Creating Hong Kong like City States

cavedave

There is an interesting podcast here (mp3) description here

The good ideas are copied, and workers migrate from failing companies to the new and old ones where the new rules are working well. The same goes for countries. Starting about 1970, China took some of the effective rules of Hong Kong (which was managed from afar by England) and set up four special economic zones along the coast operating as imitation Hong Kongs. They worked so well that China rolled out the scheme for the whole country, and its Gross Domestic Product took off. “Hong Kong was the most successful economic development program in history.”

Libertarians have always had ideas of creating micro countries with little success.

Ireland seems used tot he idea of having little coutries within our own boarder. The Financial services centre was that with positive results. The Gaeltachts are something similar. So could we allow a micro nation experiment to set up here? In the Guinness site or near knock say. Or using the biggest bit of NAMA land we can find in kildare? Would it be a bad idea?

Ostrom

cavedave wrote: »

There is an interesting podcast here (mp3) description here



Libertarians have always had ideas of creating micro countries with little success.

Ireland seems used tot he idea of having little coutries within our own boarder. The Financial services centre was that with positive results. The Gaeltachts are something similar. So could we allow a micro nation experiment to set up here? In the Guinness site or near knock say. Or using the biggest bit of NAMA land we can find in kildare? Would it be a bad idea?

Can you characterize the IFSC as a micro economy in itself given the transnational nature of its business? I'm not sure how well such an idea could work, given our size and dependence on input beyond our own borders. Interesting idea though - in an ideal scenario, what would something like this look like?

What about it makes it specifically libertarian?

silverharp

the scale would seem to be too small and you would still be weighed down with central costs and regulations. Ireland could possibly play a Hong Kong role being a 4m economy right beside a 60m economy. Introduce low & a simple tax structure compared to its neigbour and no doubt you could attract businessmen and professionals to do business here. Cut VAT to 10% and E- business companies would service the UK form here.

cavedave

Ireland could possibly play a Hong Kong role being a 4m economy right beside a 60m economy

Well in terms of area hong kong is about 1/60th of Ireland. Most of which is much more hilly then Ireland. So relatively small areas of Ireland could serve as a hong kongalike.

the scale would seem to be too small and you would still be weighed down with central costs and regulations

True the area would have to be low regulation to set up. Which i am not sure by EU rules you could do.

What about it makes it specifically libertarian?

Nothing particularly they just seem to like the idea of heading off and setting up their own country.

What micro nations exist?
1. Religious compound. Jonestown, Branch dividians, Vatican city. Religious groups have set up micronation like places. Some ended very badly
2. Tax dodges. Lichtenstein, Andorra, Gibralter. Places to buy cheap booze and cigarettes.
3. Business libertarianism. Cayman islands tax dodge. These sorts of places are getting unpopular
4. Social libertarianism. Places that allow prostitution and drugs and such. Andorra
5. Rampant capitalism. Hong Kong. Ruled with a fairly fair legal system from afar (this was set up in a very dodgy way involving war and opium).
6. Global warming refugees, rural depopulation solutions..."Perhaps China and India would in the future be keen to lease some of Sweden and Finland’s vast tracts of underpopulated land? And I’m almost being serious here"
Any other micronation business plans exist?

The idea would be something like give Singapore a 200 year lease (not the 9000 year Guinness one) on a chunk of Ireland. They get to decide the rules in this area. They can let in who they want under what rules they want. They might mess up but then people would leave. And if 20 such micronations started one might come up with a good system.

There is the problem of sovereignty. A lot of people made big sacrifices to get this country (or whatever country this would be set up in) some freedom and just selling off chunks of it is distasteful to many.

Kama

I'm all for micro-secessionism, it's always seemed the fairest way to give any wannabe idelogy or social system a fair shake.

And if 20 such micronations started one might come up with a good system.

Indeed. We'd have a much better idea on comparing regime types and policies, which incidentally is part of why I don't like harmonization.

Call em 'social and economic experimentation zones' or something...

Ostrom

Kama wrote: »

I'm all for micro-secessionism, it's always seemed the fairest way to give any wannabe idelogy or social system a fair shake.



Indeed. We'd have a much better idea on comparing regime types and policies, which incidentally is part of why I don't like harmonization.

Call em 'social and economic experimentation zones' or something...

Hmm... A 'social and economic experimentation zone'. I wonder if we could come up with one to incorporate elements of all extremes represented here.

An anarcho-socialist, libertarian commune perhaps?

cavedave

Hmm... A 'social and economic experimentation zone'. I wonder if we could come up with one to incorporate elements of all extremes represented here.

That is like asking for an experiment that covers everything at once. Can we see what happens when then water is heated and cooled at the same time? No

Kama I'm all for micro-secessionism, it's always seemed the fairest way to give any wannabe idelogy or social system a fair shake.

There is the Cayman (and to an extent Ireland) problem of a country having just tax rules, not to have a competitive advantage, just to act as a loophole. Will the world accept new 'parasitic' nations?

So who would get 1/4 of Leitrim each? The Mormons, they already run a state. The Taiwanese, might want a place to hide from the Chinese army. Paypaladonia for the libertarains? German artistville, they already own 1/4 of Leitrim. SaudiKong? Fijitown for when they go underwater. ...

Kama

no point in trying one that is everything, its the elegance of allowing diversity which appeals to me.

And yes, 'autonomous community' seems the nearest practical route.

Directions here would include Christiania in Denmark (liberalization of drug law), Transition Towns (peak oil preparedness), or the more Romer direction (corporate colonialism anyone?), to more 'kooky' things like seasteading (since we've run out of land to 'homestead' in good classic-liberal fashion) or the TAZ-tradition like bolo'bolo.

Ostrom

cavedave wrote: »

That is like asking for an experiment that covers everything at once. Can we see what happens when then water is heated and cooled at the same time? No

Just trying to lighten the mood...

You could try both concurrently in separate containers? Is some sort of co-development not implied by your concept of micro-states? Were these questions of subsumption not at the heart of many theoretical debates of the past century?

Kama wrote: »

no point in trying one that is everything, its the elegance of allowing diversity which appeals to me.

And yes, 'autonomous community' seems the nearest practical route.

Would these become mainly agrarian?

cavedave

efla

You could try both concurrently in separate containers? Is some sort of co-development not implied by your concept of micro-states? Were these questions of subsumption not at the heart of many theoretical debates of the past century?

Yeah try both and see which one works. You would needs space around each like in Hong Kong so if something did work it could be copied locally. There are reasons city states combined into nations. I would say security from attack was a leading one. Now war is in decline could smaller entities now be viable?

Kama
the TAZ-tradition like bolo'bolo.

I had not heard of bolo'bolo before, I am reading up on it now. What do you mean by TAZ-tradition?

Kama

Bolo'bolo was the first time I got interested in micro-secessionist ideas; it reads hellah naively anarchist now that I look back on it, but imo eutopian projects are all about determined naivety.

TAZ was an idea of Hakim Bey/Peter Lamborn Wilson; its a situationist-anarchist theory that rather than attempt to challenge states on territory, or maintaining permanence, you should have communities which come together and dissipate, and be 'free in the moment', or the interstices. Burning Man and Rainbow Gatherings would fit within this approach. Charter cities it ain't, but it came to mind. I probably shouldn't have put bolo'bolo with it, but I read them both from Garden of Earthly Delights, so they stick together in memory.

Would these become mainly agrarian?

What works, works. Freetown Christiania isn't agrarian, more of a zone of social liberalization and experimentation, aka Pusherstrasse

(Interestingly for decriminalization advocates, the recent 'normalization' policy has concided wiith the increased dominance of violent gangs like the Hells Angels taking over more of the drug trade, and an increase in violence.)

Yeah try both and see which one works.

Yup. See what works, then try and scale it.

cavedave

So what micronation would you
1. Like to live in
2. See happen so you could point at it and say "look your ideas failed there"

Ill go with futarchy and libertarianism. Not that i am sure libertarianism would fail but it would settle a lot of arguments.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

cavedave

donegalfella
"Social justice" doesn't work if the targets of redistributionism can opt out.

Can't they already? At least the very rich ones. Many already live in tax exile.

the bleats of "It's not fair! Wahhhh! We want their money!" would start

True these already happen for Cayman islands and such free market (at least for company law way) countries.

I presume some sort of collectivist commune would be the opposite of a libertarian microstate?

Kama

The problem of external relations crops up pretty quick, or the secession model of the Northern League...'why are we supporting a poor periphery'?
But as Dave says, the ability to abstract yourself as a tax entity is already there, for the wealthier. But proof of the pudding, I fully support the libertarian ambition, even if I tend to disagree with the ethos. Like dave says, settle a lot of arguments.

Taking the idea of experimentation zones, if they are strictly time-bounded (as with charter cities) it's less 'scary' for the sovereign state who is effectively abdicating a degree of control, while still providing services (such as defence) as non-excludable public goods.

Taking the libertarian case here, if you were doing that, I think the EU might be a bit upset at the 'dumping' aspect. Quite possibly, taking such liberties would have a response in the rescinding of other liberties; a micro-state is unlikely to be sufficient in scale for an autarky. A charter city or a experimentation zone, regrettably for a true anti-statist, isn't a revolutionary reboot, but more of a 'skunkworks' that functions with state assent within their territory. If you deliberately piss off your parents, your adolescent rights are likely to become restricted.

Ostrom

Kama wrote: »

The problem of external relations crops up pretty quick, or the secession model of the Northern League...'why are we supporting a poor periphery'?
But as Dave says, the ability to abstract yourself as a tax entity is already there, for the wealthier. But proof of the pudding, I fully support the libertarian ambition, even if I tend to disagree with the ethos. Like dave says, settle a lot of arguments.

Taking the idea of experimentation zones, if they are strictly time-bounded (as with charter cities) it's less 'scary' for the sovereign state who is effectively abdicating a degree of control, while still providing services (such as defence) as non-excludable public goods.

Taking the libertarian case here, if you were doing that, I think the EU might be a bit upset at the 'dumping' aspect. Quite possibly, taking such liberties would have a response in the rescinding of other liberties; a micro-state is unlikely to be sufficient in scale for an autarky. A charter city or a experimentation zone, regrettably for a true anti-statist, isn't a revolutionary reboot, but more of a 'skunkworks' that functions with state assent within their territory. If you deliberately piss off your parents, your adolescent rights are likely to become restricted.

Could any of this realistically function long-term in the context of transnational governance today? I would imagine issues such as policing, cross-border crime/extradition, human rights standards, spatial expansion and population control, waste management, export control and such would simply bring any kind of formal government in line, or at least undermine some aspects of its function.

Beyond sustainable agrarianism, it would appear difficult to continue today without encountering conditions of trade that could lead to a Cuba-US style relationship. What incentive to innovate if your potential trading partners could simply undermine your ability to profit?

Also, some sort of welfare provision would become necessary - certain individuals will eventually need assistance of some sort through accident or birth, and divisions of labour will only establish new standards of affluence - would the fact of relatively (to those outside the micro-state) higher income offset any desire to demand higher returns?

Joycey

Kama wrote: »

Taking the libertarian case here, if you were doing that, I think the EU might be a bit upset at the 'dumping' aspect.

Id imagine they would simply give some corrupt government somewhere on the other side of the world money in order that local kids be poisoned by their toxic waste.

Fair, equitable business transactions are what ensure life, liberty and happiness for all, havent you been listening?

Kama

efla wrote: »

Could any of this realistically function long-term in the context of transnational governance today?

My emphasis would be on the short-to-medium, as a deliberately temporary and exploratory measure in regime and policy liberalization, a micro antithesis to harmonization.

I would imagine issues such as policing, cross-border crime/extradition, human rights standards, spatial expansion and population control, waste management, export control and such would simply bring any kind of formal government in line, or at least undermine some aspects of its function.

I don't think any part of the world governance system would like or willingly tolerate having it's 'turf' tread on to hard, like the 'teeheehee taxhaven!' proposals that tend to dominate libertarian attempts on these lines prior, such as Operation Atlantis or the Republic of Minerva.

As a 'mild' form, we would just be talking about an expanded form of local government, rather than secession per se. If, say, the Peoples Republic of Cork became a real political movement rather than a tshirt, and pressed for greater 'subsidiarity' or regional autonomy.

Question is, what does the host-country 'get' out of it? If it gets nothing but a nasty parasite, there's hardly an incentive. In something like the charter cities you 'get' a developed Hong Kong, hopefully.

Also, some sort of welfare provision would become necessary - certain individuals will eventually need assistance of some sort through accident or birth, and divisions of labour will only establish new standards of affluence - would the fact of relatively (to those outside the micro-state) higher income offset any desire to demand higher returns?

I'll leave that one to DF

Valmont

cavedave wrote: »

1. Religious compound. Jonestown, Branch dividians, Vatican city. Religious groups have set up micronation like places. Some ended very badly

Understatement of the century!

cavedave

Valmont

1. Religious compound. Jonestown, Branch dividians, Vatican city. Religious groups have set up micronation like places. Some ended very badly

Understatement of the century!

David Koresh's gang don't need to be bolded?

There are loads of other successful religious micronations. The settler Puritans on Cape Cod, the Mormons in Utah. The medieval Irish monasteries that were pretty much self contained and it could be argued they preserved western civilisation. Is it that religious groups have the social cohesion needed to keep a micronation together whereas say libertarians who tend to be very individualist don't?

Soldie

There's an interesting thread about this over on Mises.org. The poster (with an Austrian slant, naturally) calls for the creation of microstates. Here's a link for those interested: http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5509.aspx

Ostrom

Soldie wrote: »

There's an interesting thread about this over on Mises.org. The poster (with an Austrian slant, naturally) calls for the creation of microstates. Here's a link for those interested: http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5509.aspx

Seems like the only way to satisfy everyone's demands

Didn't the state of Vermont vote/poll to secede a number of years ago?

Kama

That would probably be the Second Vermont Republic.

Resolution misses the prefix of citizens resolution, so it isn't as big a deal as it initially sounds. The State of Vermont passed no such resolution to my knowledge. Polls in Vermont for secession ride under 10%

Then there's the libertarian New Hampshire attempt of the Free State Project, basically trying to move all the libertarians to New Hampshire so they can make it even more libertarian. Notably, they still aren't near getting enough 'promises' to hit their target, but the idea that people who like policy X move to a state that has policies X fulfils my freedom condition reasonably well.

Other notable US secessionists are the Republic of Texas, the Alaskan Independence Party, and the legally-interesting Lakotah Oyahe, but basically any state or even county in the US probably has a secession movement, its just a matter of scale and (ir)relevance.

Possibly my fave response to secessionism comes from Gary Garrison of the BIA on this: 'when they begin the process of violating other people's rights, breaking the law, they're going to end up like all the other groups that have declared themselves independent - usually getting arrested and being put in jail'. So feel free to print passports and say what you like, but don't screw with Daddy or we'll put you down.


There's a pretty significant difference between the secession of a state, and the 'homesteading' of a new micronation on Sealand/seasteading/Minerva lines. I was quite amused by the Mises thread when it advocated setting one up in Haiti, tbh. Reckon the Haitians would make pretty short work of any libertarian enclave.

The point it emerged from is valid though; you would need to go somewhere that isn't valued. In purist terms you wouldn't be appropriating value, and your less likely to be squashed if its not worth the bother.

Came across these guys on John Robbs blog; kinda info-libertarian project that has the advantage that it has a low-scale praxis, with Hong Kong-ism as the high-end goal.

Kama

For anyone who's interested, Romer has pulled out of the TSI Seasteading conference, allegedly due to this essay in which he accuses Romer of intellectual dishonesty for not acknowledging Charter Cities are based on colonialist systems. He also calls him some nasty words, par for the course in one of his tl;dr posts.

Ah, the internet and drama...it never ends...

cavedave

To drag up a year old thread it seems a very minor version of this might happen. Welcome to Shanghai-on-Shannon