...
Here's the primary reason collectivism will not become dominant In America - it is unfeasible unless/until everyone or almost everyone in the group is participating. Opt-in participation isn't viable in a collective society. And you cannot tolerate a setup where people who are in the group but who opt out have the ability to thrive at their own hand. You MUST force them to participate, whether you do that by social coercion or political or legal coercion. Which is one reason that Bernie got kicked out of the communes he lived in. They couldn't tolerate the slacker.
If collectivism was economically or socially viable in America you'd see a lot more functioning collectives operating on the voluntary opt-in basis. None of the communes Bernie lived in or visited lasted for more than a few years. Meanwhile this here is still America - everyone still has the freedom to try again, only this time with REAL socialism. If they really wanted to. The capitalists don't need them and don't care what they do. "If you won't there are plenty of other people who will." By choice.
Even someone who is living incongruously with their values like you will recognize this on at least some level.
Collectivism is everywhere in the US. But, yes it is only partial. That can be said of a lot of countries.
1. Haveing a shared set of common laws is a form of collectivism.
2. Having a political system is also a form of collectivism
3. Throw in the infrastructure built and maintained by the government, welfare, medicare and the like.
Communism - and you will always get arguments on the details here - is essentially sharing the "fruits of production" equally among all. That does not work - because we know what happens in such a system - a few people do all the work and many others goof off. It just doesn't work.
Collectivism in various forms is absolutely needed. We can't function as a society without it.
Zelensky's "Servants to the People Party" and Trump's "Drain the Swamp" rhetoric are examples of a reaction to a breakdown of the collectivist system - when elected legislators break their social contract to represent and manage the social infrastructure
for the people who elected them to office.
When the legislators lose awareness of that social contract and what it means, when they start to group together as one or more entities with a set of goals distinct from the needs of those who elected them to power, then they will inevitably break that social contract. At some point, the population they should represent may need to fire them. But how do you fire Democrats - if they have finissed control of the ballot box through various means? The only way is to revolt - brutally - to bring out the guillotine and start to work. That is of course illegal, insurrection or sedition. So, what sometimes needs to be done is problematic. A certain threshold of grievance has to be reached before action can be safely taken.
And what about the future, the world of robot police, millions upon millions, everywhere? Revolt will then be impossible.
And wouldn't you know: