Breaking modern society

[The 13 Wise Buttlords]

So one of the biggest rules that holds modern gaming together is that you are relatively easy to kill and so is everyone else.

So what happens when you introduce certain archetypes into these settings that ignore a lot of conventions of modern society?

1) You are personally invincible to anything society can throw at you, from being nuked to being put in prison or being brainwashed, but society itself can build itself up faster than you can tear it down with your own two hands so it still holds the advantage.

2) You can destroy society anytime you feel like but they can't do a thing to you. And society knows it. What happens then?

[JonSetanta]

1. If beginning at the same pace, both immortal and society reach a state of equilibrium since mortal nature is eternal and, well, the immortal doesn't change, so they learn to either work together or the immortal goes off to wank in peace.
If the immortal has an advantage to begin, they set their image up as a god from the start to ensure personal safety and well-being. Such a setup probably lasts for a good few thousand years before some mortal finally succeeds in slaying the overbearing monstrosity because, quite frankly, the stakes to compete are high.
If the society of mortals starts out with an advantage, they win. No contest. Immortal sleeps forever buried under tons of concrete at the bottom of the ocean. Or something.

2. Mortals worship, flee in terror, and strike out in anger against the immortal all at the same time. We're all a mixed bag, you know.
After being stirred into a state of panic for a few decades to centuries, the mortal society will begin to unravel from within.
Oh sure there would be many looking to ignore such a potential threat, and many would try to forget, but as long as the immortal is an active, conscious force with the power to both judge and destroy with proof that it exists and can do so, going about day-to-day business is really sort of difficult.

What I wonder is does this immortal have the power and consciousness of an entire race within theirself? Like a hecatoncheires of myth?
I imagine the many-headed titans to be like a divergent path of consciousness evolution, in which the entity multiplies within itself to ensure survival rather than replicate itself.
As direct result the mortals and titan have differing objectives for survival, and as such will seek to destroy each other due to biological necessity.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

1) You are personally invincible to anything society can throw at you, from being nuked to being put in prison or being brainwashed, but society itself can build itself up faster than you can tear it down with your own two hands so it still holds the advantage.

The same thing happens here as in Dnd. You are the king of everyone who doesn't want to be in a constant state of fear of being attacked. There will also be people resisting no matter what you do. Your actions, good or evil, will dictate the percentages.

2) You can destroy society anytime you feel like but they can't do a thing to you. And society knows it. What happens then?

You become king, and all obey you (The ones that didn't are dead). Or you decide to be your own worst enemy (like Superman) and hamstring your ability to impose your will, for good or for evil.

[name_here]

1) this is difficult to achieve because you need serious superstrength before they can just drop a building on you and laugh at your pathetic cries for assistance. in the unlikely event that you do, you'll be a guy who does what he pleases until they invent the ability to do somthing to you. then you die.

2) it really depends on the person as to what they do. if you go for a belovent dictatorship, they'll obey while attempting to persude you to do what they want in some given instance. if you try to destroy society, they'll vary between running, worshiping, and shooting their entire arsenal at you because they don't feel like giving up, even to superman. if you don't do either of those, see example 1.

[K]

Being immortal doesn't mean that people listen to you. I mean, you can just be unkillable and people won't serve you at a bar.

By the same token, you can just be a badass and people won't do what you say. I mean, if Superman pops into the mayor's office and starts tossing around orders under threats of laser eyes beams, people are just going to evacuate. It's a classic hostage situation.

The only thing that bears mentioning is that "destroying society" is always a bluff. The politics of nuclear proliferation shows us that while it's a big threat, it has counters and once people know you aren't willing to do it then you don't have a threat anymore.

People are rarely rational. They fight against insurmountable odds with active or passive resistance. People can just surrender and still not follow the traffic laws you try to impose.

Essentially, Ghandi tells Tyrant Superman to go fuck himself.

[RandomCasualty2]

By the same token, you can just be a badass and people won't do what you say. I mean, if Superman pops into the mayor's office and starts tossing around orders under threats of laser eyes beams, people are just going to evacuate. It's a classic hostage situation.

The only thing that bears mentioning is that "destroying society" is always a bluff. The politics of nuclear proliferation shows us that while it's a big threat, it has counters and once people know you aren't willing to do it then you don't have a threat anymore.

Well, you never really threaten to destroy society, you just threaten to kill the guys in power.

It's like if Superman drops in on the White house and dictates to the president and congress that they either follow his demands or he's going to kill them. Now, since there's no way to kill Superman, there's really nothing they can do to him except resign, choose to die or play ball. Now if either of the former happens, then Superman just repeats the same threat to the new people that succeed them.

Now, while you're not going to get every individual person to follow your orders, it's pretty easy to get the government to work on your side, and basically then you make the laws. The politicians enforce your laws because otherwise you'll kill them. You don't deal with society as a whole, you deal with it on an individual level. Because while you may not destory the whole of life on earth, killing a few politicians is well within your means. And then you've basically given the nation the choice of either collapsing its government into anarchy or playing ball with your demands.

[K]

Now, while you're not going to get every individual person to follow your orders, it's pretty easy to get the government to work on your side, and basically then you make the laws. The politicians enforce your laws because otherwise you'll kill them. You don't deal with society as a whole, you deal with it on an individual level. Because while you may not destory the whole of life on earth, killing a few politicians is well within your means. And then you've basically given the nation the choice of either collapsing its government into anarchy or playing ball with your demands.

I really don't think so. I think once Superman goes to take a wiz the building evacuates and the politicians proceed to run the country from an undisclosed location.

I mean, that's how most governments work anyway. I've personally never seen a Mayor, much less a Senator or the President, so public appearances aren't really necessary. For all intents and purposes, governments run themselves through the magic of bureaucracy despite having leadership that changes every few years. That's why it is so hard to create true institutional change or get rid of corruption.

So Superman flies by an tells the DMV to stop charging for motorcycle licenses, then for like ten minutes they do that, and when he flies away they go back to business as usual. Basically, unless Superman has taken some accounting courses and is willing to look through a government worth of records, he'll never know that people don't do what he tells them (though they can just show him false records).

Look at the war in Iraq. Overwhelming force and hundreds of thousands of troops can't govern a country of around twenty-five million people (about the size of the greater New York area, or Osaka, or the Bay Area). What make you think that one guy, regardless of his power, can make the world do anything at all?

[Jerry]

If Superman tried to overcome America, then the government will ask Green Lantern, Batman, The Flash, Superwoman, and various other superheroes to take Superman down.

[RandomCasualty2]

I really don't think so. I think once Superman goes to take a wiz the building evacuates and the politicians proceed to run the country from an undisclosed location.

The thing is that this isn't really a nuclear scenario where hiding in a bunker does much good. Because there is no apocalypse and you still have a country to actually run. This means that you've got visible people running that country.

So then superman keeps going up the chain of command until he finds the politicians.

Not to mention, it seriously takes a lot of balls to try to get you and your families to safety against a guy with super speed, super hearing and invulnerability. Sure you can try to escape, but what if you get caught? Remember that you're bound to get some people who actually want to capitulate with Superman. It's really in their best interests to let Superman know where the president is going, so he can kill them and then maybe make him the new president. As soon as your government has proven itself incapable of tackling a threat, you can bet people are going to jump ship.

So long as superman's demands aren't completely ridiculous and allow at least the politicians to enjoy some measure of comfort and wealth, I can really see people playing ball with it. I mean, seriously who gives a shit if he wants a 50 ft solid gold statue of himself, the politicians aren't building it and they're not paying for it. They just increase taxes, make their people suffer and that's it.


While yes, there is a point that Superman's demands may be so brutal that the government decides to run and hide, chances are, they probably don't. Because there are a number of scenarios like: Superman gets pissed and destroys your entire military. Then Superman just negotiates with another country willing to play ball with him and they invade your country with their soldiers.

You just can't afford to take that chance with an entire nation. It's often a lot easier to cooperate with this threat until such time as you can actually defeat it. Because while you may be able to hide the world leaders, superman can sure as hell take down all your military bases and aircraft carriers, because they're not easily concealable. With your government giving a sign of such helplessness, it's only a matter of time before you get a governor of a state succeeding from US and declaring themselves a member of Superman land.

And as far as going into hiding...

I mean once you've got your government in hiding and your military can't do anything, your government is for all purposes done. It seriously doesn't matter if the president survives or not. Everyone knows you're fighting a losing war and it doesn't take long for some people to decide that working for Superman is the better choice for them. Ultimately, you'll get sold out by innate human selfishness and disloyalty. I mean seriously, knowing politicians, do you really trust these guys to be very loyal? It just takes one guy who figures he'll be better off in Superman's new regime to take out your entire government. With no long or short term plan for victory, people are going to start switching sides.

Look at the war in Iraq. Overwhelming force and hundreds of thousands of troops can't govern a country of around twenty-five million people (about the size of the greater New York area, or Osaka, or the Bay Area). What make you think that one guy, regardless of his power, can make the world do anything at all?

That's because Iraq is anarchy. And you honestly can't really do much with anarchy because you have no centralized chain of command to control. When we took out Saddam, we destroyed their organized government and basically made the country really difficult to control. You're much better off actually just holding a gun to Saddam's head and being the power behind the throne, using the existing command infrastructure to get the job done.

The other problem with Iraq is that we have strict rules of engagement that we're trying to rebuild the country, not just destroy it. It's actually pretty damn easy to just destroy the country if we wanted to. But destroying the government and trying to put up a new stable one is much tougher.

But yeah, at some point to control a large area, Superman is going to want minions, but minions will be in pretty easy supply for him so long as he offers them good benefits. The fact that superman can zip around the world to any hotspot in a few seconds means that a cellphone is pretty much all you need to put down any major rebellion. You need some troops for the small stuff, but you actually don't need a real army.

And unlike the US government, Superman could totally just make an example of some cities that resist in a brutal fashion, leveling them to the ground. Because he doesn't care what the UN thinks if he uses torture, genocide or mass slaughter of civilians.

[K]

I really don't think so. I think once Superman goes to take a wiz the building evacuates and the politicians proceed to run the country from an undisclosed location.

The thing is that this isn't really a nuclear scenario where hiding in a bunker does much good. Because there is no apocalypse and you still have a country to actually run. This means that you've got visible people running that country.

My point is that you don't. The government already runs as if our leaders were in hiding. We don't see them except on TV, from locations that are undisclosed until later, where they make decisions without ever asking us. The whole government runs without anyone at the controls.

He can even just destroy our military and ask someone else to invade....then the new country would have to feed the people living in lean-tos and having food riots. Modern society is both very delicate and very strong, and the one lesson is that unless you are committing genocide, then modern warfare only destroys the things you want to capture (like economies, power structures, etc).

Superman really can defeated by a good PR machine and minimal passive resistance. Blowing shit up just isn't impressive anymore.

[RandomCasualty2]

My point is that you don't. The government already runs as if our leaders were in hiding. We don't see them except on TV, from locations that are undisclosed until later, where they make decisions without ever asking us. The whole government runs without anyone at the controls.

Right, while our leaders can hide though, the arms that enforce the government can't, unless it wants to devolve into anarchy. And are people really going to keep paying taxes with superman running amok and the government doing nothing? Probably not.

Superman really can defeated by a good PR machine and minimal passive resistance. Blowing shit up just isn't impressive anymore.

Your incorrect assumption is that the people are going to band together and think like a hive. People are going to do what's best for them, not what's best for the government or what not. While it's true that if every person was a complete loyalist zealot, they could put up a resistance, but that's just not the case. But most people are just going to give into his demands because it's damn inconvenient to go into hiding or worry every day that Superman is going to come back and kill you.

Ultimately, most people just want the trains to run on time and live their lives. If superman can disrupt the basic infrastructure of a nation and the military is helpless to stop it, then pretty much people will jump ship and join team Superman. Because the resistance effort is great and all, but most people are more concerned with stuff like staying alive and feeding their families.

[K]

My point is that you don't. The government already runs as if our leaders were in hiding. We don't see them except on TV, from locations that are undisclosed until later, where they make decisions without ever asking us. The whole government runs without anyone at the controls.

Right, while our leaders can hide though, the arms that enforce the government can't, unless it wants to devolve into anarchy. And are people really going to keep paying taxes with superman running amok and the government doing nothing? Probably not.

They keep paying taxes when we have unjust wars and disasters where the government abandons the area and terrorist attacks with no clear enemy to fight. Why is Superman different?

I think you overestimating the bravery of the people. There is only one Superman, but there are thousands of cops who will take you to jail for not paying your taxes.

Superman really can defeated by a good PR machine and minimal passive resistance. Blowing shit up just isn't impressive anymore.

Your incorrect assumption is that the people are going to band together and think like a hive. People are going to do what's best for them, not what's best for the government or what not. While it's true that if every person was a complete loyalist zealot, they could put up a resistance, but that's just not the case. But most people are just going to give into his demands because it's damn inconvenient to go into hiding or worry every day that Superman is going to come back and kill you.

Ultimately, most people just want the trains to run on time and live their lives. If superman can disrupt the basic infrastructure of a nation and the military is helpless to stop it, then pretty much people will jump ship and join team Superman. Because the resistance effort is great and all, but most people are more concerned with stuff like staying alive and feeding their families.

And now I think you are overestimating the rationality of the people. You don't have to be a loyalist zealot to fall for a PR campaign that demonizes a nation or a person.

People really will fight losing battles or even wars with no real enemy (see the war on terror). Toss a few commercials on TV and a few speeches and people will believe that capitulating to Superman means rape camps and organ harvesting from orphans even if he only wants free healthcare and a rational foreign policy. It'll be easy for people to believe the worse because he's being a huge douchebag by destroying stuff and killing people.

Superman's control goes only as far as his threats of death can be enforced, and even then people will only obey as long as that threat is constant. Once, he takes a nap or something people will go on with their lives. Considering that his powers of perception only extend to a city in area, he could maintain control of a few cities and only then by the constant killing of resisters.

I figure Superman will get bored of murdering guys long before anyone even thinks of capitulating.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

The only thing that bears mentioning is that "destroying society" is always a bluff. The politics of nuclear proliferation shows us that while it's a big threat, it has counters and once people know you aren't willing to do it then you don't have a threat anymore.

The reason it is a bluff is because of mutually assured destruction. Superman can't be killed by nuclear weapons*, so it isn't relevant. Since nuclear weapons can only destroy people or societies, they wouldn't even be used against Superman. And if Superman decides to wipe out a country, it happens. The argument that he wouldn't use force to back a threat is meaningless.

Superman's control goes only as far as his threats of death can be enforced, and even then people will only obey as long as that threat is constant. Once, he takes a nap or something people will go on with their lives. Considering that his powers of perception only extend to a city in area, he could maintain control of a few cities and only then by the constant killing of resisters.

I figure Superman will get bored of murdering guys long before anyone even thinks of capitulating.

This is false. Superman could easily approach a large or especially aggressive country and say something like:

"Hey. Would you like to expand your country into a world spanning empire? I can facilitate this. I'll just go and destroy everybody else's nukes first. Then I'll supply you with unimaginable quantities of precious metals and other raw materials from the earths core and asteroids. Then I'll supply you will free energy. If you want you can just give some of these things freely to anyone who joins your empire peaceably. Or not. Oh, there is only one condition. Make me king. Since I can do anything, manufacture (or obtain) anything, and kill anyone, all I need from you is to worship me. Deal?"

*(Depending on the version. In any case he isn't because we are operating under the OP's original statements.)

[RandomCasualty2]

They keep paying taxes when we have unjust wars and disasters where the government abandons the area and terrorist attacks with no clear enemy to fight. Why is Superman different?

Because superman isn't showcasing a corrupt government, he's showcasing an ineffectual government. The government right now may be unjust, but it's still controlling. When superman is in the picture, he basically demonstrates that the government isn't all power and offers people another choice.

It's no surprise that when order breaks down, people tend to riot and get all crazy.

I think you overestimating the bravery of the people. There is only one Superman, but there are thousands of cops who will take you to jail for not paying your taxes.

Yeah, the numbers of people may start small at first. But eventually it's going to grow. Especially if Superman makes efforts to help these guys.

People really will fight losing battles or even wars with no real enemy (see the war on terror). Toss a few commercials on TV and a few speeches and people will believe that capitulating to Superman means rape camps and organ harvesting from orphans even if he only wants free healthcare and a rational foreign policy. It'll be easy for people to believe the worse because he's being a huge douchebag by destroying stuff and killing people.

But how are you going to be broadcasting this? TV stations? Because seriously, superman can control that shit. If they don't broadcast stuff he wants, he smashes it.

As far as propaganda goes, Superman wins.

Superman's control goes only as far as his threats of death can be enforced, and even then people will only obey as long as that threat is constant. Once, he takes a nap or something people will go on with their lives.

This is really where I think you're wrong. Most people just aren't going to take the chance that Superman comes back pissed off and kills them. It's just not worth the risk.

I mean honestly, what does the average person gain from trying to resist Superman? If superman comes into a mechanic's shop and says "Fix my car or I'll kill you", anyone except a total moron is going to fix the thing. Because it's more damaging to you in the long run to resist than it is to simply capitulate and do what he wants.

I find the idea that people are just going to rise up and revolt out of national pride or something to be pretty naive. Most people just want to live their lives. They're not going to up and go into hiding just so they can tell Superman to fuck off. I mean, a few people might do that out of principle, but certainly not the average person. It's really not a simple matter to just pack up and leave town. You're leaving behind your home, your job and you may well end up living on the streets in a cardboard box.

All I can say is that if it was me, I'd certainly cooperate with Superman.

[K]

The only thing that bears mentioning is that "destroying society" is always a bluff. The politics of nuclear proliferation shows us that while it's a big threat, it has counters and once people know you aren't willing to do it then you don't have a threat anymore.

The reason it is a bluff is because of mutually assured destruction. Superman can't be killed by nuclear weapons*, so it isn't relevant. Since nuclear weapons can only destroy people or societies, they wouldn't even be used against Superman. And if Superman decides to wipe out a country, it happens. The argument that he wouldn't use force to back a threat is meaningless.

The threat is meaningless because once you've destroyed a country, you can't take it over, and they know it (unless you like a few charred refugees). The countries of the world really can ban together and just not let some dangerous mass murder become a world leader. Countries all over the world have been telling the US to go fuck themselves for just that reason.

Superman's control goes only as far as his threats of death can be enforced, and even then people will only obey as long as that threat is constant. Once, he takes a nap or something people will go on with their lives. Considering that his powers of perception only extend to a city in area, he could maintain control of a few cities and only then by the constant killing of resisters.

I figure Superman will get bored of murdering guys long before anyone even thinks of capitulating.

This is false. Superman could easily approach a large or especially aggressive country and say something like:

"Hey. Would you like to expand your country into a world spanning empire? I can facilitate this. I'll just go and destroy everybody else's nukes first. Then I'll supply you with unimaginable quantities of precious metals and other raw materials from the earths core and asteroids. Then I'll supply you will free energy. If you want you can just give some of these things freely to anyone who joins your empire peaceably. Or not. Oh, there is only one condition. Make me king. Since I can do anything, manufacture (or obtain) anything, and kill anyone, all I need from you is to worship me. Deal?"

*(Depending on the version. In any case he isn't because we are operating under the OP's original statements.)

A world spanning empire in the modern world is not made up of guns and armies. If you think so, you've been playing too much Civ. The modern world is made up of competent people who have decided to invest in society. Trade, trained workers, and logistics make up the modern world, and handing over a pile of guns to untrained soldiers will get them killed.

I mean, the only reason there hasn't been a terrorist nuke is mostly because terrorists are uneducated barbarians from third-world countries who couldn't plan a children's party, much less a guerrilla war. It doesn't even matter that Superman is handing out unlimited energy and materials because there is no one to set up the systems to make the high-end weapons it would take to compete with a first world nation. That's not even including that you have an untrained army on top of the fact that the totally competent people in your nation won't join your army because it's a crappy way to make money.

And let's not forget that Superman can't see through lead. The world's nuclear stockpiles are safe, so any kind of mass invasion is impossible without someone walking a suitcase bomb into the invading nation's capital.

I mean, it's actually easier to kill the Superman capitulators than to give in to Superman. Once the first nation to give into him is a wasteland of black glass, I expect there won't be many others trying to join up.

Don't underestimate the willingness of politicians to kill people in order to keep themselves in power.

[cthulhu]

Superman could, of course, just start a SuperCorp and start mining asteriods or whatever and then buy things. That will work eventually.

[shau]

One of the things that has to be considered is that Superman can kill the world elite fairly easily. If someone orders the new country of Supermanland torched to ash, they are going to be hunted down very soon.


I just got done reading Death Note which has a theme somewhat similar to this. In that story, a guy almost takes control of the world and his only real power is that he can murder people and not be caught.

[K]

They keep paying taxes when we have unjust wars and disasters where the government abandons the area and terrorist attacks with no clear enemy to fight. Why is Superman different?

Because superman isn't showcasing a corrupt government, he's showcasing an ineffectual government. The government right now may be unjust, but it's still controlling. When superman is in the picture, he basically demonstrates that the government isn't all power and offers people another choice.

It's no surprise that when order breaks down, people tend to riot and get all crazy.

Governments are shown to be be ineffectual all the time, and the status quo doesn't change.(see War on Terror, War on Drugs, Leave No Child Behind, etc.)

And I seriously don't think people will pick a guy as a political leader just because he's the world's best mass murderer. People always choose representative government when they have a choice. You'll note that the only counties that have dictatorships are wildly corrupt and the peasants have never known any other kind of government.

I think you overestimating the bravery of the people. There is only one Superman, but there are thousands of cops who will take you to jail for not paying your taxes.

Yeah, the numbers of people may start small at first. But eventually it's going to grow. Especially if Superman makes efforts to help these guys.

People really will fight losing battles or even wars with no real enemy (see the war on terror). Toss a few commercials on TV and a few speeches and people will believe that capitulating to Superman means rape camps and organ harvesting from orphans even if he only wants free healthcare and a rational foreign policy. It'll be easy for people to believe the worse because he's being a huge douchebag by destroying stuff and killing people.

But how are you going to be broadcasting this? TV stations? Because seriously, superman can control that shit. If they don't broadcast stuff he wants, he smashes it.

As far as propaganda goes, Superman wins.

I'm sure that once the message get's out that Superman is world class douche and he's trying to kill everyone, and then the TV stations go down, people will have the message.

Superman's control goes only as far as his threats of death can be enforced, and even then people will only obey as long as that threat is constant. Once, he takes a nap or something people will go on with their lives.

This is really where I think you're wrong. Most people just aren't going to take the chance that Superman comes back pissed off and kills them. It's just not worth the risk.

I mean honestly, what does the average person gain from trying to resist Superman? If superman comes into a mechanic's shop and says "Fix my car or I'll kill you", anyone except a total moron is going to fix the thing. Because it's more damaging to you in the long run to resist than it is to simply capitulate and do what he wants.

I find the idea that people are just going to rise up and revolt out of national pride or something to be pretty naive. Most people just want to live their lives. They're not going to up and go into hiding just so they can tell Superman to fuck off. I mean, a few people might do that out of principle, but certainly not the average person. It's really not a simple matter to just pack up and leave town. You're leaving behind your home, your job and you may well end up living on the streets in a cardboard box.

All I can say is that if it was me, I'd certainly cooperate with Superman.

People make irrational choices all the time, especially when they've been prompted by good propaganda.

And the real response is not "give him what he wants or die for a good cause." The third choice is "oh crap, Superman is in my life so I'd better get the fuck out of town because that guy is an immoral mass murderer."

Every good relationship is built on trust. Once you know that someone can't be trusted, you don't deal with them. Superman in this scenario is a criminal and a walking atrocity and crime against humanity, so you are not going to trust that guy because you know in your heart that he might just kill you anyway. He could pay ten times the going rate for any service and people would still avoid him.

[K]

Superman could, of course, just start a SuperCorp and start mining asteriods or whatever and then buy things. That will work eventually.

Money only works if people accept your currency. The government can easily tax Superco out of business or seize his assets for something like "unfair competition".

[SphereOfFeetMan]

The threat is meaningless because once you've destroyed a country, you can't take it over, and they know it (unless you like a few charred refugees).

Superman destroys one country. The rest of the world sees that he isn't bluffing. The other countries now believe the threat.

The countries of the world really can ban together and just not let some dangerous mass murder become a world leader.

So Superman decides not to become a mass murderer until he has a position of power.

Countries all over the world have been telling the US to go fuck themselves for just that reason.

Telling. Superman has more destructive power than any single country. Saying that other countries are unhappy with what the U.S. is doing, and then not doing anything about it, doesn't support your resistance argument.

A world spanning empire in the modern world is not made up of guns and armies. If you think so, you've been playing too much Civ. The modern world is made up of competent people who have decided to invest in society. Trade, trained workers, and logistics make up the modern world, and handing over a pile of guns to untrained soldiers will get them killed.

I was actually thinking of a country like a Lex Luther America.

It doesn't even matter that Superman is handing out unlimited energy and materials because there is no one to set up the systems to make the high-end weapons it would take to compete with a first world nation.

Right. That's why the example is: Superman + unlimited energy + unlimited materials + first world nation + disarmed opposing countries. That is where Superman starts his empire.

And let's not forget that Superman can't see through lead. The world's nuclear stockpiles are safe, so any kind of mass invasion is impossible without someone walking a suitcase bomb into the invading nation's capital.

Superman could have a plan. He could just buy most of the nuclear weapons of the world first. Then he could spend a couple years doing recon and finding out where the rest are at. Then he destroys them.

I mean, it's actually easier to kill the Superman capitulators than to give in to Superman. Once the first nation to give into him is a wasteland of black glass, I expect there won't be many others trying to join up.

Superman could just say that any country that uses nuclear weapons will be destroyed. The first country that did so would be the last.

Don't underestimate the willingness of politicians to kill people in order to keep themselves in power.

That's why Superman says: "You politicians can either: be regents of your particular domain with similar powers as you now have under my empire. Or die." I would think the politicians would choose to keep themselves in power.

[cthulhu]

Yeah, though if I was superman, I wouldn't be retarded and try and piss in everyone's cheerios. As you point out, that plan is destined to failure.

Instead I'd partner up with a host government or three and just bring big ferrous rocks to earth (slowly!) and then partner up with different mining corporations tintos to avoid significant market disruptions while generating local area jobs in several regions. I'd also look at selling ice and organic rocks to low rainfall areas for agricultural projects, or potentially for creating environmental flows in rivers. The idea would be for the second activity to counter balance the first.

Then I'd invest my money and wait.

[K]

One of the things that has to be considered is that Superman can kill the world elite fairly easily. If someone orders the new country of Supermanland torched to ash, they are going to be hunted down very soon.

How? Superman is no detective. He'll see a black glass crater, and all the super hearing and sight and x-rays in the world won't change that.

Governments can just make sure that they have deniability. Decisions like this really can be done by three guys who will keep their mouths shut.

I just got done reading Death Note which has a theme somewhat similar to this. In that story, a guy almost takes control of the world and his only real power is that he can murder people and not be caught.

People like world domination fantasies. It doesn't make them possible, or even meaningful.

Death Note never seems to take into account the fact that once someone knows your shtick, they can adapt (like, all leaders all use Leader as a form of address and hide their real names from the media, which fools the Death Note entirely).

[SphereOfFeetMan]

Every good relationship is built on trust. Once you know that someone can't be trusted, you don't deal with them. Superman in this scenario is a criminal and a walking atrocity and crime against humanity, so you are not going to trust that guy because you know in your heart that he might just kill you anyway. He could pay ten times the going rate for any service and people would still avoid him.

This is half true. Superman could at the same time be a walking atrocity and still never lie. He would say things like: "Do this and you will be spared. Do that and your country dies." If he always kept his word, people that served him would trust him and wouldn't avoid him.

Money only works if people accept your currency. The government can easily tax Superco out of business or seize his assets for something like "unfair competition".

Or Superman could buy the government.

How? Superman is no detective. He'll see a black glass crater, and all the super hearing and sight and x-rays in the world won't change that.

Governments can just make sure that they have deniability. Decisions like this really can be done by three guys who will keep their mouths shut.

Superman says "If any nuclear weapons go off, I will destroy a major city in every country." Then you have a situation where no country would use nuclear weapons, and every country in the world will actively try to find any loose nuclear weapons and stop them from being used against Superman's empire.

[K]

The threat is meaningless because once you've destroyed a country, you can't take it over, and they know it (unless you like a few charred refugees).

Superman destroys one country. The rest of the world sees that he isn't bluffing. The other countries now believe the threat.

The countries of the world really can ban together and just not let some dangerous mass murder become a world leader.

So Superman decides not to become a mass murderer until he has a position of power.

You can't have both. Either he starts killing or nations won't surrender.

And it's a bluff because every country knows that if he destroys a thing he can't have it. After he kills one country, the rest can still call his bluff. the world is worth nothing if it's destroyed.

Countries all over the world have been telling the US to go fuck themselves for just that reason.

Telling. Superman has more destructive power than any single country. Saying that other countries are unhappy with what the U.S. is doing, and then not doing anything about it, doesn't support your resistance argument.

The US can destroy the whole planet around 150 times. I mean, once you are in "world destroyer" class, the rest is semantics.

A world spanning empire in the modern world is not made up of guns and armies. If you think so, you've been playing too much Civ. The modern world is made up of competent people who have decided to invest in society. Trade, trained workers, and logistics make up the modern world, and handing over a pile of guns to untrained soldiers will get them killed.

I was actually thinking of a country like a Lex Luther America.

We KNOW that invading other countries means you die for the right to feed them and deal with car bombs. We have the lowest army recruiting numbers we've ever had.

Good luck recruiting from the US.

It doesn't even matter that Superman is handing out unlimited energy and materials because there is no one to set up the systems to make the high-end weapons it would take to compete with a first world nation.

Right. That's why the example is: Superman + unlimited energy + unlimited materials + first world nation + disarmed opposing countries. That is where Superman starts his empire.

First world nations are selfish. They don't want to go to war or deal with other people's problems. Why would you when you already have the highest lifestyle on the planet?

And let's not forget that Superman can't see through lead. The world's nuclear stockpiles are safe, so any kind of mass invasion is impossible without someone walking a suitcase bomb into the invading nation's capital.

Superman could have a plan. He could just buy most of the nuclear weapons of the world first. Then he could spend a couple years doing recon and finding out where the rest are at. Then he destroys them.

A. Nuclear material is the most highly controlled thing on the planet. He's not buying it.

B. We can make new bombs. It's not even hard as long as you only want to melt cities.

I mean, it's actually easier to kill the Superman capitulators than to give in to Superman. Once the first nation to give into him is a wasteland of black glass, I expect there won't be many others trying to join up.

Superman could just say that any country that uses nuclear weapons will be destroyed. The first country that did so would be the last.

He'll never know. He's no detective.

The suitcase bomb is made for this kind of thing. you walk in and there is no way anyone can ever be pointed to. That's why it's so scary that Russia has lost like 20.

Don't underestimate the willingness of politicians to kill people in order to keep themselves in power.

That's why Superman says: "You politicians can either: be regents of your particular domain with similar powers as you now have under my empire. Or die." I would think the politicians would choose to keep themselves in power.

If they have all the same powers, then Superman has none. You aren't making any sense.

[K]

Every good relationship is built on trust. Once you know that someone can't be trusted, you don't deal with them. Superman in this scenario is a criminal and a walking atrocity and crime against humanity, so you are not going to trust that guy because you know in your heart that he might just kill you anyway. He could pay ten times the going rate for any service and people would still avoid him.

This is half true. Superman could at the same time be a walking atrocity and still never lie. He would say things like: "Do this and you will be spared. Do that and your country dies." If he always kept his word, people that served him would trust him and wouldn't avoid him.

People don't trust murderers because they might murder you. They don't even want to be in the same room.

Being a truthful murderer is just scarier. Then you know that if you fuck up he will kill you.

Money only works if people accept your currency. The government can easily tax Superco out of business or seize his assets for something like "unfair competition".

Or Superman could buy the government.

Governments aren't for sale. Ask Ross Perot.

How? Superman is no detective. He'll see a black glass crater, and all the super hearing and sight and x-rays in the world won't change that.

Governments can just make sure that they have deniability. Decisions like this really can be done by three guys who will keep their mouths shut.

Superman says "If any nuclear weapons go off, I will destroy a major city in every country." Then you have a situation where no country would use nuclear weapons, and every country in the world will actively try to find any loose nuclear weapons and stop them from being used against Superman's empire.

To prevent world domination under a madman.....yeh, people really will still nuke Supermanland. One city per nation is worth it.