NOOO STOP TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING THAT COULD LEAD ANYWHERE, ONLY TALK ABOUT JEWS!!! YES JEWS, AND ONLY JEWS, AND THEN TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT TO DO TO THEM!
but seriously, "power" is extremely vague, as is "evil". Define that shit first.
In my case, I believe "power" (in the societal context) to be the ability to make another human being do something because you say they need to do it. The more people you can do that to, the more power you have. Innately, this must be limited - there must be a sort of "algorithm" you can set up in order to ensure no one person has "ultimate" power. For every household, there should be a leader or two - but no household should exceed a certain point (say, 12 people). At some point, members of this household should be required to leave and start their own household. This is generally already done via the "nuclear family" ideal, but is still necessary in any case.
Scale this up a bit, and start considering multiple households as a unit - you need to limit the amount of households to be considered a "neighborhood". Ideally, you'd keep this number relative to the expected number of people in a given household (anywhere from 2 to 12; an average of 7). So, something similar - perhaps 2-24 households per neighborhood. Anything above that, and they're considered separate neighborhoods - again, give the ability (and expectation) that they'd grow, but require a degree of "fission" to keep from massive centralization.
Cookie cutter neighborhoods holding giant chunks of population for no other purpose than to breed and house wage slaves is obviously shit. You need to place requirements and responsibilities on neighborhoods - they should have some degree of self-sustainability, especially in the form of some food. Require some form of communal farmlands or communal greenhouses. Rather than taxes, the responsibility of a neighborhood would become that of a minor production outlet for basic goods. Not only does this give an innate sense of duty to your people, it also means that you'd have job creation that scales with the population.
From here, you can continue to scale upwards - but again, always placing actual numbers for limitations. This means that you'd never have any more "New York Cities", or "Beijings" or any other form of centralized clusterfucks. Cities breed parasites, pests, and then give them the means to flourish. If you limit this to a reasonable degree, you'll find that you instead have a much more unified people. Their struggle will be to create more, rather than to merely resist being strangled and crushed by the world around them.
As for "evil", it is simply individuals who have no desire to grow or construct anything meaningful or valuable - merely destroy and "create" rubbish. The best way to discover evil is always to ask a person, who wishes for destruction, what they would do next - what they would wish to create on top of the ruins they so desperately want. You will likely find their answers to either be trite, or nonexistent.
Attached: 0a7718be66aa5895047a6f366bf3b649da5ac39300fe8d26b15d01b4a3588999.jpg (2300x1796, 521.92K)
