Poll: World Domination

Recommended Videos

Soushi

New member
Jun 24, 2009
895
0
0
All righty, i do want to say that this is a semi-serious topic. But enough of that:

All right, there has been a lot of talk about the `American Empire` (i`m Canadian by the way) and such. I wonder though, would a world-wide empire help the human race? Would it mean an era of peace and advancement or tyranny and stagnation. Please realize that not everybody can be the emperor, that's my job. Also, please stay away from using movie/game references, but who am i kidding, you won't. So, any thoughts, plans or complaints, lets hear them.
 

SomethingUnrelated

New member
Aug 29, 2009
2,855
0
0
Whenever an empire is born, people rebel. The empire crushes them, so they go into hiding. The empire becomes over-confident and lazy, and falls, as a result of rebellion.

If any empire were to be next, it would be the American, agreed.
 

Lord George

New member
Aug 25, 2008
2,734
0
0
If America hadn't had a tantrum back when it was young then Britain could have overpowered Spain and France, then controlled all of Europe (preventing both world wars.) Then taken over Asia then gone on to have united the world in a golden age of civilisation and fine moustaches.

In short its all the yanks fault.
 

Sassafrass

This is a placeholder
Legacy
Aug 24, 2009
51,250
1
3
Country
United Kingdom
It would mean an era of tyranny, possibly. Someone somewhere will disagree and start a faction against this empire and start a Galitic Civil War.

Anyway, when the Sasquatch Militia gets powerful, we'll scurge the impure human race!
 

Sonicron

Do the buttwalk!
Mar 11, 2009
5,133
0
0
No way. Even if a worldwide empire were introduced and established, it would eventually lead to the world tearing itself apart through revolution.
 

Kazturkey

New member
Mar 1, 2009
309
0
0
You'd make an awful emperor. I poison you and take over. I rule with a fist made of fluffy marshmallow rather than iron and everyone who dissents is invited to my palace for intelligent discourse, then dropped in the sharktank if they don't stop being mean about my lovely friendly empire of happiness.
 

Kazturkey

New member
Mar 1, 2009
309
0
0
George144 said:
If America hadn't had a tantrum back when it was young then Britain could have overpowered Spain and France, then controlled all of Europe (preventing both world wars.) Then taken over Asia then gone on to have united the world in a golden age of civilisation and fine moustaches.

In short its all the yanks fault.
The brits couldn't even keep full control over as small an island as Ireland. They were cut to bits by the IRA and had to leave.

Tiocfaidh ar la!
 

Timotei

The Return of T-Bomb
Apr 21, 2009
5,162
0
0
A world empire is possible given the right circumstances, however The United Nations and the coalition of NATO would make it quite difficult to achieve.

A global empire wouldn't last very long as well since there would be mass revolution around the world, so unless said empire has 5 million soldiers then the result would be the vanquishing of said Empire and the restoring of political nations.
 

Fniff

New member
Apr 15, 2009
9,333
0
0
I'm more for a state of total anarchy.

Firstly,that will get rid of all the idiots who don't know how to survive properly,

Plus the world won't be so complicated and basically whoever has the most guns and ammo survives.

I'm for a "Do as you please" land and a "Take what you want" Land.

Anyway,it won't have any horrible revolutions and in a few years the world would basically straighten itself out and become the same as it was,leading to exactly the same thing happning that caused the anarchy,thus it becoming a cycle.
 

NeutralDrow

New member
Mar 23, 2009
9,097
0
0
That would be futile, really. The same technology that would even make such an empire possible makes resistance even more probable.

There'd also be no real point. When you're talking an empire, what makes you think it's the end of tyranny and oppression? Directly annexing other countries is a clear violation of self-determination.
 

Soushi

New member
Jun 24, 2009
895
0
0
Kazturkey said:
You'd make an awful emperor. I poison you and take over. I rule with a fist made of fluffy marshmallow rather than iron and everyone who dissents is invited to my palace for intelligent discourse, then dropped in the sharktank if they don't stop being mean about my lovely friendly empire of happiness.
I wouldn't make an good emperor? Good sir, i declare war on you, in fact i declare war on your entire family... no wait, I declare war on your country! MWU HA HA HA HA

But seriously. You and me have the same basic idea it seems, i especially like the shark tank. A few electric eels i there, and we would have a real good show!
 

Cargando

New member
Apr 8, 2009
2,092
0
0
It could go either way, it could be the start of a new era of equality and peace.

But no. Because people are dicks.

Some idiot somewhere, would see a chance for personal gain and would start a revolution. Before you know it, the whole World is tearing itself apart. So no, it would not work.
 

Soushi

New member
Jun 24, 2009
895
0
0
Fniff said:
I'm more for a state of total anarchy.

Firstly,that will get rid of all the idiots who don't know how to survive properly,

Plus the world won't be so complicated and basically whoever has the most guns and ammo survives.

I'm for a "Do as you please" land and a "Take what you want" Land.

Anyway,it won't have any horrible revolutions and in a few years the world would basically straighten itself out and become the same as it was,leading to exactly the same thing happning that caused the anarchy,thus it becoming a cycle.
Ummm, anarchy would just lead to a "bang you're dead" state of people killing each other with no technological or cultural advancement at all. But hey, everybody is entitiled to thier own opinions
 

Kaboose the Moose

New member
Feb 15, 2009
3,842
0
0
George144 said:
If America hadn't had a tantrum back when it was young then Britain could have overpowered Spain and France, then controlled all of Europe (preventing both world wars.) Then taken over Asia then gone on to have united the world in a golden age of civilisation and fine moustaches.

In short its all the yanks fault.
That sounds amazing, it would be better if the Empire was formed by a prime moustache nation dedicated towards world peace and moustache refinement. Oh what fun we could have!.


See what we are missing??.

[sub]Yes, I am quite mad![/sub]
 
May 28, 2009
3,698
0
0
Empires are always destined to fail at one point. I don't think a worldwide one would work.

Dazza5897922 said:
We pushed them all the way back to the north, shame they still control those 6 counties.
We'd not own it at all if it wasn't for Protestant Irish Unionists wanting to stick with Britain.
 

orangebandguy

Elite Member
Jan 9, 2009
3,117
0
41
Then we could invade other planets.

Seriously, no global empire will ever be made unless we are forced into a dystopian society.

So ultimately it wouldn't be good.