• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Life in a dictatorship

jay gw

Unregistered
J
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
1,821
What effects, on the average person, would you predict you'd find from living in a state where free speech and assembly are outlawed?
 
it would depend on how dictatorial the regime was, the length of time which people had been exposed to such a regime, etc. etc.....

and what do you mean by "free speech?" - we don't have completely free speech in the UK.....equally, freedom of assembly has limits......

it's an interesting question but needs more clarification - how "dictatorial" is "dictatorial"? Do you mean a contemporary regime like that in China or Russia - with some dictatorial tendencies? Or more Stalinist/Nazi models - with rather more? Or a theocratic-democratic system like Iran? Or a strongly theocratic system like under the Taliban? Or a much more general comparison with libertarianism?

but on a very general level, people seem to just get on with their lives - going to work to pay the rent, getting married, having kids, getting old....

I'm not sure how accuarate Maslow's hieracchy is deemed to be but i think it serves as a general representation of how people have priorities which far out-rank luxuries like "freedom of speech"......

Physiological needs
the need to breathe
the need to regulate body temperature
the need for water
the need for sleep
the need to eat
the need to dispose of bodily wastes
the need for sex

When the physiological needs are met, the need for safety will emerge. Safety and security rank above all other desires. These include:

Safety needs
Security of employment
Security of revenues and resources
Physical security - safety from violence, delinquency, aggressions
Moral and physiological security
Familial security
Security of health

After physiological and safety needs are fulfilled, the third layer of human needs is social. This involves emotionally-based relationships in general, such as:

Love/Belonging needs

friendship
sexual intimacy
having a family


A regime can fulfil all of the above needs on an individual level without the necessity for free speech/free assembly.....

On a contemporary level Putin's Russia is a decent example of a regime which has restraints upon free speech and democratic process but remains popular because a "strong man" is seen as necessary to meet an individual's safety needs.....

so for an "average person" who just wants a steady job, a safe neighbourhood and a couple of kids, i don't think their lives would be affected that much - but of course, it all depends on just how intrusive the dictatorship is......
 
Last edited:
Mocha Cappuccino said:
What effects, on the average person, would you predict you'd find from living in a state where free speech and assembly are outlawed?
Click to expand...
A greater reliance on family, and organized crime/extra legal bodies, to get certain things done to avoid interference from "authorities."

DR
 
Certainly it does. If sex was a biological need, then children would need it to. If children needed sex to survive, adults having sex with children would be considered no different from adults eating with children or teaching them how to use the bathroom. So, pedophilia would be a non-issue.
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
Certainly it does. If sex was a biological need, then children would need it to. If children needed sex to survive, adults having sex with children would be considered no different from adults eating with children or teaching them how to use the bathroom. So, pedophilia would be a non-issue.
Click to expand...

In some cultures it was a non-issue. There's pots from Rome with a man and a boy with b****s cuddling up.

Now that's not the same as "needing" it to survive -- and adults don't "need" it, either, to survive, since they already exist. The species needs it to survive. That some people don't reproduce with other people (or things) that are physiologically appropriate for reproduction is not the same thing.
 
What if sex is considered a need for adults, not children? (not saying so, just playing devil's advocate)
 
It still wouldn't be biological, because people don't die when sex is withheld. Celibates and asexuals who are celibate live to be old just like people who go at it like bunnies.
 
Darth Rotor said:
A greater reliance on family, and organized crime/extra legal bodies, to get certain things done to avoid interference from "authorities."

DR
Click to expand...

Good point. There would probably be a black market equivalent of information and free expression.
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
It still wouldn't be biological, because people don't die when sex is withheld. Celibates and asexuals who are celibate live to be old just like people who go at it like bunnies.
Click to expand...

Except the species would become extinct without sex. Sex might not be needed by the individual to survive, but it is needed to keep everything going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom