You know what happened long ago with Australia? I see pretty much no downside to that strategy. Suppose a country like the USA buys out some land and spends the funds necessary to set up basic infrastructure/provide hunting and farming tools, etc. This has a cost but in theory it's basically a one-time-cost then you wash your hands of it.
In the USA suppose a criminal commits a heinous violent crime and is jailed. They're eventually let go since this was a first offense. But then they do it again. Same process, eventually let out. Then they do it again. At some point, perhaps a strikes system, just ship them off and be rid of them. Then they're no longer a drain on your society, they don't need to be fed, housed, and guarded in prison, they can't get out again and cause even more problems, etc.
People would claim this was racist because we all know some groups commit way more crime than others, but as long as the policy was enforced fairly, it's actually not racist at all since you're holding every group to the same standard then weeding out the bad apples over time. And no, I don't think every crime would warrant this and a lot of crimes should just outright be dropped. For example a large portion of the prison population are there on drug charges and I don't even really think those should be illegal.
I expect there are aspects to this I've not considered, but I think it could be a decent idea provided your laws weren't manipulated to toss out your political opponents and provided the thresholds and laws that could get you discharged were well reasoned.
In the USA suppose a criminal commits a heinous violent crime and is jailed. They're eventually let go since this was a first offense. But then they do it again. Same process, eventually let out. Then they do it again. At some point, perhaps a strikes system, just ship them off and be rid of them. Then they're no longer a drain on your society, they don't need to be fed, housed, and guarded in prison, they can't get out again and cause even more problems, etc.
People would claim this was racist because we all know some groups commit way more crime than others, but as long as the policy was enforced fairly, it's actually not racist at all since you're holding every group to the same standard then weeding out the bad apples over time. And no, I don't think every crime would warrant this and a lot of crimes should just outright be dropped. For example a large portion of the prison population are there on drug charges and I don't even really think those should be illegal.
I expect there are aspects to this I've not considered, but I think it could be a decent idea provided your laws weren't manipulated to toss out your political opponents and provided the thresholds and laws that could get you discharged were well reasoned.
