Alright, I've come to a decision: I hate all of it. Democrats, republicans, socialists, communists, anarchists, monarchists, despotists, and fascists; none of their forms of government work. They all end up with one happy minority (ie. white males, Brahmin, politicians) prospering, while the rest of the population is shuffled into the role of the proletariat, where they stew until one new minority get the charisma, guts and guns they need to rise. Whatever kind of government establishes itself, this cycle seems to repeat. It's come to be my opinion that this cycle does not show some problem in society. That would be too easy; problems can be fixed. My mantra, of late is this: Society is the problem.
Wait, that's not quite accurate. My mantra is closer to "Fuck, let's burn it all."
In reality, this is rather, if not entirely, close to my proposition. The main idea is to get rid of society. So, here's my game plan (in four easy steps!):
1. Seize power.
This sounds hypocritical, but some manipulation is necessary before we reach the finale. A big country, preferably one with a lot of bombs, is ideal. The coup needn't be particularly clean; we just need planes and bombs.
2. Incite hysteria worldwide.
Make sure everyone thinks they are about to be invaded. This is important; Libya, Iran, Norway, and Siera Lione all need to be afraid of a global takeover.
3. Arm the masses.
This, combined with the next step, should be enough to take out the brunt of the population, thus removing society. This should be done by some network of conspiratorial "Freedom Fighting" groups, who will, working for you, distribute the guns.
4. Fuck it all.
Bombs, bombs, bombs, and more bombs. This is the step where we set off a high explosive in every major urban center, do hundred-trillions of dollars of damage, and take a huge bite out of 6.7 billion people.
Now this plan may seem a bit drastic, but keep in mind that I do not actually intend for anyone to make good on this proposition. This is nothing but a thought experiment; showing that it is possible to reduce humanity to a small amount of villages and hamlets, pretty much removing technology. With that said, this is, in my opinion, the only real way to "fix" the world. Who knows; maybe it would kill off humans altogether. If this happened, the earth would be considerably better off.
Hmm... a plan this glorious needs a name. I dub it: super-anarchism!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
-*-*-*! frightened !*-*-*-
wow porter, what did you get on your take over the world paper last year, it seems as though your evil scheming ability is pretty epic and would serve you well!
I don't even have a response for this.
*leaves for moon*
you are seriously messed up. Ok, i get it, the population is a little big, but there are much better ways to get it down to size without killing billions of innocent,and some not innocent, people. Control reproduction, maybe. I've thought about it too, and humans sort of need to evolve, so a natural, but avoidable for the smarter and better equipped, disaster would probably be ok for the human race in the long run. But murdering billions of people? There are so many things wrong with that. A) if you bomb every major city, the people left would probably not be able to survive, the average person has no way how to support themselves, and you have not way of controlling that the people who would know how to support themselves survive, because it's just random bombing. B) the people who are left are probably the people who knew about the plan, and supported it, so the human race is then made up of a bunch of sadistic bastards. Is that good for humanity? No. And honestly, anyone who can come up with that kind of a plan, even without the intention of seeing it out, and think of it as a good thing, needs some serious help. Seriously, what the hell?
lol, sorry, I'm a passionate person.
I can see where you're coming from, and I agree on some points. Still, the purpose of arming everyone is to maintain a degree of randomness in survival, and to eliminate the establishment of a new government. Similarly, this should remove some survival issues (hopefully more than it presents.) In reality, I can only agree with my own proposition from an objective logistical standpoint, and although I have no belief in transcendent morality, I still maintain my evolutionary compulsion to sustain human life in general. My apologies if I offended; the purpose was merely that of a thought experiment, not an actual proposal. Thanks for discussing.
Dude-- The White House is probably coming to our house at this very moment...
No wonder they searched my mail.
I want my honey stick.*
*Ask me for details
Post a Comment