An interesting point. I agree that some of the police and military would go along, and some wouldn't, depending on who was informed of the circumstances, who was particularly morally offended by the idea of the government forcibly taking the kids for 'vaccination' against a dangerous, contagious disease.
I think it's entirely possible that the real-life government WOULD do such a thing if there was a legitimate threat of a lethal viral contagion. The possibility for everyone to be killed is too great not to. For example, the World Health Organisation estimate that is someone with Ebola was to get on a plane, 90% of the world's population would be dead within 6 months.
So, I'm more surprised by the fact the soldiers weren't in Bio-Hazard suits tha the fact they went along with their orders.
Those that knew about the real plan to serve them up as a sacrifice for an alien enemy that humanity had ZERO possible chance of defeating, or even probably injuring- well, I imagine most of those with children would go along with it in exchange for the promise that their own children not be part of the 10% sacrificed. Especially, given that they were threatened that their children would definitely be sacrificed if they rebelled. Those without children, and those horrified enough to risk their own children to save other people's- they might well fight back. But I doubt many would. There are innumerable examples throughout ancient and modern history of soldiers committing horrific, immoral, violent acts, against event their own countrymen, because they were ordered to, or because of the 'mob-mentality'. The bombing of non military targets; Tienanmen square; soldiers beating and even raping non-combatants, etc. I honestly believe that even those few who knew about the real purpose of the mass kidnapping, and were outraged enough to want to fight back- most would still just follow orders, because that is what they are trained to do, even it they don't understand or agree with them.
While some families may fight back, again, most had no reason to. They believed their children were taken to be made SAFER. To be protected. That is a powerful motivator. Then there is the natural, psychological deference to authority figures that most humans have evolved with. I honestly don't believe many families would fight back either. Only those few who actually knew of what the real intentions were.
I disagree most with your closing sentence. I think the vast, overwhelming majority of countries WOULD go along with it. The democratic governments would, as you suggested, think mostly of maintaining their power, spinning the events to make them look good, and in terms of numbers not individuals. Dictatorships would think of nothing but personal good, and would only care that the dictator's own children, and probably the children of his government and army/police force (so as to maintain his rule) were not taken.
I do not think that a single country on Earth would not accede to the 456's demands. Knowing we cannot beat them militarily, I believe that EVERY nation would give in and gather the necessary sacrifices, then only focus on maintaining their power by pouring money into the military and space budgets so as to 'prevent such an atrocity ever happening again'.
I wouldn't be surprised if almost every country on Earth became a dictatorship based on those ideals, centered around a public figure who proclaimed ignorance of the true goal of the kidnaps. Again, fear is one of the most powerful motivators of human behaviour.
I am a realist. Everyone would go along. You are a humanist with far too much faith in the inherent goodness of people.
reply
share