Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
Yes, but look at the big picture. That system would only work if you constantly fire people and hire the new ones. Then the employees would really be afraid to lose their job since they know there's always someone happy to replace them. On the other hand, the most talented professionals tend to prefer a more liberal approach if have an alternative, so they would flee to your competitors.
Professionals don't need to be reminded of their work duties. That's what makes them professionals. And I don't need to constantly fire people in order to get obedience, I only need to cut their salary this month a little bit and they usually get the picture immediately.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
Such tough system can only work effectively for the relatively short period of time. Stalin's system worked as long as he purged the party and the controlling bodies. The KGB have done it elsewhere. Once the process stopped and the nomenclature became a lifelong privilege (with Brezhnev), the whole system became paralyzed by the ineffective management at all levels.
The so called 'liberal approach' began.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
The authoritarian approach stops being effective once the system becomes very complex. The inventors of the planned economy didn't know that back then. The system should be designed so that it works autonomously in a de-centralized way.
Look at the modern world trans-national corporations. They usually have effective management (and rather authoritarian ones) and they are vertically integrated - in other word - centralized.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
You're tough. I think most people would prefer living in the oblivion (for the most part). And the comfort oblivion is usually preferable to the only-getting-by oblivion.
If you remember, that character in Matrix who asked to plug him back put a condition - to forget everything. If that option is unavailable what's the point to be plugged back knowing that everything around you is not real.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
Right, you need to think it though keeping in mind the flesh-mobbing phenomena. I'm pretty sure the manipulation with the mass consciousness would step to an entire new level of sophistication. But, I find it interesting to discuss that option if you choose to.
I think that flesh-mobbing will self-regulate. After all, people would have to live with their own decisions. Besides, I don't think you can organise a flesh mob large enough to get majority of votes.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
For sure people would stop committing crimes when there's anarchy.
Technically, yes, since you can't break a law that doesn't exist. Besides, the physical threat would remain.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
No it doesn't, but it makes people be constantly conscious of the possible consequences of their actions. That significantly adds up to the overall law-abiding mindset.
Right up to the point when the judical system turns into an absurdity.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
they would need to justify their budget for the next year: why their legal costs are higher than those of the other departments? That's how it starts to roll out higher and higher to the government. Once the Head of the Police position becomes vacant, all the candidates would promise their higher executive bosses to reduce the legal costs. And subsequently they would make the local police officers respond to the calls.
Yeah, in Utopia, probably. Such a system produces sh.tloads of bureaucrats who ultimately stop the self-regulatory mechanism which looks so good on paper. Moreover, bureaucrats generate corruption which adds to the chaos even more. Democratic society as USA sees it is the same non-working utopia as communism is. Perhaps it takes probably more time for some people to realize it.