Friday, August 19, 2011

Fantasy Islands

There have been a number of great social experiments since the founding of the United States of America as a secular republic whose legitimacy arose from the consent of the governed rather than the approval of some leader presuming to speak for God. It's too soon to know if it's been entirely successful.

If the Ayn Rand style social experiment envisioned by young venture capitalist Peter Thiel ever gets off the ground, or more accurately if it floats, since it's to be conducted on an artificial island, we may get a more definitive answer in a much shorter period of time, or so I suspect. Thiel, the fellow who helped found Paypal and Facebook, would like to construct a series of floating city-states in the Pacific where the 'principles' of Ms. Rand would be tested. They would somehow be established along "strict libertarian lines with a minimalist government free from the regulation, laws, and moral suasion of any landlocked country" says Details Magazine.

How a technology-intensive creation such as a floating city could be built without rules puzzles me since the builders and owners would in essence be the government and a government responsible only to its investors like Thiel and Patri Friedman, ultra-Libertarian grandson of economist Milton Friedman and the brains behind the idea. What sounds Libertarian on the drawing board may be corporatocracy at sea -- or perhaps just a bunch of little boys whose adulthood has been stunted by their massive wealth, playing Peter Pan. I have to wonder which one is Wendy.

And of course, the islanders wouldn't be randomly selected from the teeming masses real America is composed of, if I'm guessing correctly, so perhaps the Island of Randtopian Objectivist Dreams wouldn't have to deal with the real world's most intractable problems nor would any lessons learned about the value of living without the burden of altruistic responsibility be worth the effort. Think of a Petri dish with a Plague bacteria culture. One might never know the dangers it presents since the vectors that spread it aren't present as it sits there peacefully digesting its agar.

Our country has long been home to many social experiments, some of which have withered away either by banning reproduction or lack of further interest by the participants. Some have gradually turned from the founding principles and melted into the larger American pot. Some are alive and growing, even if slowly changing. But a few thousand rich and aggressive millionaires on an oil rig without "government intrusion" forcing them to treat others in the way they'd like to be treated might be an interesting experiment, but what would the results actually mean in terms of conducting that kind of experiment outside the Petri dish: in a nation of 300,000,000 rich, poor, healthy, sick, young, old smart, stupid, people with varying degrees of neurosis? Would the experiment mean anything at all if everyone there were so wealthy that the normal concerns and normal needs of normal people never manifest themselves?

Beats me, but this is an experiment proposed by young billionaires full of enthusiasm and self-esteem or should I say, overweening egotism. The real problems of real life are far away from their experience and all too easy to associate with other people and dismiss as the "bad choices" lesser people make. Far too easy to move away from to a fantasy island where disease, suffering, old age and bad luck fear to tread and the good times always roll like those long Pacific swells.



17 comments:

  1. "Think of a Petrie dish ..."

    Make that a Patri dish. If these guys want to go Galt, the least they can do is sign a PLEDGE that constrains them from calling for aid in the event a storm or tsunami or fire ravishes their floating utopia. If they are unwilling to recognize altruism, then they should expect no consideration in kind (especially at taxpayer expense).

    One more word of advice: I hope they research their prospective location thoroughly. There are very few places on this planet untouched by international law, maritime law, or irate inlaws.

    Assuming they are successful in this misadventure, and do not create environmental havoc, I say: Good luck and good riddance!

    BTW, an interesting post, Captain, and a welcome change of pace.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Capt. Fogg,

    Hmmmm.... a Gilligan's Island where everyone is Thurston Howell III? Whatever will they do without Gilligan, the Skipper, the Professor and Ginger and Mary Ann?

    It seems to me that utopias (or dystopias, for that matter) are best kept as imaginary destinations on a world map (as Wilde put it) or fleshed out in the pages of a book (like Plato's Republic, or More's Utopia, or Bacon's New Atlantis). They're perspectival devices, not building plans. Trying to live them will just end badly.

    Anyhow, the modern libertarians who base their ideals on pure capitalism, I think, have perverted the assumptions of Adam Smith -- he didn't assume people were so capable of perfect harmony w/o government, to my knowledge. The market, he suggested, works because it harnesses human self-regard and even greed. But that kind of market ideology requires a fairly sophisticated society to work, if indeed one thinks it works well. Take things back to an almost primitive level, and I'm pretty sure some unpleasant surprises await the takers-back.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Petri dish, actually.

    But you know, the young and very rich are different than we are. They don't worry about getting fired or getting sick or getting old and they think everything they have, they have on their own merit alone and nobody helped them so they shouldn't help anybody.

    The boys at Halliburton are smarter I think. They chose a real island where they don't have to put up with those pesky US regulations or US taxes and after all, those no-bid contracts they got, they got because they are a superior breed of übermenschen, destined to rule us all.

    Funny how this breed of libertarianism resembles something else I can't quite remember the name of . . .

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dino:

    "Gilligan, the Skipper, the Professor and Ginger and Mary Ann?"

    Well, seems to me, we have the makin's of that sort of island right here - I even have a boat available for three hour tours. I'm not sure who gets to play Gilligan and the Skipper, but think I'm qualified for both.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Capt.,

    I could volunteer as the Professor -- he was always a favorite of mine growing up. (A bit of trivia -- in the context of the show, he was actually a high school teacher. That's some erudite high school teacher, what with all that knowledge about radio waves. Still couldn't fix a leaky boat, though.) But of course I would probably just swamp the boat with my tail, so I had best stay right where I am. I think you would make a fine skipper.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I would probably just swamp the boat ...

    The Captain and I have you covered. We've arranged for a custom-built barge just for you.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Captain,
    Milton Friedman’s grandson Patri Friedman is one of the ark critters. That makes it a Patri dish.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I always identified with the Professor too but he wanted to be rescued -- I don't. I can also navigate a hell of a lot better than the old skipper and I have satellite beacons and digital VHF and GPS chart plotter and auto pilot and Radar and Amateur radios, etc.

    It takes a whole lot lot more to be lost these days so one has to be a real Gilligan class doofus. Perhaps even a Republican. Still I'm working on it.

    I got the Patri dish thing, but I misspelled Petri. I hate it when I do that. It's bad to spell things wrong when you're calling someone stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It does go to credibility Captain, but you makeup for it in so many ways. Even I misspel wurds now and then.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Octo and Capt.,

    Well, if you're looking to be thoroughly lost, all you need do is ask me for directions. And hey, if there's a special barge or tail-ramp just for me, how could I possibly object to a "three-hour tour" into the abyss?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I do wonder why we pay so much attention to uniform spelling when we pay none at all to grammar and syntax and definitions, but hey. . .

    ReplyDelete
  12. I am a democrat and I would want liberalism to flourish in my city-state. The city-state plutocracy would not really work right in the end. Has no one read Animal Farm? While it make work until the objectives were achieved, once the world was perfect, competition and discontent would be the rule of the day and the libertarian heaven would be a distant memory.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Guppy Freidman is just another outlandish example of the third generation rule. Oops, news alert. There is no new frontier, guys. This is all she wrote. But a pretty funny concept; I'd love to see it go ahead... though I don't think any of us would be boating or barging out there to see it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I hold with Hobbes that there are
    ...three basic causes of the conflict in this state of nature: competition, diffidence and glory.


    I part company with Hobbes on his rather extreme solution which favors power centralized in the hands of one absolute leader who is to exercise whatever authority is necessary to free us from a constant state of war and a life that is "nasty, brutish, and short," in favor of Rousseau's social compact which is government via the consent of the governed.

    However, Both Hobbes and Rousseau agree that in the state of nature, humankind is motivated by desire for wealth, reputation and power and that some form of social compact (centralized government with authority over all) is needed to keep in check our individual desires in deference to the good of all rather than the service of one's individual desire.

    I don't think that there is much hope for a "Randian" island paradise with a "minimalist government free from the regulation, laws, and moral suasion of any landlocked country."

    Still, I would be curious to watch such an experiment from afar provided that this social experiment is not allowed to develop any weapons more sophisticated than the musket.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You can do a lot of damage with a musket, but this floating paradise wouldn't be able to produce anything yet would have the means to buy anything and the Mutually Assured Destruction policy is part of the dogma. They would buy weapons. Of course they wouldn't be able to generate or produce income to buy anything but from what they did in the real, outside world. It would be more like a cyst inside a larger organism and one that cannot exist on its own.

    What could we possibly learn from it other than a confirmation that we're of the only insane species on Earth.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This experiment brings to mind a relevant quote from that great philosopher, Yogi Berra: "In theory there's no difference between theory and practice."

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.