In part four, we
mentioned two general groups of people in America, those looking for a
better life in the afterlife or those wanting to end Earthly strife in order
to have a better life. We asked
whether these two different groups could co-exist, noting that the Federal
constitution and our large, diverse state impeded such co-existence. In light of those impediments, what could we do without a
protracted and, perhaps, futile attempt at changing the constitution or, gasp, dividing our state
into manageable units?
If we look to the Amish
in Pennsylvania, what do we learn? We
have an intact community which has survived for decades. The Amish have strong beliefs and a strong sense of
solidarity, unlike most of our American neighborhoods.
If we permitted the formation of physical communities of like-minded
people, we could create the conditions for peaceful co-existence between the
two groups in the preceding paragraph.
One might ask whether each group would need its own resources to
support itself, an issue which has contributed to shocking strife in Iraq. To some extent, yes, self-sufficiency would be a priority,
but each group would not have to live in a closed system. There could be interaction between the groups, but far less
than is now the case.
What if our idealism
about fair housing put a damper on the formation of physical communities of
like-minded people? What then?
Those of us who indulge
in science fiction might find an escape in habitable planets.
An interesting trilogy, Red Mars, Blue Mars, Green
Mars, has Earthlings inhabiting and terraforming Mars.
If Mars were made habitable and self-sufficient, which group would go
there? Probably those looking
for a better life in the present. But
science fiction would rear its "Cassandran" head by mentioning the possibility
that the population on Earth or Mars would outstrip resources, making an
invasion by one to control the other a possibility.
(Let us pause here.
Why are we trying to divide up our society?
Answer: to keep
dysfunctional diversity from paralyzing society, to create more healthful
and productive communities for people, compared with our present-day, costly
struggle to homogenize America.)
We are not going to
inhabit planets or even the Terran moon soon, so what option remains if our
idealism prevents the creation of communities?
Can technology play a role to save us?
August 9, 2007