Is it possible for humanity to create a peaceful society with the means at our disposal?
Several ideologies could lead to the answer,
but each would require the entire populace to opt in, and none is without disadvantages.
Were everyone made to think the same way, and to work towards the betterment of society as a unit then it might function perfectly.
But to do this would mean sacrificing individuality,
which doesn't fall in line with the values of most societies.
On the other hand if everyone was allowed to embrace their individuality as
much as possible, it would lead to conflicts in which someone's needs come at the cost of another's
and more willful people would subjugate the weak. Neither of these systems is ideal,
and what we have in most of first world society is a compromise based middle ground.
Everyone is made to follow certain agreed-upon rules,
but is still allowed to make many of their own decisions and represent their individual identity.
Absolute peace seems impossible under the system, as individuals disagree about what should be included in the law,
but a general sense of comfort is achievable for most, and so the system is easy to fall in line with for
all but the most extreme psychological outliers. Even if the level of happiness felt by,
and opportunities available to different people are still unequal. A worthwhile question is of whether it is in human nature to desire individuality,
or if it is a product of the culture that we grow up in. Were humans raised to believe that there is an
absolutely correct way to live, would they be happy being made to live that way? Western media is quick to present these societies as
fundamentally evil and terrifying because as people born into a society which prizes individuality,
we are terrified of being forced to lose it.
But these presentations are mere punditure, because for a person raised in those societies, their way of life would seem just as natural to them.
The best way to convince a populace to adhere to these systems is through the idea of objective morality.
Most societies implement this via religion,
convincing people that there is a higher power making distinctions between right and wrong. In the world of Pyscho-Pass,
this is done through science, convincing people that morality can be quantified via technology.
The word 'convincing' is integral here as the civil system is not absolute.
It is comprised of a literal hive mind of people with differently wired brains
making judgments about what is or isn't moral and deciding who fits into their society.
The populace is complicit in the system's existence
because it does such a good job of making most people happy with its judgments that they have no reason to question it,
and after a generation born brainwashed into complacency with it, its dominance has taken hold
Psycho-Pass poses for us the moral question of whether or not it is justified to build a happy society
on the foundation of lies and the destruction of dissent. Is it okay for the civil system to exterminate
those who it isn't fit to save in service of the greater good? Is happiness based on lies and having your identity
Shaped by the system sustainable? Or will it actively drive people insane?
Psycho-pass is one of my favorite anime because it does not attempt to provide a clear-cut answer to these questions.
Our knee-jerk reaction to the civil system is revulsion
Many including myself have criticized that it makes no sense for the Dominators to kill people in such an over-the-top fashion,
as it is pretty obviously a bad look for the system and would only traumatize anyone who saw it.
However, I will also defend not only that it looks cool as shit,
but also that it is symbolically helpful for the viewer making clear in no uncertain terms that these people are being fucking horribly murdered,
whether it's justified or not. You could say that this is both pandering and hand-holding, and you'd be right,
but as an aesthetic choice it's one that I enjoy a lot.
But is the civil system particularly different from what we already have?
Our society already passes judgment on individuals based not only on their actions,
but on suspicions and prejudice. Instead of from the top, the power comes from everywhere, and no one has matching information,
or even coherent information most of the time. Psycho-Pass presents us with a society in which crime is so rare
that citizens within the system literally can't even recognize a crime when it's happening right in front of them. And while this is negatively exploitable,
can we really say it's worse than a more chaotic system in which tragic mass killings happen so often that people live in fear of them?
It is integral to the message of Psychopaths that the civil system is not inherently or objectively evil.
Crime in this society is at an all-time low, and standards of living are at an all-time high.
For the average citizen, the system does such a good job of managing their lives that they have no reason to question it.
Most people are content,
and those who aren't will either be counseled into contentedness, or otherwise fall into the cracks of society,
which are the places that the series sets out to explore most thoroughly.
The reason I'm explaining all of this is that, while Psycho-Pass is a massively entertaining cop drama,
with one of the most memorable rivalries in modern anime,
between a hugely magnetic villain and a badass hero
that anyone can rally behind, when I think about what makes the series a favorite I always come back
to the scene in the final episode, when Akane decides to continue working within the system and trying to help improve it.
At the core of Psycho-Pass's narrative and much of Urabuchigen's writing is an ideological conflict
the Sybil system represents absolute control, while Makishima represents absolute chaos.
Makishima's rebuttal to the highly functional society of brainwashed drones
is that a life which isn't felt, or based around one's individual identity is meaningless.
He sees no purpose in the betterment of society if it comes at the cost of the individuals emotions,
and ability to express themselves, even if that expression comes at the cost of others' lives.
In between these extremes we find Kogami Shinya,
who represents the middle ground that humans most often arrive at. A ground in which - while there is belief in the need for some degree of
Order and rules within a society - those cannot be enforced in ignorance of human emotion.
In his case the desire for vengeance against a criminal
overpowers his ability to logically follow along with what will most benefit society.
He cannot bring himself to bend to the will of a system, which he disagrees with morally,
and this eventually drives him out of that system.
Kogami reflects the feelings which most viewers will have going into the series - that Makishima must be punished for his evils,
and that it would be unreasonable to reward his actions, even for the supposed benefit of society.
Akane's rebuttal to the Sibyl systems cold logic is that it ultimately misrepresents the spirit of humanity's creation of the law.
Mankind's trepidation towards forgoing individual liberty in service of the greater good is not merely selfish,
but out of hope that there is another way - that perhaps there truly is an agreeable middle ground in which everyone will be happy,
and no one has to lie, or be cast aside in order for things to work.
Akane witnesses firsthand evidence that there is more which can be done via counseling and the human touch
to communicate with supposedly incurable criminals than what the Sibyl system currently Implements.
She knows that while the current system is more functional than what was there before,
and therefore cannot be destroyed wholesale, it can clearly be improved upon.
Or perhaps alternatives can be found which function even better without being founded on lies.
Ultimately the biggest flaw of the Sibyl system is that it is rushed. It claims to be a perfect system so that the populace will comply with it,
But it is only functional to a point, and seeks to hide the parts that don't work via lies and brainwashing
which makes it that much harder to think about fixing. The more we see cracks in the system the more clear its dysfunction.
Until the point where it seems that a replacement is outright necessary.
But it is at this realization where the series concludes,
not accounting for the dreadful sequel that you should not watch, nor the okay movie which does little to expand on the show's ideas.
Psycho-Pass had me at 'hello' with its awesomely realized and functional cyberpunk world, and later got its claws in me with it's gripping narrative,
memorable characters, and the wonderful love ability of Tsunemori Akane.
And i've spent no shortage of breath discussing the strengths of the series,
especially as compared to its dismal sequel. My first time watching it I spent much of the viewing
abjectly terrified that it was eventually going to become a show about dismantling the Sibyl system,
culminating in some huge stupid action scene in which the building that houses the system is blown up.
When I got to the vastly more nuanced conclusion I was so ecstatic that it became an immediate favorite.
I'm sure that there are many details about the story
which I could nitpick, and just as many which I could praise for their imagination which I've never seen elsewhere,
but ultimately it's the presentation of the Sibyl system, and its pros and cons, and the decisions made by the characters within that system
which have left such a lasting impression on me.
This video is the fourth in a series about why each of my favorite anime has earned its spot amongst the others.
If you find after watching it that you would like more context into my views on anime,
then I recommend watching this playlist of what I consider Essential videos to understanding my viewpoint.
If you enjoy my content, then consider supporting me on Patreon where you'll quickly be introduced to the insanely vast amount of it, which I release on a daily basis.
Thanks again for watching, and I'll see you in the next one.