I love when people say "I want things based on merit" and then describe a merit function that just equates to "having the right parents".

In the view you just described being born with a billion dollars is merit that deserves proper rewarding.

An actual fair meritocratic system requires, not just suggests, that everybody have similar access to opportunities, or it isn't based on individual merit at all.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jan 6 2024 11:27am

ny banning busses?

when there is a kabob shop on every corner of your so called 'white' European nation.

You have to go hmmm

There will never be a society in which the privileged classes accept a situation where their own children don't have a leg up on the children of the plebs. I also don't see a reason why luck in the "birth lottery" should be treated different from luck in the "genetic lottery" (being born with tremendous beauty, physical ability or intelligence). So unless you want a society which forcibly levels any kind of starting advantage anyone is born into, I don't see why having the right parents should be singled out. Particularly since having the right parents doesn't just mean rich or powerful parents, it also includes parents with the right kind of values who raise their children to be disciplined, hard-working, well-behaved and productive members of society.

What I will give you is that social mobility has decreased to a dangerously low level in recent decades, so yes, we also cannot allow social classes to become too entrenched either. Still doesn't automatically imply that a successful person didn't work hard and earn his place in society just because he comes from an upper middle class background.

We will never have a perfectly equal society in terms of starting points, but the kind of argument that's being made is that there should be no consideration for how far you've come.

Bogie has literally argued with me that if you are born rich and are against a person with equal stats and performance who was born extremely poor, that the rich person should be preferred because he likely has better social connections.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jan 6 2024 05:59pm

Only one kebab shop per street? Lol, do you even migration?

Okay, I didn't follow that discussion... IF he really said that, it's bullshit. However, I also have difficulties accepting the idea that we should prefer the person with outright lower merit if only he/she has come from substantially "further down". Not just because it dilutes the meritocratic principle, but also because it runs the risk of lowering the overall performance level of society.

The best solution, imho, is for society to invest enough in schools and social programs as well as opportunity programs that anyone bright, no matter from where he starts, has a realistic chance at climbing far up the social ladder if only he works hard enough and has the talent. That a ghetto kid with addict parents won't be able to move all the way up into the highest echelons of high society within one (or even two) generations is imho acceptable, just like it is acceptable that avage folks from a privileged background might edge out slightly above-average folks from an underprivileged background.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jan 6 2024 07:16pm

Are both of you actually unaware of how dangerous cities in America have become? I'm not talking about America but specifically inner city violence. One of my favourite stats is when you take out like 12 cities, America has the same amount of gun crime as Switzerland. You can call the ME a shithole but it's not like we're any better at this point.

This link is comparing crime stats between Iran and the us:

https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Iran/United-States/Crime

Oddly enough, Israel is like 75% Caucasian and nobody bats a eyelash.

And what have we here?
Either there's two people claiming the same post as their own, or....