The philosopher Jean Rousseau spoke of the collectiveness of the population as a good thing, if it was agreed upon. He stated that if a collective group decided upon what they desired, then the collective group should be 'entitled' to receive their desire. But if Government would not aid their desire, that they should gather for themselves their desire. And so this could be in part a beginning of what Capitalism had become.
When 1 individual hinders the collective desire, because of the philosophy of self over the collective, then could it be said that that person has chosen to remain outside the collective whole. And this has also shown true in all the other entities of establishments. Each establishment can be 'weightier' on one side but just in the same way, could shift the weight onto the other side, depending on the collectiveness of that establishment. And so we see the constant manipulation of establishments being done by the individuals of the collectiveness in each establishment. No one thing, no one establishment, on Earth, has remained constant from its' very beginnings, and this is why the term 'change' is so sought after. It keeps individuals advancing in their ideas and thoughts, moving the establishment into an era where the society is seen as 'desirable'. And these manipulations occur by the new births of each year after they have come into the age of decision making. Today's Presidential Nominees were the new births of the 50's and 60's eras and their new birthing into life will become the Nation's leading force into an era which they see as desirable after the 2016 elections.
I speak of the 1 and/or the collectiveness. Each side, with their own free choice and will, should, in my opinion, look to the 'interests' of others as well as looking to the interests of self. Each member of non-important government ruling and decision making entities have their own 'good' and their own 'interests' within their lives and within their families lives. To disregard the individual's good/interests is to become more of a ruler without any concern for mankind and if a person is non concerning with other people's well being and interests while in authority, then that person can be deemed as self seeking over seeking the well being of the whole. And this brings us back to the philosophy of self over the collective whole.
If the 1 person can re-shift the paradigm to be weightier on his/her side, then the ones who have collected themselves to that person will be on his/her side, which would make those people to be self seekers as well. I don't know what self seekers would seek and what self seekers would hold as a good 'well being' for others, except to seek for self.
When 1 individual hinders the collective desire, because of the philosophy of self over the collective, then could it be said that that person has chosen to remain outside the collective whole. And this has also shown true in all the other entities of establishments. Each establishment can be 'weightier' on one side but just in the same way, could shift the weight onto the other side, depending on the collectiveness of that establishment. And so we see the constant manipulation of establishments being done by the individuals of the collectiveness in each establishment. No one thing, no one establishment, on Earth, has remained constant from its' very beginnings, and this is why the term 'change' is so sought after. It keeps individuals advancing in their ideas and thoughts, moving the establishment into an era where the society is seen as 'desirable'. And these manipulations occur by the new births of each year after they have come into the age of decision making. Today's Presidential Nominees were the new births of the 50's and 60's eras and their new birthing into life will become the Nation's leading force into an era which they see as desirable after the 2016 elections.
I speak of the 1 and/or the collectiveness. Each side, with their own free choice and will, should, in my opinion, look to the 'interests' of others as well as looking to the interests of self. Each member of non-important government ruling and decision making entities have their own 'good' and their own 'interests' within their lives and within their families lives. To disregard the individual's good/interests is to become more of a ruler without any concern for mankind and if a person is non concerning with other people's well being and interests while in authority, then that person can be deemed as self seeking over seeking the well being of the whole. And this brings us back to the philosophy of self over the collective whole.
If the 1 person can re-shift the paradigm to be weightier on his/her side, then the ones who have collected themselves to that person will be on his/her side, which would make those people to be self seekers as well. I don't know what self seekers would seek and what self seekers would hold as a good 'well being' for others, except to seek for self.
