Come and see the wonderful future of anarcholiberalism
 

http://www.nrc.nl/international/Feat...of_Dutch_youth

I believe enough words have already been said on this forum about the topic, yet I still found it an interesting article to tie it with what has been going on with western society at the moment. I have expressed my concern of a quick return of autocratic elites and the deconstruction of man's liberties that our forefathers shed their blood to make possible. On the other hand, it is a fertile ground for populism and extremism, so danger lurks for our society(ies) in the near and far future.

Well if nothing else I learned a new word :salute:

This has been going on for decades. Nothing new from where I'm standing. Meh, blame the parents who can blame the teachers who can blame the Gore-isms who can blame the global warming who can blame..... that is all this world has come to....

I can't even boast that :hmmm:

This thread reminds me of something Chinese friend of mine once told me about he called a 5 generation Coolie rule.

It's been a long time since I heard the story but as I remember it went something like this:

The first generation Coolie, motivated to get out of the crushing poverty he was born into, carefully builds up his business. Eventually with enough hard work and luck he is able to turn it over to his eldest son (2nd generation).

This son, who also spends at least a good portion of his childhood in poverty as his father built up the family business knows the value of what has been passed on to him and he spends his life striving to grow and care for it so as to eventually pass it on in good shape to his son (3rd generation).

This 3rd generation Coolie however has been born into this wealth. As a result he never really learns to appreciate it like his father and grandfather did. Under his leadership the business stops growing and stagnates. He's more interested in pleasurable pursuits, content to leave the day to day running of the business to employees.

When his son (4th generation) eventually takes over the business the poverty and hard times experienced by the 1st and second generation are nothing but boring stories told by old men. Under his control the business crumbles through neglect. A mere shell that is eventually sold to cover debts run up by himself and his father.

By the time his son (5th generation) grows up the business is gone and he is forced back into the poverty his family escaped from 4 generations ago thus completing the cycle.

I can often see parallels between that story and modern western civilization.

Good story August and very telling of how society is going.

I remember reading in Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror where she talks about families becoming nobles. For whatever reason, on average they only stayed ennobled for about 200 years, either dying out or losing their noble status.

Yes, indeedy, family wealth can be fleeting. I once went to a college where there were lots of rich white kids playing hippie. That's not a lifestyle likely to prolong dynastic wealth.

So how do we instill such values into succeeding generations without exposing them to the hard times that build such drive and character?

An excellent question August. I myself was brought up in quite a shielded manner. Even though my parents barely made ends met (due to the ruling party preventing my father to work, and one of the reasons why I fight for man's liberties), I newer suffered from the lack of anything. At least, nothing necessary for good development. I had food, I had clothes, I always got new books and not used ones, my parents even helped me buy my first computer. Frankly, I lived a blessed life. Yet the values that were instilled in me were purely Protestant, even though my family isn't religious. I was always told to work hard, even though I would had wanted more time to have fun. Work first, other interests latter. Coupled together with the way I developed my view of the world from a completely rational point of view, I have realised the meaningless importance of many accessories of modern life.

I wrote this as I wanted to show that it is not necessary to be exposed to the hardships of life in order to behave as a good member of society, while still retaining all the liberties that our parent's struggles have given us. It is the family, the education system and society in general that must ensure that the future will not be made up from douche bags, searching only materials good and pleasure, while forgetting about those, who did not have the same chance to experience something similar.

Actually Respenus it sounds like you weren't as sheltered as you believe you were. As you note your parents were barely making ends meet. They provided for you but you weren't being coddled. That's vastly different than a person born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

I've read of a lot of doting young parents in the 1950s who grew up during the Depression who wanted their kids "To have the things they never had, and the education they never got." Reminds me of a favorite quote.

"Something given has no value"~Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers

On the subject of privileged vs hardworking, let me tell a little of my life. I'm one of those self-diagnosed borderline-Aspergers people i.e. mostly thick as sh!t but with a bizarre talent for maths. I grew up in poverty (and when I say "poverty" I don't mean "I sometimes had to make do without chocolate") but luckily for me the UK government was still paying for people's degrees when I turned 18, so off to Cambridge I went. Now although its true that Cambridge make offers based soley on ability and subject knowledge, it's also true that (a) money buys a good pre-university education and (b) the middle and upper classes tend to be more interested in sending their kids to Oxbridge anyway. Consequently, Cambridge turned out to be full of middle and upper class toffs. These were not the sort of kids that had ever had to go without dinner because daddy and the other miners were on strike. But that didn't seem to lower their drive/motivation. They were by far the most driven and competitive and hard working people I've ever known.

They are, to me, absolute proof that a (financially) difficult childhood is not required in order for someone to end up being a hard working individual.

@OLD

Hard-working does not equate in any way of being socially responsible. While I am not saying that they cannot exist in the same person, far from it, the children question in Denmark were hard-working as well. The problem as I see it is not in the amount of work invested into a certain "project", it is its social consequence which matters. Those children worked for themselves in order to get material goods and while some might say this would then trickle down to the poor, it is still negative if looked at it globally (read: comprehensive). They are the modern bankers, the financial "gods" at whose whimsical will we are all subjects. Now this is what is wrong. Couple money, individualism and no sense of rules and you get a combination capable of bringing down any society, no matter how strong or how minor such incidences are. I have more respect for the manual workers than for these fellows.

You're a Cambridge alumunus? Frak me! I had no idea, I just thought you were a really smart guy. My respect to you, sir:salute:

I almost hate to say it now, but I think you might be overlooking something (or at least you didn't mention it) when it comes to the drive for success, namely incentive.

Interesting how those rich toffs could be driven to strive for success, isn't it? They already had everything they needed and yet they wanted more. Why do you suppose that is? I'd offer my opinion but I'd like to get that of a Cambridge scholar first. Please?

Assuming you're sincere: thank you :) but I probably don't deserve that much respect seeing as I was the "wooden spoon" in my year. But I did pass my degree and I'm proud that I managed to even get in.

My answer to your question: parents. And to be honest, not necessarily good ones IMO. I think there's an "ideal" middle ground between raising kids who are lazy and raising kids who have a "not good enough" complex. I'm curious to know whether that's what you think or not...

I was responding mainly to what August was saying... what you are saying is going over my head a bit. I will read the article again, I admit I just skimmed the first half of it last night cos I was tired.

Trust me, I am very sincere on this, wooden spoon be damned! It is a priviledge to talk to a person who survived the crucible of such a reputable institution. I have so many questions!

Please understand, I've never really had the chance to attend a school of repute. I am mostly self-taught. I spent less than a semester at the University of North Texas before I became disgusted by the curriculum and quit.

I'm a little baffled by your answer, though. Parents? That's it? What makes a "middle ground"? And more importantly, what psychological and biological mechanisms dictate the actions of parents? I know that this kind of topic may not be your specialty, but I'd appreciate a thorough evaluation, if it wouldn't be too much trouble. You have no idea what your opinion means to me as a contextual basis for my own.

Er... you're freaking me out a bit. ;)

Thorough evaluation? Eek.

Yeah, there are other factors, that goes without saying. What psychological and biological factors dictate the actions of parents? Christ... do you expect me to produce some sort of all-encompassing thesis on human nature? Sorry, but I can't. What's more I don't have kids yet, but I plan to within the next few years and this question is troubling me as well: how do I get that middle ground? Seems to me there's a lot of middle-grounds to try to reach in order to be a good parent and I've not really got the slightest clue how to make sure I don't raise "unbalanced" kids.

It might help me if you narrow-down your question a bit. As it stands I feel like I'm being asked the meaning of life, the universe, and everything. To give what answer I can (an expansion of my original answer) it seemed to me that many (not all) of the kids I met were motivated to succeed in order to gain a sense of worth. Seems to me that the sense of worth of an individual - up to a certain (and not exact) age - is primarily based on their perception of what their family (and their parents in particular) think of them. I've got no "proof" of that, it's just my opinion based on nothing in particular.

I think the answer frankly is balancing out all the sides. Don't spoil them, yet don't starve them either. Give them lots of love, but also lots of discipline. If they want something, make them earn it.

Frankly I think kids today are coddled and spoiled way to much, and utterly lack in discipline. I also think daycare and both parents working is problematic as well. I feel this is what is creating people who only care about themselves, and feel entitled to everything, since many of them have been given what ever they wanted, for no effort on their part.

Look at the stuff kids are running around with today: blackberries, iPods, iPhones, etc. I love watching them in class and on the bus furiously texting each other, like what they are doing is the most important thing in the entire universe. My mom likes to call them the "me and more" generation, its all about me, and me wants more more more (doesn't matter what just as long as it is more).

Sure these kids can be goal driven, but their drive stems entirely from pure greed. Which I think has been brought on by a society of rampant consumerism. We have been bombarded by advertising, telling us we need to buy all of this crap, and people are doing just that.


Btw the answer to the meaning of life, the universe, and everything is 42 :DL

Totally understandable. Sorry for creeping you out. It isn't every day I get to ask real academics for their opinions.