The problem, again, is jews. The idea of experts running society is sound in and of itself. It can work well, just like socialism, in a racially homogeneous society with high trust. That's the niche the jew needs to ply their trade - their "in" as it were. Jews have been uniquely successful in European and Middle Eastern civilizations because they can shapeshift between the two. Like a cuckoo bird's egg, jews fool their hosts into accepting them as one of their own until they make it into decision-making positions. Once in these positions their singular focus becomes consolidating power by promoting more jews, and abusing every power available to the position to sabotage their foes and advance their agenda. They are adept con men and expert manipulators of feelings, which is why they're very talented in the entertainment field. Think about it: what is fiction other than a fantastic illusion manufactured to be believable, and designed to manipulate your emotions?
Imagine a purely white society. You could probably have things like "community bicycles" (just to make an example), that everyone could just grab one and ride to where they needed to go and then leave it as good as they found it. That's a high trust society. The jew is the person who will see this as an opportunity to exploit. They can gather up all the bikes and hold them ransom. They'll call it a "service fee" or something, and justify it as footing the bill for maintenance and upkeep. If the white people won't pay, the jew can sell the bikes. They'll sell it as being so much better than the inconvenience of sharing with others. Poof! Now the white people have lost some trust. Repeat this tens of millions of times throughout society and you see how corrosive it is to the social fabric of trust that is the cornerstone of European civilization.
Experts already are running society. Go down to your local bike shop and chat to the staff, those are experts. They can tell you things about bikes you've never thought of. Go to your grocery shop and chew the fat about where they source their produce from. Those are experts, they can tell you all kinds of things about the value of beets and cucumbers, as well as seasons, weather, bookkeeping etc. The same goes for every industry where competition is still a thing. The inexpert find themselves out of business pretty quickly.
Every society is run by experts. What the globalists want is for experts they control to be running things.
The idea of experts running society is sound in and of itself.
Jews or no jews, central planners will always run into knowledge problems, because no one has enough expertise to run society from the top down.
just like socialism, in a racially homogeneous society with high trust.
No. Socialism is fundamentally flawed. A high-IQ, high-trust society will make it work better than a low-trust low-IQ society, but only because they could make anything work better.
Imagine a purely white society. You could probably have things like "community bicycles" (just to make an example), that everyone could just grab one and ride to where they needed to go and then leave it as good as they found it.
Who maintains them? Who ensures there's a bike where you need one when you need one? Who pays for them all? Who recycles them when they reach their end of life? How does this person calculate how much should be spent on each bike and how much investment is justified?
I can answer all of those questions if we're talking about a market economy, wouldn't even know where to begin in some kind of socialist gift economy.
Poof! Now the white people have lost some trust.
Why does paying for the services you consume make you lose trust exactly? If something is very expensive I know to be very careful about using it. If I can't afford it I know I need to work harder to justify using/owning it. There's no loss of trust there unless you're a freeloader.
Jews or no jews, central planners will always run into knowledge problems, because no one has enough expertise to run society from the top down.
Having subject matter experts in government doesn't imply central planning.
No. Socialism is fundamentally flawed. A high-IQ, high-trust society will make it work better than a low-trust low-IQ society, but only because they could make anything work better.
That's what I mean by "work." It will never achieve what it promises, but a high iq, high trust society could make it work well enough that there weren't bread lines and people starving to death.
Who maintains them?
Whoever broke it.
Who ensures there's a bike where you need one when you need one?
Nobody. This isn't a government program to make sure you have a bike. It's a community thing. They're there if you want to use them, and if they're not, they're not.
Who pays for them all?
Again, you're imagining a government-style program. Who pays for them is irrelevant to whether people will steal the bikes and/or vandalize them
Who recycles them when they reach their end of life?
How does this person calculate how much should be spent on each bike and how much investment is justified?
I'm surprised at how statist this style of thinking is coming from you. It's a very centralized, top-down view of the world.
Why does paying for the services you consume make you lose trust exactly?
It doesn't. Stealing a community resource and then charging people to use what was theirs is what causes the loss of trust. I never would have taken you for a jew in all the years we've gone back and forth on voat.
(post is archived)