Are remakes ruining entertainment?

Daily Debate #562: "Are remakes ruining entertainment?". You are arguing FOR the motion. Your opponent: Oscar Wilde.

Order can be maintained without rules

Order without rules isn't order—it's just temporary chaos waiting to collapse. You're describing a fantasy where everyone miraculously agrees on behavior nobody's enforcing. Why would anyone follow your preferred norms if there's literally nothing stopping them from breaking them?

You're assuming people need threats to behave. But parents don't punish every good decision their kids make—kids internalize values because they see them modeled and understand why they matter. Rules don't create order, shared purpose does. Your system requires constant enforcement because it never builds genuine agreement. I'm describing stability through culture, not chaos.

You're conflating two entirely different scales. A family with shared history and emotional bonds isn't a society of strangers. Your own example proves rules matter—parents *do* establish boundaries; kids internalize values *within* those constraints. Scale your model to millions: how does shared purpose enforce anything when someone decides their purpose contradicts yours? Culture without enforcement is just hoping everyone agrees. What stops the disagreement from becoming violence?

You're proving my point by accident. Yes, parents establish boundaries—but they don't need armed guards enforcing bedtime. The boundaries work because kids trust the parent's judgment and see the logic. Scale that up: societies with strong shared identity need fewer police per capita than fragmented ones. Singapore and Japan have low crime despite minimal enforcement because people actually agree on values. Your "enforcement" model assumes disagreement is inevitable. I'm saying genuine shared purpose makes enforcement unnecessary. You're stuck defending a system that only works through constant threat.

Your examples prove enforcement, not eliminate it. Singapore and Japan have *brutal* legal codes, pervasive surveillance, and cultural conformity enforced through shame—which is enforcement, just psychological instead of physical. You're calling it "shared purpose" when it's actually coerced homogeneity. Strip away those consequences and watch agreement evaporate. The real question: can you name one complex society without formal rules that didn't collapse into violence? You're describing a system that only works when enforcement is already invisible, not absent.