[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by lordblazer

The question I have to ask is the moment this discrepancy is discovered. Why do they keep this system in place?

Perhaps the Sibyl System arose due to crime growing out of control, more law-abiding citizens getting utterly fed up about it and complaining to the government about it, and hence the government using extreme measures to solve this crime problem.

And if this is the case, the Sibyl System probably accomplished what it was designed for. The first few weeks of the Dominators being the standard issue weapons for the police might have been a bloody month indeed. But once that horrific month was over, there were way, way fewer criminals left. Society re-stablized, with far less crime. The general populace were naturally relieved and thankful. And then the more insidious elements of the Sibyl System came into play.

Mind you, that's just speculation on my part. I will admit it's getting a bit harder to imagine the Sibyl System coming into place without a serious crime problem.

That being said, consider how the airplane industry in America responded to 9/11. 9/11 was one terrible tragedy, but again, it was one terrible tragedy. Nothing like it has happened since.

Yet, from everything I've read, the TSA has put into place ever-increasing high-security measures for people boarding planes at American airports. Some of it I'm amazed that Americans would put up with. Yet, it goes on, and I suspect that lingering fears over 9/11 is a big reason why.

It doesn't take a lot to convince people to trade some freedom and practicality for enhanced safety.

I mean I know Japan is conservative now, but things don't change easy today because the population is aged.. by the future Japan will be a much much different country (less populated too and a bit younger)...

In a way, that might actually be why the Sibyl system is so accepted. For the young, it's the only system they've ever known.

Imagine trying to tell your average middle class teenager of today that it's possible to get through life without FaceBook, Twitter, and/or text messaging. They'd probably think you're insane.

But someone my age and older at least has the memory of what life was like before these things took off like a rocket. And life was fine back then. But for kids that have never known a world without the internet, without FaceBook, without Twitter, without texting, these things are absolutely necessary.

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

There are plenty of things wrong in real-world societies that are not addressed simply because of sheer inertia.

It's not just that. It's also that...

1) Not everybody agrees that these "wrongs" are actually wrong.

2) These "wrongs" sometimes have highly difficult solutions to find.

3) The "wrongs" are largely out of sight. It's not just that they're easy to ignore, it's that many people never learn of them in the first place.


Let's look at your list.

The widening income gap between the very rich and the very poor caused by market capitalism.

Not everybody is a strict egalitarian. So many people are simply not concerned about this income gap. For some people, this is the natural (and hence acceptable) byproduct of "the American dream".

The entrenched inequality in trade between commodity producers and developed world consumers.

A lot of people simply aren't aware of this. Those that are aware of it, and are in any real position to oppose it, are generally those on the side that materially benefits from this (i.e. "developed world consumers"). If clothing sweat-shops overseas shut down, does that mean that the price of clothes goes up? That's likely a real concern for "developed world consumers".

Endemic corruption at all levels of society in many countries.

Yeah, this is an inertia thing more than anything.

Unsustainable environmental destruction fuelled by the desire to profit from natural resources while they last.

Part of this is economics, yes, but part of this is simply fulfilling the people's energy wants and needs. There's real difficulties in fulfilling people's energy wants and needs without "unsustainable environmental destruction". Based on what I've read, the only present solution would be to build a lot more nuclear reactors. And that itself comes with a certain chilling risk, of course...

Sadly, green energy has not taken off to the degree that it can substantially lower reliance on natural gas.

Stubborn East Asian preference towards more work rather than more play. The perceived laziness of Westerners who prefer more play rather than more work.

I'm going to skip this, since you (being Singaporean) are in a better position to speak on this than I.

To be sure, though, I don't think the population is as passive as many critics here make it out to be. There's the news anchor, for example, who asks reasonably insightful questions about the drawbacks of cyberisation. Then there's the retired professor who clearly has his doubts about the system. The key thing to remember is that, for the most part, the Sibyl System has brought a lot of benefits to the majority of citizens. It has its flaws, but the general belief seems to be that these are kinks that can be ironed out. Akane mentioned as much in this episode, during the drive to the professor's home.

I get the sense that for those who dislike the Sibyl System, it's kind of like the older people of today who dislike increasing reliance on electronics in day-to-day living. They probably feel like "this is the way of the future", and whether you like it or not, it's pointless to question it because you'll be viewed as a luddite or an "old curmudgeon" for doing so.