2
32

[–] DukeofAnarchy 2 points 32 points (+34|-2) ago 

East Germany : West Germany

South Korea : North Korea

1980s China : 1980s Hong Kong

Chile under Allende : Chile under Pinochet

Russia under Yeltsin : Russia under Putin

0
19

[–] 8888597? 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago 

Exactly. There are systems that can completely disable the most productive and intelligent members. You could have a nation full of geniuses but if they are held at gunpoint to act a certain way they will still fail like anyone else.

0
7

[–] 1HepCat 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Socialism is forcing the smartest, most diligent kids in the classroom to give most of their points to everyone else. Before long, the smart kids learn they get a poor grade no matter what so they either reduce their effort to the minimum needed to pass or convince their parents to put them in a rational class.

0
15

[–] TAThatBoomerang [S] 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

Yes, very true. I don't 100% agree with anon, but he raised a good point in that we can't only focus on the economic / political structure. The quality of individuals is of equal, or perhaps higher, importance.

0
5

[–] HungryCrow 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Thank god this the top comment.

I'd rather live in an Asian capitalist society than a White socialist society.

0
13

[–] 8888689? 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

I can have a farm with the highest quality plants, but if I mis-manage them, it will fall apart.

I could take a healthy bodybuilder with awesome genetics and give him a shit system and he'll get fat eventually.

I can take hard working people and put them in a shit system and turn them criminals.

Anon is wrong. The system matters more.

0
12

[–] 1True_Morty 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

Every single example you gave depends entirely on a person being useless and/or selfish.

The farm would fail because of a person being a worthless farmer.

The body builder would get fat eventually because of a person being a worthless personal trainer.

As for your third example, are you aware that Australia used to be a penal colony of England?

0
1

[–] 8892360? 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

You can take the richest person the world and have him copy the spending habits of a broke person and they will end up broke.

It doesn't matter how good the farmer is. In a debt based farm that requires more inputs than it produces, he will go broke.

Same for a bodybuilder eating shit food and a poor lifting program, regardless of genetics. If it's a worthless personal trainer, that's merely a statement upon the failing system, not the organisms within the system.

"Shit system" = takes more money than it produces, enforced rules through threat of violence. The fact that Australia was a penal colony of England doesn't nullify my point about production and sustainability of the system.

Spez: I have to expand more on the farming. It doesn't matter how hardworking the farmer is if his farm is set up to require more work than what it produces. It is the system. Our current agriculture system is a shining example. Take away government subsidies and tell me which farm would stay in the black. I can be generous and say we keep oil and power subsidies. That doesn't stop the fact that the labor force is destroyed from immigration and minimum wage increases, then also regulatory bodies reducing efficiency (Now need 5 people to accomplish the work of 4 because of extra paperwork). Labor is by far the largest expenditure on a farm and only a very solid system will keep a farm profitable.

0
0

[–] DependasaurusRex 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Whynotboth.jpeg

0
7

[–] drakesdoom 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

More freedom and less government intervention promotes productive people. It sets up a cycle where by being economically sound on the individual level leads to success. Most people will try to copy those that they see as successful.

5
-4

0
4

[–] ShinyVoater 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Anon here isn't quite right: the success of a nation depends on both the quality of government and the quality of its people. To illustrate, I'm going to take anon's tool analogy and turn it on its head so that the nation is the tools and the government is the wielder:

A shit nation would be the equivalent of a small set rusted to hell and gone; a great craftsman might be able to accomplish more than the average person, but there's only so much that can be done. A great nation would be the equivalent of a large set of perfectly maintained tools; for all the feats your average person could perform, a fool will still destroy them with ease.

However, anon is partially right that the means are irrelevant: a simple monkey-see monkey-do approach will never help the lowest reach their potential. To use the class project example, the highest scorers could split their project so that the graphic design is 100% separate from the writing is 100% separate from the research, whereas the lowest performers might be better off if they split the research equally and had the graphic design and writing handled by the same person instead.

So the ultimate question isn't "what is the quality of our nation?", but "how do we best put that quality to use?" - though to answer the latter you must first answer the former.

0
4

[–] 8889452? 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

This is why philosophy and morality are critical. It doesn't matter if the society is capitalist of communist of the people are all nihilists. They will see meaning in nothing and won't care if the government, or the corporations, overreach and start infringing upon their liberties. If people cannot think critically they will not know what to question, and therefore they will not know what to fight.

Of course the system that is in place will determine what freedoms the people have and how capable they will be of exercising freedom of speech, open discourse, protest, and rebellion. But the system in place will largely be a function of the minds of the populace. To allow a society to reach a point where a ruling class can instill the leaders they like whenever they like, where the ruling class can make a society more socialist or more corporatist as they see fit...that requires a complacent (non-critical thinking) populace. Anon is not wrong in his analysis.

0
3

[–] Ifaptocomments 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Ah yes the age old argument of nature vs nurture (ok probably not that old maybe 200 years). Is the the nature of the people who create a great country or how the country nurtures and utilizes the populace. Probably both, certainly the degeneracy of people who mindlessly consume pop culture and jewish media are not helping the problem.

0
0

[–] armday2day 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Who came first. The chicken or the egg? Its a loop.

0
3

[–] middle_path 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

A Canada poster making sense? No, it can't be.

0
1

[–] 8889417? 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

We're not all deluded cucks.

0
1

[–] lude 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

My first thought

0
2

[–] UKD 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The system shapes the gene pool, and the gene pool shapes the system, in a feedback loop.

load more comments ▼ (5 remaining)