• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Direction of Law (snowball effect)

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
239
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Just an observation:

From what I see in a broad spectrum the evelution of laws are following steps to form our society just like ("H.G Wells, The Time Machine") imagined the human race will be like, in both activities and emotionally in the future.

Basically, in the not too far future, anything that can make you laugh or smile will probably be illegal...or be able to sue someone.

Am I off base in seeing this?

How free are we?
 
The book's protagonist is a scientist and amateur inventor living in London who is never named; he is identified simply as The Time Traveller. Having demonstrated to friends using a miniature model that time is a fourth dimension, and that a suitable apparatus can move back and forth in this fourth dimension, he builds a full-scale model capable of carrying himself. He sets off on a journey into the future.


His journey takes him to the year A.D. 802,701, where he finds an apparently peaceful and pastoral society. Upon arrival, he meets a small human people who name themselves the Eloi. The Eloi live in small communities within large and futuristic yet dilapidated buildings, doing no work and eating a frugivorous diet. The land around London has become an untended garden filled with unusual fruiting and flowering plants. The landscape is dotted with large and dilapidated structures, all clearly no longer used save as sleeping areas for the Eloi. There is no evidence of active agriculture or technology, of both of which the Eloi seem incapable.

The Time Traveller is greeted with curiosity and without fear by the Eloi, who seem only vaguely surprised and curious by his appearance and lose interest rapidly. He disables the time machine and follows them to their commune and consumes a meal of fruit while trying to communicate with them. This proves somewhat ineffectual, as their unknown language and low intelligence hinders the Time Traveller from gaining any useful information. With a slight sense of disdain for his hosts' lack of curiosity and attention to him, the Time Traveller decides to explore the local area.

As he explores this landscape, the Time Traveller comments on the factors that have resulted in the Eloi's physical condition and society. He supposes that the lack of intelligence and vitality of the Eloi are the logical result of humankind's past struggle to transform and subjugate nature through technology, politics, art and creativity. With the realisation of this goal, the Eloi had devolved.

With no further need for technology, agriculture, or innovations to improve life, they became unimaginative and incurious about the world. With no work to do, they became physically weak and small in stature. Males, generally being breadwinners and workers in former times, have particularly degenerated in physique, explaining the lack of dimorphism between the sexes. The Time Traveller supposes that preventive medicine has been achieved, as he saw no sign of disease amongst his hosts. With no work to do and no hardships to overcome, society became non-hierarchical and non-cooperative, with no defined leaders or social classes.

The fact that there was no hardship or inequalities in societies meant there was no war and crime. Art and sophisticated culture, often driven by problems and aspirations or a catalyst for solutions and new developments, had waned, as no problems existed and there were no conceivable improvements for humanity. He accounted for their relatively small numbers as being due to the implementation of some form of birth control to eliminate the problems of overpopulation. The abandoned structures around him would suggest that prior to these achievements, the population had been larger and more productive, toiling to find the solution that would make the new utopia a reality.

I find this a bleak future that I do not want. I don't think you're off base thinking this, at the current rate we might not be free.
 
Am I off base in seeing this?
Yes, I'm afraid that you are.

The trend is towards outlawing forms of expression that encourage one to think.

Things that make one laugh and smile are very useful for pacifying the general population, especially if they are based on low humor.
 
Just an observation:

From what I see in a broad spectrum the evelution of laws are following steps to form our society just like ("H.G Wells, The Time Machine") imagined the human race will be like, in both activities and emotionally in the future.

Basically, in the not too far future, anything that can make you laugh or smile will probably be illegal...or be able to sue someone.

Am I off base in seeing this?

How free are we?
"We can never lose our freedom. We can only give it up, willingly."

"The price for freedom is the deaths of a generation."

"It takes a thousand men to earn freedom, but only a liar to destroy [freedom]."

I got more.
 
Last edited:
Rather than a snowball effect, I would liken it to the frog in the pot of water. Throw him into boiling water, and he'll hop right out. Put him in lukewarm water, and gradually increase the heat and you'll boil him alive.
 
Rather than a snowball effect, I would liken it to the frog in the pot of water. Throw him into boiling water, and he'll hop right out. Put him in lukewarm water, and gradually increase the heat and you'll boil him alive.

Close analogy to what is happening today? Who would have thought years ago it would be illigal to use a phone while driving. While this may be a common sense issue, are we going to make a law for everything that should be decided with common sense....I even heard they proposed laws to ban frenchfries in NY stemmed from the trans fat...
 
Close analogy to what is happening today? Who would have thought years ago it would be illigal to use a phone while driving. While this may be a common sense issue, are we going to make a law for everything that should be decided with common sense....I even heard they proposed laws to ban frenchfries in NY stemmed from the trans fat...

Link to the french fry ban? Banning trans fat makes sense in the same way banning rat poison does. As a whole, society is almost certainly becoming freer. Compare today's world to the world 500 years ago: developed nations generally have democracy now as opposed to monarchy. Even at the start of the 20th century, much of Asia and Africa was controlled by Europe through the colonial system. Now, both continents are slowly shifting toward freedom, and even places like China and Zimbabwe will eventually, in my view, have freedom of the press and unhampered elections.

Looking at world history, from the Dark Ages to now, I don't see why you think we're heading for a totalitarian society.
 
Setting aside all the platitudes being offered in this thread, can anyone give me an actual example of a law banning things that cause laughter/thought/etc.?
 
What you said are absolutely right. Thanks for such information
 
Setting aside all the platitudes being offered in this thread, can anyone give me an actual example of a law banning things that cause laughter/thought/etc.?


In western cultures thats going to be tough right now. Some forms of expression have already been deemed illegal under "hate crime" laws although those aren't enforced that often (thank goodness) but are ripe to be exploited into more extreme categories.

In other nations such as the Middle East you can point out restrictions against many women for just about anything. This story is kind of heart wrenching. It starts out nice and happy. The end just kinda stops you in your tracks. Little Travellers

Thought is a tough one to define. Expression is easier and there are dozens of threads about that subject and its oppression both in Western and other cultures (granted other cultures are sometimes royally screwed on this issue).
 
Just an observation:

From what I see in a broad spectrum the evelution of laws are following steps to form our society just like ("H.G Wells, The Time Machine") imagined the human race will be like, in both activities and emotionally in the future.

Basically, in the not too far future, anything that can make you laugh or smile will probably be illegal...or be able to sue someone.

Am I off base in seeing this?

How free are we?

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater." - Frank Zappa

As long as their is a Federal Reserve System, we will never be free. We are slaves to the economic system. We work 1/3rd of the time to pay Rockefeller and Morgan and the other elitists that control our money.

"Give me control of a nation's money, and. I care not who makes her laws" - Mayer Rothschild

“The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest” - Albert Einstein
 
As long as their is a Federal Reserve System, we will never be free. We are slaves to the economic system. We work 1/3rd of the time to pay Rockefeller and Morgan and the other elitists that control our money.

You mean capitalism.
 
In western cultures thats going to be tough right now. Some forms of expression have already been deemed illegal under "hate crime" laws although those aren't enforced that often (thank goodness) but are ripe to be exploited into more extreme categories.

Incorrect. "Hate crime" laws (as much as I might dislike them) only criminalize expression when used in conjunction with an already criminal act. That's not an overly burdensome restriction on speech.
 
Back
Top Bottom