Y’know, there’s a reason that the Kibbutz work. Why the great London clubs are such aggreeable places. And why think tanks flourish.
It’s because their members choose who will join them.
And this is why both socialism and anarchy fail. Both systems have to take everyone on. We don’t exile people any more.
Combining this insight with a quick glance at the pearl river basin, or, hell even Kaesong Industrial Region, here’s a somewhat novel proposal: The creation of special ultra low tax, ultra low government, fairly small (say around 1000 square miles) special adminidstative regions within a country. Children would not be allowed in, and the only people permitted to be citizens (or even allowed in!) of these regions would be those that met specific requirements set by the people of the regions themselves.
Criminal codes would be relaxed, save for the major ten crimes - but there would be one special punishment reserved for these regions: people could be bannished, or exiled from them, to the rest of the country.
I’m aware that there is a slight risk of an apartheid-lite situation here, but I see this idea, or a development of it, as being a way of producing a near utopian country.
I think “lol” is the only response that fits, here.
The idea is trash, by the way. It’s been tried before in America and elsewhere, and the “No Jews” or “No Blacks!” neighborhoods are what resulted. Just who do you want to banish, anyway?
But they weren’t on anything like the same scale as this idea. And don’t forget that there will not be any children permitted, so it shouldn’t get racial.
So, what happens if there are both men and women in these SARs, and they – you know, get together – and in a few months they produce babies? Do they all get exiled, or just the babies?
But you haven’t given a reason for them to work socially. You’ve just said it won’t get “racial” because there won’t be any kids, which doesn’t make any sense. *Why * won’t people exclude others on the basis of prejudice? When you say the people there get to decide, how is that done? And yeah, what the hell are the “chattering classes”?
Do you mean, only childless persons can be initially admitted? Or that any member who later has a child has to leave? If the latter, it’s not a sustainable model. Besides, we can expect some initial racial/ethnic selection even among adults.
And yet you think “the great London clubs are such agreeable places.”
I can only assume you haven’t visited them. All the times I have been they have been full of idle, borish pampered elite prigs, members of the chattering classes, and criminals, of the white collar variety at least.
I’d rather drink a pint in a pub down in Tower Hamlets than sip pink gins at the Garrick, any day.
<Dylan>
I am liberal, to a degree
I want everybody to be free
But if you think I’d let Barry Goldwater
Move in next door and marry my daughter
You must be crazy
I wouldn’t do it for all the farms in Cuba
</Dylan>
I’m curious as to what the Small British Shop Owner does that makes him think he belongs to the upper class who would be ideal for running such a place. I mean, I’m assuming that he thinks he’ll be invited to the party. Because, you know, I’ve been to quite a few small british shops in my time, and not to be cruel or anything, but the people running them were not generally your intellectual types.