The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Dinotopia

rated by 0 users
This post has 11 Replies | 7 Followers

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 658
Points 17,300
eliotn Posted: Tue, Nov 25 2008 8:48 PM

I thought Dinotopia is a neat concept.  Basically, think huge island where humans and sentient dinosaurs coexist peacefully.  But what about Capitalism Dinotopia, where there is money, and free trade?  Why did the author base it on Communism?  Why is there a government?  Would this even work in practice?

I thought these quotes were relevant to discussions on liberterianism:

"

Survival of all or none.
One raindrop raises the sea.
Weapons are enemies, even to their owners.
Give more, take less.
Others first, self last.
Observe, listen and learn.
Do one thing at a time.
Sing every day.
Exercise imagination.
Eat to live, don't live to eat.
Don't put out the light."
-Code of Dinotopia

"Both halves of the society share responsibility equally and live under a common set of laws known as the Code of Dinotopia. The society is highly communal, lacking a monetary system or even a concrete concept of ownership. Individuals are educated from youth to be compassionate, co-operative, and generally conscious of others' needs. For example, food on the island is provided at no cost, but citizens take only what they need and leave the rest for others." -From Wikipedia


I hunger for a good discussion.Smile

Schools are labour camps.

  • | Post Points: 50
Not Ranked
Posts 22
Points 275
MatthewM replied on Wed, Nov 26 2008 1:00 AM

What is Dinotopia?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 378
Points 7,300

MatthewM:

What is Dinotopia?

This is Dinotopia. All I can say is...wow.

"I cannot prove, but am prepared to affirm, that if you take care of clarity in reasoning, most good causes will take care of themselves, while some bad ones are taken care of as a matter of course." -Anthony de Jasay

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Female
Posts 80
Points 1,095

The libertarian approach to utopia is neither capitalist nor anything else pre-defined; but grounded in pure voluntarism. Utopia is whichever society you are willing to live in with like-minded individuals on a free associative basis; ie, the structure of the society, its rules, etc., will depend on the unanimous agreement of all involved parties.

This being said, capitalism (or, at least, free-market) is most likely to be adopted as an economic system because of its reliance on voluntary and decentralised mechanisms and its lack of coercion.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Female
Posts 80
Points 1,095

PS: the author just created his own prefered vision of utopia, but nothing prevents you from adopting a diametrically opposed one

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 18
Points 180
Okooka replied on Wed, Nov 26 2008 12:11 PM

Except that nobody would buy it. And the critics would label it a cutthroat dystopia.

 

People are selfish, speculative and aggressive in getting what they want, yet they dream of a communist post-state utopia. Probably in dinotopia they are reading Rothbard and sighing with dreamy eyes.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 12
Points 235

eliotn:

Survival of all or none.

 

It seems like the adherents to this code choose survival for none.  Or, at the very least, suffering for all.

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 658
Points 17,300
eliotn replied on Wed, Nov 26 2008 1:49 PM

Stanley Pinchak:
It seems like the adherents to this code choose survival for none.  Or, at the very least, suffering for all.

They don't suffer, in fact, the conditions on the island are so great, there is abundance for all.  Would a free market still be good in times of abundance?

Schools are labour camps.

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 378
Points 7,300

eliotn:

Stanley Pinchak:
It seems like the adherents to this code choose survival for none.  Or, at the very least, suffering for all.

They don't suffer, in fact, the conditions on the island are so great, there is abundance for all.  Would a free market still be good in times of abundance?

In other words, it is a work of fantasy.

"I cannot prove, but am prepared to affirm, that if you take care of clarity in reasoning, most good causes will take care of themselves, while some bad ones are taken care of as a matter of course." -Anthony de Jasay

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Female
Posts 4
Points 35

Free Market will always be good.

Such situation cannot exist because of natural reason. Yet for a short time, if a situation occurs when everything needed for a quality life is in Abundance, then that would be a perfect ground for Free Market based on voluntarism without any sort of resistance from anyone.

Yet, there will be a need for the first handers to lead the progress.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 256
Points 3,965
kiba replied on Wed, Nov 26 2008 2:02 PM

GarGi-Dixit:

Free Market will always be good.

Such situation cannot exist because of natural reason. Yet for a short time, if a situation occurs when everything needed for a quality life is in Abundance, then that would be a perfect ground for Free Market based on voluntarism without any sort of resistance from anyone.

Yet, there will be a need for the first handers to lead the progress.

Nah. Since everything is abundant, it will cause a market collapse and the law of economic no longer applies.

 

http://libregamewiki.org - The world's only encyclopedia on free(as in freedom) gaming.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 12
Points 235

eliotn,

     In a world of super-abundance, a market would still be needed to allocate the scarcity which still exists in that state, namely, property rights in and use of the bodies of the individuals inhabiting this land, as well as allocation of the standing room occupied by each individual.  As such, economics and markets will still be needed.  Communism indicates that a person and his actions are owned collectively, as such, no allocation can logically occur without a violation of the principles of collective ownership.  For how can one give one's assent to the actions of another if one is not free to give this assent without the prior assent of every other inhabitant.  Communism eventually breaks down to oligarchic rule and resorts to the principle that it is O.K. for some people to control others.  To gain a greater understanding of the flaws in these political systems, please familiarize yourself with Rothbard's, "Ethics of Liberty" and, or Hoppe's "Economics and Ethics of Private Property." I am not sure if the latter is available in pdf (I have the very nice dead tree version).

Page 1 of 1 (12 items) | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap