NationStates

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:06 pm**

NeuPolska wrote:
Iltica wrote:Field-of-study-irrelevent history class won't shut up about how great meritocracy is and got me thinking. Is there any historically plausible way it could have existed into present day? And if it did, what would the test criteria be in a secular society? Most of the real world examples have them being scholars of religious texts it seems.

You could have leaders chosen by their peers in their field. Defense ministers chosen by generals, leaders chosen based on awards received and public approval as well as taking any service they'd done into account, and leave voting restricted to members of society with high IQs, etc. Plenty of room still left for corruption I suppose but oh well.

That honestly sounds more like a technocracy and potentially even a corporatist state, though an argument could be made that both of those or at the very least the former is technically a variation of meritocracy but whatever.

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:07 pm**

Taihei Tengoku wrote:The problem is that politics is inherently political and even civil servants are self-interested actors seeking their own ends in the face of constraints and tradeoffs.

Have you, by chance, ever read Calculus of Consent?

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:14 pm**

The Macabees wrote:
Taihei Tengoku wrote:The problem is that politics is inherently political and even civil servants are self-interested actors seeking their own ends in the face of constraints and tradeoffs.

Have you, by chance, ever read Calculus of Consent?

I am a philistine who consumes exclusively Reason articles and FEE thinkpieces

no sadly :(

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:38 pm**

It's worth reading if you ever get the chance.

The book is an attempt at modeling democracy and how different rules affect outcomes, and shows how self-interested actors can produce "welfare-enhancing" decisions. There's a lot of interesting stuff in there, including on the merits of vote trading and why bicameral systems exist

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 6:33 pm**

Kazarogkai wrote:
NeuPolska wrote:You could have leaders chosen by their peers in their field. Defense ministers chosen by generals, leaders chosen based on awards received and public approval as well as taking any service they'd done into account, and leave voting restricted to members of society with high IQs, etc. Plenty of room still left for corruption I suppose but oh well.

That honestly sounds more like a technocracy and potentially even a corporatist state, though an argument could be made that both of those or at the very least the former is technically a variatthe of meritocracy but whatever.

That's more of a way to promote them than choose them. Maybe something like the Chinese with a really hard (possibly mandatory) test that anyone can take. Some electing could also be involved, but the hard part is what the hell the criteria would be. You can't quantify ethics.

Then there's the weirdness of it even existing...

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 7:35 pm**

Iltica wrote:
Kazarogkai wrote:
That honestly sounds more like a technocracy and potentially even a corporatist state, though an argument could be made that both of those or at the very least the former is technically a variatthe of meritocracy but whatever.
That's more of a way to promote them than choose them. Maybe something like the Chinese with a really hard (possibly mandatory) test that anyone can take. Some electing could also be involved, but the hard part is what the hell the criteria would be. You can't quantify ethics.

Then there's the weirdness of it even existing...

The Chinese imperial civil service exam also indirectly caused a war that killed twenty million people

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 9:37 pm**

The first thing people do when they make it to the top is kick down the ladder. Until you can change that fundamental aspect of human nature any attempt any system of "meritocracy" will be just a fig-leaf for whatever ruling class is in power.

Posted: **Sat Aug 26, 2017 10:04 pm**

Post-human hive-mind government is still in beta at the moment.
The only other trick I can think of is making it a really horrible experience to pass but then you have the same problems as sortition.
Maybe some kind of hybrid system like could work, but It's still anachronistic af.

Posted: **Sun Aug 27, 2017 3:58 am**

NeuPolska wrote:
Iltica wrote:Field-of-study-irrelevent history class won't shut up about how great meritocracy is and got me thinking. Is there any historically plausible way it could have existed into present day? And if it did, what would the test criteria be in a secular society? Most of the real world examples have them being scholars of religious texts it seems.

You could have leaders chosen by their peers in their field. Defense ministers chosen by generals, leaders chosen based on awards received and public approval as well as taking any service they'd done into account, and leave voting restricted to members of society with high IQs, etc. Plenty of room still left for corruption I suppose but oh well.

'National Syndicalism'?

Posted: **Sun Aug 27, 2017 9:18 am**

Radictistan wrote:The first thing people do when they make it to the top is kick down the ladder. Until you can change that fundamental aspect of human nature any attempt any system of "meritocracy" will be just a fig-leaf for whatever ruling class is in power.

Basically.

'Meritocracy' as a political principle (rather than one that exists inside other structures) is, like the American dream, a bit of a sham.

The difference between 'meritocratic' western countries and the alternatives is that in most critical organisations, people rise for reasons other than merit. That's (usually) bad. But as a principle for trying to organise an economy, meritocracy almost never means what its proponents say it does.

Posted: **Sun Aug 27, 2017 4:09 pm**

Even if you could make meritocracy work on the societal level, the result would be horrible for most people. The meritocrats would have ideological free reign to be as oppressive as they like and any attempt at preserving "liberty" or "civil rights" would be depicted as sour grapes. The last thing you want is people with power thinking they deserve it, especially when it's true.

Posted: **Sun Aug 27, 2017 4:13 pm**

"Liberty" and "civil rights" are just words.

Posted: **Sun Aug 27, 2017 4:51 pm**

Gallia- wrote:"Liberty" and "civil rights" are just words.

"just"

Posted: **Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:01 pm**

He is right. Rights are ultimately just privilege extended in exchange for obedience. Don't fool your self into thinking anything else.

As for the discussion about governments its really simple. What you need is a system of government which finds people who are both benevolent and loving of your country and its people by nature AND skilled in the art of governing as well as a mechanism that consistently succeeds in getting such people into positions of authority and keeping them there. You than want to give these people god like power knowing full well that they will not be abused. Also, I want an infinite bank account, 50 porn stars to do my bidding and a private space station that can blow up stars and yet is fueled by the power of true friendship.

Both are equally likely to materialize.

Posted: **Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:17 pm**

Taihei Tengoku wrote:
Gallia- wrote:"Liberty" and "civil rights" are just words.

"just"

Somehow, I suspect that the Roman Empire had very different morals from modern market economies. For one thing, slavery was a cornerstone of its economy. Anyway what I was getting at was that there was nuance in how you perceive "liberty" and "civil rights". Even within the United States, much less within the West itself, where a Californian or a New Yorker might have a very different definition of liberty and civil rights than a Texan or Floridian.

Much like "meritocracy", it means nothing without being qualified with an actual explanation.

Posted: **Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:40 am**

A question about climate.

Say you have an tropical island and it straddles the equator, what would the seasons be like? Specifically I'm asking about their structure. I know there would be a dry and wet season. I was just wondering if there would be multiple wet seasons and multiple dry seasons. My assumption is that while the north side is in the middle of summer(it's wet season) that would influence the south side enough so that said south side would be pretty wet during said wet season. In turn when the south side is going though its own summer the same would result in the north. Consequently the results would be effectively two wet seasons and in between there would be two dry seasons. That was just my thinking anyways.

The reason I ask is more or less in to do with my countries calendar. It's kinda important to know what the seasons would be like.

Posted: **Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:54 am**

Kazarogkai wrote:A question about climate.

Say you have an tropical island and it straddles the equator, what would the seasons be like? Specifically I'm asking about their structure. I know there would be a dry and wet season. I was just wondering if there would be multiple wet seasons and multiple dry seasons. My assumption is that while the north side is in the middle of summer(it's wet season) that would influence the south side enough so that said south side would be pretty wet during said wet season. In turn when the south side is going though its own summer the same would result in the north. Consequently the results would be effectively two wet seasons and in between there would be two dry seasons. That was just my thinking anyways.

The reason I ask is more or less in to do with my countries calendar. It's kinda important to know what the seasons would be like.

Obviously it depends on exact placement, but most tropical countries have a dry/wet season and not multiples of the other. That doesn't mean it never rains in the dry season and always rains the wet season though. Living through a monsoon means you expect rain all the time and sometimes don't get it and living through the dry season means you rarely expect rain but sometimes get it (and it is much hotter.)

Posted: **Mon Aug 28, 2017 9:21 pm**

Question about railways... planning a night sleeper train, and debating the following:

1. How many carriages to put in the rake? The trains run will be quite short, and through a less populous\wealthy area so I am thinking of a shorter train, maybe some 5 cars or so? My prospective locomotive is, ideally, an Su class 2-6-2 which are kinda light locomotives when it comes to pulling power, and the stock they'd be pulling would be modern. Obviously, there'd also be VL-60 electric passenger locomotives available for protection power in case the steamer failed, but I'd like to use the steam aspect as a way to sell the train to tourists

2. Given the relative lack of wealth in my nation, I am trying an make this more a luxury train, designed to bring in the tourist dollars. But should I try and sneak some third class cars in as well? I was thinking of making the train a mix of refurbished 1st class sleepers, 2nd class sleepers, and a restaurant\dining car, but I could include the infamous Russian "dormitory" style 3rd class sleepers as well.

3. It kinda seems like the rail link between Ingueshita and Chechnya was destroyed during the war, any word on that? Noticed Russian passenger trains don't seem to run between the two despite their allegedly being a railway there, based off recent steam train tours of the region.

4. Routes: contemplating either Grozny-Prokhladny, Vladikavkaz-Nazran-Prokhladny with a preference for the latter since it connects to my capital city.

Posted: **Tue Aug 29, 2017 8:12 am**

Prosorusiya wrote:2. Given the relative lack of wealth in my nation, I am trying an make this more a luxury train, designed to bring in the tourist dollars. But should I try and sneak some third class cars in as well? I was thinking of making the train a mix of refurbished 1st class sleepers, 2nd class sleepers, and a restaurant\dining car, but I could include the infamous Russian "dormitory" style 3rd class sleepers as well.

Generally, unless it's going to be a big train, you should run separate tourist services to the domestic services.

Depending on the length of the journey, 3rd class can even be regular seating. It's not comfortable, but for a one-night journey, there's no problem. The price could be 1/2 or even 1/3rd of a dormitory class sleeper.

Posted: **Tue Aug 29, 2017 8:16 am**

It's unlikely you'd run a tourist sleeper train on steam - while yes, it is a nice interest, it's less efficient and it causes a lot of noise and soot. An IRL example of what you are thinking of, the Eastern and Oriental Express, runs on diesel. A journey for each passenger is about $2,500 so they make serious bank off it.

Posted: **Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:40 pm**

How rough are the seas around where Versilia is? Would it be reasonable for the navy to use downwards slopping hulls in these waters?

Posted: **Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:56 pm**

The Islands of Versilia wrote:How rough are the seas around where Versilia is? Would it be reasonable for the navy to use downwards slopping hulls in these waters?

What is a "downward sloping hull" and what is it good for?

In any case, another good place to ask could possibly be the Military Realism Thread and Warship Thread or however that's called.

Posted: **Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:58 pm**

DnalweN acilbupeR wrote:
The Islands of Versilia wrote:How rough are the seas around where Versilia is? Would it be reasonable for the navy to use downwards slopping hulls in these waters?

What is a "downward sloping hull" and what is it good for?

In any case, another good place to ask could possibly be the Military Realism Thread and Warship Thread or however that's called.

It is the hull shape of the American Zumwalt.
I'll check them out.

Posted: **Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:13 pm**

The Islands of Versilia wrote:
DnalweN acilbupeR wrote:
What is a "downward sloping hull" and what is it good for?

In any case, another good place to ask could possibly be the Military Realism Thread and Warship Thread or however that's called.

It is the hull shape of the American Zumwalt.
I'll check them out.

That ship from my understanding was designed as a "blue water" warship meaning it's designed as a sea/ocean-going ship so by deduction the hull shape should have no problems navigating shallower/more coastal waters from the perspective of resistance to rough seas/seaworthiness.

Depending on how shallow the waters you intend to navigate actually are (and how close to shore you wanna get) you could obviously benefit from a shallower hulled ship.. but that usually trades off stability out at sea and in bad weather. You first need to figure out what you want your ship to do and where you want it to do it, and then work from there by looking at real life ships that fit the bill.

Other than that I can't give any more advanced information regarding such a downward shaping hull and its seaworthiness and whether or not its suitable for a more coastal-oriented ship, you'd have to ask someone more knowledgeable in the field of naval sperg.

You could have a look at this and this or do you mean downward-sloping longitudinally rather than transversely?

Posted: **Fri Sep 01, 2017 7:42 am**

A Tale of Two Industries: How Programming Languages Differ Between Wealthy and Developing Countries -- some evidence of how even certain coding skills are becoming low-skill (which is ALWAYS relative, not absolute).

NationStates

Worldbuilding Realism Consultation Thread Mk. 4