The concept of Socialism and Communism along the spectrum of Collective Consciousness

Dr. Adam Tabriz

Why do many people still unconsciously believe in Communism despite being recognized in times gone by that it does not work?

https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=1LCpzk_0c92HIL100
Photo by Arie Wubben on Unsplash

The socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of collective holding of the means of production and the absence of socioeconomic inequality is the core concept of a socialist system and communist doctrine.

The feelings around socialism and communism, in particular, are mixed amid world population; The relationship that is one can describe as "Love and Hate." Because the beautiful tree of socialism is rooted in the populace's collective consciousness, however, to the irony of that, that tree is hardly fruitful because it suppresses the growth and brings out the best of individuals at its parturition.

The Human Individuality within the social Framework

The balance between the human's individuality and being subordinate to society is continually changing. Some define "individuality" purely within the framework of the societal structure. Others believe it as the state of ultimate individual autonomy devoid of influence from the rest of the world. But the majority of the populace sees personal life somewhere within the extreme ends mentioned above. Those with strong social bonds believe in unity based on humane ideals, whereas, an individualist believes in independent collaboration. Despite the differences, they all share one thing inherent to every "Genuine" human being in the right mind: the need to seek help and accommodate others. The only difference is how and to what extent?

For example- we can spare a dollar to a needy and hold his hand (by redistributing fair opportunities) only with a contingency to find a job. Or we collectively fund limitless amounts of money to the poor through redistribution of wealth without establishing a competitive environment for him or even incentive to be self-sufficient. For the same reason, socialism and communist doctrine alike generally focuses on treating the symptom of the significant problem or "the fruitless tree" instead of addressing the root. Indeed, socialism has thrived throughout history because- "it sounds so perfect" is more convenient.

https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=1sId9l_0c92HIL100
Photo by Max Böhme on Unsplash

Society and the Collective Consciousness- a roadmap to Individual Interdependence

The convenience of reaching out to others and vice versa, continuously along with the potential expectations among the community members, represents a fine line between individual sovereignty and utter loss of liberty. Collective consciousness is a slippery downslope that, if one commits to, will be hard to return. Policies like social entitlement programs are one example to mention that one will raise the receiver's expectation of the assistance, yet is dependent on the contribution of another person, the tax-payer. Naturally, if the community offers a structured welfare program with a sustainable economy and wealth as a state, the ultimate subsistence of the dependents of the aid would be comfortable. Then still, it is human nature to take the path of convenience and want more and expect better, which makes it vulnerable. The latter is even more troublesome amid plummeting economy — the unhealthy milieu of which is the collective realm riddled with the crossroad between human interdependence and socioeconomic inertia.

Human Interdependence is the virtue of the Populist Doctrine

The tension between individualism and the collective doctrine has been around since the advancement of new communities. Nonetheless, since the fall of communism in the early 1990's a new form of collective dogma has emerged; That is the concept of socioeconomic Globalization.

Globalism and populism necessitate human interdependence, meaning finding a ground for group-specific individuals based on particular traits. Both populism and globalism efficiently find such commonality amongst them but different on the scope and size of their mission and vision. For instance, a new globalist is typically a liberal with a feudalistic attitude, herding the globe under the commonality that everyone merely is human — the recent calls for action on the notion of humanity and global brotherhoods.

In reality, a globalist is nothing but a populist with a different vision. The traditional populist inherently is, on the other hand, Pro "fragmentism"; because it is conservative and envisions in a more secular manner based on traits such as race, country, ethnicity, language, etc.

All in all, conservative populism and its universal model, globalism can only prevail with the interdependence of its constituents. And such inter-reliance is the grounds for a socialist structure, thus only on a different scale.

Some may argue that populist is racist, and socialism is not! However, on the contrary, racism can independently affect any community irrespective of the shared vision. For instance, Hitler Germany was fundamentally a socialist system, only under the unifying nationalist factor. To the same extent, communist Russia under Stalin was always a racist system, even though rarely acknowledged.

Populism is the catalyst of the Commune and Collective Identity.

Populism is extremely popular around the globe but rarely acknowledged by the populace. A populist sees his identity within the reflection of his particular community. The system forces individuals to see themselves categorically, such as white, Asian, Christian, European, Indian, etc.

https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=4Y5pDF_0c92HIL100
Photo by Clay Banks on Unsplash

Of course, the sense of belonging to a group or profile is not as robust in every person. Naturally, the more a person is exposed and lives amid diversely inhabited communities, the less attachment that person will have to his commune. That is why most populist communities are the ones in remote regions of the world with little or no exposure to the rest of the ecosphere. More so, it would be an outcast, though, for an outsider to fit in those, as mentioned earlier, strictly homogeneous communities.

A socialist scheme functions best under the firm establishment of shared identity and less efficiently under individualistic networks. That is why Once collective identity comes through the door, individual identity goes out.

Collectivism, Socialism, and Communism lengthways the spectrum of individual Interdependence

Socialism is the organizational form of collective identity, with communism situated at the far-left end. It is fair to assume that communism is built on the notion of collective conscience, which is Why many people still may believe in communism. But socialism and communism, in particular, tend to fail in their purest forms, even though, in theory, they are utterly humanistic. But on the conflicted side, human beings are the creators of competition and programmed to excel over their fellow humans. That is something socialism perpetually hinders. Few states have tried to combine the free, individualistic models with socialism with limited success. Nonetheless, with increasing public expectations and divergence of general knowledge homogeneity amid the works populace, a high vacuum of conflict is expanding.

The void that drives living costs more elevated and the public less trustful of the administrations trying to hold the socialist-inspired welfare programs alive. The said welfare programs are finished on Humanistic grounds but then again can't satisfy the growing expectations of the millennials.

Human beings endure humanity because it is the ultimate ideal.

We have historically strived to unite the masses based on the concept of collective conscience. And since collective consciousness and kindness serve as the glue or trait that connects people- based on that notion, henceforth, people have traditionally idolized socialism. By taking the former even further by radical intentions, it gave rise to the communist movements. They were unaware; or flunking to learn lessons from history that, if socialism is what we want, we must lower our expectations. And if we accept lower prospects, we must also give away most or all our identity.

#Socialism #politics #collectivism

This is original content from NewsBreak’s Creator Program. Join today to publish and share your own content.

Comments / 1

Published by

Adam Tabriz is a Physician, Writer, Entrepreneur, and public health policy, expert. He is an advocate for Personal liberty. The combination of his experience and expertise underlines his passion for advocating true “Personalized Healthcare” and “Healthcare without Borders.” His favorite slogan is: “Peace of mind would come to all people through the universal respect for the basic human rights of everyone”

San Francisco, CA
410 followers

More from Dr. Adam Tabriz

Comments / 0