• cyd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Hot take: this is not necessarily a bad idea, and worth experimenting with. After all, Disneyland is an existing example of such a setup, and it’s arguably better governed than other jurisdictions within Florida. And when Ron DeSantis flexed the state government power to transfer decision making from Disney back to the politicians, it was not an improvement.

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I am a “pro-corporate libertarian”, I can see why a lot of people wouldn’t like this sort of thing, but my response is “If you don’t like it, don’t move there.” They’re not proposing to turn existing cities into these.

    It seems quite possible that the Network Staters want to build them in our national parks.

    That’s possible in the sense that it isn’t forbidden by the laws of physics, but it’s quite a stretch. The federal government owns over a quarter of all the land in the USA - 650 million acres. National parks cover less than one seventh of that land. There’s plenty of space to build charter cities without having to use the most unpopular possible places to put them.

    • Random123@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sure ignore all the environmental issues arise from these cities when normal cities cant even keep conpanies in check with their dump.

      So building these cities close to any national parks is as stupid as your attempt at justifying the push

    • President Camacho@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      When I read Snow Crash, I had a hard time getting into it because I though the idea of wholesale privatisation of government responsibilities and territories went a bit too far…

      Tech bros really have a hard on for the Torment Nexus.