Poll: Would you live in a Police State?

Recommended Videos

Chechosaurus

New member
Jul 20, 2008
841
0
0
I would never choose to live in the kind of police state described in this thread. I think that jthm has got it right though. We all in a police state to a degree and I'm sure most of us live in a Capitalist one at that. As for those of you who say that you would live in a Police State, I'm sure that you have all broken the law AT LEAST once. Think about it... It would only take one mistake for them to fuck you up.

I do like the people that are going on about rebellion and all that jazz though as I would put money on the fact that most people here would never rebel to the extent which they make out. Maybe the response to "Tidy your room" would be a No but really... How many of you are even members of a political party or genuinely believe in anarchy and all the freedom you can eat? The extent of our freedom is limited more than you all think. I want to throw out capitalism but I've got to live and even the independent food stores are becoming super chains run by rich bastards paying immigrants next to nothing.
 

Tyranicus

New member
Feb 8, 2008
313
0
0
But in the society im describing the masses would be equal but controlled.

Correct me if Im wrong but I think Socialism and Authority go hand in hand.
 

AgentNein

New member
Jun 14, 2008
1,476
0
0
Dr.Kay said:
AgentNein said:
jthm said:
AgentNein said:
jthm said:
I do, we just call it a democracy.
Yeah, I think it's safe to say that you have no idea what you're talking about.
You know what they say about assumptions?

Fact is, the U.S. is more of a police state than most would like to admit. We have two candidates chosen for us to act as figureheads of govt. Why only 2? Surely there are more ideas and idealogies than can be boiled down to Democrat or Republican.

Our Press is ranked 53rd most free by an independent Swiss media watch group. Why? Because it is influenced, controlled and owned by wealthy members of our society who have ties to govt. and a personal stake in which news stories are aired and how much time they are given. As such our decisions are made based on erroneous information provided to us by people in power.

Certainly we are free to work or not to work. For most of us that means we are free to work or free to starve and lose shelter. What we actually have in this country is an elaborate system of wage slavery, allowing us to buy our own chains. Think that isn't a police state? Try missing a few payments or refusing to pay your taxes. You'll meet up with the police eventually in that conflict between citizen and state.

Our decisions are made for us as to what we eat and drink or otherwise consume, based on what is made available in our area, what is commercialized and what is legal. Further what is legal isn't decided on a basis of what is healthy or good for us, it's decided by wealthy special interests with an interest in selling certain things and not allowing competition. Do you know why marijuana isn't legal in this country? Because back in the 1800s rope manufacturers petitioned the government to make the Hemp plant illegal because Hemp rope (higher quality rope I might add) was putting them out of business. Cigarettes are still legal despite having no positive benefits and many negative ones. And lest you think I'm some crazy, pot smoking conspiracy theorist, I don't use pot or any other illegal substance. I just see bullshit for what it is.

Our communications are routinely monitored by the government, both through wiretapping and digital means. Not everyone clearly, but quite a number of dissenting opinions. This is done under the guise of crime fighting or protecting us from remote or vague "terrorist threats".
Read the patriot act if you disagree.

Our civil liberties are curtailed by a sense of morality that is expressly forbidden by the very constitution we are supposed to uphold. Disagree? See Prop 8.

I realize you were only giving a flippant response to a flippant comment that you disagreed with, but try not to assume the level of education or awareness of another person based on one sentence, m'kay?
With all due respect, I work with what you give me. But I do appreciate the well thought out response.
Can't blame the government for realising that americans are sub-human and are thus extremely easy to manipulate.
See? Perfect example of working with what I'm given. Now Dr. Kay may not be a mentally-lazy troll who enjoys generalizing entire populations of countries, but that's what I'm getting out of this post.
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
HazukiHawkins said:
That's why we have laws. In order for some rights to be had, some others must be sacrificed.

And I think I'll pass on 'The Party'.
 

CapnGod

New member
Sep 6, 2008
463
0
0
Actually, the more I think about it, if I'm the one in power doing all the oppressing, then fuck yeah I would.
 

The Hairminator

How about no?
Mar 17, 2009
3,231
0
41
I could live in a police state, although if it wasn't corrupt. If the goverment did what was right and not something else for other, corrupt reasons. However, I would probably be bombarded with enough propaganda anyways so I'd loose my point of view pretty fast so I wouldn't protest.
 

Jack_Uzi

New member
Mar 18, 2009
1,414
0
0
I agree with the people who say that most western countries tend to slide in a more and more subtle way of putting people down/invade their (human) rights. Maybe neither the terms police state or totalitarian apply. I guess with a police state the misconception of having cops all over the place is soon made, a totalitarian state brings the power to the state and nothing else (president or whatever).
I think since politicians get more and more entagled the point of power is between both politics and corporations.
For what is not a better way of knowing what maket strategy to follow if you propose to your fellow politicians to microchip money and goods for example.
In my opinion the thought of a president having power is a bit naive. If a bit corporation doesn't want him/her in power... well it'll leave the leave the country and all the goodies such as tax and places to work. It could also just pull the plug on the service it delivers.
So for those of you who are still reading my ramblings i tell you this: there will be choise and freedom in your country. It's in different colours and shapes and in stores near you. Neatly chipped with cipped money you pay or the info they get when you use your card so they can track your behavior (don't mind the cameras on the streat as you move along) . The government will all allow it because most terrorist like peanut butter... as the statistics and the profit they'll get from all of this will tell you.
And this is probably just the tipp of the iceberg... sleep tight.
 

wewontdie11

New member
May 28, 2008
2,661
0
0
Beowulf DW said:
"Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve niether."
Benjamin Franklin was a very insightful guy, and correct.

England pretty much is these days but I wouldn't like to by choice.
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
It depends if its regulated correctly, and to what extent.
Because if a police state is internally regulated (not necessarily by the people) the extent that power can be abused is limited only to the furthering of the country itself, and not to benefit the leaders.

Its a blurry line, but if properly done it could be tolerable.
 

johnman

New member
Oct 14, 2008
2,915
0
0
I would if i was part of the secerte police and had plenty of power to abuse
 

Mr Frogurt

New member
Oct 12, 2008
160
0
0
So the revolution begins...
Fly my pretties, break CCTV cameras, burn your mobile phones and rise, rise for FREEDOM!

Seriously, i do believe you should not monitor your people, as to violate millions of peoples' privacy to find a few bad eggs........Hmm, I would rather not.