Often argument of the individualists does not
Often he is swayed by emotion and passion. Being selfish and egoistic, he may act against the interest of society.
Hence the State should regulate individual activities and check anti-social and selfish activities of the individual. It should bring about a harmony between individual interests and social interests.
2) The state not a necessary evil:
The second assumption of the individualist that the state is a necessary to evil is also wrong.
if one looks at the history and evaluation of the state; one finds that the sate has been rending many useful and beneficial services to the individuals the state has helped and not hindered the growth of indivisual personality the state exit to prevent anti-social activities and selfish interest on the individual.
Aristotle is right when he says that “the state originates in bare needs of life and continues for sake of good life”.
3) Law does not curtail liberty:
The third assumption of the individualists that any extension of the functions of the State leads to a corresponding curtailment of individual liberty is also an erroneous proposition!
Law and liberty or power and freedom are not antithetical. Al laws of the State are not encroachment on individual freedom Law is often a condition of liberty. The State-interference does’ not like individual personality. Good laws provide incentives and help the development of individual personality. Planning neither harmful nor bad. Planning has proved to be a blessing in modern society.
4) Free competition is undesirable:
The economic argument of the individualists does not hold good in modern age. Uncontrolled production based on principle of free or open competition results in monopoly, wastage, overproduction, rise of prices, unemployment, slums, and labour problems.
The principle of free competition in class-divided society is likely to result in exploitation of the poor by the rich. The evils of free competition have compelled the modern States to resort to planning. The State should control and regulate economic activities in the best interests of the majority of people of society. Thus, the economic argument of the individualist does no longer hold good.
5) The society is organic in nature:
The individualism views society as an aggregation of unrelated individuals. But society is an organic unity, composed of component and interdependent individuals. The opponents of indivisual strongly oppose the application of the principle of survival of the fittest in the society. It is inhuman and unjustified to say that the old the week and the invalid should have no right to live
6) Indivisual attitude on the state wrong:
Lastly, it is also not correct to say that the state-interface cripples the human personality and character on the other hand indivisual needs the state guidance. The claim that the indivisual knows what is good for him is not correct. The condition in several countries particularly in backward countries, reveal that. The ignorant and uneducated masses do not know what for them, and it is the duty of the State to guide these people and protect them. The State has become a “friend, philosopher and guide” of the individuals in the modern age.