Author Topic: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin  (Read 1113 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Phantom Hoover

  • 211
  • Posts: 2,598
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
my father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate is the INCARNATE GOD OF HISTORY and he said dragon's talking out his arse
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • Posts: 6,689
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Since I've got no idea how serious any of you are (except you, PH, by this point I'm pretty sure you're either full of crap, adopted, or your parents' doctorate is in liberal arts :)), I'm not gonna address the four posts above.
All people are equal, just some people are more equal than others, eh? ;-)
What? No, by no means are all people equal. This idea is, in fact, much of the reason the world is headed into the dump. People are not equal. If you don't believe, take a walk on the street and talk to people, then visit the university, then have a chat with the local bum. If you're smart enough to see the distinction (pretty sure you are, unlike some others...), you will. I've been around people whose minds hardly reach further than those of animals and around those who reach further than the radius of observable universe. Humans span the whole spectrum, with smart generally doing better than the dumb. Moreover, intelligence is hereditary, not randomly distributed as some seem to believe. Dividing people is a logical consequence of people actually being different from each other, not oppression for its own sake.
You are ignoring the entire point about education. As said above, democracy requires a certain level of education and ability to reason and think for themselves in their citizens. Only then things can get better and progress.
I answered it earlier. You're giving an average citizen too much credit. It's not that they're not given the chance to be educated. It's that they can't. Their minds are simply too narrow to grasp complex concepts, which leads to information being oversimplified for their purpose. Not only that, they don't have the mental capacity to reasonably confirm what they heard is true, so they just take what they like better on an emotional level.
Quote
On the matter of "liberal autocracy" ... go read some literature from time periods where it actually existed. Like Voltaire for instance. You immediately get the impression that no argument, regardless of how logical or insightful, can stand on its own. Every argument that is presented is usually accompaigned by phrases like "As his majesty in his wisdom will surely agree with". So yeah ... progress can happen or not... at the whim of the autocrat. And if that autocrat or a successor is more interested in luxury and debauchery than progress and wisdom at some point then the whole nation is sh** out of luck. No matter how logical and strong the arguments. Wonderful Dragon World that would be. lol.
[...]
Might have something to do with the fact that science kinda works a little bit better when people have the freedom to think and express what they find and share it with the scientific community without having to make sure none of their findings upset the ruling caste and gets them locked up? Nah that would make too much sense wouldn't it?
I've read plenty of stuff from the period. Again, an autocrat doesn't have to restrict freedom to think. Monarchs of the time sponsored scientific institutions and scientists themselves. Democracy didn't start to take off in Europe until the beginning of 20th century. The fundamental discoveries of gravitation, celestial mechanics, atoms and the periodic table? All under kings.

Also, what happens in a democracy when the people start being more interested in debauchery and their petty conflicts than progress? Hint: look out of the window. That's what eating Europe. People take their own human rights for granted, so they instead focus on trying bring misery into the lives of people who are "not them". Do you really think the common people care about "progress" when they're being told (by utter humbugs, not that they know that) that Muslim hordes are invading their country? Go out on the street and present some logical pro-Arab arguments to the first islamophobe you meet. Just try not to get clobbered.
Quote
And if you really still don't get why one is better than the other yet... then you must never have wondered why there is such a huge discrepancy of progress, scientific and otherwise between western democratic nations where people are allowed to think and say what they want and nations where they are not. And for that ... personal freedom is kind of essential.
So... China is a pillar of personal liberty, right? And Japan is a liberal democracy with no caste system of any kind. The current economic and scientific discrepancy is fallout from WWII and Cold War, not anything inherent in government systems. And it's disappearing quickly. The Chinese are quickly outgrowing their stereotypical counterfeiting and are starting to make real technology. And even the USSR wasn't too far behind the US when it comes to technology itself, it merely had a different philosophy towards how technology should be deployed.
Quote
Your homework now would be to look for correlations of the speed of scientific and ecomonic progress in time periods / countries where democracies existed as opposed to when they did not exist.
Fun bonus fact: Coincidentially ... the entire scientific method only really came into it's own in democratic ancient Greece. Quite a "coincidence" huh?
Ancient Greece was democratic? We only call it that because they invented the word. Really, if it existed today we'd have called it an aristocracy ("rule of few", also a Greek concept). It was a system in which all citizens could vote. Now have a look at who was a "citizen" in ancient Athens (because that's where it comes from, not "Ancient Greece", which was not united when Athens were democratic). Citizens were effectively a military aristocracy, who ruled over a long list of people classified as non-citizens.

Most of foundations of modern science were laid during Enlightenment, under kings and emperors. Progress is faster now, but that's because the more we know, the more we can find out. The amount of scientific problems available for study grows pretty much exponentially with the amount of problems solved.
Quote
If you want to know why oppression or even just dedicated ruling castes that are "better" than their subkects are a bad idea do indeed read "Animal Farm" please.
Animal Farm was a jab at USSR (I've read it). It's about populist, ideologist leaders abandoning their ideology and their people for the sake of power. The pigs were never truly better, or smarter than anyone else. If your autocrat is not better than the subjects, you're certainly going nowhere, fast. You need someone who is better, preferably one who is good enough to know that being better than others is a responsibility (again, a tall order even among smart people, but there were rulers like that).

 

Offline Aesaar

  • 210
  • Posts: 1,254
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Since I've got no idea how serious any of you are (except you, PH, by this point I'm pretty sure you're either full of crap, adopted, or your parents' doctorate is in liberal arts :)), I'm not gonna address the four posts above.
I posted to mock you trying to insert someone else's credentials (not even yours, lol) so you could try to gain a little credibility, but nothing of what I wrote is a lie.  Your understanding of history is ****.

Quote
I've read plenty of stuff from the period. Again, an autocrat doesn't have to restrict freedom to think. Monarchs of the time sponsored scientific institutions and scientists themselves. Democracy didn't start to take off in Europe until the beginning of 20th century. The fundamental discoveries of gravitation, celestial mechanics, atoms and the periodic table? All under kings.
So were centuries of state-sanctioned religious intellectual repression.  So were countless wars motivated by ego and personal gain.  You don't get to talk up the good parts of autocracy while ignoring the incredibly bad parts that make it a terrible form of government. 

Sure, a benevolent dictatorship is nice, but the problem with all forms of autocracy is that you aren't guaranteed to get a benevolent dictator, and without the political freedom you so adamantly claim you don't need, you have no way to remove a bad ruler, and no way to stop him from taking your personal freedoms if he decides he doesn't like what you're saying about him.  This is what happens again, and again, and again.

The 20th century also represents the single most scientifically and technologically prolific period in the history of humanity, and that is not a coincidence.  Why is it that time and time again, the most prosperous periods in human history take place in regions where the government is accountable to its subjects in some significant capacity?

And democracy started taking off in Europe long before the 20th century.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2017, 07:32:47 pm by Aesaar »

 

Offline Phantom Hoover

  • 211
  • Posts: 2,598
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
(except you, PH, by this point I'm pretty sure you're either full of crap, adopted, or your parents' doctorate is in liberal arts :))

yes; you're sure that monarchies are the ideal form of government too and in both cases you are wrong to an unbelievably hilarious degree

i don't understand you dragon! when i don't know **** about a subject like e.g. the qualifications of someone else's family my natural reaction is not to start talking like i have certain knowledge about it but you seem to think the sensible thing to do is assemble the random scraps you've heard or have guessed and start throwing out half-baked rants which just make you look like a complete idiot to anyone with any knowledge of the subject in question!
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • Posts: 7,052
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Moreover, intelligence is hereditary, not randomly distributed as some seem to believe.
Citation ****ing needed.

 

Offline Phantom Hoover

  • 211
  • Posts: 2,598
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
well for instance my parents are both doctors and i have a master's in pure mathematics, whereas dragon's ancestors were inbred nobles and he's barely scraping his way through biophysics
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline BlueFlames

  • 29
  • Posts: 741
    • http://www.shatteredstar.org/ssx
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Citation ****ing needed.

He's not inherited one yet.

 

Offline 666maslo666

  • 28
  • Posts: 386
  • Artificial Neural Network
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Moreover, intelligence is hereditary, not randomly distributed as some seem to believe.
Citation ****ing needed.

Just google it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

There is some controversy but intelligence being mostly hereditary, especially in more developed countries where influence of environmental differences is less important, is a reasonable opinion to have.
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return." - Leonardo da Vinci

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • Global Moderator
  • 213
  • Posts: 12,503
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
What? No, by no means are all people equal. This idea is, in fact, much of the reason the world is headed into the dump. People are not equal. If you don't believe, take a walk on the street and talk to people, then visit the university, then have a chat with the local bum. If you're smart enough to see the distinction (pretty sure you are, unlike some others...), you will. I've been around people whose minds hardly reach further than those of animals and around those who reach further than the radius of observable universe. Humans span the whole spectrum, with smart generally doing better than the dumb. Moreover, intelligence is hereditary, not randomly distributed as some seem to believe. Dividing people is a logical consequence of people actually being different from each other, not oppression for its own sake.

No matter how strongly you believe that the circumstances of your birth make you superior to anyone, it's not going to become true anytime soon.

Quote
I answered it earlier. You're giving an average citizen too much credit. It's not that they're not given the chance to be educated. It's that they can't. Their minds are simply too narrow to grasp complex concepts, which leads to information being oversimplified for their purpose. Not only that, they don't have the mental capacity to reasonably confirm what they heard is true, so they just take what they like better on an emotional level.

You know that this is true of you too, right?

Quote
I've read plenty of stuff from the period. Again, an autocrat doesn't have to restrict freedom to think. Monarchs of the time sponsored scientific institutions and scientists themselves. Democracy didn't start to take off in Europe until the beginning of 20th century. The fundamental discoveries of gravitation, celestial mechanics, atoms and the periodic table? All under kings.

OMG you're actually serious about this, right?

Of course autocrats have to restrict the freedom to think. No autocrat, no matter how benign, can allow the people under his rule to think too hard about why he should rule and noone else. Yeah, sure, autocrats have funded science. But only the sciences that aren't immediately or obviously threatening to the autocracy (For example, it would not be possible to come up with the precursors to the Internet in an autocracy. A communication medium that is hard to monitor and censor is an obvious threat to any autocrat worthy of the title).

Quote
Also, what happens in a democracy when the people start being more interested in debauchery and their petty conflicts than progress0?

How ****ing old are you? The complaint that "People these days care not about the important things" is centuries old, probably as old as humanity itself. It has never been true.

Quote
So... China is a pillar of personal liberty, right?

China stopped being innovative a few thousand years ago, last I checked. They're still playing catch-up today, and it notably took a huge amount of liberalization to get where they are today.

Quote
And Japan is a liberal democracy with no caste system of any kind. The current economic and scientific discrepancy is fallout from WWII and Cold War, not anything inherent in government systems.

Prove it.

Quote
And it's disappearing quickly. The Chinese are quickly outgrowing their stereotypical counterfeiting and are starting to make real technology. And even the USSR wasn't too far behind the US when it comes to technology itself, it merely had a different philosophy towards how technology should be deployed.

So you're saying the USSR could be where the US is now if it wasn't for their system of government?

...Have you thought these arguments through?

Quote
Ancient Greece was democratic? We only call it that because they invented the word. Really, if it existed today we'd have called it an aristocracy ("rule of few", also a Greek concept). It was a system in which all citizens could vote. Now have a look at who was a "citizen" in ancient Athens (because that's where it comes from, not "Ancient Greece", which was not united when Athens were democratic). Citizens were effectively a military aristocracy, who ruled over a long list of people classified as non-citizens.

So? Democracy has to start somewhere, and last I checked, there is no country on Earth that has an unlimited franchise. People are routinely excluded from the vote due to age, criminal record, residency status and any number of other factors; that doesn't make those countries any less democratic. Democracy is a spectrum.

Quote
Most of foundations of modern science were laid during Enlightenment, under kings and emperors. Progress is faster now, but that's because the more we know, the more we can find out. The amount of scientific problems available for study grows pretty much exponentially with the amount of problems solved.

And guess what happened during the Enlightenment? This whole idea of the divine right of kings got put under a microscope and found wanting.

Quote
Animal Farm was a jab at USSR (I've read it). It's about populist, ideologist leaders abandoning their ideology and their people for the sake of power. The pigs were never truly better, or smarter than anyone else. If your autocrat is not better than the subjects, you're certainly going nowhere, fast. You need someone who is better, preferably one who is good enough to know that being better than others is a responsibility (again, a tall order even among smart people, but there were rulers like that).

Prove that you are better at ruling due to your genetic background. Your whole argument hinges on that, and so far, you haven't managed to make a convincing case for it.
**** every cause that ends in murder and children crying. ― Iain Banks
Join the fun at the HLP IRC channel. Get the latest spam and gossip as long as it's fresh!

 

Offline Aesaar

  • 210
  • Posts: 1,254
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
IMO, to ensure that the genetically superior are the ones in charge, we should prevent the genetically inferior from participating in the political process and prevent them from tainting the superior bloodlines.  Perhaps by placing them in special areas to centralise them?  They can be put to work on menial tasks and monitored to ensure they don't try to overthrow their betters.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 05:41:32 am by Aesaar »

 

Offline rubixcube

  • best username ever
  • 27
  • Posts: 243
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Claiming that inherited genetics have nothing to do with intelligence is foolish, yet it's also foolish to claim they're the only thing that determine your intelligence. Your 'smarts' are determined by a complex mixture of genes (inherited or not), environmental factors, life experiences etc.

It's the age old nature vs nurture argument that will probably never be fully resolved. The best analogy I've come across is by professor Gad Saad, which states humans are like cakes, with nature and nurture baked together and impossible to distinguish.
Stuff

 

Offline 666maslo666

  • 28
  • Posts: 386
  • Artificial Neural Network
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Claiming that inherited genetics have nothing to do with intelligence is foolish, yet it's also foolish to claim they're the only thing that determine your intelligence. Your 'smarts' are determined by a complex mixture of genes (inherited or not), environmental factors, life experiences etc.

I dont think Dragon claimed that it is all genetic. But there is some evidence that intelligence is roughly 75% nature and 25% nurture (with the caveat that this holds in more developed nations where environmental differences are relatively small, the importance of nurture may be much bigger in undeveloped countries where bad environment is a very important factor). So in light if this I would say that claiming "intelligence is hereditary" is merely imprecise rather than wrong. If we want to be precise, then: Intelligence is probably mostly hereditary.

That said, I disagree with Dragon on most other things. You see, politicians are already highly intelligent on average, because you have to be to succeed in democratic politics. And yes, that includes Trump, Obama, the left, the right, and almost everyone else in nation state level politics. We dont need more intelligent politicians. We need more loyal, uncorruptible, empathetic and honest ones. And if anything, democracy helps with that, even if it may not seem that way sometimes.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2017, 02:55:53 am by 666maslo666 »
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return." - Leonardo da Vinci

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

 

Offline Mikes

  • 29
  • Posts: 703
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Claiming that inherited genetics have nothing to do with intelligence is foolish, yet it's also foolish to claim they're the only thing that determine your intelligence. Your 'smarts' are determined by a complex mixture of genes (inherited or not), environmental factors, life experiences etc.

It's the age old nature vs nurture argument that will probably never be fully resolved. The best analogy I've come across is by professor Gad Saad, which states humans are like cakes, with nature and nurture baked together and impossible to distinguish.

My analogy would go along the lines of nature being different generations of Intel Core I processors ... with the software running on them being what you learned.

Now with our "software" basically writing itself through experience and learning I would strongly guess that the variance between "efficient software" and "spaghetti" code makes the minor differences in "hardware" rather meaningless.

That's what I see in class with my students every day anyways ... none of them is outright "too stupid" to have a grasp on basic math or anything else they need to have a successful career in their jobs ... what holds them back is usually a lack of focus, a lack of discipline, a lack of learning techniques, laziness, various other interests, booze, girls/boys, friends, drugs in bad cases ... in short, none of the factors that matter to me as a teacher , when dealing with my students, have anything to do with "genetics".

You could possibly argue that genetics may play a role where top end achievements (like good old Albert Einstein) is concerned ... but I see a strong case for the "genetic" part of intelligence (with the exception of outright disability/hereditary diseases) having zero relevance towards being successful at a regular job and being a responsible citizen. That's all education. Hence education's importance for politics.

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • Global Moderator
  • 213
  • Posts: 12,503
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
You could possibly argue that genetics may play a role where top end achievements (like good old Albert Einstein) is concerned ... but I see a strong case for the "genetic" part of intelligence (with the exception of outright disability/hereditary diseases) having zero relevance towards being successful at a regular job and being a responsible citizen. That's all education. Hence education's importance for politics.

The problem is that there is no way to measure the baseline capability of a human brain. Every test we have for intelligence tests for learned skills (and there is a lot of bias in them towards things people think smart people can do).
**** every cause that ends in murder and children crying. ― Iain Banks
Join the fun at the HLP IRC channel. Get the latest spam and gossip as long as it's fresh!

 

Offline -Joshua-

  • 210
  • Posts: 1,700
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
They are really usefull as a diagnostic tool for mental issues though. A kid that is tested as far smarter then those of his or her age yet performs very poorly at school might have dyslexia, for example.

But, yes: Bear in mind that IQ tests do not test for intelligence but for proficiency in IQ tests.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2017, 09:25:56 am by -Joshua- »

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
  • Posts: 473
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Quote
You see, politicians are already highly intelligent on average

I don't think so for the average politician. What I've seen politicians tend to be very capable and quick in understanding social structures and situations. But logical thinking is usually not their forte. Some of them are good in that too, but in a democracy, you get a cross-section of your nation at the helm. If you have been in a primary school or even better served in a conscript army, you'll have an idea how dumb the dumbest actually are.

Have you heard about the Prince what's-his-name of Britain who delivered the address in the radio at the advent of WWII (could have been WWI for all I remember)? It was among the first live addresses radioed to the nation, and the guy actually had a horrible stutter. He had to give the speech without any stutter to not appear weak or laughable, and I think that's not very easy thing to do. Do you think this kind of person would have any kind of chance in nowadays democracy to get elected in to power? For all I remember, this Prince did relatively well.

Since it is of some relevance to the topic, there was an elder of the village type system in Finland at place still in the early 1900s. This system basically gives all decision making power to one person (who could have got a couple of assistants if the village was big). Quite a bunch of Finns actually do not even know about this system, yet it's inherited from 1742. Now, my grand father was one of the last generation of elders, as had been my friend's grand father in the village I was born in. The history books of the time are remarkable in that the decision making was fast and there's very little negatives to be said about the justification of the decisions even by today's standards. The amount of corruption in the system is surprisingly small, while the elders were actually pursuing the common benefit quite effectively if the written history is to be trusted. I once got curious why that is, and my father replied think about it. You answer to all the people in the village, and if you piss even a small fraction of them off, tar and feathers is among nicer things they can do. This position of the elder of the village was not hereditary as far as I know, but it was based on a common vote.

Fast forward to nowaday, the point of the Western democracy is that it allows things to change without the actual revolution. Unfortunately, human nature being as it is, you'll get a lobbying mechanism(s) and governmental agencies built around the decision making system, leading to the feeling that if we wanted an actual change, the lobbying system would also need to be changed. But that's where the referendums end! So I don't think it is the democratic voting process that is the problem, the problem is the executive power getting diluted to several non-democratic entities. And that still isn't anything new, it has happened many times in history. You do not need a democracy for that to happen, aristocracies do that well too. The historical China getting suffocated by the governmental regulations is a good example.

I'm thinking each generation should sort experience their own struggle to understand the value and meaning of the democratic decision making process.
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • Posts: 6,689
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
The "village elder" is very good in cases where you have to run a small group of people. There, selection method is irrelevant (the pool of candidates is never big in first place) and generally, the scale tends to be small enough to grasp for everyone. You simply don't need any bureaucracy, you just get a particularly smart person from the group and let that person run things. Problems start when you outgrow the scale an average person can imagine. The "supreme leader" stops being someone you know and becomes a distant entity, while you can't simply discuss the matter of "who is the smartest of us" with everyone, since there are too many people around. Democracy in general was for a long time considered to be a solution that only works up to city-state size, and for a good reason. It wouldn't even be possible at larger scales until organized bureaucracy was "invented". Though to be fair, an autocracy needs bureaucratic structures to work, as well, the only system that doesn't is feudalism (in which you have multiple tiers of hereditary "village elders"). Notice that the transition never went "feudalism->democracy", but it usually was some variation on "feudalism->centralized monarchy->democracy". Monarchs built bureaucratic structures to consolidate their powers and take feudal lords out of the loop, then those structures were inherited by democratic governments which only had to expand them to account for their growth. I'm convinced that an attempt at direct transition from feudalism (thus without an established bureaucracy) would collapse into a mess of "manageable" subunits, unable to form a coherent state.
Of course autocrats have to restrict the freedom to think. No autocrat, no matter how benign, can allow the people under his rule to think too hard about why he should rule and noone else.
You're assuming one thing: that people thinking about why he should rule and not someone else wouldn't have found that reason. An autocrat who has to restrict freedom to think is one who, in the end, probably doesn't deserve his (or her) position and is only trying to hide it. Divine right was sufficient for a few centuries, but like all religious arguments, it was a flawed system (it worked until people started questioning religion, as well). An autocrat wishing to rule without this crutch has to be superior to his subjects. In the modern world, that would mean superior intellect, while in old times, it was often martial prowess.

Of course, the above applies only to thinking people. Unfortunately, unthinking people are a different problem. People too stupid to realize what it really takes to rule a country may still think they could do a better job (see Donald "I had no idea that being President was so hard" Trump). Many people dream of money and power, but most of them don't have what it takes to use either in a responsible manner. While "freedom to think" is a bit of a misnomer with those, it's better to rule this kind of people through "bread and circuses" and not oppression. Generally, they won't spontaneously organize (envy works "sideways", as well), so as long as thinking people are kept content with their ruler and unthinking ones are satisfied enough so that nobody who can think has to take pity on them, the system can stand without resorting to oppression.
Quote
So you're saying the USSR could be where the US is now if it wasn't for their system of government?
No. They could be where the US is now if it wasn't for them being Russians and not Americans. They think differently, they do things differently, they have different priorities. They do some things better (like optical glass or manned spaceflight) and do some things worse (like fashion or home appliances). Russia has actually surpassed the US in some areas, while lagging behind in others. Differences in system of government were more the result of those differences rather than the cause.
You could possibly argue that genetics may play a role where top end achievements (like good old Albert Einstein) is concerned ... but I see a strong case for the "genetic" part of intelligence (with the exception of outright disability/hereditary diseases) having zero relevance towards being successful at a regular job and being a responsible citizen. That's all education. Hence education's importance for politics.
The thing is, running a country is a top-end achievement. Everyone engaging in politics is in some way responsible for millions of people. I see allowing regular people to participate in politics as irresponsible, in light of that. I'd rather have my life in hands of one genious (or a handful of near-geniuses) than a few million cretins. Education alone is unable to bring them to that level, nor is it able to teach them responsibility (a whole lot of people can't even get their family life in order). Competence at a regular job is irrelevant here. What does a bricklayer or a grocer know about politics? It's not something that they need to worry about when doing their job. Poland had a stint with a shipyard electrician as a president. Competent electrician, good trade union leader, terrible president. Lech Wałęsa brought down communism, but what isn't so well known is that he then utterly bungled the transition and left Poland's considerable industry to be squandered away and sold off to foreign companies for pennies.
You see, politicians are already highly intelligent on average, because you have to be to succeed in democratic politics. And yes, that includes Trump, Obama, the left, the right, and almost everyone else in nation state level politics. We dont need more intelligent politicians. We need more loyal, uncorruptible, empathetic and honest ones. And if anything, democracy helps with that, even if it may not seem that way sometimes.
You, of all people, should understand that this is not the case. You're from friggin' Poland. :) No, you don't have to be intelligent to succeed in a democracy. You have to be sociable. A powerful personality and a knack for convincing people to follow you goes a lot longer way than intelligence does. Have you ever seen a shy, sheltered, highly intelligent person anywhere near power (excluding in hereditary monarchies)? Or someone with a physical deformity, but otherwise very bright? Being elected has little to do with being intelligent and everything to do with being personable. Most politicians are more intelligent than average (mostly because there are more personable people in the world than there are government seats), but they're rarely geniuses.
well for instance my parents are both doctors and i have a master's in pure mathematics, whereas dragon's ancestors were inbred nobles and he's barely scraping his way through biophysics
See? You did inherit their intelligence, intelligent parents don't have stupid children (boorish ones, on the other hand...). I'm not scraping my way through, BTW, biophysics suit me just fine (dunno where did you get that idea). If anything, they can be downright easy at times. TBH, despite you being a toxic jerk, I still have more respect for you than for most peons out there. You use your brain from time to time (even if it is just to come up with insults), which is more than can be said for the "common man". You may even say that you're one of the people who I have to thank for my disillusionment with democracy. :) After I realized that the likes of you are nonetheless worth more than an average "polite idiot", I could no longer argue in good faith for a system that gives the latter a say in politics.

 

Offline 666maslo666

  • 28
  • Posts: 386
  • Artificial Neural Network
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
You, of all people, should understand that this is not the case. You're from friggin' Poland. :) No, you don't have to be intelligent to succeed in a democracy. You have to be sociable. A powerful personality and a knack for convincing people to follow you goes a lot longer way than intelligence does. Have you ever seen a shy, sheltered, highly intelligent person anywhere near power (excluding in hereditary monarchies)? Or someone with a physical deformity, but otherwise very bright? Being elected has little to do with being intelligent and everything to do with being personable. Most politicians are more intelligent than average (mostly because there are more personable people in the world than there are government seats), but they're rarely geniuses.

Im from Slovakia actually. Not that our politicians are very different..

I wouldnt say main issue with our politicians is lack of intelligence. They are corrupt and loyal only to themselves, but they arent dumb, usually.

Geniuses are more likely to be personable, too. Of course there are many shy geniuses, or maybe geniuses who simply have better things to do than spend lots of time being social. But on average, I think this image of a socially awkward genius is a myth. To a certain degree, emotional and logical intelligence go hand in hand.

Anyway, I remain unconvinced that hereditary monarchy would lead to more intelligent rulers than democracy, in the long term.

What I would like to witness is an experiment in genuine geniocracy, tho. If intelligence is most important for ruling, then cut the BS and give power to those with highest IQ, most degrees..

But preferably in some other country first.  ;)



Honestly, I think importance of government system and government as a whole is way overrated. Sure, a really incompetent and oppressive government can do a lot of damage. But if the government is half-decent, then it doesnt matter whether it is a democracy or a enlightened dictatorship or hereditary monarchy, left or right, whatever. At that point, with government out of the way, the end result will be determined by the national character of the people, culture, etc.

And if there is one thing democracy does great it is to consistently keep the government at least tolerable. In the end, that may be even more important for success than being ruled by a bunch of geniuses.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 02:53:09 pm by 666maslo666 »
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return." - Leonardo da Vinci

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

 

Offline Mikes

  • 29
  • Posts: 703
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
What I would like to witness is an experiment in genuine geniocracy, tho. If intelligence is most important for ruling, then cut the BS and give power to those with highest IQ, most degrees..

But preferably in some other country first.  ;)

Ah yeah ... definitely in other countries far away first ... or rather not at all.

Your big assumption is that proficiency in IQ tests has anything to do with success in ruling a country.
And well that is a huge untested unproved assumption that you basically just made up.

Heck when you get down to it you can't even really define "success" ... is a country "successful" if it has a strong economy? Is it successful if it has an even stronger economy at the expense of living standards of individual people? How much economic success would make up for outright oppression? And if oppression is bad then how much economic success are you allowed to sacrifice for freedom? Is freedom or happyness of your population more important? WT* is happyness anyways and how do you measure it?

Is anything even objective as far as "success" goes or do different citizens define "successful government" in entirely different ways?

First... you can't even measure intelligence in an unbiased way, you can only measure proficiency at IQ tests. Then we have the huge trouble of defining "success". And then we haven't even begun to even discuss if intelligence is even the only or even most relevant trait. How does intelligence factor into responsibility, selflessness or selfishness for example?


Heck ... even if you had a hypothetical perfect "government simulator" that gave a completely acurate score on "government competency" ... it would still be a gigantic mistake to give the person with the highest score all the power, simply because you have no guarrantee that this person won't go full a**hole mode the moment he actually does wield *real* power.

So you got the smartest person with the best skills of running a country ... now how do you measure how much of an a**hole he WILL POTENTIALLY BE IN THE FUTURE?



At this point, we're beyond the question on whether this would work and have to begin admitting... that we have to try really hard to ignore all the solid clues as to why this would be a horrible idea and keep doing it regardless, because ... ???
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 05:03:39 pm by Mikes »

 

Offline WeatherOp

  • 29
  • Posts: 693
  • Always fixing something to fix something else.
    • http://www.geocities.com/weather_op/pageone.html?1113100476773
Re: Erdogan's Turkey goes Godwin
Sheash I'm glad Im stupid.
Decent Blacksmith, Master procrastinator.

PHD in the field of Almost Finishing Projects.