Challenge: describe "your" country

[traininthedistance]

I was starting to do an epic write up "my" country, until I realized that it was almost a perfect carbon copy of Averroësland- even down to details such as the 80 percent urban population (actually Trainland might be more like 90, but that's splitting hairs), the 75 percent nuclear power (with biomass being part of the mix), and the existence of a "Centre" communitarian party with roots in the rural areas.  Heavily urban, nonexistent burbs, gov't funded on land and consumption taxes*, lots of public transit, government heavily invested in infrastructure and energy, etc etc.  All of that good stuff.

There are a few small differences, mostly in the name of "warts and all" realism, but a couple other points of emphasis that reflect a relatively greater influence of the Liberal and Green parties in government (in Trainland the Greens are actually the largest, with the Liberals a close second, and the social democrats are instead the juniormost coalition partner):

* The consumption taxes in Trainland are somewhat less progressive, and more Pigouvian, focusing on carbon use, drugs, etc.

* There is no state-level government.  There are independent cities and "rural districts" which mainly serve as electoral and judicial boundaries, but can optionally elect an advisory board to present residents' concerns to the federal government.  Elections to Parliament are PR by either city or rural district, at-large within each city/district.

* Development is sharply restricted in the rural districts, whereas there are very few zoning laws within the cities themselves, just building safety codes, provisions for parkland and to segregate heavy industry, and sometimes design guidelines in the nicer parts of town.  As such, there's a far wider variety of building styles, with taller apartment buildings being a particularly favored living option for both the elite and the working class.  New independent cities can sometimes be chartered, but it's a bit of an annoying process for those who wish to start one up.  (It is less annoying and more frequent, but still somewhat difficult, for the cities to enlarge their boundaries to keep up with growth.  So you get a bit of upward pressure by necessity.)

* Car use is very strictly curtailed in the cities.  More like 85 percent of city residents do not own one, and most roads even prohibit automobile traffic (except for emergency vehicles).  They tend to be seen as either a plaything for the wealthy, or as a tool for certain occupations like police and contractors.  There is also a social stigma due to the dangerousness factor- there is a legal presumption that if a vehicle gets into a crash, it is the driver's fault.  Public transit is, of course, world-class.

* Retiring to a farm in the countryside isn't really an option.  The rural areas tend to be either parkland or genuinely productive landscape (farming and forestry mainly- mining has been almost regulated out of existence, which is somewhat controversial as Trainland ends up having to import all that stuff from other countries), and "hobby farms" aren't really seen as practical.  Factory farming of animals is prohibited on environmental grounds, but conventionally farmed grains/fruits/vegetables are allowed, and are the standard.  Touristy rural villages do exist, however, and do draw their share of retirees, and represent really the only common middle ground bridging the city/country divide.

* There is no minimum wage- it is assumed that the guaranteed basic income (which is provided to everyone, regardless of age or employment status) does a good enough job of providing for necessities.  And unionization levels are sharply lower, especially since the large service sector mostly consists of freelancers, independent contractors, and small businesses/co-ops for which unionization wouldn't be practical.  However, there are many jobs for which even 35 hours a week is generally considered a lot: there is a very strong culture that people value free time more than money.  The result is a slightly lower material standard of living for the median resident of Trainland, but sharply lower unemployment.  

* Of course, education, science, and the arts remain "prestige" occupations here, and attract the sorts of high-powered folks who actually want to work more.  The relatively higher status of the arts here is the only real difference- Trainland has a thriving arts and entertainment sector, and cultural products like music, literature and film are one of its main exports.  There is significant government support for "high" culture (and significant popular support for maintaining this), but popular forms are widely enjoyed as well.

* Healthcare is on the Canada model- single-payer, but the docs are in business for themselves.  Private insurance is available for the wealthy.

* Church attendance is somewhat lower: while many community organizations have their roots in religion, they have by now been pretty much fully secularized.  Attitudes towards religion in the public sphere and education are somewhat more secular than the US, but do not go so far as the legendary laicite of France: for example, secular education is compulsory for children, but they are allowed to wear headscarves/crosses/etc. and pray in public.  Generally the most religious groups tend to be immigrant communities (of which there are a lot, since borders are quite open here).

* The military is about the same size, but is slightly more willing to get involved beyond its borders (though not nearly so interventionist as the US).  Trainland is a member of NATO, and as such has contributed to peacekeeping missions in Kosovo and the like under the NATO banner.  

...

Okay, well, that was still pretty long.  Just imagine, it would have been twice as long.

[traininthedistance]

I realized something really interesting about the five-party system I had envisioned for "my country"- they relate to each other in a symmetrical, star pattern. (Note that although the parties are roughly equivalent, this particular relation probably doesn't hold in Averroes-land).

Each party has two preferred coalition partners, and two parties it doesn't like that much.  Generally whichever party gets a plurality will invite its two preferred parties.  Since the Greens are the largest party right now, they get to invite the Liberals and Social Democrats, despite the fact that those two parties are somewhat in friction.

The Green Party likes the Social Democrats and the Liberals, and it doesn't like the Center or the Conservatives.  Although, it is not 100 percent opposed to forming coalitions with any of them.  The Greens here are somewhat more pragmatic and less ideological than most other green parties, and their willingness to work with anybody was presumably a big help in becoming the current largest party, despite their newness.  Their base is less-wealthy white collar workers: academics, students, artists, bureaucrats, etc.

The Liberals like the Greens and the Conservatives, and they don't like the Center or the Social Democrats.  Despite the Liberals and the Center both claiming the mantle of "moderates", they are very different: the Liberals are the party of urban professionals and the elite, and tend to be center-right (by Trainland's standards that is) on economics and strongly left on social issues.  Whereas the Center Party is a party of rural interests, and is socially conservative but economically interventionist.

The Social Democrats obviously like the Greens and the Center, and don't like the Liberals or Conservatives.  Their base tends to be immigrants and manual laborers.

The Conservatives like the Liberals and the Center, but not Greens or SocDems.  They poll best among people who actually drive cars, i.e. police officers, contractors etc., basically better-off blue collar folks, and their signature issues tend to be a reduction in the carbon tax, as well as a hawkish foreign policy.

The rural-focused, communitarian Center likes the SocDems and Conservatives, but not so much the Liberals and Greens.  This causes a lot of problems for them these days, since the Social Democrats and Conservatives are the only two parties who outright refuse to form a coalition together, and the Liberals and Greens have been the two largest parties for most of the past 25 years.  So the Center Party has the bleakest prospects. 

There are several fringe protest parties as well, the largest three being a) a rump of Marxists, b) an anti-immigration far right populist group, and c) a libertarian/Pirate sort of thing.  All three of them will occasionally send someone to Parliament, but none of the five mainstream parties will have anything to do with them- the cordon sanitaire is in full effect.

The main unique thing here, of course, is the very close working relationship between the Liberals and Greens, as well as the fact they tend to do better than your "typical" red and blue teams.

[traininthedistance]

Fantasizing about an idealized society is for Marxists and libertarians, and I am neither. There is no ideal society; there is only the society that we have now, and what matters is what can be done to improve that society.

On the other hand, Hashemite's country does seem ideal.

lol, my country is far from ideal.  In fact, I'm pretty sure I went out of my way to show the negative consequences of utopia.

But otherwise, yeah I agree.  Hashemite's country does seem by far the best.

This is a good point.

I tried to sort of hint at some of the potential downsides of "my" ideology, but reading it again, I didn't really hint strongly enough.  So, in that spirit, here are some potentially bad things about Trainland:

* First and foremost, living space is pretty cramped.  Not Lower East Side tenement-level cramped, but most people live in fairly small apartments, or share smallish rowhomes with friends or family, and things like private yards and detached homes are pretty much luxury goods.

* Unemployment is virtually nil- anyone who wants a job can have one- but underemployment is an issue sometimes, and working class jobs are much more of the "service sector drone" model than the "unionized factory worker" model.

* The urban/rural divide is an issue, and since the population is overwhelmingly urban, rural residents can feel aggrieved at times.

* The strict environmental regulations that virtually killed off most mining mean that Trainland has to import a lot of raw materials, which is potentially a drag on the economy.  (It doesn't really have to import fossil fuels, since it's built in such a way as to basically not need them, but stuff like thorium and rare earths are still vital.)  It's not normally a huge issue, but the prospect of supply shocks does hang over the nation, and when it gets recessions that's usually the reason.

* Some folks complain that politicians don't really have any power, and that "unelected bureaucrats" decide everything.

* The predominance of the arts and entertainment as a major industry (and, in fact, one of the nation's largest exports) has led to copyright laws that, while not as stringent as currently found in the USA, would rankle many posters here.

* Hipsters, hipsters everywhere.