(For Americans) What the gun debate looks like in Europe

[TheoK]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes. 

[The_Chosen_One]

Name one anarchy that has actually worked and has been able to trade with any other country successfully. Bet you can't, becuase once the leaders have been done away with, and the citizens take over, none of them can make a collective decision to save themselves. However much you hate politicians, they are a necessary evil to stop everything from going arse up.

[TheoK]

I could accept a society, but not that "fucking holier-than-thou and" "I am God" attitude. The average Swedish politician is considerably more stupid than I am, so I don't accept being treated as a retarded child by those cowards and arseholes.

[The_Chosen_One]

I could accept a society, but not that "fucking holier-than-thou and" "I am God" attitude. The average Swedish politician is considerably more stupid than I am, so I don't accept being treated as a retarded child by those cowards and arseholes.

But short of revolution (which won't work because everyone would be running around like headless chooks) there is nothing you can do about it except front up at the polls next election and vote for someone else. Everyone else all over the world has to cop shitty politicians as well, so there is no point complaining.

[Christopher McCandless]

It still would depend on who you know and whose ass you'd kiss just to be picked to be in such a system.

Not at all - applications are done blind and anyone caught cheating (not that many could) immediately finds themselves on the bottom rung. My meritocractic system counts integrity as a form of merit, you see.

yeah but who decides who the decision makers will be?

The system, using a due meritocratic process which is designed to have a high probability of picking such people. Similar to the current order, where the system decides. The difference is that this system is a lot fairer and picks candidates for the right qualities.

so then who designs and maintains the system?

Those designing and maintaining it would also control it
[/quote]
Same as the current system then. I never remember signing up to it.

[Christopher McCandless]

I got two papers with mistakes on them - absolutely ridiculous for a maths exam. Which would be less of a problem, if
they published their actual marking procedures.

Got extra time (25%) this year - though didn't claim it last year because I didn't trust them to adhere to the basic data
protection laws (which they have flouted on several occasions). Though in all honesty they are not enough, next year I
am going to insist onwell defined marking criteria published in advance, as well as having what I need to know being well defined. Should ensure I get a first.

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

Not at all, in a meritocracy we include the right to leave on reasonable terms. You will notice that the only thing which comes close to a meritocracy, Singapore works rather well. People can leave, but choose not to.

So who would make all these informed decisions people who agreed with you?  Because it seems people who don't are just the 99% who say are too stupid. Make me want to go out and get some guns in case it ever comes to that

Qualified people who actually know something about the decisions they make whilst making the best decision. The people are allowed to produce a general document (by demarchy and referendum) every 5 years which provides a set of objectives for the meritocratic decision makers. The irony here is that they have a lot more power than in a democracy.

Like the Staff and Faculty of your University?

Its only the senior management I have issue with, who have gotten a position by being related to royalty or else been promoted out the classroom for sheer incompetence. Under a meritocracy most of my universities problems would go away for the simple reason no-one could buy their way in there or get promoted by sucking up to people.

[Parts]

It still would depend on who you know and whose ass you'd kiss just to be picked to be in such a system.

Not at all - applications are done blind and anyone caught cheating (not that many could) immediately finds themselves on the bottom rung. My meritocractic system counts integrity as a form of merit, you see.

yeah but who decides who the decision makers will be?

The system, using a due meritocratic process which is designed to have a high probability of picking such people. Similar to the current order, where the system decides. The difference is that this system is a lot fairer and picks candidates for the right qualities.

so then who designs and maintains the system?

Those designing and maintaining it would also control it

Same as the current system then. I never remember signing up to it.
[/quote]

So how are you a revolutionary then

[Christopher McCandless]

It still would depend on who you know and whose ass you'd kiss just to be picked to be in such a system.

Not at all - applications are done blind and anyone caught cheating (not that many could) immediately finds themselves on the bottom rung. My meritocractic system counts integrity as a form of merit, you see.

yeah but who decides who the decision makers will be?

The system, using a due meritocratic process which is designed to have a high probability of picking such people. Similar to the current order, where the system decides. The difference is that this system is a lot fairer and picks candidates for the right qualities.

so then who designs and maintains the system?

Those designing and maintaining it would also control it

Same as the current system then. I never remember signing up to it.

So how are you a revolutionary then
[/quote]
I want to replace the current social order, which is based nepotism and cronyism, with one where people are rewarded for using their talents whilst not being held back arbitrarily for their difficulties.  Social meritocracy at its purest.

[Christopher McCandless]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes. 

They are right - ordinary people cannot be trusted, including politicians. It should be the bright, clever and imaginative people whom should be in charge. Politicians in most cases are merely ordinary people who have ended up being put into an extraordinary office.

[TheoK]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes. 

They are right - ordinary people cannot be trusted, including politicians. It should be the bright, clever and imaginative people whom should be in charge. Politicians in most cases are merely ordinary people who have ended up being put into an extraordinary office.

But the politicians in charge are like ordinary people; it's not meritocracy.

[The_Chosen_One]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes. 

They are right - ordinary people cannot be trusted, including politicians. It should be the bright, clever and imaginative people whom should be in charge. Politicians in most cases are merely ordinary people who have ended up being put into an extraordinary office.

Such as yourself, I take it..... Where's that flying pink elephant when you need it.

[Blasted]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes. 

They are right - ordinary people cannot be trusted, including politicians. It should be the bright, clever and imaginative people whom should be in charge. Politicians in most cases are merely ordinary people who have ended up being put into an extraordinary office.

Like you? 

Edit: TCO you read my mind.

[The_Chosen_One]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes. 

They are right - ordinary people cannot be trusted, including politicians. It should be the bright, clever and imaginative people whom should be in charge. Politicians in most cases are merely ordinary people who have ended up being put into an extraordinary office.

Like you? 

Edit: TCO you read my mind.

Great minds think alike... 

[Christopher McCandless]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes. 

They are right - ordinary people cannot be trusted, including politicians. It should be the bright, clever and imaginative people whom should be in charge. Politicians in most cases are merely ordinary people who have ended up being put into an extraordinary office.

Such as yourself, I take it..... Where's that flying pink elephant when you need it.

Obviously including myself.

[The_Chosen_One]

So when I state that I don't trust the government with my personal information or to run my life you state that I am too stupid to know what is best for me.  But when your own data is at stake with those who know best at your Uni it's a different story is it? Hypocrite POS.

That's actually the way politicians here usually "argue": "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with guns", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with drugs", "'Ordinary people' can't be trusted with this and that"...and the outrageous thing is that most people accept this attitude from those arseholes.  

They are right - ordinary people cannot be trusted, including politicians. It should be the bright, clever and imaginative people whom should be in charge. Politicians in most cases are merely ordinary people who have ended up being put into an extraordinary office.

Such as yourself, I take it..... Where's that flying pink elephant when you need it.

Obviously including myself.

Given some of the crap you've written on your 'theories' about how the world should be run, I'd say your far from being the sharpest knife in the drawer. We all know that politicians are fuckwits, but even you should know that any -ocracy you repalced the system with would be worse than the one we have. Take the mess socialism made out of Russia, and the mess fascism made out of Germany - neither worked and was doomed to fail from the start. If you want change, either form a party and run for election, or stop whining and do what YOU can to make your life a bit happier. Cos until you wake up, smell the coffee and realise that all your talk on revolution and meritocracies being the way to go, and an end to a nightmare being just a pipedream, then you'll just keep running around in circles, like a headless chook.