TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Registration Act

Go To

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#201: Apr 17th 2012 at 4:11:36 AM

I'd notice how every other cop doesn't use a secret identity." Every other cop doesn't have Kingpin, Dr. Doom or Norman Osborn out to kill them. Spider-Man revealed his identity, and a hitman went after his family. There are villains who are master computer hackers, as shown by how often Tony Stark has had his files and even his own frigging armour hacked. There would also be people with access to the database who could be bribed into getting the names of certain heroes. And what happens if the wrong person gets control, the way Osborn did? One of the first things he did was try to get Spider-Man's secret identity; presumably, to destroy his life and kill him. How many other heroes would he have blackmailed and destroyed, if Stark hadn't destroyed the database?

Superheroes aren't other cops. The people they deal with are far more dangerous, and far more insane.

If you're talking about the superhero universes presented by Marvel and DC, that's true. However, in those universes the number of superhumans who are insane, revenge obsessed evil geniuses is incredibly disproportional. If superpowers turned up in reality with a more or less random distribution, you'd have far, far fewer psycho supervillains running around.

But the few still have rights. The majority can't stomp on the rights of a minority. And all your examples are controversial as it is.

A superhuman draft wouldn't work. It would be immoral and impractical. A draft is random. It's not saying, "All black people, report for military service." It's either universal - every single person reports for service, and is sorted through at that point - or it's drawing lots. What you're talking about isn't a draft. It's slavery. It's enslaving a minority for your own purposes, throwing away their rights and making them do what you want them to do, whether you like it or not.

Correction: in a draft every qualified person reports for service. Someone who's not physically or mentally fit to serve is not expected or required to do so. And in a world of superpowers, there are going to be some tasks that only one or two people are qualified to take on.

I will agree that drafting people is slavery, which is why it's only justifiable in extreme circumstances where many people's lives are at risk.

And what happens if they refuse? Do you throw them in prison when they haven't even committed a crime? For wanting to live their own lives? How is that just?

I take issue with the notion that a superhuman draft and superhumans being able to "live their own lives" are incompatible. Yes, the government assigned duties would take up some of their time, but that doesn't mean it would monopolize their time. A Flying Brick may have to spend a few hours each week defusing violent standoffs with criminals and delivering food to war torn regions, and if there's an earthquake or something they can expect to spend a few days on rescue detail, but that's hardly keeping them from having a life.

Do you think other superhumans aren't going to look at that as a dangerous precedent? Of course they will. They'll see a government that doesn't give a shit about them as people, and only sees them as resources to be used as whoever's in charge sees fit. Today, that might mean helping to control forest fires, but tomorrow, it might mean burning down a village in some third-world country.

First off, I think that most superhumans would see getting all their living expenses covered, in exchange for doing some charity work that only they can do, as a pretty good deal, and would likely have little sympathy for the ones who turn it down.

Second, burning down a village is what we call a "war crime". In that scenario, the superhuman could just tell the public what they were ordered to do, and the person who issued the order will be the one in hot water.

Further, this would lead to a superhuman arms race with other countries. They're going to see the US recruiting all its superhumans, and they're going to see it as a threat, and they'll start recruiting all the superhumans in their own country.

You act like a superhuman arms race could be prevented. Even if no country in the world passed a bill explicitely drafting superhumans (which I find unlikely) there are already countries like Switzerland, Israel, and North Korea that have universal conscription, which means they're going to conscript all their superhumans as well, and so the process would begin.

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#202: Apr 17th 2012 at 5:26:01 AM

If you're talking about the superhero universes presented by Marvel and DC, that's true. However, in those universes the number of superhumans who are insane, revenge obsessed evil geniuses is incredibly disproportional. If superpowers turned up in reality with a more or less random distribution, you'd have far, far fewer psycho supervillains running around.

Psycho supervillains isn't the issue. The Kingpin, nor Norman Osborn, nor Lex Luthor are dangerous because of superpowers. (Well, Kingpin is super-strong and Norman has powers, but they're not used often.) What makes them dangerous is their political power, savvy, and the ability to weasel out of any real culpability. That is Truth in Television, not merely a product of a world of superpowers.

Correction: in a draft every qualified person reports for service. Someone who's not physically or mentally fit to serve is not expected or required to do so. And in a world of superpowers, there are going to be some tasks that only one or two people are qualified to take on.

But superpowers would drastically alter the perception of who is "fit" to serve. Once again, if only one out of a thousand people are flying bricks, that would mean there are roughly 7 million of them in the world. And going off the precedent set by world governments during the various arms races, they're not going to care too much about how functional a weapon is before they send it into service. The period between WW 2 and the end of the Cold War is rife with examples of weapons, vehicles, and other war tech that was rushed just to keep the other side from having it.

I take issue with the notion that a superhuman draft and superhumans being able to "live their own lives" are incompatible. Yes, the government assigned duties would take up some of their time, but that doesn't mean it would monopolize their time. A Flying Brick may have to spend a few hours each week defusing violent standoffs with criminals and delivering food to war torn regions, and if there's an earthquake or something they can expect to spend a few days on rescue detail, but that's hardly keeping them from having a life.

But that isn't what Agent Rook was talking about. He literally said that superhumans would be pushed into service to do whatever the government wanted them to do, and use their powers to the best application decided by the government. With the exception of a few hours/days of shore leave, soldiers don't get to decide what they do with their time. Even when off-duty, there's protocol they have to follow and places they're not allowed to go. And when you have a soldier who is literally a walking weapon, those restrictions are going to be even harsher.

First off, I think that most superhumans would see getting all their living expenses covered, in exchange for doing some charity work that only they can do, as a pretty good deal, and would likely have little sympathy for the ones who turn it down.

Again, that's not what Rook was saying. And if it it was, that wasn't what he made it seem like.

Other than that, I've been mostly proposing a systme of reward rather than conscription since the beginning of this thread. For example, I find it utterly stupid that in some stories, the Gotham City justice system hasn't figuring out a way to incorporate Batman as a legally-recognized officer of the law. Not saying he needs to have all the power a cop does, but the ability to legally make an arrest or have access to case files/materials would be a start. Batman has literally proven that Gotham's justice system cannot function without him. So, it makes no sense to me when you have a story with some new politician who uses Batman as a scapegoat or a supervillain is let out of Arkham because Batman arrested him and not a cop.

Second, burning down a village is what we call a "war crime". In that scenario, the superhuman could just tell the public what they were ordered to do, and the person who issued the order will be the one in hot water.

That's not how Real Life governments work. For the most part, governments already use private military companies (aka mercenaries) or independent terrorist/freedom fighters or private citizens to do this sort of job for them. They simply fund or indirectly support these groups and push them to do certain tasks for them (if they weren't going to do them already). For example, if there was a religious extremist group that was planning to burn down that village, the government would just quietly support them from the shadows and deny any involvement.

This is, in my opinion, exactly how superhuman operatives would work.

You act like a superhuman arms race could be prevented. Even if no country in the world passed a bill explicitely drafting superhumans (which I find unlikely) there are already countries like Switzerland, Israel, and North Korea that have universal conscription, which means they're going to conscript all their superhumans as well, and so the process would begin.

The difference is that with superhumans not under government control and regulation, society as a whole has a chance to figure out ways to adapt to this. To put it in perspective, the US government has learned better war tactics from gamers than military experts, and private industry has often figured out better solutions to pressing military concerns than said government itself. Just as it's being assumed that some superhumans would undoubtedly be misanthropic anarchists, there's bound to be some that genuinely want to do good. A pharmaceutical firm, for example, would likely pay BILLIONS for the chance to study Porn Man, and if he wants to use that money to buy a studio and film "Big Juggs in Texas", then fucking let him.

edited 17th Apr '12 5:31:50 AM by KingZeal

AgentRook Since: Feb, 2012
#203: Apr 17th 2012 at 2:04:27 PM

You assume that Draftees aren't compensated? And why wouldn'twe throw them away in Prison. Draft Dodgingis illegal*

so yes they did do something wrong. If you're getting paid for it , and you're serving the public trust than it's not slavery otherwise the whole of the military would count. You say you have cops in your family, they have no Secret Ids, so am i to assume that the IRL Kingpins and Norman Osborns are constantly swearing vengeance on you and Stuffing you into the fridge? Public servants need to be Tpo baccountable, and anonymity is the antithesis of accountability. To be "incorpoted as a legally recognized officer of the law" you have to go through the same registration and control that we do for every other such officer. You're under the belief that Government control over anything is inherently wrong, which is a seriously flawed worldview. The Hobbsian State has been proven time and time again as the ideal organ of human society, just look at what excessive privatization did to Rome. Sure the government would probably do some Black Ops stuff with them but that's what Governments do, and I seem to notce that the CIA or Blackwater hasnt displaced the Police or the Military so I believe the evidence is not in favoir of your "universal black ops" model. Most likely they'd distribute the power to certain areas (a couple of psychics for your Festering Hive of a hometown for example) use the Superman types for Nasa or the like, and then put more of the esoteric ones for public works. The "Nuke-scale" types would be rather redundant due to MAD. we already have world-ending power. That wouldn't change anything. What would change is that power in the hands of sentient individual interests and the vast amount of utility powers opened up. For most powers,fighting crime is one of the least effective ways to serve humanity. And anyone who would deny the aid of the public trust for personal selfish interests, well they deserve what our public legal system gives them.

edited 17th Apr '12 2:14:21 PM by AgentRook

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#204: Apr 17th 2012 at 2:27:39 PM

You assume that Draftees aren't compensated? And why wouldn'twe throw them away in Prison. Draft Dodging is illegal so yes they did do something wrong.

This isn't withholding advanced weapons. This is a person being a weapon. And even then, you're not talking about only those powers which are obviously military-applicable. I'd be expected conscript, apparently, if my ability was to change my skin into solid gold.

If you're getting paid for it , and you're serving the public trust than it's not slavery otherwise the whole of the military would count.

Yes, but military conscription is only temporary, and only during times of war, and only if the person is over 18. What you're suggesting would be applicable even if Little Billy was a ten year old who had the power to hover six inches from the ground.

You say you have cops in your family, they have no Secret Ids, so am i to assume that the IRL Kingpins and Norman Osborns are constantly swearing vengeance on you and Stuffing you into the fridge?

No. Because the government is still fucking corrupt. My family isn't painting bullseyes on their chest like Spider-man or Superman, either. Our most recent police superintendant, who made a vow to deal with the police corruption in our city, was recently given a vote of no-confidence by the other cops in the organization and stripped of his title.

So yeah, don't talk nonsense.

Public servants need to be Tpo baccountable, and anonymity is the antithesis of accountability. To be "incorpoted as a legally

Except public servants are not accountable. There are tons of examples of interned corruption that only comes to light when someone finds out about it later. Read the CIA files from the Cold War. They were actively kidnapping people on the street, subjecting the public unknowingly to gas experiments, and performing illegal mind control experiments.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying private institutions are any better. But government corruption is much harder to stop, because the government can use force or sidestep the law.

You're under the belief that Government control over anything is inherently wrong, which is a seriously flawed worldview.

I never said anything of the sort. Stop strawmanning me.

The Hobbsian State has been proven time and time again as the ideal organ of human society, just look at what excessive privatization did to Rome. Sure the government would probably do some Black Ops stuff with them but that's what Governments do, and I seem to notce that the CIA or Blackwater hasnt displaced the Police or the Military so I believe the evidence is not in favoir of your "universal black ops" model.

Except that isn't my model. And no, I'm not saying that a bunch of super-soldiers or super-privateers would replace the army. That's freaking stupid, and I never said that at all. I said that the government would benefit from allowing supers free agency. I would imagine that the government would try to willingly conscript a number of supers first by paying them exorbitant amounts of money or promising that they'd be made for life. However, depending on how many of them there are, it would behoove them to also leave the ones that don't sign up alone. (Alone as in, don't force them to do anything—no government would ever stop watching them, however. Even in Marvel or DC, SHIELD or Cadmus doesn't leave the private supers alone.)

Most likely they'd distribute the power to certain areas (a couple of psychics for your Festering Hive of a hometown for example) use the Superman types for Nasa or the like, and then put more of the esoteric ones for public works.

Which would happen in a privatized supers industry, regardless.

The "Nuke-scale" types would be rather redundant due to MAD. we already have world-ending power. That wouldn't change anything.

Stop right there. Yes it would. It would change everything.

There are several points in human history where nuclear weapons were almost used because one man was willing to push for it. Douglas Mac Arthur pushed for it, it almost happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and there are other incidents where we were minutes away from midnight. However, what's saved us every time was that WMD required a large number of people to get off the ground. As it stands now, no one person (in most countries anyway) can just shoot a WMD whenever they feel like it. If you put all that power into the hands of one man, all bets are off, even if he's one of the "good guys". At that point, we literally have no choice but to either play nice or kill him, because one bad day is all it takes for millions of people to die.

And furthermore, MAD wouldn't even apply here. For example, if the Human Torch decided to spontaneously go nova, who could stop him? Sure, the Avengers possibly could if they happened to be in the right place at the right time, but as 9-11 proved in universe, they not always are. If we had a world of superhumans and one of them had an ability equivalent to Firestorm, there wouldn't be a damn thing we could do about it.

What would change is that power in the hands of sentient individual interests and the vast amount of utility powers opened up. For most powers, fighting crime is one of the least effective ways to serve humanity. And anyone who would deny the aid of the public trust for personal selfish interests, well they deserve what our public legal system gives them.

I agree with the first part. Fighting crime would be one of the least-helpful ways of serving humanity. But it would also be one of the most necessary.

Once again, the entire point to private entities like Spider-man and Batman is that they can go places and do things that ordinary officers of the law can't.

edited 17th Apr '12 2:44:37 PM by KingZeal

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#205: Apr 17th 2012 at 3:06:41 PM

"And why wouldn't we throw them away in Prison."

Because they've done nothing wrong? This isn't draft dodging, because what you're describing actually isn't a draft. It's indentured servitude. It's been explained repeatedly to you how your scenario differs vastly from a draft - drafts are either random or universal, rather than targeted, and last for a set period of time. What you're describing is the government exploiting a minority and declaring certain people to be the property of the State. Their compensation is irrelevant. You could pay them several million dollars a year, they're still being treated like property.

And that opens the system for a lot of abuse. If I'm a good marksman, should the government be allowed to force me into military service? If I'm good at math, can the government force me to work for the IRS? If I get a medical degree, but then choose to pursue another field, can the government force me to practice medicine?

In real life, the likes of Kingpin and Norman Osborn are arrested for white collar crimes. They don't give two shits about the specific police sent to arrest them, because the cops aren't the ones who actually caught them. Most of the time, the real work ends up being done by nameless investigators.

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
AgentRook Since: Feb, 2012
#206: Apr 17th 2012 at 4:13:37 PM

Zeal, why would you write several paragraphs responding to a line of my post when the very next line addressed the problem you brought up. (The WMD in the hands of individual interests)

The Mac Arthur Cold War tales are one of the exact reasons why we can't trust individual interests with such power, they need the same checks and balances we have on WM Ds irl, which are achieve via Government Control.

Also I wasn't "talking" nonsense. You made an argument that Superheros needed Secret I Ds to be saved from Villainous reprisals, and yet there are countless law enforcement agents (some you know personally) who find ways to deal with this while still doing there jobs despite your placement of Norman Osborns and Fisk's IRL.

If the government invokes eminent domain, or writes a law or does any of the countless legal and constitutional things it has at its disposal to make such a registration, any rebels would be criminals in which case its well within there bounds to arrest, try and convict them. (The high power levels involved requiring a Station 42 level facility)

Likewise you can't instigate a Slippery Slope fallacy as [up] did, a man who can make gold out of air or a walking cancer cure are far more important and dangerous than "good math."

I'm also sure that any Superhumans not militarized would fall to the private sector, and just like most new frontiers, would devolve to Companies overtime. We had the A Bomb before Nuclear Power stations after all.

The Government is the only institution that can be trusted with such power. Giving any average joe off the street uncontrolled fantastic powers would lead to disaster.

We need to put these people under the auspices of democratically elected and appointed officials both to preserve innocent life and to ensure the public trust, the individual sector simply cannot be held in good faith to wield such power, either competently or benevolently.

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#207: Apr 17th 2012 at 4:45:41 PM

It's not a slippery slope. It's simply extending your logic.

You believe the government should be allowed to force people with useful skills into indentured servitude. Does that apply to people with medical degrees who leave the profession? They can save lives, after all. So can the government force them to continue practicing medicine?

If a person with flight or energy blasts can be turned into the property of the State - and that is exactly what you're saying - then why not someone with medical training? Or who's good with a gun? What separates a doctor from the guy who can control biology? Why is one allowed to live their own life, while the other is arrested for wanting to do the same?

And what you're doing wouldn't be constitutional. It's effectively slavery. Even if you're paying them, the fact is that you're still taking a specific minority, and forcing them to engage in whatever work their owner tells them to do. You're turning them into the property of the State, and that is blatantly unconstitutional. You'd be throwing people in prison for standing up for their rights.

Requiring people with powers to undergo training to ensure they're able to use those powers responsibly - that would be fine. As soon as you start telling them how to use those powers, you've crossed a line.

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#208: Apr 17th 2012 at 5:26:13 PM

Zeal, why would you write several paragraphs responding to a line of my post when the very next line addressed the problem you brought up. (The WMD in the hands of individual interests) The Mac Arthur Cold War tales are one of the exact reasons why we can't trust individual interests with such power, they need the same checks and balances we have on WM Ds irl, which are achieve via Government Control.

Except you can't do that, because if they have any control over their own powers, no matter how many checks you have in place, they will still be able to use those powers. There would have to be a means of permanently removing their powers before you even attempt this. And even then, you run into the same problem that kicked off the third X-Men movie: calling their talents a disease will get these people to turn against you.

In essence, what you're suggesting isn't feasible. If a single person is a WMD, then you cannot stop a Mac Arthur-esque situation. They ALREADY have that power.

Also I wasn't "talking" nonsense. You made an argument that Superheros needed Secret I Ds to be saved from Villainous reprisals, and yet there are countless law enforcement agents (some you know personally) who find ways to deal with this while still doing there jobs despite your placement of Norman Osborns and Fisk's IRL.

Then you missed my point entirely.

The point isn't that cops can't do their jobs. It's that the true corruption is ingrained in the system. Your point about cops doing their jobs is a fallacy because the problem isn't about their jobs. It's about the oversight that allows corruption in the first place. That's something very difficult to see and even harder to fix without outside intervention.

If the government invokes eminent domain, or writes a law or does any of the countless legal and constitutional things it has at its disposal to make such a registration, any rebels would be criminals in which case its well within there bounds to arrest, try and convict them. (The high power levels involved requiring a Station 42 level facility) Likewise you can't instigate a Slippery Slope fallacy as did, a man who can make gold out of air or a walking cancer cure are far more important and dangerous than "good math."

Still depends. If he can only turn his skin gold, he's absolutely worthless. If he can turn anything into gold, then thats pretty useful. If he's the only person that can do it, however, it would make him unfeasible for most real military applications. In that case, he really would be better suited for small-scale applications of his power.

And a walking cancer cure would be even worse. He would honestly be completely unreasonable as a legitimate tool for the betterment of society. If anything, his very existence alone would divide every force on earth and turn them against each other. You would have less to fear from the man himself than the people who'd be after HIM.

If the guy wants to make porn, let him.

I'm also sure that any Superhumans not militarized would fall to the private sector, and just like most new frontiers, would devolve to Companies overtime. We had the A Bomb before Nuclear Power stations after all.

And there would be few problems with that.

The Government is the only institution that can be trusted with such power. Giving any average joe off the street uncontrolled fantastic powers would lead to disaster. We need to put these people under the auspices of democratically elected and appointed officials both to preserve innocent life and to ensure the public trust, the individual sector simply cannot be held in good faith to wield such power, either competently or benevolently.

Except again, they wouldn't have the power. If Porn Man or Goldy have to activate their powers to use them, nothing the government could do would actually give them the control.

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#209: Apr 17th 2012 at 6:34:25 PM

You believe the government should be allowed to force people with useful skills into indentured servitude. Does that apply to people with medical degrees who leave the profession? They can save lives, after all. So can the government force them to continue practicing medicine?

If a person with flight or energy blasts can be turned into the property of the State - and that is exactly what you're saying - then why not someone with medical training? Or who's good with a gun? What separates a doctor from the guy who can control biology? Why is one allowed to live their own life, while the other is arrested for wanting to do the same?

The difference is there are lots of doctors in the world. If one guy decides not to use their medical degree, there are plenty of others who can take their place; people's survival does not depend on this specific person using their talents. But if there's only one guy in the world who can control biology, then not having them use their abilities means letting thousands of people die who could otherwise have been saved.

Now, if superpowers are common enough that there are a dozen or so biology controllers in the world, then it's not such a big deal if one guy decides not to use their power for medicinal purposes.

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#210: Apr 17th 2012 at 6:56:35 PM

There are plenty of doctors, but there are also plenty of sick people. There aren't enough doctors for everyone who's sick, so if someone with medical training decides they don't want to be a doctor, people will die as a result.

So what's the difference?

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#211: Apr 17th 2012 at 7:31:27 PM

Because doctors and hospitals, when they can't handle all the patients they get, prioritize the most critical cases (or at least they're supposed to). While it's different in Third World countries (where getting supplies is often the more pressing issue), in industrialized nations it's very rare that someone will straight up die because the doctors just couldn't spare the time for them. The only time that really happens is in Emergency Rooms, and that's not so much because there aren't enough doctors, but because there aren't enough doctors in the right places. You can't predict when an ER is going to have a slow night or a busy night, and unless two of them are close to each other, shuttling doctors back and forth based on where they're needed is an inefficient use of their time.

AgentRook Since: Feb, 2012
#212: Apr 17th 2012 at 9:01:04 PM

If you're going to keep calling things unconstitutional I'm going to need a cite. Unconstitutional doesn't mean "I don't find it moral" likewise claiming something Slavery doesn't make it so. We have legal definition and stipulations of what define such things as well as ingrained rules and regulations that democratically elected officials have to follow. Any Registration would go have to follow these rules and would be totally legal and constitutional. That's the thing about the Governments, it works for the People. Which again goes to my main point, Super Powers should belong to the public trust, not individual gain.

Also dont make this an ethnic thing. Not be the resident Angry Black Man but it borders on insensitive when people throw around comparisons they have no business dealing with. Unless we have a genetic meat origin for the powers (ala the X-Men0 it's not an ethnic or racial issue, it's regulation of a particular sub-set of the population due to a condition, something done all the time in many states.

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#213: Apr 17th 2012 at 9:36:41 PM

When you talk about turning a minority into government property, certain comparisons are going to come up.

Nothing in the constitution allows for the government to literally own people. And what you're advocating is for the government to own people. When you're forcing them into service for an indefinite period, that's ownership of them. It's indentured servitude. Slavery.

People do not belong to the public trust. People belong to themselves. No one else. You're trying to dehumanize them by equating them to their abilities, but it doesn't work that way. "Super powers" don't belong to the public any more than "medical expertise" does. The powers are an ability possessed by a minority. So what you're saying is that it's OK to have a minority "belong" to the public.

It's not OK. It's never OK.

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#214: Apr 18th 2012 at 3:00:42 AM

So if more than 50% of the population gained superpowers, you'd be okay with a law that required superpowers be used for the common good?

I'm just not seeing what the big deal is. Giving up some liberties in exchange for certain benefits is what society is all about. The government provides people with services, and in turn it's allowed to restrict people from certain behaviors, take some of their property, and on occasion require them to perform certain tasks. Yeah, a superhuman draft would single out certain people, but so do other kinds of required labor: people without income don't have to file income tax returns, mentally retarded people don't have to serve on juries, parapalegics don't have to join the military, etc.

Look, let's try a specific example. Suppose there's a superhuman that we'll call Lava Lady; she has the power to control molten rock. When a volcano's about to erupt near a town, the government comes to Lava Lady and says they need to fly her over to the volcano so she can stop the eruption. They'll pay her for her time, but they don't give her a choice in the matter, and she has to spend the next two days flying to the volcano, using her powers to save the town, and flying back home.

After Lava Lady's done with this chore, she heads out to a bar for a drink and gripes to a friend about what a pain it all was. Then her friend mentions how she just lost her home. It seems the government was building a new highway through town, and her house was right in the middle of its path. So the government invoked the eminent domain law, allowing them to seize the friend's house against her will so they could use it for a public works project. She was financially compensated for the loss of her property, but she's still pissed about it and is going to have to spend a lot of her time now trying to find a new place to live.

Which would you say was treated worse by the government: Lava Lady or her friend?

edited 18th Apr '12 3:02:09 AM by RavenWilder

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#215: Apr 18th 2012 at 3:53:00 AM

As you said, "the government provides people with services". Like a police force, a military, roads, clean water, power, etc.

So to turn your question around on you for a second, let's assume that Lava Lady decides she doesn't want to do that. Instead, she's going to renounce her citizenship and fly out to some unchartered island close to Africa with about 20 other superhumans of about her power level and make their own society, without any need for other governments.

Should they be allowed to do this?

edited 18th Apr '12 3:53:48 AM by KingZeal

harkko Since: Apr, 2010
#216: Apr 18th 2012 at 5:02:57 AM

Some people ignore the fact that soldiers, police officers and medical personality need not only certain skills that can be tought but also certain psychological temperament. In my country where conscription is still in use, the army tries to make sure that the people, who are drafted are psychologically fit to serve.

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#217: Apr 18th 2012 at 5:04:48 AM

[up][up] I'd consider the decision irresponsible, but allowable. However, unless they've got just the right combination of powers and/or have a Reality Warper in their mix, it's going to be difficult to have a comfortable lifestyle in a nation with so few people, particularly if "I don't have to help anybody if I don't want to" is the prevailing philosophy.

[up] Well, yeah, it goes without saying you shouldn't have people do a job they are psychologically ill-equipped to do.

edited 18th Apr '12 5:05:37 AM by RavenWilder

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#218: Apr 18th 2012 at 5:09:18 AM

Well then, that would be acceptable in my view. It would never, ever happen in Real Life, but it would be just.

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#219: Apr 18th 2012 at 5:17:17 AM

Theoretically everyone has the right to renounce their country of origin and start a new nation where the laws are more to their liking. It's just ridiculously difficult to do so.

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#220: Apr 18th 2012 at 5:21:39 AM

Well yeah, because most of us aren't our own walking resources.

Again, that's the biggest problem/advantage with a person of Super Weight 4 or higher. It's not just the amount of power, but the fact that they don't need any other people to use it.

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#221: Apr 18th 2012 at 5:57:54 AM

Still, even if you have a lot of raw power, it doesn't necessarily let you grow/catch your own food or build your own tools.

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#222: Apr 18th 2012 at 6:07:14 AM

That's true. And that's precisely why most supers wouldn't do it.

As I've mentioned before, if we've got people with Type 4 power scales running around (or, hell, even a very precise or useful Type 2 or 3), it's only a matter of time until the world governments evolve into something similar to feudalism. Without the ability to take away the power that the rest of the world needs/covets, the only measure of control will be to grant privilege and title to those that possess them in exchange for cooperation, with the threat of removing them and/or no longer supporting them should they screw up. In the end, though, if and when a system develops that relies on these powers (such as governments which conscript supers into service and use other supers to keep them in line) then those supers will become more and more needed and thus gain more and more lordship. They would likely develop vices/comforts. And those vices would be our main measure of keeping them under control.

It's similar to what's already happened with the petroleum industry, as well as the military-industrial complex. The system we use right now is one that we so depend on that we can't go back lest we utterly destroy the balance of power as it exists today. It's extremely difficult for any lasting and permanent change to happen, but even then, it's mostly because if one of those companies screws up, then we'll just go to someone else who can do it. That literally will not be an option depending on the power of the supers in question.

edited 18th Apr '12 6:13:25 AM by KingZeal

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#223: Apr 18th 2012 at 12:43:35 PM

"So if more than 50% of the population gained superpowers, you'd be okay with a law that required superpowers be used for the common good?"

No.

"Giving up some liberties in exchange for certain benefits"

The superhumans give up their liberties, while others enjoy the benefits. That's not a fair trade-off.

Your examples are people who are excluded from something that is otherwise universal.

In your scenario, Lava Lady was given a specific timeframe her services would be required for. A temporary emergency recruitment is one thing. What I'm arguing against is superhumans becoming the property of the State, which is what Rook is arguing in favour of.

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
AgentRook Since: Feb, 2012
#224: Apr 18th 2012 at 3:24:39 PM

The Military works the same way and no one here calls it "indentured servitude" or "slavery." Those terms are defined by there operandi not who they target. And they are very constitutional as the previous given precedents show.

Also for the Lava Lady example, do individuals have the right to secede from the nation in the US Government? I know States don't, but whats the rule on individuals? And I'm sure they're be some property issues involved, as well as the need to be recognized legalized. Also that would make her a total bitch for letting all those people get melted.

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#225: Apr 18th 2012 at 5:25:19 PM

[up] No. The military does not work the same, even in times of a draft. We have explained this to you repeatedly. Military service is temporary, with a set period of service. You have given no indication that your scenario would be the same. Presently, in the US and many other countries, military service is voluntary rather than mandatory. With a draft, it applies to everyone over 18. Some people will be rejected, but only after they show up. There are also factors that have always allowed for refusing military service. Certain groups - I know the Jehovah's Witnesses are a definite example - are registered as conscientious objectors. (Which raises another question: If a Jehovah's Witness has powers the military deems useful, are you going to force him to serve? Thereby violating his First Amendment rights, as well?)

What you're talking about is in no way equivalent to military service. You are describing a minority being declared the property of the State, to be owned for as long as the State feels like using them, and for whatever purpose the State sees fit. That sure sounds a lot like slavery to me.

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.

Total posts: 233
Top