Big Brother Sister is watching you.
Big Brother was named after George Orwell’s character Big Brother from his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. E-mail from Big Brother originated from the Ministry of Truth, and users of the software were called Brothers source. Now we have finally reached sister.
You must log in or # to comment.
Friendly* Fascism puts a cute and / or attractive face on dystopian shit, then wraps it in the flag and salutes.
Works great.
*: Not actually friendly
make it “kawaii”/cute at least logic
I think the problem is the intrinsic enemy within rhetoric that is used to keep the public willing to tolerate draconian measures. Also the draconian measures, themselves.
It’s like the thing with cults (which I thought about looking to start a good cult or two): The basic cult template is to create an us vs them mentality against the rest of the world so that the followers can be exploited as cheap labor, easy sex or sexual labor.
(I wanted to created the Esoteric Order of Dagon as a means to allow gender redefinition and gay marriage. But cults have the evil pre-baked in.)
[ now I’m just ranting ] This is also the problem with the (blackboard hypotheticals) of the Christian Nation or the Islamic State. Either one, assuming they want a peaceful thousand-year reign needs to embrace enlightenment values such as liberty, social equality, short or no hierarchy, rule of law with no selective enforcement and sustenance guarantees. And by then, the conservative faithful might feel there’s not much of the religion left.
But without these concessions, the government is at odds with the public. It’s less of a problem if your society is under a population of one-thousand, but then larger societies will dominate your society with culture, if not a massive army.
but then larger societies will dominate your society with culture, if not a massive army
So enforcing micro nations of 1000 people would be the solution then? This reminds me of german states before around the year 1400 to 1600. Later Napoleon came and conquered because they lacked a unified grand army.
I wasn’t meaning to imply that restricting societies to small states is the solution, only that once a state gets larger than a village there’s going to be factioning and rivalry (and hence renegade behavior either to harm or subvert institutions).
Just as we found an alternative solution to infectious disease (centralized disease control, when we give it a proper budget) we need to find an alternative solution to factioning and subversion than keeping groups small. We just don’t know how to do it. Yet.
SMBC once posited a gamification of being nice to each other, in which society was self policing because everyone behaved with benevolence for the points. So I’m not the only person who’s thought about this.
What a perv.
Thanks?
