Peace Land Bread

This is my ideal society. Please critique it.

Peace. All wars ended. No soldier shall cross the border. No weapons or "advisors" shall cross the border. Soldiers only allowed in their designated zones, and the border. In the event of a border invasion or some far off country is throwing missiles, only immediate retaliation is allowed. No lengthy campaigns to invade, occupy lands, capturing capitals, etc.

Land. Every citizen at 18yrs of age is given a standard X amount of acres. They are the sole legal owners. Upon death, they can leave it to 1 heir, or its taken by the state to be redistributed. Only 1 property per citizen. Its a long project, but eventually all land will be neatly divided. No existing properties will be "stolen" by the state. But they will buy existing properties when they can and combine/cut up them up to create these standard acreage sizes.

Bread. Government will have the sole right to work all natural resources: mines (metals, uranium, chalk, etc) lumber, fish, water, etc and use those profits to 1. take place of taxes 2. Provide a basic income in terms of basic food requirements.
These government properties are exempt from "Land" distribution.

Attached: 1544519759222.jpg (350x350, 24.33K)

Other urls found in this thread:

How do you propose to preserve this society if others don't follow the same pattern? It sounds nice, but nations don't exist in vaccuo (even if it's a world gov't, there's still the possibility of breakaway colonies or hostile ayyys)

this is so relaxing to read, thank you user

Attached: 20190420_080504.jpg (790x665, 176.73K)

I dont want to be a farmer on a 50x50 meter plot, user.
Also not all land is equally valuable for agriculture.


Attached: hgstogy.jpg (360x243, 25.11K)

I like the way you are focing people to have fewer children by limiting each familys land. No matter how big the family gets over several gernerations they just have to squeeze on to the same plot of land.
But you will be redistributing a lot of land that is normally farmed in a very modern high yield way, with old fashioned homestead farming.

TL;DR theres about 100 times too many people on the planet to do this. You would have to kill a lot of people to make it work.

So what of education?
Why is there a limit to land instead of fair usage for it?
Would a state even exist in this society of agriculture?
Seems like heavy idealism to me fam. Wasn't even going to do it to you either but since other people already pointed these out I had to.

For 1 month every year in the winter (whenever nobody needs to do agriculture stuff) all the willing and able bodied fighting age men meet up and to military exercises and war games. If you train as a tank unit, you have tanks at home too, etc etc, except for maybe aircraft due to high cost and training, for that maybe have an airmens guild or something of full time pilots ready, plus theres roles for pilots during peacetime as well

decent guy…could've used more to his ideology than just land reform.

ofc a feminist would say something like this.


Attached: DnS01-dX4AAL2ht.jpg (1200x827, 74.71K)

Social Democracy a shit

Attached: 7c498b1de5823462126de023e8ab880feec455e0.jpg (1200x1080, 291.88K)

Egoism is fine if you enjoy constant free movement which puts people in danger. If you're such a proud egoist, March on to an army base and start making threats.

You retarded or something? People have before. People have filmed Area 51, gone to police stations and government areas with guns while filming them for shits and giggles.

I don't see how retardation has anything to do with this considering stuff like cuckoldry is an intellectual man's pursuit

Sounds like good material for critique and discussion. Please write us a speculative fiction novella set in this utopia, OP.


That doesn't make anything approaching sense.
You should neck yourself for saying something so retarded.

why don't you come here and make me?


I would garner you suffer from such a disorder, that you can't please your wife anymore.

Attached: 60018310_2143580689072146_5647928422836469760_n.jpg (615x928, 56.76K)

Being in the position of a government means 1. you gained power through popular support 2. through force. Ideally it's through popular support. Even if that means focusing on a single state/province and then expanding outwards.

People will largely be left alone.
Peace. The military is under government control by defacto.
Land. The government will use existing government lands. And will slowly purchase the rest. Laws may be in place where the gov. gets first right to purchase lands. And will have priority over foreign buyers of property. Slowly, all lands will be bought up and these parcels will be distributed.
Bread. Gov. will work existing government lands. And much like with "Land" will have first rights to buy existing mines, forestries, etc.

Through a bit of propaganda, a solid voter/support base will be maintained because they will have their own pieces of land, and basic incomes.

I was thinking 50acres. And you're absolutely right. The plots will be wildly diverse in quality. However, they don't need to live or work on it. They can continue living their life as they do normally, and never think of the plot that they have. And when they die, the state will redistribute it, or they can leave it to someone.
They are the legal owners of that land, and if they want to work it, or rent it out even, it is up to them. But they are the legal owners - they can't be cheated out of it. Theirs until they die.

Each plot has one legal owner. A plot owner can have as many people as they wish living on the land. Each family member at 18yrs will have their own plots, but they may all decide to never use it, and just live on one.
Some scheme could be allowed to allow people to choose plots next other plots. They can treat it as one giant 1000acre plot if they wish, but each plot is still legally separated and has its own legal owner.

There will be basic gov. schools. To learn basic language, math, social skills, laws of the country. Private schools from families to corporations can fill the rest.
A state is a predefined population and border. And the people in that country should be a microcosm of that. There is a predefined legal owner and their borders. They have a decision to do what they like. Continue living as they always have, and forget about the land, or work the land, or rent it out. But in the end, they have their own little kingdom that they can retreat to.
There are many ways a person can utilize their property. Not just agriculture. Mega corporations like Walmart will still exist. But the lands that they will be on will have a defined legal owner. Corporations will not be treated as people. There will always be a person you can point to and say "That is the legal owner."

Welfare state should be an oxymoron. A state should mean a defined border and people. And the state should hold those people as priority over all others. If not, then what's the point of a state?

It's dumbfounding that there aren't stories or short stories from "leftist" about a protagonists daily routine in their utopia. Not just an interesting story, but also a case study, addressing certain issues, and playing them out.

The virgin egoist vs the Chad ethical Solipsist

Heard Michael Hudson refer to this guy as a right-winger recently in the context of "the socialists and right-wingers like Henry George". I don't get it, how was he on the right?


because he's agrarian, and some fucks think rural folks are petit bourgeois. fuck em.

Oh buddy do I have a treat for you.

Already impossible.

To add to this post I think Ferdinand Tonnies is probably viewed in the same light as he has sympathy for the rural worker as the rural worker can be exploited easier by the mercantile capitalist class.

Not everyone lives in a cuck state like you.

hi Zig Forums, you are still a goblin

that's cool you were probably a product of rape.

Fascist drivel.

First five words and you've already fucked up. That description is simply utopian nonsense which will never happen in reality. That meme land redistribution and a country-wide orgy of small proprietors is probably the biggest offender because that's just a reprise of agrarian programs from a century ago, except it's even worse because capitalism has already eliminated the peasant class from the game in many(if not most) countries. We're long past the times of land ownership and there's no point trying to go back to it because you'll end up at the current state of society sooner or later.
Please read Marx OP.

A person doesn't exist in a vacuum floating around.
A person needs a location to live, cultivate, thrive, and retreat to.

You have a dismal view of current society. That's because people are making decisions for other people.
1. make your own decisions. You will have no one to blame but yourself.
2. a decentralized society will make it much harder for those toxic elements of society to enact their will on the rest.

There are no mythic philosopher kings, no dictatorships of your kin that will "keep you in mind" as they redesign society.


Attached: flat,550x550,075,f.u1.jpg (550x413, 74.33K)

Based and spookpilled.


very nice ideas user

Aren't most georgists libertarian?