Menzo
4901
That feels like a troll to me, or someone being sarcastic. If not, he should definitely be fired. At minimum he should be pointed at and laughed at.
Well, if you dare stray away from the left-leaning media, you get exposure to a different perspective from places like the Wall Street Journal and National Review and aggregators like Drudge Report. As a bonus, you’ll get fewer stories on the most fundamental problems our society faces: the availability of free contraceptives and people getting paid too much for services that are valued.
Apologies if I was supposed to post a trigger warning with that suggestion.
Timex
4903
OK, I did some digging, and apparently this is being covered by right wing sources… Ultimately, based upon this article by ABC.
So, when taken in the context of the actual interview, it’s not quite as bad, as it’s more of a philosophical discussion about inequality and how various things contribute to it.
He actually says eventually that he wouldn’t suggest stopping parents from reading to their children, but he would stop them from doing things like sending them to elite private schools.
Ultimately though, i think its indicative of a perspective that i think is problematic. Ultimately, Smith sees a problem with actions that improve someone’s chances in life, because if other people don’t do those things, then they will be less successful, and thus you will have inequality.
But you can’t prevent inequality. Indeed, I don’t even want to try to prevent it. Inequality is good, in that it’s what rewards action. Without inequality, there is no reason to do anything, because nothing you do can impact you positively or negatively.
We should never try to prevent people from doing things that make them or their families successful.
Instead, we should exert that effort to try and make everyone do those beneficial things. We shouldn’t try to drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator.
You can’t for grownups. You can however give all children equal opportunities if you want to structure society that way.
Timex
4905
But the way to do that isn’t to PREVENT people from trying to give their children advantages. You can’t improve anyone’s lot by lowering everyone to the lowest common denominator.
Preventing parents from reading to their kids won’t make other kids smarter. It will only make the kids whose parents would otherwise have read to them stupider.
Creating equality by making everyone as weak and stupid as the weakest and stupidest person alive does not actually benefit society, because that person isn’t going to be able to advance society.
Wait, shut up, Desslock found himself some outrage media and turned it into a narrative about the decline of Western culture?
Quelle, as they say, surprise.
Yes you can. If the common denominator is raised adequately as part of the same effort.
Timex
4908
It is not beneficial to make people worse, just so they aren’t better than others.
Doing that has achieved nothing of value at all, and diminished the human race.
You must have read Harrison Bergeron and thought it described an idyllic utopia.
Interesting read. What do you suppose could be so damning on that hacked hard drive?
Referencing a single point towards the end of the piece, barely even related to the title of the post, smacks of someone just trying to get people to read the whole tired screed.
Save yourselves the click, there is nothing new, noteworthy or relevatory at that link. Someone just trying to get click revenue.
While i do appreciate all the effort at distracting me from working today, really while I do have opinions about all sorts of topics, maybe unexpected (topics or opinions?), a lot of this really is pretty minor stuff. It’s sort of ‘weather-vane’ journalism since in the example posted the university or higher level organization reversed the initial decision. I’m still going to wake up tomorrow - at least, if i manage to actually go to to sleep this week - and the world isn’t going to change overnight. If you go looking for things to get angry about the internet is happy to help you find them. I’m pretty sure that’s why Twitter exists in the first place.
flyinj
4914
GG is now claiming ZQ doxxed and attempted to swat the lawyer guy? The guy who had her followed by a private investigator? Hoo boy.
Of all the “proven” doxxing that GG has trotted out, the only one that seemed to have actually occurred was Brad Wardell. And that had absolutely nothing to do with GamerGate, it happened years previously by some deranged guy on a forum who was immediately banned.
And seeing how we’re now just speculating, given that banned guy’s behavior, I bet he is now a hardcore GamerGater, doxxing happily away with GG cheering him on.
After trying to read through that incoherent cesspool of an article, I’m tempted to repost that gif. It’s managed to unite flyingj and me in a marvel/dc team-up.
Misery porn like Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead are some of the most popular shows on television.
I get what magnet is talking about. If you’re too proximate to a depiction of suffering or it blurs into real disgust (and not just titillation) you’re probably not going to like it anymore. Yet it can stop functioning aesthetically and still do its ‘work.’
I’m not suggesting making people worse, I’m suggesting making everyone better.
Timex
4919
Then I think you missed some of what I said.
The solution is not to prevent people from doing anything in their power to give their child the best possible chance… Parents should be maximally invested in their child’s future. And if some aren’t, the issue is not those who are… the issue is those who aren’t. THEY are the ones who need to change their behavior.
Nope. I think you are framing my statements inside your assumptions. I never said anything about preventing parents from doing anything. I was just talking very generically about equality of opportunity.
People have a natural desire to strive for improvement in their own circumstances and the circumstances of their family. At a micro focus, just looking at individuals and families, this is a good thing. At a macro level, looking at whole societies and how they develop over time, this leads to inequality and aristocracy. Very well meaning people will seek advantage and seek to structurally codify that advantage in the written or unwritten rules of society to benefit their children even if that’s to the detriment of society as a whole.
Society needs to take as many of these things as possible out of the hands of parents if they want every generation to have equality of opportunity.
