Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vester]

and no angry/noisy apes

How many times do I have to say that we're not a problem, but an asset? We're advanced enough to mine and refine metal, and then deliver it to our orbit, but we're not advanced enough to be much of a threat. And if there's one thing humans know how to do, it's kneeling before those stronger than us (our entire history proves this quite well). There wouldn't be much of a conquest, they'd just need to make examples of a couple of cities.

And free labour is cheaper than doing something yourself, however you look at it.

Actually our entire history proves that what you are proposing (violent suppression of Humans) never works out in the long term.

So you think feudalism is just a conspiracy theory?

I'm gonna quote my Physics prof, who probably stole this from somewhere, and say: "A state is not defined by its system of government. It is not defined by its religion, or its people, or its language. It is defined by its monopoly on violence. A state that has lost the monopoly on the capacity to inflict violence is a failed state."

So, yeah. Rule of force has worked in the past, and will work in the future.

[Creaca]

I'm gonna quote my Physics prof, who probably stole this from somewhere, and say: "A state is not defined by its system of government. It is not defined by its religion, or its people, or its language. It is defined by its monopoly on violence. A state that has lost the monopoly on the capacity to inflict violence is a failed state."

So, yeah. Rule of force has worked in the past, and will work in the future.

True, but still. Blowing up a few cities alone wouldn't be the end of it. They'd need either a large force to enslave the local population to work, or some kind of remuneration to those that do mine for them.

Humans never work for free. We'll work for pay, work to avoid pain or death. But only if these are immediate, and real.

Which begs the question, why not just mine an easier target?

As for possible uses for earth? Luxury for one. Earth has some very pretty sights, certainly rare sights in a work dominated by lifeless rocks. Our flora and fauna are unique to our planet.

Another possibility is colonization. Earth is already in the galactic 'Sweet Spot' for life. It'd be much easier to re-purpose to suit Alien needs then a barren rock with a weak atmosphere.

[Duke 2.0]

So you think feudalism is just a conspiracy theory?

I think emphasis is more on long-term here.

I think humanity would have too many insurrections to be useful slaves. Not to mention if they have technology to come here they would have technology that would be cheaper, faster and more efficient than slavery.

[bjlong]

I'm gonna quote my Physics prof, who probably stole this from somewhere, and say: "A state is not defined by its system of government. It is not defined by its religion, or its people, or its language. It is defined by its monopoly on violence. A state that has lost the monopoly on the capacity to inflict violence is a failed state."

So, yeah. Rule of force has worked in the past, and will work in the future.

True, but still. Blowing up a few cities alone wouldn't be the end of it. They'd need either a large force to enslave the local population to work, or some kind of remuneration to those that do mine for them.

Humans never work for free. We'll work for pay, work to avoid pain or death. But only if these are immediate, and real.

Which begs the question, why not just mine an easier target?

As for possible uses for earth? Luxury for one. Earth has some very pretty sights, certainly rare sights in a work dominated by lifeless rocks. Our flora and fauna are unique to our planet.

Another possibility is colonization. Earth is already in the galactic 'Sweet Spot' for life. It'd be much easier to re-purpose to suit Alien needs then a barren rock with a weak atmosphere.

Thing is, we would work for pay. They say that they'll teach our scientists how to do X impossible thing, for so much whatever, and you can trust that there'll be hundreds of government-sponsored jobs getting that whatever. Positioning some weapons wouldn't hurt--having all your bases covered, and all.

As for enslavement, they need only pinpoint the country/s that have what they want, take over, and point big guns at the other countries. It's like the cold war again, except without the "Mutual" in MAD.

[Il Palazzo]

So you think feudalism is just a conspiracy theory?

I think emphasis is more on long-term here.

I think humanity would have too many insurrections to be useful slaves. Not to mention if they have technology to come here they would have technology that would be cheaper, faster and more efficient than slavery.

Oh! The mind control!

[Neruz]

and no angry/noisy apes

How many times do I have to say that we're not a problem, but an asset? We're advanced enough to mine and refine metal, and then deliver it to our orbit, but we're not advanced enough to be much of a threat. And if there's one thing humans know how to do, it's kneeling before those stronger than us (our entire history proves this quite well). There wouldn't be much of a conquest, they'd just need to make examples of a couple of cities.

And free labour is cheaper than doing something yourself, however you look at it.

Actually our entire history proves that what you are proposing (violent suppression of Humans) never works out in the long term.

So you think feudalism is just a conspiracy theory?

It didn't last, did it?

[Vester]

and no angry/noisy apes

How many times do I have to say that we're not a problem, but an asset? We're advanced enough to mine and refine metal, and then deliver it to our orbit, but we're not advanced enough to be much of a threat. And if there's one thing humans know how to do, it's kneeling before those stronger than us (our entire history proves this quite well). There wouldn't be much of a conquest, they'd just need to make examples of a couple of cities.

And free labour is cheaper than doing something yourself, however you look at it.

Actually our entire history proves that what you are proposing (violent suppression of Humans) never works out in the long term.

So you think feudalism is just a conspiracy theory?

It didn't last, did it?

It did well enough for a time. And it still exists as a political, if not an economic system.

[DJ]

I think emphasis is more on long-term here.

I think humanity would have too many insurrections to be useful slaves. Not to mention if they have technology to come here they would have technology that would be cheaper, faster and more efficient than slavery.

Actually, I can't think of a single case where the indentured people successfully overthrew their oppressors on their own.

Roman slavery - ended by barbarians, not slave revolt
Feudalism - ended by bourgeoisie and monarchs (to weaken the nobility), not serfs
Slavery in USA - ended by North, not blacks
(arguably) communism - ended by economic meltdown, not popular revolt

I'm sure you could dig out some minor case of a successful peasant or slave rebellion, but overwhelming majority of them were failures.

And slavery has lasted much, much longer than our modern freedom.

[Neruz]

and no angry/noisy apes

How many times do I have to say that we're not a problem, but an asset? We're advanced enough to mine and refine metal, and then deliver it to our orbit, but we're not advanced enough to be much of a threat. And if there's one thing humans know how to do, it's kneeling before those stronger than us (our entire history proves this quite well). There wouldn't be much of a conquest, they'd just need to make examples of a couple of cities.

And free labour is cheaper than doing something yourself, however you look at it.

Actually our entire history proves that what you are proposing (violent suppression of Humans) never works out in the long term.

So you think feudalism is just a conspiracy theory?

It didn't last, did it?

It did well enough for a time. And it still exists as a political, if not an economic system.

If by 'it did well enough for a time' you mean 'it did fine when there weren't any viable alternitives' then yes.

It collapsed pretty impressively as civilisation wandered around though, didn't it.

I think emphasis is more on long-term here.

I think humanity would have too many insurrections to be useful slaves. Not to mention if they have technology to come here they would have technology that would be cheaper, faster and more efficient than slavery.

Actually, I can't think of a single case where the indentured people successfully overthrew their oppressors on their own.

Roman slavery - ended by barbarians, not slave revolt
Feudalism - ended by bourgeoisie and monarchs (to weaken the nobility), not serfs
Slavery in USA - ended by North, not blacks
(arguably) communism - ended by economic meltdown, not popular revolt

I'm sure you could dig out some minor case of a successful peasant or slave rebellion, but overwhelming majority of them were failures.

And slavery has lasted much, much longer than our modern freedom.

So it has, but you know what, hunter-gatherer tribal systems have lasted much, much longer than slavery, maybe they're a viable method of governing?


Yes, slave rebellions never seem to work out by the slaves on their own, but that's the thing, the slaves are never on their own. Even if they are just seen as tools to be wielded against one's enemies, eventually somone will realise that there are over six billion angry sapiants who would quite happily fuck shit up if somone just dropped a few fancy tanks into their laps...



A rather poignant example to look at is the British colonisation; In Africa, the British enslaved the natives. In India, the British assimilated the natives.

Africa is all fucked up. India is an economic explosion. Strange that.

[Vester]

I blame the rise of the middle class.

[Neruz]

Mostly the rise of technology. Modern technology renders the force approach impossible; when one person with a black market explosive can level an entire city block, or with a gun can murder everyone in the house within minutes, slavery suddenly stops working all that well.

That; combined with the rise of Civilisation and the realisation that enslaving other sentients really isn't such an awesome idea after all has pretty much eliminated widespread slavery.


Rather than enslaving an entire country\planet, it's much more efficient to strike up a trade agreement with them.

If Aliens came around and said "Hey, we'll give you some shiny antigravity balls if in return you give us some of these rare heavy metals you don't really have much of a use for yet but are really handy to us." I wouldn't be in the slightest bit surprised. With a little application of time and technology, Mankind is pretty much perfectly set to become a manufacturing powerhouse; we have the intelligence and knowledge to build and run run matter synthesisers if somone explains how, but we don't have the technology or civilisation to really use them that much.

[ChairmanPoo]

You have to bear in mind that slaver societies were often far more complex than simply "masters" vs "slaves". In ancient Rome, for instance, slaves could and often did fulfill positions of authority, at every level in society. For instance, Emperor Claudius often set his slaves and freedmen as important court officers. And under Emperor Constantius, his slave eunuch Eusebius acted as the emperor's personal assistant and wielded a massive ammount of power.

[Solifuge]

To draw an allegory, Roman slaves were like middle-class salaried blue-collar workers of the modern age. They recieved a stipend from their employer (owner) and got a house of their own, etc. etc.

Irrelevant to the thread topic, but any chance to bandy about what scraps of knowledge I've retained from General Education is an oportunity I'd not miss!

[Eagleon]

With a little application of time and technology, Mankind is pretty much perfectly set to become a manufacturing powerhouse; we have the intelligence and knowledge to build and run run matter synthesisers if somone explains how, but we don't have the technology or civilisation to really use them that much.

The inability of you guys to comprehend the sheer numbers involved in the undertakings you are suggesting is so very, very human.

[DJ]

Yes, slave rebellions never seem to work out by the slaves on their own, but that's the thing, the slaves are never on their own.

And who would these others be? Alien specie that's at war with our enslavers? Sure, they could arm us for rebellion, or they could just glass the whole planet to weaken the enemy's industrial base. Much easier than teaching monkeys how to use computers.

As for all insurrection stuff - just how would you do it? The enemy's homeworld is out of reach, and their war ships are in our orbit, where we can't do shit to them but they can kill us at their leisure. Best we could do is attack those that comply with aliens' demands, but then they'd just decide we need more examples because we're not meeting our quotas.

Also, I find the whole "but they have enough resources" argument naive. That's like saying they have enough dakka.