5 ms·

> Have you really opened your eyes to how some countries have much, much better governing systems? Many Scandinavian countries have a higher population than mos

> Have you really opened your eyes to how some countries have much, much better governing systems? Many Scandinavian countries have a higher population than most US states, yet somehow they seem to function better in so many dimensions. So if you're comparing a government the size of a US state to the US federal government, and saying the states do better, yeah, sure, but it's not a fair comparison. You can find US states that do better than the US as a whole, too. A much better comparison is the EU. The US is the geographical size that is almost twice the Roman Empire (9 million km^2 for the US, 5 million km^2 for the Roman Empire), with widely varying climates and therefore economies, and a diverse set of cultures. To suggest that the solutions for a Scandinavian country (relatively homogeneous culture and climate, population roughly the size of a major US city) is unhelpful. It's easy to say "these other people with a completely different history, geography, culture, and population" do it so much better, but it's just not helpful. Let me know hen you figure out how to apply Scandinavia or NZ to New York, the South, Utah, California, rural Iowa, and Alaska, and you can figure out a way to convince everyone it's in their best interests.

CRConrad 6y ago
I don't get this constant harping on size whenever it is pointed out how America sucks. “Oooh, it's so hard to govern a country this size!” Why?!? Sure, there's more to govern — but in exactly equal measure, there are also more resources to do it with! Everybody stop dragging up size as an excuse, please. It's a stupid cop-out.
ashtonkem 6y ago
I think you have missed the point. GP’s argument wasn’t that the Scandinavian model is better, they were instead forcefully rejecting the idea that everyone is as bad or worse than America. It is very common for liberals to point at Scandinavia as the ideal model, but that is not core at all to their argument. Furthermore, while you might have a point about the geographic size of the US, as an individual it’s not clear why I should care. Living under corruption sucks, regardless of the root cause. The size of ones nation doesn’t really provide a lot of psychological protection against country specific negative experiences.
- zepto 6y ago
  GP said: “Have you really opened your eyes to how some countries have much, much better governing systems?” You said: “GP’s argument wasn’t that the Scandinavian model is better” Are you trying to gaslight the parent?
  - ashtonkem 6y ago
    The definition of “gaslight” is not “I disagree with that”. Read more carefully and then respond substantively or don’t bother to respond at all.
    - zepto 6y ago
      Gaslighting is about undermining someone’s perception of what is going on, and then using that to manipulate them. Telling the parent that the GP is not making an argument that they are plainly making, looks like an attempt at gaslighting. I did read what you said. It would be valid if the GP hadn’t written what I quoted. The parent was responding reasonably to what was written, and you seemed to be trying to persuade them that the GP had made a different argument to the one they actually did, by denying the presence of the quoted section.
      - ashtonkem 6y ago
        The need to turn differences in reading and opinion into a no holds barred psychological fight is genuinely toxic. You and I have read the same post differently, and your attempt to villainize me as a gasligther is not something that should be accepted in polite conversation. Knock it off. Furthermore, if you're going to accuse someone of gaslighting, then do everyone the favor of actually paraphrasing their arguments correctly. It is deeply hypocritical to run around accusing others of gaslighting while misrepresenting their arguments. > You said: “GP’s argument wasn’t that the Scandinavian model is better” What I actually said is that their main argument is that other countries are plainly run better. You can tell because that's their first sentence. Yes, they point to Scandanavian countries as an example, but their core argument is that "the US is more poorly run than other countries". Furthermore, you can tell that their core argument isn't about Scandanavia, because they spend most of their post talking about New Zealand. If their core argument was about how great Scandanavia is, then they probably wouldn't have spent their entire post talking about New Zealand, now would they?

CRConrad 6y ago

I don't get this constant harping on size whenever it is pointed out how America sucks. “Oooh, it's so hard to govern a country this size!” Why?!? Sure, there's more to govern — but in exactly equal measure, there are also more resources to do it with! Everybody stop dragging up size as an excuse, please. It's a stupid cop-out.

ashtonkem 6y ago

I think you have missed the point. GP’s argument wasn’t that the Scandinavian model is better, they were instead forcefully rejecting the idea that everyone is as bad or worse than America. It is very common for liberals to point at Scandinavia as the ideal model, but that is not core at all to their argument. Furthermore, while you might have a point about the geographic size of the US, as an individual it’s not clear why I should care. Living under corruption sucks, regardless of the root cause. The size of ones nation doesn’t really provide a lot of psychological protection against country specific negative experiences.

zepto 6y ago
GP said: “Have you really opened your eyes to how some countries have much, much better governing systems?” You said: “GP’s argument wasn’t that the Scandinavian model is better” Are you trying to gaslight the parent?
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  The definition of “gaslight” is not “I disagree with that”. Read more carefully and then respond substantively or don’t bother to respond at all.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Gaslighting is about undermining someone’s perception of what is going on, and then using that to manipulate them. Telling the parent that the GP is not making an argument that they are plainly making, looks like an attempt at gaslighting. I did read what you said. It would be valid if the GP hadn’t written what I quoted. The parent was responding reasonably to what was written, and you seemed to be trying to persuade them that the GP had made a different argument to the one they actually did, by denying the presence of the quoted section.
    - ashtonkem 6y ago
      The need to turn differences in reading and opinion into a no holds barred psychological fight is genuinely toxic. You and I have read the same post differently, and your attempt to villainize me as a gasligther is not something that should be accepted in polite conversation. Knock it off. Furthermore, if you're going to accuse someone of gaslighting, then do everyone the favor of actually paraphrasing their arguments correctly. It is deeply hypocritical to run around accusing others of gaslighting while misrepresenting their arguments. > You said: “GP’s argument wasn’t that the Scandinavian model is better” What I actually said is that their main argument is that other countries are plainly run better. You can tell because that's their first sentence. Yes, they point to Scandanavian countries as an example, but their core argument is that "the US is more poorly run than other countries". Furthermore, you can tell that their core argument isn't about Scandanavia, because they spend most of their post talking about New Zealand. If their core argument was about how great Scandanavia is, then they probably wouldn't have spent their entire post talking about New Zealand, now would they?