Society Describe your ideal utopia (but with one rule)
- Thread starter kneeblock
- Start date
We’re living in it. I have a great life. But my ideal society would have 0 homeless people. If you’re living on the street and have no desire to improve your life or go get help, we get rid of them. As in kill them. We have too many people on the planet as is, and if you don’t want to be a contributing member of society, there’s no point in keeping you around. All the people who want to go and get the readily available housing and mental help they need, get to live and be reintroduced to society after making it through the program. Oh yeah, cig’s would be legal, but illegal to smoke them in public places. And if you’re seen throwing a butt on the ground it’s mandatory 250hours of community service.
Edit: good eye
@MMAHAWK
Edit: good eye
@MMAHAWK
Last edited:
M
member 1013
Guest
the government would simply exist to make the people feel pleasure. everyone does coke and fucks like jackrabbits but STDs and unwilling pregnancies are unknown. also coke is good for you and everyone has industrial sized star trek replicators and sumptuous housing.
M
member 1013
Guest
and big penises, tight holes, perfect hygiene and hawt bods
M
member 1013
Guest
@kneeblock also has to fite me
My ideal utopia is where foetuses get the right to choose whether to live or die and the government has the freedom to keep the money for themselves instead of giving out welfare handouts to these leeches they call foetuses
A Mordor where sauraon kills elrrond and chucked him into mount Doom
You get an F for the assignment. You only described what you wouldn't want.We’re living in it. I have a great life. But my ideal society would have 0 homeless people. If you’re living on the street and have no desire to improve your life or go get help, we get rid of them. As in kill them. We have too many people on the planet as is, and if you don’t want to be a contributing member of society, there’s no point in keeping you around. All the people who want to go and get the readily available housing and mental help they need, get to live and be reintroduced to society after making it through the program. Oh yeah, cig’s would be legal, but illegal to smoke them in public places. And if you’re seen throwing a butt on the ground it’s mandatory 250hours of community service.
Edit: good eye
Now we're talking.
M
member 1013
Guest
in my world, coke strengthens your nose so as to be invincible.
and makes your winky bigger
Everyone has the ability to reach their fullest potential and quality of life.
v1.2
v1.2
Last edited:
I realize this thread was a bit too broad, but I was interested in moving past the own the libs stop the cons politics to basic components of a society. I think instead I'm going to spin this thread off into a number of polls so it's more democratic.
you love coke...
in my world, everything is about the same except psilocybin mandates. if you refuse, you go to jail. You can do whatever you want, live however you want, pretty much similar rules apply you know? commit crime, you get locked up. just everyone has to be under mushrooms. no shrooms, no life.
I get to write you a longer answer now
@kneeblock (although my original point still stands)
to make my thoughts as brief as possible here, I think there are certain underlying factors like:
> game theory favors egoistical behavior more often than not
> different people have different talents and motivations, which is good! but not everybody is equal in every aspect
> there is no absolute good or evil (except for maybe Nietzsches definition in Der Antichrist - definitely not Kant's categorical imperative)
> overflow of information makes decisionmaking nearly impossible for the individual (unless you're a small group of hunter gatherer, I guess)
additional thoughts
+ difference between society and culture? (even in a democracy the culture can be individualistic and cold and I'm sure the other way round exists as well)
+ Even the Golden Rule is relative (have to be really careful with my words here) let's say in country A we have a saying "the cleverer/more mature/more wise give in" and somebody from another background lives by the motto "the stronger one is always right" now there's a basis for misunderstanding... althought both ways can work if the whole society follows the same pattern
+ geographical factors: shortage of space (on an island) or resources (greenland) or being surrounded by other groups or not all has big impacts
Conclusion
Would not every society, based on the need for regulation, somehow land on somebody having to enforce the rules and of course enriching themselves in the process, both the spearhead leader(s) and their backing apparatus?
They just use different main drivers as the justification
+ Religion (those Pharao guys in Egypt were pretty smart)
+ Ideology
+ Defining 'us' vs 'them'
And then use force openly or avoid it and use more propaganda, taxation, laws etc. I see here the whole spectrum from Dicatorship to Religious-State to Communism to Democracy.
Maybe the most harmonic and fair society were in fact the small hunter-gatherer packs in the Stone Age past (probably also dictator, maybe elected by consent or talent) where everybody had their role and value ... which somehow connects back to Exposed Tits.
@kneeblock (although my original point still stands)to make my thoughts as brief as possible here, I think there are certain underlying factors like:
> game theory favors egoistical behavior more often than not
> different people have different talents and motivations, which is good! but not everybody is equal in every aspect
> there is no absolute good or evil (except for maybe Nietzsches definition in Der Antichrist - definitely not Kant's categorical imperative)
> overflow of information makes decisionmaking nearly impossible for the individual (unless you're a small group of hunter gatherer, I guess)
additional thoughts
+ difference between society and culture? (even in a democracy the culture can be individualistic and cold and I'm sure the other way round exists as well)
+ Even the Golden Rule is relative (have to be really careful with my words here) let's say in country A we have a saying "the cleverer/more mature/more wise give in" and somebody from another background lives by the motto "the stronger one is always right" now there's a basis for misunderstanding... althought both ways can work if the whole society follows the same pattern
+ geographical factors: shortage of space (on an island) or resources (greenland) or being surrounded by other groups or not all has big impacts
Conclusion
Would not every society, based on the need for regulation, somehow land on somebody having to enforce the rules and of course enriching themselves in the process, both the spearhead leader(s) and their backing apparatus?
They just use different main drivers as the justification
+ Religion (those Pharao guys in Egypt were pretty smart)
+ Ideology
+ Defining 'us' vs 'them'
And then use force openly or avoid it and use more propaganda, taxation, laws etc. I see here the whole spectrum from Dicatorship to Religious-State to Communism to Democracy.
Maybe the most harmonic and fair society were in fact the small hunter-gatherer packs in the Stone Age past (probably also dictator, maybe elected by consent or talent) where everybody had their role and value ... which somehow connects back to Exposed Tits.
You should read The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow. You'll probably enjoy it.I get to write you a longer answer now
to make my thoughts as brief as possible here, I think there are certain underlying factors like:
> game theory favors egoistical behavior more often than not
> different people have different talents and motivations, which is good! but not everybody is equal in every aspect
> there is no absolute good or evil (except for maybe Nietzsches definition in Der Antichrist - definitely not Kant's categorical imperative)
> overflow of information makes decisionmaking nearly impossible for the individual (unless you're a small group of hunter gatherer, I guess)
additional thoughts
+ difference between society and culture? (even in a democracy the culture can be individualistic and cold and I'm sure the other way round exists as well)
+ Even the Golden Rule is relative (have to be really careful with my words here) let's say in country A we have a saying "the cleverer/more mature/more wise give in" and somebody from another background lives by the motto "the stronger one is always right" now there's a basis for misunderstanding... althought both ways can work if the whole society follows the same pattern
+ geographical factors: shortage of space (on an island) or resources (greenland) or being surrounded by other groups or not all has big impacts
Conclusion
Would not every society, based on the need for regulation, somehow land on somebody having to enforce the rules and of course enriching themselves in the process, both the spearhead leader(s) and their backing apparatus?
They just use different main drivers as the justification
+ Religion (those Pharao guys in Egypt were pretty smart)
+ Ideology
+ Defining 'us' vs 'them'
And then use force openly or avoid it and use more propaganda, taxation, laws etc. I see here the whole spectrum from Dicatorship to Religious-State to Communism to Democracy.
Maybe the most harmonic and fair society were in fact the small hunter-gatherer packs in the Stone Age past (probably also dictator, maybe elected by consent or talent) where everybody had their role and value ... which somehow connects back to Exposed Tits.