I like the sentiment here. Governance is the algorithm on which societies run (culture, too, sure, but if you're starting a new city, culture tends to come out of governance more than the other way around), and we need to try out more ways of running societies.
Some will fail, for sure. But just because you can point to some examples of new cities or nations that fail doesn't mean it's not worth trying and that the impact can't be incredibly huge when it goes right (e.g. America in 1776). If you pointed to a handful of failed startups and said, "I can list 7 start ups that ended terribly, therefore you should never start a company" that's naive.
That said, just thinking about pretty buildings won't get you very far either (that said, I love me a good pretty building).
I appreciate the nuance of this post; it's not "build things = good, let's build cities" nor "build things = bad, preserve status quo at all costs"
I'd love to see more thoughtful attempts emerge in this space, and happy a gaping hole in many current attempts is being pointed out.
Some will fail, for sure. But just because you can point to some examples of new cities or nations that fail doesn't mean it's not worth trying and that the impact can't be incredibly huge when it goes right (e.g. America in 1776). If you pointed to a handful of failed startups and said, "I can list 7 start ups that ended terribly, therefore you should never start a company" that's naive.
That said, just thinking about pretty buildings won't get you very far either (that said, I love me a good pretty building).
I appreciate the nuance of this post; it's not "build things = good, let's build cities" nor "build things = bad, preserve status quo at all costs"
I'd love to see more thoughtful attempts emerge in this space, and happy a gaping hole in many current attempts is being pointed out.