|
Luck comes in many forms: Inherited wealth, health, positive life experiences, etc, etc, etc.
For each element of that luck, you could point to an example where it could be discounted. The thing is... individual success stories DO NOT imply that there is equal opportunity in the system as a whole to replicate that success for the rest of the un or underemployed population.
100% intention, dedication and motivation is wonderful and is a real bonus in the fight to claw your way to where you want to be, but it fails to account for the Black Swans of life (car accident, health scare, disruptive episodes, economic episodes outside of your control, etc, etc.), the systemic necessity to restrict opportunity to a few (capitalism needs social strata to function and it needs unemployment as necessary elements of the system) and the fact that not everyone has the guts, guile, will or intelligence to make it as either an Amway fucker-overer, brain surgeon or limousine entrepreneur...
If you really want social Darwinism rule of the most successful, and I think there's a thread of that in the argument that blames the victim, then you head straight to totalitarianism, probably fascistic in the Mussolini style... Directly.
__________________
"I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--
|