Barely a day after my decidedly negative post about Collectivism, I came across a good counter-point. My last words on the subject:

The catch: to be truly collectivist and erase all individuality is to become totally removed from what we can consider “human society” and be closer to an insect hive. Very successful, very efficient, very alien.

Well, David Brooks reporting from Chengdu, China thinks very differently. To David Brooks, the important thing to consider when comparing Collectivism with Individualism is context:

This is a divide that goes deeper than economics into the way people perceive the world. If you show an American an image of a fish tank, the American will usually describe the biggest fish in the tank and what it is doing. If you ask a Chinese person to describe a fish tank, the Chinese will usually describe the context in which the fish swim.

Reading David’s article brought to mind Nassim Taleb, whom we featured recently, and his fallacy of history. When we consider criticisms of Collectivism, we almost automatically associate it with the past experiences of Communism, Socialism, and Fascism, and how the societies based on these collectivist systems we’ve seen have either failed or stagnated. However, that individualistic societies have performed better in history is only half an insight–and by no means completely rules out the value of collectivism. However, this half-insight is practically the empirical basis supporting all anti-collectivist rhetoric.

David is quick to remind us of this, and of the alternative that we have all been quick to rule out, and more importantly, in 2008 he already has a historical context: China.

We in the West have a narrative that involves the development of individual reason and conscience during the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, and then the subsequent flourishing of capitalism. According to this narrative, societies get more individualistic as they develop.

But what happens if collectivist societies snap out of their economic stagnation? What happens if collectivist societies, especially those in Asia, rise economically and come to rival the West? A new sort of global conversation develops.

The opening ceremony in Beijing was a statement in that conversation. It was part of China’s assertion that development doesn’t come only through Western, liberal means, but also through Eastern and collective ones.

From here we can appreciate that hindsight bias may be 20/20 but it is also hopelessly myopic about future developments. Meanwhile, David also brings to our focus other thoughts that are helping to support a second look at Collectivism:

For one thing, there are relatively few individualistic societies on earth. For another, the essence of a lot of the latest scientific research is that the Western idea of individual choice is an illusion and the Chinese are right to put first emphasis on social contexts.

Scientists have delighted to show that so-called rational choice is shaped by a whole range of subconscious influences, like emotional contagions and priming effects (people who think of a professor before taking a test do better than people who think of a criminal). Meanwhile, human brains turn out to be extremely permeable (they naturally mimic the neural firings of people around them). 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.

The rise of China isn’t only an economic event. It’s a cultural one. The ideal of a harmonious collective may turn out to be as attractive as the ideal of the American Dream.

Taleb calls history a fallacy and history is the only case against Collectivism. This only makes it more poignant to be students of history, and of the wide possibilities for how society can develop.

In my previous post I mentioned that the critics of Collectivism and Individualism seem to have a common fear: that of society degenerating to serve the interests of a minority. This suggests that both lines of thought are capable of creating that horror.

Thankfully, what David’s article shows is that just as importantly: both lines of thought are just as possibly capable of creating a better world instead.

A lighter topic for a change. On relationships: I read recently about the anguish of a girl from Atlanta, a not so uncommon sentiment among women these days: “There aren’t enough men to go around.” But according to this blogger, this is becoming a serious problem in Atlanta:

Last time I checked there was 21 women for everyone 1 man and the problem doesn’t stop there because the you have to factor in the homosexual males, men with kids, liars & cheaters, people with stds, no job etc.   The problem is so big that the unattractive and broke down men now think they have a choice, lol.  Granted all of the women here in Atlanta are not wife material but there are plenty of good women out here who are at their wits end.  Living here you can’t play by the same rules like not taking care of your man mentally, sexually, etc because if you don’t some other woman will.

Sadly because of the high demand for a man you’re finding many women settling for the bottom feeders who would never stand a chance anywhere else.  I mean you know it’s bad when you see women working and men sitting at home with no job, using her car, and still having the nerve to cheat.

Interestingly, girls in Atlanta don’t have to go far for “decent” advice. Jeff Herring in an ezine article offers his “analysis” of the Atlanta Singles Dating Myths:

What this does is foster the myth that good partners are scarce and hard to find. If this its true, then you beter settle for whatever you can find.

Results of this myth

In a word, desperation. You stay with somemone who is not right for you, just to be with someone. Sets up a miserable situation.

What to do

This is one of those situtations where attitude is everything. When you approoach dating from an attitude of scarcity, you see scarcity. When you approach dating from an attitude of plenty and abundance, you see plenty and abundance.

It’s all about attitude eh? (read: Law Of Attraction again?). How’s this for attitude: our favorite cynical Chinese girl Intsiksiomai offers her take on an inherent flaw in that legendary female intuition which can help explain the devastation of women in Atlanta: girls simply fall for jerks very easily:

Most girls overlook this weakness in men, until it’s too late. They have married one! Girls get easily flattered with the protectiveness and concern of jerks. Girls often allow their men to control them like robots, all under the guise of love. Girls give up their career, and even their basic human rights for the pleasure of the jerks.

It’s also with some sense of eerie coincidence that a Chinese girl would offer this insight, because if you really think men are in short supply, whether as a statistical fact or simply a whimsical notion, then you better pack your bags and get headed for China: where centuries of male-preferential breeding has actually created a real gender concentration:

WUHAN, China — Chinese traditions, a tough one-child-per-couple policy and modern medical technology have combined to create a demographic nightmare that threatens China’s stability and endangers prospects for greater political freedom in the country with the world’s largest population. Over the next two decades, as many as 40 million young Chinese men won’t be able to marry, settle down and start families. There won’t be enough wives to go around.

If the United States drops from its superpower status, will China replace it? Jim Rogers talks about China as if he is sure that China will succeed the U.S. He even goes to say that “they are among the best capitalists in the world”.

This is really funny. It seems that capitalist United States is hoping that Communist China doesn’t act like a capitalist and unload U.S. government debt.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=anZHfo6tQi60

Asia Needs Deal to Prevent Panic Selling of U.S. Debt, Yu Says

By Kevin Hamlin

Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) — Japan, China and other holders of U.S. government debt must quickly reach an agreement to prevent panic sales leading to a global financial collapse, said Yu Yongding, a former adviser to the Chinese central bank.

“We are in the same boat, we must cooperate,” Yu said in an interview in Beijing on Sept. 23. “If there’s no selling in a panicked way, then China willingly can continue to provide our financial support by continuing to hold U.S. assets.”

An agreement is needed so that no nation rushes to sell, “causing a collapse,” Yu said. Japan is the biggest owner of U.S. Treasury bills, holding $593 billion, and China is second with $519 billion. Asian countries together hold half of the $2.67 trillion total held by foreign nations.

China, Japan, South Korea and others should meet soon to seal a deal, said Yu, a former academic member of the central bank’s monetary policy committee. The talks should involve finance ministers, central bank governors and even national leaders, he said.

“Whether some kind of agreement between them to continue to hold Treasury bills is viable, I’m not sure,” said James McCormack, head of sovereign ratings at Fitch Ratings Ltd in Hong Kong. “It would be unusual. If it became apparent that sovereigns in Asia were selling Treasuries the market would take that quite badly, it’s something to be avoided.”

The global credit crisis, triggered by a housing slump in the U.S., has saddled financial companies with more than $520 billion in writedowns and losses, collapsing Bear Stearns Cos. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. in the process. Insurer American International Group Inc. and mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac also were rescued by the government.

`Grave Threats’

U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is urging Congress to pass a $700 billion plan to remove devalued assets from the banking system. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said Sept. 24 that the U.S. is facing “grave threats” to its financial stability.

China’s huge holdings of U.S. debt means it must bear a large proportion of the “burden of sorting things out” in the U.S., Yu said. China is not in a hurry to dump its U.S. holdings and communication between the two nations every “couple of days” is keeping Chinese leaders informed and helping to avoid a potential panic, he added.

“China is very worried about the safety of its assets,” he said. “If you want China to keep calm, you must ensure China that its assets are safe.”

Currency Manipulator

Yu said China is helping the U.S. “in a very big way” and added that it should get something in return. The U.S. should avoid labeling it an unfair trader and a currency manipulator and not politicize other issues, he said.

“It is not fair that we are doing this in good faith and are prepared to bear serious consequences and you are still labeling China this and that, accusing China of this and that,” he said. “China knows what to do. We don’t need your intervention.”

The U.S. financial crisis had taught China a lesson and that was: “Why are we piling up these IOUs if they may default?” China’s economic expansion strategy, which emphasizes export growth that has led to trade surpluses and the accumulation of $1.81 trillion in foreign-exchange reserves, is the main problem, said Yu.

“Our export-growth strategy has run its natural course,” he said. “We should change course.”

China should stop intervening in the foreign currency markets and thus allow rapid appreciation of the yuan, he said. While this would cause pain for exporters, China could ease the transition by using its strong fiscal position to aid those who lose their jobs. It also should stimulate domestic demand to offset lower income from overseas sales.

Without yuan appreciation, China will continue to accumulate foreign reserves, which means further accumulating “IOUs from the U.S.,” said Yu. “This is paper and it may default and it will not increase China’s national welfare.”

If China doesn’t allow the yuan to appreciate and continues to promote export-led growth it will lead to confrontation with the U.S. and Europe, Yu said.

Look what Europe has to say about the financial crisis. Is China going to replace the U.S. as a major financial superpower?

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE48O2L020080925

BERLIN (Reuters) – Germany blamed the United States on Thursday for spawning the global financial crisis with a blind drive for higher profits and said it would now have to accept greater market regulation and a loss of its financial superpower status.

In some of the toughest language since the crisis worsened earlier this month, German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrueck told parliament the financial turmoil would leave “deep marks” but was primarily an American problem.

“The world will never be as it was before the crisis,” Steinbrueck, a deputy leader of the center-left Social Democrats, told the Bundestag lower house.

“The United States will lose its superpower status in the world financial system. The world financial system will become more multi-polar.”

Steinbrueck, whose efforts to secure greater transparency on hedge funds during Germany’s G8 presidency last year collapsed amid objections from Washington and London, attacked what he called an Anglo-Saxon drive for double-digit profits and massive bonuses for bankers and company executives.

“Investment bankers and politicians in New York, Washington and London were not willing to give these up,” he said.

He proposed eight measures to address the crisis, including an international ban on “purely speculative” short-selling and an increase in capital requirements for banks in order to offset credit risks.

The collapse of U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers and financial woes of other financial institutions like insurer AIG have prompted the U.S. government to propose a $700 billion rescue package for the country’s financial sector.

AMERICAN PROBLEM

Steinbrueck welcomed U.S. efforts to stem the crisis but said it was neither necessary nor wise for Germany to replicate the U.S. plan for its own institutions, which are under pressure but do not face the same risks as their U.S. counterparts.

The German Bundesbank said earlier this week that the financial market turbulence would hit the earnings of Germany’s big commercial lenders, its publicly-owned Landesbanks and its cooperative banks.

Tighter credit in the wake of the crisis could also constrain household consumption and corporate investment, increasing the likelihood the German economy will fall into recession this year.

But Steinbrueck said German regulator Bafin believed German banks could cope with losses and ensure the safety of private savings, calling the turmoil primarily an American problem.

“The financial crisis is above all an American problem. The other G7 financial ministers in continental Europe share this opinion,” he said.

“This system, which is to a large degree insufficiently regulated, is now collapsing — with far-reaching consequences for the U.S. financial market and considerable contagion effects for the rest of the world,” Steinbrueck added.

He advocated stronger, internationally coordinated regulation, saying the crisis showed that national action was not enough.

“The International Monetary Fund should become the controlling authority for the application of worldwide financial market standards,” he said.

We are often told that radical ideas about anything–whether it be religion, politics, or philosophies, can be tolerated as long as these ideas remain within the minority of individuals.

A US-based psychiatrist, Dr. Emanuel Tanay, offered some insight into the power of ideas that while emerging from a small minority, can take over whole populations and create massive impact. He also higlights that fence-sitters, or the silent majority–are complicit in any atrocities committed in the name of radical ideas.

Here’s Dr. Tanay’s Note:

A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War ll owned a number of large industries and estates.  When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism.
 
‘Very few people were true Nazis ‘he said,’ but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools.  So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen.  Then, before we knew it,they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come.  My family lost everything.  I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.’

 
We are told again and again by ‘experts’ and ‘talking heads’ that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.  Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant.  It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectra of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.
 
It is the fanatics who march.  It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.  It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave.  It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.  It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals.  The hard quantifiable fact is that the ‘peaceful majority’, the ’silent majority’, is cowed and extraneous.
 
Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people.  The peaceful majority were irrelevant.
 
China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
 
The average Japanese individual prior to World War ll was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.
 
And, who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery.  Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were ‘peace loving’?
 
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:
 
Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghanis, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.
 
As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
 
Lastly, at the risk of offending, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand.  So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands world wide, read this -think about it – and send it on.
 
Emanuel Tanay, M.D.
2980 Provincial St .
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
734-997-0256 drtanay@umich. edu