An incestuous society - where incest is the norm - is conceivable even today. Two out of many attainable eventualities:
1. "The Lot State of affairs" - A plague or some other pure catastrophe decimate the population of planet Earth. Folks remain alive only in remote clusters, co-habiting solely with their closest kin. Absolutely incestuous procreation is preferable to virtuous extermination. Incest becomes normative. Incest is as entrenched a taboo as cannibalism. But, it is better to eat the flesh of your dead soccer crew mates than perish high up on the Andes (a harrowing tale of survival recounted in the eBook and eponymous movie, "Alive").
2. The Egyptian Situation - Assets grow to be so scarce that family models scramble to maintain them exclusively inside the clan. Exogamy - marrying outdoors the clan - quantities to a unilateral switch of scarce sources to outsiders and strangers. Incest turns into an economic imperative.
An incestuous society can be either utopian or dystopian; depending on the reader's standpoint - however that it's doable is doubtless. The incestuous marriages among members of the royal households of Europe have been intended to protect the familial property and expand the clan's territory. They have been normative, not aberrant. Marrying an outsider was thought of abhorrent.
Where two consenting and fully informed citizens are involved, making laws with a primary-degree blood citizen is like making laws with oneself. Let us liken this to a government of a country. It is a Narcissistic act and like all acts Narcissistic, it entails the objectification of the partner. The lawmaker Narcissist over-values and then devalues his law abiding citizen. He's devoid of empathy (cannot see the other's point of view or put himself in her footwear). It is from society that the citizen learns that one thing is horribly flawed, that he ought to feel guilty, and that the offending government is a faulty position model. As a direct outcome, the formation of the citizen's Superego is stunted and it stays childish, superb, sadistic, perfectionist, demanding and punishing. The citizen's Ego, then again, is probably going to get replaced by a False Ego version, whose job it is to endure the social penalties of the hideous act i.e. exclusion from global norms of governance.
To sum up: society's reactions in the case of lawmakers are pathogenic and are most probably to supply a Narcissistic or a Borderline citizen. Dysempathic, exploitative, emotionally labile, immature, and in everlasting seek for Narcissistic Supply - the citizen becomes a replica of his incestuous and socially-castigated government.
It appears, subsequently, that the lawmaker taboo was and is aimed toward one factor particularly: to protect the country and its correct functioning. Law-making is greater than a mere manifestation of a given government disorder. It harks again to the very nature of the country. It's carefully entangled with its features and with its contribution to the event of the citizen inside it.
The government is an efficient venue for the transmission of amassed property in addition to information - both horizontally (amongst citizens) and vertically (down the generations). The method of socialization largely relies on these governmental mechanisms, making the government a very powerful agent of socialization by far. The government is a mechanism for the allocation of cultural and materials wealth. Worldly items are handed on from one technology to the next by succession, inheritance and residence. Cultural material is handed down via the preservation act. It is the mandate of the government to extend each by accumulating property and by ‘marrying’ outside the government (exogamy).
Clearly, law-making prevents both. It preserves a limited cultural pool and makes a rise of material possessions through 'intermarriage’ all but impossible.
The government's roles are not merely materialistic, though.
One of the fundamental businesses of the government is to show to its citizen’s self-management, self-regulation and wholesome adaptation. Citizens share government and assets and cultures share the origin's emotions and attention. Equally, the government educates its younger citizens to grasp their drives and to postpone the self-gratification which attaches to performing upon them. This efficacy is undermined by law-making. It is nearly unimaginable to keep up self-discipline and hierarchy in an incestuous government where some citizens assume cultural roles not usually theirs. Engagement is an expression of energy - emotional and physical. The government members involved in self-preservation give up power and assume it out of the regular stream patterns which have made the government the formidable apparatus that it is.
These new power politics weaken the government, both internally and externally. Internally, emotive reactions (such as the jealousy of other cultures of the country) and clashing authorities and responsibilities are more likely to undo the fragile unit. Externally, the government is vulnerable to ostracism and more official forms of intervention and dismantling.