The other question is about the nature of the 'ruling class'. Individualist systems do have a ruling class; it is very difficult, if not impossible I think, the ever get rid of the ruling oligarghy. But the nature of the ruling class is different.
In the individualist society, the ruling class are essentially voted for by all individuals in the society. It is the free market; those who are in the ruling class have obtained their position by offering all other individuals the most perceived value - a product or service for example, at a lower price. The ruling class may preserve their position, provided that they keep on providing value to the people. If they do not, then they lose their position in the ruling class to someone who is. Notice, however, that no one has had to give those in the ruling class their position of power; and their power is ultimately only derived from their increased purchasing ability. Some individuals may despute that everyone has an equal chance of obtaining position in the ruling class, however ultimately, anyone has the ability to obtain outside investment to fund their idea for new value for society.
In the collectivist society however, the ruling class are those who lead the government. The leaders may be voted in by individuals, who have no choice but to do so, every 5 years or so. Very often, the leader will be chosen on the basis of charisma rather than the nature of their ideas. Many of the people who do the real work in the background are not voted into position. Very often these systems lead to corruption; one doesn't have to look very far to see this happening. The key difference between the ruling class of collectivism and the ruling class of individualism is that of coercion; no one has to buy anythiing. However, the leaders of government can use state power to coerce people, without choice, into their line of thinking, depending on what the leader decides to do during his or her time in office. This may or may not be for benevolent purposes; I tend to believe that man is essentially good and will try and do his best for the better lot of humanity in the greater number of instances. It also leads to corruption from the wealthy classes, who may lobby the government to give them special interest in markets; see J.P.Morgan and the railroads that were built or Rhode's De Beers for this happening. Banks are also, in collectivist societies, also given speical interest by government.
In the individualist society, if a company is reported on a truely free media to be corrupt, people will tend to avoid that company, and they will tend to lose their dominating position; hence the individuals regulate, rather than requiring a 'state prosecutor' to come forward and claim themselves to be saving angels and using the coercion of government to do something about it.
I don't think you'll ever be rid of the ruling class, however in my opinion, the fairest ruling class is that voted for by all individuals and where the ruling class do not have coercive power.
You are, of course, as an individual, perfectly entitled to disagree!