Poll: Chaos or Tyranny?

[cynicthnkr]

Tyranny is worst because chaos would certainly lead to order later on while tyranny and tyrant takes longer to replace. And in most of cases period between inevitable shift from tyranny to democracy (or something on that line) is a period of chaos anyway (you know! revolution and all)

 

[Falconus]

Okay gotta note here that Anarchy is not synonymous with chaos. It doesn't mean no order. There are still rules and laws, just no central governing body.

If there's nobody to set or enforce laws, there are no laws, and it's anarchy, a.k.a. the rule of the strongest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy
Anarchy is not even close to the rule of the strongest. In fact that's pretty much the opposite. You're an idiot.

 

[AnotherAvatar]

It's all chaos anyway, tyranny forms out of chaos and then in it's silly attempt to control it seeks to subvert the nature of reality to say that it has overtaken chaos, when in truth everything remains in chaos, the tyranny simply part of it.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I prefer Chaos or Tyranids.

 

[TheVioletBandit]

I said chaos, because at the very least I keep my freedom.


I would be interested to know if most Americans said chaos, and most Brits said tyranny?

 

[Naleh]

Oops; I voted for the one I wanted, rather than the one I thought was worse.

Obviously both are terrible, but tyranny is better than chaos. In chaos, might makes right, so you just get local tyrannies anyway. And there's a heck of a lot more bloodshed.

 

[Agayek]

Interesting question posed on twitter.

Which do you think is worse?


Personally freedom is more important to me, but then again...chaos means, well, chaos.

Considering I'm a borderline anarcho-libertarian, I can confidently state I would rather have absolute chaos than absolute order. Neither is the ideal state of being, as government is necessary (and inevitable) when more than a handful of people come together and cooperate, but complete anarchy and having to fight for every second of your life is far preferable to guaranteed survival if you do exactly what you're told. There's a difference between living and surviving, and in an absolute tyranny, there's not a whole lot of the former.

While tyranny has its obvious threats, as everybody has pointed out, it also has the benefits of food, water, shelter, electricity, protection from roving bandits, and even most likely the Escapist.

One thing you may want to realize is that if taken to the extreme, as this thread seems to suggest, tyranny would not allow access to the Escapist. You would have rigidly enforced access to precisely what entertainment/food/water/shelter/etc the state deems necessary to keep you in line. Thus, you likely wouldn't be on the Escapist ever again.

 

[spartan231490]

Tyranny is infinitely worse. Not even comparable in my mind.

 

[AmrasCalmacil]

GEORGE ORWELL,s NINETEEN EIGHTY FOUR
If anyone of you have read this book you will know what I mean, and those of you who chose Tyranny I recommend you read this book, you will see how grim a totalitarian state would be.
So definitely Chaos

I've read it at least five times.

I pick Tyranny.
Tyrants have all the nice things anyway.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

I'd prefer chaos unless I get to join some underground resistance in the tyranny. You only live once.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Both would suck, and Tyranny would be better to live in. However,Chaos is better to live with yourself in. It's easier to carve a niche to survive and live in pure Chaos than it would be to truly live in a world of pure Tyranny.

 

[darkfox85]

This is a great question. But like a bunch of other folks, I chose my preferred option instead of the one I wanted to avoid ? derp.

I think I have a bleaker view of tyranny. All artistic medium would be unconditionally banned because (a) art is integrally political: ?even the view that art should not be political is itself a political attitude? ? George Orwell (appropriately ? lol) and (b) because tyranny. Further, some say we?ll still have services and still be safe in this society but I can?t see it. None of the services work in pure tyranny and there?s no universal healthcare ? let alone even dreadful universal healthcare. At least in tyranny we won?t starve though.

Besides, even though the killing and raping by the thought police wouldn?t be half as much as chaos raiders, they'll have nothing to oppose them. Either way, death is likely and you will live in fear. In chaos, me and my tribe will do our best and who knows, there?s still a minute sliver of a chance that chaos won?t result in tyranny and instead the civil war-like thing might result in a standoff. Also, I want to keep my books at least a while before I run out of firewood (other art will be problematic... but not impossible.)

I?ve read a few posts from libertarians saying they?ll prefer tyranny and give good and respectable reasons why. Weirdly enough I?m a socialist and I?d prefer chaos. Someone else said it?d be interesting to see how Americans voted in comparison to other places and I agree. (I?m British btw.)

Anyway, this is fun!

 

[Robert Ewing]

Chaos. Ever heard of organized chaos? It's where things just sort of work, and that shit will happen eventually I guess. It's a long term solution though.

 

[zehydra]

Tyranny is worse simply because it's systematic and more efficient at what it does.

Ask any survivor from Europe in the 1940s and ask them who was worse; Fransisco Franco, or Josef Stalin.

 

[shintakie10]

So I totally voted for Tyranny because I assumed it was what you'd rather live in. Guess that's what I get for not votin before I read the OP....oh well.

Reasons? I wouldn't last a fuckin day in a place without some form of order. I can barely fight, I get whiney when I haven't eaten in at least a day, I have literally no survival skills, and I have absolutely no ability to grow my own food. I'd be one of the first people picked off in a society without the society bit to which some of you would respond with the line "At least you'd die free." To which I respond "So fuckin what? All that freedom meant fuck once you're dead."

I will forever take the rule of law, even if it is only one persons rule of law, over rule of the strong over the weak.

 

[Agayek]

So I totally voted for Tyranny because I assumed it was what you'd rather live in. Guess that's what I get for not votin before I read the OP....oh well.

Reasons? I wouldn't last a fuckin day in a place without some form of order. I can barely fight, I get whiney when I haven't eaten in at least a day, I have literally no survival skills, and I have absolutely no ability to grow my own food. I'd be one of the first people picked off in a society without the society bit to which some of you would respond with the line "At least you'd die free." To which I respond "So fuckin what? All that freedom meant fuck once you're dead."

I will forever take the rule of law, even if it is only one persons rule of law, over rule of the strong over the weak.

With this though, you'd have to keep in mind that you wouldn't really be living. You'd be surviving, sure, but what's the point in continuing to survive so that you can be miserable longer?

Maybe I'm just weird, but it certainly seems to me that a short life that you enjoy (or at least find rewarding) is worth far more than immortality being miserable.

 

[shintakie10]

So I totally voted for Tyranny because I assumed it was what you'd rather live in. Guess that's what I get for not votin before I read the OP....oh well.

Reasons? I wouldn't last a fuckin day in a place without some form of order. I can barely fight, I get whiney when I haven't eaten in at least a day, I have literally no survival skills, and I have absolutely no ability to grow my own food. I'd be one of the first people picked off in a society without the society bit to which some of you would respond with the line "At least you'd die free." To which I respond "So fuckin what? All that freedom meant fuck once you're dead."

I will forever take the rule of law, even if it is only one persons rule of law, over rule of the strong over the weak.

With this though, you'd have to keep in mind that you wouldn't really be living. You'd be surviving, sure, but what's the point in continuing to survive so that you can be miserable longer?

Maybe I'm just weird, but it certainly seems to me that a short life that you enjoy (or at least find rewarding) is worth far more than immortality being miserable.

How would livin in constant fear of some schmuck comin by and blastin you for literally no reason at all be rewardin at all is how I see it. In one scenario people like me are completely and utterly screwed from the get go. Without the basic human skills that we've progressed past actually needin in day to day lives we'd simply die off, or go insane, or go around killin people to steal their sandwich. In the other scenario, as long as we're not part of the group that our leader wants dead for whatever reason and don't make waves, we live.

Really, I'll just say what I said before in a slightly different way. All that satisfaction in bein able to know you are alive and free in a completely chaotic society means squat when some guy comes by and stabs you then leaves your body to be picked away by any animal or even person that comes by.

 

[Scarim Coral]

Chaos since I assume it's everyone doing anything they want including the lack of morals to it. With Tyranny I would got to worry about one person (and maybe his/ her minions) and not everyone else.

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

Where's the "I don't want to live on this planet anymore" option? I choose that, or I guess Tyranny.

 

[Dilapsor]

Tyranny is only good if you're the tyrant. I chose chaos, fully aware that I would more than likely be killed in such an environment, but death is preferable to oppression.