5 ms·
My crazy/naive idea is to build stable countries in South America and Africa to attract migrants and asylum seekers. It would be more economic and palatable tha
by msie 3y ago
My crazy/naive idea is to build stable countries in South America and Africa to attract migrants and asylum seekers. It would be more economic and palatable than tackling regime change/culture change in troubled countries (mexico, el salvador, iran, afghanistan) where these migrants came from and lessen the need to beef up local infrastructure. Isn't this how cities emerged in the past?
- jacknobody 3y agoThe country you seek is called Heaven. I don't blame you for recognising the need - I'm the same. Sadly many of our companions would rather see themselves in charge, just to make sure everyone is treated justly of course, but that always causes Hell for somebody.
- azmodeus 3y agoBuilding heaven on earth is a good aspirational political goal.
- jacknobody 3y agoYes!!
- nicup12345689 3y agoImmanentize the Eschaton am I rite? Just like the Gnostics, Marxists, communists, Obama, Trump ...
- weregiraffe 3y ago>Immanentize the Eschaton What else can you do with the Eschaton?
- jacknobody 3y agoBuild Heaven in your own heart - you won't be sorry :)
- imbnwa 3y agoOuter Heaven?
- MrMan 3y agoWe need immigrants in North America, why send them somewhere else
- cellis 3y agoYou can't build stable countries in those places as long as narcotraffickers and commodity smugglers exist, and they will exist as long as we have repressive laws on drug use (in the United States and other Rich Nations) and sanctions on commodities from the same. The problem is these combined policies incentivize defacto states that aren't democratic and will extort or thwart any well meaning developers. In countries without a strong rule of law you won't get far (absent finding a way to monopolize force yourself).
- toss1 3y ago>> (absent finding a way to monopolize force yourself) Exactly this. Any person who wants to live a self-determined life, and have a self-determined govt must be (individually or collectively) better armed and better prepared than everyone form the wannabe local lunch bully, regional warlord, or national authoritarian. IF not, they will take your lunch and your government every time. The GP's plan is great, but (s)he will need to start with a significant well-managed armed force. Otherwise, the local drug lord, warlord, mafia don, or authoritarian will ignore you until you create value, then decide they want it for themselves. If you cannot defend it, it will be theirs until they destroy it.
- philwelch 3y agoYou’re putting the cart before the horse here. If there isn’t a strong rule of law, any economic activity is going to come under the control of protection rackets and other armed factions. That’s completely independent of any drug prohibitions or commodity sanctions. When it comes to commodity sanctions you’re even reversing cause and effect; the sanctions are usually imposed as a half measure against whatever armed faction ends up controlling commodity extraction in a particular failed state.
- cellis 3y ago>>> If there isn’t a strong rule of law, any economic activity is going to come under the control of protection rackets and other armed factions. I think you're restating what I said. Narco traffickers are able to subvert the rule of law via corruption. Their ability to perform corruption is a function of their profitability, which in turn is a function of the demand (and their ability to supply it), in rich countries. The demand is unmet domestically because of our prohibitions and draconian federal enforcement. So the rule of law breaks down there due to strong rule of law here. We are essentially exporting the market making there, and that sort of market making, while risky, is profitable in the extreme. As for the commodity sanctions while most maybe are well intentioned, they only serve to again allow those willing to take the risk of market making to rack up obscene profits. This is regardless of what circumstances lead to them, they empower actors who aren't particularly altruistic and certainly aren't democratic, to subvert the rule of law.
- hgsgm 3y agoUK has an agreement with Rwanda to send refugees to Rwanda. But the UK High Court nixed it, because Rwanda is "not a safe country". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwanda_asylum_plan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwanda_asylum_plan
- gizajob 3y agoThere's a big difference between needing asylum and needing asylum in a stable country with universal healthcare and a benefits system.
- soligern 3y agoRefugees are trying to flee to a developed country with healthcare, jobs and safety. Why would you want to go to Rwanda? I realize it has improved by leaps and bounds but very few people are going to want to emigrate to an African country.
- nicup12345689 3y agoYou think it has not been tried by the people in those countries?
- RGamma 3y agoGet your AI army ready to enforce law, I guess.
- kwere 3y agosuch places would be flooded by desperate people in millions, creating slum town around it, a good breeding ground for crime. South Africa, once a functioning country got "invaded" by Zimbabweans escaping their hellhole, distorting the labour market and creating tension/crime. Too many people, unless you create hundreds of such experiments around the world.
- wolverine876 3y ago> South Africa, once a functioning country A functioning country for a few white people; hell for everyone else.
- nradov 3y agoSouth Africa was still functional after the end of apartheid. It really only became a failed state during the Zuma administration. Despite the history of institutionalized racism the country had enormous potential, but sadly a few corrupt politicians sacrificed the future of the country for their own benefit.
- wolverine876 3y ago> South Africa was still functional after the end of apartheid. It wasn't functional before the end of apartheid. 'Functional for a small minority' != 'functional country'.
- weard_beard 3y agoSo... America from 1850 to 1920. If you can anticipate and scale up industrial production to meet the wave of immigration and not just pen them up in refugee camps you have yourself another BRICS nation.
- monomers 3y ago> mexico, el salvador, iran, afghanistan None of those are in South America or Africa. Maybe it would be good to first understand the problem, including the geography, before proposing ideas.
- philwelch 3y agoI’m not sure I understand your idea; the only way to build a stable country in these regions would be to regime change a less stable country, or perhaps carve out some territory from the existing countries. At any rate, many of the countries on both of those continents were founded as attempts to build stable countries. On a happier note, El Salvador seems to have sorted itself out in recent years.
- soligern 3y agoIf the settlement is doing better than the actual country it is in, it is going to be overrun with locals. The only way to do that would be to fence out the locals and no country is going to agree to that.
- wolverine876 3y agoThe magic handwavy part is the first step: > build stable countries If you know how to do that, please tell the world. Stable countries need a half-century or more to create, and that's with existing institutions and culture, and still the outcome is very uncertain.
- jeffrallen 3y agoOh, they are down to a half century now? Switzerland took 700 years to make. Progress!
- wolverine876 3y agoI was thinking of South Korea, but they are extraordinary.
- jelliclesfarm 3y agoSingapore achieved this as a city-state.
- wolverine876 3y agoIn how long? Don't forget the building of the institutions that predated Yew.
- jelliclesfarm 3y ago1959 was when Yew became Sg's first PM. in his famous televised speech, yew announced the separation from malayasian federation in 1965. dont forget that singapore was under colonial rule before that. noone can deny the success of singapore, the city state with all the regional challenges. it took them about two decades. i would give 5-10 years for our nation states to become functionally successful if they split and became city states. its time for a change.
- htlion 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jmopp 3y agoThis is one of my long-term goals with my home country, South Africa. We've got the legal starting point with a progressive constitution and a reasonably independent judiciary/media. The economy could be doing better, though, and we'd need to bring equal opportunity to all. And there's a lot more in the future that could hamstring this idea. But I do believe that it's possible in my lifetime.
- slim 3y agobuild stable countries you can't do that remotely. and people who build this will develop a strong sense of identity and won't accept migrants in their community