A useful 24-minute video from Tom Bell for Reason TV. I think this may be the best hope for libertarians. Demonstrate that experimental forms of modest government can work.
2 thoughts on “Startup Cities”
One of the most limited governments in human history rapidly becomes the most powerful nation in human history, and this somehow doesn’t manage to convince everybody that limited government can work, but maybe a couple more Hong Kongs will win over the stragglers? I’m all in favor of trying sortocracy, but just to give people more candidates on the vote-with-your-feet ballot, not because it will work as a teaching tool.
Listening to Tom its funny just how semantic (in true libertarian fashion) this idea sounds. He even takes a couple of minutes to discuss what the appropriate name should be.
Anyway, the charter city, privatized city, whatever, idea is more or less the literal interpretation of the Steve Sailer/citizentist analogy, where citizens are shareholders and government officials are fiduciaries. Other than haggling over the distribution of rights/responsibilities, the moral structure is one to one. The government/company is responsible first and foremost to the citizens/shareholders over the non-citizens/non-shareholders. Really, no difference, and yet I dont suppose Bryan Caplan will be equating charter cities with apartheid and Jim Crow any time soon:)
Its almost like the real problem with government is that it is called government, and not a company. 🙂
One of the most limited governments in human history rapidly becomes the most powerful nation in human history, and this somehow doesn’t manage to convince everybody that limited government can work, but maybe a couple more Hong Kongs will win over the stragglers? I’m all in favor of trying sortocracy, but just to give people more candidates on the vote-with-your-feet ballot, not because it will work as a teaching tool.
Listening to Tom its funny just how semantic (in true libertarian fashion) this idea sounds. He even takes a couple of minutes to discuss what the appropriate name should be.
Anyway, the charter city, privatized city, whatever, idea is more or less the literal interpretation of the Steve Sailer/citizentist analogy, where citizens are shareholders and government officials are fiduciaries. Other than haggling over the distribution of rights/responsibilities, the moral structure is one to one. The government/company is responsible first and foremost to the citizens/shareholders over the non-citizens/non-shareholders. Really, no difference, and yet I dont suppose Bryan Caplan will be equating charter cities with apartheid and Jim Crow any time soon:)
Its almost like the real problem with government is that it is called government, and not a company. 🙂
BTW, I like the idea.