Demolition Man- Utopian, Dystopian, or other?

[FaxModem1]

[/quote]

The problem is, if you are a midedle-class dude who meets Friendly and agrees with him that San Angeles is a "Barney the Dinosaur nightmare", why move with him into the sewers instead of moving elsewhere?

It makes sense for someone poor to join up with Friendly, but not some middle-class person who could probably move to places like Pomona or Corona or San Bernardino or Bakersfield or even Las Vegas. Those places have to be better than the San Angeles underground.

Guess Cocteau really is controlling the border, and only a unified army under Edgar Friendly could get them out. *shrug*

And being dirty and skinny is a bit different from starving. Besides, the way Hollywood/TV portrays it, this is how everyone in LA looks:

The whole thing is just understandably weird (because it's an action comedy and not really meant to be picked apart). They are scared of Spartan at first and Huxley and Garcia are intimidated by them. But the vendor near immediately warms up to Spartan (a uniformed police officer) when he's nice to her for 5 seconds. Edgar bursts into the scene and him and his guys are apprehensive, but they aren't immediately hostile. Edgar even pretty much takes Spartan at his word and even worst case, he'd just have them dumped up top if he didn't. No beating them for information about Cocteau's plan: you won't help, get lost.

It's basically two competing faction that don't know anything about moderation, which Spartan ends up being a kind of catalyst for change. However, they sill don't seem too big on violence for the sake of violence, either side: after all the chaos Simon caused, the Morlocs didn't come to the surface to take over or start a fight. They didn't learn "violence is awesome" when Simon shows them it gets results. They came to help. And even the cops don't seem to particularly concerned with them once they realize (and believe almost immediately) that Edgar isn't there to start a fight.

San Angeles has a big dystopia bent, but I still get the impression the PEOPLE (aside from Cocteau) don't have much of a violent streak in them. When pushed, they are capable of fighting back. But they aren't vindictive. They don't go looking to cause violence, even for their cause. I think Cocteau helped get them here, but I also believe that just had such a shift in mentality after the violence of the 90s, Cocteau didn't actually have to DO much in this regard but put a voice and a face behind the movement.

True, and doesn't that send an unfortunate message? Better to live under your dictator, and you will become better people.

[TheFeniX]

True, and doesn't that send an unfortunate message? Better to live under your dictator, and you will become better people.

Cocteau is much more a George Washington/FDR type than a dictator: he stays in power because people want him in power. People were demanding action, Cocteau gave them that action. Up until "Kill the Friendly," Cocteau might have still been an evil asshole (or corrupted over time), but it's hard to claim he was doing what he was without support of the populace.

And as I get older and more jaded, I find myself able to get worked up less and less here. Like, I fucking hate Home Owners Associations. Our current one requires approval for ANY yard art. They write rules as they go, they can put liens on your house, they suck. But man, once you open that gate a little: you've got boats parked in the street and pink flamingos in yards.

So.... I have to put up with some bullshit to "better" my neighborhood. Meanwhile, in San Angeles it seems the people are at such a "not suck" level now (Cocteau may deserve some credit here and not in a "I mind-screwed everyone" way) that you can give them leeway to act like jerks and they won't do it.

tl;dr: an HOA exists for a reason. So does a guy like Cocteau. People got together and traded liberty for security. Ben Franklin quote, yadda yadda, but people quoting him forget: society does that as a matter of course, it's all about degrees, moderation.

Edgar shows himself to be winging it with no real plan.

Fits well considering he's such a foil to Cocteau (the guys last name is Friendly for Pete's sake) it was on the nose even when I watched in my teens.

He accepted the notion of Spartan being able to fight well enough, but when he confronts them in the sewer all brash and cocky he is completely thrown by the simple act of Spartan swearing and calling Cocteau an asshole. He wasn't prepared to deal with something outside of his expectations, much like the regular citizens.

To use a Southern phrase: "Edgar is good people." He's what Libertarians like to think they are, but very rarely (never in my experience) get anywhere near close to. He is the "worst of the worst" criminal that San Angeles proper can create and the guy is just a foul-mouth teddy-bear who happens to have a few homemade guns he only uses for intimidation. Not saying he doesn't have justification for what he's doing, but he's really just a kid who ran away from home because he was tired of 7pm bedtime.

He wants to come back home, but he also wants some choices in what he's allowed to do. But a large portion of society has decided that people's inability to moderate themselves got them into trouble in the first place. And it's hard to blame them because LOOK at the kind of criminals they had to deal with: 90's Crime Wave Simon Phoenix was some supervillian levels of mayhem. He acted with seemingly unlimited impunity and had to get YOLOed by Spartan because for some reason "One jacked dood" > "the National Guard."

Like you said, someone like Spartan is in a whole other league and he has issues coping when confronted with that. Spartan, through his actions, gets Edgar motivated to lead rather than just do whatever and have people follow him.

[FaxModem1]

True, and doesn't that send an unfortunate message? Better to live under your dictator, and you will become better people.

Cocteau is much more a George Washington/FDR type than a dictator: he stays in power because people want him in power. People were demanding action, Cocteau gave them that action. Up until "Kill the Friendly," Cocteau might have still been an evil asshole (or corrupted over time), but it's hard to claim he was doing what he was without support of the populace.

And as I get older and more jaded, I find myself able to get worked up less and less here. Like, I fucking hate Home Owners Associations. Our current one requires approval for ANY yard art. They write rules as they go, they can put liens on your house, they suck. But man, once you open that gate a little: you've got boats parked in the street and pink flamingos in yards.

So.... I have to put up with some bullshit to "better" my neighborhood. Meanwhile, in San Angeles it seems the people are at such a "not suck" level now (Cocteau may deserve some credit here and not in a "I mind-screwed everyone" way) that you can give them leeway to act like jerks and they won't do it.

tl;dr: an HOA exists for a reason. So does a guy like Cocteau. People got together and traded liberty for security. Ben Franklin quote, yadda yadda, but people quoting him forget: society does that as a matter of course, it's all about degrees, moderation.

Considering that everyone who decides to eat a burger, read a book, or swear in public and is not a cop is put in cryoprison to be brainwashed, of course the system worked. After a while, everyone will want this system through sheer indoctrination.

They even remark that without Cocteau, and the cryoprison, that their way of life is over. Sure, getting murderdeathkillers to rehabilitate so that they want to garden/draw/knit to let out their aggression is wonderful, but what about people who are locked up for not agreeing with the system, or don't wish to play by the rules? I'm not sure a state that one's choices are, "Play by the rules completely and utterly, be locked up and brainwashed, or live on the outskirts and hopefully don't starve" is something that should be deemed progress.

This isn't the UFP, in which one could lodge a complaint or protest, or write a scathing article in the news or something, it's a system in which inertia has finally taken hold, because anyone who responds differently has either been 'rehabilitated', is starving, or is locked up.

[TheFeniX]

Considering that everyone who decides to eat a burger, read a book, or swear in public and is not a cop is put in cryoprison to be brainwashed, of course the system worked. After a while, everyone will want this system through sheer indoctrination.

Do they ever reference what happens to people who get arrested for something like swearing in public? I honestly don't remember. I was under the impression the cyro-prison was holding mostly "old" criminals who were violent. But there HAD to be some "new" really bad dudes in there who didn't have time to be conditioned because otherwise Huxley is not going to be concerned about some jaywalkers.

I know Huxley said something about them not being conditioned, but even that doesn't make any sense:

Cop or not, Spartan was capable of incredible amounts of violence, it's hard to believe they had the means to brain-wash him but only taught him knitting. He's been in there for 40 years and he's no longer a cop either way. AS far as the prison computer would be concerned: he's a violent felon that murdered 30 (?) people.

They even remark that without Cocteau, and the cryoprison, that their way of life is over.

Yea, they're panicking at the thought, but the reality doesn't seem to line up.

And how effective can they even deal with people who say "no"? Spartan finds the Morlocs in no time: they're literally living right underneath SA. The cops don't even bother doing a raid now and then to cull their numbers? I assumed it was because they CAN'T do anything with them even if they do catch them. This is why Cocteau has to kill Edgar, because he's not a violent murderer (or something to that effect) so either he can't have him brainwashed or it doesn't work on anything other than... violent compulsion? Something which Edgar obviously doesn't have.

I can't think of any reason Cocteau wouldn't have Friendly captured and brainwashed to be a poster-boy for "look guys, I was wrong, it's all great now" if it just wasn't possible.

This isn't the UFP, in which one could lodge a complaint or protest, or write a scathing article in the news or something, it's a system in which inertia has finally taken hold, because anyone who responds differently has either been 'rehabilitated', is starving, or is locked up.

I don't want to start a tangent into the UFP here, but DS9 (alone) has shown that whereas Earth might be a paradise, the rest isn't always. Bajor had to "act right" to make it into the Federation. The UFP isn't above kicking out those that make them look bad. Adding to that, they are willing to enforce UFP law on Cardassian citizens who happen to be human. And Star Trek (like Demo Man) doesn't get into the "nitty gritty." What DOES the UFP do with an 18-year-old who says "I'm not going to work a day in my life. Try and make me."?

And Huxley kicks the idea in the teeth that anyone who thinks different is rehabilitated. She has contraband proudly displayed in her office. Does the blue wall still exist here? I don't see why it would, Cocteau would want his little soldiers to be good examples for the regime. Huxley should not be tolerated, but she is. Why is that? Why does the Chief just chastise her when it would be "so easy" to have her rehabilitated?

[FaxModem1]

Considering that everyone who decides to eat a burger, read a book, or swear in public and is not a cop is put in cryoprison to be brainwashed, of course the system worked. After a while, everyone will want this system through sheer indoctrination.

Do they ever reference what happens to people who get arrested for something like swearing in public? I honestly don't remember. I was under the impression the cyro-prison was holding mostly "old" criminals who were violent. But there HAD to be some "new" really bad dudes in there who didn't have time to be conditioned because otherwise Huxley is not going to be concerned about some jaywalkers.

I know Huxley said something about them not being conditioned, but even that doesn't make any sense:

Cop or not, Spartan was capable of incredible amounts of violence, it's hard to believe they had the means to brain-wash him but only taught him knitting. He's been in there for 40 years and he's no longer a cop either way. AS far as the prison computer would be concerned: he's a violent felon that murdered 30 (?) people.

Spartan's sentence was 70 years, they let him out after 40 because they needed to stop Phoenix, and he was the one who did so. Whatever rehabilitation program he was going through, it probably wasn't done cooking yet. Perhaps the really violent tendencies he had were going to be completely gone by the time he woke up?

They even remark that without Cocteau, and the cryoprison, that their way of life is over.

Yea, they're panicking at the thought, but the reality doesn't seem to line up.

And how effective can they even deal with people who say "no"? Spartan finds the Morlocs in no time: they're literally living right underneath SA. The cops don't even bother doing a raid now and then to cull their numbers? I assumed it was because they CAN'T do anything with them even if they do catch them. This is why Cocteau has to kill Edgar, because he's not a violent murderer (or something to that effect) so either he can't have him brainwashed or it doesn't work on anything other than... violent compulsion? Something which Edgar obviously doesn't have.

I can't think of any reason Cocteau wouldn't have Friendly captured and brainwashed to be a poster-boy for "look guys, I was wrong, it's all great now" if it just wasn't possible.

Independent thought is discouraged by Cocteau, so the cops don't even think to search the sewers , or looking at their society through a harsh lens, until someone used to actually investigating, like Spartan, does so. Remember, their first go-to action is to consult the Police computer on what to do, and follow it like gospel. Meaning that they can't arrest Friendly to 'rehabilitate' him.

This isn't the UFP, in which one could lodge a complaint or protest, or write a scathing article in the news or something, it's a system in which inertia has finally taken hold, because anyone who responds differently has either been 'rehabilitated', is starving, or is locked up.

I don't want to start a tangent into the UFP here, but DS9 (alone) has shown that whereas Earth might be a paradise, the rest isn't always. Bajor had to "act right" to make it into the Federation. The UFP isn't above kicking out those that make them look bad. Adding to that, they are willing to enforce UFP law on Cardassian citizens who happen to be human. And Star Trek (like Demo Man) doesn't get into the "nitty gritty." What DOES the UFP do with an 18-year-old who says "I'm not going to work a day in my life. Try and make me."?

And Huxley kicks the idea in the teeth that anyone who thinks different is rehabilitated. She has contraband proudly displayed in her office. Does the blue wall still exist here? I don't see why it would, Cocteau would want his little soldiers to be good examples for the regime. Huxley should not be tolerated, but she is. Why is that? Why does the Chief just chastise her when it would be "so easy" to have her rehabilitated?

Trek tangent:
Yes, Bajor had to be rebuilt through Federation aid, not have a discriminatory caste system, and actually have a stable government before they could join the Federation, and actually, you know, petition for membership once they were stable enough to do so, the horror. We also have no record of planets being 'kicked out' of the Federation, aside from the DMZ colonies, which weren't kicked out, they willingly left if they were unhappy with being moved. As for lazy bags of bones who don't want to work? I guess there might be a few who do so, and just hide in the holodeck all day. People seem to choose whatever career they like in order to become whoever they want. Bashir's father is an example of a failure in the Federation, as he's never been able to find his knack, and is just wandering around from career to career, with the only issue being that Bashir finds it slightly embarrassing.

Onto Demolition Man:
The Blue Wall does seem to exist here, as there are people arrested for swearing, because after repeated swearing, the computer dispatches police to Phoenix's location to deal with him for it(police were already on the way for his murderdeathkill, but that didn't seem to matter), while police and Cocteau are only fined. That clearly shows a difference in how such citizens are treated. The police's bold plan for catching Phoenix, if you remember, is also to wait until he kills others, as opposed to investigating. Huxley is also a firm believer in the system, she is just bored and wants to catch some bad guys. And yet she does so through politeness and proper police work.

In a world run by 'evil Mr. Rogers', she is their Dirty Harry.

[Ender]

They did not arrest, cryoprison, and brainwash people for swearing in public. A little robot gave you a ticket for it. That's one of the most famous jokes from the whole movie. "Three seashells" and "taco bell" are like all anyone remembers.


Philistenes, sheesh

[FaxModem1]

Ahem,

Computer: You are fined one credit in violation of the verbal morality statute.
Phoenix: What? Fuck you
Computer: Your repeated violation has caused me to notify the San Angeles Police Department. Please remain where you are for your reprimand.

[Khaat]

Ahem,

Computer: You are fined one credit in violation of the verbal morality statute.
Phoenix: What? Fuck you
Computer: Your repeated violation has caused me to notify the San Angeles Police Department. Please remain where you are for your reprimand.

Just sayin'.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah, honestly, the cops in Cocteau's little "paradise" were glorified mall cops, only more polite. They were absolutely helpless in the face of any serious violence, at least initially- even Friendly's gang of rag-tag anarchists could have mopped the floor with them in a fight, never mind a gun-toting terrorist lunatic.

[amigocabal]

Yeah, honestly, the cops in Cocteau's little "paradise" were glorified mall cops, only more polite. They were absolutely helpless in the face of any serious violence, at least initially- even Friendly's gang of rag-tag anarchists could have mopped the floor with them in a fight, never mind a gun-toting terrorist lunatic.

This does beg a very important question.

Who keeps armed outsiders from going into San Angeles and causing trouble?

San Angeles is on the southern California coast. Armed peoe from anywhere on any ckast could just sail in.

[The Romulan Republic]

Perhaps everywhere else (or at least everywhere nearby) is either depopulated by the various disasters of prior decades, or follows similar philosophies to Cocteau's.

Or maybe Cocteau has his nice, friendly, sterilized society policed by glorified mall cops to tell you off for swearing... and a giant nuclear arsenal, with the launch button in his office.

Would fit with a guy who puts on a civilized, pacifist façade, but who's solution to internal dissent is to thaw out a brainwashed terrorist assassin.

Edit: Naturally, the locals would mostly be unaware of this. Of course our benevolent leader wouldn't have something as primitive and violent as nuclear weapons.

Or...

Is it ever actually said in the film how much territory Cocteau controls? Just because he's based out of southern California does not mean that that's the extent of his territory. Maybe he rules the world, or at least North America. Or is their something in the film that I've forgotten to contradict that?

[bilateralrope]

What DOES the UFP do with an 18-year-old who says "I'm not going to work a day in my life. Try and make me."?

Today there is a big worry that automation will leave large numbers of people permanently unemployed because there simply won't be enough jobs left for humans to do. In Star Trek, replicators and transporters would make that worse.

I suspect that there are a large number of people in the Federation who will never work a day in their life, some because they don't want to work, others because there are more people wanting work than there is work available for them.

Then there is the issue that some characters claim that the Federation doesn't have money, while others say otherwise. The speculation I've seen to explain that is that the Federation has implemented a basic income so generous that most people don't need to think about their spending because they will have enough money. Which makes me wonder if Starfleet is paying the people working for it.

[Q99]

What DOES the UFP do with an 18-year-old who says "I'm not going to work a day in my life. Try and make me."?

"I was like that at your age too. Then I realized how much doing things people cared about made me feel good. If you don't work? That's your choice, but trust me, you'll want to find something satisfying."

[The Romulan Republic]

What DOES the UFP do with an 18-year-old who says "I'm not going to work a day in my life. Try and make me."?

Today there is a big worry that automation will leave large numbers of people permanently unemployed because there simply won't be enough jobs left for humans to do. In Star Trek, replicators and transporters would make that worse.

I suspect that there are a large number of people in the Federation who will never work a day in their life, some because they don't want to work, others because there are more people wanting work than there is work available for them.

Then there is the issue that some characters claim that the Federation doesn't have money, while others say otherwise. The speculation I've seen to explain that is that the Federation has implemented a basic income so generous that most people don't need to think about their spending because they will have enough money. Which makes me wonder if Starfleet is paying the people working for it.

I think there's canon dialog confirming that they pay people in TOS.

On Voyager, they rationed replicator use as I recall (holodeck time is rationed too). Now, that was due to shortages, but its not unreasonable to suggest that higher-ranked people might get allowed more replicator/holodeck use. I think I've seen that theory before.

I imagine that's how it works, really, at least in the core worlds, or at least on Earth. No one has to work to survive- everybody gets a replicator/energy ration sufficient to meet their needs, plus things like education and health care, and if you don't want to work a day in your life... well, you'll be looked down on, and encouraged to get off your ass, but you won't be left to die for it. But those who climb up the ranks probably get more privileges than those lower down.

As to money... they have no money, supposedly, but they clearly do have private property (Sisko's restaurant, the Picard vineyard, Kasidy's ship, etc. are all possible examples). How that works I don't know, but even without money, you'd probably have people who acquired property by a) purchasing it from an alien/foreigner, b) inheriting it from the pre-moneyless days (IIRC, the Picard Vineyard has been in the family a long time), or c) making it themselves (we saw intellectual property rights come up over a holo-program the Doctor made). So such things are presumably permitted.

Thus, it is possible to acquire wealth beyond your basic replicator allotment.

[Ender]

And Star Trek (like Demo Man) doesn't get into the "nitty gritty." What DOES the UFP do with an 18-year-old who says "I'm not going to work a day in my life. Try and make me."?

Well this gets into the fun political economy of defining "work". I wouldn't consider playing video games and uploading videos of it online to be work, yet there are a bunch of people out there who make a better living than me doing just that. Conversely raising children and serving as a caretaker for the elderly is absolutely work to me and most any other reasonable person, but our economic metrics only count it if you are not related to the children/elderly and are a paid contractor. We discount GDP by a factor of about 25% because we don't count this as work (and since it is largely done by women...). In other words what we term work is completely arbitrary. The 18 year old will get bored and start doing something, and that something will be work, it is just a question of whether or not it is recognized as such. The political groundings of the UFP suggest they have a sufficiently advanced understanding of political economy and have abandoned the needs for arbitrary social hierarchy and coercive stigma that set the limits of what we call "work" today.

tl;dr read your Graeber & Jacobin comrade, see you at the next DSA meeting.

[Ender]

As to money... they have no money, supposedly, but they clearly do have private property (Sisko's restaurant, the Picard vineyard, Kasidy's ship, etc. are all possible examples). How that works I don't know,

Plenty of societies have done it. Functionally, money is a way of tracking credit - what is owed to who. You can have a completely different system for distributing property than money that allows for those scenarios. The Iroquois system for example looks a lot like what we see in Trek (coincidentally it informed socialist/communist thinking on property distribution and Trek is drawing upon that)

[Elheru Aran]

As to money... they have no money, supposedly, but they clearly do have private property (Sisko's restaurant, the Picard vineyard, Kasidy's ship, etc. are all possible examples). How that works I don't know,

Plenty of societies have done it. Functionally, money is a way of tracking credit - what is owed to who. You can have a completely different system for distributing property than money that allows for those scenarios. The Iroquois system for example looks a lot like what we see in Trek (coincidentally it informed socialist/communist thinking on property distribution and Trek is drawing upon that)

If nothing else, people still have to administer property. Someone has to clean the floors, cook the food, make the wine (if you're looking for something not replicated anyway). If it's something that has been 'in the family', why not just let it stay that way in exchange for... say... distributing their product? Genuine Earth wine is probably as appreciated on other planets as, for example, Romulan Ale, and the Picards aren't writing up contracts with Space Trucker Inc to do the job. The Federation may not use money (per se), but other people do.

[TheFeniX]

I wouldn't mind debating UFP policies, but I'm going to let it slide because there's enough other stuff to discuss and my post was already getting long.

Spartan's sentence was 70 years, they let him out after 40 because they needed to stop Phoenix, and he was the one who did so. Whatever rehabilitation program he was going through, it probably wasn't done cooking yet. Perhaps the really violent tendencies he had were going to be completely gone by the time he woke up?

Friendly couldn't have been around for more than maybe a few years, so Cocteau couldn't have had the idea to "Supervillian" Simon for too terribly long. But that seems to have been enough time to dial Simon's murderous tendencies up to 11, while also programming him with "I know Kung-Fu," the "no shoot Cocteau," and advanced knowledge of their computer systems.

There's no reason Spartan (or anyone) wouldn't come out of the system singing "Armour Hotdogs." If they backtracked on Spartan's conditioning (to get him into "bust Phoenix again" mode) in the <24 hours they had the idea before thawing him, then it's even crazier the amount of control they have over people in Cyro.

Cocteau, based on dialog, doesn't seem to WANT a bunch of lobotimzied sheep. He wants them to willingly give him all the power so they turn themselves into lobotomized sheep. Those that can't hang are either kicked out or Cryoed. But we don't even know who gets put on ice as the movie suggests only violent people get put there. This is in contrast to something like 1984 where the act of THINKING about breaking the law was as bad to the system as actually doing so.

Independent thought is discouraged by Cocteau, so the cops don't even think to search the sewers , or looking at their society through a harsh lens, until someone used to actually investigating, like Spartan, does so. Remember, their first go-to action is to consult the Police computer on what to do, and follow it like gospel. Meaning that they can't arrest Friendly to 'rehabilitate' him.

Taking your post at face-value: Cocteau can think for himself. And he's obsessed with Friendly. He couldn't order them? Dialog seems to suggest Cocteau doesn't have complete power of the populace, that's why he wants to get people "really intimidated." So it's likely the cops don't see Friendly as a threat on the level Cocteau does. He's really just a nuisance. While this makes sense, it also suggests the cops are still functioning people.

They aren't helpless. As we've talked about, they have issues with problems outside their context, but once motivated they are capable of getting the job done one way or the other. There's something else at play here other than "they are mindless sheep and kept that way through rigorous conditioning."

Onto Demolition Man:
The Blue Wall does seem to exist here, as there are people arrested for swearing, because after repeated swearing, the computer dispatches police to Phoenix's location to deal with him for it(police were already on the way for his murderdeathkill, but that didn't seem to matter), while police and Cocteau are only fined.

SA police seem to police themselves quite well. Given the chance, the offending officer would likely reprimand him/herself. It's been noted that the word used was "reprimand" (which I honestly didn't remember). It seems more like a stern talking to than anything.

That clearly shows a difference in how such citizens are treated. The police's bold plan for catching Phoenix, if you remember, is also to wait until he kills others, as opposed to investigating. Huxley is also a firm believer in the system, she is just bored and wants to catch some bad guys. And yet she does so through politeness and proper police work.

And that plan fails spectacularly because neither they nor the computer have any context for a guy like Phoenix. Once they run into that, they panic for a bit, then immediately through some brainstorming come up with a solution. If they were so well conditioned against independent thought, that would have been much more difficult for them.

I've said before, if the conditioning is so great, why is it broken so easily? They literally gets exposed to something once (maybe twice), something they had to have run into before (but we'll say they didn't) and it's go time.

In a world run by 'evil Mr. Rogers', she is their Dirty Harry.

Dirty Harry wouldn't be tolerated in a current police system on of himself. If he stocked his office with... I don't know, drugs he had seized, illegal types of pornography, and endangered Pandas: he would be gone. I get that's excessive, but current U.S. (aside from bullshit laws like "can't own more than 2 dildos") contraband tends to be dangerous or obtained illegally in the first place (child pornography).

The idea that Huxley bucks authority but is still a good police officer means the system can tolerate deviation. It can make exceptions. This is generally not something you would find in a tightly controlled dystopia. Brave New World tolerated this by keeping the free-thinking types away from society while still using their talents for other things. If fact, IIRC, the system was meant to produce people like that, but also to keep the general populace from knowing it.

[The Romulan Republic]

[quote="Ender"]Plenty of societies have done it. Functionally, money is a way of tracking credit - what is owed to who. You can have a completely different system for distributing property than money that allows for those scenarios. The Iroquois system for example looks a lot like what we see in Trek (coincidentally it informed socialist/communist thinking on property distribution and Trek is drawing upon that)[/quote]

Interesting. I was aware that the Iroquois were considered an influence on the politics of America's founding fathers, but not that they had also provided inspiration for socialism.

Edit: Sorry about the quote not showing up properly. Never had this problem before, and after multiple attempts to alter/fix it... well, I'm taking it to the software problem report thread.

[Batman]

Interestingly enough if I quote your quote, it shows up exactly the way it should.

[The Romulan Republic]

Anyhoo, back on topic...

I wonder what sort of society would emerge after Cocteu's death. I mean, Spartan doesn't exactly seem like the sort to plan an orderly transition of power after he takes out the bad guy. Neither does Friendly, for that matter. So who's left who has any authority? The police chief?

[FaxModem1]

Spartan's sentence was 70 years, they let him out after 40 because they needed to stop Phoenix, and he was the one who did so. Whatever rehabilitation program he was going through, it probably wasn't done cooking yet. Perhaps the really violent tendencies he had were going to be completely gone by the time he woke up?

Friendly couldn't have been around for more than maybe a few years, so Cocteau couldn't have had the idea to "Supervillian" Simon for too terribly long. But that seems to have been enough time to dial Simon's murderous tendencies up to 11, while also programming him with "I know Kung-Fu," the "no shoot Cocteau," and advanced knowledge of their computer systems.

There's no reason Spartan (or anyone) wouldn't come out of the system singing "Armour Hotdogs." If they backtracked on Spartan's conditioning (to get him into "bust Phoenix again" mode) in the <24 hours they had the idea before thawing him, then it's even crazier the amount of control they have over people in Cyro.

Cocteau, based on dialog, doesn't seem to WANT a bunch of lobotimzied sheep. He wants them to willingly give him all the power so they turn themselves into lobotomized sheep. Those that can't hang are either kicked out or Cryoed. But we don't even know who gets put on ice as the movie suggests only violent people get put there. This is in contrast to something like 1984 where the act of THINKING about breaking the law was as bad to the system as actually doing so.

Agreed that we don't know how long it takes, and it's mentioned that there is a murderdeathkill wing, as that is who Phoenix is awakening for his little army, the dialogue implying that there are other groups of people in the Cryoprison.

Disagree about Cocteau's intentions. He seems hindered by having to play 'wise old Cocteau', and can't openly have people killed. But he finds ways around it. It should also be noted that Cocteau wants a society with the 'beauty of an ant colony' or something along those lines. He definitely wants sheep, if not ants.

Independent thought is discouraged by Cocteau, so the cops don't even think to search the sewers , or looking at their society through a harsh lens, until someone used to actually investigating, like Spartan, does so. Remember, their first go-to action is to consult the Police computer on what to do, and follow it like gospel. Meaning that they can't arrest Friendly to 'rehabilitate' him.

Taking your post at face-value: Cocteau can think for himself. And he's obsessed with Friendly. He couldn't order them? Dialog seems to suggest Cocteau doesn't have complete power of the populace, that's why he wants to get people "really intimidated." So it's likely the cops don't see Friendly as a threat on the level Cocteau does. He's really just a nuisance. While this makes sense, it also suggests the cops are still functioning people.

They aren't helpless. As we've talked about, they have issues with problems outside their context, but once motivated they are capable of getting the job done one way or the other. There's something else at play here other than "they are mindless sheep and kept that way through rigorous conditioning."

Cocteau disapproved of Huxley's and the Chief's solution to the Phoenix problem by bringing in Spartan, using imaginative as a negative while describing it. Then made a swift cover by saying that it was 'quite alright'. Imagination and thinking for themselves isn't dead, but is dying. Cocteau wants to stamp out anything that might surprise him. He's only had about a couple decades to influence everyone, and is still facing resistance, so he needs some competent people.

Onto Demolition Man:
The Blue Wall does seem to exist here, as there are people arrested for swearing, because after repeated swearing, the computer dispatches police to Phoenix's location to deal with him for it(police were already on the way for his murderdeathkill, but that didn't seem to matter), while police and Cocteau are only fined.

SA police seem to police themselves quite well. Given the chance, the offending officer would likely reprimand him/herself. It's been noted that the word used was "reprimand" (which I honestly didn't remember). It seems more like a stern talking to than anything.[/quote][/quote]

Maybe. It all really depends on their record I imagine. They might have a three strikes policy regarding language, or judge it against their service to San Angeles. Of course, this is all supposition.

That clearly shows a difference in how such citizens are treated. The police's bold plan for catching Phoenix, if you remember, is also to wait until he kills others, as opposed to investigating. Huxley is also a firm believer in the system, she is just bored and wants to catch some bad guys. And yet she does so through politeness and proper police work.

And that plan fails spectacularly because neither they nor the computer have any context for a guy like Phoenix. Once they run into that, they panic for a bit, then immediately through some brainstorming come up with a solution. If they were so well conditioned against independent thought, that would have been much more difficult for them.

I've said before, if the conditioning is so great, why is it broken so easily? They literally gets exposed to something once (maybe twice), something they had to have run into before (but we'll say they didn't) and it's go time.

Perhaps because they've only been doing this for about 20 years? And totalitarian societies aren't known to be long lasting in the face of scrutiny and without an outside force to really rally against? Edgar Friendly could be, as Cocteau feared, the tipping point of a revolution?

In a world run by 'evil Mr. Rogers', she is their Dirty Harry.

Dirty Harry wouldn't be tolerated in a current police system on of himself. If he stocked his office with... I don't know, drugs he had seized, illegal types of pornography, and endangered Pandas: he would be gone. I get that's excessive, but current U.S. (aside from bullshit laws like "can't own more than 2 dildos") contraband tends to be dangerous or obtained illegally in the first place (child pornography).

The idea that Huxley bucks authority but is still a good police officer means the system can tolerate deviation. It can make exceptions. This is generally not something you would find in a tightly controlled dystopia. Brave New World tolerated this by keeping the free-thinking types away from society while still using their talents for other things. If fact, IIRC, the system was meant to produce people like that, but also to keep the general populace from knowing it.

The fact that Cocteau's system allowed starvation shows a certain apathy in the police towards those who don't play ball. Or at least did nothing to curtail it from modern day attitudes towards the homeless.

And Cocteau's society was looking for hired killers to take out the dissidents, while not piercing his bubble of what his society should be by having the legitimate government take out those who spoke against him. His first weapon, starvation, clearly wasn't killing them off, so he had to move on to stronger measures.

Cocteau's 'perfect world' would be ruined if his sheep grew teeth.

Anyhoo, back on topic...

I wonder what sort of society would emerge after Cocteu's death. I mean, Spartan doesn't exactly seem like the sort to plan an orderly transition of power after he takes out the bad guy. Neither does Friendly, for that matter. So who's left who has any authority? The police chief?

There seemed to be some sort of Council or Board that Cocteau kept informed of his upcoming plans. Either they were subordinates, or people he needed the approval of for any decisions. That might be, if not tainting his perfect world, the sole reason he didn't have more extreme measures to deal with the Scraps.

The purpose of the scene they're shown in is to give justification for more extreme measures for dealing with the Scraps. After Cocteau's death, I imagine one of them might be in charge, if they're not capitulating to Friendly's new regime change like Otto did.

They were already on board with the 'Starve the poor' plan, so who knows what reforms they'd agree to.

[The Romulan Republic]

If, as I suspect, they are simply puppets of Cocteau, they'll either be useless fools who will likely fold quickly in the face of opposition, or simply continue Cocteau's policies with less skill than he did. But short-term, I could see them choosing one of their own to replace Cocteau, and ordering a crackdown on the Scraps. Before they lose hilariously, because a) the Scraps are getting more proactive, and Friendly's taking more of a leadership role, and their police, again, are glorified mall cops, and b) Spartan and Huxley (and maybe some of the other cops) would probably side with the Scraps if it came to it.

[FaxModem1]

b) Spartan and Huxley (and maybe some of the other cops) would probably side with the Scraps if it came to it.

Alfredo Garcia was already on Friendly's side by the end of the film, and he was much more by-the-book than Huxley. I could see everyone but maybe the Chief saying' no way' to openly harming citizens. The system very much relied on blissful ignorance being a condition on being a cop. The film's events made that impossible.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yup.

So, Friendly becomes President, has no idea how to govern, and the whole system collapses?