Is Washington DC a city-state? That seemed to work out pretty well. But then there was a specific purpose to DC.
I think it's an interesting idea. In order for a city-state to work, you'd have to get a lot of smart people to design it, and that kind of conscientious design can only result in good things, right? Too many of the US' cities seem like they were planned by shaking out tinker-toys onto a topographical map. Plus, everyone knows that the way to a healthier planet is through better urban planning. I could see a city-state-type solution doing the job.
Also, I could see the city-state reinvigorating people for the political process. As politically-charged as the country's been the past year, it still only feels like 40 or 45 percent of the country really cares, and I think that's because people feel disconnected from politics. Maybe it's the difference between the politics of ideas and the politics of reality? A city-state could bridge that gap by shrinking politics' responsibility. People might feel more involved.
Still, a lot of this feels like a states rights issue, which is, for me, uncomfortably right wing. In that respect, I could see the city-state being horribly corrupted. Think of it: dozens of racist, sexist, homophobic city-states whose simplemindedness is protected by their (for lack of a better term) states rights. We're seeing it now with the states we've got. There'd still be a national government, but, well, Civil War...
I know very little about politics or history, though, so I'm fairly certain my opinions on the subject are embarrassing. I'm interested to hear what made you bring it up, Miss L. What are your thoughts about it?
I was thinking about all of the crappy gladiator-type, roman/greek histrionics flicks that I hate. sparta! and I began to wonder what if we had city-states - what would it look like? unfortunately it would probably encourage some kind of pro-sport-fandom-like civic participation.
3 comments:
I hate it when you make me think.
Is Washington DC a city-state? That seemed to work out pretty well. But then there was a specific purpose to DC.
I think it's an interesting idea. In order for a city-state to work, you'd have to get a lot of smart people to design it, and that kind of conscientious design can only result in good things, right? Too many of the US' cities seem like they were planned by shaking out tinker-toys onto a topographical map. Plus, everyone knows that the way to a healthier planet is through better urban planning. I could see a city-state-type solution doing the job.
Also, I could see the city-state reinvigorating people for the political process. As politically-charged as the country's been the past year, it still only feels like 40 or 45 percent of the country really cares, and I think that's because people feel disconnected from politics. Maybe it's the difference between the politics of ideas and the politics of reality? A city-state could bridge that gap by shrinking politics' responsibility. People might feel more involved.
Still, a lot of this feels like a states rights issue, which is, for me, uncomfortably right wing. In that respect, I could see the city-state being horribly corrupted. Think of it: dozens of racist, sexist, homophobic city-states whose simplemindedness is protected by their (for lack of a better term) states rights. We're seeing it now with the states we've got. There'd still be a national government, but, well, Civil War...
I know very little about politics or history, though, so I'm fairly certain my opinions on the subject are embarrassing. I'm interested to hear what made you bring it up, Miss L. What are your thoughts about it?
I was thinking about all of the crappy gladiator-type, roman/greek histrionics flicks that I hate. sparta! and I began to wonder what if we had city-states - what would it look like? unfortunately it would probably encourage some kind of pro-sport-fandom-like civic participation.
So I changed my mind. city-state bad idea.
Post a Comment