> organization that takes collective decisions promotes people who like collective decision-making, and turns away people who prefer individual initiatives<p>Collective decision-making by definition means that the interests of the whole group will be taken into consideration.<p>"Individualistic" decision-making means the interests of EACH single individual take, or should take precedence. That means either<p>a) Autocratic decisions by a single Great Leader<p>b) Conflicting decisions by many individuals.<p>If those individuals see the light and start agreeing that everybody should have the right to vote on decisions that affect everybody then it becomes collective decision-making already. It becomes
democracy.<p>Think about elections, what are those if not collective decision-making? Is this article trying to say elections are bad?<p>INDIVDUALS RULE is their suggestion, right? Yeas but which individual? Start a fight let the biggest man with biggest gun decide? Me me me. But in the end like the Outlander movie-franchise suggested: "In the end there can be only one!" -- if you go down the route of individualistic decision making.<p>The question to address is what are you deciding on? Things that affect everybody, or things that everybody can decide for themselves because those decisions do not affect anybody else.