6 ms·

No country is perfect, and the reason why there are good and not so good policies are due to compromises that need to be made. Low taxation for example is great

by danjac 6y ago

No country is perfect, and the reason why there are good and not so good policies are due to compromises that need to be made. Low taxation for example is great, but not if it means slashing your education budget or having the streets full of homeless people. Every time people try to start a new country from scratch - whether by colonizing some land or a revolution - the results end up completely different to what they hoped or expected, often for the worse. Real lasting change is effected by the long, hard, often unhappy slog. Ask the people who fought for civil rights, or gay rights, or environmentalists - or for that matter, the various conservative groups. Honestly if you want a new country, start with the one where you live, become an active citizen and do the hard work of showing up and participating. If that's not possible then move to a country where you can make a difference, but still you have to put in the work.

JabavuAdams 6y ago
I mostly agree with your observations but would like to see more experimentation. Specifically, existing countries have to work with/for the people they've got. Over time it may be that the citizens are no longer really "like minded" to a minimum level where they can cooperate effectively. We should be able to try experiments with "re-booting" populations without secession, civil war, ethnic cleansing, or genocide. I would be interested in re-seeding a secular society that although it doesn't ban religion also doesn't privilege religion. I.e. believe and do what you want but any time your religious beliefs run into conflict with secular values, secular values win. The problem is that religious beliefs are (at least pragmatically) protected because they are so deeply and dearly held. It seems unfair and ultimately futile to just ask true believers to turn it off in school / on the job / in the voting booth. From what I understand of US law, non-profits are not able to discriminate based on religion, but religious organizations are. So e.g. you can't say "You can't join the Secular Space Nation Project because you're religiously devout or your particular religious beliefs will make you hard to integrate," but you can say "You can't join the Church of the New Space Country" because you don't practice the "New Space Country" religion.
- Leherenn 6y ago
  > We should be able to try experiments with "re-booting" populations without secession, civil war, ethnic cleansing, or genocide. How would that work? You need to have some kind of coherent territory for a state to work I would say. If you do a reboot and someone is not happy with the new values but does not want to move, what do you do?
  - JabavuAdams 6y ago
    Exactly. I guess "re-boot" was the wrong choice of word. I meant to create a new country on new territory, but with sufficiently like-minded people. EDIT> I mentioned anti-discrimination rules because even if you wanted to create a new polity, you can't actually legally deny membership even to people who would be hostile to that polity. Unless you start a religion ... weird.
    - phobosanomaly 6y ago
      US states do that to some extent. Alabama is a whole different ballgame than California, and people do (to some extent) tend to self-segregate into states that match their preferred lifestyle and political environment.
- danjac 6y ago
  So you have an ideal of how you want society to be. Being serious, how are you going to get the land you need? It's not like any country is just going to give you a spare island or two, especially if the island has enough viable resources to be worth occupying. You're going to have to take it from people who already live there, or persuade them that it's worth staying in your ideal society. Ask the Maoris or Palestians how that worked out. You might buy some land, but I'm guessing you're not Bezos, and you're not Musk either, so colonizing Mars is a no-go. Or...it looks like you want to change US law on the protection of religion. That's a specific change, that actually has a lot of support. The younger generation tends to be less religious than their parents, so there might be a long term trend behind you. Perhaps it might be worth getting on board with whatever groups are lobbying for that change. That's something actionable, rather than dreaming about starting a whole new country.

by danjac 6y ago

JabavuAdams 6y ago

I mostly agree with your observations but would like to see more experimentation. Specifically, existing countries have to work with/for the people they've got. Over time it may be that the citizens are no longer really "like minded" to a minimum level where they can cooperate effectively. We should be able to try experiments with "re-booting" populations without secession, civil war, ethnic cleansing, or genocide. I would be interested in re-seeding a secular society that although it doesn't ban religion also doesn't privilege religion. I.e. believe and do what you want but any time your religious beliefs run into conflict with secular values, secular values win. The problem is that religious beliefs are (at least pragmatically) protected because they are so deeply and dearly held. It seems unfair and ultimately futile to just ask true believers to turn it off in school / on the job / in the voting booth. From what I understand of US law, non-profits are not able to discriminate based on religion, but religious organizations are. So e.g. you can't say "You can't join the Secular Space Nation Project because you're religiously devout or your particular religious beliefs will make you hard to integrate," but you can say "You can't join the Church of the New Space Country" because you don't practice the "New Space Country" religion.

Leherenn 6y ago
> We should be able to try experiments with "re-booting" populations without secession, civil war, ethnic cleansing, or genocide. How would that work? You need to have some kind of coherent territory for a state to work I would say. If you do a reboot and someone is not happy with the new values but does not want to move, what do you do?
- JabavuAdams 6y ago
  Exactly. I guess "re-boot" was the wrong choice of word. I meant to create a new country on new territory, but with sufficiently like-minded people. EDIT> I mentioned anti-discrimination rules because even if you wanted to create a new polity, you can't actually legally deny membership even to people who would be hostile to that polity. Unless you start a religion ... weird.
  - phobosanomaly 6y ago
    US states do that to some extent. Alabama is a whole different ballgame than California, and people do (to some extent) tend to self-segregate into states that match their preferred lifestyle and political environment.
danjac 6y ago
So you have an ideal of how you want society to be. Being serious, how are you going to get the land you need? It's not like any country is just going to give you a spare island or two, especially if the island has enough viable resources to be worth occupying. You're going to have to take it from people who already live there, or persuade them that it's worth staying in your ideal society. Ask the Maoris or Palestians how that worked out. You might buy some land, but I'm guessing you're not Bezos, and you're not Musk either, so colonizing Mars is a no-go. Or...it looks like you want to change US law on the protection of religion. That's a specific change, that actually has a lot of support. The younger generation tends to be less religious than their parents, so there might be a long term trend behind you. Perhaps it might be worth getting on board with whatever groups are lobbying for that change. That's something actionable, rather than dreaming about starting a whole new country.