It doesn't have to be realistic. But whatever makes it unrealistic would go under "What is standing in the way of that today?"
I'd like to live in a small village with just a few, perhaps 5-10 families, who live in a remote area of the United States. Nothing stops me from living like that, but it'll be hard to find one if I wasn't born there.
That sounds like half the Canadian Prairies. How are you with cold weather?
A hybrid system. A mash-up of an opt-in National Socialism(National identity, not racial) with a Libertarian like back-up.
A National state within/blended into a Libertarian state. The population split between Citizens, and Freemen.
Citizens must undergo a period of service to earn their citizenship. In return they get socialist state benefits, but pay taxes.
Freemen have opted out. No service, no taxes, but also no safety net. They have to pay for medical, road toll, etc. or anything else they want.
Children would get the status of their parents until adulthood, then they would either enter state service and earn Citizenship, or choose to be a Freeman.
I believe the two could theoretically coexist.
I'm condensing, and greatly simplifying the idea, but I think that gives a picture of what I mean.
I don't believe it could ever be implemented, but I do think it could work, if it did happen.
I like that idea, mainly the opt-in part. I'm a Voluntaryist, so any system that people aren't forced into sounds good to me.
Would the Freemen be allowed to make their own opt-in governments? And how does the your government intend to acquire its land?
Edit: And why don't you think that could work?
Would the Freemen be allowed to make their own opt-in governments?
No. A state militia would prevent that. They would also have to obey a basic set of criminal law when on shared ground.
Multiple 'States' would lead to instability that at the very least would destroy the Freemen.
And how does the your government intend to acquire its land?
And why don't you think that could work?
The first question has no answer, but is the answer to the second question.
I've always strongly valued individual freedom. But I am in awe of the theoretical capabilities of Socialism. The Achillies heel of Socialism is the power structure required to make it work.
So I've spent time trying to reconcile the two.
'Ideal society' is a very broad range.
Does it have to be realistic? As in something I think could work? Or can it be an ideal that would not work with humans as we know them? Eg. If there was no violence, many far left ideas become possible, where realistically they are not.