What would it be like if supers, who were solitary and territorial at begining, gradually organized themselves into a society/circle/organization?

Hello,

I don't think I can add too much to what has already been said, but I do have a question for the OP.

Why do you keep bringing up the Ottoman Empire Jannisary Corps as an example of a new ruling class? The Janissary's were never the full rulers of the Ottoman Empire. They were highly placed, but still considered slaves and organized by outside forces (from the ruling nobility) and subject to severe discipline (including many mass executions/decimations when they rebelled). If you are using our current (well 1999) real world as a template here I don't think Supers or Normals would be using the Janissary Corps as a model for organization or ruling.

Cheers :)
It's a form of political power rising, not that it's something really same as that.

Initially, governments tried to recruit supers to serve them and to counter those criminal or overly unruly supers.

at first, these recruited supers were very compliant, content with high salaries and social status, especially when their superpower was pretty weak at that time.

however, they gradually became more arrogant and rebellious, demanding higher salaries and more privileges, and their growing importance prompted governments to give them whatever they wanted.

Eventually, one day they suddenly realize that they have no need to submit to those ordinary human weaklings.
Or perhaps most of them don't actually really want to overthrow their ordinary human masters, but when their masters refuse to give them what they want, they will use various gray (but theoretically not illegal) means to force their masters to agree.
in such case,they will deliberately keep the existing ordinary government because they don't want being on the front lines and bearing the burden of responsibility.

The Ottoman Janissaries not the rulers of their country of course. however, if their Sultan dared to do anything against them or fail to show them enough respect, the Sultan would soon be in big trouble.
and Janissaries with superpower didn't even need to personally break into the Sultan's palace to gouge out his eyes or cut off his head.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There was a plot line late in the Elemental run that involved the idea of setting up a society of supernormals, but that was about the time I stopped reading it because I didn't like where it was going.
 

The idea that something in the supers makes them act like territorial predators is interesting. Something alien maybe?
sense of superiority and security are things. a lone supers mingling among ordinary people can do whatever him/her wants, but when another super appears, his/her advantage is no longer unique.in particular, a super can easily deal with dangers from ordinary people, but if the danger comes from another super, that's a different story.

of course, this also involves significant individual differences. Many supers would happy to encounter other supers and try to achieve more through cooperation than before.

Anything can happen. many welcome the presence of their peers, while many others do not.
 


A big problem is: when you are that unique super, you can see yourself as a god while ordinary people are insects. but when you have to deal with a lot of your own kind, even those more powerful and especially far more powerful supers may see you as an insect, and bullying and enslaving the weaker supers will satisfy their ego more than merely ordinary people.
See Dark Horse Comics Titan, Star Trek (original) “Where No Man Has Gone Before”, Alphas, Heroes, and Forbidden Planet.
 

So if in 1999 you're positing one million Supers out of a world population of six billion at the time, that's a 1:6000 ratio. So about the same ratio of infants born with congenital hearing loss. Think of how many people you know who were born with hearing loss, that's your same odds of knowing a Super.

If you presume that the distribution of these million individuals is regular across the globe, you'd be looking at:
Asia: around 600,000
North America: around 50,000
Europe: around 120,000
South America: around 80,000
Africa: around 150,000

In areas with smaller populations, Supers would have a disproportionate amount of relative power and influence but that would also affect their ability to coalesce into groups. Whereas in population-dense areas, more of these individuals would be discovered and if they're predisposed to seek each other out you'd find fewer Supers in North America but they'd form groups much faster when you also factor in the higher rates of information distribution in more technologically-developed areas.

So with most everything else in the world, you'd probably see the U.S. with more visible emergence of Supers despite having the least actual amount of them. This is 1999, so while American exceptionalism/xenophobia is still a defining feature of U.S. identity, it's not the primary social characteristic that it would become in the 21st century. You're looking at pre-Y2K attitudes of optimism, idealism, and hope where it's possible that Supers could be altruistic - something like an independent Justice League could form, along the lines of a superpowered Americorps or Peace Corps. Perhaps even spreading internationally - Supers Without Borders.

This was also a time of massive national and civil unrest in other areas of the world: Rwanda, the Balkans, areas which would attract Supers who might be exploited by malicious influences. At the time, the UN member nations engaged in multinational sanctions and relief efforts - but put Supers into the mix and it becomes a sort of arms race to level the playing field. Would these Supers Sans Frontieres be willing to volunteer themselves in a paramilitary capacity for ostensibly humanitarian nation-building efforts?

The dark question: does this get you a super-powered 9/11? Does American interventionism/imperialism invite a more devastating retaliation from extremists? And would this act as a multiplier of the ensuing corruption, military-industrial expansion, xenophobia, and exploitation that would define the first quarter of the 21st century - only this time with individuals carrying the power of military divisions?

I suppose it depends on whether you think of human nature as individualist (in which case the question becomes: do we get a Superman or do we get a Homelander first?) or collectivist (would this new cohort of Supers form their own cultural in-group or would existing cultural/nationalist tendencies prove stronger?).

And even beyond all that - how do non-Supers react to the presence of sudden demigods in their midst? Much like how fantasy tropes have always failed to explain "Why have the more numerous humans not exterminated elves who present a clear and present existential threat with their hoarding of power and longer lives?" - I think you'd have a SRA/Project Wideawake within months of the first Supers emerging onto the public scene.

tl;dr version - nothing good comes out of this. Humanity is, as the kids say, cooked.

Muricas cooked.

Assuming even distribution Muricas heavily outnumbered.

Asia, India, Africa new superpowers.
 

Muricas cooked.

Assuming even distribution Muricas heavily outnumbered.

Asia, India, Africa new superpowers.
In many ways, it would be as if every country suddenly entered “The Nuclear Club”.*

Of course, exactly how the geopolitical balance shifted would depend as much on each super’s moral compass, especially in the context of where they live.

As has been pointed out in comic books & other genre fiction too numerous to mention, a Superman with a strong sense of justice or one who is a bigot could reshape countries if not the world. A sociopathic/narcissistic Superman might be happy to support or even become an oppressor. A moral one living in a dictatorship might become a one man revolution.





* depending on how powerful the most powerful supers were, of course.
 

In many ways, it would be as if every country suddenly entered “The Nuclear Club”.*

Of course, exactly how the geopolitical balance shifted would depend as much on each super’s moral compass, especially in the context of where they live.

As has been pointed out in comic books & other genre fiction too numerous to mention, a Superman with a strong sense of justice or one who is a bigot could reshape countries if not the world. A sociopathic/narcissistic Superman might be happy to support or even become an oppressor. A moral one living in a dictatorship might become a one man revolution.





* depending on how powerful the most powerful supers were, of course.

I got bored one time and added up how many people in the world swing vaguely the "right way".

Europe +USA plus Canada, Aussie NZ. About a billion.

How many swing your way. 30-40% being generous doesn't matter what those beliefs are.

8 billion people on the plant (6 1999?).

Depending on how many superman/homelander or similar types are around nukes and airforce are obsolete.

Africa, China, India and Islamic world are your new Superpowers. USA infamously gets along well with all of them. Oh South America as well erm nvrmind.

RIP. If push comes to shove I'm learning Mandarin or Hindi.
 

We probably shouldn't cast people from any given geographical region,let alone whole continent, as a monolith. I mean, we don't even tolerate that with fictional salient species around here.

Let's back up and define "super" -- the OP starts with "can take several special forces soldiers" and backs off a little. That's a million Wolverines, not a million Supermen. This would be disruptive, but not world ending. And numbers aren't all that matters: the ability to actually organize and utilize those people would matter a lot.
 

I think Star Trek augments are significantly below "super" status. As in, Khan can do a one-handed throw of a man across a room, but not a car.
Certainly true but in Star Trek the megalomania of the augments was part and parcel of the process. Imagine a Star Trek augment who was pushed to true super abilities.
 

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top