I hear these comments for not wanting to help people, and it feels like we’re worshipping individuality to the detriment of community, which is necessary for survival.
- “I don’t want my money going to ___ .”
- “This is not a democracy, it’s a constitutional republic!”
- “You don’t have any freedoms under socialism/communism.”
- “They’re just looking for a handout because they’re lazy.”
- “I’m a self-made man. I didn’t need anyone’s help.”
- “Empathy is not a virtue.”
- “I don’t see how that’s my problem.”
I still think you need to present examples that fit your definitions first. Assuming we’re only talking about selectivity here. Also you’ve kind of raised the bar on yourself by stipulating democracy, egalitarianism, etc.
IMO if you control for selectivity you will find that it’s statistically insignificant and that the success of those examples was due to other factors not how selective they are.
Like the closest thing I would agree exists is mennonites/etc but you don’t count patriachial and religious.
I agree that the bar seems to have raised; the implicit assumptions were taken from the OPs quotes. That was the intended context, apologies if that was not clear.
Non-selective bodies: food banks that serve all who appear, common greens and parks, public libraries, perhaps some gyms or cellular networks. There were a few intentional communities that took a broad welcoming stance, I think New Harmony Owenites is one I’ve heard about.