Cultural Individualism (CI) is an applied approach to pauperise, debauch and deflate the tyranny of mainstream narratives, collectivism norms, social fascism, democracy of the mobs and legal obligations. It is absolutely and radically characterized by individualism. CI is the moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that emphasizes the moral worth of the individual. CI promotes the exercise of one’s goals and desires and so value independence and self-reliance and advocate that interests of the individual should achieve precedence over the state or a social group, while opposing external interference upon one’s own interests by society or institutions such as the government.
CI Individualism makes the individual its focus and so starts “with the fundamental premise that the human individual is of primary importance in the struggle for liberation”. Anarchism is an example of CI movements that take the human individual as a central unit of analysis, whereas political science textbooks and their economists-cum-sociologists take the government or collective factors as a central unit of analysis. The world is heading towards global fascism because the current structure of society is hopelessly inured to defend, justify and provide oppression, conscription, intimidation, expropriation and social condemnation. The supply of the fascism is dependent upon the production of the uncritical, normal and obedient individuals. CI is a counter introduction to the economics of fascism.
CI critically enunciates an individualistic culture, permissive society and open/free environment where all “acting agents” assemble, function, cooperate and associate peacefully. It may sound “utopian” but CI as an approach is coherent, logical and comprehensible to outlaw the government’s or collective mirage. Workers in an individualist culture are more likely to value their own well-being over the good of the group. Contrast this with a collectivist culture where people might sacrifice their own comfort for the greater good of everyone else. Such differences can influence nearly every aspect of behavior ranging from the career a person choose, the products they buy, and the social issues that they care about.
CI is important — indeed essential — because authoritarian values are embedded in a total system of domination with many aspects besides the political and economic. Hence, those values cannot be eradicated even by a voting or political revolution. The endeavors of CI is accompanied by profound psychological changes in the majority of the population. My article “State is a state of mind” clarifies the said stance.
CI ideas are shared by almost all schools of anarchist thought, and consciousness-raising is considered an essential part of any anarchist movement. For anarchists, it’s important to “build the new world in the shell of the old” in all aspects of our lives and creating an individualistic culture is part of that activity. Few anarchists like me, however, consider consciousness-raising as enough in itself and so combine CI activities with organising, using indirect action a.k.a agorism and building libertarian alternatives in our socialist society. In order to control what they see as “dangerous expression”, cultural authoritarians often resort to casual and spurious accusations of misogyny, racism, and homophobia. The goal is to manipulate the boundaries of acceptable speech by smearing their targets with socially unacceptable labels and to write off speakers they don’t like as bigots so they don’t have to engage with the speaker’s arguments. The range of socially acceptable speech and art is sometimes called the “Overton window.” The purpose of much contemporary criticism, according to CI, aims to move or simply narrow that window.
Culture critics from the right and left claim that art can be harmful, but never provide adequate evidence of how this might be so. CI can frequently be found skewering critics who take themselves too seriously or are excessively earnest, especially when making specious arguments about the supposed “real-world effect” of violent or allegedly offensive media. Their attitude is refreshing for readers tired of being lectured to by newspaper columnists and east coast bloggers, and one of the reasons CI is gaining traction so quickly.
Leave a Comment