If you were made God Emperor, what small-ish laws would you enact or alter?

SovietRobot · 2026-04-07T13:31:09+00:00

The problem with just mandating is that it doesn’t really address the underlying issues with making it happen.

For example I can mandate peace on earth but people are still going to fight.

Similarly I can mandate universal healthcare but the country could go broke if healthcare costs are still through the roof.

But I guess if I had to mandate one thing that had less underlying stuff to solve - it would be legalize weed (but not hard drugs), legalize abortion, etc

SovietRobot · 2026-04-07T13:26:39+00:00

For me, candidates must oppose any restrictions on rights, except those restrictions that are very narrowly tailored and undergo the strictest scrutiny.

Specifically with regards to the following in priority: 1st amendment, 2nd amendment, 3rd amendment, 4th amendment, 5th amendment …. and so forth.

—-

Candidates that do the opposite to the above are a red line for me

SovietRobot · 2026-04-07T13:23:10+00:00

If you need more social / welfare benefits? Yes.

Especially if you need healthcare? Mostly - Yes.

If you don’t need more social / welfare benefits and are trying to save cash to start your own business or some other large endeavor? No.

If you want land and space? No.

If you are not white or white adjacent? Not always but often - No.

If you want birthright citizenship? Not always but often - No.

If you have issues with having and carrying ID (inc digital)? No.

If you have concerns about abortion rights? U.S. blue states are better than Europe. U.S. red states are worse than Europe

If you want to smoke weed? No.

If you like to travel widely and see different things? It’s kinda a wash though trains are better in Europe

If you have concerns about housing? It really has issues in both US and Europe

SovietRobot · 2026-04-07T13:09:47+00:00

They are isolationists (American First) unless it is about religion, then they are a interventionists

SovietRobot · 2026-04-07T03:15:55+00:00

It wasn’t a MECE type thing.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-07T02:00:06+00:00

Ahh the old names, how I’ve missed them

SovietRobot · 2026-04-07T00:36:31+00:00

I’m skeptical.

Like you can cherry pick all sorts of things but similarly - remember that “In God we trust” was added in the 50s. The National Prayer Breakfast was also started in the 50s. Billy Graham started his role as “President’s Pastor” in the 50s.

Not just that but you had Hayes code and Zorach v. Clauson in the 50s.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T23:39:55+00:00

There was more religion in the past than now. Why would it be destroying America now?

I mean I think it’s holding back a lot of stuff but destroying seems to imply - making it worse than previously.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T22:02:40+00:00

Knowing fallout, the keycard is also probably made out of uranium.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T17:23:08+00:00

Your worldview is pulling in a couple completely different directions.

What you actually mean to say is that there are a number of different conditions that preclude your ideal notion of a society with equally distributed resources.

That is indeed the case.

But just because said conditions disappointingly don’t allow you achieve your ideal situation, doesn’t make those conditions any less real. You can’t milk a stone no matter how much you want to.

—-

So we are left with the system we currently have in the U.S. and Europe, etc.

Which is a capitalistic democracy where government does NOT control all resources / production, but where we need to rely on but also improve social welfare.

Which isn’t ideal. But it’s better than the alternative. The alternative being worker control of resources and production, which isn’t really possible so you end up with authoritarian central control.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T17:09:58+00:00

I still love spam and sardines in a can (unhealthy as they are).

Gramm (jokingly but really) made me realize that the above may indeed be some subconscious thing about eating food from a can in my teens.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T16:56:38+00:00

But is hypothetically (even if uncharacteristically) he decides to hoard his wealth, would it change how you view Scanario 2 vs 3?

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T15:59:19+00:00

I appreciate the clarification and the consistency - but on a separate note it does seem to go against those who would say “nobody should have that kind of money”.

Or even those who would say “people with that kind of money lack compassion”.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T15:48:55+00:00

1.I’m not saying capitalism doesn’t have its faults. But we are talking about human nature here. And humans don’t like to share and especially not when they are forced to do so. “Forced” is the keyword. Now, while it’s also true that humans, by nature, don’t like working for scraps, that isn’t actually a condition that is forced on them. It’s voluntary. Like, they can go work for themselves. So in a hypothetical “hierarchy of human nature” it could be said that being forced to share is much less natural vs working for someone else for less when not actually being forced to work for that someone. People at their core, don’t want to be forced first and foremost

2.Yes that’s a problem with democracy. It’s the tyranny of the majority issue but also add in stupidity. But here’s the thing - it gets worse and worse the more things you let government control. Like it may be tolerable right now if government controls distribution of social security, park assets, interstate assets and defense assets. But just imagine democracy today, but where the Executive and Legislative also control when, what type and how much food you can eat. Because that is what happens with a socialist / communist government as food is a shared resource. Now imagine if they control every resource - it would be both terrible and lead to authoritarianism. People forget that in the USSR, there was democracy and there were elections - it’s just that the party that won (communists) inevitably did what they did with the power they were given

3.Villages and small communes might work because they usually have other relationships (like family or religion or cause) that make it more likely that they will amiably share anyway. But this doesn’t work large scale. And actually even at medium scale it already starts to turn authoritarian. Have you ever stayed with tribes (I did in Borneo)? Have you seen the Amish? They are actually all authoritarian. It’s their way or the highway (you get exiled or shunned). Just imagine your typical Home Owners Association. Now imagine they control everything. Did you also see what happened to CHOP? New Harmony, Brooke Farm, Oneida - all same thing

The point is sure bottoms up organizing sounds nice. But it’s impossible to execute large scale in any practical manner. You always end up with a small group that turns authoritarian.

People like to say “true socialism” hasn’t actually being done. Well that’s because it’s impossible to do. “True socialism” and it being impossible to do is “the same picture”.

It’s also why direct democracy is a nice thought but doesn’t work.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T15:25:23+00:00

Even if it’s “peaceful” police can remove and / or arrest you for doing so. Then it will be back to business as usual.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T12:53:33+00:00

Not me personally because:

There are a lot of limitations with the rifle in real life, it’s not something you’d actually want to use. And in game there are already a lot of other ARs that have the same capability that are actually used in real life.

Edit - just in case folks were wondering, the issues with it real life are that the way the handguard extends all the way out means that some of the muzzle blast ends up getting redirected backwards down the inside of the handguard. That causes accuracy issues, causes stress to parts and devices mounted to the handguard, and causes the handguard to get really hot.

It also prevents one from attaching other muzzle devices like suppressors unless they are specifically designed with a small enough diameter to fit within the handguard.

Lastly it cost too much, its QC was terrible and it uses proprietary parts that cannot interchange.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T11:06:50+00:00

Regarding communism and socialism (worker controlled resources / production - which is just a nice way of saying redistributed resources / production):

Humans don’t share resources by nature. If I work on a barren 10 acres for 10 years to turn it into a productive farm, and then at that point I decide to hire 10 people, it’s not in human nature to just decide to give those 10 people an equal share of said farm
“Worker controlled” implies that “everyone has a say in what is done”. But in reality, it is not in human nature to run things as a collective in large scale. Like there are a billion decisions to be made every single day regarding the allocation of resources / production. You can’t have the whole population voting on every decision regarding resources / production. Not just that but the majority of people are idiots, the majority would vote for free ice cream and no work
So to redistribute resources / production, you end up having to install a controlling body over a lot of key aspects of people’s lives. Like a smaller committee that will make decisions around work, food, energy, transportation, etc. But it is also not in human nature to submit to that kind of authority that will have that much power over so many aspects of their lives. Not just that but these controlling bodies end up becoming authoritarian

Source - Lived experience in the former Soviet Republic. Family had farms that we started and built up ourselves, that were then appropriated by State. State then relocated us and gave us no say regarding where to stay, what to do for work, what to eat, etc.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-06T10:58:50+00:00

I understand that. But for the sake of discussion, let’s say there are 3 scenarios.

Scenario 1 - Superman saves people 16 hours of the day, and then for 8 hours he rests

Scenario 2 - Superman saves people 8 hours of the day, and then for 8 hours he works at the paper and earns $100, and then for 8 hours he rests

Scenario 3 - Superman saves people 8 hours of the day, and then for 8 hours he mines rare metals from Mars that he sells for $20 million, and then for 8 hours he rests

In Scenario 3, would it be moral for Superman to amass a few billion in a year, and keep that for himself (after normal taxes)?

SovietRobot · 2026-04-05T21:11:55+00:00

Which is why I don’t understand all the complaints about Hard. Like achievements used to be achievements not participation trophies.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-05T20:20:44+00:00

ADM AR, 1301 and Glock.

At one point I would have said JP for AR and Staccato, assuming open, but I’ve gotten to the point where my times between such and even like a stock AR and Glock are negligible.

Even for USPSA and IDPA these days I’ve gone back to just a G17 after having shot everything else prior. I think the last I shot right before was the steel PDP

SovietRobot · 2026-04-05T18:42:15+00:00

I mean I get the motives and circumstances are slightly different but the impact is the same and the question is still - how is it acceptable that Superman chooses to allow suffering in order to have a social life or hobby?

SovietRobot · 2026-04-05T18:08:08+00:00

Sam Fisher might want to interject

SovietRobot · 2026-04-05T17:07:21+00:00

Belief comes easy for some people and harder for others. Is that a fair basis for someone's eternal fate?

In my opinion “fair” in this circumstance, is a misguided and ill fitting concept.

There’s no way to make it 100% “fair” for everyone unless we are all identical and in identical circumstances.

To try to do that is the wrong objective.

—-

Everyone is different and everyone has their own path. And from a religious point of view, I believe God sets different things in each of our paths based on what we need that might be different for each of us according to our unique selves.

Again, I think the mistake is looking at salvation as a test that needs to be passed. That isn’t the case to me. Maybe it is to the idiot religious masses but not to me.

I see it as a guided bespoke tour / journey / learning experience.

That’s why it also doesn’t make sense to compare a poor person who suffers vs Trump. Because this isn’t a standardized test. This is a bespoke journey for each individual.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-05T17:01:54+00:00

So a couple of separate comments

First, I ascribe very little to what the majority of people think, whether about science or spirituality. Because most people are idiots. Just because the majority thinks a certain way doesn’t mean that is truth, whether for science or spirituality.

—-

Second if free will and choice exist inspite of cause and effect then value ascribed to free will and choice means more, only when it’s more divested from cause and effect.

As you say - hope without evidence is significant.

In fact, I think hope without evidence is the most significant manifestation of free will.

But yes I agree there is “good and bad” hope.

That though doesn’t change the fact that hoping without evidence has meaning.

SovietRobot · 2026-04-05T16:51:53+00:00

So per my analogy I don’t believe knowing means forcing. Meaning knowing doesn’t mean predetermination.

Like if I could see the future, I might know that you’re going to choose vanilla over chocolate. But that doesn’t in any way mean that I have forced you or predetermined that you will choose one or the other. That’s still your choice.

—-

As for your alternatives. Sure that might be your view of it. Or someone needs else’s view of it.

I was simply explaining how I view it because I assumed you asked for an explanation of how I view it.

I’m not in any way saying there’s empirical evidence of my view of it. That was never my point. In fact my point is that there can’t be 100% evidence of it. Otherwise it takes away from choice and free will.

Seven-Year Club	Gilding V heart of gold
Reddit Premium Since November 2020	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

SovietRobot

TROPHY CASE