The answer is, no. Now the job is to recognize what in individualism is anti-social and vicious, and what in individualism is good.
There is nothing anti-social or vicious in individualism. Those who think there is confuse their only subjectivist hedonism with individualism. The least dangerous or harmful person in any society is the independent, self-sufficient, individualist. All the others are parasites who despise the individualist precisely because they know they need him, but he does not need them.
Hank
Actually, I think "individualism," taken by itself, is almost by definition anti-social. And an unrestrained individualism could easily descend into vicious action
The problem is not with individualism per se, but rather in insisting that individualism is sufficient in itself.
In real life, individualism is one of several "isms" that must work together, in tension.
For example, self-sufficiency and individual initiative must be tempered by the effects that our actions may produce on others.
It's never a good thing to tout one "ism" over all others. The real world is far more complicated than that, because we live among other people. Our rights and theirs interact; our actions must take their existence into account.