reliable source, such a peer-reviewed statistical analysis of anarchists around the world, that shows that more than 50% of anarchists "embrace democracy". I conducted a search but could find no such source.
Speaking of reliable sources, the statement in the title of this section is referenced by this webpage: http://www.spunk.org/texts/intro/sp001631.html
Spunk.org is an "online anarchist library and archive" owned by Spunk Press. The site is promotional in nature; according to the Wikipedia entry on Spunk Library, Spunk.org "was not intended to replace print publishing, but rather served a shop window promoting anarchist book publishers, newspapers and journals." Wikipedia maintains that "the identity of the author may help determine reliability", but the page referenced does not provide the author's name. So this source is unreliable on multiple counts.
The second source for this statement is "Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice". Page 65, which is referenced as the source for this claim, has nothing to do with the statement made; the topic discussed on page 65 is Anarcho-Syndicalist workers of Spain, and democracy or horizontal collectivism is not even mentioned. Nor does it support the "most" anarchist claim I mentioned above.
Based on these factors, I believe the entire sentence should be stricken. The first source is unrelable, and the second source does not support the assertion. I believe this shows POV and bias on the part of the editor who wrote this part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Relationship between collectivism and corporatism
I reverted another users edit in which they asserted "corporativism definitely isn't a form of collectivism."
I wholeheartedly disagree, there is a clear relationship.
But I thought I should WP:Discuss the matter with other editors here.
collectivists think group > individual. socialists want collective ownership of the means of production because socialization of production makes classical liberalism impossible. so, socialists may also be liberal individualists, and when they are are called anarchists; these ideas of collectivism and socialism are not connected in any meaningful way. i'm going to clean the article up appropriately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 12:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- i ended up removing the asinine section on the cold war. collectivism is a far better term to use to describe the soviet and nazi systems than socialism, as no workers ever had ownership of the means of production and minority rights were constantly infringed for the purpose of the greater good, which should not happen under socialism. i removed another section that tried to separate between soviet socialism and collectivism, because it likewise made no sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 12:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- I put for the suggestion that Collectivism is society working together without a central government. The statement "which in practical terms is the government." should be removed as it does not represent collectivism which is a form of people working together without centralized control. Government is a centralized control mechanism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government "a government more narrowly refers to the particular executive in control of a state at a given time" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective "A collective is a group of entities that share or are motivated by at least one common issue or interest, or work together to achieve a common objective. Collectives differ from cooperatives in that they are not necessarily focused upon an economic benefit or saving, but can be that as well."