1. Ideologies can be categorized into two major groups; individualist or collectivist. Collectivism is a way of thinking that values the goals of the group and the common good over the goals of any one individual. Individualism, on the other hand, values the freedom and worth of the individual, sometimes over the security and harmony of the group. These two sources are great examples of this. Each article shows an opinion from a different side, displaying the differences between individualists and collectivist as well as the few similarities.<br />Source I, titled “An Elder Offers Advice”, is a great example of collectivism. Mary Anulik Kutsiq shares with her audience that in earlier times, Inuit helped each other through the hard times. Everyone shared what they had in the community and it was divided up between the people evenly. She goes on to say that “the problem today is that there are too many people in the communities and a lot of them are too self-centered and involved with their own problems to help others”. Her way of thinking is very focused on the group as a whole rather than individually. Mary strives for a society in which all our needs are divided equally amongst all the people and everyone has what they need. This completely outlines the principles of collectivism. <br />Source II, a cartoon which reads, “In my day, bears worked for their honey”, is an example of a point of view of a strong individualist. The man standing on the street comes across as rude and self-centered towards the begging bear, but this is because he believes that everyone should make their own success and be able to meet their own needs without others having to give hand-outs. He simply sees the bear as lazy. His way of thinking is, “if the bear doesn’t put in the effort to provide himself with honey, why should I give up my hard-earned money to help him”. It displays how individualists value their own wealth, even when it causes harm to someone else in the process of building themselves up.<br />Although these sources are on opposite sides of the scale between collectivism and individualism, both display some principles of liberalism. Source II shows the principle of self interest and competition in classical liberalism. This means that each individual should be able to pursue their own interests to benefit themselves in our world and that competition is beneficial and brings out the best products. This is their way of working for the common good, because the best products will benefit everyone and should make people work harder to be on top. Source I, being a collectivist ideology, illustrates the principles of collective responsibility in saying that each person should share what they have with those who don’t have enough. This means that the large group is responsible for providing for the people who cannot meet their needs, which is an example of welfare capitalism, a principle of contemporary liberalism. Both contemporary and classical liberalism are ideas of individualism but through these sources we are shown that collectivists can value some aspects of liberalism in certain situations. <br />With one source focusing on the group and the other on the individual, the ideologies of the two are very much in contrast. As Source I demonstrates an importance for a form of welfare capitalism within a community, the second source criticizes that principle. We see here, contemporary and classical liberalism on different sides to each other when it comes to helping other people out or furthering yourself. <br />Despite the obvious contrasts between the two sources, they are similar in saying that individuals worked hard towards progressivism in the past, but in our current society people do not work as hard. While both ideologies believe in hard work for progressivism, the form of progressivism is in disagreement. The individualists work hard to progress themselves individually, leaving others behind in some cases, without feeling the need to share their successes with the group. In collectivism, progressivism is for the group, where every member is equal and they all progress together. The voices of both these texts do not long for progressivism in the way society works today, but want to return to the way things were done in the past.<br />Therefore, from these sources we can conclude that there are two very opposite perspectives on ideology. Collectivism; working for the group, and individualism; working for the individual. Although these ideologies are very different, they can contain similar principles of liberalism in some circumstances and can work toward similar goals in ways that they believe will benefit most people. <br />