6 ms·

Inequality works pretty well, until it doesn’t. The system is build to fail. Part of the reason we get along so famously here in Scandinavia, and why we share

by moksly 5y ago

Inequality works pretty well, until it doesn’t. The system is build to fail. Part of the reason we get along so famously here in Scandinavia, and why we share the burden of the less fortunate is because of how we build our cities and systems of society so that everyone met everyone. In an average school class in the 90’ies you’d find children from the top and the bottom of society, and that helps generate and build compassion, understanding and empathy in ways that I think are very underrated in today’s Danish society where we all send our children to private institutions and schools if we can afford it, and aren’t ideologically inclined not to do so. This has created ghettos of wealthy and poor, where we don’t really mix anymore. The result has been fairly obvious over the past two decades, and as inequality steadily increases the classes grow further and further apart. This will of course only have one conclusion unless the legal system gets a grip and starts seizing and redistributing the wealth. Maybe people are willing to live in their cars and work warehouse jobs in America, but here in the cradle of social democracy, people are sharpening their axes.

TacticalCoder 5y ago
You're basically saying that somehow the socialist idealism of Denmark is failing (despite its very high tax rates) and that now that it is failing people need to go further left, to communism? ("seizing and redistributing the wealth"). What changed in Denmark between the 90s and now? Why do people, even in Denmark, send their kid to private schools if they can afford it? Tax rates have always been very high in Denmark, you're advocating for them to be even higher? > ... but here in the cradle of social democracy, people are sharpening their axes. Blood to make sure to make more of what didn't work?
- aerosmile 5y ago
  I don't know why you're being downvoted. Let's put our political inclinations aside, and just marvel in the long list of contradictions and unintentional negative commentary that someone managed to produce by trying to voice the opposite. With a large enough microphone, this fellow HN member would bring to fall any political affiliation they decide to join and support.
- dijit 5y ago
  Denmark has been lurching towards the right for a while (from a Swedish perspective). There is more anti-immigrant sentiment and a solid foundation for keeping migrants out. (You need an address to get a CPH number, but you can't get an address without a CPH number for example). I'm not saying they're wrong, I don't know. But that's the perspective from Malmo which is the closest major city to Denmark in Sweden... in fact Malmo is sometimes referred to a suburb of Copenhagen. (this is also controversial)
- mikegioia 5y ago
  > What changed in Denmark between the 90s and now? > Why do people, even in Denmark, send their kid to > private schools if they can afford it? I'm not speaking on behalf of the OP here, but my interpretation is that what changed _was_ people sending their kids to private schools instead of intermingling as they did before. I believe you are asking about the "why", why did they start sending them to private schools or why did they stop sending them to public or community schools. That could be a multi-faceted answer, and it could be very difficult to pin down even what the dominant factors are. I would also like to know about Denmark. I will add that this same problem exists in some form in my own home town, so I don't know if it's something unique to Denmark. My guess is that it's probably something to do with competition in generation from many more people consuming increasing amounts of a diminishing supply of resources.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "now that it is failing people need to go further left, to communism?" Is it a feature of American politics to bring up communism in every discussion? It's always some comedic parody too, like 'race mixing is communism' or 'climate change is a communist plot'. Basically a boogeyman of American politics
chmsky00 5y ago
It’s not intentionally built to fail It’s intentionally built to empower people who die, and the baton gets fumbled around once they do Frankly it’s working peoples fault. Aristocrats financial hegemony would vanish tomorrow if workers became independent agents rather than work for them. Only 5% of the US hunts anymore. Everyone is dependent on industrialized economic distribution. Let the bankers in NY and London try to collect mortgages across the world when we stop paying. Let the 800,000 sworn officers in the US police 300 million+ for no pay. The system is too small to handle the reality. It’s not designed to fail, it’s not designed to scale. We see similar planning effort in the logistics pipeline problems; no slack. Militant efficiency. Just like with religion, it’s the belief of the masses that enable the co-opting of our agency for their profit. Our belief enables them. Unions need to stop collecting dues from members and start charging employers subscription fees, or similar changes to social norms. But that’s all politically babysat and everyone is happy to look away from the lack of disruption in that context, while disrupting the shit out of lives dependent on business that is now extracted from the community. My fellow Americans ended up being a bunch of Daniel Plainviews… I drink your milkshake. But the financial wealth is all a mirage, made up to serve the old ways. Good luck when the masses realize very smart people took away their American dream.
- r00fus 5y ago
  > Frankly it’s working peoples fault. I agree with everything but this. This is exactly why the propaganda machine for ages (fairytales) have put royalty/nobles at the top. e.g. It's the knight who kills the dragon, not the townsfolk who band together. Or that magical talent is somehow always hereditary. Or that the king No, don't blame the working peoples. The countries where the working class got rid of royalty and are consistently demonized.
  - gruez 5y ago
    > e.g. It's the knight who kills the dragon, not the townsfolk who band together. You think it's propaganda that professional soldiers have a better shot at killing a mythical creature than a peasant militia?
  - 5y ago
rsync 5y ago
"... but here in the cradle of social democracy, people are sharpening their axes." People revolt (for real) when they are hungry. I am skeptical that any well-fed, satiated populace will spawn any kind of violent revolution. So, regardless of the markers of inequality or other drivers of outrage (which certainly exist) I would be loath to predict any kind of violent unrest while everyone has food to put on the table. They appear to in Scandinavia.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "I am skeptical that any well-fed, satiated populace will spawn any kind of violent revolution" Relatively well fed people started the american civil war, which is a kind of revolution.
  - lowkey_ 5y ago
    The war began when they were faced with a threat of being less well-fed (not disregarding the immorality of it all).
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      By that logic housing shortage or runaway climate change should lead to war?
      - lowkey_ 5y ago
        There has to be another country-like entity directly causing it for the war to occur. A housing shortage doesn't qualify in that sense, and a revolution (internal war) is unlikely as a result of it because we don't have some tremendous housing shortage where a large population are not well-fed. If we did, maybe so!
- virgilp 5y ago
  That's very cynical and not true at all (easy counter-example: France.) Also, revolutions don't need to be violent! I argue it's better if they aren't. The "axes" can be metaphorical too.

by moksly 5y ago

TacticalCoder 5y ago

You're basically saying that somehow the socialist idealism of Denmark is failing (despite its very high tax rates) and that now that it is failing people need to go further left, to communism? ("seizing and redistributing the wealth"). What changed in Denmark between the 90s and now? Why do people, even in Denmark, send their kid to private schools if they can afford it? Tax rates have always been very high in Denmark, you're advocating for them to be even higher? > ... but here in the cradle of social democracy, people are sharpening their axes. Blood to make sure to make more of what didn't work?

aerosmile 5y ago
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Let's put our political inclinations aside, and just marvel in the long list of contradictions and unintentional negative commentary that someone managed to produce by trying to voice the opposite. With a large enough microphone, this fellow HN member would bring to fall any political affiliation they decide to join and support.
dijit 5y ago
Denmark has been lurching towards the right for a while (from a Swedish perspective). There is more anti-immigrant sentiment and a solid foundation for keeping migrants out. (You need an address to get a CPH number, but you can't get an address without a CPH number for example). I'm not saying they're wrong, I don't know. But that's the perspective from Malmo which is the closest major city to Denmark in Sweden... in fact Malmo is sometimes referred to a suburb of Copenhagen. (this is also controversial)
mikegioia 5y ago
> What changed in Denmark between the 90s and now? > Why do people, even in Denmark, send their kid to > private schools if they can afford it? I'm not speaking on behalf of the OP here, but my interpretation is that what changed _was_ people sending their kids to private schools instead of intermingling as they did before. I believe you are asking about the "why", why did they start sending them to private schools or why did they stop sending them to public or community schools. That could be a multi-faceted answer, and it could be very difficult to pin down even what the dominant factors are. I would also like to know about Denmark. I will add that this same problem exists in some form in my own home town, so I don't know if it's something unique to Denmark. My guess is that it's probably something to do with competition in generation from many more people consuming increasing amounts of a diminishing supply of resources.
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"now that it is failing people need to go further left, to communism?" Is it a feature of American politics to bring up communism in every discussion? It's always some comedic parody too, like 'race mixing is communism' or 'climate change is a communist plot'. Basically a boogeyman of American politics

chmsky00 5y ago

It’s not intentionally built to fail It’s intentionally built to empower people who die, and the baton gets fumbled around once they do Frankly it’s working peoples fault. Aristocrats financial hegemony would vanish tomorrow if workers became independent agents rather than work for them. Only 5% of the US hunts anymore. Everyone is dependent on industrialized economic distribution. Let the bankers in NY and London try to collect mortgages across the world when we stop paying. Let the 800,000 sworn officers in the US police 300 million+ for no pay. The system is too small to handle the reality. It’s not designed to fail, it’s not designed to scale. We see similar planning effort in the logistics pipeline problems; no slack. Militant efficiency. Just like with religion, it’s the belief of the masses that enable the co-opting of our agency for their profit. Our belief enables them. Unions need to stop collecting dues from members and start charging employers subscription fees, or similar changes to social norms. But that’s all politically babysat and everyone is happy to look away from the lack of disruption in that context, while disrupting the shit out of lives dependent on business that is now extracted from the community. My fellow Americans ended up being a bunch of Daniel Plainviews… I drink your milkshake. But the financial wealth is all a mirage, made up to serve the old ways. Good luck when the masses realize very smart people took away their American dream.

r00fus 5y ago
> Frankly it’s working peoples fault. I agree with everything but this. This is exactly why the propaganda machine for ages (fairytales) have put royalty/nobles at the top. e.g. It's the knight who kills the dragon, not the townsfolk who band together. Or that magical talent is somehow always hereditary. Or that the king No, don't blame the working peoples. The countries where the working class got rid of royalty and are consistently demonized.
- gruez 5y ago
  > e.g. It's the knight who kills the dragon, not the townsfolk who band together. You think it's propaganda that professional soldiers have a better shot at killing a mythical creature than a peasant militia?
- 5y ago

rsync 5y ago

"... but here in the cradle of social democracy, people are sharpening their axes." People revolt (for real) when they are hungry. I am skeptical that any well-fed, satiated populace will spawn any kind of violent revolution. So, regardless of the markers of inequality or other drivers of outrage (which certainly exist) I would be loath to predict any kind of violent unrest while everyone has food to put on the table. They appear to in Scandinavia.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"I am skeptical that any well-fed, satiated populace will spawn any kind of violent revolution" Relatively well fed people started the american civil war, which is a kind of revolution.
- lowkey_ 5y ago
  The war began when they were faced with a threat of being less well-fed (not disregarding the immorality of it all).
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    By that logic housing shortage or runaway climate change should lead to war?
    - lowkey_ 5y ago
      There has to be another country-like entity directly causing it for the war to occur. A housing shortage doesn't qualify in that sense, and a revolution (internal war) is unlikely as a result of it because we don't have some tremendous housing shortage where a large population are not well-fed. If we did, maybe so!
virgilp 5y ago
That's very cynical and not true at all (easy counter-example: France.) Also, revolutions don't need to be violent! I argue it's better if they aren't. The "axes" can be metaphorical too.