Moral Responsibility

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY 

The most pressing motive for ditching OBeCities in favour of OAeCities is the environmental one and, whilst not absolving 3rd World countries of their lack of action vis a vis their high fertility rates, I believe it is the moral responsibility of the rich world to massively reduce its ecological “footprint”.  
It is GREEDY, SELFISH, RECKLESS, and IMMORAL to relentlessly plunder the worlds finite resources and endlessly pollute its landscape, oceans, lakes, and rivers, etc.   Yes I know you have heard this tiresome eco-lecturing prescribing the usual palliatives – using public transport more often – switching to electric/hybrid cars (and hopefully sharing them or using them only “when you really must”) – installing low-energy lighting and better home insulation, and so on and so forth.   But even if all those measures were taken, would it be enough to claim a “massive” reduction – what can be done?   

But, lets talk for a moment about Global Warming (GW) or Climate Change (CC).   Even assuming (1) it is occurring and (2) it is man-made, I do NOT claim that a widespread adoption of OACities would prevent it because (assuming man-made GW/CC is occurring, which I believe is the case) the seeds of destruction were planted many decades ago and without the total co-operation of all the big polluters, which is obviously NOT going to happen, it is now almost certainly too late to arrest it let alone reverse it.

Aside from the obvious ecological imperatives there are many other very good reasons why thoughtful people like yourselves (you must be if you’re reading this – well, aren’t you?) should be concerned about the many negative aspects of 2-dimensional ObeCities (sprawl cities) and consider the many possibilities and advantages of 3-dimensional OAcities like Deltapolis.

The reasons are – well, every reason you can think of  – Social, political, moral, economic, health and well-ness, nutritional, climatic comfort and, not least, safety and security.

Unlike some other proposed Eco-Cities and so-called “Smart-Cities”, most of which are “one-offs” or frivolously expensive vanity projects like the concept cars that pop-up at every Motor Show (usually never to be seen again), DP is a template that can easily be adapted for all countries and climates and any building site – whether green-field or brown-field, whether tropics or tundra or desert.   Since DP looks like a large luxury resort hotel it is natural to assume that it will be unaffordable for all but a wealthy elite.   But this need not be the case.   Resort Hotels are expensive because they are built in fashionable and pricey locations and have huge overheads, staffing in particular, and also the need to make a fat profit.

A GIANT PANIC-ROOM..?

Another misconception related to perceived cost is that DP is intended as a fortress-like virtual “island” – a giant “panic room” in which multi-millionaires will be able to batten down the hatches and ride out the coming storm whilst keeping the great unwashed at a safe distance.    Yes, the immutable laws of supply and demand may well dictate that DP begins life with a silver-spoon in its mouth, but if that helps brings the concept to the attention of the general public then that is no bad thing.   I seem to recall that cars and planes and cruise liners were also born into exclusivity, as was the idea of holidays abroad.

The manner in which DP is born is unimportant, but it is very important that it IS born because DP has the potential to be the palliative for a wide range of ills, not only the usual environmental ills but those of a societal, philosophical and political nature too.