Letter: We are all collectivists
Mr. Smith accused Mr. Chisesi of being a “collectivist” (PI letters, March 12). He is correct. To the degree that one chooses to be a member of a family, the Rotary, a cooperative business venture, a town or the United Nations, to that degree, one is a collectivist.
We are all collectivists to some degree. The issue is one of personal values: How much collectivism is desirable versus how much individualism? Where to draw that line? It’s not an easy question to answer, and here we disagree in good conscience.
Most likely Mr. Chisesi and I would probably go quite a bit further than Mr. Smith in terms of how much collectivism is desirable. But putting the issue in either/or, black/white terms and implying that “collectivism” is a pejorative term is a cheap trick that only serves to divide us as a nation and a people.
You are entitled to your values and your opinion Mr. Smith, but where is your patriotism? This country has been, is and should be bigger that your personal values and opinions.
As for Ross Talbott and Appletree regulations, it’s difficult to form an opinion from information in this exchange of letters. To the degree that Appletree regulations are personally promulgated and enforced by Mr. Talbott and dictated to residents, Mr. Chisesi would be correct that Talbott likes rules well enough when he is making them but does not trust people to make them for themselves. That certainly qualifies as hypocrisy. But to the degree that the residents themselves promulgate, alter and enforce rules, these rules are simply another example of collectivism.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.