The Clean Slate Solution

Lets look at justifying the clean slate city state concept by presenting it as a solution to many current and future problems that may face current society.

1: Oil.

Oil prices have risen greatly over the past few years, and the majority of predictions see that they will continue to do so for some time. This is because the worlds energy demand is growing at a faster rate than ever before (due largely to China's speedy economic growth), while the growth of oil production capacity lags significantly behind.



Currently, record amounts of money are being spent on the search for new oil deposits and more efficient extraction technologies, in an attempt to close this production gap. But these new sources of oil are becoming increasingly smaller and more expensive to extract. It appears that the historically main sources of oil, such as the large deposits in Saudi Arabia, will continue to be the worlds primary source of oil, and these have already reached their production limits.

Once the oil price exceeds about $100 a barrel, new sources of oil such as tar sands will become economically viable to extract, but at a cost. These operations will be far less profitable than traditional ones, and the rate at which the necessary infrastructure can be built to take advantage of these new sources will not make up for the worlds oil production gap. As a result, oil prices will continue to rise.

And they will rise quickly. As the worlds economic machine runs practically exclusively on the energy derived from oil, governments will pay dearly for it, lest they sacrifice their own economies. It is unlikely that the worlds oil demand will show signs of slowing down while its price is still under $200 a barrel.

At least by this stage the high price of gasoline will have affected many areas of the economy. Goverments will try to subsidize those industries which are vital to the rest of the economy, like transport; and public transport services will increase. However, in the best scenario the efficiency of the economy will be decreased, and this will result in a large increase in the number of poor.

In the worst case: Once the economy displays significant effects from the high price of oil, private investment in the economy will decline, and unless the government steps in heavily, there may be a danger of total economic collapse.

Both of these effects will finally result in a reduction of oil consumption. But demand, and therefore prices, will remain high for some time. Countries with economies that are less reliant on oil will be able to pay a higher price for it before risking such effects. This may result in a period of intense competition between countries; further sustaining prices.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

In the later stages of this period governments will begin to intervene more heavily; attempting to ween their economies off of oil. Large investments will be made in non-oil based power generation and transport infrastructure. However, the pace of change will be slow; exacerbated by the already wounded state of their economies. The poor of the suburbs, where public transport could not serve them, will attempt to move into the city, but the rate of construction may not be able to meet the demand for new homes.

And this will be the inherent problem of current society: That it is too sluggish to respond to the effects of a rapidly increasing oil price (There are a number of reasons for this inherent sluggishness, but I will explore them elsewhere).


A clean-slate city-state, with an economy independant of oil from the start, will be free from these effects. Instead, such a city state will become an island of stability and predictability: attracting investment and immigration (the latter primarily due to the promise of much higher wages). It may also be able to supply many manufactured goods at cheaper costs to other countries throughout this time. This will be possible because the clean-slate city-state will not have to subsidize the poor during this time period. Instead, a steady influx of immigrants will provide a source of cheap labor. High economic efficiency, unaffected by the oil price, and continual private investment will further contribute to this cause. Electric and fuel-cell cars, as well as trucks and other oil-free technologies, may become staple high-profit exports during this period.

In all, the combination of economic efficiency and stability, a high rate of investment, immigration and economic growth, and the profits from exports, will serve to make the clean-slate city-state rich.

2. Environment

Climate change, induced by global warming, has become a pretty hot topic over the past few years. Current climate predictions differ greatly, but the more dire ones are gaining in scientific support. In fact, the consensus among leading scientist today is that, unless drastic changes are made, the effects of global warming will be nothing less than catastrophic over the course of the next century.

Steps to mitigate CO2 production have gained ground in recent times; supported by increased public and political awareness of the issue. However, most scientists agree that the current rate of progress is far too slow to have any significant effects.

The problem is that there is very little incentive for governments to act to significantly reduce their countries CO2 emissions. Rather, there are many dis-incentives.

The degree to which current world economies are reliant on energy from CO2 producing sources means that CO2 emissions are directly related to economic output. This is due to a variety of factors, but first and foremost it is because the cheapest methods of energy production are also the most polluting: The burning of coal and oil. Asking ones own country to drastically reduce CO2 emissions would indirectly imply a necessary reduction in economic output also, and would thus be political suicide.

However, asking for only small reductions may in fact have the opposite effect. The reason this happens is because small reductions can be met primarily by reducing wastage, rather than requiring any degree of economic sacrifice. Also, by spurring innovations which increase energy utilization, the economy is made more efficient. Moreover, these innovative techniques and devices can be patented and exported to similar countries for profit, further strengthening the economy. (The positive political and social attention of such actions helps too)

However, the economic benefit of lowering emissions only works up to a certain threshold. Once this has been reached, any further reduction of CO2 emissions will almost certainly require some degree of economic sacrifice. Even in the best case scenario, where countries can eventually adapt to meet emissions targets, the process will be slow and costly.

Perhaps the biggest obstacle to the reduction of global CO2 emissions will be the obstinance of economically competitive countries, such as the United States. Without a universally accepted system of emissions reduction, countries with stronger emissions targets will be at risk of falling out of competitiveness with less environmentally responsible economies. Many have thus concluded that a massive reduction of global CO2 emissions on the scale needed to prevent severe climate change will be unlikely (barring a major fall of global economy due to the high cost of oil or some other factor).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change

A clean-slate city-state, while not being able to solve the global problem of CO2 emissions, will certainly gain some degree of distinction as a nearly emissions-free city. Also, because the city-state will be built as a self-sustaining entity which is seperated from its environment, it will not suffer the effects of climate change. Both of these factors together should contribute to the cities economic stability and investability. Furthermore, the clean-slate city-state may become an exporter of zero-emissions technologies. In any case, it will serve as a leading example to the rest of the world.

Perhaps it will be possible for outside countries to invest into the concept, colaborating with other countries, as a project of global responsibility and significance.

Other environmental problems of the future include increasing drought due to demand for fresh water, sea level rise, and increased political instability caused by the increasing profitability and demand for oil. The effects of all three of these should be avoidable by the clean-slate city-state.

Another important environmental consideration is that the growth of the city, even on a very large scale, will not intrude on its surrounding environment at all, unlike the destructive effects of expanding urban environments of other cities. This is because the clean-slate city-state will be situated on a vast desert plain, where there is a minimum of biodiversity.

Much of the cities waste will recycled. This will be achieved at less cost than in other cities, as the city-state will be designed to facilitate recycling from the beginning. Waste that cannot be efficiently recycled will likely be incenerated or fused into glass. The clean-slate approach will also allow stricter guidelines for recyclability of products to be introduced without instigating industry resistance. Efficient 'cradle to cradle' systems will be planned from the outset. This, in combination with dematerialization, will reduce waste, and at the same time also reduce the clean-slate city-states demand for raw materials imports; improving overall material efficiency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecopolis_%28city%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecocity

3. Government.

As mentioned, in order to continue the adaption process while under an already weakened economy, and also due to excessive privitization of infrastructure, governments may be forced to exert more power over their economies. An increase of crime due to the weak economy and the populations increased dependance on the government might also result in increased social control and authoritarianism. In short, modern socio-economic principles will be overturned, and the resulting increased repression will be despised by the populace.

But even neglecting these theoretical consequences of higher oil prices, it can be seen that there already exists a lot of room for improvement of even the best democracies in use today. The plausibility of the theoretical scenario above can only attest to the weakness of current democracies in times of crisis. But there are many other good reasons for change.

Books have been written before on the flaws of current democracies and how these might be fixed (through increased participation, direct democracy, etc.). I will not go into details here, but the underlying notion is that the creation of a clean-slate society will allow these changes to be made without impedence due to apathy or resistance to change (traditionalism etc.) from both the people and from within the governments themselves.

However, the clean-slate approach presents a great deal of risk, as the consequences of empowering an ineffective or unproven government model may be great. Therefore, much debate should be made about how this clean-slate government should function, and the processes by which it operates, before it is implemented. In other words, it must be guaranteed to work straight out of the box.

4. Security

The threat of terrorism has become a big issue recently, especially in the United States after the attacks of 9/11. However, of more concern to many in the United States was the resultant implementation of the USA PATRIOT act, which dramatically expanded the authority of U.S. law enforcement agencies, including allowing increased monitoring of private correspondences, justified only on the basis of suspicion.

The general trend here is that an increase of perceived risk by the public allows the government to expand its authority with far less opposition. It is this concept that has lended support to many 9/11 conspiracy theories.

To understand the motivating factors behind terrorism, one must look into the history of interaction between the Muslim people and the West. What must be understood here is that Islamic terrorism is a result of these historical interactions, and not simply the product of Islamic Extremist philosophy by itself.

Therefore, the biggest advantage that any clean-slate country may have against the threat of terrorism is that it is largely free of negative associations brought about through historical interactions.

However, there will also be other benefits for a clean-slate city-state:

- A small, easily monitored border, with limited points of entry. This is a unique advantage of a city-state; something which is impossible to realize for any large country.

- The opportunity to enact stricter controls on the purchase and storage of explosive substances without risking industrial opposition; ensuring that improvised explosives cannot be easily made. If the country can be weened off of gasoline entirely, then this would further reduce the risk (Diesel, which may still be required for trucks and the like, is far less explosive than gasoline).

- Anti-guns and weapons laws, where only highly trained police officers may carry hand weapons. This is virtually impossible to do in countries like the US, where hand weapons are already in wide-spread public possession and are widely acknowledged as a constitutional right. Even in countries which do not allow individuals to carry hand weapons, there are still difficulties in controlling illegal imports, as their borders are large and not easily monitored.

What must be stressed, however, is that this increased protection does not come at the expense of decreased privacy or freedom. Rather, as only imports into the city are monitored, the result should be greater freedom and privacy within the cities borders.