Perfect Society

Derrida says, in his essay "Cosmopolitism", that this type of city as "cities of refuge". Derrida states "Ever since of the first meeting, we have been calling for the opening of such refuge cities across the world. That in effect, very much resembles a new cosmopolitics we have undertaken to bring about the proclamation and institution of numerous and, above all, autonomous "cities of refuge", each as independent from the other and from the state as possible, but nevertheless, allied to each other according to forms of solidarity yet to be invented."(Derrida 4) I would take part in one of these "cities of refuge". A city where people would be accepted when seeking political asylum. A place of refuge from discrimination and persecution. They would be accepted in because it is the right thing to do not the economic thing to do. This was not the case with France. Derrida says "France has had a certain tendency to portray itself as being more open to political refugees in contradiction to other European countries, but the motives behind such a policy of opening up to the foreigner have, however, never been "ethical"- in the sense of the moral law or the law of the land-, or, indeed law of hospitality. The comparative drop in birth rate in France since the middle of the eighteenth century has generally permitted her to be more liberal in matters of immigration for obvious economic reasons; when the economy is doing well, and workers are needed, one tends not to be overly particular when trying to sort out political and economic motivation." (Derrida 10) You cannot have a city/state/government think selfishly, unmorally, and expect its people to think differently. The city/state/government must have the same moral values and rules that reflect the people living there. If you live in an open city where everyone is welcome, that would create a diverse group of people (people from different races, different religions, and different economic classes).