TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

It is a two party police state

Go To

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#1: Mar 25th 2011 at 3:33:34 PM

Yes, that does pose some odd issues because most police states are controlled by a single political party. The some dictatorship tropes need to be subverted here but not sure which ones.

Ok the thing is that this is a parliamentary republic that was formed out of the remains of a constitutional monarchy that was weaken by a short-lived civil war and destroyed by the work of foreign corporations.

One party is led by a former prince whom lead a failed rebellion (the aforementioned civil war) against his brother, the emperor, as part of a plan to force the the nation to adopt some form of popular rule to end various domestic issues. So yes it this party is kinda the Fantasy Counterpart Culture to a Communist Party.

The other party is composed of the former nobility. They were loyal to the late emperor, but absolutely despised his brother for having played a part in the downfall of the old empire. While they longed for the days of a monarchy, they know that it won't come back so they formed this rival party to secure whatever political influence they still have.

Of course, now that you know about the backgrounds of the parties. Just what would make them agree on really harsh punishments and law enforcement tactics for various felonies, including speaking out against the state?

Yej (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
#2: Mar 25th 2011 at 3:35:00 PM

They're actually one Party, or functionally one Party, because they know that'll let them stay in power? Sort of like a smaller scale version of the war in Nineteen Eighty Four.

edited 25th Mar '11 3:35:22 PM by Yej

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#3: Mar 25th 2011 at 3:58:58 PM

Nah I really want the two parties to hate each other. While other countries like to demonize them as being some monolithic dictatorship, only those on the inside know how divided their government really is.

edited 25th Mar '11 3:59:42 PM by Worlder

PDown It's easy, mmkay? Since: Jan, 2012
It's easy, mmkay?
#4: Mar 25th 2011 at 10:18:54 PM

How about two parties that hate each other and alternate between being in power, and whichever one is in power persecutes the other, but tehy're really Not So Different... or different at all aside from name and logos?

At first I didn't realize I needed all this stuff...
TParadox Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: The captain of her heart
#5: Mar 25th 2011 at 10:30:37 PM

Write the society that the U.S.A. would have if the Democrats and Republicans were both right about the other side.

Fresh-eyed movie blog
Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#6: Mar 25th 2011 at 10:39:14 PM

Hmm, would a prolonged string of riots between the voters of the two parties result in the government having to establish more heavy police presence on a daily basis?

Because no one is going to run for office if the moment they step out the door they see a horde of angry citizens and find themselves missing everything from the chin down.

Wanderhome The Joke-Master Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
The Joke-Master
#7: Mar 26th 2011 at 5:00:48 PM

Huh. I know a guy in Real Life who came up with almost the exact same type of society, minus the two-party part, as the background for a screenplay. This world wouldn't happen to have a retrofuturistic, Forties-like aesthetic, would it?

Anyway, riots and unrest would more likely cause both parties to try to take power by force rather than work together. If they both felt threatened enough by some foreign power/sci-fi threat/mutant underclass/whatever, though, they might be afraid of weakening themselves through internercine struggle, but at the same time paranoid about subversive elements. That way they might be willing to try to get along, at least as long as they feel threatened by third parties.

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#8: Mar 27th 2011 at 2:56:18 PM

Maybe I didn't state it more clearly.

The riots aren't citizen against the state. It is citizens of one party lynching on the citizens of the other party.

Both parties conclude that this is unacceptable and proceed with much greater police presence nationwide in order to curb the animosity of the populace.

Sounds good?

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#9: Mar 28th 2011 at 8:10:24 AM

I think it works best if both parties are terrified of the citizenry. They both welcome draconian laws on what the citizens can say and do because they're both afraid of a general citizen uprising sweeping one (or both!) of them out of power.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#10: Mar 28th 2011 at 2:32:59 PM

But the indefinitely long string of riots (most of them armed riots) is also a good reason too right?

BTW this country in which these two parties rule are part of a Grey-and-Gray Morality world.

Wanderhome The Joke-Master Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
The Joke-Master
#11: Mar 29th 2011 at 1:38:51 PM

"The riots aren't citizen against the state. It is citizens of one party lynching on the citizens of the other party.

Both parties conclude that this is unacceptable and proceed with much greater police presence nationwide in order to curb the animosity of the populace.

Sounds good? "

I understood you the first time. I'm just saying that if I were trying to guide my party to absolute power, and there were riots between my supporters and my opponents' supporters, there's no way I'd go "well, that must mean we need to work together". That would indicate to me that I have enough popular support to make a bid for control of the nation and exterminate my enemies, and that they have the means to do the same, so I'd better hurry up and kill them before they get a chance to kill me.

If there was an outside threat, or like Native Jovian said, a majority of the population that wants both me and my opponent gone, then I might be willing to work with the other party, if only because the civil war/purge to destroy them would weaken me enough that my party would be destroyed by the outside threat/oppressed masses.

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#12: Mar 29th 2011 at 2:48:50 PM

Well it is a majority of the population that supports either of the two parties.

But yeah neither would dare attempt to oust the other. No more matter how loud the respective mob calls for the death of the other.

Especially since the country of origin of the MegaCorps are pressuring their home country's government for retribution.

SPOILERS: There won't be another war for a while. The police state rebuilds and the executives of the MegaCorps get away with their atrocities.

edited 29th Mar '11 2:49:24 PM by Worlder

Wanderhome The Joke-Master Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
The Joke-Master
#13: Mar 29th 2011 at 3:11:45 PM

As long as that other country poses a serious threat, then yeah, it would be plausible for the two parties to tolerate each other.

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#14: Mar 29th 2011 at 9:17:33 PM

Now that we got the origins. Sort of.

Now here is something that's totally odd. By this time you know that is country is gonna be an odd one.

Dissent is permitted to a vague extent. Sometimes one can write an entire 300 page book criticizing both parties and the government structure itself, sell it nationwide and get away with it. However, one bad phone-tap conversation can lead to jailtime and redtape up the wazoo (the all are innocent until proven guilty...in a real trial).

Also, the populace is armed to the teeth. Ample supply of commercially available guns and ammunition, and adult education courses on guerrilla warfare (and how to properly display the decapitated heads of enemies) taught at state funded schools.

Yet, most of them don't feel any need to rise up. Any band of "freedom fighters" will promptly have their brains blow out... by the bystanders.

Yeah, odd place to live. Also the citizens either have horns and/or oversized canines.

Wanderhome The Joke-Master Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
The Joke-Master
#15: Mar 30th 2011 at 7:02:31 AM

Okay. That would imply that the vast majority of people are consenting to the current government. Why would it then need or want to be a police state?

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#16: Mar 30th 2011 at 10:29:57 AM

Because that's how they roll! It is all about image and intimidation. The leaders have decided what better way to mess with the heads of other countries than to fully embrace the oppressive dictatorship image that was thrusted upon them.

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
SavageHeathen Pro-Freedom Fanatic from Somewhere Since: Feb, 2011
Pro-Freedom Fanatic
#18: Mar 31st 2011 at 5:22:58 PM

A two party police State?

Is it perchance called the US of A? Or Britain?

You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.
Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#19: Mar 31st 2011 at 6:49:38 PM

No, the setting is in a fantasy world.

MattII Since: Sep, 2009
#20: Mar 31st 2011 at 8:33:30 PM

Ah, so it's Armericia and Boratain?

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#21: Mar 31st 2011 at 10:15:01 PM

Unlike real world police states that seek to cover up their unethical activities, this one intentionally exports videos of skull-cracking and esteem-breaking to viewers overseas.

Why? Because it is a reality tv equivalent of mounting the skulls of enemies on sticks.

Worlder What? Since: Jan, 2001
What?
#22: Apr 6th 2011 at 8:41:28 PM

Any more questions? Comments?

Add Post

Total posts: 22
Top