-2
$\begingroup$

The experiment requires 250 million people and a lifetime dedication; once in there's no way out. It consists on enclosing people in 5 artificial countries, each country with fixed rules. Each person can choose their country but once they are in, they can't get back.

The goal is to convince at least 50 million people to join each country.

The first country is:

Tribal communist country

This country has law enforcers external to the country employed by the scientists conducing the experimentation, they are here to make sure the experiment goes well.

Those law enforcers will only intervene to make sure that no other ideology rises and no one hurts another person and that no one is exploiting the system. Nothing is private in this country and everything is seen, even law enforcers have cameras stuck in their bodies.

This country is based on the premise that no one can get wealthier than another and each person has to have a productive contribution to society. The only legal jobs are ones involved in building, education, cleaning, repairing, healing and production.

Every other job can be a done as a passion or hobby but doesn't count as communal contribution to the country, each person must spend a minimum of 30 hours a week contributing to the country with their job.

In this country there are no sex workers, no salesman, no entertainment jobs... nothing that is useless to society. If a woman wants to sell her body for advantages, she should do it as a hobby because she just loves so much to have sex with strangers everyday not because she has to feed her babies. If one wants to produce art forms or study by themselves, they must balance it with their free time and do it for free, selling your passion counts as selling your soul, and selling your soul is prostitution by law.

Those who refuse working are not fed and not sheltered, people who protest by starving themselves are considered mentally deranged individuals and are sent to be repaired and re-educated. Every person, even the most utterly useless one is given an useful job to society. Disabled and retarded people are given jobs too.

The minimum age required to have a job is 15. Children begin their education at the age of 5 in Russian/Pakistan style.

  • I lived in many countries and in Russia at the age of 8 in elementary school I used to study what Italians study at the age of 16 in high school

So by the age of 15 people would have completed the level of education the average European and American spends the first 24 years of their life to learn.

The tribal communist country has enough resources to support the first people until they are able to support themselves and for a few emergency occasions.

In future questions I will ask about other countries too.

But for now, how do I convince 50 million people, minimum to join this country?

$\endgroup$
16
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ "In this [tribal communist] country there are no sex workers": this is in violent contradiction with the historical experience of any communist (or even non-communist) country ever. The thing with communist countries is that while the basic necessities of life were (sort-of) satisfied, they sucked at providing desirable but not strictly necessary goods and services. And guess what? Enterprising souls found a way to obtain said amenities, and sex work was definitely one of the ways to do it. Yes, no woman was compelled to prostitute herself in order to eat; but if she wanted to eat well... $\endgroup$ – AlexP Jun 11 at 8:23
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ P.S. Juvenal, 1900 years ago: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Do you realized how many "law enforcers external to the country" you need in order to police a country of 50 million? Won't they become corrupt by their absolute power? Won't the objectives of the scientists change in time? All countries change; all civilizations changes; all experiments change; all scientists change; all policemen are corruptible. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Jun 11 at 8:29
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ "Law enforcers will... no one hurts another person" and "Those refuse working are not fed and not sheltered" - I can't reconcile those statements. $\endgroup$ – KerrAvon2055 Jun 11 at 8:31
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ External peacekeepers? Forced work? Don't earn money or status? Can't leave? Your country sounds a bit like a giant prison. $\endgroup$ – Erik Jun 11 at 8:49
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Ifthe system is not full of people that disagree with it, its not a good test of the system. $\endgroup$ – John Jun 11 at 12:49
2
$\begingroup$

Your country does not sound bad, apart from the complete absence of privacy. You may want to reconsider that part, but that is just a side note.

Look around the world. A huge majority of people are worse off than what you describe for that country. Even the "leaders of the free world" live much worse lives, although most of them are still happily believing that was just a temporary inconvenience on the way to the top.

Your country apparently offers anything for free, to anybody who is willing to support the society. Food, housing, healthcare, energy...

What your country lacks is a chance to rise above your fellow citizens. For some reason, a lot of people seem to feel the need to do that. I once dead about an experiment, where individual people were made to choose: they alone could get, say, 100\$. Or everyone in the group gets 200\$. For reasons I will never really understand, some 70% chose the 100\$ for themselves, apparently on the grounds that that would make them feel superior to the others. That still leaves 30% of people who are not sociopaths, and who can calculate. Plus, you can still become an honoured artist / inventor / author / ... , just without the financial benefits. But the social benefits (like, meeting interesting people of the gender(s) you are attracted to) are still available. Maybe even more so, since material distractions don't push you in the background.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It is not a superiority thing, simple game model as potencial explanation. If everyone gets 1rock then you would like to have 2rocks per month, because you know that things will be "priced" in the way that in average survivial costs 1 rock, because if not all people die and they won't allow that course of descision/outcome, but having 2 rocks you will have certain advantage. So it is not the greed as capitalists usually say, it is insecurity feeling from uncertainty of outcome. If one would know everything will be ok and enough for one, one would not give sht that much what do others have. $\endgroup$ – MolbOrg Jun 11 at 10:17
  • $\begingroup$ @MolbOrg if at all, your explanation would only work if it wasn't entirely clear in the experiment that that is a single transaction that will not be repeated. In that setting, clearly having 200$ is better than having 100$. But if you have a better explanation than the people who conducted the study, that might indeed be interesting to hear. Game theory, though, has been proven to favor sociopaths. $\endgroup$ – Burki Jun 11 at 13:52
  • $\begingroup$ Sure my explanation is oversimplified for multiple reasons, I was interested to give you an idea that things may be more complex. People are slaves of their habits, I guess that was one of the capitalists sturdy, so subjects were from the same society, greed is popular notion and expected outcome, etc. Maybe the study is perfect, and I'm totaly wrong, it isn't a critique of the study which I know nothing about and haven't read, that comment adresses your formulations, your words, and I thought u may benefit from a take from a different angle. Not helpfull, that's okay, business as usual. $\endgroup$ – MolbOrg Jun 12 at 1:08
  • $\begingroup$ Look at comment under the q "Ifthe system is not full of people that disagree with it, its not a good test of the system." I can name the angry country the notion is from, lol. There are certain notions, reactions, standart solutions which are inherited form regular life in a society, ideas, what shoud or shouldn't etc. Such thing are interesting to observe in expats, how they adapt, what they adjust in their views, what they do not understand, etc. There is plenty of such stories on youtube, it affects things and that why OP's q makes sense. $\endgroup$ – MolbOrg Jun 12 at 1:36
2
$\begingroup$

Target oppressed people who work the jobs you need and don't care about basic living standards

Lets say you are a gay architect who builds buildings in a third world country where being gay is illegal. Suddenly you get an invitation to a country who will provide you transport, protect you from extradition, give you a job with less hours but equal pay, and won't punish you for being gay. That is an easy choice to make.

Target lazy people who can live without basic amenities

Someone in a dead end job who works 40 hours a week with no passion for the work they do is also a good candidate. Someone might be willing to work 10 more hours a week for better amenities, so you will need to find people who don't care about that.

Target starving people or refugees

If you live somewhere where you can't get food or might die in a war going someplace where at least that is guaranteed not to happen is an easy sell. These people probably aren't going to be educated though.

Target "Disabled and retarded" people

People with serious mental and physical problems who might not be able to work normally will flood to your country. Since no other place provides these benefits they are easy recruits.

Target people who are dying of disease

Free medical care is something lots of people want, and even if you are only going to live for a year you want to die peacefully. People obviously won't have to work while they are healing, so you can easily get people dying of terminal cancers or in hospice to join.

How to not recruit for this country.

  1. Promise a bright new future for this country.

Not listed in this country of jobs that pay are things like researchers, entertainers, or cooks. While the rest of the world advances, your country will have to get by with second hand tech taken from other places since no research occurs in your borders. Your country would have no professional musicians, no great film-makers, and very few artists. You want to go to a restaurant? Too bad, no one is willing to make you food for free even if they are willing to do so for money. This place will be an awful place to live right off the bat with no chance to improve.

  1. Find hard workers who can build the society you want.

If you are a hard worker with the skills to help this society the one place you don't want to be is in this society. Even if through hard work you amass great "wealth" you will have no private property or even basic services to compensate you. Sure, the food is free, but that doesn't mean it is good food.

  1. Promise them basic human dignity.

Even the hardcore supporters are going to balk when you say that there is an external police force, universal invasive surveillance, and no chance to leave. Anyone who pays attention to world affairs knows that this is a human rights violation waiting to happen.

  1. Promise them a useful job

Since your workforce is made up of people too unmotivated, uneducated, or unintelligent to do most work effectively, jobs that these people might gravitate too will be overwhelmed. Yes, you might want to hire new surgeons, but if the highest level of education out of your hiring pool is high school you need to lower your expectations.

  1. Promise them a chance to explore their passion

In most countries it is very difficult to pursue your passion in the arts while financially supporting yourself at the same time. In this country it is literally impossible. Even the most unknown artist can get some minor amount of money that they can turn into food or shelter from their art. But in this system that is also impossible.

All in all, your country will not be populated with people who can actually test this system of government like you are expecting and your country will be dead on arrival immediately.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.