Plan to limit school places for children of past pupils to go
Lots of bizarre assumptions and ‘facts’ in here dkin. All good systems are based on hierarchy? Really, isn’t it also the case that all bad systems are based on hierarchy? I think your take is more Nietzschean that Greek, tbh. Democracy is about the role people play (and the fact that they play a role) and is less about politicians. Compare the system we live under to that of the greeks (and not just the Greek ruling class who star in the classics but the women, peasants, workers and slaves), there is far less hierarchy and far more democracy. You’re mad if you think the alt-right and neoreactionaries are “smart people who have an intuitive grasp of what they are trying to express and an argument can be made for technocracy certainly above democracy”, quite the opposite, they are narrowly educated commercial accidents who have taken their 'right school, right training, right moment" luck and mistranslated it as absolute merit. They’ve taken on a menu of discredited ideas like the bell curve and digested them into narcissism. They really think of themselves as an aristocracy, very like the robber barons of the 19th century. Thiel is actually becoming more and more fascistic such is the grip these ideas have over him.
“The bell curve” is a discredited idea?
Some people it seems think that the normal distribution of intelligence is white patriarchal oppression and that they can be any IQ they want…
Or as Asians love to point out, we are the most intelligent race by average IQ… That’s one part of the Bell Curve hypothesis you never hear about. Whites are not the most intelligent race. Far from it. We’re just average it seems. But it seems pointing out that in standardized IQ tests (American born) blacks do badly is somehow deeply racist in some way. And the fact the immigrant Africans and Afro-Caribbeans do quite well in these tests is irrelevant to the charge by the progressives that the Bell Curve is nothing more than racist propaganda. Little better than Birth of a Nation. Which is actually quite a good film. Much in the same way as Triumph of the Will. But as both these films have the “wrong” politics they are both evil. Where as Battleship Potemkin which is a truely dreadful film because it has the “right” politics is somehow one of the greatest films ever. Go figure.
But I digress.
Only since it was published, though the ideas it recycles have been taking on water for a hundred years.
Even capitalism has abandoned it’s appealing but fatuous simplicity.
OK, you don’t mean that “the bell curve” is a discredited idea. You mean that one particular description of intelligence/ability among humans, described in a particular book, has been discredited. The bell curve is alive and well.
Read the second link.
I did. It inhabits the right side of the bell curve in Use Of Capital Letters.
Then I’m unclear about what you are unclear about, “The Bell Curve” is the title of a book, it may have entered general usage so as to refer to the theories inside the book but it’s pedantry to insist that it refers to something other than the book. The article I linked to challenges even it’s assumptions about intelligence distribution, never mind measurement, thus undermining the descriptive power of the title to describe a kind of graph which doesn’t exist, meaning that what you might be assuming it describes, other than the book, actually does not exist.
Yes both are, no system is built on ‘equality’. The word equality has no meaning as it does not exist. So why do we keep hearing about it? The sooner we accept equality does not exist the better. We need to deal with reality not fantasy. Equality = socialism and gulag. So why is it held up as an ideal. All that this achieves is to prevent excellence. Case in point grammar schools which allowed many working class people to succeed due to their ability, now destroyed on the alter of ‘equality’. This is a poison that simply results in everyone being forced to the lowest common denominator. So the first thing to accept is that hierarchy is the natural law and this should be accepted.
Democracy does not work as it rewards people who can psychologically manipulate people. Being electable is a different skill set to running a country. So this system is badly designed. The ideal system according to Plato is a ‘Philosopher King’ who is selected from the most talented and bred to rule the country overcomign many trials. This is a form of aristocracy. Implicit in this system is heirarchy, the best are the rulers. The idea that everyone has an equal opinion is ludicrous, read the federalist papers they tear democracy apart.
They probably are an intellectual aristocracy to an extent, the works that I have read are intelligent and well written, not the output of those with substandard intelligence. I don’t consider the bell curve discredited. There is a bell curve in height, size, temperature etc. Most of reality aligns with a bell curve of some sort. Gaussian is ubiquitas. IQ/g-factor is a definite measurement and aligns with a bell curve and is strongly associated with heredity.
Gulags are the result of authoritarianism, not equality. And of course equality does exist in all kinds of arenas and expressions. Only when you see the entire world and all it’s inhabitants and insist on making lists to rate them through some set of arbitrary measures can you come up with this stuff. The tabloids and click bait sites have it down to the finest art, top ten this, 50 greatest that, etc. I’ve pointed out before that in The Origin Of the Species competition plays a very minor role, and cooperation is a much more important factor in Darwin’s thesis. Your ideas are not based on observation or facts in any meaningful way, rather they are ideological. Jesus, living in Ireland surely you understand that when everyone in the golf club insists that such and such is the greatest cervical cancer doctor in the country you know you’re dealing with some sort of FF deviant.
How did all the great Berkely worker owned co-op and communes work out? I think Bernie was evicted from one for not doing his share of the work. Thinking like your’s results in the ‘modern art’ movement in which a bunch of know nothings stand around critiquing some impressionist shite that will be forgotten in 20 years while the true realists lie forgotten. This is the problem with ‘equality’ it is opposed to excellence. Humans are hierarchical by default, it’s like trying to tell someone they can fly if they flap their hand enough.
There is a much deeper meaning to that statement that boils down to the difference between the sacred and the profane.
I could make you quite a long list of successful Berkeley coops that have been around for decades, thousands of students even live in coops, sharing tooth brushes under a regime of forced equality. But your point is what? That you hate certain political and philosophical ideas and are holding onto to others as their counter weights, and throwing around vague spiritual sounding shibboleths? In fact the straw man you erect to legitimize your version of monarchism doesn’t even exist. You seem to mistake anti discrimination practices for equality, or something like that. Equality has been an organizing principle of democratic states for a few hundred years AS FAR AS ONES RELATIONSHIP WITH THE STATE GOES. Currently here in CA lots of people end up in jail over unpaid traffic and parking fines. Guess what, it’s not well off people this happens to, it’s poor people. These people are going to jail because they are poor, and having their licenses suspended meaning that often they can’t work when they get out, very counterproductive. It’s increasingly common throughout the US as local cities use fines to fund everything. That’s a basic inequality and eventually the courts will rule it as such and those practices will end, at least in some places. How is that the enemy of freedom? I think you just misunderstand the role of the state and how it operates as a legal entity and the monopolist of violence.
Thinking like mine leads to degenerate art? You’ve been reading the conspiracy sites again. Thinking like yours will lead to art galleries becoming churches to worship portraits of the rich, like the old days, which is what your ideas are actually all about.
I should have clarified the I meant the ‘worker run’ coops in which management decisions are decided by consensus. I have no issue with worker owned co-ops provided a good management structure is put in place, a heirarchical one.
I think Monarchism is a better system than electing a President but it’s a minor issue for me. There always needs to be a balance as a heirarchy needs to be held accountable. Monarch and the family operates as a focal point for the people and solidifies identity, interesting devlopments in this space. What is more important is that the elite are promoted to positions of power.
Fundamentally humans are quite tribal and etho-nationalist. This was common wisdom 50 years ago. Ireland unlike the US is still based on this model in fact it was the basis of the creation of the state, we are a small country with local politics and the politicians have to answer to their constituents, I’m not opposed to this. Most of our political institutions were designed in saner times and have largely stood the test of time.
In the US, the politicians are paid mandarins with almost no regard for the rest of the citizens, it is primarily a class based society which I consider inferior to Ireland’s more tribal culture. Due to the coalescing nature of identity politics in the US, it looks quite similar to Yugoslavia before it entered civil war or Libya/Syria. I’m not sure if this was the plan all along to divide the populace and get them to turn on each other while the elite profits, probably. Only likely to get worse.
What I disagree with is the emphasis on ‘equality’ that simply results in an acceptance and promotion of the mediocre and the idea that all people are the same despite the obvious fact that this is not true. This ideology could quite conceivable lead to the fracture of the US as a nation state and the famous ‘rivers of blood’ that Powell prophesied .
This essay largely sums up my beliefs regarding the right and left divide. The fundamental difference in my view is the difference between spirituality and materialism.
A bell curve is a statistical distribution. It is a mathematical entity that exists whether you believe in it or not, and as such can’t be “discredited”. You’re familiar with a narrow application of it, which may or may not have merit, but to claim that the bell curve is somehow not a thing is crazy.
No need to clarify, do a bit of research and you’ll find that some of the most well known businesses in Berkeley have been worker owned and run since the 1960s or 70s.The Cheese Board is a good example.
I assume you think capitalism is the ne plus ultra of economic systems, yet it’s the very system that undermines the bedrock of social organization you seem to admire, i.e… the family as the basic unit making up larger communities with social and ethnic ties emanating out. I think it’s very naive to think that monarchs act in some sort of grand way and in the interests of everyone, maybe some do but the history of monarchism is a history of rigid hierarchy that serves a very tiny elite. It’s the original trickle down economics and it doesn’t work! If human nature is so base and petty as you seem to believe then why should monarchs be any different, particularly as they’ve never before proven to be. You should not need anything other than the story of WW1 to discredit the idea of god kings having everyones interests at heart. The rise of the so called alt-right, and that includes the monarchists, is I think reflective of the distance we have travelled since those dark days, and a lack of historicism that’s fairly widespread in tech culture generally. The dystopian singularity is another example of it.
How many businesses with hierarchical organizing structures fail? How many shite managers with too much power have you come across? In large companies how many of the workers actually do anything that’s useful? In my experience the larger and more hierarchical is an organization the more incoherent and wasteful it is, particularly with peoples time. You are making Stockholm Syndrome assumptions that are heavily influenced by perspective. If you think equality is what is producing mediocrity in our society you are not getting out much. Take a look at the Eurovision, the films funded by the IFB, the English soccer team, HP, Microsoft, latterly Apple and tell me that the mediocrity you see is the result of equality. When I hear people coming out with this stuff I can only assume they are mourning something else that’s been lost because they are way off the mark in their analysis of the ills produced by the so called surplus of democracy.
Pure pedantry. I think you know what we are talking about Mantissa, lines exist!
The cheese board was in fact the business I had in mind when I mentioned Berkeley co-ops. I don’t think Monarchies or the feudal system were an ideal anyone should strive for. Monarchies exist in many Western countries today and I prefer them to Presidents, that is just a personal preference for a minor ceremonial role.
The problem with capitalism is that it creates a heavily stratified society that is disconnected at a fundamental level from its lower class constituents. As a result this class of people can insulate themselves from the commons in a fashion even more divided than feudal society in which at least there was the concept of the noblesse-oblige. That is the argument of the neoreactionaires. I am lukewarm on the idea frankly, and consider it a reaction to the fact that the US has become a multicultural mess with no coherent sense of identity. Frankly I consider the current situation in Ireland to be significantly better than any of the neoreactionary ideals as Ireland despite its flaws is quite tribal and frequently people act out of these motivations.
I agree corporations are badly run, and I am not writing a critique of capitalism per se. Capitalism will weed out the dysfunctional ones e.g. how much longer will Microsoft exist? My deeper issue is the problem that all ideas and cultures are ‘equal’. This is alien to traditional Western thinking which was largely aligned with creating heaven on Earth. What exactly is the motivation behind the great religious structures and artworks? This was a struggle for a higher ideal that in modern society is lost. This struggle is in my view (backed up by most religions) the fundamental reason for existence the struggle for the sacred. Without the fundamental pillar that underlyed the entire civilisation, how can it survive?
A cursory read/google of the research cited in the second link (and the interpretation) and I’m seeing stuff that would stand up to scrutiny about as strongly as what was in ‘The Bell Curve’.
The most interesting thing about ‘The Bell Curve’ was the controversy it engendered.
Personally, I have no problem believing that human abilities are ultimately limited by genes, and that those genes are not distributed equally among people, or the among the populations of the earth. I worked that one out the first time I saw the Olympic 100m final.
Capitalism does not weed out anything, it socializes the costs of it’s failures, the result of the role money and elitism play in politics. Kings and queens will not change that, and elite capitalists (who the alt right and neoreactionaries think are the most ideal leadership class) certainly won’t change it because they think their activities are the highest order of human activity and should be cosseted. Think Fergal Quinn as the entrepreneurial savior of the Irish economy in the 1980’;s. We’ve already been though this and it’s ineffective. As for the struggle for the sacred, most people struggle to survive, pondering the sacred takes a full belly and some sense of security. Power exists, how it is distributed is a life and death question. Embracing dangerous ideas because they superficially relate to poetry is how fascism came about.