There’s a really good scene in a JLA comic where superman and flash argue about this. Together they could just take away all the weapons, punish all the crimes, stop everyone from doing bad things ever. But the consequences of that are that it would take away the free will of people. Their heroes would become their masters.
Who was arguing which side? I’m guessing it was Superman who argued against taking away people’s free will?
There are also the unintended consequences to the economy and to the natural world. For example, provide food for everyone, and you accidentally bankrupt farmers. Suddenly remove CO2 from the atmosphere and maybe you shock and kill plants, etc.
While true, absolutely worth the risk. If I have the power to completely end a hostile military, I’m not holding back for fear of what it’ll mean for the dildo economy.
And then all the unintended harms because nobody has ever done things like that and so nobody has ever thought what the consequences could be.
There’s a really good scene in a JLA comic where superman and flash argue about this. Together they could just take away all the weapons, punish all the crimes, stop everyone from doing bad things ever. But the consequences of that are that it would take away the free will of people. Their heroes would become their masters.
Who was arguing which side? I’m guessing it was Superman who argued against taking away people’s free will?
There are also the unintended consequences to the economy and to the natural world. For example, provide food for everyone, and you accidentally bankrupt farmers. Suddenly remove CO2 from the atmosphere and maybe you shock and kill plants, etc.
While true, absolutely worth the risk. If I have the power to completely end a hostile military, I’m not holding back for fear of what it’ll mean for the dildo economy.