Reading this LRC article, this interesting remark caught my eye. Speaking of advices for a potentially independent Vermont, the author writes: “Unabashedly embrace the socio-economic, political model of Switzerland, the most sustainable nation-state of all time.”
So, what do you think, is indeed Switzerland the most sustainable state ever? Has decentralization worked well there? Would total decentralization (allowing any group of, say, 10’000 voters to for a canton and allowing individual cantons to opt out from any federal program) produce a stable State?
It has lasted the longest.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
I would say that Vatican City is the most sustainable, although it's relatively young.
Vermont's secession might work. Why would America as a whole care about one mountain country?
Mtn Dew: I would say that Vatican City is the most sustainable, although it's relatively young.
I’d agree with one important divergence: the Vatican is not a country, it’s a private firm. As such, it shall remain viable as long as the market for its (spiritual) services resist.
Why don't you consider it a country?
Mtn Dew: Why don't you consider it a country?
The Vatican would seem to me just a firm which imposes condition on people entering its property. No taxation, no NAP-violation whatsoever (although the ‘justness” of the origin of its property could easily be questioned). The same holds for the Order of the Knights of Malta. Such entities are just sovereign property-holders in a world of States, such as we all should be.
Merlin: “Unabashedly embrace the socio-economic, political model of Switzerland, the most sustainable nation-state of all time.”
“Unabashedly embrace the socio-economic, political model of Switzerland, the most sustainable nation-state of all time.”
Green totalitarianism?
Is taxation the definition of a state? I think the Vatican is indeed a state. In fact, I think it's the model every other state should follow.
Young? The Vatican City State is the rump state remnant of the Papal States, which dates to the 8th century AD.
But let's be honest here, Switzerland is really quite boring.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
My understanding is that, technically, Vatican City is a a new state separate from the Papal States of the middle ages. So 1929 would be the year it was created.
Boring? Man, the chick you meet at the bar probably shoots a 5.56 military-grade AR much better that we play CoD6. Not exactly my definition of boring
Try not stopping your engine at red light.
The Ice Cream is far too expensive in Switzerland, I would not want to live there. Maybe that's why it is so stable? Because people who make a fuss will not move there because the ice cream is too expensive? Yeah, probably it.
Mtn Dew: My understanding is that, technically, Vatican City is a a new state separate from the Papal States of the middle ages. So 1929 would be the year it was created.
In preparation for the treaty with the Kingdom of Italy, Pius XI renounced the old land claims from the Papal States. Aside from that, the governance is unchanged (with the exception of actual coded law dating from 1917 instead of organic law). The Pope is still an absolute monarch, as he was dating from the end of Frankish rule over the State. And it wasnt merely a long ago middle ages state; the Papal States were annexed by Italy in 1870, within living memory of Pius XI.