While the specific mention of a “cease-fire between individualism and collectivism” is made until the very last paragraph of the chapter, the broader idea of individualism and collectivism competing with one another in the international markets are peppered throughout the text. Oftentimes, free markets can be analogous with individualism, much like sustainable practices can be compared to collectivism. While reading the chapter, a further thought technology was developed, introducing the idea of a selfish actor vs. a selfless actor. The selfish actor would tend to prefer individualism, as that philosophy would often allow behaviors that would let this actor justify means that may be harmful to others, in this case they may adopt what other actors would consider unsustainable practices.The selfless actor may prefer collectivism. There, they could consider their own actions in context with other actors, adopting sustainable practices that may not initially have financial benefits, but could be in the future. While the immediate benefits of adopting these sustainable practices may be less tangible, the society has deemed them as ideals. However, after developing this comparison, there is a fundamental problem that occurs here. The assumption is made that those who do not adopt sustainable practices are selfish. Many reasons may occur why an actor would not adopt sustainable practices. The least of which may be that it is financially impossible to do so. On the other side, there are not always altruistic motivations for actors to adopt sustainable practices. The promoters of sustainable development must acknowledge this, and find new ways to encourage adoption, and stay away from the more moral arguments that activists take.