You are certainly right about regional planning. Christaller said, “The aim of regional planning … is to introduce order into impractical, outdated and arbitrary urban forms or transport networks, and this order can only be achieved on the basis of an ideal plan – which means in spatial terms a geometrical schema ... Central places will be spaced an equal distance apart, so that they form equilateral triangles. These triangles will in turn form regular hexagons, with the central place in the middle of
these hexagons assuming a greater importance.” None of this can be accomplished by letting people freely come and go ...
Yes, but you need to put it in a context. You get empty land, relatively flat. You want to put people there in an organized way, to maximize the efficiency of distribution, in a chain of interconnected settlements. They also occupy as much area as possible, so establish their control over a large area.
This means that it is *their* land, that no interloper can occupy a large area within their area. And this was Israel’s national prerogative, to not have non-Israeli squatters interspersed with Israelis.
Granted, in the early days, Israel was all about socialism and government everything. But my point is that this doesn’t have to be that way.
As a logistical and mathematical model it makes sense.
And importantly, again, it is “formative”. Once set up, it should slowly change and adapt and specialize, while retaining the advantages. Much like planting seedlings a given distance apart so that they will have room to grow, but still be in the same overall field.