Log in

No account? Create an account
Vexen Crabtree 2015


Vexen Crabtree's Live Journal

Sociology, Theology, Anti-Religion and Exploration: Forcing Humanity Forwards

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Vexen Crabtree 2015

Which country sets the best examples?

Which country sets the best examples?

Which ones set the best examples to the rest of the world? Which ones would we do best to copy, to emulate and to admire for their foresight, hard work and long-term conscience? Which countries would have humanity survive gleaming into clean, happy, bright future? Compiling relevant statistics and constructing rankings, I've arrived at a shortlist of five countries that beat all the others. Mainly, it is Sweden, Finland and Norway. Secondly, Switzerland and Australia. Be the best!
  • Acievement of Women's Right to Vote on an Equal Basis with Men
  • Life expectancy
  • Quality of Life
  • Most Competitive Economy
  • Gay Rights
  • Obesity
  • Asylum Seeker Acceptance Rates
Am going to add more (crime, environment, etc).

Australia made it onto your list despite their treatmeant of asylum seekers?

What, you mean the way the Australians stood up to the profession asylum industry that goes hysterical when their dogma is challenged?

(no subject) (Anonymous) Expand
Where's better? (Anonymous) Expand
Oh you gotta add in schools, age starting school, performance levels, etc. The Scandanavian countries school systems are FAR superior!
And housing as well, quiality of, availability, enviromentaly friendly-ness off... to my knowledge those same countries will come out ahead in those areas too.
Good work man!

I'd like to add educational attainment, but to compare different qualifications and tests across countries is difficult. Age of schooling is irrelevant - if a country has good home schooling as part of it's cultural inheritance, then this is good but can hardly be taken into account. Achievements & intelligence are more important than actual schooling; and finding markers of those that are international is difficult. But I'm keeping my eyes open!

I bet there's an international UN dept. that actually measures educational levels in children and young adults, all I've got to do is find it!

Will you be considering enviromental aspects such as encouragement of recycling, use of public transport, alternate fuels, etc?

Gay marriages

Not sure where you got the facts about gay marriages, but Denmark was the first country in the world to come up with a system of registered partnerships as of 01.10.1989.
The rest of the scandinavian countries followed suit in the early 90s afaik.

Without the US and the UK, all names on your short list would speak German now. Therefore, it has to be the US or/and the UK.

Also, without Russia, we would also all be speaking German.

(no subject) (Anonymous) Expand
(no subject) (Anonymous) Expand

What about Race?

Hi, What about racial equality? I know it's a difficult subject for you Europeans to consider, but it needs to be addressed.

Re: What about Race?

European law does not discriminate on race; no legal restrictions are race-specific, and no upheld rights are race-specific either. All such discrimination is outlawed. It would therefore be pointless to compare racial equality across these countries.

Re: What about Race? (Anonymous) Expand

Inequality matters

Australia has a problem with the quality of life of the bottom end of society, particularly the indigenous people.

You probably need something like HDI of the bottom 5% of the society, and rich poor divide. And it's getting worse and the gap between rich and poor getting bigger.

Also, australia has the highest land clearing rates in the world. How can anything compare with that for environmental record?

Also manditory detention for people not charged with anything...

Also... a culture of fear and hatred...

Points should also be deducted

This approach works OK, I think, because it does tally with my experience that overall Sweden, Denmark and Finland are the best countries in the world. However, the results have been distorted through positive bias. Points should also be DEDUCTED for negative phenomena. Australia, for example, is largely an environmental wasteland, is the world's second worst waster of water, has an appalling media, has a stingy welfare state and high levels of job insecurity, and the unemployment statistics have been artificially reduced by treating anyone who works an hour a week or more as if they have full-time jobs. The UK deserves points taken off for its appallingly Orwellian surveillance state alone. Also, points should also be deducted for Jewish control of politicians and the media.

Re: Points should also be deducted

I have spent time thinking about having negative points; maybe I will. At the moment 'negative' points work by the fact that when I add a criteria, all countries gain points, but the ones at the bottom of the charts gain very few. The *points difference* is more or less the same as if I used a negative points system.

As to your own heuristics, you're certainly not shy, and this is what I think:

1. a 'stingy' welfare state isn't in itself bad, as there are various welfare *systems* in the world that work without being completely state-based. It's not a question of the *method* of welfare, but of the results, so /health/ is a more important example to set, than any particular method of /attaining/ health.

2. Again with job insecurity; it is not in itself bad. Some cultures in history have stuck to an ideal of lifetime-jobs; many modern countries have a very transient attitude towards jobs. If the labour market is fluid, then, job security is less important. It is too complicated to use 'job security' as a criteria. Also, more importantly, it is very hard to compare job security from one legal politic to another in space or time!

3. UKs growing state isn't a bad thing; a state has right to observe and fight crime (even potential crime), the problem (even for Orwell) is the abuse of power; so, it is more important that a state has the checks-and-balances in place that is required of a democracy. Otherwise I would have to start deciding what level of surveillance was 'optimum' and grant fewer points to those who are too Orwellian (too strongman), or too slack (insecure, weak). An almost impossible call to make!

4. It does not matter who the 'Jews' are; as long as proper legal restraints are in place to separate Church and State, and that positions are not open to abuse, no particular religion can gain a theocratic hold. The UK has powerful anti-corruption mechanisms, so, it doesn't matter what religion incumbants are - no major parties in the UK are ordered along religious lines.

If you were to stand on the porch of Orwell's London home, you would notice there are 22 CCTV cameras within 200 yards of your field of view.

"Big Brother" did not abuse his power. He did what the people wanted him to do - which is whatever Big Brother told them it was.

Freedom isn't taken by force in the modern day - it is taken by ignorance and dogma.

Democracy and religious freedom

In Britain, every schoolchild is forcibly indoctrinated in religion. Every morning, from their first day at school to their very last day at school, children in the United Kingdom are forced to sing praises to God and listen quietly and passively to adults explaining the wonders of God‘s plan, not allowed to show the slightest cynicism. At the supposedly secular school I attended in Britain, we were even forced to pray in the junior school before we were allowed to eat at lunchtime. When I became an atheist at the age of 14, I was still forced to attend morning religious assemblies and was even punished with a detention if I did not sing loudly enough. I was not exempt from religious education in class, even at the age of 17. Strangely children of other faiths, Judaism, Islam or Hinduism as examples, either were not obliged to sit in assembly or had other arrangements made that were tailored to suit there religious tastes, all kindly organised by the school. When I challenged the school on this hypocrisy, they told me that since I was an atheist it did not matter whether I agreed with the religious doctrine of the Christian assembly so no special arrangement need be made for me or other atheists.

On another point, Britain is also the only western country not to fully elect its governing parliament. The House of Lords, one of the most powerful parliamentary upper houses in the world, it can block legislation from the democratically elected House of Commons on a simple majority vote, has absolutely no democratic mandate to exist and to hold so much power. It is completely unelected.

Surely, above all else, religious freedom and democracy should be the most important considerations when weighing up whether a country sets a good example or not?


this helped a ton. with some school reports i have been doing, this info is valid aswell as exful for essays and such.



First of all (before you read what's written below) - I am the free thinking atheist-scientist ! = I am free to explore everything (in the very full meaning of the word 'everything').
Secondly - I mostly agree with Your countrys' rewiev, but there's one thing that I disagree with. This thing is "Gay Rights". I really do think that "Gay rights" should be taken as if they were the part of advanced civilisation.
Scientifical argumentation:
1.Homosexualism hapens to exist in the Nature(not only in human cilisation) - another words it's the "natural mistake" in genetical code = the mutation (sometimes one may be born with "predispositions" to homosexualism - but if such a child will be upbringed properly(heterosexually) then the child will be normal).
2.Homosexualism can be treated(but there's very small group of people in the world who're actually engaged in to this) - we're often used to close our eyes on homosexualits for eg. giving them laws of marriages, so that we won't have to bother ourselfes with treating other peolpe (but still they're a part of our organism = civilisation -> if the organism'll accept cancer cells - this organism'll die).
3.In conclusion (what I do suggest) : homosexualism is a treatable mistake in one's sexualism & our society should not give laws to homosexualists (another words we shouldn't make ourselfes as if we're accepting the mistakeable sexual behaviour in our society - simple eg: If everyone'd be homosexualist - how'd our civilisation reproduce?) but carefuly & compassionately explain to those people: Who tey're? -> a part of our civilisation that can changed istelf positively(by becaming heterosexual) & help them to overcame their sickness by proper treatment...
PS.I suggest to all human beeing to be open-minded & free thinking all the time...

Canada in the rank????

I am European and I am living in Canada(because of work) for ten years. I personally wouldn't include Canada in any of the the examples except Asylum Seeker Acceptance Rates, the reason is because lately very few people want to come to Canada! My father was a diplomat and I lived in 7 different countries, I have travelled a lot! Canada is droping year after year in terms of quality of life. The corruption here is comparable to any third world country! The level of morality mostly from the politicians is incredibly low! The justice and education systems are in critical stage of degradation!
The only good service provided by the government in Canada is the collection of money!
Considering the taxes we pay and the services we get the total will be far below zero for what we get...