Forum: The Classroom Topic: i've got a question started by: darksol Posted by darksol on Jan. 16 2001,22:38
I have a question, if one person were to take control of the entire Earth, or just simply total control of what is now The United States, and it was in his/her mind to get rid of "stupid"(i.e. assholes) people would you rather just exterminate them nazi style, or try a re-education plan?------------------ Posted by damien_s_lucifer on Jan. 16 2001,22:59
I'd take control of all television broadcasting and make the stupid people my slaves by careful regulation of TV broadcasts."Attention sector 3. Friends will not be shown tonight because of poor productivity. Broadcast will resume when productivity returns to normal." Posted by PersonGuy on Jan. 16 2001,22:59
I wish I had more compassion, but probably nazi style because of cost efficiency.------------------ Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Jan. 16 2001,23:04
what do you mean ? i already rulez da wurld dont i? oops my mistake damn this time machine!!! wrong century you worthless metal beatch. just tell them that their cash prize is hiding under that nuclear tower over there in that desrt ------------------ Posted by Sithiee on Jan. 16 2001,23:26
if you tried it nazi style, your control wouldnt last for long...history has proven time and time again that it doesnt work.second, im interested to know what your objective way of analyzing who is "stupid" and who isnt...cause some people may be really good at writing and such, but suck at math an science, are they stupid? or vise versa? just cause someone is an ass though, doesnt make them stupid. Newton was an ass...but he invented calculus (yes, i know, at the same time as leibniz)... Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Jan. 17 2001,00:14
quote: Interesting fact actually. you can survive a nuclear blast (apart from being nowhere near it of course) by being directly under the bomb when it explodes (as it dont go off when it hits the ground but due to an altimeter) the blast creates a shockwave that deflects the fallout away from you. this has been proven when the u.s government (this'll make you proud to be an american )sent some journalists to document the tests of the bomb and sending them under it and detonating it without them knowing, (they tricked them into wearing safety googles somehow). Also the hiroshima bomb site ahs a living tree where the epicentre of the blast was. have i gone a bit off topic ? ------------------ Posted by diusFrenzy on Jan. 17 2001,00:58
Best bet is not to cleanse the current, but prepare for the future. Actually eliminating the stupid people from America today is virtually impossible. You're better off declaring a national state of emergency (have several government agencies site severely limited resources, combined with a sophisticated propoganda engine to convince the public) and attemp to instigate a limit on breeding. In secret, breed your own homo superior a la' Gattica (sp?) (using trial and error to generate the best way to genetically sequence a superior human). Ultimately you can slowly but surely integrate your homo superior into the population (now of course genetics isn't enough. You'll have to combine this with a living environment of Samurai-level mind control whereby you get these people insanely bent on perfection and honor yadda yadda -- the ability to breed loyalty is not to be taken lightly). Eventually, darwinism will force the unwanted population to dwindle and eventually die. Granted this won't benefit you any, since it will take several (best guestimation -- 5?) generations to complete, but ultimately is probably has the best chance of success for the continuing growth and betterment of human society.
Oh and by the way, history hasn't proven that his control won't last for a long time. Romans instigated a severe classist society (granted they didn't quite reach the levels of genocide, but they did maintain an empire of slavery) that lasted a thousand years (or damn near). And history proves that only Hitler's insanity and incredible military incompetance ultimately led to his defeat. His governmental style had nothing whatsoever to do with his empire ultimately being destroyed (what was slightly more relevant was the location of his nuclear research facilities, destroyed by British dambusters, invading Russia too early, not maximizing the oil production of the countries he DID control, failing to decimate British forces as they retreated from France, etc. etc.) ------------------ This message has been edited by diusFrenzy on January 17, 2001 at 08:04 PM Posted by darksol on Jan. 17 2001,01:02
actually, sithiee, i meant stupid more in an asshole type. or people that continually repeat stupid stupid actions. and as for it not helping the person, i would try see what works and wait to see if the medical technology of that time period could extend my life or possibly recreate myself somehow.------------------ Posted by CatKnight on Jan. 17 2001,01:20
wtf is wrong with you thats just fucked up. dont fucking joke about that shit
Posted by darksol on Jan. 17 2001,02:23
who says im joking?------------------ Posted by CatKnight on Jan. 17 2001,03:56
thats even worse you fucknut
Posted by solid on Jan. 17 2001,04:02
i wouldnt do either, id take off a piece of the earth, call it stupid land, and stick all those people in it. eventually theyll kill emselves so its not my problem, and id even provide them with resources
Posted by darksol on Jan. 17 2001,04:24
but really catknight, what makes it so wrong? these people are driving the Earth to the brink, they cause conflict all around. it would be a better world without them.------------------ This message has been edited by darksol on January 17, 2001 at 11:28 PM Posted by Sithiee on Jan. 17 2001,08:26
and the fact that you think that you have the right to just get rid of them, makes you one of them. catknight is right.This message has been edited by Sithiee on January 18, 2001 at 03:27 AM Posted by Neophyre on Jan. 17 2001,10:52
Read Rainbow 6 by Tom Clancy.fuckin great stuff Posted by Raven on Jan. 17 2001,18:07
well heres how i see it. Why are stupid people, by whatever means you define them as so annoying? because they are useless. Or they detract from the productivity of the useful people, who provide somehting for the better of mankind. Im not moralist, neither a beleiver, but i feel each persons worth as a human is a direct output of what their worth productivly. So i think that they should take every single person and evaluate them for what their good for and if that turns to be nothing, then simple removal. and if they prove to be useful are returned. That way the world becomes a place of people who are useful in someway and that everyone has a part in everything.now whos to say whats useful and whats not, well thats not my focus on this topic, so i wont go into that. enough said. ------------------ vote for your favorite tribes mod at < www.postnuclear.net. > boink! Posted by Raven on Jan. 17 2001,18:09
ack, ignore the vote part of that sig, that was a long time ago.....
Posted by nobody on Jan. 17 2001,20:07
Killing people is NOT COOL, mmkay?
Posted by DuSTman on Jan. 17 2001,20:39
quote: Yes mum.
Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Jan. 17 2001,20:43
corse it's cool if you've got the guts to kill em with your bare hands and not with some pussy gun. (like some people in here) >: )------------------ Posted by Blain on Jan. 17 2001,21:01
The world actually does need idiots though; how many geniuses do you see driving cabs or moping shit up of a subway floor? Social sponges, on the other hand, I would not mind getting rid of. Something along the lines of: if you have been on welfare for three years and haven’t looked for a job in one year then your next welfare check comes coated in Anthrax.------------------ Posted by Sithiee on Jan. 17 2001,21:18
heres an even better idea. lets kill off all the smart people. no, wait! hear me out! see, if we kill off all the smart people, there will be 2 benefits of this. the first is that many of the previously classified "stupid" people will now be smart, because youve lowered the bar. new smart people! yay! the second, is that all the so called "smart" people wont have to deal with all the "stupid" people that they find so annoying, and they wont be upset about it! alright! now if you go the other way, and you kill off all the "stupid" people, you have 2 very bad outcomes. the first is that some of the previously called "smart" people will become "stupid" because the bar has been raised. That sucks for them, because now your gonna have to kill them, right? the second bad outcome, is as previously mentioned, many workers will now be gone, and all the "smart" people will have to get off their asses and take "stupid" people jobs so that they can get all the things they want.in case you couldnt tell, i was being a little satirical there...and i have to agree with nobody (that sounds odd), killing is bad. Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Jan. 17 2001,21:20
well if you kill the smart people and that makes the stupid people smart wont you have to kill the now smart people too. you'd end up with everyone dead!------------------ Posted by darksol on Jan. 17 2001,21:41
so i see........by killing off all of the smart people you would leave yourself and all of your friends alive......------------------ Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Jan. 17 2001,21:43
yes but because we were stupid now we are smart and so have to die so theres no-one left... except yo momma beacth ------------------ Posted by darksol on Jan. 17 2001,23:23
awwwwwwww damn g------------------ Posted by diusFrenzy on Jan. 17 2001,23:44
with regards to the "worker bee" response to killing the stupid:not the case, if you look throughout history you'll see that many great innovations come as a response to necessity, and that necessity inevitably spawns a solution. If the "worker bees" went away, the odds are that the smart people who survived would be able to generate a solution (such as automating many of those tasks). They do not develop such a solution now, because there's no need -- no energy is expended in that direction due to a lack of necessity. And to nobody -- why is killing bad? If I kill someone who just shot my brother, my father and mother and is about to shoot my wife is that wrong or is that justified self-defense? And if that's okay, then is it okay for the state to execute a known sociopathic homocidal maniac? And if that's okay... where do you draw the line? Your statement suggested that ALL killing is wrong - but I have a hard time imagining anybody actually believes this (except perhaps the severely misguided). ------------------ Posted by kuru on Jan. 18 2001,02:58
even the dalai lama took up a rifle when the chinese army closed in on tibet.not all killing is wrong, but all killing is grievous. ------------------ Posted by CatKnight on Jan. 18 2001,04:13
if you want innovation from necessity, secretly create problems for people to solve (i.e. no more petrolium=super efficient electric cars, incoming asteroid=super advanced space technology, over population=martian colonization, etc.)and seriously guys talking about mass killing is fucked up please dont joke about it. i just came back from the holocause museum in jerusalem a couple weeks ago...you wouldn't joke about it if you did too Posted by darksol on Jan. 18 2001,04:42
holocaust, not sure if that was a typo or if you really think its holocause. In any case, what does that "innovation from necessity" statement exactly mean? human beings are facing none of those problems at this time, and as a common response if its not in our faces then most people wont even think about those problems. by the time any of those occurences pop up it will be to late for any orginizations to come up with anything. The reason for this is that the orginizations that come up with this stuff are usually funded by the government or very wealthy individuals. If the government doesnt see these inventions within their best interest, and it does cost a lot of money, then they generally wont support it.------------------ Posted by kuru on Jan. 18 2001,04:48
everything can be joked about. absolutely everything.some things /have/ to be joked about because they are so serious.. (my apologies to neils bohr for stealing his idea) ------------------ Posted by darksol on Jan. 18 2001,05:41
hows that sithiee? why does asking a question make me one of them?------------------ Posted by Sithiee on Jan. 18 2001,05:44
if you think you have the right to get rid of all people you see as unfit, then you have just proved yourself unfit, and that someone should get rid of you, but they couldnt do it, because then they would be just like you. the mere fact that you even suggested a mass killing scares me. and re-education? eesh, you are one sick motherfucker...
Posted by Vigilante on Jan. 18 2001,05:49
Sithiee looks like a prime candidate for re-education. Hmm./me jots down names Posted by darksol on Jan. 18 2001,05:59
my my.....it seems your getting quite energetic about replying to my question. why so hasty? its not like you saying anything really matters in the end, but just because im curious; again, as seeing how i suggested mass killing, how does that really make me one of the unfit? i dont want an unthought reply trying to get me angry. I want something filled with thought and a good supporting base argument. Until then.......------------------ Posted by Sithiee on Jan. 18 2001,08:33
most people work better under pressure. thats why our super efficient cars arent super efficient, because we can live off of gas powered cars for a long time still. and we knew that in like 10 years, all the gas would be consumed, then wed probably have at least 40 different super efficient cars already, making the ones we have out now look like utter crap....its like that mad tv episode where the guy wakes up sober, and he finds out hes been the president, but all drunk and shit, and how he discovered a cure to AIDS by giving it to 10 of the worlds top leaders (his aide said that they had 4 different cures by the end of the day). yes i know its just tv, but its still true...
Posted by kuru on Jan. 18 2001,08:36
you know, we could solve a lot of this 'food shortage' stuff if we would just have barbecues instead of funerals.------------------ Posted by Bozeman on Jan. 18 2001,09:33
Valentine Michael Smith groks that idea perfectly.
Posted by Wolfguard on Jan. 18 2001,10:26
quote: Mmmmm...Barbecue... I know that I have posted before on this subject but ill say it again. The gene pool does not have a lifeguard and I'm willing to sit in the big chair. The GPPTF is ready to take action. (Gene Pool Purification Task Force) ------------------ Posted by kuru on Jan. 18 2001,11:10
as long as i'm on the task force, and not the object of the task force, i'm all in favor.btw, when we have this barbecue, can i do the cookin? ------------------ Posted by PersonGuy on Jan. 18 2001,14:22
Is it against the law to eat your dead family members? SERIOUSLY! Like if it was all pre-aranged and stuff...------------------ |