RE: National Culture - Individualism VS Collectivism around the World
That comparison is quite interesting, because in 2010, just before the crisis began, Venezuela was ranked number 5 in a happiness survey, but today is very different, since it appears in the worst positions. So, having that personal experience, I believe that happiness in the countries of Central and South America is due to the fact that the collectivist countries can dedicate themselves to their social activities once they have their basic needs met, something that makes them happy. However, I believe that individualist countries tend to be more competitive and do not give happiness as much priority. People in individualistic countries tend to be results oriented, and to achieve goals, as a consequence, that is why they are generally classified as "less happy". In the case of the Nordic countries, I think that their happiness is due to the high quality of life indexes, and to a low density of population, Allan Pease in his books explained that in the cities people tend to be more hostile, since they tend to reduce your personal space, in places with low population density the opposite happens, personal space is expanded.
An excellent observation, totally in line with the Maslow's hierarchy of the human needs! In a way, people in individualistic countries tend to continue focusing on money even after their physiological and safety needs are well-met, thus failing to achieve a more complete/overall happiness (coming from love and belonging, esteem, and self-actualization).
Yes, the Nordic countries have very high culture standards in terms of liberty, justice, healthcare, free time, and similar, which is maybe why they manage to provide happy lives although they are relatively individualistic societies.
I like the explanation by Allan Pease. People in villages on average definitely have more serenity and less stress in their lives than those living in large, crowded cities.
Thank you for a meaningful comment, as always. Cheers! : )
Quite the contrary!Have you read the Gulag Archipelago? I mean you people are talking about what the socialists "can"do once they have thier basic needs met!and i don't understand your statement about individualistic countries being result oriented?are you familiar with the western conceptulaization of the indivual? the mesopotamian myths?
Hi @shery7, thank you for joining the discussion. It's important to differentiate between capitalism/socialism and individualism/collectivism. The first two are political systems, while the second two are extremes of a national culture dimension. A nation can have a capitalistic political system while having a cultural preference for collectivism, and vice versa.
It's the ideas that matter not the systems constructed on them.so my argument was collectivism is a attractive theory but shallow and when put in practice proves fatal (yes!im saying your happiness around the world map thingy is incorrect to say the least happiness is fleeting).The individual is responsible for his action and only his action and not the group.and if we study for the sake of the argument lets say psycologically the human history collectivism is nothing but a facade made up by materialists for the well being of humans(on the surface!)
So i'm "just" saying highly idividualistic societies do better but the lack of meaning due to the death of God is a big problem and it needs rectification
I'm not atteacking anyone i just love to discuss these things:)