Come and see the wonderful future of anarcholiberalism

[Respenus]

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.

[SteamWake]

Well if nothing else I learned a new word

[AVGWarhawk]

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....

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Well if nothing else I learned a new word

I can't even boast that

[August]

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.

[AVGWarhawk]

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

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Originally Posted by August

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.

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.

[August]

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

[Respenus]

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.

[August]

Originally Posted by Respenus

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.

[Torplexed]

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

[onelifecrisis]

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.

[Respenus]

@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.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by onelifecrisis

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.

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

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?

[onelifecrisis]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

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

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...