# Free Cities Foundation — full content > Free Cities are self-governing territories that uphold individual rights and freedoms. The Free Cities Foundation researches, documents and connects them. The complete plain text of the site in one file, ordered so the most definitional material comes first: the Foundation, the FAQ, the topic hubs, the project directory, then the whitepaper, books, the conference, organizations, articles, podcast episodes and people. A truncated read still gets the material that defines the subject. If this file is too large to fetch, the same corpus is split by section and capped at 200 kB per file under https://free-cities.org/llms/ — see https://free-cities.org/llms.txt. Index of every page: https://free-cities.org/llms.txt --- # THE FOUNDATION --- # About Free Cities Foundation URL: https://free-cities.org/organizations/free-cities-foundation Legal name: Free Cities Foundation Formerly: Free Private Cities Foundation (until 2022) Founded: 2020 Tax status: 501(c)(3) nonprofit, EIN 99-0806210, incorporated in Wyoming, USA Address: 30 North Gould Street, Suite R, Sheridan, WY 82801, USA Contact: info@free-cities.org Free Cities are self-governing territories that uphold individual rights and freedoms. The Free Cities Foundation researches, documents and connects them. A Free City is a self-governing territory with a special legal status within its host state, run to uphold the individual rights and freedoms of the people who live there. The Free Cities Foundation is a nonprofit that researches, documents and connects new models of governance: Free Private Cities, charter cities, special economic zones, network states, seasteads, micronations and intentional communities. It publishes news and essays, produces The Free Cities Podcast, maintains the Free Cities Directory of projects, publishes books including the Free Private Cities whitepaper, runs the annual Free Cities Conference, and supports a worldwide community of meetups and ambassadors. Key entry points: /faq answers the common questions; /learn is the knowledge base; /topics indexes the governance models and themes; /projects is the Free Cities Directory of real projects; /people profiles the network; /news and /podcast carry the ongoing coverage. --- # FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS --- # Frequently asked questions about Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/faq 25 questions and answers ## What is a Free City? A Free City is a self-governing territory with a special legal status within its host state, run to uphold the individual rights and freedoms of the people who live there. Unlike business-only zones such as Special Economic Zones, it serves a full residential community rather than just companies. Nine distinct models fall under the term, from Free Private Cities to seasteads. ## How is a Free City different from a Special Economic Zone? Special Economic Zones offer businesses lower taxes and lighter regulation, but rarely have genuine regulatory autonomy or a resident population. Free Cities go further: they govern themselves and are built around the freedom and quality of life of the people who live there. SEZs can be a stepping stone toward Free Cities, but are not Free Cities in themselves. ## Are Free Cities legal? How do they relate to their host country? Yes. A Free City is established through a legal agreement with its host country, which forms the basis of its special status, whether it operates as an autonomous zone inside the state or moves toward fuller independence. The host country retains sovereignty over matters like international relations and defence. ## Do Free Cities actually exist today? Projects at every stage exist around the world, from operational zones like Próspera and Ciudad Morazán in Honduras to communities in development and early planning. You can explore them on our interactive directory. ## What is a Free Private City? A Free Private City is run by a private company (a City Operator) that provides administration, security and the rule of law under a Citizen Contract, with disputes settled by independent arbitration. The Contract fixes the relationship between residents and the Operator, and limits the Operator’s power to what is written down. ## How does a Free Private City differ from existing city-states like Singapore, Monaco or Dubai? In those city-states there is a government or parliament that can change the prevailing rules at virtually any time without asking residents, even to their detriment, and contrary to the very reasons most people came there. Residents are not customers but subjects, and the number of rules, and so the restrictions on freedom, grows steadily. In a Free Private City you instead receive a contractual offer from the Operator, who is in effect a “state service provider.” The Citizen Contract spells out exactly which services it provides and what they cost you, the obligations you take on for the sake of peaceful coexistence, which legal system applies, and so on. The Operator cannot later change these terms or the amounts payable unilaterally. You have an enforceable legal claim to them, and disputes are heard before an independent arbitration court. The contract runs, possibly after a probationary period, for an indefinite term: like a long-running insurance policy you can terminate it at any time with proper notice, while the Operator can do so only in exceptional cases, such as a breach of your obligations. ## What is the main advantage of a contract system over a constitutional one? The decisive difference is that the Operator, or a body elected by the majority, cannot keep arrogating more powers to itself and interfering in residents’ lives. Constitutions can be changed against the will of those affected if the necessary majorities exist; a contract can be changed only if the other party agrees. That is why the individual contract, and the legal position it gives each resident, matter so much. The aim is the greatest possible self-determination, not the greatest possible co-determination: if everyone can freely decide how to live, there is little need for bodies like parliaments, which in any case always risk being captured by interest groups or the government. Finally, every contract citizen can sue the Operator, or withhold payment, if they believe the contract is not being honoured, whereas in a constitutional system the individual usually has no standing to sue when the state performs its tasks poorly, let alone any right to withhold taxes. ## Isn’t the City Operator a kind of dictator, leaving residents at its mercy? The Operator is bound by the Contract, which limits its powers to a few areas, and it has submitted itself to independent dispute resolution. By virtue of its territorial monopoly on force it could in theory behave as a dictator, but most residents would then leave, and the loss of reputation would make it impossible to found successful new cities elsewhere. In this it is no different from the captain of a cruise ship on the open sea or the manager of a remote holiday resort: both could in theory act as dictators, but refrain out of commercial self-interest. ## How can residents enforce judgments and arbitration awards made against the Operator? The situation is no different from international commercial law. Someone holding a judgment against a foreign state that refuses to pay has no higher executive authority to enforce it, but can try to seize that state’s assets in other countries, and much the same applies against the Operator. The Operator also has an incentive to respect such decisions and keep to the contract, because failing to do so would diminish its prospects of profit. ## Aren’t changes to the contract eventually unavoidable, and don’t they just lead back to conventional systems? Arbitration courts and courts should be able to decide even novel situations by drawing on legal principles that have applied for centuries and on a balanced, reasonable weighing of interests. This is how the common law works, and the guiding principles of today’s civil-law systems still correspond to those of Roman law from over two thousand years ago. In practice, workable arrangements will often emerge in new areas of life without any court ruling or contract change, as happened with the handling of fraud in the credit-card industry. There is also the option of offering new residents different contracts from existing ones, gradually creating a new order without depriving anyone of their rights. The problem of amending contracts is nonetheless one of the weightiest objections; it is treated in chapter 15 of the book Free Private Cities. ## How does the fee system differ from taxes in conventional systems? In conventional systems the citizen is obliged to pay taxes without a corresponding right to services. In a Free Private City, service and payment stand in a direct relationship: both parties have a right to performance of the contract. The Operator can demand the agreed fee but no additional amounts, while the citizen can sue the Operator to meet its obligations, for instance to guarantee security and a functioning legal system. Anyone who becomes the victim of a crime generally has a claim for damages against the Operator. ## Are Free Private Cities only for the rich? Not at all. The estimated cost of the mandatory basic package (security and the court system) is no more than about a thousand euros a year, or a few thousand if a minimum level of social protection is added; most people should be able to afford that. Because no taxes are levied, single people starting their careers, and middle-earners generally, should be substantially better off, with the money freed up available for their own health- and pension-savings, mutual-aid memberships, and their children’s education. Free Private Cities also give businesses strong incentives to settle, which creates jobs for low- and middle-earners; and given the low charges and other advantages, why would they not live in the city too? ## Without a welfare state and its protective rules, won’t the weak be exploited by the strong? When people come to a Free Private City voluntarily to take a job, knowing there is no welfare state and no minimum wage, the claim of “exploitation” only holds up if you deny them the right to decide for themselves. Many do argue that most people are incapable of looking after their own interests, implicitly claiming that they themselves are better able to, and so have the right to patronise others. That is presumptuous. There is no middle way: either adults have the right to decide for themselves, or they do not. Even so, the weak are not unprotected, because a body of civil law guards against, for example, surprising clauses in contracts. And the objection overlooks that protection of the weak, and help for the genuinely needy who cannot help themselves, can be provided without coercive state systems, and without their harmful side effects. In the end, Free Private Cities will be more social than so-called welfare states. Social security is dealt with in detail in chapter 21 of the book Free Private Cities. ## Can a community without ethnic, cultural or religious cohesion endure in the long run? In a Free Private City a culture of its own will most likely develop gradually out of the residents’ shared values, as happened in the United States. Alongside this, Free Private Cities are conceivable that are aimed at particular ethnic, cultural or religious groups. Beyond that the question must be regarded as open: Dubai and Singapore have so far managed without such means of cohesion. ## Won’t a host state simply reclaim a Free Private City at the first opportunity? Even a defensible one stands no chance against great powers. The host state has a contract with the Operator that is likely to include the usual investment-protection clauses, so occupying a Free Private City would risk substantial financial claims, potentially even the seizure of the state’s assets abroad. The city will nonetheless try to prevent matters reaching that point, through a combination of public-relations work, diplomatic ties to other states, and enough defensive capability to put a price on any takeover; it can also note in good time that its highly mobile residents would quickly leave, making it an unattractive target. Few states stand a chance against great powers, and genuine sovereignty exists only insofar as the great powers permit it. Even so, even powerful states cannot occupy other territories without justification: doing so draws in other powers and can become domestically dangerous for the rulers involved. Were it otherwise, no small states would exist today. ## Why would a state ever decide to give up control over part of its territory? States can only be won over to such a concept if they expect to benefit. Around city-states like Hong Kong, Singapore or Monaco, a belt of densely populated and comparatively prosperous areas has formed, whose inhabitants often work in the city-state but pay taxes to the home country. If such a development takes place in a previously structurally weak or unpopulated area, the host state can only gain. Ideally none of its laws would continue to apply; for practical and political reasons that will probably not be possible in pure form, and just how much internal autonomy a particular Free Private City has is ultimately a matter of negotiation. ## Can I live in a Free City today? Yes, in a handful of places at different stages of development. Próspera on Roatán, Honduras, accepts residents and e-residents from anywhere in the world. Ciudad Morazán in Choloma, Honduras, rents homes to working families. Sark in the Channel Islands takes new residents under the rules of the Bailiwick of Guernsey and levies no income tax. Montelibero in Montenegro and Liberstad in Norway are communities you join by agreement, and Veritas Villages in Central America and Citadel.Garden in Croatia and Madeira are family networks whose first residents have moved in. Every project page says who the place is built for. ## How do I move to a Free City? Through the project itself. Each project page links to the official website, and the operator or community runs its own residency, application or membership process. The Foundation does not place residents, takes no fee and has no say in who is accepted; it documents the projects so you can compare them before you get in touch. ## Do I need a visa or a second passport? Usually a visa or residence permit for the host country, not a second passport. A Free City sits inside a host state and issues no passport of its own; the project adds its own residency or membership status on top of the host country’s rules. Documents issued by micronations such as Liberland are not recognised for travel. Entry and residence rules change often, so check the host country’s current requirements before planning a move. ## What does it cost to live in a Free City? It depends on the place. For the Free Private City concept, the estimated cost of the mandatory basic package, security and the court system, is no more than about a thousand euros a year. In the projects that exist today you pay rent or a land price plus the project’s own fee: Próspera charges an annual residency fee, Ciudad Morazán rents homes at prices set for local workers, Sark has island property prices and no income tax, and the village networks sell or lease lots. Each project page links to the current figures. ## How can I get involved with the Free Cities movement? There are many ways in: join the community, attend a local meetup, come to the Free Cities Conference, or follow the podcast and newsletter. See the Get Involved page for the current options. ## Is there a local meetup near me? The Foundation supports a growing network of city meetups. Check the Meetups page to find a group near you, or get in touch about starting one. ## How can I support the Foundation? You can support the work financially, spread the ideas, or contribute your time and skills. The Get Involved page lists the ways to help. ## What does the Free Cities Foundation do? The Foundation aims to inspire, inform and connect people to create a global market of living together. It publishes news and essays, produces The Free Cities Podcast, maintains the Free Cities Directory of projects, publishes books including the Free Private Cities whitepaper, runs the annual Free Cities Conference, and supports a worldwide community of meetups and ambassadors. ## Does the Foundation build or run cities itself? No. The Foundation is not a developer or operator. It is a connective hub for the movement, surfacing projects, ideas and people, and helping the ecosystem around Free Cities grow. --- # TOPICS: GOVERNANCE MODELS AND THEMES --- # Free Private Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities Kind: governance-model Also covers: FPC, Free Private City, Private City, Private Cities, Citizen Contract, City Operator, Freie Privatstadt, Freie Privatstädte, Privatstädte Cities whose administration, security and rule of law are run by a private company (the City Operator) under a Citizen Contract, with disputes settled by independent arbitration. Free Private Cities are characterized by a distinctive system of governance. In these cities, a private company (a City Operator) is responsible for the city’s administration and the provision of security and the rule of law. All other services are provided by private third parties and/or residents themselves. A central feature of this system is the Citizen Contract, in which the rights and obligations of both the resident and the City Operator are explicitly laid out. Besides the rules of living together specified in the Contract, the Operator has no right to further intervene in any areas of the resident’s life without their consent. Disputes over the contents of the Contract or the conduct of one of the parties are adjudicated by a third-party arbitration court that is fully independent from the Operator. Free Private Cities can be established either as autonomous zones within Host Countries or as fully independent entities. Whatever the setting, it always involves a legal agreement with the Host Country that forms the legal underpinning of the city’s status. The Free Private City is one of the modern Free City models that exemplify the creative renaissance of Free Cities in today’s age. ## What Would Life Be Like in a Free Private City? Innovative service providers such as Uber or Airbnb would be welcomed to a Free Private City. Private entrepreneurs would provide everything demanded by citizens: from hospitals, schools and kindergartens to waste collection and transport. If desired, residents would take out private insurance or set up self-help groups to protect themselves against illness, death, need of care or accidents. Anyone would be free to offer new products and services without authorization or license, and get paid in any currency they desire, including bitcoin. Lack of labor market restrictions such as minimum wage laws would mean that lower skilled workers would easily find jobs, rather than being excluded from the labor market. New drugs and treatment methods would be available to any adult wanting to test them with knowledge of the potential risks. Environmental thresholds would apply only to products and processes deemed truly dangerous by serious scientific research. Crime and vandalism would hardly exist. Citizens would be able to let their children out on the streets at night without having to worry. In Free Private Cities, people would not be stirred up against each other by politics. In a contract-based society with no parliament or central bank, political activism would no longer play a significant role in people’s lives. Without the fetters of top-down regulation, residents would be able to produce innovations that improve productivity. Free Trade would prevail, and everyone would be able to import everything duty-free. No taxes would be payable apart from the annual contribution to the operator specified in the Citizen Contract. Through this system, even low-income earners would be able to achieve a high standard of living. Because neither currency nor interest rates would be manipulated by governments and central banks, the purchasing power of the residents of Free Private Cities would constantly increase. Pension schemes would be private and allow for retirement whenever the person concerned considers their funds to be sufficient. Political activism, missionary zeal, distributional struggles and the stirring-up of social groups against one another would practically disappear in Free Private Cities. Residents would know that they cannot interfere with the contracts of fellow citizens and would respect each other’s different views and assessments. People would once again be responsible for taking care of themselves. This would make them more self-confident, stable and realistic in their assessments. After a couple of generations, Free Private Cities would be wealthier, freer and more peaceful than any place we have known so far. Once the first Free Private Cities have been successfully established, a completely new, highly lucrative asset class will emerge. This is because both the “software” (the legal and contractual framework), and the “hardware” (the master plan and infrastructure), can be reused as often as required and adapted for different purposes. --- # Special Economic Zones URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/special-economic-zones Kind: governance-model Also covers: SEZ, Special Economic Zone, Free Trade Zone, Free Zone, Export Processing Zone Business zones with lower taxes and lighter regulation but no real autonomy: a precursor to, but not themselves, Free Cities. Special Economic Zones (SEZs) are areas within nation-states where different rules and regulations apply in some areas. These zones are usually tailored toward business, manufacturing, or enabling easy imports and exports. Since the mid-20th century, they have become a popular choice for governments to boost regional economic growth without the need for country-wide changes or controversial reforms. While SEZs usually feature lower business taxes, exemptions from tariffs and other fees, and a simplified pro-business regulatory environment, they typically do not have regulatory autonomy. This means that while they are free to manage their own internal affairs to some extent, they cannot choose the regulations that will apply within them and are governed by pre-set legislation established by the national government. There are now perhaps over six thousand SEZs worldwide, depending on the exact definition. Though they are self-governing to some extent and are in some respects freer than the rest of their nation-state, they either have little to no population, or the concessions within them are limited to businesses. While SEZs are in one way a precursor to some modern-day Free Cities, they cannot really be described as Free Cities themselves. --- # Charter Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/charter-cities Kind: governance-model Also covers: Charter City, Startup City, Startup Cities, Paul Romer Zones granted their own legislative powers through a charter. Popularised by Paul Romer, they are Free Cities when that charter is freedom-oriented. A Charter City is a special zone within a country that is granted separate legislative powers via a charter that establishes the city and its status. This allows the city to become a partially autonomous territory that is able to set its own targeted policies on a local level, which is often not feasible to do in a nationwide setting. Charter Cities are commonplace in some developed countries, such as the United States. They usually do not feature far-reaching innovation in governance and are often governed by a traditional municipal government, sometimes with a handful of special characteristics and more flexible policies. The Charter Cities movement was revived by Paul Romer in the 2000s, who advocated for establishing cities with local autonomy across the world. The movement has seen great successes since, with Charter Cities now being negotiated and established across the world. Charter Cities can be Free Cities if the content of their Charter is oriented toward expanding and protecting the freedoms of its citizens. This might not always be the case, as there are places and situations where freedom is not always priority number one and other values take precedence. --- # Network States URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/network-states Kind: governance-model Also covers: Network State, Cloud Country, Digital Nation, Startup Society, Network Union, Network Archipelago, Parallel Society Online-first communities, defined by Balaji Srinivasan in 2022, that crowdfund territory around the world and seek recognition as self-governing states. A Network State is an online community that sets out to become a country. It begins on the internet, built around an idea that sets it apart from the world around it, and it develops a culture, an internal economy and a way of making decisions together. Once it has the members and the money, it starts buying property: apartments, houses and whole streets, in several countries at once, connected over the internet instead of by a shared border. The final step is diplomatic recognition from at least one existing government. Balaji Srinivasan defined the term in his 2022 book The Network State: How to Start a New Country. He argues that the usual ways of founding a country are no longer open. Elections are crowded, revolutions and wars are violent, micronations are ignored, and seasteads and Mars colonies depend on technology nobody has finished building. What is possible today, he says, is to build a large online community first, give it a physical presence later in as many places as it can afford, and negotiate for recognition once the numbers are big enough to take seriously. Network States sit at the digital end of the Free Cities spectrum. A community that ends up governing its own territory and protecting the rights and freedoms of the people living there is a Free City, whichever route it took to get there. But the model is a method, and it says nothing about what a community stands for. Many startup societies are organised around a diet, a technology or a religion. ## The book that named it The book is The Network State: How to Start a New Country, published in 2022 by [Balaji Srinivasan](/people/balaji-srinivasan), an investor and entrepreneur who was chief technology officer of Coinbase and a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz. The full text is free to read and download at [thenetworkstate.com](https://thenetworkstate.com), where every section also has a web address of its own. ## How one is built Srinivasan is firm that nobody founds a Network State, in the same way that nobody founds a public company. You found a startup society: an online community with ambitions beyond conversation. Its founder has authority for as long as people choose to follow. What comes after that happens in stages. The first stage is the network union. The community organises itself to act collectively, with a purpose and a regular call to action. It is not a union set up against an employer. It is a group that can bargain, buy in bulk, place its members in work and fund things together, and that learns to act as one while it still has nothing to lose. The second stage is the network archipelago. The union starts buying property: an apartment, a few houses, a street, in whichever cities its members already live, connected over the internet. Access is granted by a cryptographic credential instead of a passport stamp. At the same time the community publishes a census that anyone can check, covering how many members it has, what they earn and how much land they own. Srinivasan’s reasoning is that nobody will believe an unverifiable claim about size. The third stage is recognition. The first government to grant it does not have to be a large one, and Srinivasan calls it the bootstrap recognizer. A city or a province would count. His analogy is [bitcoin](/topics/bitcoin-and-free-cities), which El Salvador made legal tender in 2021, years before larger states stopped dismissing it. He also treats the earlier stages as reasonable places to stop. A network union that never buys a square metre is still a functioning organisation. ## Where it stands today Several experiments have run. [Zuzalu](/zuzalu-a-pop-up-city-on-the-mediterranean) was a two-month gathering that Vitalik Buterin convened on the Montenegrin coast in 2023, to test whether a community assembled online would hold together in person, and the pop-up villages that followed have repeated it on other continents. Praxis and Afropolitan have both raised money to build somewhere for a community gathered online first. Cabin runs a network of rural properties for remote workers, which is close to the archipelago idea. The [Network State Conference](/decentralization-through-voluntary-commitment-the-network-state-conference) has met every year since Amsterdam in 2023. Srinivasan has also tried the model himself. The [Network School](https://ns.com) is a residential programme in Astana, Kazakhstan, on the fifth floor of the Astana Hub technology park, for people who want to learn technology, work remotely and get fit in the company of others doing the same. Its own summary of that is Learn, Burn, and Earn. Membership is sold as Society-as-a-Service: an apartment, three meals a day, a gym with classes and trainers, coworking around the clock, wifi and a content studio, alongside a programme of guest talks, tutorials and workshops. Cohorts start on the first of each month and members stay from a month upwards. Applications are reviewed as they arrive. The school ran in Forest City in Johor, Malaysia before it moved to Astana in 2026. It is one place with a membership, not a state. It is also the closest thing yet to the kind of node the book describes, run by the person who wrote it. ## How it differs from the other models Most of the models covered here start with land and work back to the people. A [Special Economic Zone](/topics/special-economic-zones) is created by a government that keeps the power to change the terms. A [Charter City](/topics/charter-cities) is granted its own legislation by charter. A [Free Private City](/free-private-cities) is negotiated with a host country and then run by an operator under a contract with each resident. A Network State does it the other way round, and two of its features follow from that. It is spread out because a single site can be surrounded, which is why Srinivasan rules out the [city-state](/topics/city-states-today) as a model. And recognition comes at the end: a Free Private City needs its agreement with a host country before it can start. It is not a [micronation](/topics/micronations) either, though the two are often discussed together. A micronation declares sovereignty first and then looks for a population and for recognition. All these models rest on the same claim: that people should be able to choose the rules they live under by joining, not by winning an election. Whether a particular Network State would count as a Free City depends on what it does with that choice, and [Are Network States Free Cities?](/are-network-states-free-cities) works through it. --- # Seasteading URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/seasteading Kind: governance-model Also covers: Seastead, Seasteads, Sea Steading, Floating City, Ocean Living Permanent settlements on the high seas, beyond existing states: a new frontier for voluntary models of governance. Seasteading is the concept of building settlements on the sea, outside of the jurisdictions of existing nation-states. Since all the land on Earth has been parceled out, the high seas are a new frontier where true independence could be attained and new, more voluntary models of governance could be tried. Usually, the idea of seasteading involves individual modules that could be connected to form floating, city-sized platforms, but from which citizens could detach and join a different one if they were not happy with the governance of one particular seastead. This would allow one to move with one’s property and even real estate, something impossible in land-based settlements. Seasteads are well aligned with Free Cities. Their goal is to uphold and maximize individual rights and freedoms by providing a freer alternative to existing states. By the virtue of being located in government-unowned international waters, they will also become self-governing territories. --- # Micronations URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/micronations Kind: governance-model Also covers: Micronation, Self-proclaimed State, Terra Nullius, New Country Self-proclaimed states that claim their own territory and full sovereignty without international recognition, from Sealand’s sea fort to Liberland on the Danube. Micronations are entities that declare themselves independent states. They claim a defined territory, adopt the institutions and symbols of statehood (constitutions, flags, passports, stamps and currencies) and conduct themselves as sovereign countries. What separates them from recognised states is that established governments and international bodies do not acknowledge their claims. What separates the serious ones from mere fantasy is that they back their claims with legal argument, physical presence and a real community of citizens. Micronations sit at the radical end of the Free Cities spectrum. Rather than negotiating autonomy within a host state, they assert full sovereignty from the outset and then work toward recognition, population and a functioning economy. Those that aim to build self-governing communities upholding individual rights and freedoms are natural allies of the Free Cities movement, and the questions they raise about sovereignty, recognition and the right to start a new country run through the entire field. The best-known micronations arise from gaps in the international order. The Principality of Sealand was proclaimed in 1967 on a wartime naval platform that stood beyond Britain’s territorial waters at the time. Liberland was proclaimed in 2015 on a pocket of land along the Danube that neither Croatia nor Serbia formally claims, treated by its founders as terra nullius, land belonging to no state. In both cases the founders identified a space no existing state had filled and moved to fill it with a new jurisdiction. Micronations should not be confused with microstates such as Monaco, Liechtenstein or San Marino, which are small but fully recognised sovereign countries. Nor is every micronation a Free City in the making. Many are artistic statements, protests or hobbies, with no ambition to host a real community, and these fall outside the Free Cities banner. The micronations that matter to this movement are the ones that treat statehood as a serious project: places whose founders want a permanent population living under institutions explicitly built to protect individual rights and freedoms. For them, a micronation is the most direct route to a Free City that exists, skipping the host state entirely. The price of that directness is the hardest problem in the field, gaining acceptance from a world of existing states. Whether through endurance, diplomacy or the slow accumulation of facts on the ground, every micronation is running the same experiment: how much statehood can you build before the world agrees that you have built a state? --- # Intentional Communities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/intentional-communities Kind: governance-model Also covers: Intentional Community, Communal Living, Ecovillage, Co-living, Commune Groups living together around shared values: grassroots self-determination within existing states. An intentional community is a group of people who choose to live together with a common purpose and shared core values, which may be social, political, religious, or spiritual. While these communities exist within nation-states and lack formal legal autonomy, they often represent grassroots attempts at self-determination. These communities often form around environmental, communal living, religious, or self-sufficiency principles. While they typically don’t challenge state sovereignty, they create their own internal rules enforced through social consensus rather than force. This makes them attractive to those seeking alternatives to mainstream society. There are thousands of intentional communities worldwide. Many have demonstrated that alternative social arrangements can work well among voluntary participants who share common goals and values. These communities serve as practical examples of grassroots self-governance and the potential for creating successful alternative living arrangements. --- # Honduran ZEDEs URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/honduran-zedes Kind: governance-model Also covers: ZEDE, ZEDEs, Zona de Empleo y Desarrollo Económico, Zones for Employment and Economic Development, Honduras, Roatán Honduras’s Zones for Employment and Economic Development: a far-reaching autonomy framework, and home to Próspera and Ciudad Morazán. ZEDEs, or Zonas de Empleo y Desarrollo Económico (Zones for Employment and Economic Development), are a Honduran legal framework that grants designated zones far-reaching autonomy over their own administration, courts, taxation and regulation. Created through constitutional reform in 2013, they are among the most ambitious special-jurisdiction frameworks anywhere: a ZEDE can run its own civil and administrative law, set its own fiscal rules, and resolve disputes through its own courts and arbitration, while Honduras retains sovereignty over criminal law, defence and foreign affairs. Because a ZEDE is administered by a private promoter under agreements with its residents and the host state, the best-known ZEDEs sit much closer to the Free Private City model than to an ordinary Special Economic Zone. Próspera, on the island of Roatán, is aimed at international entrepreneurs, innovation and longevity research; Ciudad Morazán, near Choloma, is built around safe, affordable living for blue-collar Hondurans. Together they are the clearest real-world test yet of whether a privately governed Free City can deliver a better life inside an existing nation-state. The framework’s future is contested. In 2022 the Honduran Congress voted to repeal the constitutional provisions underpinning the ZEDEs, and the zones’ legal status has been disputed ever since, including international arbitration brought by their operators. What happens next matters far beyond Honduras: the ZEDEs are widely watched as a bellwether for the whole Free Cities movement. --- # Modern City-States and Small Sovereign Territories URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/city-states-today Kind: governance-model Also covers: City-State, City States, Microstate, Small States, Monaco, Singapore, Liechtenstein, Principality, Hong Kong, Macau, SAR, Special Administrative Region, One Country Two Systems The places already governing themselves at city scale, from a principality owned by one family to a Special Administrative Region of 7 million people. A city-state is a sovereign or largely self-governing state the size of a city and the land around it. Monaco, Liechtenstein, Singapore, Hong Kong and the Channel Island of Sark govern themselves at a scale most countries would call a suburb, and each arrived there by a different route: inheritance, treaty, empire, secession or accident. Long before anyone proposed building a Free City, these already existed. They are not models anyone designed, which is exactly what makes them useful. Every argument about whether a city-sized jurisdiction can raise revenue, defend itself, hold a legal system together or survive a change of ruler has already been tested in at least one of these places, in public, over decades. This hub gathers what those cases show: how Monaco funds itself without income tax, why Hong Kong’s autonomy proved reversible, what happened when Sark ended feudal rule in 2008, and how Dubai turned a set of free zones into a magnet for people who could live anywhere. Their histories are covered under History of Free Cities; here the question is how they work today. --- # Private Governance URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/private-governance Kind: theme Also covers: Governance, Rule of Law, Private Law, Arbitration, Dispute Resolution, Property Rights, Constitution How Free Cities organise authority, protect property and resolve disputes, from citizen contracts to independent arbitration. What sets a Free City apart is rarely its skyline. It is how decisions get made and how rules are enforced. Across the movement the recurring questions are the same: who holds authority, how is it constrained, and what stops it from being abused? Private governance is the attempt to answer those questions with agreements rather than elections. In the Free Private City model the terms sit in a Citizen Contract that the operator cannot change on its own, and any falling-out between resident and operator goes to an arbitration tribunal neither side controls. The pattern is older than the movement: merchants, exchanges and trade fairs built working legal orders long before the modern state offered them one. This topic gathers the conversations on constitutional design, the rule of law, property rights, dispute resolution and independent arbitration that run through the Foundation’s articles, podcasts and projects, together with the objections they attract. ## Rules by agreement rather than by vote Private governance describes any arrangement in which the rules people live by, and the body that enforces them, draw their authority from agreement rather than from sovereignty. The clearest version in this movement is the Citizen Contract set out in Titus Gebel’s Free Private Cities model. A resident and an operator sign a document fixing what the resident pays and what the operator owes in return: security, a legal and regulatory framework, and a way to settle disputes. The operator cannot rewrite it unilaterally, and if the two fall out, the case is heard by an arbitration tribunal that neither of them controls. That inverts the familiar relationship. A constitution can be amended by the same body it is meant to restrain, and a social contract nobody signed can be reinterpreted by one party alone. A contract cannot. The trade is deliberate: residents give up a vote on the rules and gain the ability to enforce them, and to leave without forfeiting what they were promised. ## Where private order already works None of this is hypothetical. International commerce has run on private adjudication for generations. Arbitral awards are recognised across more than 170 countries under the New York Convention of 1958, which often makes a ruling from a private tribunal easier to enforce abroad than a judgment from a national court. Lisa Bernstein found New York’s diamond dealers settling high-value disputes through their own trade club rather than the courts. Robert Ellickson found Californian ranchers resolving cattle-trespass claims by neighbourhood norms while remaining largely ignorant of the law that supposedly governed them. Elinor Ostrom won a Nobel Prize for documenting communities that manage shared resources under rules of their own making. Whole legal systems have been imported, too. The Dubai International Financial Centre and Abu Dhabi Global Market run English common law inside a civil-law state, with their own courts and judges. Próspera writes its arbitration centre into every resident agreement, and its awards travel abroad under the same conventions that carry ordinary commercial ones. In the United States, tens of millions of people already live under private rulebooks written by homeowner associations. ## Keeping the operator honest The design question every Free City has to answer is what holds the operator to its word once residents have arrived. The model’s answer is four constraints that work together. The contract fixes the price and the obligations, so the operator cannot raise the fee or add duties later. Disputes go to a tribunal outside its control, and because those awards are recognised abroad, a resident is not dependent on the operator’s goodwill to collect. Residents can leave, and a jurisdiction that loses residents loses its revenue. An operator that owns the land also carries the consequences directly, since bad governance shows up in what the land is worth long before it shows up anywhere else. Constitutional economists describe this as the difference between rules chosen in advance and rules made along the way. James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock argued that the legitimate moment to agree terms is before anyone knows how they will be affected by them, which is precisely the moment at which a resident signs a citizen contract. It is among the oldest ideas in the field, and the reason the movement keeps returning to the contract as its central instrument. --- # Taxation and Economic Development in Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/taxation-and-economics Kind: theme Also covers: Taxation, Tax, Flat Tax, Tax Residency, Economics, Free Markets, Trade, Business, Currency Taxes, business environments, sound money and the economic case for jurisdictions that compete for residents. Free Cities compete for residents and capital the way companies compete for customers. That makes their tax regimes, regulatory burden and monetary choices central to whether they succeed. The revenue side looks less like national taxation than like a bill. Where a state taxes what it can reach, an operator charges for what it delivers, and the people paying are free to leave. That changes the design problem: rates get capped in writing, land rent does work that income tax does elsewhere, and the figure that matters is what the place costs to run rather than how much can be extracted from it. Here you will find the economic thinking behind low-tax jurisdictions, special economic zones, sound-money experiments and the broader argument that governance improves when jurisdictions compete. ## How a Free City pays for itself Nation-states tax income, consumption and capital because those are the flows a sovereign can reach. A city that has to attract its residents starts from the other end: what does this place cost to run, and who will pay that willingly? Three answers recur across the movement. The first is the flat rate with a ceiling. Próspera’s charter sets an effective income tax of around five per cent on individuals and roughly one per cent on companies, puts the maximum rates in the founding document rather than in an annual budget, and commits to capping total public revenue at 7.5 per cent of the zone’s economy. The second is land. Henry George’s argument that land rent is the one thing worth taxing resurfaces in Próspera’s land value tax and in Estonia’s property tax, which falls on the land and not on the buildings placed upon it. Hong Kong runs the largest version of all: nearly every plot is leased from the government, and selling those leases has helped fund an unusually light tax system since the colony’s founding. The third is the plain fee. The Cayman Islands operate a functioning government with no direct taxation whatsoever, financed by registry, licence and work-permit charges alongside import duties. Ciudad Morazán does the same thing on a single site, where nothing is sold and everything is leased, so the rent simply is the revenue. ## Competition as the mechanism Why any of this should produce better government was set out by Charles Tiebout in 1956. Where many small jurisdictions offer different bundles of services and taxes, and people can move between them, residents reveal what they actually want by choosing, and a government that misprices loses its base. Spencer Heath and Fred Foldvary pushed the argument further with the proprietary community: an owner who supplies the streets, the security and the courts and recovers the cost through ground rent has a direct financial stake in governing well, because bad governance shows up straight away in the value of the land. Special economic zones are the nearest thing to a natural experiment. UNCTAD counted roughly 5,400 of them across 147 economies in 2019, and the best of them have transformed regions: Shenzhen went from a modest border county in 1980 to one of the largest urban economies in China. ## Where the competition happens now Tax competition is no longer mainly a contest of headline rates. The OECD’s global minimum tax tops large multinationals up to fifteen per cent wherever they book their profits, and automatic exchange of account information has made cross-border financial privacy a thing of the past. What remains is competition on everything else: how quickly a company can be registered, how long a building permit takes, whether the courts work, and whether the rules will still be the same in ten years. That plays to the Free Cities argument rather than against it. A jurisdiction whose only offer was a lower rate has lost its product. The ones with a future can run a city for less and show residents what the money buys. The Foundation has used Carmel, Indiana as a benchmark for what that might look like in practice, at roughly $1,370 per resident per year, around half what comparable American cities spend, achieved through design and coherence rather than through any special legal status. --- # Bitcoin and Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/bitcoin-and-free-cities Kind: theme Also covers: Bitcoin, Crypto, Cryptocurrency, Bitcoin City, Crypto City, Sound Money, Stablecoin, Satoshi Sound money in practice: the bitcoin economies, payment rails and monetary experiments emerging inside Free Cities and special jurisdictions. Free Cities and bitcoin share a premise: that the rules governing money and the rules governing a place should be chosen rather than imposed. Several projects have taken that literally, adopting bitcoin as legal tender, denominating fees in it, or building an economy around it. The link is structural rather than decorative. A currency monopoly is how a state funds itself without having to ask, so a jurisdiction that cannot inflate has tied its own hands in much the same way a fixed fee schedule binds a city operator. That is the attraction, and it is the source of most of the difficulties, because a money nobody controls is also a money nobody can steady. This topic gathers the coverage of those experiments, what has worked, what has not, and what a jurisdiction actually has to change to make sound money more than a slogan. ## One argument applied to two goods Hayek made the case for monetary competition in 1976, arguing in The Denationalisation of Money that the state monopoly on issue should be broken and rival currencies left to discipline one another. Free Cities make the same argument about governance. The two fit together: an operator that denominates its citizen fee in a money it cannot print gives up seigniorage and buys credibility in return, because it can no longer quietly reduce what it owes residents. States resist for the mirror reason. A currency monopoly funds deficits through inflation, underwrites capital controls and makes financial sanctions possible. ## What has actually been tried El Salvador went first, making bitcoin legal tender in September 2021 and announcing Bitcoin City at the foot of the Conchagua volcano, to be powered by geothermal mining; the law was amended in January 2025 to make private acceptance voluntary. Próspera adopted bitcoin as legal tender in 2022 and then went further in a quieter way. In January 2024 it became the first jurisdiction anywhere to recognise bitcoin as a unit of account, so that a business can compute its tax liability in bitcoin rather than merely settle in it. That is the deeper change, because becoming a unit of account is what separates a currency from a payment rail. At city scale, Lugano accepts bitcoin and a dollar stablecoin for every municipal invoice, from taxes to parking fines, and the Swiss canton of Zug has taken tax payments in bitcoin since 2021. Below that sit the circular economies, where the aim is a working local market rather than a legal status: El Zonte in El Salvador, where the experiment began in 2019, then Berlín in the same country, Bitcoin Jungle in Costa Rica, Bitcoin Ekasi in South Africa and Bitcoin Lake in Guatemala. These are villages and small towns with merchant networks in the low hundreds, built from the ground up rather than legislated into being. ## What a jurisdiction actually has to change Accepting bitcoin for payments is the easy part and the least consequential. Zug takes tax payments in bitcoin but converts them to francs the same day, so nothing about the canton’s finances changes. Lugano goes further by accepting it for every bill it issues. Próspera goes furthest by letting a business keep its accounts in bitcoin, which is the change that matters, because a money only becomes a currency once people reckon in it. A jurisdiction that wants to go beyond gestures has three decisions to make. The first is what it accepts in payment, which is the easiest. The second is what it denominates: fees, contracts and taxes. That one is hard, because it decides what people reckon in. The third is what it holds in the treasury, and it carries real risk, since an asset that can halve within a year behaves very differently on a city’s balance sheet than in a personal portfolio. The most durable version of the idea is also the cheapest. A jurisdiction can simply permit people to keep their accounts, price their contracts and settle their obligations in a money of their own choosing, which is close to what Hayek asked for in 1976. That is a change in the law rather than a bet on a price, it costs the treasury nothing, and it obliges nobody to hold anything. --- # Technology in New Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/technology-in-new-cities Kind: theme Also covers: Technology, Innovation, Digital Governance, E-Governance, Digital Identity, AI, Infrastructure, Energy Smart infrastructure, digital governance and the technologies reshaping how cities are built and run. New cities are a chance to build on a blank slate, and technology is often what makes the blank slate attractive. From digital identity and e-governance to energy, construction and payments, tooling shapes what a city can be. Two questions run through everything gathered here. The first is what technology makes possible: a jurisdiction founded by a few hundred people can only work if its administration runs on software rather than on ministries. The second is who ends up holding the controls, because the same registry, identity system and sensor network can serve residents or be turned on them. This topic collects coverage of the technologies and digital infrastructure that recur across Free City projects, for better and sometimes for worse. ## The administration is the product A new jurisdiction cannot afford a civil service, so it buys software instead. Estonia is the working proof: its X-Road data exchange lets agencies query one another instead of making citizens carry paper between them, and the once-only principle means a fact is given to the state a single time. Companies are founded online in minutes, and the e-Residency programme has issued digital identities to well over a hundred thousand people who have never lived there, tens of thousands of whom went on to register businesses. Próspera has built a smaller version of the same idea: online incorporation, an e-residency open from anywhere, and a rule that lets a business adopt the regulatory code of an approved foreign country rather than wait for a local one to be written. Land registry is the quieter half of it. Hernando de Soto’s argument that insecure title locks up capital drove Georgia’s experiment in anchoring digital land records to a public blockchain. Honduras announced a comparable project in 2015 and nothing came of it, because the registry software was never the part that was missing. ## Building on a blank slate The physical side has moved further than the debate suggests. Modular and volumetric construction cuts build times sharply against conventional methods, and the first hundred-home neighbourhood of 3D-printed houses has been completed in Texas. Reverse-osmosis desalination now delivers drinking water for a few kilowatt hours per cubic metre. Battery costs have fallen far enough that a solar microgrid is a serious alternative to a grid connection that does not exist, and satellite internet has removed the last practical reason a remote coastline had to sit near a telecoms network. Together these lower the cost of starting a settlement somewhere an incumbent state never bothered to build. Not everything on the wishlist has arrived. Small modular reactors are routinely promised as the answer to a new city’s power and are not yet a product anyone can buy: the flagship American project was cancelled in 2023 after its projected costs nearly doubled. ## Who holds the controls The same stack that makes a small jurisdiction administratively cheap also decides who holds power inside it. One identity, one register, one interface is convenient for a resident and equally convenient for whoever runs the system. The design question is therefore not how much data a city gathers but who may query it, and whether the subject can see the query. Estonia’s answer is architectural rather than promissory. There is no central pool of records: every agency keeps its own, access is granted case by case, each exchange is signed and logged, and any citizen can open the log and see who has looked at their file. The country also keeps a backup of its core registers on Luxembourg soil under Estonian jurisdiction, so the state survives the loss of its own servers. For a Free City the equivalent commitments are portability and legibility. A resident should be able to leave with their title, their records and their money, and should be able to see what the operator knows about them. Both are choices made when the system is built, and both are very hard to retrofit afterwards. --- # Medical Regulation in Special Jurisdictions URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/medical-regulation Kind: theme Also covers: Medical Freedom, Health Freedom, Right to Try, Biotech, Longevity, Medical Tourism, FDA Medical freedom, biotech and the longevity research that special jurisdictions like Próspera have made possible. Some of the most striking experiments in Free Cities are medical: jurisdictions that let patients and doctors try treatments national regulators will not yet approve. Próspera’s medical regime and “right to try” laws are recurring themes. The question underneath is not whether medicine should be regulated but who does it, and at what point. Every approval regime trades two kinds of error against one another: letting a harmful treatment through, and delaying a useful one. Special jurisdictions are attempts to strike that balance differently, usually by shifting the check from prior approval towards liability, insurance and disclosure. This topic gathers the discussions on medical freedom, biotech, longevity research and the regulatory innovation that makes them possible. ## The trade-off inside every approval regime Modern drug regulation dates from a specific disaster. Thalidomide caused severe birth defects in thousands of children, and the American response, the Kefauver-Harris Amendment of 1962, added proof of effectiveness to the existing requirement of proof of safety. Nearly every argument in this field is an argument about that amendment. The case for it was earned in the worst possible way. The case against it is that regulators face an asymmetry: the harm from approving a bad drug is visible and attributable, while the harm from delaying a good one falls on people nobody can name. Daniel Klein and Alex Tabarrok’s survey of that literature is the standard reference. The accounting is genuinely difficult. Roughly eight per cent of drugs that enter human trials are eventually approved, and estimates of what it costs to bring one to market range from a few hundred million dollars to well over two billion, depending on whether the cost of capital and the failures are counted. ## What a special jurisdiction actually changes Próspera in Honduras is the most developed example. Its framework does not abolish regulation, it makes it selectable. A medical business there can operate under Honduran rules, adopt the regime of a recognised regulator such as the FDA, the EMA, Japan’s PMDA or Health Canada, propose a bespoke framework for approval, or fall back on common-law liability with enhanced damages. The distinctive part is who checks compliance: providers must carry regulatory insurance, and the insurer inspects, because the insurer pays when something goes wrong. Niklas Anzinger, who works on this inside Próspera, describes it as an opt-in parallel lane rather than a replacement for the FDA. The same logic turns up without leaving the developed world. Dubai Healthcare City has run its own health regulator since 2002. Montana began licensing experimental treatment centres in 2025, allowing supply of therapies that have completed only early-phase trials, under written informed consent. Japan created a conditional approval route for regenerative products in 2014, and the European Union has granted conditional marketing authorisations for close to two decades. ## Approval, liability and the space between Prior approval is not the only way to hold a treatment to account, and the alternatives special jurisdictions reach for fall into three families. The first is liability: a provider may act freely but answers fully for the harm it causes, with damages heavy enough to concentrate the mind. The second is insurance, which is Próspera’s distinctive move, since an insurer who has to pay out has a direct financial reason to inspect a protocol before it is used and none at all to wave a bad one through. The third is disclosure, where the authority certifies rather than prohibits, publishes what is known, and leaves the decision with the patient and the doctor. Jessica Flanigan has made the fullest philosophical case for that last approach. Each of them needs something in place to work. Liability needs courts that can enforce a judgment. Insurance needs insurers who are independent of the people they inspect. Certification needs someone credible doing the testing. That is why the subject belongs under governance rather than under medicine: what a jurisdiction is really choosing is which institution it trusts to do the checking, and whether that institution has any reason to be careful. It is also why the interesting cases are not all offshore. Montana began licensing experimental treatment centres in 2025 inside the ordinary American federal system. And the reform most often proposed is not the abolition of approval but its mutual recognition, so that a medicine cleared by one competent regulator need not be cleared again from scratch by the next. --- # Residency and Citizenship in Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/residency-and-citizenship Kind: theme Also covers: Residency, Citizenship, Second Passport, Visa, E-Residency, Immigration, Migration, Digital Nomad, Relocation Residency, mobility and what it means to choose your jurisdiction in a world of competing cities. If governance is a service, residents are customers who can leave. Free Cities put migration, residency and citizenship at the centre, making the freedom to exit, and to choose where you belong, a live question. The wider shift matters as much as the Free Cities themselves. Holding two nationalities was an anomaly a lifetime ago and is now ordinary, some sixty countries issue a visa aimed at people who work remotely, and an ancestry claim or a few years of residence can open a second life to someone who never thought of themselves as an investor. Much of what a Free City promises is already available in fragments to anyone willing to work out where they belong. This topic collects coverage of residency programmes, mobility, e-residency and the politics of who gets to join a new jurisdiction. ## A world that stopped insisting on one passport The most consequential change in this field happened with very little fanfare. In 1960 most states treated a second nationality as a problem to be prevented. By 2020 around three quarters accepted it. Germany opened up in 2024, permitting multiple citizenship generally and shortening the road to naturalisation. Italy moved the other way in 2025, restricting descent claims to people with an Italian parent or grandparent born in the country, after decades in which a great-grandparent was enough. Taken together this is a real and largely unremarked expansion of options. Citizenship by descent, naturalisation after a few years of residence, marriage, and now some sixty national visas written for remote workers: none of these require money in the usual sense, and between them they let far more people than at any earlier point decide where their life actually happens. Albert Hirschman’s distinction between exit and voice is the frame the movement uses for it. If you cannot change a place you can leave it, and a credible threat of leaving changes how you are treated while you stay. ## The market in residency Alongside the ordinary routes runs an explicit market. Five Caribbean states offer citizenship in exchange for an investment, under a floor of two hundred thousand dollars they agreed among themselves in 2024. Golden visas granting residency rather than nationality are far more widespread, from Panama and Paraguay to the United Arab Emirates. Portugal channels its programme into investment funds, Italy offers wealthy new residents a flat annual charge on foreign income in place of ordinary taxation, and Puerto Rico has run an incentive regime for years. Two practical things are worth knowing about this field. The terms move constantly: Portugal removed its property route, Spain closed its programme in 2025, Italy raised its flat charge twice within two years. And residence and taxation are separate questions. Where you are taxed turns on day counts, on where your centre of life sits and, for Americans, on citizenship rather than residence at all. Anyone comparing programmes needs tax advice in both countries, not just the brochure. ## What a Free City adds Against that backdrop the Free Cities offer is unusual for being cheap. Próspera opened residency and e-residency to anyone in the world for a flat annual fee an order of magnitude below any investment programme. Estonia’s e-Residency, which is not a Free City but pioneered the idea, has issued digital identities to well over a hundred thousand people from most countries on earth, most of whom use it to run a company inside the European single market from wherever they happen to live. What is on offer differs too. An investment programme sells a document and the travel it unlocks. A Free City sells the rules themselves: a defined legal framework, a known fee, courts that work, and the freedom to leave. Albert Hirschman called that exit, and its value does not depend on ever using it, because a resident who can go elsewhere is treated differently by whoever governs the place they are in. The movement also has projects aimed well below the investor market. Ciudad Morazán near Choloma was built for Honduran factory workers, with rents set against local wages rather than international ones. It is the clearest statement that choosing your own jurisdiction is not meant to stay a service for people who already have options. --- # History of Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/history-of-free-cities Kind: theme Also covers: Hanseatic League, Hanse, Italian City-States, Free Imperial City, Venice, Historical From the Hanseatic League and Italian city-states to the modern renaissance of self-governing territories. The idea of the Free City is old. Long before the age of nation-states, self-governing cities (the Hanseatic League, the Italian city-states, the free imperial cities) were engines of trade, law and liberty. They also lost. Venice fell to Napoleon in 1797, and between the great reorganisation of the Holy Roman Empire in 1803 and the annexation of Frankfurt in 1866 the free imperial cities went from about fifty to a remnant of three. Why the territorial state beat the self-governing city is a more useful question for this movement than any amount of admiration for the cities themselves. This topic traces that lineage and the historical thinking that informs today’s Free Cities movement, connecting the past to the projects being built now. ## Before Europe had states The practice is older than Europe. Between 800 and 300 BC more than a thousand Greek settlements of the polis type ringed the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, sharing a language, a religion and the Olympic Games while insisting absolutely on governing themselves. Each passed its own laws, minted its own coins and raised its own men. Josiah Ober’s account of why that world stayed rich for so long names three causes, and all three are arguments this movement makes without knowing it: competition between systems forced continuous technical and institutional invention, a decentralised structure held the whole together with nobody in charge of it, and rules reliable enough to invest against kept transaction costs low. Aristotle was born in Stageira, a small independent town, and did his work in a larger one. ## Cities that made their own law In medieval Central Europe the promise was personal before it was constitutional. A serf who reached a free imperial city and went uncaught for a year and a day was a free man, and the saying that city air makes you free was meant literally. The status was taken, not given. Cologne rose against its archbishop in 1074 and was put down, won an independent bench of magistrates by 1103 and a city council in 1216 over his objection, and settled the argument at the Battle of Worringen in 1288. For several centuries in Europe the city was a jurisdiction in its own right. At the Peace of Constance in 1183 the Emperor conceded that the northern Italian communes could elect their own councils and pass their own legislation. Venice ran as a republic from the early Middle Ages until Napoleon ended it in 1797. In the Empire, a free imperial city answered to the Emperor alone and to no intervening prince, and about fifty of them still sat in the Imperial Diet in 1792. Law travelled the way software does now. Cities adopted whole legal codes from other cities because they worked, most often Lübeck’s or Magdeburg’s, and named the Magdeburg bench as their court of appeal in unclear cases. Magdeburg had no power to enforce anything it decided. The arrangement held because the cities wanted it to. The Hanseatic League was something else again, and the most interesting precedent for the present. It held no territory the way a state does. It was a network of towns, perhaps two hundred at its widest extent, bound by shared commercial law and anchored by four great trading houses at Novgorod, Bergen, London and Bruges, each with its own treasury, seal and rulebook. It had no constitution, no budget and no officials of its own, and no body but the Hansetag, whose decisions each city council was free to ratify or reject. Members joined and drifted away. Nothing about it looked like a country, and for three hundred years it worked. ## Competition worked Then the incumbents changed their minds. Having watched what self-government did to trade, the surrounding princes stopped fighting urban independence and began selling it, offering settlers guaranteed city rights on their own territory and copying the charters the older cities had spent generations extracting. In parts of southern Germany, villages bought their way out from under the local prince and answered to the Emperor directly. Nobody legislated any of this. The Free Cities were visibly richer, people and money moved toward them, and the rulers who wanted that revenue had to match the offer. It is the clearest case in European history of jurisdictions competing for residents and the residents winning, and it is why this period is worth more to the Free Cities movement than nostalgia. ## Why they disappeared They were not simply crushed. Hendrik Spruyt’s account of the period treats the sovereign territorial state, the city league and the city-state as three competing designs, and argues that the territorial state won on the merits of its age. It could make binding treaties, because someone could speak for the whole of it, and a league of self-interested towns could not. The imperial reorganisation of 1803 wiped out all but six Free Cities, the Congress of Vienna confirmed four, and Prussia took Frankfurt in 1866, leaving Hamburg, Bremen and Lübeck to carry the old titles as ordinary federal states. The Hanse ended less dramatically. From the sixteenth century Lübeck drew the League into one northern war after another, and member cities tired of paying for adventures that were not theirs; as the territorial powers around them consolidated, most were pressed into leaving. The last diet met in 1669. The Free Cities of the twentieth century were a different thing wearing the same name. Danzig, Kraków and the Free Territory of Trieste were diplomatic compromises over contested ground, administered by outside powers, and each was extinguished within a generation. Free ports lasted longer but ended for a duller reason: Hamburg closed its Freihafen in 2013 because average tariffs had fallen from roughly thirty per cent to three, and the exemption had become paperwork. What a Free City is worth has always been a function of how bad the surrounding regime is. ## The thread to the present What these cities had in common was not a political programme but a position. They sold predictable law and low friction in a world short of both, and people and capital moved to them far out of proportion to their size. Livorno’s charters of the 1590s offered exemption from guild restrictions and freedom of worship, and drew Jewish, Dutch, English and Greek merchants to a small Tuscan port. Hong Kong after 1841 did the same thing on a far larger scale. Jurisdictional variety also made it hard for any European ruler to close off every exit, which is the deeper reason this period keeps being argued over. The modern movement is a bet that the same still holds. It runs from the founding of the Seasteading Institute in 2008 and Paul Romer’s charter cities argument in 2009, through the Honduran ZEDE law of 2013, to Titus Gebel’s Free Private Cities and the network state. The Hanse’s answer to territory, a network of places bound by common rules rather than by a border, is being proposed again by people who mostly do not realise they are repeating it. Titus Gebel states the test plainly: a society is successful if many people want to live there voluntarily, over a long period. The Free Cities of the Middle Ages passed that test for several hundred years, which is why the movement keeps coming back to them. --- # Urban Design in New Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/urban-design Kind: theme Also covers: Urban Design, Urbanism, Architecture, Urban Planning, City Design, Built Environment, Parametricism, Master Planning, New Urbanism Architecture, urbanism and the human-scale design of cities: how the built environment of a Free City is planned, shaped and allowed to evolve. A Free City is more than its legal framework: it is a physical place that people live in, walk through and call home. How its streets, buildings and public spaces are designed, and who gets to shape them, decides whether a city feels humane and alive or sterile and imposed. The argument is older than this movement and reaches well beyond it. Jane Jacobs, Christopher Alexander and the New Urbanists were disputing generated against imposed order long before anyone proposed a new jurisdiction to test it in, and the record of purpose-built capitals has given both sides plenty to work with. This topic gathers the architecture and urbanism running through the Foundation’s work: market-based urban order, human-scale neighbourhoods, the role of beauty, and the case for letting cities evolve from the bottom up rather than be dictated by central planners. ## Order that grows Jane Jacobs opened the modern argument in 1961 by pointing out that the qualities planners were busy demolishing, density, mixed use, short blocks and old buildings standing next to new ones, were exactly the ones that made a street safe and interesting. Christopher Alexander gave the insight a structure four years later with the observation that a city is not a tree: real settlements are overlapping webs of relationships, and a plan that sorts them into a tidy hierarchy destroys what it set out to organise. His later distinction between generative order, which unfolds step by step under rules, and imposed order, fixed as an image in advance, remains the sharpest framing of the whole debate. James C. Scott extended it in Seeing Like a State, reading Brasília and Chandigarh as attempts to make a city legible to the authorities at the cost of the local knowledge people use to live in one. Brasília is the case that will not go away. Its pilot plan was sized for around half a million residents and has never exceeded that, while the surrounding Federal District passed two and a half million. The growth went into unplanned settlements the plan had no room for, one of which was known as Cidade Livre, the Free City. ## Somebody still has to lay out the streets Not everything can be left to emerge, though. Streets are the layer that cannot be changed afterwards: buildings turn over every few decades, but the right-of-way and the pattern of plots decide what can be built there for a century. Drainage, sewerage, road hierarchy and public transport are the goods a collection of individual developers reliably undersupplies, because no one of them captures the benefit of getting them right. The distinction that resolves this is between regulating form and regulating use. The New Urbanists turned Jacobs’ observations into an instrument, the form-based code, which governs the shape of the street and the building line and leaves what happens inside the building alone. That is a far lighter rule than the use-based zoning standard in America since 1926, and it is the version of planning most compatible with a market. Alain Bertaud’s Order Without Design supplies the economist’s case: a city is first of all a labour market, and mobility and affordability are the two things a plan must not break. Tokyo is the working example, where a national framework permits housing almost everywhere and municipalities cannot write themselves out of it. ## What the new cities are testing The Free Cities projects are running two experiments worth watching. Próspera lets a builder choose among recognised international building codes instead of waiting for a local one to be drafted, and issues approvals in weeks. That turns the building code from something imposed into something selected, which is the same move the movement makes with law in general. Ciudad Morazán near Choloma is the opposite of a showpiece, and the more instructive for it. A compact walkable district of some forty-five hectares built for Honduran factory workers, it sets street widths against how many people there actually own cars rather than against an imported standard, keeps plots small enough for a small trader to take on, and maximises the leasable land so the cost of infrastructure per household stays low. Its designers describe the public role as supplying the initial public goods and then leaving room for the place to grow. Underneath both lies the same economics. Land value is the scoreboard, since good urbanism shows up as a price premium, and that gives a developer who owns the whole site an incentive an ordinary builder never has. Beauty behaves the same way: no single builder can capture the return on a coherent street, which is why supplying it takes either a covenant, a code or a single landowner. That is the real subject of this topic. Not what to build, but who is entitled to decide. --- # Alternative Education Outside the State System URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/alternative-education Kind: theme Also covers: Homeschooling, Home Education, Unschooling, Microschools, Self-Directed Education, School Choice, Education Freedom, Compulsory Schooling, Parallel Polis, Bitcoin Education Schooling built outside the state system: home education law, microschools, and the education experiments new jurisdictions make possible. Education is among the most tightly regulated things a society does, and the regulation reaches further than most people notice. In much of Europe the law does not require that a child be educated but that a child attend a school, and a private school is often still bound to the national curriculum and to state-licensed teachers. The effect is that the field where experiments would be most valuable is the field where they are hardest to run. Where the rules do not bend, families move instead, and a small number of jurisdictions have quietly become destinations for people who could not teach their children the way they wanted at home. This topic gathers the coverage of home education law, microschools, self-directed and parallel education projects, and what a jurisdiction able to write its own rules can try. ## Three locks on the schoolhouse door The first lock is compulsory attendance. German law requires attendance at a school rather than an education as such, and the courts have upheld enforcement to a considerable degree: in Wunderlich v. Germany in 2019 the European Court of Human Rights found no violation of family life where parents lost part of their parental authority and their four children were taken into care for three weeks after being withdrawn from school. Sweden’s Education Act of 2010 permits home education only in extraordinary circumstances, granted a year at a time. France replaced its declaration regime with prior authorisation on four defined grounds from the 2022 school year, and registered home instruction fell from roughly 72,000 children to roughly 59,000 in a single year. The second lock is quieter and binds more widely. In most European systems a private school still teaches the national curriculum and still employs state-licensed teachers. A family can therefore leave the public system without reaching a different education: what the law offers is a choice of provider, not a choice of method. Countries that permit home education often apply the same logic to it, assessing the child against the curriculum they left. The third lock sits at the far end, and it is the one that makes the other two heavier than they look. A school-leaving certificate is worth what universities and employers will accept it for. Whatever a family does when a child is fifteen has to be legible to an admissions office when the child is eighteen, which quietly rules out anything that cannot be translated back into the standard qualification. ## When the rules do not bend, families move The clearest illustration is a place nobody chose as an experiment. Åland is an autonomous, Swedish-speaking province of Finland a few hours by boat from the Swedish mainland, with its own education legislation and a Finnish constitutional guarantee of the parental role. In 2012 it registered eleven home-educated children. By 2024 the figure was 132, most of them from families who had left Sweden because they could not teach their children at home there. This is jurisdictional competition in education happening by itself, without anyone designing it: a rule written in Stockholm, and a ferry. It is also a lesson in how little the mechanism guarantees. Åland tightened its own rules in 2021, allowing authorities to end home education where a child’s progress was judged insufficient, and has considered going further still. Asked about families who find the local law too strict, one supervisory teacher’s answer was that they are free to move away. Exit is worth exactly what the next jurisdiction is willing to allow, and nothing in the arrangement keeps the next one open. ## Why a city can try what a country cannot National caution here is not simple obstinacy. The subjects are children, the feedback loop runs a decade or more, and a reform that fails is discovered long after the cohort that absorbed it has left school. At the scale of a country that risk is close to unbearable, and the rational response is to change very little, very slowly, and to make deviation difficult in the meantime. A jurisdiction of a few thousand people changes the arithmetic without changing the argument. A school of forty pupils is a real trial of a real method. A failure there affects a few dozen families, shows up within a few years, and can be ended. That is the general case for jurisdictional competition, and education is where it bites hardest, because it is the field in which a national system is least able to run a trial on itself. It is also why the interesting work tends to appear at the edges: AmityAge Academy, a Bitcoin education centre being built on Roatán with Próspera’s support, or the Prague institutions built on Václav Benda’s idea of a parallel polis, where the response to an education you could not obtain was to build the institution rather than petition for one. One case shows both the promise and its limit. My First Bitcoin began teaching a ten-week course to 38 El Salvadoran public school students in 2022, entirely outside the state system, and grew to tens of thousands taught. Its open-source workbook was then adopted by the country’s education ministry as the basis of a national curriculum, and the state programme ended in April 2025, after which the organisation closed its local chapter. The workbook is still the basis of what El Salvador teaches. The organisation that wrote it no longer operates there. The contrary case shows what happens when a lock is simply released. Arizona opened its education savings accounts to every school-age child in 2022; enrolment went from around 12,000 to over 100,000 within four years, and a network of microschools grew up to meet it, because a dozen families with a few thousand dollars each is enough to pay a teacher and rent a room. Arizona is a US state rather than a Free City, and the point is the mechanism rather than the place: where the money follows the child and the provision is not prescribed, provision appears quickly. ## The constraint that does not go away A new jurisdiction can write its own school law. It cannot make a university in another country accept the certificate that law produces. This is why schools in special jurisdictions overwhelmingly route through an established international qualification, the International Baccalaureate or Cambridge International, rather than inventing one: it solves recognition by borrowing someone else’s, at the price of taking their curriculum with it. The genuine frontier is whether a small jurisdiction can build a credential of its own that anyone outside honours, and no one has done it yet. That is a fair statement of where the field stands. The regulatory freedom exists in principle in several of the projects covered on this site, and very little has yet been built on it. What the Free Cities argument offers education is not a finished alternative but the one thing the national systems structurally cannot provide, which is somewhere to try, at a scale small enough that being wrong is survivable. --- # Criticism of Free Cities: The Case Against URL: https://free-cities.org/topics/criticism-and-debate Kind: theme Also covers: Criticism, Critique, Crack-Up Capitalism, Objections, Debate, Democratic Legitimacy, Colonialism, Accountability The serious objections to Free Cities, stated as their critics state them, with what is answerable, what is contested, and what is still genuinely open. Any idea worth taking seriously attracts serious objections, and Free Cities have attracted several. They come from constitutional lawyers, development economists, historians of empire and from residents of the countries where these projects are actually built. This page collects those arguments rather than a rebuttal of them. Where an objection has a persuasive answer, the answer is given. Where it does not, that is said plainly. ## Consent, and who gets to give it The central promise of a Free City is that the relationship between resident and government becomes contractual: you agree to the rules before you arrive, and you may leave if they change. The objection is that this only describes the people who arrive. A jurisdiction is also inhabited by those who were already there, by children who never signed anything, and by workers who commute in daily without the standing residents hold. For them the contract is not a choice but a condition of the place they live. Advocates answer that consent by contract is at least explicit, where the social contract of a nation-state is a fiction nobody ever signed. That is a real argument, but it does not dissolve the objection: a fiction that applies equally is different from a real contract that applies unequally. How a jurisdiction treats the people inside it who are not parties to its founding agreement is a fair test of any such project, and one on which the existing cases differ considerably. A sharper version of the same answer addresses workers specifically. If someone takes a job in a jurisdiction knowing there is no minimum wage and no welfare state, then calling the result exploitation denies them the standing to judge their own interests, and quietly claims that standing for the person objecting. The Foundation puts it flatly: either adults have the right to decide for themselves, or they do not. Against that, ordinary civil law still guards the weaker party, for instance against surprising terms buried in a contract. How much force that carries depends on how real the alternative was. Where a job inside the zone is plainly better than what is available outside it, the choice is genuine and the objection is weak. Where the zone is the only employer within reach, consent starts doing less work than the word suggests. That is an empirical question about a specific place rather than a philosophical one, which is also why it cannot be settled in the abstract by either side. ## Sovereignty, development and the colonial charge The sharpest published critique is Quinn Slobodian’s, which reads zones of all kinds as a way of carving economic sovereignty out of poorer states for the benefit of capital that is accountable elsewhere. On this account, an arrangement that lets a foreign operator write the commercial law of a territory is not a new form of governance but an old one under a new name. The comparison is contested on the facts. Historical colonies were imposed by force and extracted without consent of the host government; host-country agreements are negotiated with governments that can and sometimes do revoke them, as Honduras demonstrated in 2022. On why a state would agree in the first place, the Foundation’s answer is that host states expect to gain: around Hong Kong, Singapore and Monaco a belt of comparatively prosperous territory has formed whose residents often work in the city-state while paying tax at home, and a structurally weak region has little to lose by trying it. But the underlying asymmetry the critique identifies is real. A small state negotiating with well-resourced international investors is not bargaining between equals. And the same investment-protection clauses the Foundation cites as the reason a host state cannot simply seize a city back are, from the other direction, precisely the mechanism by which a later democratic decision becomes expensive to make. Both descriptions are accurate; which one matters more depends on whether you are more worried about expropriation or about a government being priced out of changing its mind. ## Accountability when the operator is the problem If a city operator provides law and security under contract, what happens when the operator itself is the party at fault? The Foundation answers in two parts. The operator is bound by a contract that confines its powers to a few defined areas and submits it to independent arbitration; a territorial monopoly on force could in principle be abused, but residents would leave and the reputational damage would end any prospect of founding cities elsewhere. The comparison offered is the captain of a cruise ship or the manager of a remote resort, both of whom could behave as dictators and refrain out of commercial self-interest. On enforcement, the position is that this is no worse than international commercial law: whoever holds an award against a state that refuses to pay cannot compel it either, and pursues its assets abroad instead. Critics point out that arbitration is expensive and slow relative to the resources of an individual resident, that exit is far costlier for someone who has bought a home than for someone who has not, and that the most vulnerable residents are precisely those least able to leave. The cruise-ship comparison also cuts both ways: a passenger is aboard for a week and owns nothing on the vessel, which is exactly what makes leaving cheap enough to discipline the captain. This is the objection with the least developed answer so far. Competitive pressure works well for customers who are mobile and badly for those who are not, and no operating Free City has yet been through a genuine, public confrontation with its own residents that would show how the mechanism holds up. ## What the record actually shows The most deflationary criticism is not philosophical but empirical. There are more than 7,000 special economic zones worldwide, and the development literature on them is mixed at best: many underperform, some function mainly as tax arbitrage, and the handful of famous successes are cited so often precisely because they are unusual. Extrapolating from Shenzhen or Dubai risks selecting on the outcome. The honest position is that the modern Free City has a very short and very small record. The projects that go furthest toward genuine legal autonomy are barely a decade old, count residents in the thousands, and have not yet faced a recession, a succession crisis or a hostile host government at scale. Anyone claiming to know how this ends, in either direction, is ahead of the evidence. ## Labour, land and the race to the bottom A jurisdiction that competes for residents and investment also competes on the standards it is willing to lower. Critics in labour and environmental policy argue that this is the mechanism by which zones actually work: not better governance, but cheaper governance, with the costs pushed onto workers who have little bargaining power and onto an environment that has no vote at all. The concern is sharpest where a zone sets its own employment law in a country whose national protections are already weakly enforced. Land is the second half of this objection, and it is the half most often misread. Every large development project draws opposition from the people living nearest to it, whatever its legal form. A port, a business park, a wind farm and a housing estate all produce the same pattern, and the objection is geographic rather than ideological: it is about what goes up next door, not about who writes the commercial code. Free Cities are not exempt from this, but neither are they a special case of it. What the campaigns against existing projects do show is how quickly the two arguments merge. Opposition that starts as ordinary local resistance to construction picks up the vocabulary of the sovereignty critique, and criticism of the governance model borrows the moral weight of a neighbourhood dispute. From outside, the result is hard to read: the volume of local opposition says very little about whether the grievance is with a jurisdiction or with a building site. Anyone assessing a project seriously has to separate the two, and the test is simple enough: would this objection still be made if the same development were built under ordinary national law? ## What is still open Three questions have no settled answer: whether a jurisdiction can stay attractive to residents without becoming captured by whoever finances it; whether legal autonomy granted by a government can survive that government changing its mind; and whether the model reaches people who need better governance most, or mainly those who could already afford to move. On the last of those the Foundation does offer a number: the mandatory basic package of security and courts is estimated at roughly a thousand euros per person per year, or a few thousand once a minimum of social protection is included, with no taxes on top. If that holds, the model is not a rich person’s product. Whether it holds is untested, because no Free City has yet operated at a scale where the fixed costs of running courts, policing and infrastructure are spread across a real population rather than a projection. The Honduran ZEDEs are currently the closest thing to a live test of all three questions. --- # TOPICS: NATIVE-LANGUAGE EDITIONS --- # Freie Privatstädte URL: https://free-cities.org/freie-privatstaedte Language: German (de) Translation of: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities Ein neues Betriebssystem für unser Zusammenleben Freie Privatstädte sind das Konzept von Dr. Titus Gebel, Unternehmer und promovierter Jurist. Er gründete den Rohstoff- und Energiekonzern Deutsche Rohstoff AG mit und gab 2014 den Vorstandsvorsitz ab, um sich ganz der Idee zu widmen. Ausgearbeitet hat er sie im Buch Freie Privatstädte: Mehr Wettbewerb im wichtigsten Markt der Welt und in dem Whitepaper auf dieser Seite. Er gründete die Free Cities Foundation als gemeinnütziges Zuhause der Idee und führt Tipolis, ein Unternehmen, das gemeinsam mit Regierungen und Sonderwirtschaftszonen neue Jurisdiktionen entwickelt. ## Wie könnte das Leben in Freien Privatstädten aussehen? Neuartige Dienstleister wie Uber oder Airbnb sind nicht verboten, sondern eine Selbstverständlichkeit. Es gibt private Unternehmer, die vom Krankenhaus über Schulen und Kindergärten bis hin zur Müllabfuhr alles abdecken, was nachgefragt wird. Gegen sämtliche Eventualitäten des Lebens versichern sich die Bewohner bei Interesse privat oder gründen Selbsthilfegruppen, sei es zum Schutz vor Krankheit, Tod, Pflegebedürftigkeit oder Unfällen. Jeder kann neue Produkte und Dienstleistungen ohne Genehmigung oder Lizenz anbieten, und sich in jeder gewünschten Währung, einschließlich Bitcoin, bezahlen lassen. Auch für Ungelernte gibt es Verwendung, weil es keine Mindestlohnvorschriften gibt. Neue Medikamente und Behandlungsmethoden sind jedem Erwachsenen zugänglich, der diese in Kenntnis des möglichen Risikos testen will. Umweltgrenzwerte gelten nur für wirkliche Toxizität auf wissenschaftlicher Grundlage. Kriminalität und Vandalismus sind kaum existent, man kann seine Kinder ruhigen Gewissens sogar nachts auf die Straße lassen. Die Menschen werden von der Politik nicht gegeneinander aufgehetzt, da diese keine nennenswerte Rolle mehr spielt. Es gibt weder Parlament noch Zentralbank, dafür umfassende Selbstbestimmung. Aufgrund der geringen Regelungsdichte bringen die Bürger viele Innovationen hervor und erreichen eine hohe Produktivität. Da Freihandel herrscht, jeder somit alles zollfrei importieren kann, und außer dem Jahresbeitrag keine Steuern zu bezahlen sind, haben auch Geringverdiener einen hohen Lebensstandard. Weil Währung und Zinssätze nicht manipuliert werden können, steigt die Kaufkraft der Bewohner aufgrund von Produktivitätsfortschritten stetig. Die Altersversorgung ist planbar und ermöglicht den Ruhestand, wann immer der Betroffene das erreichte Niveau für ausreichend hält. Politischer Aktivismus, Missionierungseifer, Verteilungskämpfe und das Aufwiegeln gesellschaftlicher Gruppen gegeneinander sind praktisch verschwunden. Denn die Vertragsbürger wissen, dass sie nicht in die Verträge der anderen eingreifen können und respektieren daher ihre unterschiedlichen Anschauungen und Einschätzungen. Die Menschen sind wieder in der Verantwortung, für sich selbst zu sorgen und dadurch automatisch selbstbewusster, stabiler und realistischer in ihren Einschätzungen. Nach spätestens zwei Generationen wären Freie Privatstädte wohlhabender, freier und friedlicher als alles, was wir bisher kennen. Sind die ersten Freien Privatstädte erfolgreich etabliert, dann wird eine völlig neues, hochlukratives Anlagemodell entstehen. Denn sowohl die „Software“, also der rechtliche und vertragliche Rahmen, als auch die „Hardware“, also Masterplan und Infrastruktur, können beliebig oft wiederverwendet und in alle Richtungen angepasst werden. ### Was ist eine Freie Privatstadt? Eine Freie Privatstadt ist ein Gebiet mit eigenem Rechts- und Ordnungsrahmen, das von einer Betreibergesellschaft als gewinnorientiertes Unternehmen geführt wird. Gegen einen festgelegten Beitrag gewährleistet der Betreiber den Bewohnern Schutz von Leben, Freiheit und Eigentum, also innere und äußere Sicherheit, einen Rechtsrahmen und eine unabhängige Streitschlichtung. Jeder Bewohner hat mit dem Betreiber einen schriftlichen Bürgervertrag geschlossen, der nicht einseitig geändert werden kann; Streitigkeiten entscheiden unabhängige Schiedsgerichte. Steuern gibt es darüber hinaus nicht. ### Wer hat das Konzept der Freien Privatstädte erfunden? Titus Gebel, Unternehmer und promovierter Jurist. Er hat das Modell im Buch Freie Privatstädte: Mehr Wettbewerb im wichtigsten Markt der Welt und in dem Whitepaper auf dieser Seite ausgearbeitet, die Free Cities Foundation gegründet und führt Tipolis, ein Unternehmen, das mit Regierungen und Sonderwirtschaftszonen neue Jurisdiktionen entwickelt. ### Gibt es schon Freie Privatstädte, und wo? Das Modell wird schrittweise erprobt. Am weitesten ist Próspera auf der Insel Roatán in Honduras: eine Sonderjurisdiktion nach dem honduranischen ZEDE-Gesetz, gegründet 2017, mit eigenen Zivil- und Handelsregeln, eigenem Steuerrecht und eigener Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, die Teil von Honduras bleibt und an dessen Verfassung, Strafrecht und internationale Verträge gebunden ist. Das Projektverzeichnis der Foundation führt Próspera und die anderen neuen Jurisdiktionen, die Schritte in diese Richtung gegangen sind. ### Gibt es Freie Privatstädte in Deutschland oder anderswo in Europa? Nein. Eine Freie Privatstadt braucht eine Vereinbarung mit einem Gastgeberstaat, der einem abgegrenzten Gebiet einen eigenen Rechtsrahmen einräumt. Kein europäischer Staat hat bisher eine solche Vereinbarung geschlossen. Privat gebaute Siedlungen gibt es auch in Deutschland, sie unterliegen aber vollständig dem Recht des umgebenden Staates. Die Projekte, die den ersten Schritt gegangen sind, stehen im Projektverzeichnis; am weitesten ist Honduras. ### Was unterscheidet eine Freie Privatstadt von einer Sonderwirtschaftszone? Eine Sonderwirtschaftszone bietet niedrigere Steuern und weniger Regulierung, aber der Staat bleibt Verwalter und kann die Regeln jederzeit ändern. In einer Freien Privatstadt sind die Regeln in einem Vertrag festgelegt, der nicht gegen den Bewohner geändert werden kann, der Verwalter ist ein verklagbarer privater Betreiber, und Streitigkeiten gehen vor unabhängige Schiedsgerichte. Titus Gebel beschreibt die Freie Privatstadt als die nächste Stufe in der Entwicklung der Sonderwirtschaftszonen. ### Was kostet das Leben in einer Freien Privatstadt? Das Whitepaper beziffert die Jahresgebühr für das obligatorische Basispaket aus Infrastruktur, Sicherheit und Rechts- und Streitschlichtungssystem auf etwa 1.500 US-Dollar pro Person; in einkommensschwachen Ländern kann der Betrag niedriger liegen. Steuern kommen nicht hinzu. Alles andere, von Gesundheitsversorgung über Schule bis Altersvorsorge, kaufen die Bewohner am Markt oder organisieren es über Versicherungen und Selbsthilfeeinrichtungen. ### Was hindert den Betreiber daran, sich wie ein Diktator zu verhalten? Abwanderung und Wettbewerb. Zwang darf der Betreiber nur zur Durchsetzung der im Bürgervertrag vereinbarten Regeln anwenden, Streitigkeiten entscheiden Schiedsgerichte außerhalb seiner Organisation, und jeder Bewohner kann den Vertrag jederzeit kündigen und die Stadt verlassen. Ignoriert ein Betreiber Schiedssprüche oder missbraucht er seine Macht, wandern die Bewohner ab, seine Einnahmen brechen weg, und der Ansehensverlust macht es ihm unmöglich, anderswo neue Städte zu gründen. Titus Gebel vergleicht den Betreiber mit dem Kapitän eines Kreuzfahrtschiffs: theoretisch in der Lage, als Diktator aufzutreten, in der Praxis durch sein wirtschaftliches Interesse gebunden. ### Wo kann ich das Whitepaper und das Buch lesen? Das vollständige Whitepaper „Freie Privatstädte: Ein neues Betriebssystem für unser Zusammenleben“ steht auf dieser Seite und als PDF zum Herunterladen bereit; die englische Fassung von 2023 sowie die spanische, französische, portugiesische und russische Ausgabe sind über den Sprachumschalter erreichbar. Das Buch Freie Privatstädte: Mehr Wettbewerb im wichtigsten Markt der Welt ist gedruckt, als E-Book und als Hörbuch erhältlich. --- # Ciudades Privadas Libres URL: https://free-cities.org/ciudades-privadas-libres Language: Spanish (es) Translation of: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities Un nuevo sistema operativo para la convivencia Las Ciudades Privadas Libres son el concepto del Dr. Titus Gebel, empresario y doctor en Derecho. Cofundó el grupo energético y minero Deutsche Rohstoff AG y dejó su cargo de consejero delegado en 2014 para dedicarse por completo a la idea. La desarrolló en el libro Ciudades Privadas Libres: Hacer que los gobiernos compitan por ti y en el libro blanco de esta página. Fundó la Free Cities Foundation como hogar sin ánimo de lucro de la idea y dirige Tipolis, una empresa que desarrolla nuevas jurisdicciones junto con gobiernos y zonas económicas especiales. ## Cómo es la vida diaria en una Ciudad Privada Libre? Proyectos innovadores y disruptivos como Uber y Airbnb serán mas que bienvenidos en una Ciudad Privada Libre. Empresarios privados podrán proveer todos los servicios necesarios a los ciudadanos, desde hospitales, colegios y jardines de infantes hasta la recolección de basura y transporte publico. Cada residente es libre de asegurarse de forma privada de acuerdo con sus necesidades y gustos. Cualquier individuo será libre de ofrecer sus productos y servicios sin la necesidad de autorizaciones o licencias burocráticas, y será también libre de aceptar la divisa o moneda que desee, incluyendo criptomonedas. La Ciudad Privada Libre también ofrecerá posibilidades para trabajadores poco cualificados. Debido a la inexistencia de restricciones labores como el salario mínimo, trabajadores con poca experiencia o cualificaciones no serán excluidos del mercado laboral, pero tendrán la oportunidad de ser parte de el. Nuevos medicamentos y tratamientos de salud estarán a disposición de cualquier adulto que quiera probarlos con conocimiento del riesgo potencial. Además, las restricciones ambientales solo se aplicarán a productos y procesos industriales de alto riesgo, según lo determinado por investigaciones científicas y no por el pánico. En una Ciudad Privada Libre el vandalismo y crimen es casi inexistente, un lugar en el que es posible dejar a los hijos jugar en la calle por la noche sin tener que preocuparse por su seguridad. Las personas no son instigadas unas contra otras por la política o ideologías, que ya no juega un papel significativo. En esta sociedad, no existe ni el parlamento ni el banco central; el activismo político, por lo tanto, dejará de jugar un rol en la vida diaria de las personas. Debido a las pocas regulaciones y burocracia, los residentes de la Ciudad Privada Libre son libres de innovar y así, mejorar la productividad de la sociedad. El libre comercio juega un rol esencial, todas las importaciones estarán libres de aranceles e impuestos. Los residentes no pagaran impuestos más allá de la contribución anual. Debido a esto, incluso los que reciben bajos ingresos tendrán un alto nivel de vida. Como el gobierno no puede manipular ni la moneda ni las tasas de interés, el poder adquisitivo de los residentes aumentará constantemente. El sistema de pensiones será privado y permitirá la jubilación cuando el individuo lo considere apropiado. El activismo político, las luchas por redistribuir la riqueza de otros y la agitación de los grupos sociales prácticamente desaparecerán. Los residentes saben que no pueden interferir en los contratos de sus conciudadanos y respetan los diferentes puntos de vista de cada uno. Las personas vuelven a ser responsables de cuidarse a sí mismas y, por lo tanto, automáticamente tienen más confianza en sí mismas, son más estables y más realistas en sus evaluaciones. Después de dos generaciones como máximo, las Ciudades Privadas Libres serían más ricas, más libres y más pacíficas que todo lo que hemos conocido hasta ahora. Una vez que se establezcan las primeras Ciudades Privadas Libres, surgirá una clase de activos completamente nueva y altamente rentable. Esto se debe a que tanto el “software”, es decir, la estructura legal y contractual, como el “hardware”, es decir, el plan maestro y la infraestructura, pueden ser reutilizados cuando sea necesario y adaptados en todas las direcciones posibles. ### ¿Qué es una Ciudad Privada Libre? Una Ciudad Privada Libre es un territorio con su propio marco jurídico y normativo, gestionado por una empresa operadora con ánimo de lucro. A cambio de una cuota básica fija, el Operador garantiza a los habitantes la protección de la vida, la libertad y la propiedad: seguridad interna y externa, un marco legal y un sistema independiente de resolución de conflictos. Cada residente ha suscrito por escrito un Contrato Ciudadano con el Operador que ninguna de las partes puede modificar unilateralmente; los litigios se resuelven ante tribunales de arbitraje independientes. No hay impuestos. ### ¿Existen ciudades privadas? ¿Dónde? El modelo se está poniendo en práctica por etapas. El proyecto más avanzado es Próspera, en la isla de Roatán, Honduras: una jurisdicción especial creada en 2017 bajo la ley hondureña de las ZEDE, con sus propias normas civiles y mercantiles, su propio código fiscal y su propio arbitraje, que sigue formando parte de Honduras y está sujeta a su constitución, su derecho penal y sus tratados internacionales. El directorio de proyectos de la Fundación recoge Próspera y las demás jurisdicciones nuevas que han dado pasos en esta dirección. ### ¿Hay Ciudades Privadas Libres en Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala u otros países de América Latina? Por ahora, fuera de Honduras, no. Una Ciudad Privada Libre necesita un acuerdo con una nación anfitriona que conceda a un territorio definido su propio marco jurídico, y hasta hoy solo Honduras ha creado una ley para ello. Existen urbanizaciones y ciudades construidas por empresas privadas en varios países, pero funcionan íntegramente bajo el derecho del Estado que las rodea. Las iniciativas que han dado los primeros pasos figuran en el directorio de proyectos. ### ¿Quién es Titus Gebel? Titus Gebel es el creador del concepto de las Ciudades Privadas Libres, empresario alemán y doctor en Derecho. Expuso el modelo en el libro Ciudades Privadas Libres: Hacer que los gobiernos compitan por ti y en el libro blanco de esta página, fundó la Free Cities Foundation y dirige Tipolis, una empresa que desarrolla nuevas jurisdicciones con gobiernos y zonas económicas especiales. ### ¿En qué se diferencia una Ciudad Privada Libre de una Zona Económica Especial? Una Zona Económica Especial ofrece menos impuestos y menos regulación, pero el Estado sigue siendo el administrador y puede cambiar las reglas en cualquier momento. En una Ciudad Privada Libre las reglas están fijadas en un contrato que no puede modificarse contra el residente, el administrador es un Operador privado al que se puede demandar y los litigios van a tribunales de arbitraje independientes. Titus Gebel describe la Ciudad Privada Libre como la siguiente etapa en la evolución de las Zonas Económicas Especiales. ### ¿Cuánto cuesta vivir en una Ciudad Privada Libre? El libro blanco estima el paquete básico obligatorio, compuesto por infraestructura, seguridad y el sistema jurídico y de resolución de conflictos, en unos 1.500 dólares por persona y año, con importes menores en países de bajos ingresos. No hay impuestos además de esa cuota. Todo lo demás, desde la sanidad hasta la educación y las pensiones, se contrata en el mercado o se organiza mediante seguros e instituciones de autoayuda. ### ¿Dónde puedo leer o descargar el libro blanco y el libro? El libro blanco completo, Ciudades Privadas Libres: un nuevo sistema operativo para la convivencia, está en esta página y disponible como PDF; las ediciones en inglés, alemán, francés, portugués y ruso se alcanzan con el selector de idioma. El libro Ciudades Privadas Libres: Hacer que los gobiernos compitan por ti está disponible en papel y en formato electrónico. --- # Villes Privées Libres URL: https://free-cities.org/villes-privees-libres Language: French (fr) Translation of: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities Un nouveau modèle de gouvernance Les Villes Privées Libres sont le concept du Dr Titus Gebel, entrepreneur et docteur en droit. Il a cofondé le groupe énergétique et minier Deutsche Rohstoff AG et a quitté sa direction en 2014 pour se consacrer entièrement à cette idée. Il l’a développée dans le livre Villes Privées Libres : pour que les gouvernements se battent pour vous et dans le livre blanc de cette page. Il a fondé la Free Cities Foundation pour donner à l’idée un foyer à but non lucratif et dirige Tipolis, une société qui développe de nouvelles juridictions avec des gouvernements et des zones économiques spéciales. ## Comment se présente la vie dans une Cité Privée Libre? Les prestataires de services innovants tels que Uber ou Airbnb ne sont pas interdits mais vont de soi. Il existe des entrepreneurs privés qui couvrent tout ce qui est demandé, des hôpitaux, des écoles et des jardins d’enfants à la collecte des déchets. Si on le souhaite, les habitants peuvent s’assurer à titre privé contre toutes les éventualités de la vie ou créer des groupes d’entraide, que ce soit pour se protéger contre la maladie, la mort, le besoin de soins ou les accidents. Tout le monde peut offrir de nouveaux produits et services sans autorisation ou licence et être payé dans la devise souhaitée, y compris Bitcoin. L’absence de restrictions sur le marché du travail, telles que les lois sur le salaire minimum, signifierait que les travailleurs moins qualifiés trouveraient facilement un emploi, plutôt que d’être exclus du marché du travail. Les nouveaux médicaments et les nouvelles méthodes de traitement sont à la disposition de tout adulte qui veut les tester en connaissant les risques potentiels. Les seuils environnementaux ne s’appliquent qu’aux produits et procédés réellement dangereux, tels que déterminés par des recherches scientifiques sérieuses. La criminalité et le vandalisme n’existent pratiquement pas, vous pouvez même laisser vos enfants sortir dans la rue la nuit sans vous soucier d’eux. Dans les Cités Privées Libres, les gens ne sont pas dressés les uns contre les autres par la politique, qui ne joue plus un rôle important. Il n’y a ni Parlement ni Banque centrale, mais une autodétermination complète. En raison de la faible densité de la réglementation, les habitants produisent de nombreuses innovations et atteignent un niveau de productivité élevé. Comme le libre-échange prévaut, que chacun peut tout importer en franchise de droits et qu’aucune taxe n’est due en dehors de la cotisation annuelle, même les personnes à faible revenu ont un niveau de vie élevé. Comme ni la monnaie ni les taux d’intérêt ne peuvent être manipulés par le gouvernement, le pouvoir d’achat des résidents augmente constamment. Le régime de pension peut être planifié et permet de prendre sa retraite chaque fois que l’intéressé estime que le niveau atteint est suffisant. Une fois que les premières Cités Privées Libres auront été établies avec succès, une toute nouvelle classe d’actifs très lucrative émergera. En effet, tant le “software” , c’est-à-dire le cadre légal et contractuel, que le “hardware” , c’est-à-dire le plan directeur et l’infrastructure, peuvent être réutilisés aussi souvent que nécessaire et adaptés dans toutes les directions. ### Qu’est-ce qu’une Ville Privée Libre ? Une Ville Privée Libre est un territoire doté de son propre cadre juridique et réglementaire, géré par une société d’exploitation à but lucratif. En échange d’une contribution fixe, l’opérateur garantit aux habitants la protection de leur vie, de leur liberté et de leur propriété : sécurité intérieure et extérieure, cadre juridique et règlement indépendant des litiges. Chaque habitant a conclu par écrit un contrat citoyen avec l’opérateur, qu’aucune des deux parties ne peut modifier unilatéralement ; les litiges sont tranchés par des tribunaux d’arbitrage indépendants. Il n’y a pas d’impôts. ### Existe-t-il déjà des Villes Privées Libres ? Où ? Le modèle est mis en œuvre par étapes. Le projet le plus avancé est Próspera, sur l’île de Roatán au Honduras : une juridiction spéciale créée en 2017 en vertu de la loi hondurienne sur les ZEDE, avec ses propres règles civiles et commerciales, son propre code fiscal et son propre arbitrage, qui reste partie intégrante du Honduras et soumise à sa constitution, à son droit pénal et à ses traités internationaux. Le répertoire des projets de la Fondation recense Próspera et les autres nouvelles juridictions qui avancent dans cette direction. ### Qui est Titus Gebel ? Titus Gebel est l’inventeur du concept des Villes Privées Libres, entrepreneur allemand et docteur en droit. Il a exposé le modèle dans le livre Villes Privées Libres : pour que les gouvernements se battent pour vous et dans le livre blanc de cette page, a fondé la Free Cities Foundation et dirige Tipolis, une société qui développe de nouvelles juridictions avec des gouvernements et des zones économiques spéciales. ### Quelle est la différence avec une zone économique spéciale ? Une zone économique spéciale offre moins d’impôts et moins de réglementation, mais l’État reste l’administrateur et peut changer les règles à tout moment. Dans une Ville Privée Libre, les règles sont fixées dans un contrat qui ne peut pas être modifié contre l’habitant, l’administrateur est un opérateur privé que l’on peut poursuivre en justice, et les litiges vont devant des tribunaux d’arbitrage indépendants. Titus Gebel décrit la Ville Privée Libre comme l’étape suivante dans l’évolution des zones économiques spéciales. ### Combien coûte la vie dans une Ville Privée Libre ? Le livre blanc estime le paquet de base obligatoire, comprenant l’infrastructure, la sécurité et le système juridique et de règlement des litiges, à environ 1 500 dollars par personne et par an, avec des montants plus bas dans les pays à faible revenu. Aucun impôt ne s’ajoute à cette redevance. Tout le reste, des soins de santé à l’éducation et à la retraite, s’achète sur le marché ou s’organise par des assurances et des organismes d’entraide. ### Où lire ou télécharger le livre blanc et le livre ? Le livre blanc complet, Villes Privées Libres : un nouveau modèle de gouvernance, se trouve sur cette page et en téléchargement PDF ; les éditions anglaise, allemande, espagnole, portugaise et russe sont accessibles par le sélecteur de langue. Le livre Villes Privées Libres : pour que les gouvernements se battent pour vous est disponible en version imprimée et numérique. --- # Città Private Libere URL: https://free-cities.org/citta-private-libere Language: Italian (it) Translation of: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities Un nuovo sistema operativo per la convivenza Le Città Private Libere sono il concetto del Dr. Titus Gebel, imprenditore e dottore in giurisprudenza. Ha cofondato il gruppo energetico e minerario Deutsche Rohstoff AG e nel 2014 ne ha lasciato la guida per dedicarsi interamente all’idea. L’ha sviluppata nel libro Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You e nel whitepaper omonimo. Ha fondato la Free Cities Foundation come casa senza scopo di lucro dell’idea e guida Tipolis, una società che sviluppa nuove giurisdizioni insieme a governi e zone economiche speciali. ## Com’è la vita quotidiana in una Città Privata Libera? Naturalmente non sono vietati fornitori di servizi innovativi come Uber e Airbnb. Ci sono imprenditori privati che si occupano di tutto, dagli ospedali, alle scuole e agli asili alla raccolta dei rifiuti. Se lo si desidera, i residenti possono assicurarsi in particolare contro tutte le eventualità della vita o creare gruppi di auto-aiuto, sia per proteggersi da malattie, morte, necessità di trattamento o incidenti. Chiunque può offrire nuovi prodotti e servizi senza autorizzazione o licenza ed essere pagato nella valuta desiderata, incluso il Bitcoin. La mancanza di restrizioni sul mercato del lavoro, come le leggi sul salario minimo, significherebbe che i lavoratori meno qualificati troverebbero facilmente un lavoro, piuttosto che essere esclusi dal mercato del lavoro. Nuovi farmaci e metodi di trattamento sono a disposizione di qualsiasi adulto che voglia testarli con la conoscenza del rischio potenziale. Le limitazioni ambientali si applicano solo a prodotti e processi veramente pericolosi, come determinato da una seria ricerca scientifica. Il crimine e il vandalismo non esistono quasi mai; potete anche lasciare i vostri figli per strada di notte senza preoccuparvi di loro. Nelle Città Private Libere, le persone non sono istigate l’una contro l’altra dalla politica, che non ha più un ruolo significativo. Non esiste un parlamento o una banca centrale, ma un’autodeterminazione completa. A causa della bassa densità di regolamentazione, i residenti producono molte innovazioni e raggiungono un alto livello di produttività. Poiché prevale il libero mercato, e tutti possono importare tutto in esenzione d’imposta e non vengono pagate tasse oltre il contributo annuale, anche coloro che ricevono un reddito basso hanno un alto tenore di vita. Poiché né la valuta né i tassi d’interesse possono essere manipolati dal governo, il potere d’acquisto dei residenti è in costante aumento. Il sistema pensionistico può essere pianificato e autorizzato ad andare in pensione ogni volta che l’interessato ritiene sufficiente il livello raggiunto. L’attivismo politico, lo zelo missionario, le lotte distributive e l’agitazione dei gruppi sociali l’uno contro l’altro praticamente scompaiono. I residenti sanno che non possono interferire con i contratti dei loro concittadini e rispettano le diverse opinioni e valutazioni reciproche. Le persone hanno di nuovo la responsabilità di aiutarsi da sole e sono quindi automaticamente più sicure di sé, più stabili e più realistiche nelle loro valutazioni. Dopo due generazioni al massimo, la Città Privata Libera sarebbe più ricca, più libera e più pacifica di tutto ciò che abbiamo conosciuto finora. ## Utopia o Business Case? L’istituzione di una Città Privata Libera richiede un accordo contrattuale con uno Stato esistente. Con questo contratto, la Nazione ospitante concede alla società operativa il diritto di stabilire la Città Privata Libera in un territorio definito secondo le condizioni concordate. Ma perché gli Stati esistenti dovrebbero essere d’accordo? Come in tutte le transazioni di baratto, c’è un solo motivo: i propri interessi. Gli Stati possono accettare di rinunciare ad alcuni dei loro poteri in un determinato territorio se si aspettano dei benefici da esso. Si deve quindi creare una situazione vantaggiosa per tutti. L’istituzione di Città Private Libere in aree strutturalmente deboli non solo aumenta l’attrattiva della regione circostante, ma crea anche posti di lavoro e investimenti nella regione, a tutto vantaggio dello Stato ospitante. In una Città Privata Libera, tutti sono sovrani di se stessi che, per accordo volontario, hanno stipulato un vero e proprio contratto con un fornitore di servizi, il Contratto del Cittadino. Entrambe le parti hanno gli stessi diritti formali e sono quindi legalmente su un piano di parità. Il rapporto tra autorità e subalterno è sostituito dal rapporto tra cliente e fornitore di servizi. A differenza dei sistemi convenzionali, in cui il cittadino è obbligato a pagare le tasse senza avere il corrispondente diritto alle prestazioni, in una Città Privata Libera i servizi e il corrispettivo sono direttamente correlati. Entrambe le parti contraenti hanno il diritto di adempiere al contratto, cioè il gestore può richiedere il pagamento del contributo fisso al cittadino contraente, ma senza costi aggiuntivi. A sua volta, il cittadino può citare in giudizio l’operatore per l’adempimento dei suoi obblighi contrattuali, ad esempio per garantire la sicurezza e un sistema di diritto civile funzionante. Chi è attualmente responsabile della società operativa o a cui appartiene non è rilevante per il funzionamento del modello. Una Città Privata Libera non è quindi un’utopia, ma un’idea di business i cui elementi funzionali sono già noti e che devono essere trasferiti solo in un altro settore, quello della convivenza. In sostanza, come fornitore di servizi, l’operatore fornisce solo la struttura in cui la società può svilupparsi apertamente nel senso di un “ordine spontaneo” (Hayek). Una volta stabilite la prima Città Privata Libera, emergerà una classe di attività completamente nuova e altamente redditizia. Questo perché sia il “software”, cioè la struttura legale e contrattuale, sia l’”hardware”, cioè il master plan e l’infrastruttura, possono essere riutilizzati ogni volta che è necessario e adattati in tutte le direzioni. ### Che cos’è una Città Privata Libera? Una Città Privata Libera è un territorio con un proprio quadro giuridico e normativo, gestito da una società operatrice a scopo di lucro. In cambio di un canone fisso, l’operatore garantisce agli abitanti la protezione della vita, della libertà e della proprietà: sicurezza interna ed esterna, un quadro giuridico e una risoluzione indipendente delle controversie. Ogni abitante ha stipulato per iscritto un contratto con l’operatore che nessuna delle parti può modificare unilateralmente; le controversie sono decise da tribunali arbitrali indipendenti. Non ci sono tasse. ### Esistono già Città Private Libere? Dove? Il modello viene sperimentato per gradi. Il progetto più avanzato è Próspera, sull’isola di Roatán in Honduras: una giurisdizione speciale creata nel 2017 in base alla legge honduregna sulle ZEDE, con proprie regole civili e commerciali, un proprio codice fiscale e un proprio arbitrato, che resta parte dell’Honduras ed è vincolata alla sua costituzione, al suo diritto penale e ai suoi trattati internazionali. L’elenco dei progetti della Fondazione raccoglie Próspera e le altre nuove giurisdizioni che si muovono in questa direzione. ### Chi è Titus Gebel? Titus Gebel è l’ideatore del concetto delle Città Private Libere, imprenditore tedesco e dottore in giurisprudenza. Ha esposto il modello nel libro Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You e nel whitepaper omonimo, ha fondato la Free Cities Foundation e guida Tipolis, una società che sviluppa nuove giurisdizioni con governi e zone economiche speciali. ### Qual è la differenza rispetto a una zona economica speciale? Una zona economica speciale offre tasse più basse e meno regolamentazione, ma lo Stato resta l’amministratore e può cambiare le regole in qualsiasi momento. In una Città Privata Libera le regole sono fissate in un contratto che non può essere modificato contro l’abitante, l’amministratore è un operatore privato che può essere citato in giudizio e le controversie vanno davanti a tribunali arbitrali indipendenti. Titus Gebel descrive la Città Privata Libera come la tappa successiva nell’evoluzione delle zone economiche speciali. ### Quanto costa vivere in una Città Privata Libera? Il whitepaper stima il pacchetto di base obbligatorio, cioè infrastrutture, sicurezza e sistema giuridico e di risoluzione delle controversie, in circa 1.500 dollari a persona all’anno, con importi inferiori nei paesi a basso reddito. Non ci sono tasse oltre a questo canone. Tutto il resto, dalla sanità all’istruzione e alla previdenza, si acquista sul mercato o si organizza tramite assicurazioni e istituzioni di mutuo aiuto. ### Dove posso leggere il whitepaper e il libro? Il whitepaper completo, Free Private Cities: A New Operating System for Living Together, è pubblicato sulla pagina inglese e in tedesco, spagnolo, francese, portoghese e russo sulle rispettive pagine. Il libro Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You è disponibile in inglese, tedesco, spagnolo, portoghese e francese. --- # Cidades Privadas Livres URL: https://free-cities.org/cidades-privadas-livres Language: Portuguese (pt) Translation of: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities Um novo sistema operativo para viver em conjunto As Cidades Privadas Livres são o conceito do Dr. Titus Gebel, empresário e doutor em Direito. Cofundou o grupo energético e mineiro Deutsche Rohstoff AG e deixou o cargo de CEO em 2014 para se dedicar inteiramente à ideia. Desenvolveu-a no livro Cidades Privadas Livres: Fazer Com Que os Governos Compitam Por Si e no livro branco desta página. Fundou a Free Cities Foundation como casa sem fins lucrativos da ideia e dirige a Tipolis, uma empresa que desenvolve novas jurisdições em conjunto com governos e zonas económicas especiais. ## Como seria a vida cotidiana em uma Cidade Privada Livre? Provedores de serviços inovadores, como a Uber e a Airbnb, são bem-vindos em uma Cidade Privada Livre. Existem empreendedores privados que cobrem tudo o que é procurado, desde hospitais, escolas e jardins de infância à coleta de lixo e transportes. Se desejado, os residentes podem segurar-se em particular contra todas as eventualidades da vida ou criar grupos de autoajuda, seja para proteger contra doenças, morte, necessidade de cuidados ou acidentes. Qualquer pessoa pode oferecer novos produtos e serviços sem autorização ou licença e ser pago na moeda desejada, incluindo o Bitcoin. A ausência de restrições no mercado de trabalho, como leis de salário mínimo, significaria que trabalhadores menos qualificados encontrariam facilmente empregos, ao invés de serem excluídos do mercado de trabalho. Novos medicamentos e métodos de tratamento estão disponíveis para qualquer adulto que queira testá-los com conhecimento do risco potencial. As limitações ambientais aplicam-se apenas a produtos e processos verdadeiramente perigosos, conforme determinado por pesquisas científicas sérias. O crime e vandalismo dificilmente existem; você pode até deixar seus filhos nas ruas à noite sem maiores preocupações. Nas Cidades Privadas Livres, as pessoas não são instigadas umas contra as outras pela política. Em uma sociedade baseada em contrato sem parlamento ou banco central, o ativismo político deixaria de ter um papel central na vida das pessoas. Devido à baixa densidade de regulamentação, os moradores podem produzir muitas inovações que elevam a produtividade. Como o livre comércio prevalece, todos podem importar tudo com isenção de impostos, e nenhum imposto é pago além da contribuição anual especificada no Contrato de Cidadão. Através deste sistema, mesmo as pessoas de baixa renda podem alcançar um alto padrão de vida. Como nem a moeda nem as taxas de juros podem ser manipuladas pelo governo ou banqueiros centrais, o poder de compra dos residentes aumenta constantemente. O regime de pensões seria privado, permitindo a aposentadoria sempre que a pessoa em questão considerar suficiente o nível atingido. O ativismo político, o zelo missionário, as lutas distributivas e a agitação de grupos sociais uns contra os outros praticamente desaparecem nas Cidades Privadas Livres. Os moradores sabem que não podem interferir nos contratos dos concidadãos e respeitam as diferentes visões e avaliações uns dos outros. As pessoas são mais uma vez responsáveis por cuidar de si mesmas e, portanto, são mais autoconfiantes, mais estáveis e mais realistas em suas avaliações. Depois de duas gerações, as Cidades Privadas Livres seriam mais ricas, livres e pacíficas do que qualquer coisa que conhecemos até agora. Uma vez estabelecidas as primeiras Cidades Privadas Livres, uma classe de ativos completamente nova e altamente lucrativa surgirá. Isso ocorre porque tanto o “software”, isto é, a estrutura legal e contratual, quanto o “hardware”, isto é, o plano mestre e a infraestrutura, podem ser reutilizados sempre que necessário e adaptados em todas as direções. ### O que é uma Cidade Privada Livre? Uma Cidade Privada Livre é um território com o seu próprio enquadramento legal e regulamentar, gerido por uma empresa operadora com fins lucrativos. Em troca de uma taxa de base fixa, a Operadora garante aos habitantes a proteção da vida, da liberdade e da propriedade: segurança interna e externa, um quadro jurídico e um sistema independente de resolução de litígios. Cada residente celebrou por escrito um Contrato de Cidadão com a Operadora que nenhuma das partes pode alterar unilateralmente; os litígios são decididos por tribunais arbitrais independentes. Não há impostos. ### Existem cidades privadas? Onde? O modelo está a ser posto em prática por etapas. O projeto mais avançado é Próspera, na ilha de Roatán, nas Honduras: uma jurisdição especial criada em 2017 ao abrigo da lei hondurenha das ZEDE, com as suas próprias regras civis e comerciais, o seu próprio código fiscal e a sua própria arbitragem, que continua a fazer parte das Honduras e está vinculada à sua constituição, ao seu direito penal e aos seus tratados internacionais. O diretório de projetos da Fundação reúne Próspera e as outras novas jurisdições que deram passos nesta direção. ### Há cidades privadas no Brasil ou em Portugal? No sentido do conceito, não. Uma Cidade Privada Livre precisa de um acordo com uma nação anfitriã que conceda a um território definido o seu próprio enquadramento legal, e nem o Brasil nem Portugal celebraram um acordo desse tipo. Condomínios e cidades planeadas por empresas privadas existem em muitos países, mas funcionam inteiramente sob o direito do Estado que os rodeia. As iniciativas que deram os primeiros passos estão no diretório de projetos; as Honduras estão mais adiantadas. ### Quem é Titus Gebel? Titus Gebel é o criador do conceito das Cidades Privadas Livres, empresário alemão e doutor em Direito. Expôs o modelo no livro Cidades Privadas Livres: Fazer Com Que os Governos Compitam Por Si e no livro branco desta página, fundou a Free Cities Foundation e dirige a Tipolis, uma empresa que desenvolve novas jurisdições com governos e zonas económicas especiais. ### Qual é a diferença entre uma Cidade Privada Livre e uma Zona Económica Especial? Uma Zona Económica Especial oferece impostos mais baixos e menos regulação, mas o Estado continua a ser o administrador e pode mudar as regras a qualquer momento. Numa Cidade Privada Livre as regras estão fixadas num contrato que não pode ser alterado contra o residente, o administrador é uma Operadora privada que pode ser processada e os litígios vão para tribunais arbitrais independentes. Titus Gebel descreve a Cidade Privada Livre como a próxima etapa na evolução das Zonas Económicas Especiais. ### Quanto custa viver numa Cidade Privada Livre? O livro branco estima o pacote de base obrigatório, constituído por infraestruturas, segurança e sistema legal e de resolução de litígios, em cerca de 1.500 dólares por pessoa por ano, com valores mais baixos em países de baixos rendimentos. Não há impostos para além dessa taxa. Tudo o resto, da saúde à educação e às pensões, compra-se no mercado ou organiza-se através de seguros e instituições de autoajuda. ### Onde posso ler ou descarregar o livro branco e o livro? O livro branco completo, Cidades Privadas Livres: Um Novo Sistema Operativo Para Viver Em Conjunto, está nesta página e disponível como PDF; as edições em inglês, alemão, espanhol, francês e russo estão acessíveis pelo seletor de idioma. O livro Cidades Privadas Livres: Fazer Com Que os Governos Compitam Por Si está disponível em papel e em formato digital. --- # Вольные частные города URL: https://free-cities.org/volnye-chastnye-goroda Language: Russian (ru) Translation of: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities Новая операционная система для нашего сосуществования Вольные частные города — это концепция доктора Титуса Гебеля, предпринимателя и юриста. Он был сооснователем сырьевого и энергетического концерна Deutsche Rohstoff AG и в 2014 году оставил пост генерального директора, чтобы полностью посвятить себя этой идее. Он изложил её в книге Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You и в белой книге на этой странице. Он основал Free Cities Foundation как некоммерческий дом идеи и руководит компанией Tipolis, которая создаёт новые юрисдикции вместе с правительствами и особыми экономическими зонами. ### Что такое Вольный частный город? Вольный частный город — это территория с собственной нормативно-правовой базой, которой управляет операционная компания как коммерческое предприятие. За фиксированный взнос оператор гарантирует жителям защиту жизни, свободы и имущества: внутреннюю и внешнюю безопасность, правовые рамки и независимое разрешение споров. Каждый житель заключает с оператором письменный договор, который ни одна из сторон не может изменить в одностороннем порядке; споры рассматривают независимые арбитражные суды. Налогов сверх взноса нет. ### Существуют ли уже частные города? Где? Модель реализуется поэтапно. Самый развитый проект — Проспера на острове Роатан в Гондурасе: особая юрисдикция, созданная в 2017 году по гондурасскому закону о ZEDE, с собственными гражданскими и коммерческими правилами, налоговым кодексом и арбитражем, которая остаётся частью Гондураса и связана его конституцией, уголовным правом и международными договорами. Каталог проектов фонда собирает Просперу и другие новые юрисдикции, сделавшие шаги в этом направлении. ### Есть ли Вольные частные города в России? В смысле концепции — нет. Вольному частному городу нужно соглашение с принимающим государством, которое предоставляет определённой территории собственные правовые рамки, и Россия такого соглашения не заключала. Частные посёлки и построенные компаниями города существуют во многих странах, но они полностью подчинены праву окружающего государства. Проекты, сделавшие первые шаги, перечислены в каталоге проектов; дальше всех продвинулся Гондурас. ### Кто такой Титус Гебель? Титус Гебель — автор концепции Вольных частных городов, немецкий предприниматель и доктор права. Он изложил модель в книге Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You и в белой книге на этой странице, основал Free Cities Foundation и руководит компанией Tipolis, которая создаёт новые юрисдикции вместе с правительствами и особыми экономическими зонами. ### Чем Вольный частный город отличается от особой экономической зоны? Особая экономическая зона предлагает более низкие налоги и меньше регулирования, но государство остаётся администратором и может изменить правила в любой момент. В Вольном частном городе правила закреплены в договоре, который нельзя изменить против жителя, администратор — частный оператор, на которого можно подать в суд, а споры рассматривают независимые арбитражные суды. Титус Гебель описывает Вольный частный город как следующий этап в развитии особых экономических зон. ### Сколько стоит жизнь в Вольном частном городе? Белая книга оценивает обязательный базовый пакет, то есть инфраструктуру, безопасность и систему права и разрешения споров, примерно в 1500 долларов США на человека в год, с меньшими суммами в странах с низким уровнем дохода. Налогов сверх этого взноса нет. Всё остальное, от здравоохранения до образования и пенсий, покупается на рынке или организуется через страхование и организации самопомощи. ### Где прочитать или скачать белую книгу и книгу? Полный текст белой книги «Вольные частные города: новая операционная система для нашего сосуществования» опубликован на этой странице и доступен в формате PDF; английское, немецкое, испанское, французское и португальское издания открываются через переключатель языка. Книга Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You доступна на английском, немецком, испанском, португальском и французском языках. --- # PROJECTS: THE DIRECTORY OF REAL PLACES --- # Free Commune of Penadexo URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-commune-of-penadexo Type: Intentional Community Stage: Operational Country: Spain Region: Europe Established: 2022 Population: Under 50 residents Climate: Mediterranean Languages: Dutch, Spanish, English Who it is for: Families seeking freer, community-based life Coordinates: 42.5905, -7.3218 Official website: https://www.freecommune.org/ Also known as: Free Commune, Penadexo The Free Commune of Penadexo is an intentional community restoring an abandoned hill village in the province of Lugo, Galicia, in north-western Spain, as a home for people who want a freer, more self-reliant life. ## What the Free Commune of Penadexo is The Free Commune of Penadexo is a grassroots intentional community taking shape in a long-abandoned village in rural Galicia, one of the most sparsely populated corners of north-western Spain. It belongs to a wider movement of village-revival projects that repopulate Europe’s emptying countryside with newcomers drawn together by shared values rather than by birthplace, and it is associated with the Dutch entrepreneur Marnix van Suylekom, who has documented the purchase and the restoration in public. The initiative grew from a simple idea: that a deserted settlement, still served by water, electricity, internet and road access but set at a comfortable distance from dense bureaucracy, can become a home for people seeking a freer, more self-directed life. It is conceived as an open homeowners’ community, welcoming people of any age or nationality. ## Where Penadexo is Penadexo is a village in the parish of Saá in the municipality of A Pobra do Brollón, in the province of Lugo, at about 800 metres on the western edge of the Courel mountains. The village had been almost entirely abandoned, and the official population register still lists a single registered inhabitant, which is what made a whole village available to restore. ## How the Free Commune works Members aim to rebuild the village’s houses and common spaces and, over the long term, to cultivate a largely self-sufficient local economy founded on agricultural and cultural activity, with an emphasis on voluntary cooperation and private ownership rather than reliance on outside institutions. Prospective members are expected to work on the restoration or to pay for work to be done; residents earn their living remotely, from savings or seasonally elsewhere, and the community has begun planting an apple orchard and a chestnut grove as its first commercial crops. The village keeps a feast day for its patron saint, Titus Brandsma, each July. Visitors are taken in from May to October: a guest room in one of the restored houses, and a campsite with electricity, a bathroom and a kitchen. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Eight permanent residents as of late 2025; May 2025: an agricultural plan published, with an apple orchard and a chestnut grove; First houses bought as ruins in 2023 and under restoration ## Where is Penadexo? In the parish of Saá, municipality of A Pobra do Brollón, province of Lugo, Galicia, in north-western Spain, at about 800 metres near the Courel mountains. ## What is the Free Commune of Penadexo? A freedom-oriented intentional community restoring an abandoned village as an open homeowners’ community, with the long-term aim of a largely self-sufficient local economy built on agriculture and culture. ## Who can join the Free Commune? People of any age or nationality who share its values and are willing to work on the restoration or to pay for work to be done. The commune sets out how to get involved on its own site. --- # Free State Project URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project Type: Intentional Community Stage: Operational Country: United States Region: North America Established: 2001 Population: 5,000–10,000 residents Businesses: About 120 Climate: Humid Continental Languages: English Industries: Healthcare, Manufacturing, Retail, Education Who it is for: US-based libertarians Coordinates: 43.663, -71.776 Official website: https://www.fsp.org/ Also known as: FSP, Free State Project New Hampshire, Free Staters The Free State Project is a migration movement that asks libertarians to move to New Hampshire, the “Live Free or Die” state, so that a concentrated community can shape its civic life. Founded in 2001, it triggered its move in 2016 when 20,000 people had pledged to relocate. ## What the Free State Project is The Free State Project is not a settlement but a movement: it recruits people who believe the proper role of government is the protection of life, liberty and property, and asks them to move to one small state, New Hampshire, where a few thousand like-minded residents can matter. It is organised by an educational non-profit of the same name, which is not a political party, runs no candidates and endorses no legislation; participants take part in the state’s ordinary politics and civic life as individuals. Its premise is arithmetic. A political philosophy spread thinly across a country of hundreds of millions has little purchase, whereas the same number of people gathered in a state of about 1.4 million can serve in its citizen legislature, run its towns and set the tone of its public life. ## Where the Free State Project is New Hampshire, in New England in the north-eastern United States. Participants live across the state rather than in one town; the annual Porcupine Freedom Festival, PorcFest, was held for two decades at a campground in Lancaster in the White Mountains, and the winter conference, the New Hampshire Liberty Forum, takes place in the state capital, Concord. ## How the Free State Project works Anyone may sign the Statement of Intent, a pledge to move to New Hampshire and exert one’s fullest practical effort towards a society in which the maximum role of government is the protection of individual rights. The project set itself the target of 20,000 signers before calling the move; that threshold was reached on 3 February 2016, now marked as Porcupine Day. Movers organise themselves: the non-profit runs the Liberty Forum and a calendar of gatherings, while PorcFest has grown into a decentralised summer festival run by the community itself. ## Who the Free State Project is for Libertarians and classical liberals from across the United States, from software engineers and entrepreneurs to homesteaders and retirees, drawn by low taxes, since New Hampshire levies no general income or sales tax, by the “Live Free or Die” tradition and by the country’s largest citizen legislature, to which movers have been elected since 2006. It is an American, English-speaking movement; nothing about it requires a visa, a purchase or a membership fee. ## How the Free State Project came about Jason Sorens, then a doctoral student at Yale, proposed the idea in an essay in 2001. Participants chose New Hampshire by vote in 2003, over candidates such as Wyoming and Montana, and the state’s governor publicly welcomed them. The first PorcFest was held in 2004, the first mover was elected to the state house in 2006, more than four hundred had moved by 2008, and by the trigger in 2016 the movement had a decade of institutions behind it. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Jun 2026: PorcFest held as a decentralised festival across the state after outgrowing its campground; Mar 2026: New Hampshire Liberty Forum held in Concord; Between 6,000 and 10,000 participants have moved to New Hampshire, by the project’s own estimate in 2026; Libertarians and classical liberals held about a quarter of the New Hampshire House and a sixth of the Senate in 2025, by the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance’s count; Eric Brakey, a former Maine state senator, has been executive director since December 2023 ## What is the Free State Project? A movement founded in 2001 to concentrate libertarians in one US state, New Hampshire, so that a few thousand people can shape its politics and civic life. It is run by an educational non-profit, not a party, and builds no settlement of its own. ## What is a Free Stater? Someone who has signed the Free State Project’s Statement of Intent and moved to New Hampshire, or who identifies with the movement once living there. The word is ordinary usage in the state’s politics, where Free Staters sit in the legislature and serve in town government, and it describes an affiliation rather than membership of a party. ## How many people have moved to New Hampshire for the Free State Project? More than 20,000 signed the pledge, and the project estimates that between 6,000 and 10,000 have moved so far. Movers were arriving long before the pledge target was reached: more than four hundred had settled by 2008. ## Is the Free State Project still active? Yes. The move was triggered in 2016 and continues; the non-profit has an executive director, runs the Liberty Forum and recruits in neighbouring states, and Free Staters sit in both chambers of the legislature. ## What is PorcFest? The Porcupine Freedom Festival, a week-long libertarian camping festival held every June in New Hampshire since 2004, and the movement’s largest gathering. It has outgrown its long-time campground in Lancaster and is now run as a decentralised event by the community. ## Is the Free State Project a political party? No. It is an educational non-profit that does not run candidates, fund campaigns or take positions on bills. Participants who enter politics do so as individuals. --- # Liberstad URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberstad Type: Intentional Community Stage: Operational Country: Norway Region: Europe Established: 2017 Population: Under 50 residents Area: 350 ha Businesses: About 40 Climate: Cool Continental Languages: Norwegian, English Industries: Software, Construction Who it is for: Adventurous anarcho-capitalists Coordinates: 58.358, 7.546 Official website: https://www.liberstad.com/ Also known as: Free City of Liberstad, Liberstad Norway Liberstad is a private, member-based settlement in the Agder region of southern Norway, founded by John Holmesland and Sondre Bjellås as a community organised around voluntary cooperation, private property and the non-aggression principle. ## What Liberstad is Liberstad is a private settlement in southern Norway, conceived as a community for people who organise their affairs around the non-aggression principle. It grew out of the libertarian idea that a town can be run as a voluntary association rather than as a public municipality: all of its land is privately owned, there is no public land and no public infrastructure, and it has no elected officials, no police with coercive powers and no state-backed courts. The project was started in 2015 by John Holmesland and Sondre Bjellås and took possession of its land in 2017. ## Where Liberstad is The settlement occupies some 350 hectares of wooded, largely off-grid land in the Agder region of southern Norway, in what was the municipality of Marnardal until it merged into Lindesnes in 2020. Kristiansand, the regional capital and its airport, lies to the south-east. The land was assembled in stages, the later part of it including a plot taken in a land swap at the end of 2022, and the main area is laid out as four districts: a central one for shops, administration and restaurants, a tourist district for festivals and camping, a housing district and a stretch kept for nature and recreation. ## How Liberstad works Liberstad is organised as a membership community, registered in Norway as the Liberstad Membership Organization. Residents and supporters join by application, sign an agreement and pay an annual fee, and receive an identity in the settlement’s own system, FreeID; a land registry, a zoning office and a security organisation run its internal affairs, with a dispute-resolution body in development. Shared services are arranged privately instead of funded through taxation, and common costs are met through voluntary contributions and the settlement’s own internal economy. That economy uses its own unit of account, the Libra, issued by the Bank of Liberstad and expressly not a cryptocurrency or a financial instrument; an earlier cryptocurrency, City Coin, was adopted as the settlement’s currency in 2019. Norwegian planning law shapes the settlement’s form: land zoned for housing obliges its owner to live there permanently, so Liberstad is built as a cabin town, where that duty does not apply. It appeals to voluntaryists, anarcho-capitalists and others drawn to self-reliant living, and the founders’ long-term ambition is to grow it into a fully private city. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: FreeID, the land registry, the zoning office and the security organisation are operational; the dispute-resolution organisation is in development; Membership is open by application, with an application fee and an annual membership fee ## Where is Liberstad? In the Agder region of southern Norway, on a wooded farm property in the former municipality of Marnardal, now part of Lindesnes, north-west of Kristiansand. ## What is Liberstad? A private, member-based settlement founded on the non-aggression principle: all land is privately owned, there are no elected officials or public services, and shared costs are met by voluntary contributions. ## Does Liberstad have its own currency? It uses an internal unit of account, the Libra, issued by the Bank of Liberstad, which the settlement describes as neither a cryptocurrency nor a financial instrument. An earlier cryptocurrency, City Coin, was adopted in 2019. ## Can anyone join Liberstad? Membership is by application and subject to review; approved members pay an application fee and an annual fee and receive a FreeID. Liberstad sets out the steps on its own site. --- # Montelibero URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/montelibero Type: Intentional Community Stage: Operational Country: Montenegro Region: Europe Established: 2021 Population: 50–250 residents Businesses: Under 10 on site Climate: Mediterranean Languages: Russian, English Industries: Software, Retail Who it is for: Russian-speaking libertarians Coordinates: 42.032, 19.166 Official website: https://montelibero.org/ Also known as: MTL City, Montelibero Montenegro Montelibero is an intentional community of libertarians on the Adriatic coast of Montenegro, founded in 2021 by Russian-speaking liberty advocates and grown international since, with a settlement of its own, MTL City, near the port of Bar. ## What Montelibero is Montelibero is an intentional community on the Adriatic coast of Montenegro, built around a shared commitment to libertarian values. It describes itself as an open social experiment: a test of whether a society organised on non-aggression, voluntary contracts and self-organisation can outcompete the alternatives. The first settler arrived in the summer of 2020 and the project took shape the following year. It was started by Ukrainian agorists, the community around panarchy.ru and past and present members of the Libertarian Party of Russia, which is why Russian speakers from Ukraine, Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan still make up most of it; participants from the United Kingdom, Lithuania, Israel, Montenegro, France and India have joined since. ## Where Montelibero is The community’s centrepiece is MTL City, a settlement on a hillside above the sea at Pečurice in the municipality of Bar, on Montenegro’s southern coast, alongside members already dispersed along the Montenegrin coast. Bar is the country’s main port, with the airports of Podgorica and Tivat within reach. ## How Montelibero works The project takes inspiration from the Free State Project in the United States, but with a deliberately different method. Because most of its members are foreign nationals, for whom direct involvement in local politics would be unwelcome, Montelibero seeks influence not through a voting bloc but by example: by being good neighbours and demonstrating its values in practice, in the hope of spreading them to the surrounding society. Its affairs run through two decentralised organisations, the Montelibero Association and the Montelibero Fund, and an internal economy with its own euro-pegged stablecoin, EURMTL, issued on the Stellar network and accepted by a growing number of local businesses. The token is used for everyday transactions and to channel investment into the community’s ventures, including the building of MTL City. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Sep 2026: about 200 members in the Association and nearly 400 in the Fund, by the project’s own counters; Some 250 members living in Montenegro full time in early 2024, around twenty of them in MTL City in September 2024; May 2023: the first resident moved into MTL City, and the first completed building was let long-term that summer; two were finished by mid-2024, with more under construction ## Where is Montelibero? On the Adriatic coast of Montenegro. Its settlement, MTL City, stands on a hillside above the sea at Pečurice in the municipality of Bar, and its members live along the coast around it. ## What is Montelibero? A libertarian intentional community founded in 2021 that runs its affairs through two decentralised organisations and its own internal economy, and seeks to spread its values by example rather than through politics. ## What is EURMTL? Montelibero’s euro-pegged stablecoin, issued on the Stellar blockchain. It is used for payments within the community and at participating local businesses, and to fund the community’s projects. --- # Citadel.Garden URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/citadel-garden Type: Intentional Community Stage: In Development Country: Croatia · Madeira Region: Europe Population: Under 50 residents Climate: Mediterranean Languages: German, English Industries: Education, Remote Work Who it is for: Location-independent European families Coordinates: 45.24, 13.94 Official website: https://citadel.garden/ Also known as: citadel.garden, Citadel Garden This shareholder-owned network of family homes across borders gives location-independent families dependable places to return to, beginning with a first village built in the Istrian countryside in Croatia. ## What Citadel.Garden is Citadel.Garden is a network of private family homes conceived for location-independent families: households that can work, learn and live across borders, but still need dependable places to return to. Rather than each family buying and maintaining one isolated foreign property, the network is held in common by the families in it, who stay in whichever of its homes is free. Citadel.Garden publishes the terms of participation on its own site. Its premise is that a European passport already supplies the mobility special jurisdictions are built to create elsewhere, so the binding constraint on a freer life is rarely the right jurisdiction but continuity: families who leave to escape a schooling system or a tax regime can travel for years before their children begin to miss durable friendships, sport and the ordinary opportunities of a settled place. The answer it proposes is the multi-home pattern of wealthy households, at a scale a middle-class family can reach. ## How Citadel.Garden works That scale rests on shared infrastructure rather than shared living: the stated minimum is roughly 25 families across the network, and rotation between homes becomes practical only once at least three locations exist. Families arrange their own movements, some staying for years, some for a season. Each place is meant to carry what its families have in common, among them workshops, agriculture and an approach to education that begins with unschooling. One model that becomes possible over the years is that you spend three months of the year where you are from, to keep the cultural ties and the links to friends and family, then about two stretches of three months in European locations, and perhaps another three months outside Europe. And you can shift that. ## Where Citadel.Garden is The first village stands in the Istrian countryside in Croatia, near enough to reach by car from central Europe; the second is on Madeira, the Atlantic island that fills the network’s EU special-zone circle, mild in climate and well served by direct flights. Three further circles reach into Europe beyond the Union and past the continent altogether, and those sites stay private until disclosure serves the network. The project takes no political part and claims no best jurisdiction, looking instead for places that are safe, well connected and good to live in. The name states the balance it wants: a citadel for resilience, a garden for life. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: One location fully built: the village in the Istrian countryside; A second location on Madeira in preparation ## Where is Citadel.Garden? Its first village is built in the Istrian countryside in Croatia, within driving distance of central Europe, and its second is on the Atlantic island of Madeira. The wider network follows five concentric jurisdictional circles, from the European Union outward to Europe beyond it and to bases beyond the continent. ## Where are the next locations planned? The third is to be in Europe outside the European Union and the fourth beyond the continent to the west, with Latin America, Asia, Africa and further European sites named as places being scouted. Beyond Croatia and Madeira the individual locations are kept private until disclosure serves the network. ## Who is Citadel.Garden for? Location-independent families, mostly European, who want both freedom of movement and dependable places to return to. Having a family is the limiting factor rather than any particular nationality, and the network is meant to be multi-generational; the membership began in the German-speaking countries and has grown more international over time. --- # Ciudad Morazán URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Type: Special Jurisdiction Stage: Operational Country: Honduras Region: Latin America Established: 2018 Population: 200–500 residents Area: 24 ha (60 acres) Businesses: About 25 Climate: Tropical Languages: Spanish, English Industries: Manufacturing, Logistics, Services Who it is for: Local blue-collar workers Coordinates: 15.62, -87.927 Official website: https://www.morazan.city/ Also known as: Morazán ZEDE, Ciudad Morazan, Morazán City, ZEDE Morazán Ciudad Morazán is a special economic zone on the outskirts of Choloma in northern Honduras: a walled, rental-only town and industrial park built under the ZEDE law for working- and middle-class Hondurans. ## What Ciudad Morazán is Ciudad Morazán is one of Honduras’s three Zones for Employment and Economic Development (ZEDEs), and the one built for ordinary Hondurans. It is a complete community planned on 24 enclosed hectares: housing, an industrial area, commercial space, parks, churches and schools, laid out to grow gradually towards a population of about 10,000 and some three thousand jobs. Its developer calls it a blue-collar Free City, and its tenants are overwhelmingly Honduran families who work in the surrounding manufacturing region. It was developed by Massimo Mazzone, an entrepreneur based in Honduras for some twenty years, whose holding company Centro American Consulting & Capital runs pharmacy and consumer businesses across Central America. ## Where Ciudad Morazán is The town lies on the outskirts of Choloma in the department of Cortés, Honduras’s third-largest city and the centre of its maquila manufacturing belt, between the port of Puerto Cortés to the north and San Pedro Sula to the south. Puerto Cortés, the country’s largest port, San Pedro Sula’s international airport and the main bus terminal are all within an hour’s drive, which is much of the reason the site was chosen. ## How Ciudad Morazán is governed As a ZEDE, Ciudad Morazán sets its own fiscal and regulatory rules within the Honduran constitution, criminal law and international treaties. Rather than importing a foreign legal code, it adopted a simplified version of the Honduran Civil Code, and its statutes on tax, labour, the environment, policing and dispute resolution must be approved by CAMP, the national committee that oversees the zones. Its highest authority is the Technical Secretary, a Honduran official whose role combines those of a mayor and a municipal council; residents vote on community matters, and the project intends that residents and landowners will hold the large majority of votes as the town matures. ### Taxes and rules The zone levies a single income tax of 5 percent, paid to the ZEDE, which passes 12 percent of its revenue to national agencies. Its minimum wage is set 10 percent above the national minimum, a business can be registered in a day for a nominal fee, and the zone has its own customs authority allowing duty-free imports and exports. Disputes are steered towards third-party arbitration. Security is provided privately inside a walled perimeter with a visitor-management system; anyone who commits a crime is handed to the national police, and tenants who break the community’s rules lose their lease. ## Living in Ciudad Morazán Everything in the town is rented, never sold, on what its developer calls the Entrecomm model. Any Honduran citizen, or a foreigner legally resident in Honduras, can lease a home or business premises, and rents include security, maintenance and the town’s services. The first phase consists of 64 townhouses, a second row of 44, and an apartment building of about seventy units; a bilingual private school opened beside the football pitch, its fees subsidised for families who cannot pay them, and a central park, minimarkets, a café, a laundry, a gym and restaurants have followed. The rental model keeps the town answerable to its residents: a landlord who wants tenants has to keep the streets safe and the services working. ## How Ciudad Morazán came about Honduras created the ZEDE framework by constitutional amendment in 2012 and organic law in 2013. Ciudad Morazán was approved as the country’s second ZEDE in December 2018, adopted its charter and bylaws in 2020 with advice from the Charter Cities Institute, and welcomed its first residents in 2021, the year it became cash-flow positive. ### Legal status Congress voted to repeal the ZEDE law in 2022, and the Supreme Court declared the ZEDE constitutional amendments unconstitutional in September 2024. The zones continue to operate: the repeal of the constitutional articles was never ratified by a following legislature as the constitution requires, and the ZEDEs hold fifty-year legal-stability agreements and treaty protections. Ciudad Morazán has kept building throughout. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Built on site: 64 townhouses of 60 m², fully let; A second row of 44 townhouses, completed in late 2024; A first apartment building of about 70 units, with the first homes handed over in September 2025; A bilingual private school, opened February 2025; Central park, football pitch, minimarkets, café, laundry, gym and restaurants; Warehouses for industrial and commercial tenants; The town’s own water and electricity utility Recent developments: Jan 2026: a new Honduran government under President Nasry Asfura; Honduras began rejoining ICSID in early 2026; Apr 2025: full occupancy of the homes and, for the first time, of the warehouses; Feb 2025: the ICSID tribunal rejected Honduras’s preliminary objection in the ZEDE case; 2025: crypto payments accepted by the utility and the primary landlord; Growth slowed from late 2021 while the ZEDE framework was politically contested ## Where is Ciudad Morazán? On the outskirts of Choloma in the department of Cortés, northern Honduras, between the port of Puerto Cortés and San Pedro Sula. The port, San Pedro Sula’s international airport and the main bus terminal are all within an hour. ## What is Ciudad Morazán? A ZEDE, one of Honduras’s three special jurisdictions with their own fiscal and regulatory rules: a walled, rental-only town and industrial park on 24 hectares, planned to grow to about 10,000 residents. ## Who is Ciudad Morazán for? Working- and middle-class Hondurans, not international investors. That is the deliberate difference from its better-known counterparts: it is a blue-collar Free City, and its design answers problems common in the region such as insecurity, weak public services and patchy infrastructure. ## How many ZEDEs are there in Honduras? Three, all approved under the ZEDE law of 2013, and two of them are places where people live: Ciudad Morazán outside Choloma in the industrial north and Próspera on the island of Roatán. ## Can you buy a home in Ciudad Morazán? No. The town follows a rental model: homes and commercial premises are leased rather than sold, and rents include security, maintenance and services. ## Is Ciudad Morazán part of Honduras? Yes. As a ZEDE it sets its own fiscal and regulatory rules in exchange for a share of its tax revenue, but it remains part of Honduras and bound by the national constitution and criminal law. ## How much does it cost to live in Ciudad Morazán? Rents are set for factory wages: a 60 m² townhouse lets for a few thousand lempiras a month with services included, and the new apartments are cheaper still. The town publishes current rents on its own site. --- # Próspera URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Type: Special Jurisdiction Stage: Operational Country: Honduras Region: Latin America Established: 2017 Population: 200–500 residents Businesses: About 350 Climate: Tropical Languages: English, Spanish Industries: Biotech & Longevity, Crypto & Fintech, Technology, Hospitality Who it is for: International entrepreneurs & innovators Coordinates: 16.368, -86.471 Official website: https://www.prospera.co/ Also known as: Próspera ZEDE, Prospera, Prospera Honduras, Prospera Roatán Próspera is a special economic zone on the island of Roatán, Honduras, created under the country’s ZEDE law: a jurisdiction with its own civil and commercial rules, tax code and arbitration, built to attract entrepreneurs and new industries. ## What Próspera is Próspera is one of Honduras’s Zones for Employment and Economic Development (ZEDEs): a special jurisdiction created under national law that writes its own civil, commercial, labour and environmental rules while remaining part of Honduras, bound by the constitution, criminal law and international treaties. It describes itself as a governance platform where entrepreneurs are “free to build”, and it is the most developed project of its kind anywhere. It is a public-private partnership. The Próspera ZEDE is a Honduran local-government jurisdiction under the constitution; the platform that runs it is furnished by Honduras Próspera Inc., a company founded by Erick Brimen and backed by investors including Pronomos Capital and, later, Coinbase Ventures. The zone is headed by a Technical Secretary, a Honduran official appointed by the state, and its rules require approval from CAMP, the national committee that oversees the ZEDEs. ## Where Próspera is Próspera sits on the west side of Roatán, the largest of Honduras’s Bay Islands, about 65 kilometres off the Caribbean coast and around twenty minutes from Roatán’s international airport, which has direct flights from Miami, Houston, Atlanta, Denver, Toronto and Madrid. Its two districts are a twenty-minute walk apart: the Beta District, the first hillside campus, and Pristine Bay, a beach resort with an eighteen-hole golf course. The jurisdiction also includes a mainland site near La Ceiba, incorporated in 2021 and intended for manufacturing. The zone started with under five acres in 2017 and grows by consent: land enters Próspera only when its owner chooses to incorporate it, recorded in the public land registry. ## How Próspera is governed Próspera’s legal system is built on common-law foundations, with an unusual choice of regulation: a business may operate under the default common-law liability rules, adopt the regulatory regime of an OECD country such as the United States, Canada, Sweden or the state of Delaware, adopt Próspera’s own best-practice rules, or propose its own, backed by regulatory insurance. Its charter incorporates the U.S. Bill of Rights and prohibits the expropriation of land. ### Taxes The published tax code is short. Personal income tax works out at an effective 5 percent, business income tax at an effective 1 percent of gross revenue, value-added tax at an effective 2.5 percent, and there is a 1 percent tax on the unimproved value of land. There is no capital gains, estate, inheritance, wealth, payroll or gift tax and no import or export duties. Twelve percent of the zone’s taxes and fees go to the Honduran national government, and the charter caps what Próspera may collect at 7.5 percent of its economic output. ### Courts and currency Disputes go by default to the Próspera Arbitration Center, whose roster includes former state supreme court justices from the United States, though parties may agree on other courts. The lempira and the US dollar circulate, and Bitcoin is recognised as an official unit of account in which taxes and fees can be paid. ## Living and working in Próspera Anyone entering the zone signs an Agreement of Coexistence, as the ZEDE law requires. Residency and e-Residency are open to foreigners and Hondurans alike for an annual fee, and a company can be formed online in under a day. By charter, at least 90 percent of employees must be Honduran and wages must exceed the national minimum. The built environment includes the Duna Residences tower, the tallest building on Roatán, with studios and apartments, coworking and a makerspace; the Beta Building, which houses the arbitration centre; a hotel, beach club and golf course at Pristine Bay; a Montessori school; a clinic; and a Bitcoin centre. The businesses on site cluster in biotechnology and longevity medicine, crypto and fintech, technology and hospitality. ## How Próspera came about Honduras amended its constitution in 2012 and passed the ZEDE Organic Law in 2013 to allow special jurisdictions with their own legal and fiscal systems. Erick Brimen applied for a zone on Roatán in 2017 and Próspera was approved that December; the first residents and businesses arrived in 2020, construction of the Beta District began in 2021, and the e-Residency programme launched the same year. ### Legal status Congress voted to repeal the ZEDE law in April 2022, and in September 2024 the Supreme Court declared the ZEDE constitutional amendments unconstitutional. Próspera continues to operate. It holds a fifty-year legal-stability agreement with the Honduran state, the repeal of the constitutional articles was never ratified by a subsequent legislature as the constitution requires, and the developer points to protections under the Honduras-Kuwait investment treaty and the CAFTA-DR trade agreement. Honduras Próspera Inc. has brought a claim before the World Bank’s ICSID tribunal, and the zone’s Technical Secretary and independent legal opinions have concluded that it may keep operating while the dispute is resolved. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Built on site: Beta Building, the first completed development, opened 2020 and now home to the Próspera Arbitration Center; Pristine Bay, which joined in 2021: the Las Verandas hotel, the beach club and the Black Pearl golf course; Circular Factory, the robotic woodworking shop, opened 2023; Duna Residences, fourteen storeys, opened 2024 and at full occupancy from early 2025; The Make.DIY makerspace, the Infinita clinic and Pristine Academy; More than 34,000 m² of floor space built and about 1,000 acres incorporated Recent developments: Sep 2026: host of the Free Cities Conference; Jan 2026: a new Honduran government under President Nasry Asfura; Honduras began rejoining ICSID in Feb and Mar 2026; Feb 2025: the ICSID tribunal rejected Honduras’s preliminary objection; Sep 2024: residency and e-Residency fees set at US$130 a year; applications resumed in Dec 2024 after the Supreme Court ruling; Aug 2024: 1,793 (e)Residents registered, 79 of them living full time on Roatán; independent reporting counted about 200 permanent residents in Aug 2026 ## Where is Próspera? On the west side of Roatán, the largest of Honduras’s Bay Islands, about twenty minutes from the island’s international airport. It has two districts, the Beta District and Pristine Bay, plus a mainland site near La Ceiba. ## What is Próspera ZEDE? A Zone for Employment and Economic Development, the Honduran legal form for a special jurisdiction with its own civil law, taxes and courts inside the country. Próspera is the most developed of the three ZEDEs. ## Is Próspera legal, and is it part of Honduras? Yes to both. Próspera remains part of Honduras, bound by its constitution and criminal law. Congress repealed the ZEDE law in 2022 and the Supreme Court ruled against the ZEDE amendments in 2024, but the zone operates under a fifty-year legal-stability agreement and treaty protections, and the dispute is before an international tribunal. ## What is a ZEDE? A Zone for Employment and Economic Development, in Spanish Zona de Empleo y Desarrollo Económico: a Honduran legal form, created by constitutional amendment in 2012 and organic law in 2013, under which a jurisdiction writes its own civil, commercial, labour and fiscal rules while remaining part of Honduras and bound by its constitution, criminal law and treaties. Three have been approved, and two of them are places to live: Próspera on the island of Roatán and Ciudad Morazán near Choloma. ## What taxes does Próspera charge? An effective 5 percent income tax for individuals, 1 percent of gross revenue for businesses, 2.5 percent value-added tax and a 1 percent land-value tax, with no capital gains, inheritance, payroll or gift taxes. Twelve percent of its revenue goes to the Honduran government. ## Can I live in Próspera? Yes. Residency is open to foreigners and Hondurans for an annual fee, e-Residency lets you form and run a company without living there, and everyone signs an Agreement of Coexistence. Housing ranges from the Duna Residences tower to resort villas; the zone publishes its own listings. ## What is the cost of living in Próspera? Prices follow Roatán’s tourism economy rather than the Honduran mainland: housing in the zone is let in US dollars by the night or the month, and most goods are imported to the island. Próspera publishes current rents and prices on its own site. --- # Sark URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/sark Type: Sovereign Territory Stage: Operational Country: Guernsey, Channel Islands Region: Europe Established: 1565 Population: 250–1,000 residents Area: 5.4 km² Climate: Oceanic Languages: English, French Industries: Tourism & Hospitality, Agriculture & Fishing, Remote Work Who it is for: Individuals and families looking for a simpler lifestyle Coordinates: 49.43, -2.358 Official website: https://sarkgov.co.uk/ Also known as: Isle of Sark, Sercq Sark is a small self-governing island in the English Channel, part of the Bailiwick of Guernsey and a Crown Dependency rather than part of the United Kingdom, with its own parliament, its own tax system and no cars. ## What Sark is Sark is one of the Channel Islands and one of the smallest self-governing territories in the world. It belongs to the Bailiwick of Guernsey, a British Crown Dependency, which makes it a possession of the Crown rather than part of the United Kingdom or the European Union, with its own parliament, the Chief Pleas, and its own body of law. Cars are banned, and in 2011 it became the world’s first Dark Sky Island. ## Where Sark is The island lies in the south-western English Channel off the coast of Normandy and covers about 5.4 square kilometres including the neighbouring island of Brecqhou. There is no airport: the crossing is by ferry from St Peter Port on Guernsey, roughly 55 minutes, and the nearest airports are Guernsey’s and Jersey’s. ## How Sark is governed The Chief Pleas is Sark’s parliament: eighteen elected Conseillers, half of whom stand every two years, with a Speaker and the Seigneur sitting without a vote. The Seigneur holds the island as a fief from the Crown, a title held since 2016 by Christopher Beaumont, the 23rd Seigneur; he may delay primary legislation, but the Chief Pleas can override him by a simple majority. Sark’s laws take effect with Royal Assent through the Privy Council, and the island sets its own budget independently of Guernsey. ### Tax Sark levies no income tax, no capital gains tax, no inheritance tax and no sales tax. Public spending is funded instead by a property tax, a personal capital tax that every adult resident pays within a fixed annual band, duties on alcohol, tobacco and fuel, and a transfer tax on property sales. ## Living on Sark Around five hundred people live on the island year-round, rising to about a thousand in the tourist season. Anyone who is a British citizen or entitled to live in the United Kingdom may move to Sark. Homes built since 1976 are reserved for people with fifteen years’ residence or local family ties, while the older “open market” dwellings can be bought or rented by newcomers without restriction, and residents join the electoral roll after two years. ## How Sark came about The fief of Sark was granted in 1565 by Elizabeth I to Helier de Carteret, on condition that he settle forty armed men there to hold the island against pirates. The tenants of those original holdings sat in the Chief Pleas by right for more than four centuries, which made Sark the last feudal state in Europe, until a new constitution brought the island its first fully democratic elections in 2008. ## The plan to renew Sark The island is also the object of a long-running attempt to renew it, and that effort is much of the reason Sark is listed here alongside projects built from nothing. By 2020 its resident population had fallen to about 360 from some 600 a decade earlier, the average resident was 65 years old, much of the housing stood empty or derelict, and the only supermarket was thought to be close to closing. Swen Lorenz, an investor who had made the island his base in 2017, answered with a manual on how and why to move to Sark: the BBC picked the campaign up within a day, and 120 new residents had registered four months later. He and Christopher Beaumont have argued since, in their talks and interviews, that self-government of this kind is only as durable as the community carrying it. An investment plan followed, prepared with the Seigneur and his heir Hugh Beaumont and made public in 2023: buy and restore up to £100m of the island’s existing buildings, which they calculated could house about 1,200 people without adding a square foot, and pay for the expert work behind a long-term plan if the island wanted one. The vehicle was the Guernsey-registered Sark Property Company, set up by the two of them with the Seigneur as one of its two directors. Its proposals reached past property to a guarantee that would let a bank write the island’s first mortgages, affordable housing, harbour studies and a seeded emergency fund, and Lorenz proposed listing the company publicly, with a cap on any one holder’s votes so that no investor could buy a jurisdiction. Its £20m cash bid for the Barclay family’s Sark portfolio, about a fifth of the island’s land, was turned down in 2024 over the asking price. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Jul 2026: five of the Barclay family’s Sark properties listed individually, among them two former hotels; the Sark Property Company said it would not buy piecemeal; Jan 2026: Chief Pleas took up proposals to tax residents by their assets rather than by the size of the house they live in; Dec 2025: Sark sought a £1.5m loan from Guernsey against future alcohol duty; Swen Lorenz reviewed the island’s position in Demography is Destiny; Nov 2025: budget for 2026 passed with spending up about 14 percent to £2.5m and the personal capital tax band set at £630 to £12,619; Nov 2024: the bid turned down, the owners’ asking price higher than the company would pay; Oct 2024: the Sark Property Company bid £20m in cash for the Barclay portfolio, about a fifth of the island’s land, excluding Brecqhou; Sep 2023: population of 562 published from the 2022 census ## Who owns Sark? No one owns the island outright. The Seigneur, Christopher Beaumont, holds Sark as a fief from the Crown, which is a title and a set of obligations rather than a deed to the land, and the ground itself is in private hands in a pattern that goes back to the forty holdings of 1565. The Barclay family holds about a fifth of the island’s surface, together with the neighbouring island of Brecqhou. ## What is the Sark Property Company? A Guernsey-registered company set up by the investor Swen Lorenz and Christopher Beaumont, the 23rd Seigneur, who is one of its two directors, to buy and restore a large part of Sark’s building stock and to pay for the expert work behind a long-term plan for the island. It was conceived as a perpetual capital vehicle, and more than a hundred investors gave binding commitments to a fundraising of about £35m. ## What happened to the bid for the Barclay estate? The company bid £20m in cash in October 2024 for the Barclay family’s Sark portfolio in one piece, some 80 homes, four hotels, 20 commercial properties and 139 acres, though not Brecqhou. The offer carried no conditions and stood for thirty days. It was turned down at the end of November 2024, the owners’ asking price being higher than the company judged the portfolio to be worth. ## Can you buy a house on Sark? Yes, within limits. Homes built since 1976 are reserved for people with fifteen years’ residence or local family ties, while the older “open market” houses can be bought by anyone. It is a small market and was a cash one for centuries, since lending against land was outlawed in 1611 and mortgages were legalised only in 2021, and several of the Barclay family’s former hotels and houses were listed individually in July 2026. ## Can I move to Sark? Yes, if you are a British citizen or entitled to live in the United Kingdom and can find somewhere to live. There is no income tax, capital gains tax or inheritance tax; residents pay a property tax and a personal capital tax within a fixed band, and may vote after two years. Housing is the real constraint, which is what the repopulation campaign of 2020 and the investment plans since were meant to loosen. ## How many people live on Sark? There were 562 at the 2022 census, and the island’s government puts the resident population at around five hundred, rising to about a thousand in the summer season. The figure is the island’s central question rather than a piece of trivia: it had fallen to about 360 during the 2010s before a campaign to attract new residents turned it round. --- # Liberland URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland Type: Sovereign Territory Stage: Complicated Country: Croatia / Serbia Region: Europe Established: 2015 Population: No permanent residents Area: 7 km² Climate: Humid Continental Languages: English Who it is for: Adventurous libertarians Coordinates: 45.77, 18.872 Official website: https://liberland.org/ Also known as: Free Republic of Liberland, Republic of Liberland, Gornja Siga Liberland is a self-declared micronation on a seven-square-kilometre parcel of Danube floodplain between Croatia and Serbia, proclaimed in 2015 on land that neither neighbour administers and run on libertarian principles. ## What Liberland is Liberland, formally the Free Republic of Liberland, is an aspiring state proclaimed on 13 April 2015 by the Czech politician Vít Jedlička. It has a constitution, a provisional government with a president and ministers, a congress elected by its citizens on its own blockchain, a flag and a unit of account, the Liberland merit. No member of the United Nations recognises it, and it counts among the best-known micronations in the world. Its motto is “To Live and Let Live”. ## Where Liberland is The territory is Gornja Siga, a wooded floodplain of about seven square kilometres on the western bank of the Danube between Croatia and Serbia. Because of an unresolved border dispute, Serbia does not claim the parcel and Croatia holds that it belongs to Serbia, which left it administered by neither state; Liberland’s founders treat it as terra nullius, land belonging to no one. The nearest village is Zmajevac in Croatia, about six kilometres away, and the nearest airports are Osijek in Croatia, Belgrade and Budapest. ## How Liberland is governed Liberland’s constitution is written to protect individual freedom and to constrain the growth of government, and the project experiments with an open approach to lawmaking in which citizens take part directly. Its government is provisional, headed by a president and four ministers, with a Congress and a Senate; elections and much of its decision-making run on the Liberland blockchain, where citizens vote and hold the merit. The project describes itself as the first republic governed on-chain. ## Citizenship and living in Liberland Liberland grants citizenship to applicants who accept its principles and contribute to the project; it keeps a roll of registered citizens, a far larger number of applications, and an e-residency open to anyone. Settlement on the ground has been the harder part. Croatia controls the approaches and for years turned visitors back; since August 2023 Liberland reports a permanent group of settlers on the territory and a border crossing agreed with the Croatian police, while its supporters have built a community nearby in Apatin, on the Serbian side of the river, with a business incubator in the town’s free trade zone. ## How Liberland came about The parcel became available through the border dispute that followed the break-up of Yugoslavia: Croatia claims the border along the old cadastral line, Serbia along the river’s present course, leaving pockets on each bank that one side claims and the other declines. Jedlička, then active in the Czech Free Citizens Party, proclaimed Liberland on the largest of the pockets on the western bank in April 2015 and invited the world to apply for citizenship; hundreds of thousands did within weeks. In the years since, the project has built a network of representative offices abroad, held its first on-chain elections and hosted an annual gathering on the Serbian side of the river. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Sep 2026: 1,323 registered citizens and about 814,000 citizenship applications, by Liberland’s own counters; Dec 2025: congressional elections held on the Liberland blockchain; Mar 2024: some 200 people entered the territory during a settlement gathering; Aug 2023: Liberland reports a permanent settler group on the territory and a border crossing agreed with the Croatian police; A business incubator and the ARK Village community in Apatin, Serbia ## Is Liberland a country? Not in the eyes of any recognised state: no UN member recognises it, and it does not administer the land it claims. Liberland argues that it meets the criteria of statehood, with a defined territory, a citizenry, a government and relations with other states, and it maintains representative offices in dozens of countries. ## Where is Liberland? On the western bank of the Danube between Croatia and Serbia, on a parcel of about seven square kilometres known as Gornja Siga. The nearest village is Zmajevac in Croatia; the nearest airports are Osijek, Belgrade and Budapest. ## How big is Liberland? About seven square kilometres, or 7.2 by Liberland’s own measurement: roughly the size of Gibraltar, and larger than Monaco or the Vatican. ## How many people live in Liberland? No permanent population is recognised by other states. Liberland reports a core group of settlers on the territory since August 2023, and its citizens, more than a thousand registered and many hundreds of thousands who have applied, live around the world. The project itself continues: it holds elections on its own blockchain, maintains representative offices abroad and gathers on the territory every April. ## Can you visit Liberland? Getting in is the hard part. Croatia has policed the approaches since May 2015, a month after the proclamation, when the founders were turned back and briefly detained, and in September 2023 Croatian forestry workers and police cleared the wooden structures built on the site. Liberland reports a crossing agreed with the Croatian police since August 2023, and its supporters keep a base at Apatin on the Serbian bank, from which the territory is reached by boat. ## When was Liberland founded? On 13 April 2015, when the Czech politician Vít Jedlička and Jana Markovicova proclaimed the Free Republic of Liberland on Gornja Siga and raised its flag there. Jedlička has served as president since, and the anniversary is marked on the territory every April. ## How do you become a citizen of Liberland? By applying online. E-residency is free and open to anyone; citizenship is granted to applicants who accept Liberland’s principles and contribute to the project. Liberland sets out the steps on its own site. --- # Atlas Island URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/atlas-island Type: Seastead Stage: In Planning Region: At Sea Established: 2021 Languages: English Who it is for: Seasteading enthusiasts Coordinates: -31.633, 8.333 Official website: https://atlasisland.org/ Also known as: Atlas Island seastead Atlas Island is a seasteading project, founded in 2021 by members of The Seasteading Institute’s community, that plans to grow in stages from an online community into a floating city-state of privately operated platforms in international waters. ## What Atlas Island is Atlas Island is a seasteading project that aims to build a permanent floating community in international waters, beyond the jurisdiction of any existing state. It describes itself as an international community of people who believe in freedom and individual sovereignty, its principles are anarcho-capitalist, and its slogan is “vote with your boat”. It was founded in 2021 by ambassadors of The Seasteading Institute, took its name from the novel Atlas Shrugged, and set itself the goal of making seasteading a reality within ten years. ## How Atlas Island works The project envisions a gradual, staged path. It begins as an online community of like-minded people who refine the plans and work with the Seasteading Institute on flags and legal frameworks; it grows into a network of members living aboard vessels and in containerised buildings, then into marina communities in each region of the world, ideally beside Free Cities; from there into floating platforms anchored in coastal waters, and finally into platforms that move into international waters behind their own breakwaters. The final stage is a self-sustaining seastead that operates independently of onshore governments. ## How Atlas Island will be governed Atlas Island is imagined as a patchwork of free private cities on the water. Each platform is to be owned and operated privately, and the relationship between a platform and its residents is set out in a written Resident Contract that lists the services the operator provides and the user fees residents pay; the project is opposed to taxes and offers no citizenship, because it does not claim authority over anyone. Platforms would first fly flags of convenience chosen for the freedom they allow, with the eventual goal of declaring full autonomy under a flag of their own. A defining principle is exit: because residents own their own vessels or buildings, they are free to leave at any time and take their home, business and property with them. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Stage one: an online community recruiting members; Presented at the Free Cities Conference 2025 in Prague alongside ArkPad ## What is Atlas Island? A seasteading project founded in 2021 that plans, in five stages, to move its members from an online community onto vessels and containerised homes, then onto privately operated floating platforms in international waters. ## Where will Atlas Island be? No site has been chosen. Its marinas are planned near metropolitan areas and ideally in Free Cities, its first platforms in coastal waters, and its final settlement in open water with few hurricanes; the project points to the South Atlantic as one such region. ## Will Atlas Island offer citizenship? No. Because it does not claim authority over its residents, it offers a Resident Contract rather than citizenship: a written agreement setting out the platform’s services and the user fees that pay for them. --- # Veritas Villages URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/veritas-villages Type: Intentional Community Stage: Operational Region: Latin America Established: 2023 Climate: Tropical Languages: Spanish, English Industries: Remote Work Who it is for: Families, retirees and freedom-seekers Official website: https://www.veritasvillages.com/?ref=Peter-Young Also known as: Veritas Villages by Autris, Veritas Village Veritas Villages is a network of off-grid, self-sustaining freedom communities developed across Latin America by Autris. Every village is built around the F.I.R.S.T. philosophy of Freedom, Independence, Resiliency, Self-Sustainability and Transparency, letting residents live more self-reliantly while sharing amenities and community across several locations. ## What Veritas Villages is Veritas Villages is a network of intentional communities in Latin America rather than a single development, and it is designed to keep growing. The villages profiled here are Playa Pacifica on the Pacific coast of Nicaragua, which opened first; Coronado on a hillside above the Panamanian Pacific and Chiriquí in the western Panamanian foothills; and Atenas, the largest of them, in the Central Valley of Costa Rica. The developer, Autris, names further communities in Belize, Honduras and El Salvador, and has said it intends to expand into Mexico, Ecuador and Argentina. Each village is organised around a standard its founder Patrick Hiebert calls F.I.R.S.T.: Freedom, Independence, Resiliency, Self-Sustainability and Transparency. Hiebert and his son Spencer spent years living aboard a boat, generating their own power and fresh water, and the villages carry that experience onto land. Spencer drew the first plans during the pandemic lockdowns, and the intent has not changed since: to depend less on centralised institutions, from governments to utilities to banks. ## Where the villages are Playa Pacifica is a neighbourhood inside the Gran Pacifica beach and golf resort on Nicaragua’s Pacific coast, between one and one and a half hours from Managua and its international airport. Coronado stands on a Pacific-facing hillside ten minutes above the town of Coronado, west of Panama City; Chiriquí lies in the foothills of western Panama between La Concepción and Bugaba, half an hour from the Costa Rican border. Atenas occupies a river valley in Costa Rica’s Central Valley, about half an hour from San José’s international airport. Each village has a page of its own with its land, its master plan and what stands on it. ## How the villages work The villages are meant to work off grid from the outset rather than adding solar panels to a conventional subdivision. Power comes from the sun, water from wells and springs on the property, and waste water is treated locally and reused for irrigation. Food production is part of the layout rather than a hobby: every master plan sets aside orchards and community gardens, and most add a greenhouse, a chicken coop or a hydroponic growing area. Each site is chosen partly for whether its soil and rainfall can carry them. Because the villages share one developer and one standard, they are designed as a network: a household that settles in Panama is meant to have somewhere to stay on the Nicaraguan coast or in the Costa Rican hills. The mix differs by site, but the elements that recur are a community pool, gardens and orchards, a workshop, and a place to eat at the centre of the village. Veritas Villages do not seek legal autonomy from their host countries. They are private communities under ordinary national law, and the freedom they pursue is practical rather than jurisdictional: self-government inside the community, and enough local production of power, water and food that daily life depends less on outside systems. That places them closer to the intentional-community tradition than to the Charter City or Free Private City models covered elsewhere on this site. ## How Veritas Villages came about Patrick Hiebert had built an off-grid community in Nicaragua, Milagro Verde, in 2009, and the family’s years at sea supplied the rest of the method. Playa Pacifica opened in 2023 as the first village, inside a resort where the amenities already existed; Autris, the developer Hiebert leads, took over the Panamanian village company in October 2023, launched Coronado in July 2024 with most of its homesites reserved on the first day, and bought the Atenas land in September 2025, the largest purchase in the network so far. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Dec 2025: homes rising on their lots at Coronado, with the first deliveries expected in early 2026; Sep 2025: the Atenas land purchase completed, 138 hectares; Jul 2025: the Playa Pacifica property acquired by Autris, with ten homes completed or under way and 43 homesites in the plan; Mar 2025: the first homes broke ground at Coronado; Jul 2024: Coronado launched, with most homesites reserved on the first day ## What does F.I.R.S.T. stand for? Freedom, Independence, Resiliency, Self-Sustainability and Transparency. It is the standard the developer applies to every village, and in practice it shows up as on-site power and water, food grown within the community, and decisions taken and recorded openly among residents. ## Are Veritas Villages autonomous territories or special jurisdictions? No. Each village is a private community under the ordinary law of its host country, with no special legal status, no separate courts and no negotiated charter. The independence they pursue is infrastructural and social rather than legal, which distinguishes them from Charter Cities, Special Economic Zones and Free Private Cities. ## Can residents move between the villages? That is the idea behind running them as a network. The villages share a developer and a common standard, so a household settled in one is meant to be able to use the others, from surf and golf on the Nicaraguan coast to farmland in the Panamanian highlands. ## Who is behind Veritas Villages? The developer is Autris, and the villages were founded by Patrick Hiebert, its chief executive, with his son Spencer Hiebert, who leads the design work. Patrick Hiebert had built self-sustainable communities for years before the first village, beginning in Nicaragua in 2009, and has spoken about the project at Free Cities Foundation events. --- # Veritas Village - Atenas URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/veritas-villages/atenas Type: Intentional Community Stage: In Planning Country: Costa Rica Region: Latin America Area: 340 acres (138 ha) Climate: Tropical Savanna Languages: Spanish, English Who it is for: Families, retirees Coordinates: 9.97, -84.38 Official website: https://www.veritasvillages.com/atenas?ref=Peter-Young Also known as: Veritas Village Atenas, Veritas Villages Costa Rica The largest of the villages by a wide margin: more than 340 acres of river valley and coffee land in the hills above Atenas, half an hour from San José’s international airport. Its master plan, dated July 2026, sets out a terraced house community, a denser European style village and a hillside hotel. ## The land Veritas Village – Atenas occupies more than 340 acres, about 138 hectares, in the hills around Atenas, a town in Costa Rica’s Central Valley west of San José. It is the largest site in the network by a wide margin, and the easiest to reach from outside the region: Juan Santamaría International Airport is roughly half an hour away, and the plan signposts San José on one side of the valley and the Pacific coast on the other. The land is a river valley. Watercourses run the length of the property and the master plan marks natural waterfalls along them, with the housing set on the ground above. Around forty acres are an established coffee plantation, which the developer intends to keep in production and sell under the village’s own label. Atenas has a long local reputation for its climate, and that reputation is much of the reason the town has drawn foreign residents for decades. ## Getting there Atenas is a town in the province of Alajuela in Costa Rica’s Central Valley, west of San José. Juan Santamaría International Airport is roughly half an hour away, and the plan signposts San José on one side of the valley and the Pacific coast on the other, which makes it the easiest of the villages to reach from outside the region. ## Homes and amenities The plan, dated July 2026, divides the valley into a terraced house community, a denser quarter it calls the European style village, and a hillside terrace hotel at the far end, with two gated entrances and house models between about 400 and 3,400 square feet. The developer has announced a first phase of roughly seventy homesites. The programme is the most elaborate of the four villages. Alongside the welcome centre sits an equestrian zone, and the plan adds a hobby farm, a farmers’ market park, a restaurant and a viewpoint café, a workshop and a co-work lounge, a fitness centre with a pool, racquet courts and a small football pitch, a family park with a playground and ziplines, mountain bike trails, a disc golf course, a campsite, a yoga palapa, a pet hotel and a panoramic skywalk over the valley. Community orchards, gardens and park land are woven between the housing rather than pushed to the edges. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Built on site: Land purchase completed, more than 340 acres; Roughly 40 acres of coffee plantation in production; Master plan drawn, July 2026 In the master plan: A first phase of about 70 homesites; Welcome centre and equestrian zone; Hobby farm and farmers’ market park; Restaurant, viewpoint café and co-work lounge; Fitness centre with pool, racquet courts and football pitch; Mountain bike trails, disc golf and a campsite; Panoramic skywalk and family park with ziplines ## Where is Veritas Village Atenas? In the hills around Atenas, a town in the province of Alajuela in Costa Rica’s Central Valley, about half an hour from Juan Santamaría International Airport near San José. ## How big is the Atenas village? More than 340 acres, about 138 hectares, of river valley and coffee land, the largest site in the Veritas network by a wide margin, with a first phase of roughly seventy homesites. ## What is planned at Atenas? A terraced house community, a denser European style village and a hillside hotel, around a programme of orchards, gardens, an equestrian zone, a farmers’ market, restaurants, sports facilities, trails and a viewing skywalk, with house models from about 400 to 3,400 square feet. --- # Veritas Village - Playa Pacifica URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/veritas-villages/playa-pacifica Type: Intentional Community Stage: Operational Country: Nicaragua Region: Latin America Established: 2023 Population: Under 50 residents Climate: Tropical Savanna Languages: Spanish, English Industries: Remote Work Who it is for: Families, retirees Coordinates: 11.91, -86.615 Official website: https://www.veritasvillages.com/playa-pacifica?ref=Peter-Young Also known as: Veritas Village Playa Pacifica, Veritas Villages Nicaragua The first Veritas Village to open, and the only one built inside an existing resort. It is a beachfront neighbourhood inside Gran Pacifica on Nicaragua’s Pacific coast, between one and one and a half hours from Managua, sharing the resort’s nine-hole golf course, stables, beachfront pools and surf break. ## The village Veritas Village – Playa Pacifica is a neighbourhood inside Gran Pacifica, a gated beach and golf resort on the Pacific coast of Nicaragua. It opened in 2023 as the first of the villages, and it is the only one built into an existing resort rather than laid out on land developed from scratch. The village itself is arranged around a clubhouse and restaurant set back from the shore, with a beachfront pool below it and a community orchard and a bird-watching spot at the inland end, and because it opened first it is where the network’s ideas about off-grid services and shared amenities have had the longest to be tested in practice. ## Getting there The resort lies on the Pacific coast west of Managua, between one hour and ninety minutes by road from the capital and its international airport, at the end of a private road through the resort gates. ## Homes and amenities That arrangement gives residents a set of amenities a young community could not have built on its own. The resort brings a nine-hole golf course, grass tennis, disc golf, stables and horseback riding on the sand, yoga palapas, several restaurants and a long stretch of coast with a surf break. A sea turtle sanctuary operates on the beach, a cause the village’s founder has supported through his own foundation for more than a decade. The master plan mixes detached homes on their own plots, a row of houses along the beach, a crescent of deluxe condos and two blocks it labels luxury villas, in a Spanish idiom of white walls and red tile roofs. It is a small community by design, with some forty homesites and a future condominium building. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Built on site: Homes occupied since 2023; Nine-hole golf course, tennis and disc golf; Stables and horseback riding on the beach; Clubhouse, restaurants and beachfront pools; Surf break and sea turtle sanctuary on the shore In the master plan: Further villas and beachfront houses from the master plan; Expanded community orchard and gardens Recent developments: Jul 2025: the property acquired by Autris, with ten homes completed, occupied or under construction and 43 homesites in the master plan ## Where is Veritas Village Playa Pacifica? Inside the Gran Pacifica beach and golf resort on Nicaragua’s Pacific coast, between one hour and ninety minutes west of Managua and its international airport. ## Is Playa Pacifica part of a resort? Yes. It is the only Veritas Village built inside an existing resort, which is why it shares Gran Pacifica’s golf course, tennis, stables, restaurants, surf break and turtle sanctuary from the start. ## What homes are there at Playa Pacifica? Detached homes on their own plots, a row of beachfront houses, deluxe condos and villas in a Spanish style of white walls and red tile roofs, on a small master plan of some forty homesites. --- # Veritas Village - Chiriquí URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/veritas-villages/chiriqui Type: Intentional Community Stage: In Development Country: Panama Region: Latin America Established: 2025 Climate: Tropical Wet Languages: Spanish, English Who it is for: Families, retirees Coordinates: 8.51, -82.64 Official website: https://www.veritasvillages.com/chiriqui?ref=Peter-Young Also known as: Veritas Village Chiriquí, Veritas Villages Panama The smallest and most agricultural of the villages: fourteen lots and four guest units on volcanic soil in the foothills of western Panama, between La Concepción and Bugaba, with a river along one boundary and half an hour to the Costa Rican border. ## The land Veritas Village – Chiriquí sits in the foothills of western Panama, between the towns of La Concepción and Bugaba. Chiriquí is Panama’s agricultural province, and this is the village where that matters most: the land is volcanic soil with a river running along one boundary and a swimming hole where residents reach it. ## Getting there The village is within reach of David, the provincial capital and the largest city in the west of the country, which has the region’s airport. The Costa Rican border is about half an hour away by road and the Pacific coast under an hour, which places the site between the highlands and the sea. ## Homes and the plan The climate is temperate rather than hot, warm through the day and cool in the evening, and wet enough to grow food all year. Of the four villages it is the one where self-sufficiency asks least of the site: a food forest, community gardens, a greenhouse and a chicken coop are all drawn into a plan of just fourteen lots. It is also deliberately small. The master plan divides the property into fourteen residential lots, between roughly 490 and 810 square metres each, arranged along a private road and around a shared centre with a community pool, a rancho, a workshop and four guest units. Further land alongside is marked for a later phase. Seven house models are offered, from a studio of about 400 square feet to a three-bedroom of around 1,150, each named after a bird found in the region. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Built on site: Land held and surveyed, master plan drawn; Water drawn from sources on the property; River access and swimming hole In the master plan: Fourteen residential lots and four guest units; Community pool and rancho; Greenhouse, food forest and community gardens; Workshop and chicken coop; A later phase on the adjoining land ## Where is Veritas Village Chiriquí? In the foothills of Chiriquí province in western Panama, between La Concepción and Bugaba, near the city of David, about half an hour from the Costa Rican border. ## How many lots does Chiriquí have? Fourteen residential lots of roughly 490 to 810 square metres, plus four guest units, arranged along a private road around a shared centre with a pool, a rancho and a workshop; further land alongside is set aside for a later phase. ## What is the climate like at Chiriquí? Temperate rather than hot: warm through the day and cool in the evening, on volcanic soil with enough rain to grow food all year, which is why the plan gives so much space to a food forest, gardens and a greenhouse. --- # Veritas Village - Coronado URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/veritas-villages/coronado Type: Intentional Community Stage: In Development Country: Panama Region: Latin America Established: 2025 Area: 19.2 ha Climate: Tropical Savanna Languages: Spanish, English Who it is for: Families, retirees Coordinates: 8.573, -79.985 Official website: https://www.veritasvillages.com/coronado?ref=Peter-Young Also known as: Veritas Village Coronado, Veritas Villages Panama A hillside village of 87 lots on the Panamanian Pacific coast, ten minutes above the town of Coronado at between 250 and 350 metres. Its welcome centre is built to run entirely off grid, and the master plan sets out a school, stables, a tilapia pond and an amphitheatre among the lots. ## The land Veritas Village – Coronado stands on a Pacific-facing hillside about ten minutes’ drive above the town of Coronado, at between 250 and 350 metres, high enough that the plan marks ocean and valley views across the site. The elevation gives the site a milder version of the coastal climate: warm enough to use a pool through the day, and cool enough in the evenings to cut back on air conditioning. The master plan divides the hillside into 87 numbered lots, ranging from around 500 to more than 5,000 square metres, threaded with hiking trails and set around a creek along one edge of the property. There is a main gate with a guard station and a second entrance lower down. ## Getting there Coronado is a Pacific beach town west of Panama City and the country’s best-established hub for international residents; the village is about ten minutes’ drive up the hillside above it, close enough to use the town’s shops, clinics and beaches. ## Homes and amenities The welcome centre is designed to run entirely off grid on its own solar power and water, and serves as the working demonstration of how the rest of the village is meant to operate. Thirteen house models are offered, from a studio of about 400 square feet to a family house of roughly 3,400, each named after a Panamanian bird, and residents can also build to their own design. The shared programme is set out in unusual detail for a village of this size. Alongside the welcome centre and community pool the plan places a farmers’ market, a clinic, a conference palapa and an international school at the entrance; tennis, padel and volleyball courts and a gym; a tilapia pond with a beach; stables and a chicken coop; a woodworking shop and music studio; community orchards, gardens and a hydroponic growing and food-processing area; and, further down the slope, a restaurant with a viewing deck, an amphitheatre, a fire lounge, a disc golf course and a butterfly garden and bird sanctuary. ## Where things stand (as of Q4 2025) Built on site: Welcome centre, running fully off grid on solar and its own water; Main access, guard station and hillside roads; First houses under construction on their lots In the master plan: Farmers’ market, clinic and conference palapa; Expat international school; Community pool, gym and tennis, padel and volleyball courts; Stables, chicken coop and tilapia pond; Woodworking shop and music studio; Orchards, gardens and hydroponic growing area; Restaurant with viewing deck, amphitheatre and fire lounge; Disc golf, hiking trails and a butterfly garden and bird sanctuary ## Where is Veritas Village Coronado? On a Pacific-facing hillside about ten minutes above the town of Coronado, west of Panama City, at between 250 and 350 metres. ## How many lots does Coronado have? Eighty-seven numbered lots on about nineteen hectares, ranging from around 500 to more than 5,000 square metres, with thirteen house models from about 400 to 3,400 square feet. ## Is Coronado off grid? The welcome centre runs entirely on its own solar power and water, and the village is designed to work the same way, with wells, solar arrays and local waste treatment rather than a connection to the public grid. --- # Freeth’m URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/freethm Type: Intentional Community Stage: In Planning Country: Portugal Region: Europe Established: 2020 Climate: Mediterranean Languages: English Who it is for: Individuals and families seeking freer, community-based life Coordinates: 38.865, -8.347 Official website: https://www.freethm.com/ Also known as: Freethm, Freeth’m towns Freeth’m is a project, founded by Or Sofer, to build a worldwide network of small, self-sufficient towns for people who want a freer life close to nature, beginning with a first town in Portugal. ## What Freeth’m is Freeth’m is a project to build a worldwide network of small, purpose-built towns for people who want a freer, more self-directed life close to nature. Guided by a “live and let live” philosophy, it offers rural and semi-rural living that is independent of, but not isolated from, the wider world. Its founder, Or Sofer, began the project around 2020 after regulation had cost him his previous companies, and set the goal of a hundred towns by 2034. The first town is planned for Portugal, within about ninety minutes of Lisbon, with further locations envisaged elsewhere. ## How Freeth’m works Each town is designed to be largely self-sufficient, with its own decentralised infrastructure and shared facilities such as coworking and community spaces, a library, medical amenities and indoor and outdoor farming. To protect residents’ privacy, homes are detached, and each town is kept deliberately small, on the order of a few hundred houses. Freeth’m follows a build-to-rent model: the developer owns the housing and acts as the town’s manager, while residents secure their place through a contract covering both short and long stays. The project does not seek autonomy from any government; it aims instead for practical, de facto independence through self-sufficiency. A planned global membership is intended to let residents move easily between the network’s towns across different countries. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: Oct 2024: land for the first town in the final stage of selection, within ninety minutes of Lisbon, with a resident waitlist open; The stated goal is a hundred towns by 2034 ## What is Freeth’m? A project to build a network of small, self-sufficient rental towns for people seeking a freer life close to nature, with shared facilities and a few hundred homes each, beginning in Portugal. ## Where will the first Freeth’m town be? In Portugal, within about ninety minutes of Lisbon. The exact site has not been announced. ## How does living in a Freeth’m town work? Homes are rented rather than sold: the developer owns and manages the town, and residents hold a contract for a short or long stay, with a planned membership that lets them move between towns in the network. --- # CryptoCity URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/cryptocity Type: Intentional Community Stage: In Development Country: Venezuela Region: Latin America Established: 2023 Area: 40 ha Climate: Arid Tropical Languages: German, English, Spanish Who it is for: German-speaking entrepreneurs and their families Coordinates: 10.884, -64.004 Official website: https://cryptocity.land/ Also known as: Crypto City, CryptoCity Margarita, CryptoCity Venezuela CryptoCity is an intentional community being built on the south coast of Isla de Margarita, Venezuela: some three hundred plots on forty terraced hectares above a private beach, governed by a vote of its landowners and aimed at German-speaking entrepreneurs and their families. ## What CryptoCity is CryptoCity is a privately built residential community on Isla de Margarita, a Venezuelan island in the Caribbean. Its master plan divides around forty hectares of hillside above the shore into some three hundred plots, on which owners build to their own design or to one of the project’s solar-powered villa models, with a beach club, a mini-market, a harbour and a harbour club planned at the centre, and a hotel, a golf course and a port already standing next to the site. It describes itself as the first DAO-governed city: what the community holds in common is decided by a vote of its landowners. The project was founded in 2022 by four partners, Tim Stern, Bernd Armbruster, Luis Olivo and André Herrmann, and is run by a Venezuelan company with a Venezuelan engineering and construction team. It is aimed at a small circle of freedom-oriented, largely German-speaking entrepreneurs and their families looking for a second home in the tropics and a base for high-value business networking. ## Where CryptoCity is The site is on the island’s dry south coast, on the Punta Carnero headland a few minutes by car from the airport and from El Yaque, one of the best-known windsurfing and kitesurfing beaches in the Caribbean, and about twenty minutes from Porlamar, the island’s commercial centre. Margarita lies some forty kilometres off the Venezuelan mainland, south of the Atlantic hurricane track, warm and dry for most of the year, and the terraces run down to about seven hundred metres of private shoreline. ## How CryptoCity works CryptoCity is organised as a decentralised autonomous organisation. Every plot carries a vote, and decisions on urban planning, infrastructure, security, building and rental rules, environmental standards and community services require a two-thirds majority of the landowners, on the Swiss model of direct votes. Newcomers are admitted by a vote of the members already there, and the project describes itself as a closed community of entrepreneurs and their families rather than an open development. CryptoCity publishes what a plot costs and what a buyer gets on its own site. ### Currency and law As the name suggests, the community’s internal economy runs on cryptocurrency, a natural fit in a country where years of hyperinflation have made stablecoins and digital payments commonplace, though plots can be paid for in ordinary currency and nobody needs to hold crypto to live there. Land is bought through notaries and entered in the land registry as it would be in Germany. Margarita and the state of Nueva Esparta have carried free-port status since the 1970s and were decreed a special economic zone in November 2023, covering industry, science and technology, and tourism. ## Living in CryptoCity German and English are spoken inside the community; Spanish is the language of the island and of the project’s own staff. The development is designed to produce its own water, power and part of its own food, and a well and a fibre-optic connection already serve the whole site. The island’s attractions are the climate, the beaches, the wind on the south shore and the company of like-minded neighbours: the project says most people who approach it come for those rather than for the technology. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Built on site: Earthworks finished across the whole site: 42 terraces cut into the hillside; A well supplying water to the whole community; A fibre-optic connection to the island network; Retaining walls under construction along the terrace edges; The first house, a Villa Caribe on plot 132, under construction since August 2026 In the master plan: Roads, street lighting, pipework and planting across the terraces; The gatehouse and the perimeter entrance; Private houses on the sold plots; Beach club, mini-market and harbour club, then the harbour itself; The community’s own power, water and food production Recent developments: 2026: more than forty investors committed as future residents; May 2025: the master plan expanded from 100 plots on 13 hectares to about 300 on 40; First homes scheduled for occupation from the end of 2027 on the project’s roadmap ## Where is CryptoCity? On the south coast of Isla de Margarita, a Venezuelan island in the Caribbean roughly 40 kilometres off the mainland. The site sits on the Punta Carnero headland near El Yaque, a few minutes from the island’s airport and about twenty from Porlamar, the island’s commercial centre. ## What is CryptoCity? An intentional community of around three hundred plots being built on some forty hectares of terraced coastline. Its landowners govern the shared parts of it by a two-thirds vote, and its internal economy runs on cryptocurrency. ## Do you have to be into cryptocurrency to live in CryptoCity? No. The name describes how the community pays and votes, not a requirement of the people who live there, and plots can be paid for in ordinary currency. The project says most of those who approach it come for the island, the climate and the company rather than for the technology. ## Who can join CryptoCity? Admission is decided by the people already in it: an applicant is put to a vote of the existing members before a purchase goes ahead. The project describes itself as a closed community of entrepreneurs, investors and their families, and says it is not looking for absentee landlords. Its working languages are German and English, with Spanish the language of the island around it. ## Who is behind CryptoCity? Four partners founded it in 2022: Tim Stern, Bernd Armbruster, Luis Olivo and André Herrmann. The development is run by a Venezuelan company with a Venezuelan engineering and construction team, and Tim Stern has presented the project at Free Cities Foundation events and written about it for this site. ## Is Isla de Margarita a special economic zone? Yes. The island and the wider state of Nueva Esparta have carried free-port status since the 1970s and were decreed a special economic zone in November 2023, covering industry, science and technology, and tourism. --- # Principality of Sealand URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/principality-of-sealand Type: Sovereign Territory Stage: Operational Country: United Kingdom Region: Europe Established: 1967 Population: Under 5 residents Area: 550 m² (platform) Climate: Oceanic Languages: English Coordinates: 51.894, 1.48 Official website: https://sealandgov.org/ Also known as: Sealand, HM Fort Roughs, Roughs Tower The Principality of Sealand is a self-declared micronation on HM Fort Roughs, a Second World War naval platform in the North Sea off the coast of England, founded in 1967 by Paddy Roy Bates and run since as a hereditary principality by his family. ## What Sealand is Sealand is the world’s best-known micronation: a former Maunsell sea fort, two concrete towers carrying a steel deck, that Paddy Roy Bates, a former British Army major and pirate-radio broadcaster, occupied and declared an independent principality on 2 September 1967. It has a constitution, a flag, a national motto, E Mare Libertas (“From the Sea, Freedom”), stamps and coins, and a nobility whose titles the family confers on supporters around the world. No state recognises it, and it appears in international-law teaching as a standard test case for what makes a state. ## Where Sealand is The platform stands on Rough Sands, a sandbank in the North Sea about eleven kilometres off the Suffolk coast and thirteen off Essex. When it was built in 1942, and when Bates took it, the site lay outside Britain’s then three-mile territorial waters; the United Kingdom extended its waters to twelve miles in 1987, which placed the fort inside them. ## How Sealand works Sealand is run as a hereditary principality by the Bates family. Roy Bates was succeeded on his death in 2012 by his son Michael, who had acted as regent since 1999 and who lives in Essex; a caretaker keeps the fort itself occupied. Its legal claim rests on a 1968 case heard at Chelmsford, Regina v. Bates, in which the court held that an incident on the platform lay outside English jurisdiction because the fort was beyond territorial waters at the time. The principality sustains itself by conferring titles of nobility on supporters, once briefly hosted an offshore data centre, and repelled an attempted takeover in 1978 by helicopter. Passports were issued from 1975 until the family revoked them all in 1997 after forgeries surfaced abroad. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: One permanent caretaker on the platform as of August 2024; Michael Bates has been Prince of Sealand since 2012; The titles and e-citizenship programme is the principality’s active business ## Where is Sealand? On Rough Sands, a sandbank in the North Sea about eleven kilometres off the coast of Suffolk, England, on a Second World War naval fort. ## Is Sealand a country? No recognised state acknowledges it. Its claim rests on a 1968 English court ruling that the fort lay outside British jurisdiction at the time, and on the fact that it stood outside territorial waters until Britain extended them in 1987. ## Who is the Prince of Sealand? Michael Bates, son of the founder Roy Bates. He has held the title since his father’s death in 2012, having served as regent from 1999. Sealand’s head of state is styled Prince rather than king or president, the title passes within the Bates family, and the family lives in Essex while a caretaker keeps the platform occupied. ## How many people live in Sealand? A caretaker lives on the platform; the Bates family lives in Essex. Sealand counts its supporters and title-holders around the world rather than a resident population. ## Can you get a Sealand passport? No. Sealand issued passports from 1975 but withdrew them all in 1997; the principality offers titles of nobility and an e-citizenship instead. --- # ArkPad URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/arkpad Type: Seastead Stage: Operational Country: Philippines Region: Asia Established: 2022 Climate: Tropical Languages: English, Filipino Industries: Tourism & Hospitality, Naval Architecture Who it is for: Seasteaders and aspiring ocean residents Official website: https://arkpad.co/ Also known as: ArkPad Philippines, Arkpad ArkPad is a naval architecture company in the Philippines that designs and builds floating platforms, aquaculture systems and vessels. Its floating home, its fish cage and its glamping unit are all in use at the Reef Resort off Samal Island, the first site it has built and runs. ## What ArkPad is ArkPad is a company of naval architects, civil engineers and mechanical engineers based in the Philippines that designs and builds floating platforms, aquaculture systems and vessels, and takes on design work for other people’s projects alongside its own. It is a business member of The Seasteading Institute, and its stated goal is a floating city in open water. What it has built so far floats in Philippine coastal waters: its own floating home, the ArkPad-D, its fish cage, the Hexafarm, and its glamping unit, all in use at the Reef Resort off Samal Island, the first site it built and runs. ## Where ArkPad builds The company designs and builds in the Philippines, chosen for the workers available there, its freeports and its tourism. Its prototype was launched at Nabas on the coast of Aklan, its first working site is the Reef Resort in the Davao Gulf off the southern tip of Samal Island, and the next is drawn for the Caribbean, beside Próspera on the island of Roatán in Honduras. ## How ArkPad’s platforms work ### The ArkPad-D The floating home is the ArkPad-D, a platform of 490 square feet standing on spars. Its centre of mass is set below the waterline, which the company says means that even in the strongest storms it will never flip over, and it puts the largest wave the design has survived in simulation at seven metres. It is built in fibreglass and stainless steel that cannot rust or corrode, with a stated life expectancy of eighty to ninety-five years, carries a structure of up to eight metric tonnes, and needs ten metres of water beneath it. It is meant to be used with solar panels and water desalinators, and to connect physically to the ArkPads moored beside it, sharing water, electricity and internet with them. The prototype was launched at Nabas in September 2024 and came through four named typhoons that year, storms that overturned cars and wrecked homes on shore. ### The Hexafarm Around the homes sits the Hexafarm, a hexagonal floating fish cage built for polyculture: milkfish in the inner cage, and rabbitfish, seaweed or shellfish in the outer one, with baskets of shellfish hung inside the outer mesh and lobsters on the netted floor below. The shellfish filter the water, the seaweed raises the oxygen in it, and the rabbitfish and lobsters graze the fouling off the nets, which is labour nobody then has to spend. A walkway runs the whole way around so that guests and operators can cross from cage to cage without a boat, and one Hexafarm is built to carry up to twelve glamphouses. Mitchell’s vision is my dream come true, plus a lot more. ## Where ArkPad is going Fish farm and hotel are the two businesses meant to carry a seastead’s running costs, and the first place ArkPad put them together is the Reef Resort in the Davao Gulf, profiled on its own page. A second is drawn for the Caribbean, off the coast of Próspera on Roatán: hexagonal clusters of glamphouses with ArkPad units moored separately from them. The company calls it a goal and has published no construction date for it. The longer ambition is a floating city in open water south of the Philippines, near the equator, assembled from the same platforms and pens. Its governance idea is jurisdictional arbitrage: each part of the settlement would take its laws from the country whose flag it flies. ArkPad names Panama as a flag already approved and the Philippines as one it expects to add after launch. Alongside the platforms the company builds ships, among them LiberArx, a solar catamaran, and works with the Institute’s volunteers on the legal recognition of seasteads. ## How ArkPad came about Mitchell Suchner came across seasteading in January 2021, began posting his own designs in the seasteading forums, and through them joined the floating-platform venture Arktide, where he became chief operating officer. He then split ArkPad off as a company of its own in 2022 and set up in the Philippines. The prototype went into the water in 2024, the resort opened in 2025, and that autumn the company received the Innovation Award at the Free Cities Conference in Prague for the first operational seasteading resort. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Recent developments: May 2026: Roatán announced as the next Reef Resort location; Oct 2025: Innovation Award at the Free Cities Conference in Prague; Sep 2025: the Reef Resort opened off Samal Island; Jul to Nov 2024: the prototype rode out four named typhoons; Sep 2024: the ArkPad-D prototype launched at Nabas, Aklan, and the first aquaculture harvest came in ## What is ArkPad? ArkPad designs and builds floating platforms, aquaculture systems and vessels in the Philippines. Its own products are the ArkPad-D floating home, the Hexafarm fish cage and the Glamphouse, and all three are in use at the Reef Resort off Samal Island. ## What is the ArkPad-D? ArkPad’s floating home: a platform of 490 square feet on spars, built in fibreglass and stainless steel, with a stated life expectancy of eighty to ninety-five years. Its centre of mass sits below the waterline so that it cannot flip over, it is rated for seven-metre waves in simulation, and it can be joined to the units beside it to share water, power and internet. ## What is the Hexafarm? ArkPad’s hexagonal floating fish cage. Milkfish grow in the inner cage while rabbitfish, seaweed or shellfish occupy the outer one and lobsters live on the netted floor, so that the species keep the water and the nets clean between them. A walkway rings the whole cage, and it is built to carry up to twelve glamphouses. ## Where is ArkPad building next? Off the coast of Próspera on the island of Roatán, Honduras, where it has drawn a second Reef Resort of glamphouse clusters with ArkPad units moored separately. No construction date has been published. Its longer ambition is a floating city in open water south of the Philippines. ## How does ArkPad relate to seasteading and Free Cities? ArkPad is a business member of The Seasteading Institute, whose volunteers work with the company on the legal recognition of seasteads. Its founder, Mitchell Suchner, has spoken at Free Cities Foundation conferences since 2024 and received the Free Cities Conference Innovation Award in 2025. ## Is ArkPad a seastead in international waters? No. What ArkPad has built floats in Philippine coastal waters. The floating city it describes would sit in open water and take its laws from the country whose flag it flies; Panama is named as a flag already approved, the Philippines as one to add after launch. --- # ArkPad Reef Resort, Samal Island URL: https://free-cities.org/projects/arkpad/reef-resort Type: Seastead Stage: Operational Country: Philippines Region: Asia Established: 2025 Climate: Tropical Languages: English, Filipino Industries: Tourism & Hospitality Who it is for: Guests, day visitors and floating-home owners Coordinates: 6.962, 125.722 Official website: https://samal.reefresort.co/ Also known as: Reef Resort Samal, Samal Reef Resort The Reef Resort is ArkPad’s floating resort in the Davao Gulf, a few hundred metres off Kaputian at the southern tip of Samal Island: fourteen glamphouses and two ArkPad units standing on a working fish farm, open to day visitors and overnight guests. ## The platforms The resort is a cluster of hexagonal Hexafarm platforms. Fourteen glamphouses of 290 square feet stand on them, along with two ArkPad units of 490 square feet and a service deck under a thatched roof with the restaurant on it. Solar arrays on the decks supply the power, and the resort makes its own fresh water. Kayaks, paddleboards, water bikes and an inflatable water park are moored alongside, and guests swim above the reef. Underneath them the farm keeps working. Milkfish grow in the inner cages, rabbitfish and shellfish occupy the outer ones, lobsters live on the netted floor, and seaweed and mussels hang around the outside, so that the species keep the water and the nets clean between them. The restaurant serves what is harvested there. The first harvest came in during September 2024, a year before the first overnight guests. ## Getting there Samal Island sits across the water from Davao City in the southern Philippines, and Kaputian is its southernmost district. The Reef Resort floats a few hundred metres off Kaputian Beach, far enough out to stand in open water and close enough that guests reach it by boat from the shore. Getting there means the ferry to Samal and a drive down the island, and the resort makes no charge for the crossing at the end of it. ## Staying and owning The resort opened in September 2025 and takes day visitors as well as overnight guests, with room for up to 150 guests a day. Videos of it drew a wide audience: a Filipino-language clip passed 1.6 million views and an English version 570,000. The glamphouses and the units are sold to individuals, whole or in fractions, and owners stay in them; what that ownership involves is set out by ArkPad itself. ## Where things stand (as of Q3 2026) Built on site: Fourteen glamphouses and two ArkPad units on the Hexafarm platforms; Service deck with the restaurant under a thatched roof; Solar power and its own fresh water; Milkfish, rabbitfish, shellfish, lobster, seaweed and mussels in the cages beneath; Inflatable water park, kayaks, paddleboards and water bikes In the master plan: Further ArkPad-D units moored beside the platforms; More rooms, with the number of them roughly doubling ## Where is the Reef Resort? In the Davao Gulf, a few hundred metres off Kaputian Beach at the southern tip of Samal Island, across the water from Davao City in the southern Philippines. ## How do you get to the Reef Resort? By ferry from Davao City to Samal Island and a drive south to Kaputian, where the resort’s boat makes the last stretch. The transfer is free and comes with a stay or a day pass. ## Can you stay overnight? Yes. Guests sleep in one of the fourteen glamphouses or in one of the two ArkPad units, and the resort also sells day passes that include the boat transfer and swimming above the reef. ## What is farmed under the resort? Milkfish in the inner cages, rabbitfish and shellfish in the outer ones, lobsters on the netted floor, and seaweed and mussels around the outside. The species keep each other’s water and nets clean, and the restaurant on the platform serves what is harvested. ## Can you own part of the Reef Resort? The glamphouses and the ArkPad units are sold to individuals, whole or in fractions, and owners can stay in them. What that ownership involves is set out by ArkPad itself; the resort’s own site is linked above. --- # FREE PRIVATE CITIES WHITEPAPER --- # Free Private Cities: A New Operating System for Living Together URL: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities#whitepaper Language: English (en) Author: Titus Gebel Edition: Version 2.0, January 2023 PDF: https://free-cities.org/docs/whitepaper-free-private-cities-en.pdf In current political systems, the actions of both rulers and the governed are shaped by wrong incentives. Rulers have no liability and face no economic disadvantage if they make poor decisions. The governed are made to believe that “free” benefits can come into existence through the power of their votes. This politicizes the state monopoly on force and leads to constant changes to the “social contract” and an endless struggle to influence the direction of this change. In this paper, I propose a peaceful and voluntary alternative to the political status quo: Free Private Cities. The defining feature of a Free Private City is that it is run by a for-profit company, referred to as the Operator, which acts as a “government service provider”. This company can also be organized as a cooperative or be wholly owned by the citizens. In this capacity, the Operator offers citizens of the Free Private City protection of life, liberty and property. These services encompass internal and external security, a predefined legal and regulatory framework and an independent dispute resolution system. Interested individuals and companies enter into a Citizens’ Contract, paying a fixed yearly fee for these services instead of taxes. Within that framework, a “spontaneous order” can develop which emerges from the voluntary activities of the citizens. The Operator cannot later unilaterally change the Citizens’ Contract without the permission of the citizen concerned. Disputes between citizens and the Operator are heard before external arbitration tribunals, as is already customary in international commercial law. If the Operator ignores arbitral awards or abuses its power, customers will eventually leave and the Operator will face the risk of bankruptcy. Since all land is currently controlled by governments, the establishment of a Free Private City requires that an Operator enters into a contractual agreement with an existing state, referred to as the Host Nation. In this agreement, the Host Nation grants the Operator the right to establish the Free Private City on a defined territory in accordance with certain predefined conditions, normally encompassing extended regulatory autonomy in various fields. One would expect states to be willing to surrender some of their power if they expect large enough benefits in return. Such benefits could include job creation, attraction of foreign investment and a percentage of profits generated by the Operator. The existence of a large number of Special Economic Zones worldwide demonstrates the willingness of states to do this. ## 1. THE UNSOLVABLE PROBLEM OF CURRENT SYSTEMS ### 1.1 Overstretching Leviathan In his famous book “Leviathan”, Thomas Hobbes argued that a state monopoly on force creates a peaceful order that ultimately benefits all of the state’s inhabitants. It is indeed the case that innovation, division of labour, trade, scientific progress and flourishing of the arts cannot be achieved in an environment plagued by violence. However, a substantial part of this advantage is lost if the state uses its monopoly on force to achieve goals that go beyond the enforcement and protection of peace. That is when the state becomes politicized and imposes political goals on everyone, which tend to be outcomes only desired by certain interest groups within society. In the end, politics inevitably implies imposing one’s view of the world on all others. But people are different. What is right for one person is often wrong for another. The fact that individual values are ultimately subjective and that people also have objectively different life situations causes any “political solution” to leave behind those who have been forced to do something against their will. To “make politics” means taking sides and making the wishes of some the yardstick for all. Finally, by force, since these political solutions are ultimately backed up by the threat of violence through the executive branch of the government. In current political systems, the relationship between citizens and governments is analogous to the relationship between somebody who wants to buy a car — while the car dealer (the government) insists that he will choose the model, the colour, the size of the motor, the interior, as well as the price the buyer (the citizen) has to pay for it. And furthermore, there is no choice in the deal: everyone must buy. This is an obviously unattractive deal, yet this is the deal most of us accept through our political systems. The alleged “social contract” is constantly being changed, but only by one side: the state. However, if the state monopoly on force becomes an instrument of politically motivated partiality, then the original concept loses its effect. Behind the façade of the peaceful state, a perpetual struggle of rival groups arises. Politics thus becomes an invisible civil war, whose discreteness stems from the fact that the victims of state interference have no realistic chance of defending themselves. The peace achieved in modern states is illusory and based on the effective suppression of divergent interests. It is therefore counterproductive to give the state a power that goes beyond guaranteeing internal and external security. Because once peace is established, the only legitimate governmental task should be to ensure that residents do not force their will upon others. The state itself may only use force to safeguard this principle. ### 1.2 When the Minimum Principle meets Politics There is a problem: In practice, this kind of self-restraint on the part of the state is impossible to achieve. Human beings tend to prefer the social order that offers them the highest “return on life” at the lowest price, meaning they attempt to obtain as much benefit as possible for as little effort as possible. This natural human disposition, which is referred to as the minimum principle, makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. It has led to innovation, specialization and division of labor, which allow the average person in most countries to live in a state of affluence that was previously only accessible to the privileged upper classes. In order to achieve their ends, humans interact with others. As long as these interactions are voluntary, both parties seek to benefit from them – otherwise, these interactions would not take place. Voluntary interaction is always initiated by a promise: “I will give you something valuable in return”. However, whenever somebody wants another person to interact with them, they face an alternative, namely, to issue a threat: “If you don’t comply, I will harm you”. As soon as somebody tries to achieve their ends in this manner, the other party will most likely be damaged, and the social order will be weakened. In theory, all the members of the social order could agree to jointly suppress violent behavior. However, the benefits derived from the division of labor, economies of scale and economies of scope, suggest it may be prudent to agree on a “guarantor of the peace” who is solely allowed to enforce this agreement, if so required. In our current world this guarantor is the state. Now, if the human disposition towards the minimum principle meets with state power, a problem arises: due to the state’s monopoly on the use of force politics can promise benefits, such as subsidies and handouts, that seem to cost the recipients nothing. In reality they are on the expense of other citizens. This turns the original idea of preventing harmful interaction upside down: Now, the most powerful institution itself initiates harm. The human disposition toward the minimum principle will lead to interest groups seeking to maximize their own benefits at the expense of others with the help of the state. From the recipients’ point of view, subsidies and handouts are an appealing concept: they put in no effort, yet receive profit. Essentially, the granting of child benefits, free health care or an unconditional basic income, can be classified as the buying of votes. Such subsidies lead to a population demanding ever more short-term benefits, unconditional promises and additional “free” offers. The dynamics described here also ensure that the state interferes more and more in citizens’ private lives. This is because “intangible benefits” are also distributed, like regulations in favour of the wishes of certain interest groups. Since almost every interest group tries to take their personal wishes into account, the number of laws, the tax burden and the national debt inevitably increase over time. Political polarization is an unavoidable outcome of such a system. The possibility of individuals leading their lives according to their own tastes, becomes increasingly restricted. In theory, this problem can be overcome using reason and persuasion while in practice, the minimum principle remains stronger. Politicians or rulers who advocate cuts in benefits will sooner or later be voted out of office or replaced by more “supportive” and “generous” mandate holders. Over and above that, the respective rulers have no incentive to behave sustainably, since they bear no economic consequences for their decisions. They remain legally immune from liability and have no enforceable obligations towards those whom they rule. However, such systems cannot continue to function in the long term. Inevitably, overpromising and subsidizing unprofitable but well-meaning programs will lead to governments running out of funds, bringing about self-destruction of the prevailing political system. Fiscal trickery by central banks, such as downward manipulation of interest rates or the purchase of their own government bonds, can only delay this result, not prevent it. I am well aware that the following is an extremely painful realization for many, but there is no way around this insight: A system, however legitimated, which by law provides for expropriations in favor of third parties (for example in the form of taxes and social security contributions) and to which not all those affected have agreed to, cannot lead to a system of peaceful and stable cooperation. The foundations and results of voluntary cooperation are destroyed through the exertion of state power. True solidarity cannot emerge in an environment of coercion. The resulting battle of all against all for the implementation of regulation, favorable to some at the expense of others, successively undermines what makes a society cohesive, successful and attractive. ## 2. CRITERIA FOR ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS It is no use blaming people for following their evolutionary dispositions or complaining about politicians for delivering what the electorate wants. The only remedy is to decentralize and limit power. The fewer areas of life politics controls, the less important it is who controls or influences politicians. Anyone who wants to avoid receiving special benefits from the government at the expense of third parties must create a system of government that cannot grant special benefits at all. Hence, we have to define a system that by design avoids misaligned incentives and is inherently stable. A new, long-term, stable social order must require those in charge to: - be unable to grant special benefits to individual groups or citizens (avoidance of lobbying, corruption and struggles over state largess), - be held liable for errors (coupling of power and responsibility), - have an economic interest in the success of the society (skin in the game), - allow their citizens to leave or secede at any time without imposing financial or other obstacles (enabling competition), - have clearly defined written obligations, changeable only with the consent of both the governed and the rulers (a real social contract, legal certainty, predictability), - be suable by the parties concerned in the event of differences before independent courts or arbitration bodies (neutral dispute resolution). At present, even Western democracies only fulfil the last of the above criteria, often with caveats, since only certain organs can sue the government and the courts are financed by the same government. The legal security and predictability provided by constitutions is no longer effective in practice, since those in power, with their parliamentary majorities and by the appointment of judges, can largely control both the wording and interpretation of the constitution. ## 3. GOVERNMENT AS A SERVICE: FREE PRIVATE CITIES This paper proposes a concept that fulfils the above criteria and overcomes the problems described above. The concept is called a Free Private City. ### 3.1 Defining Elements of Free Private Cities - A Free Private City is a sovereign or semi-autonomous territory with its own legal and regulatory framework. It has its own tax, customs and social regime, as well as its own administration, security forces and an independent dispute resolution system (autonomous regulation and administration). - Free Private Cities are run by an operating company as a for-profit business (“Operator”). This company may be a private or publicly listed entity, organized as a cooperative and can be also wholly or partly owned by the citizens. The Operator guarantees inhabitants of the Free Private City protection of life, liberty and property which it provides in exchange for a fixed basic fee (Protection by Operator). - Each individual resident or residing entity has concluded a written “Citizens’ Contract” with the Operator, which clearly defines their mutual rights and obligations. This includes the services to be provided by the Operator and the fees to be paid to them for their services; there are no taxes. It also outlines rules that apply in the Free Private City: both for the citizens and the Operator. A defining aspect of the Citizens’ Contract is that it cannot be unilaterally changed by either party. It represents the “personal constitution” of every contract citizen (real and reliable social contract). - Participation and residence in the Free Private City is voluntary (voluntary participation). - There is no legal claim to admission to the Free Private City; to fulfil the security promise, the Operator decides on immigration according to his criteria and his discretion (immigration policy). - Furthermore, contract citizens can do as they please, provided that they do not violate the rights of others or the rules laid down in the Citizens’ Contract (the live and let live principle). - Any citizen can terminate the contract at any time and leave the Free Private City, but the Operator can only terminate the contract for good cause, for example for breach of contractual obligations such as continued non-payment of the fee (unilateral free contract cancellation). - Coercion by the city operator can only be used to enforce the predefined and agreed rules. Serious or repeated violations lead to exclusion from the Free Private City (contract-violation-based exclusion possible). - In the event of conflicts with the Operator, each party is entitled to appeal to independent (arbitration) courts that are not part of the Operator’s organization (independent arbitration). ### 3.2 Real Social Contract In a Free Private City, everyone would be the Sovereign of Themselves. By voluntary agreement, they have concluded a genuine contract with a more or less ordinary service provider. Both parties have the same formal rights and are therefore legally on an equal footing. In Free Private Cities, the relationship between ruler and subject in traditional governance systems is replaced by a relationship between customer and service provider. For the first time in history, there would be a real “social contract” with predefined rules, not a fictional one that is repeatedly changed by one side. Unlike conventional systems, where the citizen is obliged to pay tax without having a corresponding right to benefits, in a Free Private City service and compensation are directly related. Both contracting parties are entitled to fulfilment of the contract by the respective counterparty. The Operator can demand payment of the fixed contribution from the citizen, but no additional fees (unless the citizen agrees). In turn, the citizen can sue the Operator for non-compliance with his contractual obligations such as ensuring security and a functioning system of private law. Who actually manages or to whom the operating company belongs is of no relevance to the functioning of the model. As said, the Operator could even be owned by the citizenship as a whole. At the same time, the strictly bilateral contract between citizens and the Operator addresses an age-old problem of mankind: the desire of some people to impose their will on others. In a Free Private City, there is no platform for paternalists and rent-seekers to hijack. Political activism, missionary zeal, distributional struggles and the stirring-up of social groups against one other would disappear, because of the simple lack of a benefit for the executing party. Citizens know that they cannot interfere with the Citizens’ Contract of fellow citizens and would subsequently learn to respect each other’s differing views and assessments. The Operator is neither king nor dictator, but a mere service provider who may (or must) only do what both sides have agreed in the contract. Disputes between the Operator and citizens will be heard before independent arbitration tribunals, as is already customary in international commercial law. If the Operator ignores the arbitral awards or abuses his power in any other way, his customers will leave and he will eventually face bankruptcy. The Operator therefore faces a real economic risk and therefore has every incentive to treat his customers well and in accordance with the Citizens’ Contract. Since the Operator has limited responsibilities, namely the protection of life, liberty and property of the citizens, he would only guarantee the framework within which society could develop as a “spontaneous order”. A spontaneous order is an order which emerges as the result of the voluntary activities of individuals, based on their decentralized knowledge, rather than as a result of government mandate or central planning. Examples of systems which evolved through spontaneous order or self-organization include the evolution of life on Earth, languages, the Internet and free market economies. ### 3.3 Main Principles There are just a few simple principles that determine how people live together in a Free Private City. The guiding principle is self-determination and private autonomy, the right to shape one’s legal relationships according to one’s own decisions. Furthermore, the Golden Rule applies as expressed in the proverb “do not unto others what you do not want done unto you”. In addition, the principle do ut des (I give so that you give) is valid, the recognition that merit is based on reciprocation. Finally, there is the principle of voluntaryism and non-aggression, meaning interactions are based only on voluntary cooperation, rather than coercion and expropriation, including for allegedly “good” causes. The result is a “live and let live” society. ### 3.4 Profit Motive The Operator’s profit motive is of central importance to the Free Private Cities model. Many people consider the pursuit of profit to be something immoral, especially when it touches on social issues like our living together. They fail to recognize that there is no better incentive than the profit motive to make optimal use of scarce resources. Competition with other systems and the need to make profit incentivizes the Operator of a Free Private City to permanently seek to improve his “product” and optimize the use of scarce resources. This ultimately results in elevated satisfaction and better-quality services for citizens. Every decision the Operator makes has an immediate impact. The Operator must ask whether his actions will increase the satisfaction of the citizens or whether it is better to implement cost-cutting measures that allow fees to fall so that the Free Private City can become more competitive. In other words, before the Operator acts, he must first ask whether his action will ultimately generate more revenues than expenses. If more revenue is generated, profit is made and the enterprise value of the Free Private City is increased, reflecting the increased contentment of the individual residents and residing entities. If the measure will be loss making, the measure should either be improved or reversed. Such efficiency, and therefore elevated quality of life for all stakeholders, will never be achieved by public state systems. ### 3.5 Competition Free Private Cities can be modified in all directions, from anarcho-capitalist models without a monopoly on force to kibbutz-like communes without private property. The choice of different concepts makes it possible to defuse most political conflicts and replace them with a peaceful coexistence of different systems that everyone voluntarily enters into. Precisely because people’s preferences differ and we cannot know which system is evolutionarily the best for whom, we must allow for diversity and competition to flourish. A single world government would be an extreme danger to liberty: No more exiles, no more comparison, no more choice. The view of a social order as a “product” on the “Market of Living Together” and the peaceful competition of systems for citizens as “customers” will considerably increase both peace and liberty. This is because finding solutions on the market is non-violent, non-revolutionary, but instead an evolutionary process that takes place through mutation (trial and error), selection (profitability or bankruptcy) and reproduction (imitation of successful solutions). Therefore, alternative forms of society must firstly be allowed and secondly, citizens must not be prevented from exiting the system. Anyone who does not want to be a Sovereign of Themselves but prefers a communitarian atmosphere and “social warmth” has every right in the world to seek that out. But he or she has no right to detain or restrain against their will those who prefer freedom or to force them to finance his or her desired way of life. Social orders that only work if people are held in them against their will and forced to behave in a certain way will fail in the long run anyway. If you have a good product, you do not have to fear criticism or competition and therefore do not need to prohibit or regulate them. In fact, competition has proved to be the only permanently effective means of limiting human power. ### 3.6 Implementation Penetrating the Market of Living Together is not easy. Normally one has to win an election, carry out a revolution or organise a movement for secession. The establishment of Free Private Cities is a peaceful alternative to these methods. Undoubtedly, getting existing states to give up part of their sovereignty is an ambitious task. Nevertheless, this path seems easier than changing existing systems “from within” to make them more amenable to freedom, legal security and self-responsibility. The fact that all over the world many Special Economic Zones already exist, some with a “one country, two systems” model - shows that similar paths are possible. In a way, the Free Private Cities concept is merely the next stage in the evolution of Special Economic Zones. Describing it in this way may make it easier to convince potential host countries. The establishment of a Free Private City requires a contractual agreement with an existing state. In this agreement, the “Host Nation” grants the operating company the right to establish the Free Private City on a defined territory in accordance with the agreed conditions. To ensure voluntary participation, it is best for the area proposed for the establishment of a Free Private City to be initially uninhabited. The degree of autonomy the respective Free Private City will actually end up having, is a matter for negotiation with the Host Nation. It is unlikely that a Free Private City will be able to negotiate complete independence. In addition to territorial sovereignty (defence, foreign policy), the Host Nation will probably insist on the continued application of certain legal norms, such as the validity of the human rights enshrined in its constitution, as well as continued respect for its international agreements and criminal codes. The Free Private City should be able to cope with this without giving up its essence. In this respect, the Free Private City will not be able to grant its own citizenship; residents will keep their own, but they will get a residency status in the Host Nation. States may agree to surrender some of their power over a certain territory if they expect to benefit from it. A win-win situation between the Operator and the Host Nation must therefore be created. The establishment of Free Private Cities in structurally weak areas not only increases their attractiveness to the surrounding region, but also stands to create jobs and investment in the neighbouring areas, which ultimately benefits the Host Nation. Hong Kong, Singapore and Monaco provide good examples: A cordon of densely populated and, comparatively prosperous areas has formed around these city states. Inhabitants of the Host Nation often work in the neighbouring city-state, but pay taxes in the motherland. If one assumes that such developments take place in a formerly structurally weak or completely uninhabited area, then the Host Nation only stands to benefit. ## 4. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS The following are the most frequently raised issues when discussing the idea of Free Private Cities. Further details are covered in the links provided at the end of this document. ### 4.1 Target Group Free Private Cities target all income groups as well as all businesses. The estimated costs for the mandatory basic package, consisting of infrastructure, security and the legal and dispute resolution system, will amount to approximately USD 1,500 per person per year (less than an ounce of gold). The amount may be adjusted downward in low-income countries. The fact that no taxes are levied relieves the financial burden on the residing entity considerably, especially on single entrants to the labour market, but also on all middle-income earners with families. The funds freed up are available for citizens’ own health and pension savings plans or membership of self-help institutions, as well as for their children’s education. Since they are tax-free and have a low-regulation, business-friendly, service-oriented legal regime, Free Private Cities offer considerable incentives to settlers, especially companies. As a result of their economic activity, jobs will also be created for low and middle-income earners. ### 4.2 Social Security Free Private Cities will allow for the establishment of voluntary, multi-layer support networks for those with disability, illness or other incapacity. Collective self-help institutions, private insurance providers, as well as support by family and friends and charities would be encouraged (dealt with in detail in the book on Free Private Cities). These institutions should be sufficient to deal with all cases of real hardship in a community. Some Operators might choose to add a contractually guaranteed minimum social security. ### 4.3 Environment Free Private Cities have an interest in maintaining a clean environment as a means of attracting residents. In principle, environmental protection in the Free Private City is based on the protection of individual rights. Environmental damage is unthinkable without affecting property, possessions, or persons. Therefore, there is a corresponding right to sue anyone who pollutes the environment of another, and it must then be decided by independent courts whether the claim is justified. In a Free Private City, there is no tragedy of the commons because all land and waters are owned, or at least controlled, by actors. This applies in particular to the Operator himself, who in addition to his administrative activities is also subject to private law as the owner of land, streets and squares. As such he can use his right to sue in cases of environmental damage to his property. ### 4.4 Democracy The Operator acts as an actionable service provider with a narrow scope: protection of life, liberty and property according to pre-defined and pre-agreed rules, which are not unilaterally changeable. The vast majority of life decisions happens outside the Operator’s sphere of influence. If everyone can decide nearly everything for themselves, including how they want to live and which causes they want to support, then there is no need to delegate these decisions to a parliament, government or majority vote. Free Private Cities should enable maximum self-determination, not maximum co-determination. With the evolution of a governance system from one of majority rule to one of self-determination, there is no more principal-agent problem arising from the fact that agents might prefer their own interests over the interests of those they represent. If everyone can decide which products and projects continue to exist and which do not, there is more democracy in the sense of a rule of all than in a majoritarian system. Through this process, Free Private Cities are able to achieve “full-democracy” rather than the quasi-democracy represented by the majoritarian systems of today. ### 4.5 Monopoly on Force Because of the territorial monopoly on force, the Operator would in theory be able to misuse this monopoly and behave like a dictator. However, most citizens would respond by leaving the Free Private City, and it would be impossible for the Operator to successfully found new cities elsewhere due to his loss of reputation. In this respect the Operator is no different from the captain of a cruise ship on the high seas or the head of a remote holiday resort. Both could theoretically take the opportunity to act as dictators, but refrain from doing so because of their commercial interests. Allowing competing security service providers with their own rules and thus competing legal systems may appear theoretically attractive for reasons of preventing monopolies. In practice, however, the effort and inconvenience involved (transaction costs) are probably too high. It would take years for rules to develop in the market on how to resolve collisions between the various providers and legal systems. In practice, the owners of the strongest security service could do what they want. Once the model of Free Private Cities has proven itself profitable, then competitors will inevitably appear on the scene. This is the best guarantee for the residents that the respective Operators will not abuse their position of power. Apart from that, the right of every contract citizen to self-defence and the corresponding support of third parties against attacks remain unaffected or expressly guaranteed by contract. ### 4.6 Contract Changes Constitutions of nation states can be changed, even against the will of the people, provided a qualified (parliamentary) majority agrees to the change. Contracts, on the other hand, can only be changed if both contracting parties agree. That is why the Citizen Contract and the corresponding legal position are so important to the protection of the individual residents’ rights. However, even the best contract cannot foresee all possible future contingencies. But a contract that can be changed at any time by the Operator or contains vague language would be of no real use to the citizens. Therefore, the wording of the contract must be as clear and unambiguous as possible. If later this leads to disputes of interpretation due to missing or vaguely formulated clauses in certain areas, then the respective (arbitration) courts will decide the controversial issue and fill the legal gap, using the pre-agreed legal principles that have been in force for centuries and a reasonable balance of interests. The development of contracts takes place exclusively through “case law”. This means court judgments and arbitration awards dealing with a certain issue are from then on binding for all contracts, and do not require the introduction of new rules or amendments to contracts. This is how Common Law has successfully worked for hundreds of years. ### 4.7 Financing Free Private Cities finance themselves, through the basic fees of the citizens that cover expenses for security, a legal system and a certain infrastructure. Another source of income are land transactions. The Operator will likely have to make initial infrastructure investments during the first few years of operation to attract initial settlers, but pre-financing is normal in the venture capital business. Due to economies of scale, the fee system will likely become profitable once a certain number of inhabitants (around 10,000) is reached, since expenses for security forces, dispute resolution bodies and infrastructure do not have to increase in proportion to the number of inhabitants. In practice, the Operator will probably generate a large part of its income from real estate transactions. This could include buying land early, which will then increase in value as a result of the establishment of a stable and attractive system. The land can also be parcelled out and sold or leased. The corresponding revenues can then be used to cross-finance expenditure, infrastructure or even to lower the basic fee. ### 4.8 Protection Especially if successful, a Free Private City might be subject to a hostile takeover attempt by the Host Nation. Therefore, the agreement between the Operator and the Host Nation will contain common investment protection and arbitration clauses. In this respect, the Host Nation risks being exposed to considerable financial demands after occupying the Free Private City, which could also result in a seizure of its foreign assets. Nevertheless, the Free Private City Operator will be incentivised to not let it get that far. He would likely make use of alternative means, for example a combination of public relations, diplomatic contact with other states and renowned institutions or other defensive measures. Moreover, it can be pointed out in time that residents are highly mobile and would be able to quickly leave the Free Private City in the event of a hostile takeover, further undermining the incentive of the Host Nation to make this attempt. ## 5. CONCLUSION Changing existing, entrenched political systems in a peaceful way is a challenging task. If we want to create a freer world with a focus on personal sovereignty, we better try to establish alternative voluntary systems and frameworks. Free Private Cities are such a product. Free Private Cities are not a utopia, but rather a business idea whose functional elements are already known (providing contracted services) and which need only be transferred to another sector, namely that of living together. We are living in an increasingly connected world, where many people can work from home for clients in several countries. Cryptocurrencies and decentralized finance are emerging. In such a world, it is becoming more and more difficult for nation states to collect taxes and social contributions on all kinds of activities. For this reason alone, the fee system of Free Private Cities is the more promising option for the future. The successful establishment of parallel structures independent of nation-states and powerful international organizations is possible: Bitcoin is proof. Parallel structures in the Market of Living Together are supposedly also in high demand. That’s because people don’t want to be subjugated by rules and regulations that they have not consented to. People don’t want to pay for things they have not ordered. And reasonable people don’t need hundreds or thousands of laws to live peacefully together. Finally, people need a safe space where they can congregate and cooperate peacefully but are otherwise left alone by coercive authorities. Free Private Cities can deliver these human desires. The existing political systems cannot. It is for this reason that Free Private Cities have a chance to succeed. Eventually, people will go where they are treated best. --- # Freie Privatstädte: Ein neues Betriebssystem für unser Zusammenleben URL: https://free-cities.org/freie-privatstaedte#whitepaper Language: German (de) Author: Titus Gebel Edition: Version 1.2, April 2022 PDF: https://free-cities.org/docs/whitepaper-freie-privatstaedte-de.pdf Derzeitige politische Systeme sind von falschen Anreizen sowohl für die Regierenden als auch für die Regierten geprägt. Die Regierenden sind nicht haftbar und haben keine wirtschaftlichen Nachteile zu befürchten, wenn sie schlechte Entscheidungen treffen. Den Regierten wird vorgegaukelt, dass sie sich „kostenlose“ Leistungen per Stimmabgabe in die Tasche wählen können. Dies politisiert das staatliche Gewaltmonopol und führt zu ständigen Änderungen des „Gesellschaftsvertrags“. Ergebnis ist ein ständiger Kampf, um diese Änderungen in eine bestimmte Richtung zu beeinflussen. Mit diesem Beitrag schlage ich eine friedliche und freiwillige Alternative zum politischen status quo vor: Freie Privatstädte. Eine Freie Privatstadt zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass sie von einem gewinnorientierten Unternehmen, dem Stadtbetreiber, veranstaltet wird, der als „Staatsdienstleister“ fungiert. Dieser kann auch als Genossenschaft organisiert sein und sich teilweise oder vollständig im Eigentum der Bürger befinden. In dieser Eigenschaft garantiert der Betreiber seinen Bürgern den Schutz von Leben, Freiheit und Eigentum. Die vom Betreiber erbrachten Dienstleistungen umfassen die innere und äußere Sicherheit, einen vordefinierten Rechts- und Regulierungsrahmen sowie ein unabhängiges Streitschlichtungssystem. Interessierte Einzelpersonen und Unternehmen schließen mit ihm einen „Bürgervertrag“ ab und zahlen anstelle von Steuern eine feste Jahresgebühr für diese Dienstleistungen. Innerhalb dieses Rahmens kann sich eine „spontane Ordnung“ entwickeln, die sich aus den freiwilligen Aktivitätenund Entscheidungen der Bürger ergibt. Der Betreiber kann den Bürgervertrag später nicht ohne die Zustimmung des betroffenen Bürgers einseitig ändern. Streitigkeiten zwischen Bürgern und dem Betreiber werden vor externen Schiedsgerichten verhandelt, wie es im internationalen Handelsrecht üblich ist. Ignoriert der Betreiber die Schiedssprüche oder missbraucht er seineMacht, wandern seine Kunden ab, und ihm droht die Insolvenz. Da derzeit alle Landflächen von Regierungen kontrolliert werden, ist es für die Gründung einer Freien Privatstadt erforderlich, dass der Betreiber eine vertragliche Vereinbarung mit einem bestehenden Staat abschließt. In dieser Vereinbarung räumt der „Gastgeberstaat“ dem Betreiber das Recht ein, die Freie Privatstadt auf einem bestimmten Gebiet zu bestimmten Bedingungen zu errichten, die eine rechtliche Autonomie in verschiedenen Bereichen umfasst. Staaten können dazu bereit sein, einen Teil ihrer Macht abzugeben, wenn sie sich im Gegenzug Vorteile versprechen. Dazu gehört etwa die Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen, ausländische Investitionen und eine Beteiligung an den vom Betreiber erwirtschafteten Gewinnen. Die Existenz einer großen Anzahl von Sonderwirtschaftszonen weltweit beweist die grundsätzliche Bereitschaft der Staaten, diesen Weg zu gehen. ## 1. DAS UNLÖSBARE PROBLEM HEUTIGER SYSTEME ### 1.1 Die Überdehnung Leviathans In seinem berühmten Werk „Leviathan“ führt Thomas Hobbes aus, dass ein staatliches Gewaltmonopol eine friedliche Ordnung schafft, die letztlich allen Einwohnern des Staates zugutekommt. Es ist in der Tat so, dass Innovation, Arbeitsteilung, Handel, wissenschaftlicher Fortschritt und die Entfaltung der Künste in einem von Gewalt geprägten Umfeld nicht möglich sind. Ein wesentlicher Teil dieses Vorteils geht jedoch verloren, wenn der Staat sein Gewaltmonopol nutzt, um Ziele zu erreichen, die über die Durchsetzung und den Schutz des Friedens hinausgehen. Das ist dann der Fall, wenn der Staat politisiert wird und allen Bürgern politische Ziele vorschreibt, die in der Regel nur von bestimmten Interessengruppen innerhalb der Gesellschaft gewünscht werden. Denn letztendlich bedeutet Politik, dass man allen anderen die eigene Sicht der Welt aufzwingt. Aber Menschen sind verschieden. Was für den einen richtig ist, kann für den anderen falsch sein. Die Tatsache, dass individuelle Werte letztlich subjektiv sind und dass Menschen auch objektiv unterschiedliche Lebenssituationen haben, führt dazu, dass jede „politische Lösung“ diejenigen zurücklässt, die gegen ihren Willen zu etwas gezwungen wurden. „Politik machen“ bedeutet, Partei zu ergreifen und die Wünsche der einen zum Maßstab für alle zu machen. Und zwar notfalls mit Gewalt, denn alle politischen Lösungen werden letztlich durch die Androhung von Gewalt der Exekutive gestützt. In den derzeitigen politischen Systemen ist die Beziehung zwischen Bürgern und Regierungen vergleichbar mit der Beziehung zwischen jemandem, der ein Auto kaufen möchte und dem Autohändler – wobei der Autohändler (= Regierung) darauf besteht, dass er selbst das Modell, die Farbe, die Motorisierung, die Innenausstattung sowie den Preis, den der Käufer (= Bürger) dafür zu zahlen hat, bestimmt. Außerdem gibt es bei dem Geschäft keine Wahlmöglichkeit: Jeder muss kaufen. Das ist ein offensichtlich unattraktives Geschäft, aber das ist, was die meisten von uns in unseren politischen Systemen akzeptieren. Der angebliche „Gesellschaftsvertrag“ wird ständig geändert, aber stets nur von einer Seite: dem Staat. Wenn aber das staatliche Gewaltmonopol zu einem Instrument politisch motivierter Parteilichkeit wird, dann verliert das ursprüngliche Konzept seine Wirkung. Hinter der Fassade des friedlichen Staates entsteht ein ständiger Kampf rivalisierender Gruppen. Die Politik wird so zu einem unsichtbaren Bürgerkrieg, dessen Unauffälligkeit sich daraus ergibt, dass die Opfer staatlicher Eingriffe keine realistische Chance auf Gegenwehr haben. Der in modernen Staaten erreichte Frieden ist illusorisch und beruht in Wahrheit auf der effektiven Unterdrückung abweichender Interessen. Es ist daher kontraproduktiv, dem Staat eine Macht zu geben, die über die Gewährleistung der inneren und äußeren Sicherheit hinausgeht. Denn wenn der Frieden erst einmal hergestellt ist, besteht die einzige legitime Aufgabe des Staates darin, dafür zu sorgen, dass die einen den anderen nicht ihren Willen aufzwingen. Der Staat selbst darf nur zur Wahrung dieses Prinzips Gewalt anwenden. ### 1.2 Minimalprinzip trifft Politik Es gibt dabei ein Problem: In der Praxis ist es unmöglich, diese Art der Selbstbeschränkung des Staates zu erreichen. Der Mensch neigt dazu, diejenige Gesellschaftsordnung zu bevorzugen, die ihm den höchsten „Lebensertrag“ zum niedrigsten Preis bietet, das heißt, er versucht, mit möglichst wenig Aufwand möglichst viel Nutzen zu erzielen. Diese natürliche menschliche Veranlagung, im Folgenden als Minimalprinzip bezeichnet, ist aus evolutionärer Sicht sinnvoll. Sie hat zu Innovation, Spezialisierung und Arbeitsteilung geführt, die es dem Durchschnittsmenschen heute in den meisten Ländern ermöglicht, in einem Wohlstand zu leben, der früher nur privilegierten Oberschichten vorbehalten war. Um ihre Ziele zu erreichen, interagieren die Menschen mit anderen. Solange diese Interaktionen freiwillig sind, wollen beide Parteien davon profitieren - andernfalls würden dieses Zusammenspiel nicht stattfinden. Freiwillige Interaktionen werden immer durch ein Versprechen eingeleitet: „Ich gebe Dir etwas Wertvolles im Gegenzug“. Wenn jemand jedoch möchte, dass eine andere Person mit ihm interagiert, kann er auch eine Drohung aussprechen: „Wenn Du nicht einwilligst, werde ich Dir schaden“. Sobald jemand versucht, seine Ziele auf diese Weise zu erreichen, wird die andere Partei höchstwahrscheinlich geschädigt und die soziale Ordnung wird geschwächt. Theoretisch könnten sich alle Mitglieder der sozialen Ordnung darauf einigen, gewalttätiges Verhalten gemeinsam zu unterbinden. Aufgrund der Vorteile, die sich aus der Arbeitsteilung, den Größen- und Verbundvorteilen ergeben, ist es jedoch sinnvoll, sich auf einen „Friedensgaranten“ zu einigen, der allein befugt ist, diese Vereinbarung durchzusetzen. In unserer heutigen Welt ist dieser Garant der Staat. Wenn die menschliche Disposition zum Minimalprinzip nun auf staatliche Macht trifft, entsteht ein Problem: Aufgrund des staatlichen Gewaltmonopols kann die Politik Leistungen versprechen, welche die Empfänger scheinbar nichts kosten. In Wirklichkeit gehen sie freilich auf Kosten der anderen Bürger. Damit wird die ursprüngliche Idee, schädliche Interaktionen zu verhindern, auf den Kopf gestellt: Jetzt ist es die mächtigste Institution selbst, die Schaden anrichtet. Die menschliche Veranlagung zum Minimalprinzip führt zwangsläufig dazu, dass Interessengruppen mit Hilfe des Staates versuchen, ihren eigenen Nutzen auf Kosten anderer zu maximieren. Aus der Sicht der Empfänger sind staatliche Subventionen und Zuwendungen ein verlockendes Konzept: kein Aufwand, dennoch Ertrag. Die Gewährung von Kindergeld, kostenloser Gesundheitsversorgung oder eines bedingungslosen Grundeinkommens kann im Grunde als Stimmenkauf eingestuft werden. Solche Subventionen führen dazu, dass die Bevölkerung immer mehr kurzfristige Leistungen, bedingungslose Versprechen und zusätzliche „kostenlose“ Angebote einfordert. Die hier beschriebene Dynamik sorgt auch dafür, dass sich der Staat immer mehr in das Privatleben der Bürger einmischt. Denn es werden auch „immaterielle Vorteile“ verteilt, wie Regelungen zugunsten der Wünsche bestimmter Interessengruppen. Da fast jede Interessengruppe versucht, ihre Ideen umzusetzen, steigen mit der Zeit zwangsläufig die Zahl der Gesetze, die Steuerlast und die Staatsverschuldung. Die politische Polarisierung ist eine unvermeidliche Folge eines solchen Systems. Die Möglichkeit des Einzelnen, sein Leben nach eigenem Gutdünken zu gestalten, wird zunehmend eingeschränkt. In der Theorie lässt sich dieses Problem mit Vernunft und Überzeugungskraft lösen, in der Praxis ist das Minimalprinzip stärker. Politiker oder Machthaber, die Leistungskürzungen befürworten, werden früher oder später abgewählt oder durch „sozial gerechte“ und „solidarischere“ Mandatsträger ersetzt. Darüber hinaus haben die jeweiligen Machthaber keinen Anreiz, sich langfristig vernünftig zu verhalten, da sie keine wirtschaftlichen Konsequenzen für ihre Entscheidungen tragen. Sie sind rechtlich nicht haftbar und keinen einklagbaren Verpflichtungen seitens der Regierten ausgesetzt. Solche Systeme können aber auf Dauer nicht funktionieren. Überzogene Versprechungen und die Subventionierung unrentabler, aber gut gemeinter Programme führen unweigerlich dazu, dass den Regierungen die Mittel ausgehen, was zur Selbstzerstörung des politischen Systems führt. Fiskalische Tricksereien der Zentralbanken, wie die Manipulation der Zinssätze nach unten oder der Ankauf eigener Staatsanleihen, können dieses Ergebnis nur verzögern, aber nicht verhindern. Ich bin mir bewusst, dass das Folgende für viele eine äußerst schmerzhafte Erkenntnis ist, aber es führt kein Weg an dieser Einsicht vorbei: Ein wie auch immer legitimiertes System, welches per Gesetz Enteignungen zugunsten Dritter vorsieht (etwa in Form von Steuern und Sozialabgaben) und dem nicht alle Betroffenen zugestimmt haben, kann auf Dauer weder ein friedliches, noch ein berechenbares Miteinander schaffen. Es zerstört die Grundlagen und Resultate freiwilliger Kooperation durch staatliche Macht. Echte Solidarität kann unter Zwang nicht entstehen. Ein solches System vernichtet sukzessive das, was eine Gesellschaft zusammenhält, was sie erfolgreich und attraktiv macht und mündet in einen Kampf aller gegen alle um die Durchsetzung begünstigender Regelungen. ## 2. KRITERIEN FÜR ALTERNATIVE SYSTEME Es ist fruchtlos, Menschen dafür zu tadeln, dass sie ihren evolutionären Veranlagungen folgen, oder sich über Politiker zu beschweren, weil sie die Wünsche der Wähler erfüllen. Die einzige Abhilfe besteht darin, die Macht zu dezentralisieren und zu begrenzen. Je weniger Lebensbereiche die Politik kontrolliert, desto weniger wichtig ist es, wer die Politiker kontrolliert oder beeinflusst. Wer vermeiden will, dass der Staat Sondervorteile auf Kosten Dritter gewährt, muss ein Regierungssystem schaffen, das überhaupt keine Sondervorteile gewähren kann. Es geht also darum, ein System zu definieren, das von vornherein Fehlanreize vermeidet und in sich stabil ist. Eine neue, langfristig stabile Gesellschaftsordnung muss von denjenigen, die das Gemeinwesen leiten, verlangen, dass diese - einzelnen Gruppen oder Bürgern keine Sondervorteile gewähren können (Vermeidung von Lobbyismus, Korruption und Verteilungskämpfen), - für Fehler haftbar gemacht werden können (Kopplung von Macht und Verantwortung), - ein eigenes wirtschaftliches Interesse am Erfolg des Gemeinwesens haben (skin in the game), - ihren Bürgern den jederzeitigen Weggang oder eine Sezession ermöglichen, ohne finanzielle oder sonstige Hürden aufzurichten (Ermöglichung von Wettbewerb), - schriftlich genau umrissene Verpflichtungen und Kompetenzen haben, die nicht einseitig geändert werden können (Rechtssicherheit, Planbarkeit), - im Falle von Differenzen vor unabhängigen Gerichten oder Schiedsstellen von den Betroffenen verklagt werden können (neutrale Streitschlichtung). Es wird deutlich, dass auch die westlichen demokratischen Rechtsstaaten eigentlich nur das letzte Kriterium erfüllen, häufig mit Einschränkungen, da nur bestimmte Organe die Regierung verklagen können. Die durch die Verfassungen eigentlich vorgesehene Rechtssicherheit und Planbarkeit ist in der Staatenpraxis nicht mehr gegeben. Die Machthaber können mit ihren Parlamentsmehrheiten und durch die Ernennung von Richtern sowohl Wortlaut als auch Auslegung der Verfassung weitgehend beliebig steuern. ## 3. REGIERUNG ALS DIENSTLEISTUNG: FREIE PRIVATSTÄDTE In diesem Papier wird ein Konzept vorgeschlagen, das die genannten Kriterien erfüllt und die beschriebenen Probleme überwindet. Dieses Konzept ist die Freie Privatstadt. ### 3.1 Merkmale Freier Privatstädte - Eine Freie Privatstadt ist eine souveräne oder mindestens teilautonome Gebietskörperschaft, die über einen eigenen Rechts- und Ordnungsrahmen, ein Steuer- Zoll- und Sozialregime und über eigene Verwaltung, Sicherheitskräfte sowie ein unabhängiges Streitschlichtungssystem verfügt (autonome Verwaltung und Regelungsbefugnis). - Die Freie Privatstadt wird von einer Betreibergesellschaft als gewinnorientiertes Unternehmen geführt („Betreiber“). Diese Gesellschaft kann ein privates oder börsennotiertes Unternehmen sein, als Genossenschaft organisiert und sich ganz oder teilweise im Besitz der Bürger befinden. Gegen einen festgelegten finanziellen Beitrag gewährleistet sie den Bewohnern Schutz von Leben, Freiheit und Eigentum (Schutz durch Betreiber). - Jeder einzelne Bewohner hat mit dem Betreiber einen schriftlichen Bürgervertrag geschlossen, der die gegenseitigen Rechte und Pflichten abschließend regelt. Dieser umfasst die vom Betreiber zu erbringenden Leistungen und den dafür zu bezahlenden Beitrag, daneben die in der Freien Privatstadt geltenden Regeln. Darüber hinausgehende Steuern gibt es nicht. Dieser Bürgervertrag kann nicht einseitig geändert werden; er stellt die „persönliche Verfassung“ eines jeden Vertragsbürgers dar (echter Gesellschaftsvertrag). - Teilnahme und Verbleib in der Freien Privatstadt sind freiwillig (volle Freiwilligkeit). - Es besteht kein Rechtsanspruch auf Aufnahme in die Freie Privatstadt; um sein Sicherheitsversprechen zu erfüllen, entscheidet darüber der Betreiber nach seinen Kriterien und seinem Ermessen (Einwanderungsvorbehalt). - Im Übrigen können die Vertragsbürger tun, was sie möchten, sofern sie dadurch nicht die Rechte anderer oder die sonstigen, im Bürgervertrag festgelegten Regeln verletzen (Leben und leben lassen). - Jeder Bewohner kann den Vertrag jederzeit kündigen und die Freie Privatstadt wieder verlassen, der Betreiber kann jedoch nur aus wichtigem Grund kündigen, etwa wegen Verstoßes gegen die Vertragspflichten wie z. B. fortgesetzter Nichtzahlung des Beitrages (jederzeitige Vertragsbeendigung durch Bürger). - Zwang durch den Stadtbetreiber kann nur zur Durchsetzung der vorgegebenen und vereinbarten Regeln angewendet werden. Schwerwiegende oder wiederholte Verstöße führen zum Ausschluss aus der Freien Privatstadt (vertragsverletzungsbedingter Ausschluss möglich). - Im Falle von Konflikten mit der Betreibergesellschaft ist jeder Vertragsbürger berechtigt, unabhängige (Schieds-) Gerichte anzurufen, die nicht der Organisation des Betreibers angehören (echte unabhängige Streitschlichtung). ### 3.2 Echter Gesellschaftsvertrag In einer Freien Privatstadt ist jeder Souverän Seiner Selbst. Durch eine freiwillige Vereinbarung haben die Bewohner einen echten Vertrag mit einem mehr oder weniger gewöhnlichen Dienstleister geschlossen. Beide Parteien haben die gleichen formalen Rechte und sind daher rechtlich gleichgestellt. In Freien Privatstädten wird die herkömmliche Beziehung zwischen Herrschern und Beherrschten durch eine Beziehung zwischen Kunde und Dienstleister ersetzt. Zum ersten Mal in der Geschichte gibt es einen echten Gesellschaftsvertrag mit festgelegten Regeln, nicht einen fiktiven, der immer wieder von einer Seite geändert wird. Im Gegensatz zu herkömmlichen Systemen, in denen der Bürger verpflichtet ist, Steuern zu zahlen, ohne ein entsprechendes Recht auf Gegenleistung zu haben, sind in einer Freien Privatstadt Leistung und Gegenleistung direkt miteinander verknüpft. Beide Vertragsparteien haben einen Anspruch auf Vertragserfüllung durch die jeweilige Gegenpartei. Der Betreiber kann vom Bürger die Zahlung des festgelegten Beitrags, aber keine zusätzlichen Gebühren verlangen (es sei denn, der Bürger stimmt zu). Der Bürger wiederum kann den Betreiber wegen Nichterfüllung seiner vertraglichen Pflichten etwa hinsichtlich der Gewährleistung der Sicherheit oder eines funktionierenden Privatrechtssystems verklagen. Wer die Betreibergesellschaft tatsächlich leitet oder wem sie gehört, ist für das Funktionieren des Modells ohne Belang. Die Betreibergesellschaft kann auch im gemeinschaftlichen Eigentum aller Bürger stehen. Entscheidend ist, dass mit dem streng zweiseitigen Vertrag zwischen Bürgern und Betreiber ein uraltes Problem der Menschheit angegangen wird: der Wunsch einiger Menschen, anderen ihren Willen aufzuzwingen. In einer Freien Privatstadt gibt es keine Plattform, die von Bevormundern und Abgreifern gekapert werden könnte. Politischer Aktivismus, missionarischer Eifer, Verteilungskämpfe und das Aufhetzen sozialer Gruppen gegeneinander verschwinden, weil sie keinen Nutzen für die ausführende Partei bringen. Die Bürger wissen, dass sie den Bürgervertrag ihrer Mitbürger nicht ändern können und lernen, die unterschiedlichen Ansichten und Einschätzungen der anderen zu respektieren. Der Betreiber ist weder König noch Diktator, sondern ein reiner Dienstleister, der nur das tun darf (bzw. muss), was beide Seiten im Vertrag vereinbart haben. Streitigkeiten zwischen dem Betreiber und den Bürgern werden vor unabhängigen Schiedsgerichten verhandelt, wie es im internationalen Handelsrecht bereits üblich ist. Wenn der Betreiber die Schiedssprüche ignoriert oder seine Macht auf andere Weise missbraucht, werden seine Kunden abwandern und ihm droht schließlich die Insolvenz und der Reputationsverlust für künftige Projekte. Der Betreiber sieht sich also einem realen wirtschaftlichen Risiko gegenüber und hat daher jeden Anreiz, seine Kunden gut und in Übereinstimmung mit dem Bürgervertrag zu behandeln. Da der Betreiber nur einen begrenzten Machtbereich hat, nämlich den Schutz von Leben, Freiheit und Eigentum der Bürger, garantiert er nur den Rahmen, innerhalb dessen sich die Gesellschaft im Sinne einer „spontanen Ordnung“ entwickeln kann. Eine spontane Ordnung ist eine Ordnung, die durch die vielen freiwilligen Aktivitäten der Einzelnen auf der Grundlage ihres dezentralen Wissens entsteht, nicht durch ein staatliches Mandat oder eine zentrale Planung. Beispiele für Systeme, die sich durch spontane Ordnung oder Selbstorganisation entwickelt haben, sind die Evolution des Lebens auf der Erde, die Sprachen, das Internet und die freie Marktwirtschaft. ### 3.3 Grundsätze des Zusammenlebens Es gibt neben den vereinbarten Regeln nur wenige einfache Prinzipien, die das Zusammenleben der Menschen in einer Freien Privatstadt bestimmen. Leitprinzipien sind Selbstbestimmung und Privatautonomie, also das Recht, die eigenen Rechtsverhältnisse nach eigenem Ermessen zu gestalten. Darüber hinaus gilt die Goldene Regel, wie sie in dem Sprichwort zum Ausdruck kommt: „Was du nicht willst, dass man dir tu’, das füg’ auch keinem andern zu“. Darüber hinaus gilt der Grundsatz do ut des (ich gebe, damit du gibst), also die Erkenntnis, dass Leistung auf Gegenleistung beruht. Schließlich gibt es den Grundsatz der Freiwilligkeit und der Nicht-Aggression, was bedeutet, dass Interaktionen nur aufgrund freiwilliger Zusammenarbeit stattfinden und nicht aufgrund von Zwang und Enteignung, auch nicht für vermeintlich „gute“ Zwecke. Das Ergebnis ist eine „Leben und leben lassen“-Gesellschaft. ### 3.4 Gewinnstreben Das Gewinnstreben des Betreibers ist für das Modell der Freien Privatstädte von zentraler Bedeutung. Viele Menschen halten das Gewinnstreben für etwas Unmoralisches, vor allem wenn es soziale Fragen wie unser Zusammenleben berührt. Sie verkennen, dass es keinen besseren Anreiz gibt, um knappe Ressourcen optimal zu nutzen. Der Wettbewerb mit anderen Systemen und die Notwendigkeit, Gewinn zu erzielen, veranlasst den Betreiber einer Freien Privatstadt dazu, ständig danach zu streben, sein „Produkt“ zu verbessern und die Nutzung der knappen Ressourcen zu optimieren. Dies führt letztlich zu einer höheren Zufriedenheit und einer besseren Qualität der Dienstleistungen für die Bürger. Jede Entscheidung, die der Betreiber trifft, hat eine unmittelbare Auswirkung. Der Betreiber muss sich fragen, ob seine Maßnahmen die Zufriedenheit der Bürger erhöhen oder ob es besser ist, Sparmaßnahmen durchzuführen, die eine Senkung der Gebühren ermöglichen, damit die Freie Privatstadt wettbewerbsfähiger werden kann. Mit anderen Worten: Bevor der Betreiber handelt, muss er sich zunächst fragen, ob seine Maßnahmen letztlich mehr Einnahmen als Ausgaben generieren werden. Werden mehr Einnahmen erzielt, wird ein Gewinn erwirtschaftet und der Unternehmenswert der Freien Privatstadt erhöht, was die gestiegene Zufriedenheit der einzelnen Einwohner und der ansässigen Unternehmen widerspiegelt. Wenn die Maßnahme zu Verlusten führt, muss sie entweder verbessert oder rückgängig gemacht werden. Eine solche Effizienz und damit eine höhere Lebensqualität für alle Beteiligten wird von herkömmlichen staatlichen Systemen niemals erreicht werden können. ### 3.5 Wettbewerb Freie Privatstädte können in alle Richtungen modifiziert werden, von anarcho-kapitalistischen Modellen ohne Gewaltmonopol bis hin zu Kibbuz-artigen Kommunen ohne Privateigentum. Die Wahl unterschiedlicher Konzepte ermöglicht es, die meisten politischen Konflikte zu entschärfen und durch ein friedliches Nebeneinander verschiedener Systeme zu ersetzen, denen sich die jeweiligen Bewohner freiwillig anschließen. Gerade weil die Präferenzen der Menschen unterschiedlich sind und wir nicht wissen können, welches System für wen das Beste ist, müssen wir Vielfalt und Wettbewerb zulassen. Eine einzige Weltregierung wäre eine extreme Gefahr für die Freiheit: Keine Exile, keine Vergleiche, keine Wahl mehr. Die Betrachtung einer Gesellschaftsordnung als „Produkt“ auf dem „Markt des Zusammenlebens“ und der friedliche Wettbewerb der Systeme um die Bürger als „Kunden“ wird sowohl mehr Frieden als auch mehr Freiheit bringen. Denn das Finden von Lösungen auf dem Markt ist nicht gewalttätig, nicht revolutionär, sondern ein evolutionärer Prozess, der sich durch Mutation (Versuch und Irrtum), Selektion (Rentabilität oder Konkurs) und Reproduktion (Nachahmung erfolgreicher Lösungen) vollzieht. Deshalb müssen erstens alternative Gesellschaftsformen zugelassen werden und zweitens dürfen die Bürger nicht daran gehindert werden, aus dem jeweiligen System auszusteigen. Wer kein Souverän Seiner Selbst sein will, sondern das Leben im Kollektiv und „soziale Wärme“ bevorzugt, hat alles Recht der Welt dazu. Aber er hat nicht das Recht, andere, die Freiheit bevorzugen, gegen ihren Willen festzuhalten oder zu zwingen, die von ihm gewünschte Lebensweise zu finanzieren. Gesellschaftsordnungen, die nur funktionieren, wenn Menschen gegen ihren Willen in ihnen festgehalten und zu einem bestimmten Verhalten gezwungen werden, werden auf Dauer ohnehin scheitern. Wer ein gutes Produkt hat, muss weder Kritik noch Konkurrenz fürchten und braucht diese deshalb auch nicht zu verbieten oder zu regulieren. Tatsächlich hat sich der Wettbewerb als das einzige dauerhaft wirksame Mittel zur Begrenzung menschlicher Macht erwiesen. ### 3.6 Umsetzung Es ist nicht einfach, in den „Markt des Zusammenlebens“ einzudringen. Bislang musste man dazu eine Wahl gewinnen, eine Revolution durchführen oder eine Sezessionsbewegung organisieren. Die Gründung von Freien Privatstädten ist eine friedliche Alternative zu diesen Methoden. Zweifellos ist es keine leichte Aufgabe, bestehende Staaten dazu zu bringen, einen Teil ihrer Souveränität aufzugeben. Dennoch dürfte dieser Weg einfacher sein, als bestehende Systeme „von innen“ in Richtung auf mehr Freiheit, Rechtssicherheit und Selbstverantwortung zu verändern. Dass so etwas möglich ist, zeigt die Tatsache, dass es weltweit bereits viele Sonderwirtschaftszonen gibt, zum Teil nach dem Modell „ein Land, zwei Systeme“. In gewisser Weise ist das Konzept der Freien Privatstädte lediglich die nächste Stufe in der Entwicklung der Sonderwirtschaftszonen. Wenn man es auf diese Weise beschreibt, lässt sich das Konzept potenziellen Gastgeberstaaten auch leichter nahebringen, weil es an bekannte Modelle anknüpft. Die Einrichtung einer Freien Privatstadt erfordert eine vertragliche Vereinbarung mit einem bestehenden Staat. In dieser Vereinbarung räumt der „Gastgeberstaat“ dem Betreiber das Recht ein, die Freie Privatstadt auf einem bestimmten Gebiet zu den vereinbarten Bedingungen zu errichten. Um die Freiwilligkeit der Teilnahme zu gewährleisten, sollte das für die Gründung einer Freien Privatstadt vorgesehene Gebiet zunächst unbewohnt sein. Der Grad der Autonomie, den die jeweilige Freie Privatstadt letztendlich haben wird, ist Verhandlungssache mit dem Gastgeberstaat. Es ist unwahrscheinlich, dass eine Freie Privatstadt in der Lage sein wird, eine vollständige Unabhängigkeit auszuhandeln. Neben der territorialen Souveränität (Verteidigung, Außenpolitik) wird der Gastgeberstaat wahrscheinlich auf der Anwendung bestimmter Rechtsnormen bestehen, wie z. B. der Gültigkeit der in seiner Verfassung verankerten Menschenrechte sowie der Einhaltung der von ihm geschlossenen internationalen Abkommen. Die Freie Privatstadt sollte in der Lage sein, dies zuzugestehen, ohne ihr Wesen aufzugeben. Insofern wird die Freie Privatstadt nicht in der Lage sein, eine eigene Staatsbürgerschaft zu vergeben; die Einwohner behalten ihre eigene, erhalten aber einen Aufenthaltsstatus im Gastgeberstaat. Staaten können bereit sein, einen Teil ihrer Macht über ein bestimmtes Gebiet abzugeben, wenn sie sich davon Vorteile versprechen. Es muss also eine Win-Win-Situation sowohl für den Betreiber als auch für den Gastgeberstaat geschaffen werden. Die Ansiedlung Freier Privatstädte in strukturschwachen Gebieten erhöht nicht nur ihre Attraktivität für die betreffende Region, sondern schafft auch Arbeitsplätze und Investitionen in den angrenzenden Gebieten, was letztlich dem Gastgeberland zugutekommt. Hongkong, Singapur und Monaco sind hierfür gute Beispiele: Um diese Stadtstaaten hat sich in den Nachbarstaaten ein Kordon aus dicht besiedelten und vergleichsweise wohlhabenden Gebieten gebildet. Viele Einwohner der Anliegerstaaten arbeiten im Stadtstaat, zahlen aber Steuern im Heimatland. Wenn man davon ausgeht, dass derartige Entwicklungen in einem ehemals strukturschwachen oder völlig unbewohnten Gebiet stattfinden, dann kann der Gastgeberstaat davon nur profitieren. ## 4. EINZELFRAGEN Die folgenden Punkte betreffen die am häufigsten aufgeworfenen Fragen zur Idee der Freien Privatstädte. Weitere Einzelheiten dazu finden sich in den Links am Ende dieses Dokuments. ### 4.1 Zielgruppe Freie Privatstädte richten sich an alle Einkommensgruppen. Die Höhe der Jahresgebühr für das obligatorische Basispaket, bestehend aus Infrastruktur, Sicherheit und dem Rechts- und Streitschlichtungssystem, beläuft sich auf etwa 1.500 USD pro Person (weniger als eine Unze Gold). Der Betrag kann in einkommensschwachen Ländern nach unten angepasst werden. Die Tatsache, dass keine Steuern erhoben werden, entlastet die Vertragsbürger finanziell, insbesondere Alleinstehende, aber auch alle mittleren Einkommensbezieher mit Familien. Die freiwerdenden Mittel stehen den Bürgern für die eigene Gesundheits- und Altersvorsorge, die Mitgliedschaft in Selbsthilfeeinrichtungen sowie für die Ausbildung ihrer Kinder zur Verfügung. Freie Privatstädte bieten aufgrund ihrer Steuerfreiheit und des regulierungsarmen, wirtschaftsfreundlichen und dienstleistungsorientierten Rechtssystems erhebliche Anreize für die Ansiedlung von Unternehmen. Durch deren wirtschaftliche Aktivität werden auch Arbeitsplätze für Gering- und Mittelverdiener geschaffen. ### 4.2 Soziale Sicherheit Freie Privatstädte ermöglichen den Aufbau von freiwilligen, vielschichtigen Unterstützungsnetzen für Menschen mit Behinderung, Krankheit oder sonstiger Beeinträchtigung. Die Etablierung von kollektiven Selbsthilfeeinrichtungen, privaten Versicherungsanbietern sowie die Unterstützung durch Familie und Freunde und Wohltätigkeitsorganisationen werden ausdrücklich ermutigt (im Buch über Freie Privatstädte ausführlich behandelt). Diese Einrichtungen sollten ausreichen, um alle echten Härtefälle in einer Gemeinschaft aufzufangen. Einige Betreiber könnten sich weiter dafür entscheiden, eine vertraglich garantierte Mindestsicherung anzubieten. ### 4.3 Umweltschutz Freie Privatstädte haben ein Interesse daran, eine saubere Umwelt zu erhalten, um attraktiv für ihre Kunden (Bewohner) zu sein. Im Prinzip basiert der Umweltschutz in der Freien Privatstadt auf dem Schutz der individuellen Rechte. Umweltschäden sind ohne Beeinträchtigung von Eigentum, Besitz oder Personen nicht denkbar. Daher gibt es ein entsprechendes Klagerecht gegen jeden, der diesbezügliche Belange eines anderen beeinträchtigt, und es muss dann von unabhängigen Gerichten entschieden werden, ob der Anspruch berechtigt ist. In einer Freien Privatstadt gibt es keine Tragik der Allmende, da alle Flächen und Gewässer im Besitz oder zumindest unter der Kontrolle von Akteuren sind. Dies gilt insbesondere für den Betreiber selbst, der neben seiner Verwaltungstätigkeit auch als Eigentümer von Grundstücken, Straßen und Plätzen dem Privatrecht unterliegt und als solcher von seinem Klagerecht bei Umweltschäden an seinem Eigentum Gebrauch machen kann. ### 4.4 Demokratie Der Betreiber ist ein jederzeit verklagbarer Dienstleister mit einem engen Aufgabenbereich: Schutz von Leben, Freiheit und Eigentum nach vorher festgelegten und vereinbarten Regeln, die nicht einseitig geändert werden können. Die überwiegende Mehrheit der Entscheidungen im Leben der Bewohner findet daher außerhalb des Einflussbereichs des Betreibers statt. Wenn jeder Mensch fast alles selbst entscheiden kann, einschließlich der Frage, wie er leben und welche Ziele er unterstützen möchte, dann besteht keine Notwendigkeit, diese Entscheidungen an ein Parlament, eine Regierung oder die Mehrheit zu delegieren. Freie Privatstädte sollen maximale Selbstbestimmung ermöglichen, nicht maximale Mitbestimmung. Mit der Fortentwicklung der Gemeinwesen von der Mehrheitsentscheidung zur Selbstbestimmung entfällt auch das principal-agent-problem, das dadurch entsteht, dass Repräsentanten ihre eigenen Interessen bevorzugen gegenüber den Interessen derer, die sie vertreten. Wenn alle durch ihre Handlungen entscheiden können, welche Produkte und Projekte weiter bestehen und welche nicht, ist dies demokratischer im Sinne einer „Herrschaft aller“ als in einem Mehrheitssystem. Durch diesen Prozess sind Freie Privatstädte eher „Volldemokratien“ als die Quasi-Demokratien und Parteienherrschaften, die heutigen Systeme charakterisieren. ### 4.5 Gewaltmonopol Aufgrund des Gewaltmonopols in der Freien Privatstadt wäre der Betreiber theoretisch in der Lage, dieses Monopol zu missbrauchen und sich wie ein Diktator zu verhalten. Allerdings würden die meisten Bürger darauf mit dem Verlassen der Freien Privatstadt reagieren, und es wäre für den Betreiber aufgrund des Ansehensverlustes unmöglich, anderswo erfolgreich neue Privatstädte zu gründen. In dieser Hinsicht unterscheidet sich der Betreiber nicht vom Kapitän eines Kreuzfahrtschiffes auf hoher See oder dem Verwalter einer abgelegenen Feriensiedlung. Beide haben die Macht als Diktatoren aufzutreten, verzichten aber aufgrund ihrer wirtschaftlichen Interessen darauf. Die Zulassung von konkurrierenden Sicherheitsdienstleistern mit eigenen Regeln und damit konkurrierenden Rechtssystemen mag aus Gründen der Monopolvermeidung theoretisch attraktiv erscheinen. In der Praxis dürften der Aufwand und die Unannehmlichkeiten (Transaktionskosten) jedoch zu hoch sein. Es würde Jahre dauern, bis sich auf dem Markt Regeln herausbildeten, wie Kollisionen zwischen den verschiedenen Anbietern und Rechtssystemen gelöst werden können. Faktisch könnte der Eigentümer des stärksten Sicherheitsdienstes machen, was er will. Sobald sich das Modell der Freien Privatstädte als rentabel erwiesen hat, werden zwangsläufig Wettbewerber auf den Plan treten. Dies ist die beste Garantie für die Bewohner, dass die jeweiligen Betreiber ihre Machtposition nicht missbrauchen. Im Übrigen bleiben das Recht eines jeden Vertragsbürgers auf Selbstverteidigung und die entsprechende Unterstützung Dritter gegen Angriffe unberührt bzw. werden ausdrücklich vertraglich garantiert. ### 4.6 Vertragsänderungen Verfassungen können auch gegen den Willen des Volkes geändert werden, wenn eine qualifizierte (parlamentarische) Mehrheit der Änderung zustimmt. Verträge hingegen können nur geändert werden, wenn beide Vertragsparteien zustimmen. Deshalb ist der Bürgervertrag so wichtig für den Schutz der Rechte der einzelnen Einwohner. Freilich kann auch der beste Vertrag nicht alle möglichen zukünftigen Eventualitäten vorhersehen. Aber ein Vertrag, der vom Betreiber jederzeit geändert werden kann oder vage Formulierungen enthält, ist für die Bürger nicht wirklich von Nutzen. Daher muss der Vertragstext so klar und eindeutig wie möglich sein. Kommt es später zu Auslegungsstreitigkeiten wegen fehlender oder unklar formulierter Klauseln in bestimmten Bereichen, so entscheiden die jeweiligen (Schieds-)Gerichte über die strittige Frage und füllen die Regelungslücke. Sie tun dies unter Anwendung der seit Jahrhunderten geltenden, vorab vereinbarten Rechtsgrundsätze und im Rahmen eines vernünftigen Interessenausgleichs. Die Entwicklung von Verträgen findet somit ausschließlich von Fall zu Fall nach einem entsprechenden Urteil statt. Das bedeutet, dass Gerichtsurteile und Schiedssprüche, die sich mit einer bestimmten Frage befassen, von da an für alle verbindlich sind. Neue Regeln oder Vertragsänderungen sind nicht erforderlich. Auf diese Weise funktioniert das englische Common Law seit Jahrhunderten. ### 4.7 Finanzierung Freie Privatstädte finanzieren sich über die Gebührenbeiträge der Bürger, welche die Ausgaben für Sicherheit, ein Rechtssystem und eine gewisse Infrastruktur abdecken. Eine weitere Einnahmequelle sind Grundstücksgeschäfte. Der Betreiber wird in den ersten Betriebsjahren wahrscheinlich Investitionen in die Infrastruktur selbst tätigen müssen, um Siedler anzuziehen, aber eine Vorfinanzierung ist im Risikokapitalgeschäft üblich. Aufgrund von Skaleneffekten wird das Gebührensystem wahrscheinlich erst ab einer bestimmten Einwohnerzahl (etwa 10.000) rentabel, da die Ausgaben für Sicherheitskräfte, Streitschlichtungsstellen und Infrastruktur nicht proportional zur Einwohnerzahl steigen müssen. In der Praxis wird der Betreiber wahrscheinlich einen großen Teil seiner Einnahmen aus Immobiliengeschäften erzielen. Dazu könnte der frühzeitige Erwerb von Grundstücken gehören, deren Wert dann durch die Einrichtung eines stabilen und attraktiven Systems steigt. Die Grundstücke können parzelliert und verkauft oder verpachtet werden. Die entsprechenden Einnahmen können dann zur Querfinanzierung von Ausgaben, Infrastruktur oder sogar zur Senkung der Jahresgebühr verwendet werden. ### 4.8 Schutz vor Übernahme Eine Freie Privatstadt kann, insbesondere wenn sie erfolgreich ist, einem feindlichen Übernahmeversuch durch den Gastgeberstaat ausgesetzt sein. Daher wird der Vertrag zwischen dem Betreiber und dem Gastgeberstaat Investitionsschutz- und Schiedsgerichtsklauseln enthalten. Die abschreckende Wirkung wird dadurch erreicht, dass der Gastgeberstaat nach der Besetzung der Freien Privatstadt erheblichen finanziellen Forderungen ausgesetzt ist, was auch zu einer Beschlagnahmung seiner ausländischen Vermögenswerte führen könnte. Der Betreiber der Freien Privatstadt wird jedoch ein Interesse daran haben, es nicht so weit kommen zu lassen. Er wird wahrscheinlich auf alternative Mittel zurückgreifen, z. B. eine Kombination aus Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, diplomatischen Kontakten zu anderen Staaten und renommierten Institutionen oder anderen Verteidigungsmaßnahmen. Außerdem kann beizeiten darauf hingewiesen werden, dass die Bewohner sehr mobil sind und im Falle einer feindlichen Übernahme die Freie Privatstadt schnell verlassen werden, was den Anreiz für den Gastgeberstaat, diesen Versuch zu unternehmen, weiter schwächt. ## 5. FAZIT Die friedliche Veränderung bestehender, festgefahrener politischer Systeme ist eine sehr schwierige Aufgabe. Wenn wir eine freiere, selbstbestimmte Welt schaffen wollen, sollten wir stattdessen versuchen, alternative Systeme und Rahmenbedingungen zu schaffen. Freie Privatstädte sind ein solcher Versuch. Sie sind keine Utopie, sondern eine Geschäftsidee, deren Funktionselemente bereits bekannt sind (Erbringung vertraglich vereinbarter Dienstleistungen) und die einfach auf einen anderen Bereich übertragen wird, nämlich den des Zusammenlebens. Wir leben in einer zunehmend vernetzten Welt, in der viele Menschen von zu Hause aus für Kunden in mehreren Ländern arbeiten können. Kryptowährungen und dezentrales Finanzwesen sind im Kommen. In einer solchen Welt wird es für Nationalstaaten immer schwieriger, Steuern und Sozialabgaben auf alle möglichen Aktivitäten zu erheben. Schon aus diesem Grund ist das Gebührensystem der Freien Privatstädte die zukunftsträchtigere Option. Der erfolgreiche Aufbau von Parallelstrukturen unabhängig von Nationalstaaten und mächtigen internationalen Organisationen ist möglich: Bitcoin ist der Beweis. Parallelstrukturen auf dem Markt des Zusammenlebens sind ebenfalls gefragt. Das liegt daran, dass die Menschen sich nicht Regeln und Vorschriften unterwerfen wollen, denen sie nicht zugestimmt haben. Die Menschen wollen nicht für Dinge bezahlen, die sie nicht bestellt haben. Und vernünftige Menschen brauchen nicht Hunderte oder Tausende von Gesetzen, um friedlich zusammenzuleben. Stattdessen benötigen die Menschen einen sicheren Raum, in dem sie leben und mit anderen zusammenarbeiten können, aber ansonsten in Ruhe gelassen werden. Freie Privatstädte können diese Wünsche erfüllen. Die bestehenden politischen Systeme können das nicht. Aus diesem Grund haben Freie Privatstädte eine Chance auf Erfolg. Am Ende gehen die Menschen nämlich dorthin, wo sie am besten behandelt werden. --- # Ciudades Privadas Libres: Un nuevo sistema operativo para la convivencia URL: https://free-cities.org/ciudades-privadas-libres#whitepaper Language: Spanish (es) Author: Titus Gebel Edition: Edición de enero de 2022 PDF: https://free-cities.org/docs/whitepaper-free-private-cities-es.pdf En los sistemas políticos actuales, las acciones tanto de los gobernantes como de los gobernados están condicionadas por incentivos erróneos. Los gobernantes no tienen ninguna responsabilidad ni se enfrentan a ninguna desventaja económica si toman malas decisiones. A los gobernados se les hace creer que pueden obtener beneficios “gratuitos” gracias al poder de sus votos. Esto politiza el monopolio estatal de la fuerza y conduce a constantes cambios en el “contrato social” y a una lucha interminable por influir en la dirección de este cambio. En este documento, propongo una alternativa pacífica y voluntaria al statu quo político: Ciudades Privadas Libres. La característica que define a una Ciudad Privada Libre es que está dirigida por una empresa con ánimo de lucro, denominada Operador, que actúa como “proveedor de servicios gubernamentales”. En esta capacidad, el Operador ofrece a los ciudadanos de la Ciudad Privada Libre la protección de la vida, la libertad y la propiedad. Los servicios que presta el Operador abarcan la seguridad interna y externa, un marco legal y reglamentario predefinido y un sistema independiente de resolución de conflictos. Las personas y empresas interesadas suscriben un Contrato Ciudadano, pagando una cuota anual fija por estos servicios en lugar de impuestos. En ese marco puede desarrollarse un “orden espontáneo” que surge de las actividades voluntarias de los ciudadanos. El Operador no puede modificar posteriormente de forma unilateral un Contrato Ciudadano sin el permiso delciudadano afectado. Los litigios entre los ciudadanos y el Operador se dirimen ante tribunales de arbitraje externos, como ya es habitual en el derecho mercantil internacional. Si el Operador ignora los laudos arbitrales o abusa de su poder, los clientes acabarán marchándosey el Operador se enfrentará al riesgo de quiebra. Dado que todo el territorio está actualmente controlado por los gobiernos, el establecimiento de una Ciudad Privada Libre requiere que un Operador celebre un acuerdo contractual con un Estado existente, denominado Nación Anfitriona. En este acuerdo, la Nación Anfitriona concede al Operador el derecho a establecer la Ciudad Privada Libre en un territorio definido de acuerdo con ciertas condiciones predefinidas, que normalmente abarcan una amplia autonomía regulatoria en varios campos. Cabe esperar que los Estados estén dispuestos a ceder parte de su poder si esperan obtener beneficios suficientemente importantes a cambio. Estos beneficios podrían incluir la creación de empleo, la atracción deinversiones extranjeras y un porcentaje de los beneficios generados por el Operador. La existencia de un gran número de Zonas Económicas Especiales en todo el mundo demuestra la disposición de los Estados a hacerlo. ## 1. El PROBLEMA IRRESOLUBLE DE LOS SISTEMAS ACTUALES ### 1.1 Exceder al Leviatán En su famoso libro “Leviatán”, Thomas Hobbes sostenía que el monopolio estatal de la fuerza crea un orden pacífico que, en última instancia, beneficia a todos los habitantes del Estado. Es cierto que la innovación, la división del trabajo, el comercio, el progreso científico y el florecimiento de las artes no pueden lograrse en un entorno plagado de violencia. Sin embargo, una parte sustancial de esta ventaja se pierde si el Estado utiliza su monopolio de la fuerza para lograr objetivos que van más allá de la aplicación y la protección de la paz. Es entonces cuando el Estado se politiza e impone a todos los objetivos políticos, que suelen ser resultados sólo deseados por determinados grupos de interés dentro de la sociedad. Al final, la política implica inevitablemente imponer la propia visión del mundo a todos los demás. Pero las personas son diferentes. Lo que es correcto para una persona suele ser incorrecto para otra. El hecho de que los valores individuales sean, en última instancia, subjetivos y de que las personas tengan también situaciones vitales objetivamente diferentes hace que cualquier “solución política” deje atrás a quienes se han visto obligados a hacer algo contra su voluntad. Hacer política” significa tomar partido y convertir los deseos de algunos en la vara de medir de todos. Por la fuerza, ya que estas soluciones políticas están respaldadas en última instancia por la amenaza de la violencia a través del poder ejecutivo del gobierno. En los sistemas políticos actuales, la relación entre los ciudadanos y los gobiernos es análoga a la relación entre alguien que quiere comprar un coche y el vendedor de coches: el vendedor de coches (el gobierno) insiste en que él elegirá el modelo, el color, el tamaño del motor, el interior, así como el precio que el comprador (el ciudadano) tiene que pagar por él. Y, además, no hay elección en el trato: todos deben comprar. Se trata de un trato evidentemente poco atractivo, pero es el que la mayoría de nosotros aceptamos a través de nuestros sistemas políticos. El supuesto “contrato social” se modifica constantemente, pero sólo, por una parte: el Estado. Sin embargo, si el monopolio estatal de la fuerza se convierte en un instrumento de parcialidad por motivos políticos, entonces el concepto original pierde su efecto. Tras la fachada del Estado pacífico, surge una lucha perpetua de grupos rivales. La política se convierte así en una guerra civil invisible, cuya discreción proviene del hecho de que las víctimas de la injerencia estatal no tienen ninguna posibilidad realista de defenderse. La paz alcanzada en los Estados modernos es ilusoria y se basa en la supresión efectiva de los intereses divergentes. Por lo tanto, es contraproducente dar al Estado un poder que vaya más allá de garantizar la seguridad interna y externa. Porque una vez establecida la paz, la única tarea legítima del gobierno debe ser garantizar que los residentes no impongan su voluntad a los demás. El propio Estado sólo puede utilizar la fuerza para salvaguardar este principio. ### 1.2 Cuando el principio de mínimos se une a la política Hay un problema: en la práctica, este tipo de autocontrol por parte del Estado es imposible de conseguir. Los seres humanos tienden a preferir el orden social que les ofrece el mayor “rendimiento de la vida” al menor precio, lo que significa que intentan obtener el mayor beneficio posible con el menor esfuerzo posible. Esta disposición humana natural, que se denomina principio del mínimo, tiene sentido desde una perspectiva evolutiva. Ha dado lugar a la innovación, la especialización y la división del trabajo, que permiten al ciudadano medio de la mayoría de los países vivir en un estado de afluencia que antes sólo estaba al alcance de las clases altas privilegiadas. Para conseguir sus fines, los seres humanos interactúan con otros. Mientras estas interacciones sean voluntarias, ambas partes buscan beneficiarse de ellas; de lo contrario, estas interacciones no tendrían lugar. La interacción voluntaria siempre se inicia con una promesa: “Te daré algo valioso a cambio”. Sin embargo, cuando alguien quiere que otra persona interactúe con él, se enfrenta a una alternativa, a saber, lanzar una amenaza: “Si no cumples, te haré daño”. En cuanto alguien intenta conseguir sus fines de esta manera, lo más probable es que la otra parte salga perjudicada y el orden social se debilite. En teoría, todos los miembros del orden social podrían ponerse de acuerdo para suprimir conjuntamente los comportamientos violentos. Sin embargo, los beneficios derivados de la división del trabajo, las economías de escala y las economías de alcance, sugieren que puede ser prudente acordar un “garante de la paz” que sea el único que pueda hacer cumplir este acuerdo, si así lo requiere. En nuestro mundo actual este garante es el Estado. Si la disposición humana hacia el principio mínimo se encuentra con el poder del Estado, surge un problema: debido al monopolio del Estado sobre el uso de la fuerza, la política puede prometer beneficios, como subvenciones y dádivas, que parecen no costar nada a los beneficiarios. En realidad, son a costa de otros ciudadanos. Esto da la vuelta a la idea original de evitar la interacción perjudicial: Ahora, la propia institución más poderosa inicia el daño. La disposición humana hacia el principio del mínimo llevará a los grupos de interés a tratar de maximizar sus propios beneficios a expensas de los demás con la ayuda del Estado. Desde el punto de vista de los beneficiarios, los subsidios y las dádivas son un concepto atractivo: no hacen ningún esfuerzo, pero reciben beneficios. Esencialmente, la concesión de subsidios por hijos, de asistencia sanitaria gratuita o de una renta básica incondicional, puede calificarse de compra de votos. Tales subsidios conducen a una población que exige cada vez más prestaciones a corto plazo, promesas incondicionales y ofertas adicionales “gratuitas”. La dinámica aquí descrita también hace que el Estado se inmiscuya cada vez más en la vida privada de los ciudadanos. Esto se debe a que también se distribuyen “beneficios intangibles”, como las regulaciones a favor de los deseos de determinados grupos de interés. Como casi todos los grupos de interés intentan tener en cuenta sus deseos personales, el número de leyes, la carga fiscal y la deuda nacional aumentan inevitablemente con el tiempo. La polarización política es un resultado inevitable de este sistema. La posibilidad de que los individuos lleven su vida según sus propios gustos se ve cada vez más restringida. En teoría, este problema puede superarse utilizando la razón y la persuasión, mientras que, en la práctica, el principio de mínimos sigue siendo más fuerte. Los políticos o gobernantes que abogan por los recortes en las prestaciones serán, tarde o temprano, expulsados del cargo o sustituidos por mandatarios más “solidarios” y “generosos”. Además, los respectivos gobernantes no tienen ningún incentivo para comportarse de forma sostenible, ya que no tienen consecuencias económicas por sus decisiones. Siguen siendo jurídicamente inmunes a la responsabilidad y no tienen obligaciones exigibles para con sus gobernados. Sin embargo, estos sistemas no pueden seguir funcionando a largo plazo. Inevitablemente, el exceso de promesas y la subvención de programas no rentables pero bienintencionados llevarán a los gobiernos a quedarse sin fondos, provocando la autodestrucción del sistema político imperante. Las artimañas fiscales de los bancos centrales, como la manipulación a la baja de los tipos de interés o la compra de sus propios bonos del Estado, sólo pueden retrasar este resultado, no evitarlo. Soy consciente de que lo que sigue es una constatación extremadamente dolorosa para muchos, pero no hay manera de evitar esta percepción: Un sistema, por muy legitimado que esté, que prevé por ley expropiaciones a favor de terceros (por ejemplo, en forma de impuestos y cotizaciones a la seguridad social) y con el que no todos los afectados han estado de acuerdo, no puede conducir a un sistema de cooperación pacífica y estable. Las bases y los resultados de la cooperación voluntaria se destruyen mediante el ejercicio del poder estatal. La verdadera solidaridad no puede surgir en un entorno de coacción. La batalla resultante de todos contra todos por la aplicación de la normativa, favorable a unos a costa de otros, socava sucesivamente lo que hace que una sociedad sea cohesionada, exitosa y atractiva. ## 2. CRITERIOS PARA LOS SISTEMAS ALTERNATIVOS No sirve de nada culpar a la gente por seguir sus disposiciones evolutivas ni quejarse de los políticos por ofrecer lo que el electorado quiere. El único remedio es descentralizar y limitar el poder. Cuantos menos ámbitos de la vida controle la política, menos importante será quién controle o influya en los políticos. Quien quiera evitar recibir beneficios especiales del gobierno a costa de terceros debe crear un sistema de gobierno que no pueda conceder beneficios especiales en absoluto. Por lo tanto, tenemos que definir un sistema que, por su diseño, evite los incentivos desajustados y sea intrínsecamente estable. Un nuevo orden social estable a largo plazo debe exigir a los responsables que: - no poder conceder beneficios especiales a grupos o ciudadanos individuales (evitar los grupos de presión, la corrupción y las luchas por la generosidad del Estado), - ser responsable de los errores (acoplamiento de poder y responsabilidad), - tienen un interés económico en el éxito de la sociedad (poner la piel en el juego), - permitir a sus ciudadanos abandonar o separarse en cualquier momento sin imponer obstáculos financieros o de otro tipo (permitiendo la competencia), - tener obligaciones escritas claramente, definidas y modificables sólo con el consentimiento tanto de los gobernados como de los gobernantes (un verdadero contrato social, seguridad jurídica, previsibilidad), - ser demandado por las partes interesadas en caso de diferencias ante tribunales independientes u organismos de arbitraje (resolución neutral de conflictos). En la actualidad, incluso las democracias occidentales sólo cumplen el último de los criterios anteriores, a menudo con salvedades, ya que sólo algunos órganos pueden demandar al gobierno y los tribunales son financiados por el mismo gobierno. La seguridad jurídica y la previsibilidad que proporcionan las constituciones ya no son efectivas en la práctica, ya que los gobernantes, con sus mayorías parlamentarias y mediante el nombramiento de jueces, pueden controlar en gran medida tanto la redacción como la interpretación de la constitución. ## 3. EL GOBIERNO COMO SERVICIO: CIUDADES PRIVADAS LIBRES Este documento propone un concepto que cumple los criterios anteriores y supera los problemas descritos. Este concepto se denomina Ciudad Privada Libre. ### 3.1 Elementos definitorios de las Ciudades Privadas Libres - Una Ciudad Libre Privada es un territorio soberano o semiautónomo con su propio marco jurídico y normativo. Tiene su propio régimen fiscal, aduanero y social, así como su propia administración, fuerzas de seguridad y un sistema independiente de resolución de conflictos (regulación y administración autónomas). - Las Ciudades Privadas Libres son gestionadas por una empresa operadora con ánimo de lucro (“Operador”). El Operador garantiza a los habitantes de la Ciudad Privada Libre la protección de la vida, la libertad y la propiedad que proporciona a cambio de una cuota básica fija (Protección por el Operador). - Cada residente individual o entidad residente ha suscrito un “Contrato Ciudadano” por escrito con el Operador, que define claramente sus derechos y obligaciones mutuas. Incluye los servicios que debe prestar el Operador y las tarifas que debe pagarle por sus servicios; no hay impuestos. También establece las normas que se aplican en la Ciudad Privada Libre: tanto para los ciudadanos como para el Operador. Un aspecto definitorio del Contrato Ciudadano es que no puede ser modificado unilateralmente por ninguna de las partes. Representa la “constitución personal” de cada ciudadano contratado (contrato social real y fiable). - La participación y residencia en la Ciudad Privada Libre es voluntaria (participación voluntaria). - No hay ninguna pretensión legal de admisión en la Ciudad Privada Libre; para cumplir la promesa de seguridad, el Operador decide sobre la inmigración según su criterio y su discreción (política de inmigración). - Además, los ciudadanos contratantes pueden hacer lo que quieran, siempre que no violen los derechos de los demás o las normas establecidas en el Contrato Ciudadano (el principio de “vive y deja vivir”). - Cualquier ciudadano puede rescindir el contrato en cualquier momento y abandonar la Ciudad Privada Libre, pero el Operador sólo puede rescindir el contrato por causa justificada, por ejemplo, por incumplimiento de las obligaciones contractuales, como el impago continuado de la tasa (rescisión unilateral del contrato libre). - La coacción del operador de la ciudad sólo puede utilizarse para hacer cumplir las normas predefinidas y acordadas. Las infracciones graves o repetidas conducen a la exclusión de la Ciudad Privada Libre (es posible la exclusión basada en el contrato). - En caso de conflicto con el Operador, cada parte tiene derecho a recurrir a tribunales independientes (de arbitraje) que no formen parte de la organización del Operador (arbitraje independiente). ### 3.2 Contrato social real En una Ciudad Privada Libre, cada uno sería el soberano de sí mismo. Por acuerdo voluntario, han celebrado un auténtico contrato con un proveedor de servicios más o menos ordinario. Ambas partes tienen los mismos derechos formales y, por tanto, están en igualdad de condiciones jurídicas. En las Ciudades Privadas Libres, la relación entre gobernante y súbdito de los sistemas de gobierno tradicionales se sustituye por una relación entre cliente y proveedor de servicios. Por primera vez en la historia, existiría un contrato social real con reglas predefinidas, y no uno ficticio que es cambiado repetidamente por una de las partes. A diferencia de los sistemas convencionales, en los que el ciudadano está obligado a pagar impuestos sin tener el correspondiente derecho a las prestaciones, en una Ciudad Privada Libre el servicio y la compensación están directamente relacionados. Ambas partes contratantes tienen derecho al cumplimiento del contrato por parte de la contraparte respectiva. El Operador puede exigir al ciudadano el pago de la contribución fijada, pero no de tasas adicionales (salvo que el ciudadano esté de acuerdo). A su vez, el ciudadano puede demandar al Operador por el incumplimiento de sus obligaciones contractuales, como garantizar la seguridad y el funcionamiento del sistema de derecho privado. Quién gestiona realmente o a quién pertenece la empresa operadora no es relevante para el funcionamiento del modelo. El Operador podría incluso ser propiedad de la ciudadanía en su conjunto. Al mismo tiempo, el contrato estrictamente bilateral entre los ciudadanos y el Operador aborda un viejo problema de la humanidad: el deseo de algunas personas de imponer su voluntad a otras. En una Ciudad Privada Libre, no hay plataforma que puedan secuestrar los paternalistas y los buscadores de rentas. El activismo político, el celo misionero, las luchas distributivas y la agitación de los grupos sociales entre sí desaparecerían, por la simple ausencia de un beneficio para la parte ejecutora. Los ciudadanos saben que no pueden interferir en el Contrato Ciudadano de sus conciudadanos y, por lo tanto, aprenderían a respetar las diferentes opiniones y valoraciones de los demás. Las disputas entre el Operador y los ciudadanos se dirimirán ante tribunales de arbitraje independientes, como ya es habitual en el derecho comercial internacional. Si el Operador hace caso omiso de los laudos arbitrales o abusa de su poder de cualquier otra manera, sus clientes se irán y acabará enfrentándose a la quiebra. Por tanto, el Operador se enfrenta a un riesgo económico real y, por lo tanto, tiene todos los incentivos para tratar a sus clientes bien y de acuerdo con el Contrato Ciudadano. Dado que el Operador tiene responsabilidades limitadas, a saber, la protección de la vida, la libertad y la propiedad de los ciudadanos, sólo garantizaría el marco en el que la sociedad podría desarrollarse como un “orden espontáneo”. Un orden espontáneo es un orden que surge como resultado de las actividades voluntarias de los individuos, basadas en su conocimiento descentralizado, y no como resultado de un mandato gubernamental o de una planificación central. Entre los ejemplos de sistemas que evolucionaron mediante el orden espontáneo o la auto organización se encuentran la evolución de la vida en la Tierra, los idiomas, Internet y las economías de libre mercado. ### 3.3 Principios fundamentales Hay unos pocos y sencillos principios que determinan la convivencia en una Ciudad Privada Libre. El principio rector es la autodeterminación y la autonomía privada, el derecho a configurar las relaciones jurídicas de cada uno según sus propias decisiones. Además, se aplica la Regla de Oro expresada en el proverbio “no hagas a los demás lo que no quieras que te hagan a ti”. Además, es válido el principio do ut des (yo doy para que tú des), el reconocimiento de que el mérito se basa en la reciprocidad. Por último, existe el principio de voluntariedad y no agresión, lo que significa que las interacciones se basan únicamente en la cooperación voluntaria, en lugar de la coacción y la expropiación, incluso por causas supuestamente “buenas”. El resultado es una sociedad que “vive y deja vivir”. ### 3.4 Motivo de lucro El afán de lucro del Operador tiene una importancia fundamental para el modelo de Ciudades Privadas Libres. Mucha gente considera que el afán de lucro es algo inmoral, especialmente cuando afecta a cuestiones sociales como nuestra convivencia. No reconocen que no hay mejor incentivo que el afán de lucro para hacer un uso óptimo de unos recursos escasos. La competencia con otros sistemas y la necesidad de obtener beneficios incentivan al Operador de una ciudad privada libre a buscar permanentemente la mejora de su “producto” y a optimizar el uso de unos recursos escasos. En última instancia, esto se traduce en una mayor satisfacción y en unos servicios de mayor calidad para los ciudadanos. Cada decisión que toma el Operador tiene un impacto inmediato. El Operador debe preguntarse si sus acciones aumentarán la satisfacción de los ciudadanos o si es mejor aplicar medidas de recorte de costes que permitan reducir las tasas para que la Ciudad Privada Libre sea más competitiva. En otras palabras, antes de actuar, el Operador debe preguntarse si su acción acabará generando más ingresos que gastos. Si se generan más ingresos, se obtienen beneficios y se incrementa el valor empresarial de la Ciudad Privada Libre, lo que refleja la mayor satisfacción de los residentes individuales y de las entidades residentes. Si la medida genera pérdidas, debe mejorarse o invertirse. Esta eficiencia, y por tanto una mayor calidad de vida para todas las partes interesadas, nunca se conseguirá con los sistemas públicos estatales. ### 3.5 Competencia Las Ciudades Privadas Libres pueden modificarse en todas las direcciones, desde los modelos anarcocapitalistas sin monopolio de la fuerza hasta las comunas tipo kibbutz sin propiedad privada. La elección de diferentes conceptos permite desactivar la mayoría de los conflictos políticos y sustituirlos por una coexistencia pacífica de diferentes sistemas en los que cada uno entra voluntariamente. Precisamente porque las preferencias de las personas difieren y no podemos saber qué sistema es evolutivamente el mejor para quién, debemos permitir que florezcan la diversidad y la competencia. Un gobierno mundial único sería un peligro extremo para la libertad: No más exilios, no más comparación, no más elección. La visión de un orden social como “producto” en el “Mercado de la Convivencia” y la competencia pacífica de los sistemas por los ciudadanos como “clientes” aumentarán considerablemente tanto la paz como la libertad. Esto se debe a que la búsqueda de soluciones en el mercado no es violenta ni revolucionaria, sino que es un proceso evolutivo que tiene lugar a través de la mutación (ensayo y error), la selección (rentabilidad o quiebra) y la reproducción (imitación de soluciones exitosas). Por lo tanto, en primer lugar, deben permitirse formas alternativas de sociedad y, en segundo lugar, no debe impedirse a los ciudadanos salir del sistema. Quien no quiera ser un individuo soberano, sino que prefiera un ambiente comunitario y “calor social”, tiene todo el derecho del mundo a buscarlo. Pero no tiene derecho a detener o retener contra su voluntad a quienes prefieren la libertad ni a obligarles a financiar su forma de vida deseada. Los órdenes sociales que sólo funcionan si se retiene a las personas en ellos contra su voluntad y se les obliga a comportarse de una determinada manera, fracasarán de todos modos a largo plazo. Si se tiene un buen producto, no hay que temer las críticas ni la competencia y, por tanto, no hay que prohibirlas ni regularlas. De hecho, la competencia ha demostrado ser el único medio permanentemente eficaz para limitar el poder humano. ### 3.6 Aplicación Penetrar en el mercado de la convivencia no es fácil. Normalmente hay que ganar unas elecciones, llevar a cabo una revolución u organizar un movimiento de secesión. La creación de Ciudades Privadas Libres es una alternativa pacífica a estos métodos. Sin duda, conseguir que los Estados existentes renuncien a parte de su soberanía es una tarea ambiciosa. Sin embargo, esta vía parece más fácil que cambiar los sistemas existentes “desde dentro” para hacerlos más proclives a la libertad, la seguridad jurídica y la autorresponsabilidad. El hecho de que en todo el mundo existan ya muchas Zonas Económicas Especiales, algunas con un modelo de “un país, dos sistemas”, demuestra que son posibles caminos similares. En cierto modo, el concepto de Ciudades Privadas Libres no es más que la siguiente etapa en la evolución de las Zonas Económicas Especiales. Describirlo así puede facilitar la tarea de convencer a los posibles países anfitriones. El establecimiento de una Ciudad Privada Libre requiere un acuerdo contractual con un Estado existente. En este acuerdo, la “Nación Anfitriona” concede a la empresa operadora el derecho a establecer la Ciudad Privada Libre en un territorio definido de acuerdo con las condiciones acordadas. Para garantizar la participación voluntaria, lo mejor es que la zona propuesta para el establecimiento de una Ciudad Privada Libre esté inicialmente deshabitada. El grado de autonomía que acabe teniendo la respectiva Ciudad Libre Privada, es una cuestión a negociar con la Nación Anfitriona. Es poco probable que una Ciudad Libre Privada pueda negociar una independencia total. Además de la soberanía territorial (defensa, política exterior), la Nación Anfitriona probablemente insistirá en que se sigan aplicando ciertas normas legales, como la validez de los derechos humanos consagrados en su constitución, así como el respeto continuado a sus acuerdos internacionales y códigos penales. La Ciudad Privada Libre debería ser capaz de hacer frente a esto sin renunciar a su esencia. En este sentido, la Ciudad Privada Libre no podrá conceder su propia ciudadanía; los residentes mantendrán la suya, pero obtendrán un estatus de residencia en la Nación Anfitriona. Los Estados pueden aceptar ceder parte de su poder sobre un determinado territorio si esperan beneficiarse de él. Por tanto, hay que crear una situación en la que todos salgan ganando entre el Operador y la Nación Anfitriona. El establecimiento de Ciudades Privadas Libres en zonas estructuralmente débiles no sólo aumenta su atractivo para la región circundante, sino que también puede crear puestos de trabajo e inversiones en las zonas vecinas, lo que en última instancia beneficia a la Nación Anfitriona. Hong Kong, Singapur y Mónaco son buenos ejemplos: Alrededor de estas ciudades-estado se ha formado un cordón de zonas densamente pobladas y comparativamente prósperas. Los habitantes de la nación anfitriona suelen trabajar en la ciudad-estado vecina, pero pagan impuestos en la patria. Si se parte de la base de que estos desarrollos tienen lugar en una zona antes estructuralmente débil o completamente deshabitada, entonces la Nación Anfitriona sólo puede beneficiarse. ## 4. CONSIDERACIONES ADICIONALES A continuación, se exponen las cuestiones que se plantean con más frecuencia al debatir la idea de las Ciudades Privadas Libres. En los enlaces que figuran al final de este documento se ofrecen más detalles. ### 4.1 Grupo objetivo Las Ciudades Privadas Libres se dirigen a todos los grupos de ingresos, así como a todas las empresas. Los costes estimados del paquete básico obligatorio, compuesto por la infraestructura, la seguridad y el sistema jurídico y de resolución de conflictos, ascenderán a unos 1.500 dólares por persona y año (menos de una onza de oro). El importe puede ajustarse a la baja en los países de bajos ingresos. El hecho de que no se cobren impuestos alivia considerablemente la carga financiera de la entidad residente, sobre todo de las personas que se incorporan solas al mercado laboral, pero también de todos los asalariados de ingresos medios con familia. Los fondos liberados pueden destinarse a los planes de ahorro para la salud y las pensiones de los ciudadanos o a su afiliación a instituciones de autoayuda, así como a la educación de sus hijos. Al estar exentas de impuestos y tener un régimen jurídico poco regulado, favorable a las empresas y orientado a los servicios, las Ciudades Privadas Libres ofrecen considerables incentivos a los colonos, especialmente a las empresas. Como resultado de su actividad económica, también se crearán puestos de trabajo para personas con ingresos bajos y medios. ### 4.2 Seguridad social Las Ciudades Privadas Libres permitirán el establecimiento de redes de apoyo voluntarias y de varios niveles para las personas con discapacidad, enfermedad u otra incapacidad. Se fomentarían las instituciones de autoayuda colectiva, los proveedores de seguros privados, así como el apoyo de familiares y amigos y las organizaciones benéficas (que se tratan en detalle en el libro sobre Ciudades Privadas Libres). Estas instituciones deberían ser suficientes para atender todos los casos de penuria real en una comunidad. Algunos operadores podrían optar por añadir una seguridad social mínima garantizada por contrato. ### 4.3 Medio Ambiente Las Ciudades Privadas Libres tienen interés en mantener un medio ambiente limpio como medio para atraer a los residentes. En principio, la protección del medio ambiente en la Ciudad Privada Libre se basa en la protección de los derechos individuales. Es impensable un daño medioambiental que no afecte a la propiedad, las posesiones o las personas. Por lo tanto, existe el correspondiente derecho a demandar a quien contamina el medio ambiente de otro, y luego deben decidir los tribunales independientes si la demanda está justificada. En una Ciudad Privada Libre, no existe la tragedia de los comunes porque toda la tierra y las aguas son propiedad, o al menos están controladas, por los actores. Esto se aplica en particular al propio Operador, que además de sus actividades administrativas también está sujeto al derecho privado como propietario de terrenos, calles y plazas y, como tal, puede hacer uso de su derecho a demandar en caso de daños medioambientales a su propiedad. ### 4.4 Democracia El Operador actúa como un proveedor de servicios accionable con un alcance limitado: la protección de la vida, la libertad y la propiedad de acuerdo con reglas predefinidas y pre acordadas, que no son modificables unilateralmente. La gran mayoría de las decisiones de la vida ocurren fuera de la esfera de influencia del Operador. Si todo el mundo puede decidir casi todo por sí mismo, incluyendo cómo quiere vivir y qué causas quiere apoyar, entonces no hay necesidad de delegar estas decisiones en un parlamento, un gobierno o un voto mayoritario. Las Ciudades Privadas Libres deben permitir la máxima autodeterminación, no la máxima codeterminación. Con la evolución de un sistema de gobernanza que pasa de la regla de la mayoría a la de la autodeterminación, ya no existe el problema del agente principal derivado del hecho de que los agentes puedan preferir sus propios intereses a los de sus representados. Si todos pueden decidir qué productos y proyectos siguen existiendo y cuáles no, hay más democracia en el sentido de un gobierno de todos que en un sistema mayoritario. A través de este proceso, las Ciudades Privadas Libres son capaces de lograr una “democracia plena” en lugar de la cuasi-democracia que representan los sistemas mayoritarios de hoy en día. ### 4.5 Monopolio de la Fuerza Debido al monopolio territorial de la fuerza, el Operador podría, en teoría, abusar de este monopolio y comportarse como un dictador. Sin embargo, la mayoría de los ciudadanos responderían abandonando la Ciudad Privada Libre, y al Operador le sería imposible fundar con éxito nuevas ciudades en otros lugares debido a su pérdida de reputación. En este sentido, el Operador no se diferencia del capitán de un crucero en alta mar o del director de un complejo turístico remoto. Ambos podrían, en teoría, aprovechar la oportunidad de actuar como dictadores, pero se abstienen de hacerlo debido a sus intereses comerciales. Permitir que los proveedores de servicios de seguridad compitan entre sí con sus propias normas y, por tanto, con sistemas jurídicos competitivos, puede parecer teóricamente atractivo por razones de prevención de monopolios. En la práctica, sin embargo, el esfuerzo y los inconvenientes que conlleva (costes de transacción) son probablemente demasiado elevados. Harían falta años para que se desarrollaran reglas en el mercado sobre cómo resolver las colisiones entre los distintos proveedores y sistemas jurídicos. En la práctica, los propietarios del servicio de seguridad más fuerte podrían hacer lo que quisieran. Una vez que el modelo de Ciudades Privadas Libres ha demostrado ser rentable, es inevitable que aparezcan competidores en la escena. Esta es la mejor garantía para los residentes de que los respectivos operadores no abusarán de su posición de poder. Aparte de eso, el derecho de todo ciudadano contratado a la autodefensa y el correspondiente apoyo de terceros contra los ataques no se ven afectados ni se garantizan expresamente por contrato. ### 4.6 Cambios de contrato Las constituciones de los Estados nacionales pueden modificarse, incluso en contra de la voluntad del pueblo, siempre que una mayoría cualificada (parlamentaria) esté de acuerdo con el cambio. Los contratos, en cambio, sólo pueden modificarse si ambas partes contratantes están de acuerdo. Por ello, el contrato de los ciudadanos y la posición jurídica correspondiente son tan importantes para la protección de los derechos individuales de los residentes. Sin embargo, incluso el mejor contrato no puede prever todas las posibles contingencias futuras. Pero un contrato que pueda ser modificado en cualquier momento por el Operador o que contenga un lenguaje vago no tendría ninguna utilidad real para los ciudadanos. Por lo tanto, la redacción del contrato debe ser lo más clara e inequívoca posible. Si más tarde esto da lugar a disputas de interpretación debido a la ausencia de cláusulas o a su formulación vaga en determinadas áreas, entonces los respectivos tribunales (de arbitraje) decidirán la cuestión controvertida y llenarán el vacío legal, utilizando los principios legales pre-acordados que han estado en vigor durante siglos y un equilibrio razonable de intereses. El desarrollo de los contratos tiene lugar exclusivamente a través de la “jurisprudencia”. Esto significa que las sentencias judiciales y los laudos arbitrales que abordan una determinada cuestión son, a partir de entonces, vinculantes para todos los contratos, y no requieren la introducción de nuevas normas o modificaciones en los contratos. Así es como el Common Law ha funcionado con éxito durante cientos de años. ### 4.7 Financiación Las Ciudades Privadas Libres se financian a sí mismas, a través de las tasas básicas de los ciudadanos que cubren los gastos de seguridad, un sistema legal y una determinada infraestructura. Otra fuente de ingresos son las transacciones de terrenos. Es probable que el Operador tenga que realizar inversiones iniciales en infraestructuras durante los primeros años de funcionamiento para atraer a los primeros colonos, pero la financiación previa es normal en el negocio del capital riesgo. Debido a las economías de escala, es probable que el sistema de tasas sólo sea rentable cuando se alcance un determinado número de habitantes (alrededor de 10.000), ya que los gastos de las fuerzas de seguridad, los órganos de resolución de conflictos y las infraestructuras no tienen por qué aumentar en proporción al número de habitantes. En la práctica, es probable que el Operador genere gran parte de sus ingresos a partir de transacciones inmobiliarias. Esto podría incluir la compra anticipada de terrenos, que luego aumentarán de valor como resultado del establecimiento de un sistema estable y atractivo. Los terrenos también pueden parcelarse y venderse o arrendarse. Los ingresos correspondientes pueden utilizarse entonces para la financiación cruzada de gastos, infraestructuras o incluso para rebajar el canon básico. ### 4.8 Protección Especialmente si tiene éxito, una Ciudad Privada Libre podría ser objeto de un intento de adquisición hostil por parte de la Nación Anfitriona. Por ello, el acuerdo entre el Operador y la Nación Anfitriona contendrá cláusulas comunes de protección de la inversión y de arbitraje. En este sentido, la Nación Anfitriona corre el riesgo de verse expuesta a considerables demandas financieras tras la ocupación de la Ciudad Privada Libre, lo que también podría dar lugar a un embargo de sus activos extranjeros. No obstante, el Operador de la Ciudad Privada Libre estará incentivado para no dejar que se llegue tan lejos. Probablemente utilizará medios alternativos, por ejemplo, una combinación de relaciones públicas, contactos diplomáticos con otros estados e instituciones de renombre u otras medidas defensivas. Sin embargo, desde la perspectiva de la teoría del juego, puede señalarse que los residentes son muy móviles y podrían abandonar rápidamente la Ciudad Privada Libre en caso de una toma de posesión hostil, lo que socava aún más el incentivo de la Nación Anfitriona para realizar este intento. ## 5. CONCLUSION Cambiar los sistemas políticos existentes y arraigados de forma pacífica es una tarea difícil. Si queremos crear un mundo más libre centrado en la soberanía personal, es mejor que intentemos establecer sistemas y marcos voluntarios alternativos. Las Ciudades Privadas Libres son un producto de este tipo. Las Ciudades Privadas Libres no son una utopía, sino una idea de negocio cuyos elementos funcionales ya se conocen (prestación de servicios contratados) y que sólo hay que trasladar a otro sector, el de la convivencia. Vivimos en un mundo cada vez más conectado, en el que muchas personas pueden trabajar desde casa para clientes de varios países. Están surgiendo las criptomonedas y las finanzas descentralizadas. En un mundo así, cada vez es más difícil para los Estados nacionales recaudar impuestos y contribuciones sociales sobre todo tipo de actividades. Sólo por esta razón, el sistema de tasas de las Ciudades Privadas Libres es la opción más prometedora para el futuro. El establecimiento exitoso de estructuras paralelas independientes de los estados-nación y de las poderosas organizaciones internacionales es posible: Bitcoin es la prueba. Se supone que las estructuras paralelas en el Mercado de la Convivencia también tienen una gran demanda. Eso es porque la gente no quiere ser subyugada por reglas y regulaciones que no ha consentido. La gente no quiere pagar por cosas que no ha pedido. Y la gente razonable no necesita cientos o miles de leyes para convivir pacíficamente. Por último, la gente necesita un espacio seguro en el que pueda congregarse y cooperar pacíficamente, pero en el que las autoridades coercitivas le dejen en paz. Las Ciudades Privadas Libres pueden cumplir estos deseos humanos. Los sistemas políticos existentes no pueden. Por esta razón, las Ciudades Privadas Libres tienen la oportunidad de triunfar. Al final, la gente irá a donde se le trate mejor. --- # Villes Privées Libres: Un nouveau modèle de gouvernance URL: https://free-cities.org/villes-privees-libres#whitepaper Language: French (fr) Author: Titus Gebel Edition: Édition d’avril 2022 PDF: https://free-cities.org/docs/whitepaper-free-private-cities-fr.pdf Les systèmes politiques actuels sont caractérisés par de fausses incitations, tant pour les gouvernants que pour les gouvernés. Les gouvernants ne sont pas responsables de leurs actes et n’ont pas à craindre de préjudices économiques s’ils prennent de mauvaises décisions. Quant aux gouvernés, on leur fait croire qu’ils peuvent obtenir des prestations « gratuites » rien qu’en votant. Cela politise le monopole de la violence de l’État et conduit à des modifications constantes du « contrat social ». Il en résulte une lutte continue pour influencer ces changements dans une certaine direction. Cette contribution propose une alternative pacifique et volontaire au statu quo politique : les villes privées libres. Une ville privée libre se caractérise par le fait qu’elle est organisée par une entreprise à but lucratif, à savoir le gérant de la ville, qui agit en tant que « prestataire de services publics ». En cette qualité, cette entreprise garantit à ses citoyens la protection de leur vie, de leur liberté et de leur propriété. Les services fournis par les opérateurs comprennent la sécurité intérieure et extérieure, un cadre juridique et réglementaire prédéfini et un système indépendant de règlement des litiges. Les individus et les entreprises intéressés concluent avec lui un « contrat citoyen » et paient une redevance annuelle fixe pour ces services au lieu de payer des impôts. Toutes les terres sont actuellement contrôlées par des États. De fait, la création d’une ville libre privée nécessite de conclure un accord avec un État existant. Dans cet accord, l’État « hôte » accorde à l’opérateur le droit d’établir une ville privée sur un territoire donné, à des conditions précises, qui comprennent une autonomie juridique dans différents domaines. Les États pourraient céder une partie de leur pouvoir s’ils espéraient en retirer des avantages en contrepartie. Par exemple des créations d’emplois, des investissements étrangers et une partie des bénéfices générés. L’existence de plusieurs zones économiques spéciales dans le monde prouve que les États sont prêts à s’engager dans cette voie. ## 1. LE PROBLÈME INSOLUBLE DES SYSTÈMES ACTUELS Dans son célèbre ouvrage Léviathan, Thomas Hobbes explique qu’un monopole étatique de la violence crée un ordre pacifique qui profite en fin de compte à tous les habitants de l’État. Il est en effet vrai que l’innovation, la division du travail, le commerce, le progrès scientifique et l’épanouissement des arts ne sont pas possibles dans un environnement marqué par la violence. Une partie importante de cet avantage est toutefois perdue lorsque l’État utilise son monopole de la violence pour atteindre des objectifs qui vont au-delà de l’imposition de la paix et de sa sauvegarde. C’est le cas lorsque l’État se politise et impose à tous les citoyens des objectifs politiques qui, en règle générale, ne sont souhaités que par certains groupes d’intérêt au sein de la société. Car en fin de compte, la politique consiste à imposer à tous les autres sa propre vision du monde. Or, les gens sont tous différents. Ce qui est juste pour l’un peut être faux pour l’autre. Le fait que les valeurs individuelles soient en fin de compte subjectives et que les gens aient aussi des situations de vie objectivement différents faits que toute « solution politique » laisse sur le carreau ceux qui ont été forcés à faire quelque chose contre leur gré. « Faire de la politique » signifie prendre parti et faire des souhaits des uns la norme pour tous. Et ce par la force, si c’est nécessaire, car toutes les solutions politiques sont en fin de compte soutenues par la menace que représente un recours à la force par le pouvoir en place. Dans les systèmes politiques actuels, la relation entre les citoyens et les gouvernements est comparable à la relation entre quelqu’un qui veut acheter une voiture et un concessionnaire automobile - le concessionnaire automobile (= le gouvernement) exigeant de déterminer lui-même le modèle, la couleur, la motorisation, l’équipement intérieur ainsi que le prix que l’acheteur (= le citoyen) doit payer pour cette voiture. De plus, il n’y a pas de choix possible dans cette affaire : tout le monde doit acheter. C’est un marché manifestement peu attractif, mais c’est le marché que la plupart d’entre nous acceptent dans nos systèmes politiques. Dans la plupart des pays, le prétendu « contrat social » est constamment modifié, mais toujours par une seule partie : l’État. Lorsque le monopole de l’État sur l’usage de la force devient un instrument au service d’une vision partisane à motivation politique, le concept initial perd de son efficacité. Derrière la façade d’un État pacifique, une lutte permanente entre groupes rivaux se développe. La politique devient alors une guerre civile invisible, dont la discrétion résulte du fait que les victimes des interventions de l’État n’ont aucune chance réaliste de se défendre. La paix obtenue dans les États modernes est illusoire et repose en réalité sur la répression effective des intérêts divergents. Il est donc contre-productif de donner à l’État un pouvoir qui va au-delà de la garantie de la sécurité intérieure et extérieure. En effet, une fois la paix établie, la seule tâche légitime de l’État est de veiller à ce que les uns n’imposent pas leur volonté aux autres. L’État lui-même ne peut recourir à la force que pour préserver ce principe. ### 1.1 La politique comme moyen de vivre aux dépens d’autrui Il y a un problème à cet égard : dans la pratique, il est impossible de concrétiser ce type d’autolimitation de l’État. L’être humain a tendance à privilégier l’ordre social qui lui apporte le maximum au moindre coût, c’est-à-dire qu’il essaie d’obtenir le maximum d’avantages avec le moins d’efforts possible. Cette disposition humaine naturelle, appelée ci-après « principe minimaliste », est judicieuse du point de vue de l’évolution. Elle a conduit à l’innovation, à la spécialisation et à la division du travail, qui permettent aujourd’hui à un individu moyen, dans la plupart des pays, de vivre dans une prospérité qui était autrefois réservée aux classes supérieures privilégiées. Pour atteindre leurs objectifs, les personnes interagissent avec d’autres. Tant que ces interactions sont volontaires, les deux parties veulent en tirer profit - sinon ces interactions n’auraient pas lieu. Les interactions volontaires sont toujours précédées d’une promesse : « Je te donnerai quelque chose de précieux en échange ». En revanche, si quelqu’un force une autre personne à interagir avec lui, il doit se résoudre à proférer une menace : « Si tu n’acceptes pas, je te ferai du mal ». Dès qu’une personne tente d’atteindre ses objectifs de cette manière, il est fort probable que l’autre partie subisse un préjudice et que l’ordre social soit affaibli. En théorie, tous les membres de l’ordre social pourraient se mettre d’accord pour empêcher ensemble les comportements violents. Toutefois, en raison des avantages découlant de la division du travail et des économies d’échelle et de diversification, il est préférable de se mettre d’accord sur un « garant de la paix », qui est le seul habilité à faire respecter cet accord. Dans notre monde actuel, ce garant est l’État. Lorsque la tendance naturelle de l’homme à recourir au « principe minimaliste » rencontre le pouvoir de l’État, un problème surgit : en raison du monopole de l’État sur l’usage de la force, la politique peut promettre des prestations qui, en apparence, ne coûtent rien aux bénéficiaires. En réalité, elles se font aux frais des autres citoyens. L’idée initiale d’empêcher les interactions nuisibles est ainsi renversée : c’est désormais l’institution la plus puissante qui cause elle-même des dommages. La prédisposition humaine au « principe minimaliste » conduit inévitablement à ce que des groupes d’intérêts tentent, avec l’aide de l’État, de maximiser leurs propres avantages au détriment des autres. Du point de vue des bénéficiaires, les subventions et les allocations de l’État sont un concept séduisant : pas de dépenses, mais quand même des revenus. L’octroi d’allocations familiales, de soins de santé gratuits ou d’un revenu de base inconditionnel peut en fait être classé comme une forme d’achat de voix. De telles subventions ont pour effet que la population réclame toujours plus de prestations à court terme, de promesses inconditionnelles et d’offres « gratuites » supplémentaires. La dynamique décrite ici fait également en sorte que l’État s’immisce de plus en plus dans la vie privée des citoyens. En effet, des « avantages immatériels » sont également distribués, comme des réglementations en faveur de certains groupes d’intérêt. Comme presque chaque groupe d’intérêt cherche à obtenir un avantage, le nombre de lois, la charge fiscale et l’endettement de l’État augmentent inévitablement avec le temps. La polarisation politique est une conséquence inévitable d’un tel système. La possibilité pour les individus d’organiser leur vie comme ils l’entendent est de plus en plus entravée. En théorie, ce problème peut être résolu par la raison et la force de persuasion, mais dans la pratique, le « principe minimaliste » est plus fort. Les hommes politiques ou les détenteurs du pouvoir qui préconisent des réductions de prestations sont tôt ou tard désavoués ou remplacés par des élus « socialement justes » et « plus solidaires ». En outre, les détenteurs du pouvoir en place ne sont pas incités à adopter un comportement raisonnable à long terme, car ils ne doivent faire face à aucune conséquence économique de leurs décisions. Ils ne sont pas juridiquement responsables et ne sont soumis à aucune obligation contraignante de la part des gouvernés. De tels systèmes ne peuvent pas fonctionner à long terme. Les promesses excessives et le subventionnement de programmes non rentables mais bien intentionnés amènent inévitablement les gouvernements à manquer de moyens, ce qui conduit à l’autodestruction du système politique. Les bricolages fiscaux des banques centrales, comme la manipulation des taux d’intérêt à la baisse ou l’achat de leurs propres obligations d’État, ne peuvent que retarder ce résultat, mais pas l’empêcher. Je comprends que ce soit une prise de conscience extrêmement douloureuse pour beaucoup, mais il n’y a pas d’autre solution : un système, quelle que soit sa légitimité, qui prévoit par la loi des expropriations au profit de tiers (par exemple sous forme d’impôts et de cotisations sociales) et auquel toutes les personnes concernées n’ont pas donné leur accord, ne peut créer à long terme ni une coexistence pacifique, ni une coexistence stable. Il détruit les bases et les résultats de la coopération volontaire par le biais du pouvoir étatique. Une véritable solidarité ne peut pas naître sous la contrainte. Un tel système détruit pas à pas ce qui fait la cohésion d’une société, ce qui la rend prospère et attractive, et débouche sur une lutte de tous contre tous pour imposer aux autres sa façon de vivre. ## 2. CRÉER DES ALTERNATIVES, QUELLES RÈGLES FAUT-IL RESPECTER ? Il est stérile de reprocher aux gens de suivre leurs penchants naturels ou de se plaindre des hommes politiques parce qu’ils répondent aux souhaits des électeurs. Le seul remède est de décentraliser et de limiter le pouvoir. Moins la politique contrôle de domaines de la vie, moins il est important de savoir qui contrôle ou influence les hommes politiques. Si l’on veut éviter que l’État accorde des avantages particuliers au détriment de tiers, il faut créer un système de gouvernement qui ne puisse pas accorder d’avantages particuliers du tout. Il s’agit donc de définir un système qui évite dès le départ les mauvaises incitations et qui soit structurellement stable. Un nouvel ordre social stable à long terme doit exiger de ceux qui gouvernent qu’ils respectent les principes suivants: - Ne pas accorder d’avantages particuliers à certains groupes ou citoyens (éviter le lobbying, la corruption et les luttes en matière de redistribution), - Être tenu responsable des erreurs commises (couplage du pouvoir et de la responsabilité), - Avoir un intérêt économique personnel au succès de la collectivité (skin in the game), - Permettre aux citoyens de partir ou de faire sécession à tout moment, sans imposer d’obstacles financiers ou autres (permettre la concurrence), - Avoir des responsabilités et des prérogatives bien définies par écrit, qui ne peuvent pas être modifiées unilatéralement (sécurité juridique, prévisibilité), - En cas de divergences, les personnes concernées peuvent porter plainte devant des tribunaux ou des organes d’arbitrage indépendants (règlement neutre des litiges). On constate que les États de droit démocratiques occidentaux, par exemple, ne remplissent en fait que le dernier critère, souvent avec des restrictions, car seuls certains organes peuvent porter plainte contre le gouvernement. La sécurité juridique et la prévisibilité prévues par les constitutions n’existent plus dans la pratique des États, car les détenteurs du pouvoir peuvent, grâce à leurs majorités parlementaires et à la nomination de juges, contrôler dans une large mesure à leur gré aussi bien le texte que l’interprétation de la constitution ## 3. LE GOUVERNEMENT COMME PRESTATAIRE DE SERVICES Le présent document propose un concept qui répond aux critères susmentionnés et qui permet de surmonter les problèmes décrits. Ce concept est la ville privée libre. ### 3.1 Caractéristiques des villes privées libres - Une ville privée libre est une collectivité territoriale souveraine ou au moins partiellement autonome, qui dispose de son propre cadre juridique et réglementaire, d’un régime fiscal, douanier et social, ainsi que de sa propre administration, de ses propres forces de sécurité et d’un système indépendant de règlement des différends (administration autonome et pouvoir réglementaire). - La ville privée libre est gérée par une société d’exploitation en tant qu’entreprise à but lucratif (« opérateur »). En échange d’une contribution financière définie, elle garantit aux habitants la protection de leur vie, de leur liberté et de leur propriété (protection assurée par la société chargée de la gestion de la ville privée). - Chaque habitant individuel a conclu avec la société d’exploitation un contrat de citoyen écrit qui règle de manière exhaustive les droits et obligations réciproques. Celui-ci comprend les prestations à fournir par l’exploitant et la contribution à verser en contrepartie, ainsi que les règles en vigueur dans la ville privée libre. Il n’y a pas d’autres impôts. Ce contrat citoyen ne peut pas être modifié unilatéralement ; il représente la « constitution personnelle » de chaque citoyen contractant (véritable contrat social). - La participation et le fait de rester dans la ville privée libre sont volontaires (volontariat total). - Il n’existe aucun droit légal à être admis dans la ville privée libre ; afin de remplir sa promesse de sécurité, l’exploitant décide en fonction de ses critères et de son pouvoir d’appréciation (L’immigration doit être compatible avec les promesses de prestations faites aux individus qui habitent dans la ville privée libre). - Pour le reste, les citoyens signataires du contrat sont libres de faire ce qu’ils veulent, pour autant qu’ils ne violent pas les droits d’autrui ou les autres règles fixées dans le contrat citoyen (principe du « vivre et laisser vivre »). - Chaque habitant peut résilier le contrat à tout moment et quitter la ville privée libre, mais l’exploitant ne peut résilier le contrat que pour des motifs graves, par exemple en cas de violation des obligations contractuelles, comme le non-paiement persistant de la redevance (résiliation du contrat possible à tout moment par les citoyens). - La contrainte exercée par l’opérateur de la ville ne peut être utilisée que pour faire respecter les règles prescrites et convenues. Les violations graves ou répétées entraînent l’exclusion de la ville privée libre (exclusion possible en cas de violation du contrat). - En cas de conflit avec l’opérateur, chaque citoyen a le droit de faire appel à des tribunaux (d’arbitrage) indépendants qui n’appartiennent pas à l’opérateur (véritable règlement indépendant des litiges). ### 3.2 Un véritable contrat social Dans une ville privée libre, chacun est souverain sur lui-même. Par un accord volontaire, les habitants ont conclu un véritable contrat avec un prestataire de services plus ou moins ordinaire. Les deux parties ont les mêmes droits formels et sont donc juridiquement égales. Dans les villes privées libres, la relation traditionnelle entre les gouvernants et les gouvernés est remplacée par une relation entre le client et le prestataire de services. Pour la première fois dans l’histoire, il existe un véritable contrat social avec des règles établies, et non un contrat fictif qui est sans cesse modifié par l’une des parties. Contrairement aux systèmes traditionnels, dans lesquels le citoyen est obligé de payer des impôts sans avoir un droit correspondant à une contrepartie, dans une ville libre privée, la prestation et la contrepartie sont directement liées. Les deux parties contractantes ont un droit à l’exécution du contrat par la partie adverse respective. L’opérateur peut exiger du citoyen le paiement de la contribution fixée, mais pas de frais supplémentaires (à moins que le citoyen ne donne son accord). Le citoyen, quant à lui, peut poursuivre l’opérateur pour non-respect de ses obligations contractuelles, telles que la garantie de la sécurité ou le bon fonctionnement du système de droit privé. La question de savoir qui dirige effectivement la société d’exploitation ou qui en est propriétaire n’a aucune incidence sur le fonctionnement du modèle. La société d’exploitation pourrait également être la propriété de tous les citoyens. L’essentiel est que le contrat strictement bilatéral entre les citoyens et l’opérateur s’attaque à un problème ancestral de l’humanité : le désir de certains d’imposer leur volonté aux autres. Dans une ville privée libre, il n’y a pas de plate-forme qui puisse être capturée par des paternalistes et des profiteurs. L’activisme politique, le zèle missionnaire, les luttes pour la redistribution et le fait de monter des groupes sociaux les uns contre les autres disparaissent parce qu’ils n’apportent aucun bénéfice à ceux qui les organisent. Les citoyens savent qu’ils ne peuvent pas changer le contrat social de leurs concitoyens et apprennent à respecter les points de vue différents d’autrui. Les litiges entre l’opérateur et les citoyens sont portés devant des tribunaux d’arbitrage indépendants, comme c’est déjà le cas en droit commercial international. Si l’opérateur ignore les sentences arbitrales ou abuse de son pouvoir d’une autre manière, ses clients s’en iront et il risque finalement de faire faillite et de perdre sa réputation pour de futurs projets. L’opérateur est donc confronté à un risque économique réel et a donc tout intérêt à bien traiter ses clients et à le faire dans le respect du contrat conclu avec les citoyens. Comme l’opérateur n’a qu’un pouvoir limité, à savoir la protection de la vie, de la liberté et de la propriété des citoyens, il ne garantit que le cadre dans lequel la société peut évoluer dans le sens d’un « ordre spontané ». Un ordre spontané est un ordre qui résulte des nombreuses activités volontaires des individus sur la base de leurs connaissances décentralisées, et non d’un mandat de l’État ou d’une planification centralisée. L’évolution de la vie sur Terre, les langues, Internet et l’économie de marché libre sont des exemples de systèmes qui se sont développés par ordre spontané ou auto-organisation. ### 3.3 Les principes de la vie en commun Outre les règles convenues, il n’existe que quelques principes simples qui régissent la cohabitation des personnes dans une ville privée libre. Les principes directeurs sont l’autodétermination et l’autonomie privée, c’est-à-dire le droit d’organiser ses propres rapports juridiques comme on l’entend. En outre, une règle d’or s’applique, comme l’exprime le proverbe : « Ne fais pas à autrui ce que tu ne veux pas qu’il te fasse ». En outre, notons le principe « do ut des » (je donne pour que tu donnes), c’est-à-dire la reconnaissance que la prestation repose sur une contrepartie. Enfin, il y a le principe du volontariat et de la non-agression, ce qui signifie que les interactions n’ont lieu que sur la base d’une coopération volontaire et non sur la base de la contrainte et la spoliation, même pour de prétendues « bonnes » causes. Le résultat est une société qui a pour but de « vivre et laisser vivre ». ### 3.4 La recherche du profit comme incitation à faire un travail de qualité La recherche du profit par l’opérateur est d’une importance capitale pour le modèle des villes privées libres. De nombreuses personnes considèrent la recherche du profit comme quelque chose d’immoral, surtout lorsqu’elle touche à des questions sociales telles que l’harmonie de notre cohabitation. Ils méconnaissent le fait qu’il n’existe pas de meilleure incitation pour utiliser de manière optimale des ressources limitées. La concurrence avec d’autres systèmes et la nécessité de réaliser des bénéfices poussent l’exploitant d’une ville privée libre à s’efforcer constamment d’améliorer son « produit » et d’optimiser l’utilisation des ressources rares. Cela se traduit en fin de compte par une plus grande satisfaction et une meilleure qualité de service pour les citoyens. Chaque décision prise par l’opérateur a un impact immédiat. L’opérateur doit se demander si ses actions augmentent la satisfaction des citoyens ou s’il est préférable de mettre en œuvre des mesures d’économie qui permettent de réduire les tarifs afin de rendre la ville privée libre plus compétitive. En d’autres termes, avant d’agir, l’opérateur doit d’abord se demander si ses mesures généreront en fin de compte plus de recettes que de dépenses. Si les recettes sont plus importantes, un bénéfice sera généré et la valeur de l’entreprise de la ville privée libre augmentera, ce qui reflètera la satisfaction accrue des habitants individuels et des entreprises résidentes. Si la mesure entraîne des pertes, elle devrait être soit améliorée, soit annulée. Une telle efficacité, et donc une meilleure qualité de vie pour toutes les parties concernées, ne pourront jamais être atteintes par les systèmes publics traditionnels ### 3.5 La concurrence Les villes privées libres peuvent être adaptées à tous les besoins, des modèles anarcho-capitalistes sans monopole de la violence aux communautés de type kibboutz sans propriété privée. Le choix de différents concepts permet de désamorcer la plupart des conflits politiques et de les remplacer par une coexistence pacifique de différents systèmes auxquels les habitants respectifs adhèrent volontairement. C’est précisément parce que les préférences des gens sont différentes et que nous ne pouvons pas savoir quel système est le meilleur, et pour qui, que nous devons permettre la diversité et la concurrence. Un gouvernement mondial unique serait néfaste pour la liberté : pas de possibilité de s’exiler, la fin de la possibilité de faire des comparaisons et donc de faire des choix entre différents pays. Le fait de considérer un ordre social comme un « produit » sur le « marché du vivre ensemble » et la concurrence pacifique des systèmes pour les citoyens en tant que « clients » apporteront à la fois plus de paix et plus de liberté. En effet, trouver des solutions sur le marché n’est pas violent, ni révolutionnaire, mais un processus évolutif qui s’effectue par mutation (essais et erreurs), sélection (rentabilité ou faillite) et reproduction (imitation de solutions réussies). C’est pourquoi, premièrement, il faut autoriser des formes alternatives de société et, deuxièmement, il ne faut pas empêcher les citoyens de quitter le système en question. Celui qui ne veut pas être souverain de lui-même, mais qui préfère un système qui fait passer le collectif avant les individus, a tout le droit du monde de le choisir. Mais il n’a pas le droit de retenir contre leur gré ceux qui préfèrent la liberté, ni de les forcer à financer le mode de vie qu’il souhaite. Les systèmes sociaux qui ne fonctionnent que si les gens y sont retenus contre leur gré et contraints à un certain comportement échoueront de toute façon sur le long terme. Celui qui a un bon produit ne doit craindre ni la critique ni la concurrence et n’a donc pas besoin de les interdire ou de les réglementer. En fait, la concurrence s’est avérée être le seul moyen durablement efficace de limiter le pouvoir humain. ### 3.6 Mise en œuvre Il n’est pas facile de rentrer sur le « marché du vivre ensemble ». Jusqu’à présent, il fallait pour cela gagner une élection, faire une révolution ou organiser un mouvement sécessionniste. La création de villes privées libres est une alternative pacifique à ces méthodes. Il ne fait aucun doute qu’amener des États existants à renoncer à une partie de leur souveraineté n’est pas une tâche facile. Néanmoins, cette voie semble plus simple que de modifier « de l’intérieur » les systèmes existants dans le sens de plus de liberté, de sécurité juridique et de responsabilité individuelle. Le fait qu’il existe déjà de nombreuses zones économiques spéciales dans le monde, en partie sur le modèle « un pays, deux systèmes », montre que de telles voies sont possibles. D’une certaine manière, le concept des villes privées libres n’est que l’étape suivante dans le développement des zones économiques spéciales. En le décrivant de cette manière, il est également plus facile de le présenter aux pays hôtes potentiels, car il s’inspire de modèles connus. La création d’une ville privée libre nécessite un accord contractuel avec un État existant. Dans cet accord, l’« État hôte » accorde à l’opérateur le droit d’établir la ville libre privée sur un territoire donné, aux conditions convenues. Afin de garantir le caractère volontaire de la participation, le territoire prévu pour la création d’une ville privée libre doit être initialement inhabité. Le degré d’autonomie dont jouira finalement chaque ville privée libre est une question de négociation avec l’État d’accueil. Il est peu probable qu’une ville privée libre soit en mesure de négocier une indépendance totale. Outre la souveraineté territoriale (défense, politique étrangère), l’État hôte insistera probablement sur l’application de certaines normes juridiques, telles que la validité des droits de l’homme inscrits dans sa constitution et le respect des accords internationaux qu’il a conclus. La ville privée libre devrait être en mesure de concéder cela sans renoncer à son essence. En ce sens, la ville privée libre ne sera pas en mesure d’accorder sa propre citoyenneté ; ses habitants conserveront la leur, mais bénéficieront d’un statut de résident dans l’État d’accueil. Les États peuvent être prêts à céder une partie de leur pouvoir sur un territoire donné s’ils espèrent en tirer des avantages. Il faut donc créer une situation gagnant-gagnant à la fois pour l’opérateur et pour l’État d’accueil. L’implantation de villes privées libres dans des zones structurellement faibles augmente non seulement l’attractivité de la région concernée, mais crée également des emplois et des investissements dans les zones voisines, ce qui profite en fin de compte au pays hôte. Hong Kong, Singapour et Monaco en sont de bons exemples. Un cordon de régions densément peuplées et relativement prospères s’est formé autour de ces villes-États dans les États voisins. De nombreux habitants des États riverains travaillent dans la ville-État, mais paient des impôts dans leur pays d’origine. Si l’on part du principe que de tels développements ont lieu dans une région qui, antérieurement, était structurellement faible ou totalement inhabitée, l’État hôte ne peut qu’en profiter. ## 4. RÉPONSES AUX QUESTIONS HABITUELLES Les points suivants concernent les questions les plus fréquemment posées sur l’idée des villes privées libres. Pour plus de détails, voir les liens à la fin de ce document. ### 4.1 Public cible Les villes privées libres s’adressent à toutes les catégories de revenus. Le montant de la redevance annuelle pour le paquet de base obligatoire, comprenant l’infrastructure, la sécurité et le système juridique et de règlement des litiges, s’élève à environ 1’500 dollars par personne (moins d’une once d’or). Ce montant peut être revu à la baisse dans les pays à faible revenu. Le fait qu’aucun impôt ne soit prélevé allège la charge financière des citoyens contractants, en particulier des personnes seules, mais aussi de tous ceux qui ont des revenus moyens et des familles. Les fonds ainsi libérés sont à la disposition des citoyens pour leurs propres soins de santé et de retraite, pour l’adhésion à des organismes d’entraide et pour l’éducation de leurs enfants. Les villes privées libres offrent des incitations considérables à l’implantation d’entreprises en raison de leur exonération fiscale et de leur système juridique peu réglementé, favorable à l’économie et axé sur les services. L’activité économique de ces dernières permet également de créer des emplois pour les personnes à faibles et moyens revenus. ### 4.2 Sécurité sociale Les villes privées libres permettent la mise en place de réseaux de soutien volontaires et diversifiés pour les personnes handicapées ou malades. L’établissement d’institutions collectives d’entraide, de fournisseurs d’assurances privées ainsi que le soutien de la famille et des amis et des organisations caritatives sont expressément encouragés. Ces institutions devraient être suffisantes pour faire face à toutes les difficultés réelles dans une communauté. Certains opérateurs pourraient choisir d’offrir une sécurité minimale garantie par contrat. ### 4.3 Protection de l'environnement Les villes privées libres ont intérêt à maintenir un environnement propre afin d’être attractives pour leurs clients (résidents). En principe, la protection de l’environnement dans les villes privées libres est basée sur la protection des droits individuels. Les dommages environnementaux ne sont pas concevables sans atteinte à la propriété, aux biens ou aux personnes. C’est pourquoi il existe un droit d’action correspondant contre toute personne qui porte atteinte aux intérêts d’autrui à cet égard, et il appartient ensuite à des tribunaux indépendants de décider si la revendication est justifiée. Dans une ville privée libre, il n’y a pas de tragédie des biens communs, puisque toutes les surfaces et les eaux sont la propriété ou du moins sous le contrôle de certains acteurs. Cela vaut en particulier pour l’exploitant lui-même qui, en plus de ses activités de gestion, est soumis au droit privé en tant que propriétaire de terrains, de rues et de places et peut, à ce titre, faire usage de son droit d’action en cas de dommages environnementaux sur sa propriété. ### 4.4 Démocratie Le gestionnaire est un prestataire de services pouvant être poursuivi en justice à tout moment, avec un champ d’action restreint : protéger la vie, la liberté et la propriété selon des règles préétablies et convenues qui ne peuvent pas être modifiées unilatéralement. La grande majorité des décisions dans la vie des résidents se situent donc en dehors de la sphère d’influence de l’exploitant. Si chaque personne peut décider de presque tout, y compris de la manière dont elle souhaite vivre et des objectifs qu’elle souhaite soutenir, il n’est pas nécessaire de déléguer ces décisions à un parlement, un gouvernement ou à la majorité. Les villes privées libres doivent permettre une autodétermination maximale, et non une codécision maximale. En faisant évoluer les communautés de la prise de décision à la majorité vers l’autodétermination, le problème du principal-agent, qui survient lorsque les représentants privilégient leurs propres intérêts par rapport à ceux des individus qu’ils représentent, disparaît également. Si tous peuvent décider par leurs actions quels produits et projets continueront à exister et lesquels ne le pourront pas, il y a plus de démocratie au sens d’une « règle commune à tous » que dans un système majoritaire. Grâce à ce processus, les villes privées libres sont davantage des « démocraties complètes » que les quasi-démocraties et les régimes de partis qui caractérisent les systèmes actuels. ### 4.5 Le monopole légal de la force En raison du monopole de la violence dans la ville privée libre, l’opérateur serait théoriquement en mesure d’abuser de ce monopole et de se comporter comme un dictateur. Cependant, la plupart des citoyens réagiraient en quittant la ville privée libre et il serait impossible pour l’opérateur de fonder avec succès de nouvelles villes privées ailleurs en raison de la perte de sa réputation. En ce sens, l’opérateur n’est pas différent du capitaine d’un bateau de croisière en haute mer ou du gestionnaire d’une colonie de vacances isolée. Tous deux ont le pouvoir d’agir en tant que dictateurs, mais y renoncent en raison de leurs intérêts économiques. En théorie, il peut sembler intéressant d’autoriser des prestataires de services de sécurité concurrents, avec leurs propres règles et donc des systèmes juridiques concurrents, pour des raisons de prévention de monopole. Dans la pratique, les efforts et les inconvénients (coûts de transaction) risquent toutefois d’être trop importants. Il faudrait des années pour que des règles se mettent en place sur le marché afin de résoudre les conflits entre les différents fournisseurs et systèmes juridiques. Dans les faits, le propriétaire du service de sécurité le plus puissant pourrait faire ce qu’il voudrait. Une fois que le modèle des villes privées libres aura prouvé sa rentabilité, des concurrents apparaîtront inévitablement. C’est la meilleure garantie pour les habitants que les opérateurs respectifs n’abusent pas de leur position de force. Par ailleurs, le droit de chaque citoyen contractant à l’autodéfense et le soutien correspondant de tiers contre des attaques restent intacts ou sont expressément garantis par le contrat. ### 4.6 Modifications du contrat Dans certains pays, les constitutions peuvent être modifiées, même contre la volonté du peuple, si une majorité qualifiée (parlementaire) approuve la modification. En revanche, les contrats ne peuvent être modifiés que si les deux parties contractantes sont d’accord. C’est pourquoi le contrat de citoyen est si important pour la protection des droits de chaque habitant. Certes, même le meilleur contrat ne peut pas prévoir toutes les éventualités futures possibles. Mais un contrat qui peut être modifié à tout moment par l’opérateur ou qui contient des formulations vagues n’est pas vraiment utile pour les citoyens. C’est pourquoi le texte du contrat doit être aussi clair et précis que possible. Si des litiges d’interprétation surviennent ultérieurement en raison de l’absence de clauses ou de clauses formulées de manière peu claire dans certains domaines, les tribunaux (d’arbitrage) concernés tranchent la question litigieuse et comblent le vide réglementaire. Ils le font en appliquant les principes juridiques convenus à l’avance et en vigueur depuis des siècles, dans le cadre d’un équilibre raisonnable des intérêts. L’évolution des contrats se fait donc exclusivement au cas par cas, après un jugement approprié. Cela signifie que les décisions de justice et les sentences arbitrales qui traitent d’une question particulière sont dès lors contraignantes pour tous. Il n’est pas nécessaire d’établir de nouvelles règles ou de modifier les contrats. C’est ainsi que fonctionne la Common Law anglaise depuis des siècles. ### 4.7 Financement Les villes privées libres sont financées par les contributions des citoyens sous forme de redevances, qui couvrent les dépenses liées à la sécurité, à un système juridique et à une certaine infrastructure. Les transactions immobilières constituent une autre source de revenus. L’opérateur devra probablement réaliser lui-même des investissements dans l’infrastructure au cours des premières années d’exploitation afin d’attirer des habitants. Ce genre de préfinancement est courant dans les opérations de capital-risque. En raison des économies d’échelle, le système de redevances ne sera probablement rentable qu’à partir d’un certain nombre d’habitants (environ 10’000), car les dépenses pour les forces de sécurité, les services de règlement des litiges et les infrastructures ne doivent pas augmenter proportionnellement au nombre d’habitants. Dans la pratique, l’opérateur tirera probablement une grande partie de ses revenus de transactions immobilières. Cela pourrait inclure l’acquisition précoce de terrains, dont la valeur augmente ensuite grâce à la mise en place d’un système stable et attrayant. Les terrains peuvent être divisés en parcelles et vendus ou loués. Les recettes correspondantes peuvent alors être utilisées pour le financement croisé des dépenses, des infrastructures ou même pour réduire la redevance annuelle. ### 4.8 Protection contre un envahissement de la ville privée libre Une ville privée libre, surtout si elle connaît un certain succès, peut être exposée à une tentative de prise de contrôle hostile de la part de l’État d’accueil. C’est pourquoi le contrat entre l’opérateur et l’État d’accueil contiendra des clauses de protection des investissements et d’arbitrage. L’effet dissuasif est obtenu en exposant l’État hôte à d’importantes conséquences financières après l’occupation de la ville privée libre, ce qui pourrait également conduire à la saisie de ses actifs étrangers. L’exploitant de la ville privée libre aura toutefois intérêt à ne pas en arriver là. Il aura probablement recours à des moyens alternatifs, par exemple une combinaison de relations publiques, de contacts diplomatiques avec d’autres États et institutions renommées ou d’autres mesures de défense. En outre, il pourra être souligné à temps que les habitants sont très mobiles et qu’ils quitteraient rapidement la ville privée libre en cas de prise de contrôle par l’ennemi, ce qui affaiblira encore l’incitation de l’État hôte à faire cette tentative. ## 5. CONCLUSION La modification pacifique des systèmes politiques existants et figés est une tâche très difficile. Si nous voulons créer un monde plus libre et autodéterminé, nous devrions plutôt essayer de créer des systèmes et des cadres alternatifs. Les villes privées libres sont une telle tentative. Elles ne sont pas une utopie, mais une idée commerciale dont les éléments de fonctionnement sont déjà connus (fourniture de services contractuels) et qui est simplement transposée dans un autre domaine, celui de la vie en commun. Nous vivons dans un monde de plus en plus interconnecté, dans lequel de nombreuses personnes peuvent travailler depuis leur domicile pour des clients situés dans plusieurs pays. Les crypto-monnaies et la finance décentralisée sont en plein essor. Dans un tel monde, il devient de plus en plus difficile pour les États-nations de prélever des impôts et des cotisations sociales sur toutes sortes d’activités. Ne serait-ce que pour cette raison, le système de redevances des villes privées libres est une option prometteuse. La mise en place réussie de structures parallèles indépendantes des États-nations et des puissantes organisations internationales est possible. Le bitcoin en est la preuve. Les structures parallèles sur le marché de la vie en commun sont également nécessaires et demandées. Cela s’explique par le fait que les gens ne veulent pas se soumettre à des règles et à des réglementations auxquelles ils n’ont pas consenti. Les gens ne veulent pas payer pour des choses qu’ils n’ont pas commandées. Et les personnes raisonnables n’ont pas besoin de centaines ou de milliers de lois pour vivre ensemble en paix. Au lieu de cela, les gens ont besoin d’un espace sûr dans lequel ils peuvent vivre et travailler avec d’autres, mais où ils sont par ailleurs laissés tranquilles. Les villes privées libres peuvent répondre à ces souhaits. Les systèmes politiques existants ne le peuvent pas. C’est pour cette raison que les villes privées libres ont une chance de réussir. Car les gens finissent par aller là où ils sont le mieux traités. --- # Cidades Privadas Livres: Um novo sistema operativo para viver em conjunto URL: https://free-cities.org/cidades-privadas-livres#whitepaper Language: Portuguese (pt) Author: Titus Gebel Edition: Edição de janeiro de 2022 PDF: https://free-cities.org/docs/whitepaper-free-private-cities-pt.pdf Nos sistemas políticos atuais, as ações tanto dos governantes como dos governados são moldadas por incentivos errados. Os governantes não têm qualquer responsabilidade e não enfrentam qualquer desvantagem económica se tomarem más decisões. Os governados são levados a crer que os benefícios “gratuitos” podem surgir através do poder dos seus votos. Isto politiza o monopólio do Estado em força e leva a constantes alterações ao “contrato social” e a uma luta interminável para influenciar o rumo desta mudança. Neste documento, proponho uma alternativa pacífica e voluntária ao status quo político: Cidades Privadas Livres. A característica determinante de uma Cidade Privada Livre é que é gerida por uma empresa com fins lucrativos, denominada Operadora, que atua como “prestadora de serviços públicos”. Nesta qualidade, a Operadora oferece aos cidadãos da Cidade Privada Livre a proteção da vida, da liberdade e da propriedade. Os operadores de serviços fornecem uma segurança interna e externa, um quadro jurídico e regulamentar predefinido e um sistema independente de resolução de litígios. Os interessados e as empresas entram num Contrato de Cidadão, pagando uma taxa anual fixa por estes serviços, em vez de impostos. Neste contexto, pode desenvolver-se uma “ordem espontânea” que emerge das atividades voluntárias dos cidadãos. A Operadora não pode posteriormente alterar unilateralmente um Contrato de Cidadão sem a autorização do cidadão em causa. Os litígios entre os cidadãos e a Operadora são ouvidos em tribunais de arbitragem externos, como já é habitual no direito comercial internacional. Se a Operadora ignorar os prémios arbitrais ou abusar do seu poder, os clientes acabarão por sair e a Operadora enfrentará risco de falência. Uma vez que todos os territórios são atualmente controlados pelos governos, a criação de uma Cidade Privada Livre exige que uma Operadora celebre um acordo contratual com um Estado existente, denominado Nação Anfitriã. Neste acordo, a Nação Anfitriã concede à Operadora o direito de estabelecer a Cidade Privada Livre num território definido de acordo com determinadas condições predefinidas, abrangendo normalmente uma autonomia regulamentar alargada em vários domínios. Seria de esperar que os Estados estivessem dispostos a ceder parte do seu poder se esperassem avultados benefícios em troca. Esses benefícios podem incluir a criação de emprego, a atração de investimento estrangeiro e uma percentagem dos lucros gerados pela Operadora. A existência de um grande número de Zonas Económicas Especiais em todo o mundo demonstra a vontade dos Estados em fazê-lo. ## 1. O PROBLEMA INSOLÚVEL DOS SISTEMAS ATUAIS ### 1.1 Um Leviatã que se Estende Excessivamente No seu famoso livro “Leviatã”, Thomas Hobbes argumentou que um monopólio estatal forçado cria uma ordem pacífica que acaba por beneficiar todos os habitantes do Estado. Com efeito, a inovação, a divisão do trabalho, o comércio, o progresso científico e o florescimento das artes não podem ser alcançados num ambiente atormentado pela violência. No entanto, perde-se uma parte substancial desta vantagem se o Estado usar o seu monopólio forçado para alcançar objetivos que vão além da aplicação e da proteção da paz. É aí que o Estado se politiza e impõe objetivos políticos a todos, que tendem a ser resultados apenas desejados por certos grupos de interesses numa dada sociedade. No final, a política implica inevitavelmente impor a visão do mundo a todos os outros. Mas as pessoas são diferentes. O que é certo para uma pessoa é, muitas vezes, errado para outra. O facto de os valores individuais serem, em última análise, subjetivos e de as pessoas também terem circunstâncias de vida objetivamente diferentes, faz com que qualquer “solução política” deixe para trás aqueles que foram forçados a fazer algo contra a sua vontade. “Fazer política” significa tomar partido e fazer dos desejos de alguns o critério para todos. À força, uma vez que estas soluções políticas são, em última análise, apoiadas pela ameaça de violência através do poder executivo do governo. Nos sistemas políticos atuais, a relação entre cidadãos e governos é análoga à relação entre alguém que quer comprar um carro e o concessionário de automóveis — enquanto o concessionário de automóveis (o governo) insiste em escolher o modelo, a cor, a potência do motor, o interior, bem como o preço que o comprador (o cidadão) tem de pagar por ele. Além disso, não há escolha no acordo: todos têm de comprar. Trata-se, obviamente, de um acordo pouco atrativo, mas este é o acordo que a maioria de nós aceita através dos nossos sistemas políticos. O alegado “contrato social” está constantemente a ser alterado, mas apenas por um dos lados: o Estado. No entanto, se o monopólio estatal forçado se tornar um instrumento de parcialidade politicamente motivada, então o conceito original perde o seu efeito. Por detrás da fachada do estado pacífico, surge uma luta perpétua de grupos rivais. A política torna-se, assim, uma guerra civil invisível, cuja discrição se revela no facto de as vítimas da interferência do Estado não terem hipóteses realistas de se defenderem. A paz alcançada nos Estados modernos é ilusória e baseada na supressão efetiva de interesses divergentes. É, portanto, contraproducente dar ao Estado um poder que vai além de garantir a segurança interna e externa. Porque uma vez estabelecida a paz, a única tarefa governamental legítima deve ser garantir que os residentes não forcem a sua vontade sobre os outros. O próprio Estado só pode usar a força para salvaguardar este princípio. ### 1.2 Quando o Princípio Mínimo se encontra com a Política Há um problema: na prática, este tipo de auto-contenção por parte do Estado é impossível de alcançar. Os seres humanos tendem a preferir a ordem social que lhes oferece o maior “retorno na vida” ao preço mais baixo, o que significa que tentam obter o máximo de benefícios possível para o mínimo de esforço possível. Esta disposição humana natural, que é referida como o princípio mínimo, faz sentido numa perspetiva evolutiva. Conduziu à inovação, especialização e divisão do trabalho, que permitem que a pessoa média na maioria dos países viva num estado de afluência que antes só era acessível às classes altas e privilegiadas. Para atingir os seus fins, os humanos interagem com os outros. Enquanto estas interações forem voluntárias, ambas as partes procuram beneficiar delas - caso contrário, essas interações não se realizariam. A interação voluntária é sempre iniciada por uma promessa: “Vou dar-te algo valioso em troca”. No entanto, sempre que alguém quer que outra pessoa interaja consigo, enfrenta uma alternativa, nomeadamente, a de emitir uma ameaça: “Se não obedeceres, eu faço-te mal”. Assim que alguém tentar atingir os seus fins desta forma, a outra parte provavelmente será danificada, e a ordem social será enfraquecida. Em teoria, todos os membros da ordem social concordaram em suprimir conjuntamente comportamentos violentos. No entanto, os benefícios derivados da divisão do trabalho, economias de escala e economias de âmbito, sugerem que pode ser prudente chegar a acordo sobre um “garante da paz” que só pode fazer cumprir este acordo, se assim o for exigido. No nosso mundo atual, este garante é o Estado. Se a disposição humana em relação ao princípio mínimo se der ao alcance do poder do Estado, surge um problema: devido ao monopólio do Estado sobre o uso da força, a política pode prometer benefícios, como subsídios e ajudas, que parecem nada custar aos destinatários. Na realidade, são à custa de outros cidadãos. Isto põe de pernas para o ar a ideia original de prevenir a interação prejudicial: Agora, a instituição mais poderosa em si inicia os danos. A disposição humana em relação ao princípio mínimo conduzirá a grupos de interesses que procuram maximizar os seus próprios benefícios em detrimento de outros, com a ajuda do Estado. Do ponto de vista dos beneficiários, os subsídios e as ajudas são um conceito apelativo: não se esforçam, mas recebem lucro. Essencialmente, a concessão de abonos, cuidados de saúde gratuitos ou um rendimento básico incondicional, pode ser classificada como a compra de votos. Estes subsídios conduzem a uma população que exige cada vez mais benefícios a curto prazo, promessas incondicionais e ofertas adicionais “gratuitas”. As dinâmicas aqui descritas também asseguram que o Estado interfere cada vez mais na vida privada dos cidadãos. Isto porque também são distribuídos “benefícios intangíveis”, como regulamentos a favor da vontade de certos grupos de interesses. Uma vez que quase todos os grupos de interesses tentam ter em conta os seus desejos pessoais, o número de leis, a carga fiscal e a dívida nacional aumentam inevitavelmente ao longo do tempo. A polarização política é um resultado inevitável de tal sistema. A possibilidade de os indivíduos levarem as suas vidas de acordo com as suas próprias preferências, torna-se cada vez mais restrita. Em teoria, este problema pode ser ultrapassado utilizando a razão e a persuasão enquanto, na prática, o princípio mínimo continua a ser mais forte. Os políticos ou governantes que defendem cortes nos benefícios serão, mais cedo ou mais tarde, eliminados do cargo ou substituídos por titulares de mandatos mais “solidários” e “generosos”. Para além disso, os respetivos governantes não têm qualquer incentivo para se comportarem de forma sustentável, uma vez que não têm consequências económicas para as suas decisões. Permanecem legalmente imunes à responsabilidade e não têm obrigações executórias para com aqueles que governam. No entanto, estes sistemas não podem continuar a funcionar a longo prazo. Inevitavelmente, o excesso de promessas e a subvenção de programas não rentáveis, mas bem-intencionados, conduzirão a que os governos se esbatam, provocando a autodestruição do sistema político dominante. Os truques fiscais dos bancos centrais, como a redução das taxas de juro ou a compra das suas próprias obrigações do Tesouro, só conseguem atrasar este resultado, mas não o impedem. Bem sei que o que se segue é uma descoberta extremamente dolorosa para muitos, mas não há como contornar esta perceção: um sistema, por muito legítimo que seja, que por lei prevê expropriações a favor de terceiros (por exemplo, sob a forma de impostos e contribuições para a segurança social) e com o qual nem todos os afetados concordaram, não pode conduzir a um sistema de cooperação pacífica e estável. As bases e os resultados da cooperação voluntária são destruídos através do exercício do poder estatal. A verdadeira solidariedade não pode emergir num ambiente de coação. A batalha resultante de todos contra todos pela aplicação da regulamentação, favorável a alguns em detrimento de outros, mina sucessivamente o que torna uma sociedade coesa, bem-sucedida e atraente. ## 2. CRITÉRIOS PARA SISTEMAS ALTERNATIVOS Não vale a pena culpar as pessoas por seguirem as suas disposições evolutivas ou queixarem-se de políticos por fazerem o que o eleitorado quer. A única solução é descentralizar e limitar o poder. Quanto menos áreas da vida a política controla, menos importante é quem controla ou influencia os políticos. Quem quiser evitar receber benefícios especiais do governo em detrimento de terceiros deve criar um sistema de governo que não possa conceder benefícios especiais. Por isso, temos de definir um sistema que por princípio evite incentivos desalinhados e seja inerentemente estável. Uma nova ordem social estável e a longo prazo deve exigir que os responsáveis: - não possam conceder benefícios especiais a grupos individuais ou a cidadãos (evitando lobbying, corrupção e lutas sobre a amplitude do Estado), - sejam responsabilizados por erros (acoplamento entre poder e responsabilidade), - tenham um interesse económico no sucesso da sociedade (que seja a sua pele em jogo), - permitam que os seus cidadãos saiam ou se separem a qualquer momento sem imporem obstáculos financeiros ou outros (permitindo a concorrência), - tenham obrigações escritas claramente definidas, alteráveis apenas com o consentimento dos governantes e dos governados (um verdadeiro contrato social, segurança jurídica, previsibilidade), - sejam passíveis de ação judicial pelas partes envolvidas em caso de divergências, perante tribunais independentes ou organismos arbitrais (resolução neutra de litígios). Atualmente, mesmo as democracias ocidentais apenas preenchem o último dos critérios acima referidos, muitas vezes com ressalvas, uma vez que apenas certos órgãos podem processar o governo e os tribunais são financiados pelo mesmo governo. A segurança jurídica e a previsibilidade previstas nas constituições já não são eficazes na prática, uma vez que os que estão no poder, com as suas maiorias parlamentares e com a nomeação de juízes, podem, em grande medida, controlar tanto a redação como a interpretação da Constituição. ## 3. GOVERNO COMO SERVIÇO: CIDADES PRIVADAS LIVRES Este documento propõe um conceito que preencha os critérios acima referidos e supere os problemas acima descritos. Este conceito chama-se Cidade Privada Livre. ### 3.1 Elementos que definem as Cidades Privadas Livres - Uma Cidade Privada Livre é um território soberano ou semi-autónomo com o seu próprio enquadramento legal e regulamentar. Tem o seu próprio regime fiscal, aduaneiro e social, bem como a sua própria administração, forças de segurança e um sistema independente de resolução de litígios (regulação e administração autónomas). - As Cidades Privadas Livres são geridas por uma empresa operadora, como uma empresa com fins lucrativos (“Operadora”). A Operadora garante aos habitantes da Cidade Privada Livre a proteção da vida, da liberdade e dos bens que prevê em troca de uma taxa de base fixa (Proteção pela Operadora). - Cada residente ou entidade residente terá celebrado com a Operadora um “Contrato de Cidadão” escrito, que define claramente os seus direitos e obrigações mútuas. Isto inclui os serviços a prestar pela Operadora e as taxas a pagar-lhes pelos seus serviços; não há impostos. Também delineia as regras que se aplicam na Cidade Privada Livre: tanto para os cidadãos como para a Operadora. Um aspeto determinante do Contrato do Cidadão é que não pode ser alterado unilateralmente por nenhuma das partes. Representa a “constituição pessoal” de cada cidadão contratado (contrato social real e fiável). - A participação e residência na Cidade Privada Livre é voluntária (participação voluntária). - Não existe qualquer reivindicação legal de admissão à Cidade Privada Livre; para cumprir a promessa de segurança, a Operadora decide sobre a imigração de acordo com os seus critérios e a sua discrição (política de imigração). - Além disso, os cidadãos com contrato podem fazer o que bem entenderem, desde que não violem os direitos dos outros ou as regras previstas no Contrato de Cidadão (o princípio do “live and let live”). - Qualquer cidadão pode rescindir o contrato a qualquer momento e sair da Cidade Privada Livre, mas a Operadora só pode rescindir o contrato por justa causa, por exemplo, por violação de obrigações contratuais como o incumprimento continuado da taxa (cancelamento de contrato gratuito unilateral). - A coação por parte da operadora da cidade só pode ser utilizada para impor as regras predefinidas e acordadas. Violações graves ou repetidas levam à exclusão da Cidade Privada Livre (a exclusão baseada em violação de contrato é possível). - Em caso de conflitos com a Operadora, cada uma das partes tem o direito de recorrer a tribunais independentes (arbitragem) que não fazem parte da organização da Operadora (arbitragem independente). ### 3.2 Contrato Social Real Numa Cidade Privada Livre, todos seriam o Soberano de Si mesmos. Por acordo voluntário, concluíram um contrato genuíno com um prestador de serviços mais ou menos comum. Ambas as partes têm os mesmos direitos formais e, por conseguinte, estão legalmente em pé de igualdade. Nas Cidades Privadas Livres, a relação entre governante e sujeito nos sistemas tradicionais de governação é substituída por uma relação entre cliente e prestador de serviços. Pela primeira vez na história, haveria um verdadeiro contrato social com regras predefinidas, e não um fictício que é repetidamente alterado por um lado. Ao contrário dos sistemas convencionais, em que o cidadão é obrigado a pagar imposto sem ter um direito correspondente a prestações, num serviço de Cidade Privada Livre e as compensações estão diretamente relacionadas. Ambas as partes contratantes têm direito ao cumprimento do contrato pela outra parte. A Operadora pode exigir o pagamento da contribuição fixa do cidadão, mas não há taxas adicionais (a menos que o cidadão concorde). Por sua vez, o cidadão pode processar a Operadora por incumprimento das suas obrigações contratuais, tais como garantir a segurança e um sistema de funcionamento do direito privado. Quem realmente gere ou a quem pertence a empresa operadora não tem qualquer relevância para o funcionamento do modelo. A Operadora pode mesmo ser propriedade da cidadania no seu conjunto. Ao mesmo tempo, o contrato estritamente bilateral entre os cidadãos e a Operadora aborda um velho problema da humanidade: o desejo de algumas pessoas de impor a sua vontade aos outros. Numa Cidade Privada Livre, não há plataforma para os paternalistas e os exploradores se aproveitarem. O ativismo político, o zelo missionário, as lutas distributais e a agitação dos grupos sociais uns contra os outros desapareceriam, devido à simples falta de benefícios para o partido executante. Os cidadãos sabem que não podem interferir no Contrato dos Cidadãos dos seus concidadãos e, posteriormente, aprenderiam a respeitar as diferentes opiniões e avaliações uns dos outros. Os litígios entre a Operadora e os cidadãos serão ouvidos em tribunais de arbitragem independentes, como já é habitual no direito comercial internacional. Se a Operadora ignorar as decisões arbitrais ou abusar do seu poder de qualquer outra forma, os seus clientes irão embora e acabará por enfrentar falência. A Operadora enfrenta, portanto, um risco económico real e, por conseguinte, tem todo o incentivo para tratar bem os seus clientes e de acordo com o Contrato dos Cidadãos. Uma vez que a Operadora tem responsabilidades limitadas, nomeadamente a proteção da vida, da liberdade e da propriedade dos cidadãos, apenas garantiria o enquadramento em que a sociedade poderia desenvolver-se como uma “ordem espontânea”. Uma ordem espontânea é uma ordem que surge como resultado das atividades voluntárias dos indivíduos, baseadas nos seus conhecimentos descentralizados, e não em resultado de um mandato governamental ou de um planeamento central. Exemplos de sistemas que evoluíram através da ordem espontânea ou da auto-organização incluem a evolução da vida na Terra, as línguas, a Internet e as economias de mercado livre. ### 3.3 Princípios Fundamentais Há apenas alguns princípios simples que determinam como as pessoas vivem juntas numa Cidade Privada Livre. O princípio orientador é a autodeterminação e a autonomia privada, o direito de moldar as suas relações legais de acordo com as suas próprias decisões. Além disso, a Regra de Ouro aplica-se como expressa no provérbio “não faças aos outros o que não queres que te façam”. Além disso, o princípio do ut des (dou-te para que me dês) é válido, o reconhecimento de que o mérito se baseia na reciprocidade. Por último, existe o princípio do voluntariado e da não agressão, o que significa que as interações se baseiam apenas na cooperação voluntária, em vez de coação e expropriação, incluindo por causas alegadamente “boas”. O resultado é uma sociedade “live and let live”. ### 3.4 Motivo de Lucro O motivo de lucro da operadora é de importância central para o modelo Cidades Privadas Livres. Muitas pessoas consideram a busca do lucro algo imoral, especialmente quando toca em questões sociais como a nossa vida em conjunto. Não reconhecem que não há melhor incentivo do que o motivo do lucro para fazer uma utilização ótima de recursos escassos. A concorrência com outros sistemas e a necessidade de obter lucros incentivam a Operadora de uma Cidade Privada Livre a procurar melhorar permanentemente o seu “produto” e otimizar a utilização de recursos escassos. Isto resulta, em última análise, em elevados serviços de satisfação e de melhor qualidade para os cidadãos. Cada decisão que a Operadora toma tem um impacto imediato. A Operadora deve questionar-se se as suas ações aumentarão a satisfação dos cidadãos ou se é melhor implementar medidas de redução de custos que permitam a descida das taxas para que a Cidade Privada Livre possa tornar-se mais competitiva. Por outras palavras, antes de a Operadora agir, tem primeiro de questionar se a sua ação irá, em última análise, gerar mais receita do que despesa. Se for gerada mais receita, o lucro e o valor da empresa da Cidade Privada Livre aumentam, refletindo o incremento da satisfação dos residentes individuais e das entidades residentes. Se a medida levar à perda, a medida deve ser melhorada ou invertida. Essa eficiência e, por conseguinte, a elevada qualidade de vida de todas as partes interessadas nunca serão alcançadas pelos sistemas públicos do Estado. ### 3.5 Competição As Cidades Privadas Livres podem ser modificadas em todas as direções, desde modelos anarco-capitalistas sem monopólio forçado até comunas semelhantes a uma kibutz, sem propriedade privada. A escolha de diferentes conceitos permite desarmar a maioria dos conflitos políticos e substituí-los por uma coexistência pacífica de diferentes sistemas em que todos entram voluntariamente. Precisamente porque as preferências das pessoas diferem e não podemos saber qual é o melhor sistema para cada um, temos de permitir que a diversidade e a concorrência floresçam. Um único governo mundial seria um perigo extremo para a liberdade: deixaríamos de ter exiliados, comparações, escolhas. A visão de uma ordem social como um “produto” sobre o “Mercado de Viver Juntos” e a concorrência pacífica dos sistemas para os cidadãos como “clientes” aumentará consideravelmente tanto a paz como a liberdade. Isto porque encontrar soluções no mercado não é violento, não é revolucionário, mas sim um processo evolutivo que ocorre através de mutação (tentativa e erro), seleção (rentabilidade ou falência) e reprodução (imitação de soluções bem-sucedidas). Por conseguinte, as formas alternativas da sociedade devem, em primeiro lugar, ser autorizadas e, em segundo lugar, os cidadãos não devem ser impedidos de sair do sistema. Quem não quer ser um Indivíduo Soberano, mas prefere uma atmosfera comunitarista e o “calor social” tem todo o direito do mundo em procurá-lo. Mas ele ou ela não tem o direito de deter ou conter contra a sua vontade aqueles que preferem a liberdade ou forçá-los a financiar o seu modo de vida desejado. As ordens sociais que só funcionam se as pessoas forem mantidas nelas contra a sua vontade e forçadas a comportar-se de uma certa forma, falharão a longo prazo. Se tem um bom produto, não tem de temer críticas ou concorrência e, portanto, não precisa de os proibir ou regular. Com efeito, a concorrência provou ser o único meio permanentemente eficaz de limitar o poder humano. ### 3.6 Implementação Penetrar no Mercado de Viver Juntos não é fácil. Normalmente, temos de ganhar uma eleição, fazer uma revolução ou organizar um movimento de secessão. O estabelecimento de Cidades Privadas Livres é uma alternativa pacífica a estes métodos. Sem dúvida, conseguir que os Estados existentes abdiquem de uma parte da sua soberania é uma tarefa ambiciosa. No entanto, este caminho parece mais fácil do que mudar os sistemas existentes “a partir de dentro” para os torna mais favoráveis à liberdade, à segurança jurídica e à autorresponsabilidade. O facto de em todo o mundo já existirem muitas Zonas Económicas Especiais, algumas com um modelo de “um país, dois sistemas” - mostra que caminhos semelhantes são possíveis. De certa forma, o conceito de Cidades Privadas Livres é apenas a próxima etapa na evolução das Zonas Económicas Especiais. Descrever desta forma pode facilitar a convenção de potenciais nações anfitriãs. A criação de uma Cidade Privada Livre requer um acordo contratual com um Estado existente. Neste acordo, a “Nação Anfitriã” concede à empresa operadora o direito de estabelecer a Cidade Privada Livre num território definido de acordo com as condições acordadas. Para garantir a participação voluntária, é melhor que a área proposta para a criação de uma Cidade Privada Livre seja inicialmente desabitada. O grau de autonomia que a respetiva Cidade Privada Livre acabará por ter, é uma questão de negociação com a Nação Anfitriã. É pouco provável que uma Cidade Privada Livre seja capaz de negociar a independência total. Para além da soberania territorial (defesa, política externa), a Nação Anfitriã provavelmente insistirá na continuação da aplicação de certas normas legais, como a validade dos direitos humanos consagrados na sua constituição, bem como o respeito contínuo pelos seus acordos internacionais e códigos penais. A Cidade Privada Livre deve ser capaz de lidar com isto sem abdicar da sua essência. A este respeito, a Cidade Privada Livre não poderá conceder a sua própria cidadania; os residentes manterão a sua própria, mas obterão um estatuto de residência na Nação Anfitriã. Os Estados podem concordar em ceder parte do seu poder sobre um determinado território, se esperam beneficiar dele. Por conseguinte, deve criar-se uma situação vantajosa entre a Operadora e a Nação Anfitriã. A criação de Cidades Privadas Livres em zonas estruturalmente débeis não só aumenta a sua atratividade para a região circundante, como também cria emprego e investimento nas zonas vizinhas, o que acaba por beneficiar a Nação Anfitriã. Hong Kong, Singapura e Mónaco fornecem bons exemplos: Um cordão de áreas densamente povoadas e comparativamente prósperas formou-se em torno destes estados da cidade. Os habitantes da Nação Anfitriã trabalham frequentemente na cidade-estado vizinha, mas pagam impostos na sua pátria. Se se supõe que tais desenvolvimentos ocorrem numa área estruturalmente fraca ou completamente desabitada, então a Nação Anfitriã só pode beneficiar. ## 4. CONSIDERAÇÕES ADICIONAIS Seguem-se as questões mais frequentemente colocadas quando se discute a ideia de Cidades Privadas Livres. Estão abrangidos mais pormenores nos links fornecidos no final deste documento. ### 4.1 Grupo alvo As Cidades Privadas Livres têm como alvo todos os grupos de rendimentos, bem como todas as empresas. Os custos estimados para o pacote de base obrigatório, constituído por infraestruturas, segurança e sistema legal e de resolução de litígios, ascenderão a cerca de USD 1.500 por pessoa por ano (menos de uma onça de ouro). O facto de não serem cobrados impostos alivia consideravelmente os encargos financeiros para a entidade residente, especialmente nos novos participantes do mercado de trabalho, mas também em todos os trabalhadores com rendimentos médios que tenham famílias. Os fundos libertados estão disponíveis para os planos de poupança de saúde e de pensões dos cidadãos ou para a adesão a instituições de autoajuda, bem como para a educação dos seus filhos. Uma vez que são isentas de impostos e têm um regime jurídico de baixa regulação, favorável às empresas e orientado para os serviços, as Cidades Privadas Livres oferecem incentivos consideráveis aos seus colonos, especialmente às empresas. Como resultado da sua atividade económica, serão também criados postos de trabalho para os trabalhadores de baixos e médios rendimentos. ### 4.2 Segurança Social As Cidades Privadas Livres permitirão o estabelecimento de redes voluntárias de apoio a várias camadas para pessoas com deficiência, doenças ou outras incapacidades. As instituições coletivas de autoajuda, os prestadores de seguros privados, bem como o apoio da família e amigos e das instituições de caridade seriam encorajados (tratados em pormenor no livro sobre as Cidades Privadas Livres). Estas instituições devem ser suficientes para lidar com todos os casos de verdadeiras dificuldades numa comunidade. Algumas Operadoras poderão optar por adicionar uma segurança social mínima contratualmente garantida. ### 4.3 Ambiente As Cidades Privadas Livres têm interesse em manter um ambiente limpo como forma de atrair residentes. Em princípio, a proteção do ambiente na Cidade Privada Livre baseia-se na proteção dos direitos individuais. Os danos ambientais são impensáveis sem afetar bens, propriedade ou pessoas. Por conseguinte, existe um direito correspondente de processar qualquer pessoa que polua o ambiente de outro, e deve então ser decidido pelos tribunais independentes se o pedido é justificado. Numa Cidade Privada Livre, não há nenhuma tragédia dos comuns porque todas as terras e água são propriedade, ou pelo menos controladas, por atores. Isto aplica-se, em particular, à própria Operadora, que para além das suas atividades administrativas está também sujeita ao direito privado, uma vez que o proprietário de terrenos, ruas e praças e, como tal, pode utilizar o seu direito de processar em caso de danos ambientais à sua propriedade. ### 4.4 Democracia A Operadora atua como um prestador de serviços acionáveis com um âmbito restrito: proteção da vida, liberdade e propriedade de acordo com regras pré-definidas e pré-acordadas, que não são unilateralmente mutáveis. A grande maioria das decisões de vida acontecem fora da esfera de influência da Operadora. Se todos puderem decidir quase tudo por si mesmos, incluindo a forma como querem viver e quais as causas que querem apoiar, então não há necessidade de delegar estas decisões a um parlamento, num governo ou numa votação por maioria. As Cidades Privadas Livres devem permitir a máxima autodeterminação e não a máxima codeterminação. Com a evolução de um sistema de governação de uma regra maioritária para uma de autodeterminação, deixa de haver um problema de agente principal decorrente do facto de os agentes poderem preferir os seus próprios interesses, em vez dos interesses daqueles que representam. Se todos puderem decidir que produtos e projetos continuam a existir e que deixam de existir, há mais democracia no sentido de uma regra de todos do que num sistema maioritário. Através deste processo, as Cidades Privadas Livres são capazes de alcançar a “democracia plena” em vez da quase-democracia representada pelos sistemas maioritários de hoje. ### 4.5 Monopólio Forçado Devido ao monopólio territorial forçado, a Operadora seria, em teoria, capaz de utilizar mal este monopólio e comportar-se como um ditador. No entanto, a maioria dos cidadãos responderia abandonando a Cidade Privada Livre, e seria impossível para a Operadora encontrar com sucesso novas cidades noutros lugares devido à sua perda de reputação. A este respeito, a Operadora não é diferente do capitão de um navio de cruzeiro em alto mar ou do chefe de uma estância de férias remota. Ambos poderiam teoricamente aproveitar a oportunidade para atuar como ditadores, mas abstêm-se de o fazer devido aos seus interesses comerciais. Permitir que os prestadores de serviços de segurança concorrentes tenham as suas próprias regras e, por conseguinte, sistemas jurídicos concorrentes podem parecer teoricamente atrativos por razões de prevenção dos monopólios. Na prática, porém, o esforço e o inconveniente envolvidos (custos de transação) são provavelmente demasiado elevados. Levaria anos para que as regras se desenvolvessem no mercado, sobre a forma de resolver as colisões entre os diferentes prestadores e os sistemas jurídicos. Na prática, os proprietários do serviço de segurança mais forte poderiam fazer o que quisessem. Uma vez que o modelo de Cidades Privadas Livres se tenha revelado rentável, os concorrentes aparecerão inevitavelmente no local. Esta é a melhor garantia para os residentes de que as respetivas Operadoras não abusarão da sua posição de poder. Para além disso, o direito de cada cidadão contratado à autodefesa e o correspondente apoio de terceiros contra ataques permanecem inalterados ou expressamente garantidos pelo contrato. ### 4.6 Alterações contratuais As constituições dos Estados-nação podem ser alteradas, mesmo contra a vontade do povo, desde que uma maioria qualificada (parlamentar) concorde com a mudança. Os contratos, por outro lado, só podem ser alterados se ambas as partes contratantes concordarem. É por isso que o Contrato de Cidadão e a correspondente posição jurídica são tão importantes para a proteção dos direitos individuais dos residentes. No entanto, mesmo o melhor contrato não pode prever todas as contingências futuras possíveis. Mas um contrato que possa ser alterado a qualquer momento pela Operadora ou que contenha uma linguagem vaga não seria de utilidade real para os cidadãos. Por conseguinte, a redação do contrato deve ser o mais clara e inequívoca possível. Se mais tarde isto conduzir a litígios de interpretação devido a cláusulas em falta ou vagamente formuladas em determinadas áreas, os respetivos tribunais (arbitragem) decidirão a questão controversa e preencherão a lacuna jurídica, utilizando os princípios jurídicos pré-acordados que estão em vigor há séculos e um equilíbrio de interesses razoável. A celebração dos contratos ocorre exclusivamente através da “jurisprudência”. Isto significa que os acórdãos judiciais e as decisões arbitrais relativas a uma determinada questão são, a partir daí, vinculativos para todos os contratos e não exigem a introdução de novas regras ou alterações aos contratos. É assim que o Direito Consuetudinário tem funcionado com sucesso durante centenas de anos. ### 4.7 Financiamento As Cidades Privadas Livres financiam-se, através das taxas básicas dos cidadãos que cobrem despesas de segurança, de um sistema jurídico e de uma determinada infraestrutura. Outra fonte de rendimento são as transações imobiliárias. A Operadora provavelmente terá de fazer investimentos iniciais de infraestruturas durante os primeiros anos de operação para atrair os colonos iniciais, mas o pré-financiamento é normal no negócio de capital de risco. Devido às economias de escala, o sistema de taxas só será lucrativo quando um certo número de habitantes (cerca de 10.000) for atingido, uma vez que as despesas com as forças de segurança, os organismos de resolução de litígios e as infraestruturas não têm de aumentar proporcionalmente ao número de habitantes. Na prática, a Operadora provavelmente gerará uma grande parte dos seus rendimentos a partir de transações imobiliárias. Tal poderia incluir a compra antecipada de terrenos, que aumentarão de valor em resultado da criação de um sistema estável e atraente. O terreno também pode ser parcelado e vendido ou arrendado. As receitas correspondentes podem então ser utilizadas para financiar as despesas, infraestruturas ou mesmo para baixar a taxa de base. ### 4.8 Proteção Especialmente se for bem-sucedida, uma Cidade Privada Livre pode estar sujeita a uma tentativa hostil de tomada de posse pela Nação Anfitriã. Por conseguinte, o acordo entre a Operadora e a Nação Anfitriã conterá cláusulas comuns de proteção do investimento e arbitragem. A este respeito, a Nação Anfitriã corre o risco de ser exposta a exigências financeiras consideráveis após a ocupação da Cidade Privada Livre, o que também pode resultar numa apreensão dos seus ativos estrangeiros. No entanto, a Operadora da Cidade Privada Livre será incentivada a não deixar que aquela vá tão longe. Provavelmente, utilizaria meios alternativos, por exemplo, uma combinação de relações públicas, contacto diplomático com outros Estados e instituições de renome, ou outras medidas defensivas. Do ponto de vista teórico do jogo, no entanto, pode salientar-se que os residentes são altamente móveis e seriam capazes de sair rapidamente da Cidade Privada Livre em caso de aquisição hostil, minando ainda mais o incentivo da Nação Anfitriã de prosseguir com esta tentativa. ## 5. CONCLUSÃO Mudar os sistemas políticos existentes e entrincheirados de forma pacífica é uma tarefa desafiante. Se queremos criar um mundo mais livre, com foco na soberania pessoal, é melhor tentarmos estabelecer sistemas e quadros voluntários alternativos. As Cidades Privadas Livres são um produto. As Cidades Privadas Livres não são uma utopia, mas sim uma ideia de negócio cujos elementos funcionais já são conhecidos (prestação de serviços contratados) e que só precisam de ser transferidos para outro sector, nomeadamente o de viver em conjunto. Vivemos num mundo cada vez mais conectado, onde muitas pessoas podem trabalhar a partir de casa para clientes em vários países. As criptomoedas e as finanças descentralizadas estão a emergir. Neste mundo, torna-se cada vez mais difícil para os Estados-Nação cobrar impostos e contribuições sociais em todo o tipo de atividades. Só por esta razão, o sistema de taxas das Cidades Privadas Livres é a opção mais promissora para o futuro. O estabelecimento bem-sucedido de estruturas paralelas independentes dos Estados-nação e das poderosas organizações internacionais é possível: o Bitcoin é a prova. Estruturas paralelas no Mercado de Viver Juntos são supostamente também de elevada procura. Isso é porque as pessoas não querem ser subjugadas por regras e regulamentos que não consentiram. As pessoas não querem pagar por coisas que não pediram. E pessoas razoáveis não precisam de centenas ou milhares de leis para viver em paz juntas. Por último, as pessoas precisam de um espaço seguro onde possam reunir-se e cooperar pacificamente, mas as autoridades coercivas não as deixam em paz. As Cidades Privadas Livres conseguem tornar realidade estes desejos humanos. Os sistemas políticos existentes não conseguem. É por esta razão que as Cidades Privadas Livres têm a oportunidade de atingir o sucesso. Eventualmente, as pessoas vão para onde são melhor tratadas. --- # Вольные частные города: Новая операционная система для нашего сосуществования URL: https://free-cities.org/volnye-chastnye-goroda#whitepaper Language: Russian (ru) Author: Титус Гебель Edition: Издание января 2022 года PDF: https://free-cities.org/docs/whitepaper-free-private-cities-ru.pdf Современные политические системы характеризуются ложными стимулами как для правителей, так и для управляемых. Правители не несут ответственности и не беспокоятся об экономических потерях в случае принятия ими неправильных решений. Управляемых заставляют поверить в то, что путем голосования они могут получить «бесплатные» блага. Это политизирует государственную монополию власти и приводит к постоянным изменениям «общественного договора». В результате возникает постоянная борьба за то, чтобы пустить эти изменения в определенномнаправлении. В данном материале я предлагаю мирную и добровольную альтернативу политическому статус-кво: Вольные частные города. Вольный частный город характеризуется тем, что его организацией занимается коммерческая компания, оператор города, который выступает в качестве «поставщика государственных услуг». В этом качестве оператор гарантирует своим гражданам защиту жизни, свободы и имущества. Услуги, предоставляемые операторами, включают внутреннюю и внешнюю безопасность, заранее определенную нормативно-правовую базу и независимую систему разрешения споров. Заинтересованные лица и компании заключают с ней «гражданский договор» и платят за эти услуги фиксированную ежегодную плату вместо налогов. В этих рамках может развиться «спонтанный порядок», являющийся результатом добровольных действий и решений граждан. Оператор не может впоследствии в одностороннем порядке изменить договор с гражданином без его согласия. Споры между гражданами и оператором рассматриваются внешними арбитражными судами, как это принято в международном торговом праве. Если оператор игнорирует решения арбитража или злоупотребляет своей властью, его клиенты уходят, и ему грозит банкротство. Поскольку в настоящее время вся земля контролируется правительствами, создание Вольного частного города потребует от оператора заключения договорного соглашения с существующим государством. В этом соглашении «принимающее государство» предоставляет оператору право на создание Вольного частного города на определенной территории на определенных условиях, которые включают юридическую автономию в различных областях. Государства могут быть готовы отказаться от части своей власти, если они ожидают взамен значительных выгод. К ним относятся, например, создание рабочих мест, иностранные инвестиции и доля в прибыли, получаемой оператором. Существование большого количества специальных экономических зон по всему миру доказывает готовность государств идти по этому пути ## 1. НЕРАЗРЕШИМАЯ ПРОБЛЕМА СОВРЕМЕННЫХ СИСТЕМ ### 1.1 Перенапряжение Левиафана В своем знаменитом труде «Левиафан» Томас Гоббс утверждает, что монополия государства на применение силы создает мирный порядок, который в конечном итоге выгоден всем жителям государства. Действительно, инновации, разделение труда, торговля, научный прогресс и расцвет искусства невозможны в условиях, характеризующихся насилием. Однако значительная часть этого преимущества теряется, когда государство использует свою монополию на применение силы для достижения целей, выходящих за рамки обеспечения мира и его защиты. Это происходит, когда государство становится политизированным и навязывает всем гражданам политические цели, которых обычно желают только определенные группировки общества. Поскольку, в конечном счете, политика означает навязывание собственного взгляда на мир всем остальным. Но люди разные. То, что правильно для одного человека, может быть неправильным для другого. Тот факт, что индивидуальные ценности в конечном итоге субъективны и что у людей также объективно разные жизненные ситуации, означает, что любое «политическое решение» оставляет позади тех, кто был принужден к чему-то против своей воли. «Делать политику» означает принимать чью-либо сторону и делать желания одних стандартом для всех. И, если потребуется, силой, потому что все политические решения в конечном счете подкрепляются угрозой применения силы со стороны исполнительной власти. В нынешних политических системах отношения между гражданами и правительствами сравнимы с отношениями между человеком, который хочет купить автомобиль, и продавцом автомобиля - когда продавец автомобиля (= правительство) настаивает на том, что он сам определит модель, цвет, двигатель, внутреннюю отделку и цену, которую покупатель (= гражданин) должен за него заплатить. Кроме того, в сделке нет возможности выбора: каждому придется купить. Это явно непривлекательная сделка, но это та сделка, которую большинство из нас принимает в наших политических системах. Так называемый «общественный договор» постоянно меняется, но всегда только одной стороной - государством. Но когда монополия государства на применение силы становится инструментом политически мотивированной партийности, первоначальная концепция теряет свою силу. За фасадом мирного государства скрывается постоянная борьба соперничающих группировок. Таким образом, политика становится невидимой гражданской войной, незаметность которой обусловлена тем, что жертвы государственного вмешательства не имеют реальных шансов дать отпор. Мир, достигнутый в современных государствах, иллюзорен и на самом деле основан на эффективном подавлении инакомыслия. Поэтому наделять государство полномочиями, выходящими за рамки обеспечения внутренней и внешней безопасности, контрпродуктивно. Ведь после установления мира единственной законной задачей государства является обеспечение того, чтобы одни не навязывали свою волю другим. Само государство может применять силу только для поддержания этого принципа. ### 1.2 Принцип минимума поражает политику Здесь есть проблема: на практике добиться такого самоограничения со стороны государства невозможно. Люди склонны предпочитать тот социальный порядок, который предлагает им наибольший «жизненный доход» по наименьшей цене, то есть они стараются достичь как можно большего блага при как можно меньших усилиях. Эта естественная человеческая склонность, названная ниже принципом минимума, имеет смысл с эволюционной точки зрения. Она привела к инновациям, специализации и разделению труда, которые сегодня позволяют среднему человеку в большинстве стран жить в достатке, который раньше был уделом привилегированных высших классов. Для достижения своих целей люди взаимодействуют с другими людьми. Пока эти взаимодействия являются добровольными, обе стороны хотят получить от них выгоду - иначе это взаимодействие не состоялось бы. Добровольное взаимодействие всегда инициируется обещанием: «Я дам тебе что-то ценное взамен». Однако если кто-то хочет, чтобы другой человек взаимодействовал с ним, он может прибегнуть к угрозе: «Если ты не подчинишься, я причиню тебе вред». Как только кто-то попытается достичь своих целей таким образом, другой стороне, скорее всего, будет нанесен ущерб, и социальный порядок будет ослаблен. Теоретически, все члены социального порядка могли бы договориться о совместном прекращении насильственного поведения. Однако из-за экономии, возникающей в результате разделения труда, увеличения масштабов и создания объединений, имеет смысл договориться о «гаранте мира», который один будет иметь полномочия обеспечить выполнение этого соглашения. В нашем сегодняшнем мире таким гарантом является государство. Теперь, когда человеческая склонность к принципу минимума встречается с государственной властью, возникает проблема: благодаря монополии государства на применение силы, политика может обещать выгоды, которые, казалось бы, ничего не стоят получателям. Однако в действительности они работают за счет других граждан. Это переворачивает с ног на голову первоначальную идею предотвращения причиняющих вред взаимодействий: Теперь самый могущественный институт сам наносит вред. Человеческая склонность к минимальному принципу неизбежно приводит к тому, что группировки с помощью государства пытаются максимально увеличить собственную выгоду за счет других. С точки зрения получателей, государственные субсидии и гранты представляют собой заманчивую концепцию: никаких затрат, только доход. Предоставление детских пособий, бесплатного медицинского обслуживания или безусловного базового дохода в принципе можно отнести к покупке голосов. Такие субсидии приводят к тому, что население требует все больше и больше краткосрочных льгот, безусловных обещаний и дополнительных «бесплатных» предложений. Описанная здесь динамика также обеспечивает все большее вмешательство государства в частную жизнь граждан. Это происходит потому, что распределяются и «нематериальные блага», например, нормативные акты в пользу пожеланий определенных групп интересов. Поскольку почти каждая группа интересов пытается реализовать свои идеи, количество законов, налоговое бремя и государственный долг со временем неизбежно увеличиваются. Политическая поляризация является неизбежным следствием такой системы. Возможность человека строить свою жизнь так, как он считает нужным, все больше ограничивается. Теоретически эту проблему можно решить с помощью разума и убеждения, но на практике принцип минимума оказывается сильнее. Политики или власть имущие, выступающие за сокращение пособий, рано или поздно будут изгнаны с должности или заменены «социально справедливыми» и более «солидарными» избранниками. Кроме того, у соответствующих правителей нет стимула вести себя разумно в долгосрочной перспективе, поскольку они не несут никаких экономических последствий за свои решения. Они не несут юридической ответственности и не являются объектами судебных исков по обязательствам управляемых ими. Такие системы не могут работать в долгосрочной перспективе. Чрезмерные обещания и субсидирование невыгодных, но благонамеренных программ неизбежно приводят к тому, что у правительств заканчиваются средства, что приводит к саморазрушению политической системы. Фискальные уловки центральных банков, такие как манипулирование процентными ставками в сторону понижения или покупка собственных государственных облигаций, могут лишь отсрочить этот исход, но не предотвратить его. Я понимаю, что для многих это крайне болезненное осознание, но обойти это понимание невозможно: система, какой бы легитимной она ни была, которая законодательно предусматривает экспроприацию в пользу третьих лиц (например, в виде налогов и взносов на социальное обеспечение) и с которой согласны не все, кого это касается, в долгосрочной перспективе не может создать ни мирного, ни предсказуемого сосуществования. Она разрушает основы и результаты добровольного сотрудничества с помощью государственной власти. Подлинная солидарность не может развиваться под принуждением. Такая система последовательно разрушает то, что скрепляет общество, что делает его успешным и привлекательным, и приводит к борьбе всех против всех за установление благоприятствующих правил. ## 2. КРИТЕРИИ ДЛЯ АЛЬТЕРНАТИВНЫХ СИСТЕМ Бесполезно обвинять людей в том, что они следуют своим эволюционным предрасположенностям, или жаловаться на политиков за то, что они выполняют желания электората. Единственным средством является децентрализация и ограничение власти. Чем меньше сфер жизни контролирует политика, тем менее важно, кто контролирует или влияет на политиков. Тот, кто хочет избежать предоставления государством особых преимуществ за счет третьих лиц, должен создать такую систему управления, которая вообще не сможет предоставлять особые преимущества. Поэтому необходимо определить систему, которая с самого начала позволяет избежать ложных стимулов и сама по себе является стабильной. Новый социальный порядок, стабильный в долгосрочной перспективе, должен требовать, чтобы те, кто управляет государством, - не могли предоставлять особые преимущества отдельным группам или гражданам (избегать лоббирования, коррупции и борьбы за распределение), - несли ответственность за ошибки (соединение власти и ответственности), - имели собственный экономический интерес в успехе государства («рисковать собственной шкурой»), - позволяли своим гражданам в любое время уйти или отделиться без финансовых или других препятствий (создание условий для конкуренции), - имели точно очерченные обязательства и полномочия в письменном виде, которые не могут быть изменены в одностороннем порядке (правовая определенность, предсказуемость), - могли бы в случае разногласий стать объектом исков в независимые суды или арбитражные суды (нейтральное разрешение споров). Становится ясно, что, например, западные демократические конституционные государства фактически выполняют только последний критерий, часто с ограничениями, поскольку только определенные органы могут подавать судебные иски на правительство. Правовая определенность и плановость, фактически предусмотренные конституциями, больше не существуют в государственной практике, поскольку власть имущие могут контролировать как формулировки, так и интерпретацию конституции по своему усмотрению, используя свое парламентское большинство и назначая судей. ## 3. ПРАВИТЕЛЬСТВО КАК УСЛУГА: ВОЛЬНЫЕ ЧАСТНЫЕ ГОРОДА В данной статье предлагается концепция, которая отвечает вышеуказанным критериям и преодолевает описанные проблемы. Эта концепция - Вольный частный город. ### 3.1 Признаки Вольных частных городов - Вольный частный город — это суверенное или, по крайней мере, полуавтономное территориальное образование, имеющее собственную нормативно-правовую базу, налоговый, таможенный и социальный режим, а также собственную администрацию, органы безопасности и независимую систему разрешения споров (автономная администрация и регулирующая власть). - Вольный частный город управляется операционной компанией - предприятием, ориентированным на получение прибыли («оператор»). За фиксированный финансовый взнос она гарантирует жителям защиту жизни, свободы и имущества (защита оператором). - Каждый отдельный житель заключает письменный договор с оператором, который окончательно регулирует взаимные права и обязанности. Он включает в себя услуги, которые должен предоставлять оператор, и взнос, который должен быть уплачен за них, а также правила, действующие в Вольном частном городе. Никаких налогов сверх этого нет. Этот договор не может быть изменен в одностороннем порядке; он представляет собой «личную конституцию» каждого договаривающегося гражданина (подлинный общественный договор). - Участие и пребывание в Вольном частном городе являются добровольными (полная добровольность). - Нет законного притязания на вступление в Вольный частный город; оператор принимает решение об этом в соответствии со своими критериями и по своему усмотрению, чтобы выполнить свое обещание о безопасности (иммиграционная резервация). - В остальном граждане, заключившие договор, могут делать все, что им нравится, если они тем самым не нарушают права других граждан или другие правила, установленные в договоре (принцип «живи и дай жить»). - Любой житель может в любое время расторгнуть договор и покинуть Вольный частный город, но оператор может расторгнуть договор только по уважительной причине, в частности в связи с нарушением договорных обязательств, например, постоянной неуплатой взносов (расторжение договора гражданином в любое время). - Принуждение со стороны городского оператора может быть использовано только для обеспечения соблюдения установленных и согласованных правил. Серьезные или повторяющиеся нарушения ведут к исключению из Вольного частного города (возможно исключение из-за нарушения договора). - В случае возникновения конфликтов с оператором, каждый договаривающийся гражданин имеет право обращаться в независимые (арбитражные) суды, не относящиеся к организации оператора (подлинное независимое разрешение споров). ### 3.2 Подлинный общественный договор В Вольном частном городе каждый сам себе хозяин. Посредством добровольного соглашения жители заключают настоящий договор с более или менее обычным поставщиком услуг. Обе стороны имеют одинаковые формальные права и, следовательно, равны по закону. В Вольных частных городах традиционные отношения между правителями и управляемыми заменяются отношениями между клиентом и поставщиком услуг. Впервые в истории существует подлинный общественный договор с фиксированными правилами, а не фиктивный, который постоянно меняется одной из сторон. В отличие от обычных систем, в которых гражданин обязан платить налоги, не имея соответствующего права на получение встречной услуги, в Вольном частном городе исполнение и встречное исполнение напрямую связаны. Обе договаривающиеся стороны имеют право на исполнение договора контрагентом. Оператор может потребовать от гражданина уплаты фиксированного взноса, но никаких дополнительных платежей (если только гражданин не согласится). Гражданин, в свою очередь, может подать в суд на оператора за невыполнение своих договорных обязательств, таких как обеспечение безопасности или функционирование системы частного права. Кто фактически управляет или владеет операционной компанией, значения для функционирования модели не имеет. Операционная компания также может принадлежать всем гражданам. Крайне важно, что строго двусторонний договор между гражданами и операторами решает извечную проблему человечества: желание одних людей навязать свою волю другим. В Вольном частном городе нет платформы, которую могли бы захватить разыгрывающие из себя правителей и злоумышленники. Политическая активность, миссионерское рвение, распределительная борьба и натравливание социальных групп друг на друга исчезают, потому что они не приносят выгоду проводящей их партии. Граждане знают, что они не могут изменить договоры своих сограждан, и учатся уважать различные взгляды и мнения друг друга. Споры между оператором и гражданами будут рассматриваться независимыми арбитражными судами, как это уже принято в международном торговом праве. Если оператор игнорирует решения арбитража или иным образом злоупотребляет своими полномочиями, его клиенты уйдут, и в конечном итоге он столкнется с неплатежеспособностью и потерей репутации для будущих проектов. Поэтому оператор сталкивается с реальным экономическим риском и имеет все стимулы относиться к своим клиентам хорошо и в соответствии с заключенными договорами. Поскольку оператор обладает лишь ограниченной сферой власти, а именно защитой жизни, свободы и имущества граждан, он лишь гарантирует рамки, в которых общество может развиваться в условиях «спонтанного порядка». Спонтанный порядок - это порядок, который возникает в результате многочисленных добровольных действий людей на основе их децентрализованных знаний, а не в результате наказа избирателей или централизованного планирования. Примерами систем, которые развивались посредством спонтанного порядка или самоорганизации, являются эволюция жизни на Земле, языки, интернет и свободная рыночная экономика. ### 3.3 Принципы сосуществования Помимо согласованных правил, существует всего несколько простых принципов, которые определяют, как люди живут вместе в Вольном частном городе. Руководящими принципами являются самоопределение и частная автономия, т.е. право формировать собственные правовые отношения по своему усмотрению. Кроме того, действует Золотое правило, выраженное в пословице: «Поступай с другими так, как ты хотел бы, чтобы они поступали с тобой». Также существует принцип do ut des (я даю, чтобы ты мог дать), т.е. осознание того, что исполнение обязательств основано на взаимности. Наконец, существует принцип добровольности и ненападения, который означает, что взаимодействие происходит только на основе добровольного сотрудничества, а не на основе принуждения и отчуждения, даже ради якобы «благих» целей. В результате возникает общество, существующее по принципу «живи и дай жить». ### 3.4 Стремление к получению прибыли Стремление оператора к получению прибыли является центральным в модели Вольных частных городов. Многие люди считают стремление к прибыли чем-то аморальным, особенно когда оно затрагивает такие социальные вопросы, как наше сосуществование. Они не понимают, что нет лучшего стимула для наилучшего использования ограниченных ресурсов. Конкуренция с другими системами и необходимость получения прибыли заставляет оператора Вольного частного города постоянно стремиться к улучшению своего «продукта» и оптимизации использования ограниченных ресурсов. В конечном итоге это приводит к повышению удовлетворенности и улучшению качества услуг для граждан. Каждое решение, которое принимает оператор, оказывает непосредственное воздействие. Оператор должен спросить себя, повысят ли его меры удовлетворенность граждан, или лучше принять меры жесткой экономии, которые позволят снизить плату за услуги, чтобы Вольный частный город мог стать более конкурентоспособным. Другими словами, прежде чем оператор начнет действовать, он должен сначала спросить себя, принесут ли его меры в конечном итоге больше доходов, чем расходов. В случае роста доходов будет получена прибыль, и балансовая стоимость Вольного частного города как предприятия увеличится, что отразится в росте удовлетворенности отдельных жителей и предприятий-резидентов. Если мера приведет к потерям, ее следует либо улучшить, либо отменить. Такая эффективность и, следовательно, более высокое качество жизни для всех заинтересованных сторон никогда не будут достигнуты традиционными государственными системами. ### 3.5 Конкуренция Вольные частные города могут быть модифицированы во всех направлениях, от анархо-капиталистических моделей без монополии на насилие до коммун по типу кибуцей без частной собственности. Выбор различных концепций позволяет разрядить большинство политических конфликтов и заменить их мирным сосуществованием различных систем, к которым добровольно присоединяются соответствующие жители. Именно потому, что предпочтения людей различны и мы не можем знать, какая система для кого лучше, мы должны допускать разнообразие и конкуренцию. Единое мировое правительство стало бы чрезвычайной опасностью для свободы: больше никаких изгнаний, никаких сравнений, никакого выбора. Если рассматривать социальный порядок как «товар» на «рынке совместной жизни» и мирную конкуренцию систем в борьбе за граждан как «покупателей», то это принесет и больше мира, и больше свободы. Потому что поиск решений на рынке - это не насилие, не революция, а эволюционный процесс, который происходит через мутацию (пробы и ошибки), отбор (прибыльность или банкротство) и воспроизводство (повторение успешных решений). Поэтому, во-первых, должны быть разрешены альтернативные формы общества, а во-вторых, нельзя препятствовать гражданам отказаться от соответствующей системы. Тот, кто не хочет быть хозяином самому себе, а предпочитает коллективное и «социальное тепло», имеет на это все права. Но он не имеет права удерживать против воли тех, кто предпочитает свободу, или заставлять их финансировать тот образ жизни, который он хочет. Социальные порядки, которые функционируют только в том случае, если людей удерживают в них против их воли и заставляют вести себя определенным образом, в долгосрочной перспективе все равно потерпят крах. Тем, у кого есть хороший продукт, не нужно бояться ни критики, ни конкуренции, а значит, не нужно их запрещать или регулировать. Конкуренция действительно оказалась единственным постоянно эффективным средством ограничения человеческой власти. ### 3.6 Реализация Попасть на «рынок сосуществования» непросто. До сих пор для этого нужно было выиграть выборы, совершить революцию или организовать сепаратистское движение. Создание Вольных частных городов является мирной альтернативой этим методам. Несомненно, заставить существующие государства отказаться от части своего суверенитета - задача не из легких. Тем не менее, этот путь кажется более легким, чем изменение существующих систем «изнутри» в сторону большей свободы, правовой безопасности и моральной ответственности. О том, что такие пути возможны, говорит тот факт, что в мире уже существует множество особых экономических зон, часть из которых организованы по модели «одна страна - две системы». В некотором смысле, концепция Вольных частных городов - это всего лишь следующий этап в развитии особых экономических зон. Описывая концепцию таким образом, легче представить ее потенциальным принимающим государствам, поскольку она связана со знакомыми моделями. Для создания Вольного частного города требуется договорное соглашение с существующим государством. В этом соглашении «принимающее государство» предоставляет оператору право на создание Вольного частного города на определенной территории на согласованных условиях. Чтобы обеспечить добровольность участия, территория, предназначенная для создания Вольного частного города, должна быть изначально незаселенной. Степень автономии, которой в конечном итоге будет обладать соответствующий Вольный частный город, является предметом переговоров с принимающим государством. Маловероятно, что Вольный частный город сможет договориться о полной независимости. Помимо территориального суверенитета (оборона, внешняя политика), принимающее государство, скорее всего, будет настаивать на применении определенных правовых норм, например, норм о правах человека, закрепленных в его конституции, и на соблюдении заключенных им международных соглашений. Вольный частный город должен быть в состоянии уступить в этом, не отказываясь от своей сущности. Поскольку Вольный частный город не сможет предоставлять собственное гражданство, жители сохранят свое собственное, но получат статус резидента принимающего государства. Государства могут быть готовы отказаться от части своей власти над определенной территорией, если они ожидают получить от этого выгоду. Таким образом, должна быть создана беспроигрышная ситуация как для оператора, так и для принимающего государства. Создание Вольных частных городов в структурно слабых районах не только повышает их привлекательность для данного региона, но и создает рабочие места и инвестиции в соседних районах, что в конечном итоге выгодно для принимающего государства. Гонконг, Сингапур и Монако являются хорошими примерами этого: вокруг этих городов-государств в соседних странах образовался ряд густонаселенных и сравнительно благополучных районов. Многие жители соседних государств работают в городе-государстве, но платят налоги в своей стране. Если предположить, что такое развитие произойдет в ранее структурно слабом или полностью незаселенном районе, то принимающее государство сможет только выиграть. ## 4. ЧАСТНЫЕ ВОПРОСЫ В следующих пунктах рассматриваются наиболее часто задаваемые вопросы об идее Вольных частных городов. Более подробную информацию можно найти по ссылкам, приведенным в конце данного документа. ### 4.1 Целевая аудитория Вольные частные города ориентированы на все группы населения. Размер ежегодного взноса за обязательный базовый пакет, состоящий из инфраструктуры, безопасности и системы правового обеспечения и разрешения споров, составляет около 1500 долларов США на человека (меньше унции золота). Эта сумма может быть скорректирована в сторону уменьшения в странах с низким уровнем дохода. Тот факт, что налоги не взимаются, облегчает финансовое бремя для граждан, заключивших договор, особенно для одиноких людей, а также для всех людей со средним доходом и семьями. Высвободившиеся средства граждане могут потратить на свое здоровье и уход по старости, членство в организациях самопомощи и на образование своих детей. Вольные частные города предлагают значительные стимулы для создания бизнеса благодаря безналоговому статусу и правовой системе с низким уровнем регулирования, дружественной к бизнесу и ориентированной на услуги. Благодаря экономической деятельности в Вольных частных городах создаются рабочие места для лиц с низким и средним уровнем дохода. ### 4.2 Социальное обеспечение Вольные частные города позволяют создавать добровольные, многоуровневые сети поддержки для людей с инвалидностью, болезнью или другими нарушениями. Настоятельно рекомендуется создание коллективных учреждений самопомощи, частных страховых компаний, поддержка со стороны семьи, друзей и благотворительных организаций (подробно описано в книге «Вольные частные города»). Этих учреждений должно быть достаточно, чтобы преодолеть все реальные трудности в обществе. Некоторые операторы могут также предложить гарантированный договором минимальный уровень защиты. ### 4.3 Защита окружающей среды Вольные частные города заинтересованы в поддержании чистоты окружающей среды, чтобы быть привлекательными для своих клиентов (жителей). В принципе, защита окружающей среды в Вольном частном городе основана на защите прав личности. Экологический ущерб немыслим без нанесения ущерба имуществу, имуществу или людям. Поэтому существует соответствующее право на подачу иска против любого, кто вмешивается в интересы другого в этом отношении, и затем независимые суды должны решить, является ли иск обоснованным. В Вольном частном городе нет трагедии общих ресурсов, поскольку вся земля и вода находятся в собственности или, по крайней мере, контролируются заинтересованными сторонами. Особенно это касается самого оператора, который, помимо своей административной деятельности, является субъектом частного права как владелец земли, улиц и площадей, и в этом качестве может использовать свое право подать в суд за экологический ущерб, нанесенный его собственности. ### 4.4 Демократия Оператор - это поставщик услуг, на которого можно в любое время подать в суд, и у которого узкие полномочия: защищать жизнь, свободу и собственность в соответствии с заранее установленными и согласованными правилами, которые не могут быть изменены в одностороннем порядке. Поэтому подавляющее большинство решений в жизни жителей происходит вне сферы влияния оператора. Если каждый человек может решить для себя практически все, включая то, как он хочет жить и какие цели поддерживать, то нет необходимости делегировать эти решения парламенту, правительству или большинству. Вольные частные города должны позволять максимальное самоопределение, а не максимальное участие в управлении. По мере того как государства эволюционируют от правления большинства к самоопределению, проблема принципала-агента, возникающая из-за того, что представители предпочитают свои собственные интересы интересам тех, кого они представляют, также устраняется. Если все могут своими действиями решать, какие продукты и проекты продолжают существовать, а какие нет, то это более демократично в смысле «правления всех», чем в системе большинства. Благодаря этому процессу вольные частные города становятся «полноценными демократиями», а не квазидемократиями и партийным правлением, которые характерны для современных систем. ### 4.5 Монополия на насилие Из-за монополии на насилие в Вольном частном городе оператор теоретически мог бы злоупотреблять этой монополией и вести себя как диктатор. Однако большинство жителей в ответ покинут Вольный частный город, и оператор не сможет успешно основывать новые частные города в других местах из-за потери репутации. В этом отношении оператор ничем не отличается от капитана круизного судна в открытом море или менеджера удаленного курорта. Оба имеют возможность действовать как диктаторы, но воздерживаются от этого из-за своих экономических интересов. Допуск конкурирующих поставщиков услуг безопасности со своими собственными правилами и, следовательно, конкурирующими правовыми системами в теории может показаться привлекательным с точки зрения избежания монополии. На практике, однако, усилия и неудобства (операционные издержки), скорее всего, будут слишком высокими. Потребуются годы, чтобы на рынке появились правила, как разрешать коллизии между различными провайдерами и правовыми системами. На самом деле, владелец самой сильной службы безопасности сможет делать все, что захочет. Как только модель Вольных частных городов покажет свою рентабельность, на сцену неизбежно выйдут конкуренты. Для жителей это лучшая гарантия того, что их оператор не будет злоупотреблять своим положением. Кроме того, право каждого договаривающегося гражданина на самооборону и соответствующую поддержку третьих лиц против нападений остается в силе и прямо гарантируется договором. ### 4.6 Поправки к договору Конституция может быть изменена и вопреки воле народа, если квалифицированное (парламентское) большинство согласится с поправками. Договоры же, напротив, могут быть изменены только в случае согласия обеих сторон договора. Именно поэтому договоры, заключенные гражданами, так важны для защиты прав жителей. Разумеется, даже самый лучший договор не может предусмотреть все возможные будущие непредвиденные обстоятельства. Но договор, который может быть изменен оператором в любое время или содержит расплывчатые формулировки, не будет полезен для граждан. Поэтому текст договора должен быть максимально ясным и недвусмысленным. Если позже возникнут споры о толковании из-за отсутствия или нечетко сформулированных формулировок по определенным вопросам, компетентные (арбитражные) суды примут решение по спорному вопросу и восполнят пробел в регулировании. Они сделают это, применяя заранее согласованные правовые принципы, действующие на протяжении веков, и в рамках разумного баланса интересов. Таким образом, доработка договоров происходит исключительно в индивидуальном порядке после вынесения соответствующего решения. Это означает, что судебные и арбитражные решения, касающиеся конкретного вопроса, с этого момента станут обязательны для всех. Никаких новых правил или поправок к договору не потребуется. Так работает английское общее право на протяжении веков. ### 4.7 Финансирование Вольные частные города финансируются за счет взносов граждан, которые покрывают расходы на безопасность, правовую систему и определенную инфраструктуру. Еще одним источником дохода являются сделки с землей. Вероятно, в первые годы работы оператору придется самому инвестировать в инфраструктуру, чтобы привлечь поселенцев, но авансовое финансирование - обычное дело в венчурном бизнесе. За счет эффекта масштаба, система сборов, скорее всего, станет прибыльной только при определенном количестве жителей (около 10000), поскольку расходы на силы безопасности, услуги по разрешению споров и инфраструктуру не должны увеличиваться пропорционально количеству жителей. На практике оператор, скорее всего, будет получать большую часть своего дохода от сделок с недвижимостью. Это может включать в себя заблаговременное приобретение земли, стоимость которой затем увеличится в результате создания стабильной и привлекательной системы. Участки могут быть разделены на части, проданы или сданы в аренду. Соответствующий доход может быть использован для перекрестного финансирования расходов, инфраструктуры или даже для снижения размера годового взноса. ### 4.8 Защита от поглощения Вольный частный город, особенно в случае успеха, может подвергнуться попытке враждебного поглощения со стороны принимающего государства. Поэтому договор между оператором и принимающим государством будет включать положения о защите инвестиций и арбитражную оговорку. Сдерживающий эффект будет достигнут за счет того, что после оккупации Вольного частного города против принимающего государства будут выдвинуты значительные финансовые претензии, что также может привести к аресту его зарубежных активов. Однако оператор Вольного частного города будет заинтересован в том, чтобы не допустить этого. Вероятно, он прибегнет к альтернативным средствам, таким как сочетание связей с общественностью, дипломатических контактов с другими государствами и авторитетными институтами или других оборонительных мер. Кроме того, можно будет заблаговременно заметить, что жители очень мобильны и быстро покинут Вольный частный город в случае враждебного поглощения, что еще больше ослабит стимул для принимающего государства предпринять такую попытку. ## 5. ВЫВОД Мирное изменение существующих, укоренившихся политических систем - очень сложная задача. Если мы хотим создать более свободный, самоопределяющийся мир, нам следовало бы попытаться создать альтернативные системы и рамки. Вольные частные города - одна из таких попыток. Это не утопия, а бизнес-идея, функциональные элементы которой уже известны (предоставление услуг по договору) и которая просто переносится в другую область - совместное проживание. Мы живем во все более взаимосвязанном мире, где многие люди могут работать из дома для клиентов в разных странах. Криптовалюты и децентрализованные финансы находятся на подъеме. В таком мире национальным государствам становится все труднее собирать налоги и социальные взносы на все виды деятельности. Только по этой причине система платы за пользование Вольными частными городами является более перспективным вариантом на будущее. Успешное создание параллельных структур, независимых от национальных государств и мощных международных организаций, возможно: биткойн - тому доказательство. Параллельные структуры на рынке совместного проживания также пользуются спросом. Это связано с тем, что люди не хотят подчиняться правилам и нормам, с которыми они не соглашались. Люди не хотят платить за то, что они не заказывали. И разумным людям не нужны сотни или тысячи законов, чтобы мирно жить вместе. Вместо этого людям нужно безопасное пространство, где они могут жить и сотрудничать с другими людьми, но в остальное время их оставляют в покое. Вольные частные города могут исполнить эти желания. Существующие политические системы не могут этого сделать. Именно поэтому Вольные частные города имеют шанс на успех. Потому что, в конце концов, люди идут туда, где к ним относятся лучше всего. --- # BOOKS --- # Free Private Cities: A New Operating System for Living Together URL: https://free-cities.org/books Author: Titus Gebel Category: paper In current political systems, the actions of both rulers and the governed are shaped by wrong incentives. Rulers have no liability and face no economic disadvantage if they make poor decisions. The whitepaper proposes a peaceful and voluntary alternative to the political status quo. --- # Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You URL: https://free-cities.org/books/free-private-cities Author: Titus Gebel Category: non-fiction Published: 2018-10 Publisher: Free Cities Foundation ISBN: 979-8992380774 Titus Gebel’s book presents the theoretical framework for creating Free Cities, drawing lessons from past and present autonomous cities and outlining a model for building a Free City in the real world. Free Private Cities represent one of the few non-totalitarian alternatives to the majoritarian political systems adopted by most Western nation-states. In a Free Private City, a private company acts as a government service provider, offering protection of life, liberty and property in a defined territory. The operator provides security, a legal and regulatory framework and independent dispute resolution, and residents pay a contractually fixed fee for these services. Nobody lives there without having agreed to the arrangement first. The book moves from the foundational questions of social organization to the concept itself, its historical precursors, and the practicalities of implementation: law, citizen contracts, infrastructure, security, economics and currency. First published in 2018, the current third, revised edition adds new chapters on Charter Cities, Network States and seasteading, along with case studies such as Próspera in Honduras. The book is also available in German, Spanish, Portuguese and French. --- # Entrepreneurial Communities: An Alternative to the State URL: https://free-cities.org/books/entrepreneurial-communities Author: Calvin Duke Category: non-fiction Published: 2023-06 Publisher: Free Cities Foundation ISBN: 979-8398127720 What if there was a better way to organize society, one that didn’t rely on taxation and self-serving political parties? Calvin Duke introduces the little known social thinkers Spencer Heath and Spencer MacCallum and explores current successful examples of their radical ideas. The entrepreneurial community is the governance model chosen for the Honduran Free City Ciudad Morazán. Entrepreneurial communities, or entrecomms, are privately owned communities that earn their revenue through rental and lease agreements rather than taxation. Duke presents them as a natural way to organize a free society and an efficient means of providing what economists call public goods. First published in 2020 and reissued in a revised edition in 2023, the book lays out the entrecomm concept in both theory and practice, drawing on real-world examples of communities that already operate this way. --- # A Country That Builds: Guantánamo Bay and the Future of American Power URL: https://free-cities.org/books/country-that-builds Author: Alexander D. Voss Category: non-fiction Published: 2026-06 Publisher: Free Cities Foundation ISBN: 979-8180815231 The United States has leased forty-five square miles of Caribbean coastline at Guantánamo Bay since 1903, and for decades the naval station has sat largely idle. Alex Voss argues that its extraterritorial status and ready-built port, runway, and power grid make it the ideal site for a Free City under American sovereignty, drawing lessons from Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai, and Shenzhen. The naval station costs roughly half a billion dollars a year to run. Voss sees in its idle infrastructure the foundations of a city, and in the Cuban-American diaspora of Miami the natural workforce, leadership and political coalition to build it, five miles from the darkened houses of Caimanera. The book widens the lens with the development histories of Subic Bay, Malta and Taiwan alongside the better-known stories of Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai and Shenzhen. It includes a foreword by Mailyn Salabarria. --- # The Proprietary State: A Capitalist Vision for Better Governance URL: https://free-cities.org/books/proprietary-state Author: Andries Kerpestein Category: non-fiction Published: 2025-04 Publisher: Free Cities Foundation ISBN: 979-8992380705 What if a government takes the form of a for-profit corporation? Andries Kerpestein explores this provocative idea, proposing a system where governments have shareholders instead of voters. Drawing on contract theory, entrepreneurship, and consumer sovereignty, he outlines how proprietary governance could outperform traditional democracies. Kerpestein develops a theory of proprietary government and weighs the advantages and disadvantages of privatizing a government, and how to get the most out of the former while minimizing the latter. He argues that this form of governance is less novel than it sounds and could improve billions of lives. The book carries endorsements from Erick Brimen, founder and CEO of Próspera, and from Titus Gebel, founder and CEO of Tipolis and author of Free Private Cities. --- # Strategies for Liberty: Free Cities & Bitcoin URL: https://free-cities.org/books/strategies-for-liberty Author: Alexander D. Voss Category: non-fiction Published: 2023-09 Publisher: Free Cities Foundation ISBN: 979-8862356984 In this book, Alex Voss makes the case that Free Cities and Bitcoin are among the most powerful tools we have to meaningfully enhance liberty. Importantly, the synergies between these two tools make them exceptionally powerful in their potential to free us from today’s legacy systems. Billed as the first systematic exploration of the interplay between Free Cities and Bitcoin, the book is deliberately practical rather than theoretical. It covers questions such as how Bitcoin could mitigate boom and bust cycles in Free Cities and how it enables permissionless global trade, written as a playbook for Free Cities and Bitcoin entrepreneurs. The book carries endorsements from Titus Gebel, from Saifedean Ammous, author of The Bitcoin Standard, and from Free Cities Foundation Managing Director Peter Young. --- # Road to Liberty: Short Stories Book URL: https://free-cities.org/books/road-to-liberty Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: fiction Published: 2022-10 Publisher: Free Cities Foundation ISBN: 979-8356223204 In 2020, the Free Cities Foundation announced a short story writing competition, in which we asked writers to imagine what it would be like to live in a Free Private City. Over a hundred stories were submitted from all around the world, and the best are compiled in this book. The result is a collection of more than twenty-five stories that carry one idea into fiction: a city run as a voluntary community, where residents contract for the services a government usually monopolises. The writers take that premise in very different directions, from noir and satire to hopeful, near-utopian visions, and set it everywhere from a fractured near-future Europe to a seastead and a station drifting between Earth and Mars. A foreword by scholar Rahim Taghizadegan frames why Free Cities matter, and each story that follows tests the concept in its own way: the everyday life, the opportunities and the frictions of choosing where and how you want to live. Published in 2022, the anthology is meant less as an argument than as an invitation, a way to picture what living together could look like when it is built on consent. --- # FREE CITIES CONFERENCE --- # Free Cities Conference 2027 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference Year: 2027 Format: in-person Dates: October 28–31, 2027 Location: Prague, Czech Republic Motto: The world’s largest gathering for the Free Cities movement. The Free Cities Conference returns to Prague in 2027 for four days at the historic Empire Hall, bringing together the founders, residents, investors and thinkers building the next generation of free jurisdictions. Thursday opens with warm-up drinks, Friday and Saturday are the main conference days, and Sunday closes with a dedicated Decentralized Day. ## Schedule outline - Thursday (28 October): Warm-up Drinks — An informal evening to collect your badge and meet fellow attendees, speakers and the Foundation team before the conference begins. - Friday (29 October): Main Conference · Day One — The first full day of keynotes, talks and panels from the founders and thinkers building free jurisdictions around the world. - Saturday (30 October): Main Conference · Day Two — A second day of talks spanning governance, finance and personal sovereignty, closing with the Free Cities Award ceremony. - Sunday (31 October): Decentralized Day — A dedicated final day on sound money, digital identity and the decentralized tools powering self-governing communities, with workshops and open space. --- # Free Cities Conference 2027 — FAQ URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/faq ## Where does the conference take place? The main conference takes place at Empire Hall, a grand Art-Deco ballroom inside the Slovanský Dům complex at Na Příkopě 859/22, in the heart of Prague’s historic centre. Both main conference days, Friday and Saturday, run here. Thursday’s warm-up drinks and Sunday’s Decentralized Day take place at nearby venues in the city, which we confirm closer to the event. You’ll find the full address, a map and getting-around tips on the venue page. ## What is the conference like? Our recent conferences have drawn participants from more than 50 countries: perpetual travellers, digital nomads, entrepreneurs looking to start or relocate businesses in Free Cities, and investors backing Free City projects. You’ll have the chance to mingle with around 40 speakers leading the development of Free Cities or working in related fields such as architecture, urban planning and Flag Theory. The schedule pairs impactful talks with plenty of room to connect. The main stage features short, engaging talks (10–20 minutes each) that introduce a wide range of topics, while evening social events and Sunday’s interactive Decentralized Day are designed to help you exchange ideas and build lasting relationships. Sunday puts the spotlight on the audience: expect rotating panels, “Ask Me Anything” sessions with experts on everything from seasteading to international tax planning, and lighter, more exploratory discussions. ## When should I arrive and depart? The main conference talks run on Friday, October 29th and Saturday, October 30th, with networking events on the sidelines. To comfortably take everything in, we recommend arriving in Prague by Thursday, October 28th, when a welcome drinks mixer kicks things off, and departing on or after the evening of Sunday, October 31st, once the Decentralized Day and closing socials wrap up. That said, we’d encourage you to stay a little longer. Prague is a fantastic city with stunning architecture, rich history and a vibrant cultural scene, and many of our attendees extend their trip to enjoy it and spend more time with fellow participants. ## Can I bring my kids to the Free Cities Conference? Yes. The Free Cities Conference is a family-friendly event. Children under 18 attend free when accompanied by a paying adult, and a supervised children’s play area is available in the networking room during the two main conference days. For safeguarding reasons, every child must be registered with us in advance. The dedicated kids page has the full details: the play area, evening childcare options and family-friendly places to stay. ## What should I wear to the conference? We kindly ask attendees to dress in business attire. For men, this typically means a shirt with a jacket, smart trousers and formal shoes. For women, business clothing such as a dress, skirt or trousers with a blouse or jacket is recommended. Why a dress code? The Free Cities community is united by the ambition to build new societies. Dressing well reflects the seriousness of our mission and shows respect to our speakers and fellow participants. ## How can I speak at the Free Cities Conference? Every year far more people want to speak than we have slots for, so we ask everyone to go through the same form. It asks what you would like to talk about, who you are and how a speaking slot could work as a partnership between us. We read every application and nobody is left without an answer. If you represent a company and want to present a product, a service or a Free City project, a speaking slot normally comes with a sponsorship package instead of the open application. Write to us at info@free-cities.org and we will send you the options, or see the sponsorship question below. ## How can I sponsor the Free Cities Conference? Sponsoring the conference offers valuable benefits, including online marketing exposure, on-site branding, access to premium speaking slots and the opportunity to host a booth, all while supporting the successful delivery of our event. If you’re interested in partnering with us, we’d be delighted to discuss the possibilities and share our sponsor kit; just get in touch at info@free-cities.org. If you’d like to support the event outside of a business context, one way to do so is by purchasing our Platinum Pass. As well as all VIP benefits, this exclusive pass includes special perks such as a seat at the top table at the VIP dinner and our limited-edition Free Cities Foundation lapel pin, and it makes a real difference in supporting the conference. ## Where should I stay? Prague gets especially busy around our conference dates, so we strongly recommend booking your accommodation early to secure the best rates. We partner with several excellent hotels near the venue that offer exclusive discounts for our attendees. Full details on where to stay, along with tips on getting around, dining and exploring the city, can be found in our Prague guide. --- # Free Cities Conference 2026 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/2026 Year: 2026 Format: in-person Dates: September 3 – 6, 2026 Location: Próspera, Roatán, Honduras Motto: Experience a Free City Talks on record: 48 After four years in Prague, the 2026 edition moved inside a working Free City. Four days in Próspera on the island of Roatán: two stages in the Infinita Dome and the Duna Tower, a public sitting of the Próspera Council, and a week of tours, excursions and side events around them. ## Schedule - Zones of Progress: Film Screening — Timothy Allen: The documentary shown with remarks from its director. - Welcome to the Free Cities Conference — Peter Young - Why Free Cities Are the Future — Titus Gebel: Government as a service, permissionless innovation and human-centred design: the case for the cities of the future, and why building them takes decades rather than years. - Building a City From Scratch: What We’ve Learned So Far — Erick Brimen: A decade of building Próspera: the MAYA principle, political legitimacy and legal protection, what went right and what did not, and the next step at St. John’s Bay. - The Government Can’t Cut Their Power: Inside Veritas Villages — Patrick Hiebert: Off-grid communities across Latin America that produce their own power, water and food without lowering the standard of living: how Veritas Villages work day to day, their Bitcoin-friendly local economy, and where Autris builds next. - The 1,000-Year Family: Protect, Govern, Endure — Mikkel Thorup - Staatenlos Freedom Ranking: Rethinking How We Measure Freedom — Danny Hertle - The $100 Million Reason Big Pharma Wants a Floating Lab — Joe Quirk: Floating businesses already moving between jurisdictions in the Philippines, maritime law as a framework, and how single platforms could grow into towns at sea. - Your Free Cities Knowledge Hub — Peter Young, Jan Bertram - Five Years in Próspera: A Personal Retrospective — Niklas Anzinger - An Infinite Future of Floating Cities — Mitchell Suchner - CryptoCity: Building in Post-Maduro Venezuela — Tim Stern - Atlas Yachts: Your Future Home, Free on the Sea — Mason - Investing in Charter Cities: Ask Me Anything — Patri Friedman - Edge City: Building a Society Incubator — Telamon Ardavanis - Meridia: Building a Freestead in Texas — Billy Tetrud, Stacia Wilson - The City That Ran on Just Two Government Employees — Oliver W. Porter: How Sandy Springs, Georgia, contracted out its municipal services: two government employees at the start, a $40 million surplus, no long-term debt and no tax increases in its first decade, and twelve cities that followed. - Ciudad Morazán: An Update — Massimo Mazzone - Global Peace via the Live and Let Live Philosophy — Marc J. Victor - Free Cities Award Ceremony — Titus Gebel: The 2026 Storyteller, Innovation, Builder and Pioneer Awards, presented on the plenary stage. - Expat Money Stage: Opening Remarks — Mikkel Thorup - Tax Residency for the Modern Nomad — Joey Langenbrunner - How to Turn a Free City into a Global Financial Hub — Jorge Colindres, Derek Khanna, Danel Armendáriz - Free Cities: Assessing Progress in 2026 — Joyce Brand, Alex Ugorji - Vision for St John’s Bay: Deep Dive — Ivan Syrtsov, Ricardo Gonzalez - The Plan B AMA: Residency, Offshore and Freedom — Patrick Hiebert, Mikkel Thorup, Raphaël Lima - Screening: The World’s First Startup City - Panel: Making Seasteads Legal — Jorge Schmidt, Joe Quirk, O. Shane Balloun, Chad Elwartowski, Nadia Elwartowski - The Future of the Free Cities Movement — Mark Edge - Debate: Should Free Cities Protect Intellectual Property? — Alex Voss, Stephan Kinsella, Brian O’Beirne - How to Make Your Free City an Entrepreneurial Superpower — Per Bylund - Panel: Why Institutional Capital Should Bet on Free Cities — Alex Voss, Patri Friedman, Lotta Moberg, Erick Brimen - Próspera Council Public Meeting — Erick Brimen, Jorge Colindres: A sitting of the Council in the Beta Building, open to attendees: laws being made in front of the people they bind. - Flag Theory: The Special Economic Zone Edge — Francisco Litvay - Why Do All Cities Look the Same? — Max Medina - Planning the Unplannable: Potential Paths to a Liberty Polity — Jeremy Kauffman - Charter Cities: From Idea to Execution — Mark Lutter - Planning Free Cities That Work: Five Big Ideas — Patrick Lamson-Hall - Full Stack Free Jurisdictions — Max Borders - Lessons Learned from Bitcoinizing Roatán — Dušan Matuška - Ocean Living on a Budget: What $3k, $30k and $600k Can Buy You — Mitchell Suchner, Mason, Chad Elwartowski - US and Tribal Zones - The Future of Free Cities: Lessons from a Year of Conversations — Timothy Allen - Closing Remarks — Titus Gebel - Mystery Session: Off the record, under Chatham House rules. Never recorded. - The AI Tidal Wave: Threats and Opportunities for New Jurisdictions — Trey Goff, Nick Dranias: Off the record, under Chatham House rules. Never recorded. - Big Tax Changes Are Coming. Here’s How to Prepare — Raphaël Lima, Emile Phaneuf, Aleksa Burmazovic: Off the record, under Chatham House rules. Never recorded. - Between Empires: New Jurisdictions in a Dangerous World — Li Schoolland, Massimo Mazzone, Mailyn Salabarria, Patrick Hiebert, Mikkel Thorup: Off the record, under Chatham House rules. Never recorded. --- # Free Cities Conference 2025 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/2025 Year: 2025 Format: in-person Dates: October 30 – November 2, 2025 Location: Prague, Czech Republic Talks on record: 44 The 2025 edition brought the global Free Cities community to Prague for four days of talks, from new jurisdictions like Próspera, Liberland and Ciudad Morazán to seasteading, capital flight, longevity and digital governance. ## Schedule - Opening Remarks — Peter Young - Vote With Your Feet — Titus Gebel - Freedom Communities Backed by Bitcoin Treasuries — Patrick Hiebert, Alex Voss - CryptoCity: Build the City You Want to Live In — Tim Stern - Milei's Argentina: Two Years On — Iván Dubois - Próspera in 2025 — Trey Goff - Freedom Migration: Latin America Opportunities — Trey Goff, Alex Ugorji, Patrick Hiebert, Tim Stern, Titus Gebel - The Heroic Story of Seasteading — Joe Quirk - Ciudad Morazán: Never Mind the Nonsense, Keep Building — Massimo Mazzone - Atlas Island and LiberArx: Vote with your Boat — Mason - Global Investment Mastery: Build Wealth, Protect Freedom — Mikkel Thorup - The Ocean Exit: Seasteading — Mitchell Suchner - Why We Need Free Cities If You Can Live (Tax)-Free Anywhere — Christoph Heuermann - Make Sealand Great Again: Story of the World's Smallest Country — Michael Bates, Liam Bates - Q&A Session with the Seasteaders — Joe Quirk, Mitchell Suchner, Mason - Capital Packs Its Bags: Lessons from SEZs & Private Wealth — Lotta Moberg - Why Freedom Isn’t Enough — Yaron Brook - 2025 Free Cities Award Ceremony — Titus Gebel - Vote with Your Money: Investment Opportunities in an Era of Capital Flight — Alex Voss, Lotta Moberg, Swen Lorenz, Sam Roberts - Liberland – Nation of Voluntary Citizens — Vít Jedlička - The Role of Free Societies in Global Peace — Scott Schneider - A Free Commune in Switzerland: Hopes and Challenges — Marc-Felix Otto - Mapping Tax Freedom for Digital Nomads — Felipe Munizaga - Digital Zones — Economic Engines for the Post-AI Era — Hugo Mathecowitsch - Why Support the Free Cities Movement — Mark Edge - Próspera: The Path to Longevity as a Human Right — Vladimir Leshko - Planning Ciudad Morazán: From Plan to Reality — Patrick Lamson-Hall, Nuria Puigcerver - How to Thrive as a Borderless Entrepreneur — Patrick Hiebert, Tim Stern, Trey Goff, Alex Ugorji, Iván Dubois - Tribal Nations: America’s Untapped Frontier for Free Cities — Joseph McKinney - Draper Nation: Your Freedom Stack for the Age of Optionality — Vikram Bharati - How I Voted with My Feet: Fleeing Cuba in Search of Freedom — Mailyn Salabarria - Why Free Cities Are Good for the Planet — Vera Kichanova - Real Estate as the Foundation for Free Cities — Michael Cruz - Take Your Digital Identity With You — Jordi Llonch Esteve - Urban Expansion Company: Empowering Africa’s Urban Growth — Mark Lutter - Prague: Should I Stay or Should I Go? — Jan Mošovský - Communities & Real Estate: Learnings from Citadel.Garden — Rahim Taghizadegan - Vote With Your Skills: Why Education Leads to Freedom — Marcell Heinrich - Immortalis: A Free City to Advance Human Longevity — José Cordeiro - Veritas Villages: Live Free in Latin America — Patrick Hiebert - Closing Remarks — Titus Gebel - Próspera Deep Dive — Tomek K., Khushboo Khullar, Ivan Syrtsov, Trey Goff - Free Cities Among the Stars — Thomas Walker-Werth - How I Moved in Search of Freedom — Mailyn Salabarria, Titus Gebel, Vera Kichanova, Zuzana Martakova --- # Free Cities Online Summit 2025 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/2025-summit Year: 2025 Format: online Dates: May 26–30, 2025 Motto: From Vision to Reality Talks on record: 42 The 2025 Free Cities Online Summit ran for five days, entirely online, with more than 40 sessions spanning seasteading, special jurisdictions, personal sovereignty and the future of governance, featuring founders and thinkers from Próspera, Ciudad Morazán, Liberland, the seasteading movement and beyond. ## Schedule - Welcome to the Free Cities Online Summit 2025 — Peter Young - Free Cities in the Real World: The Latest Developments — Titus Gebel - Seasteads Floating… Now What? — Joe Quirk - Ciudad Morazán: Interview with the Founder of a Free City — Massimo Mazzone - LiberArx: Designing Open Source Citadels of Freedom — Mason - Autonomous Cities: Successes, Challenges and What Comes Next — Michael Strong - Financing Freedom: Why a League of Free Cities Unlocks New Opportunities — Art Finch - One Flag Is a Trap: Why Sovereignty Starts With Diversification — Mikkel Thorup - Global Wealth Strategies: Achieving Financial Sovereignty Across Borders — Lotta Moberg, Mikkel Thorup - A Decade of Political Economy of Special Economic Zones — Lotta Moberg - Veritas Villages: Real World Freedom Communities in Central America — Patrick Hiebert - Guantánamo Bay: The Hong Kong of the Caribbean — Alex Voss - Two Long-term Residents Discuss Work, Life, and Freedom in a Blue-Collar Free City — Alex Ugorji - The Blue Frontier: Overcoming the Practical Challenges of Seasteading — Ben Silone - How to Live Internationally for Greater Sovereignty — Francisco Litvay - Roadmap to Free Floating Cities — Mitchell Suchner - Seasteading: Making It Happen — Joe Quirk, Ben Silone, Mitchell Suchner - What Free Cities Can Learn From American History — Tom Woods - Planting Flags: How to Live Freely and Fully Across Borders — Christoph Heuermann - The Unsung Architect of the Honduran ZEDEs — Carlos Pineda - Designing for Adaptability: What Evolution and Institutional Theory Teach Us About Building Societies — Paul Dragos Aligica, David Sloan Wilson - Mauritius: Island of Freedom and Prosperity — Hartmut Sieper - Can Free Cities Improve on Democracy? — Frank Karsten - Seasteading: What Does the Future Hold? — Chad Elwartowski - Building Autonomy: Technology, Territory, and the Future of Free Communities — Titus Gebel, Patrick Hiebert, Aleks Svetski - Securing Freedom: Private Law and Defense in Free Cities — Robert P. Murphy - Seeding Autonomy: How Pronomos Capital Is Funding New Cities — Patri Friedman - Próspera in 2025: A Snapshot of Recent Progress — Lonis Hamaili - Gain More Privacy in Your Life with GrapheneOS — Nathalie Schönwetter - The Square Mile: What Free Cities Can Learn From the City of London — Michael Mainelli - The Urban Expansion Company: Our Tool for Building Charter Cities — Jidy Chitta - How to Bring Efficiency, Security and Legality to Free Cities — Alex Tourski - Nostr vs ePassports: Competing Visions for Digital Identity — Alex Tourski, Jordi Llonch Esteve - Freedom, Tariffs, and the Financial System: Navigating America’s Next Chapter — Jeff Deist - Satlantis: A Super-app for Self-Sovereign Communities — Aleks Svetski - Bringing Free Cities to Established (But Stagnating) Democracies — Vera Kichanova - Freedom Cities: Can Trump’s Vision Take Off? — Mark Lutter - Nostr: How to Become Self-Sovereign Online — Jordi Llonch Esteve - Directing “A Private Libertarian City in Honduras”: A Story of Filming in Próspera — Zach Weissmueller - Unlocking Minds: How Free Cities Can Transform Education — Marcell Heinrich - Why Rule of Law Matters and How Free Cities Can Deliver It — Tom W. Bell - From Freeports to Floating Cities: Building Free Communities on Land and Water — Mason, Vera Kichanova --- # Liberty in Our Lifetime 2024 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/2024 Year: 2024 Format: in-person Dates: October 31 – November 3, 2024 Location: Prague, Czech Republic Motto: From Vision to Reality Talks on record: 46 Liberty in Our Lifetime 2024, the annual gathering of the global Free Cities community now held as the Free Cities Conference, brought 350+ attendees to Prague’s Empire Hall for two days of talks on building free jurisdictions: private cities like Próspera and Ciudad Morazán in Honduras, intentional communities such as Montelibero and Liberstad, the self-governing island of Sark, and the wider toolkit of seasteading, flag theory and personal sovereignty. ## Schedule - Welcome to Liberty in Our Lifetime — Peter Young - Free Cities: From Vision to Reality — Titus Gebel - Ciudad Morazán: Accelerating Growth into Election Year — Massimo Mazzone - Overcoming Adversity: Building Against Political Headwinds — Gabriel Delgado-Ayau - Charter Cities in Africa: Anchoring, Iterating, and Scaling — Carl Peterson - Economic Plan B: How I Help My High-Net-Worth Clients Find Freedom — Mikkel Thorup - Seasteads: Floating 2024 — Joe Quirk - Anchoring Liberty: Building Freedom on the Sea — Grant Romundt - How the World’s First Floating Resort Will Benefit Free Cities — Mitchell Suchner - Liberland Updates from 2024 — Vít Jedlička - A Trojan Horse to Freedom — David Parkinson - Politics Doesn’t Lead to Liberty: What to Do Instead — Jack Zama - The Journey to 21st Century City in Thames Freeport — Ivan Ko - Tribute to Ott Vatter — Ott Vatter, Gabriel Delgado-Ayau - Inspiring Free Cities through the Creation of Beauty — Vince Graham - Lessons from History: Mikhail Gorbachev's Impact on Global Freedom — János Zolcer - Building a Charter City in Zanzibar — Mark Lutter - Liberstad: Running a City — Sondre Bjellås - Live and Let Live: Practical Principles for Freedom, Peace, and Prosperity — Scott Schneider - Entrepreneurs as Value Creators: The Path to Prosperity in Free Cities — Per Bylund - The Metaverse as Gateway to Free Cities — Patrik Schumacher, Vera Kichanova, Michal Ptáčník - From Talking to Doing: Creating Freedom-Oriented Communities in the Tropics — Patrick Hiebert - CBDCs or Bitcoin? The Choice Facing Free Cities — Efrat Fenigson - Escaping Leviathan: How Small States Foster Freedom and Prosperity — Stephan Livera - Montelibero: Building a Decentralized Free Society — Tatiana Butanka - CryptoCity: Building a Freedom-Oriented Community in Paradise — Tim Stern - Why Set Up a Business in a Free City? — Alex Ugorji - FREE Madeira: Bitcoinising an Island to Freedom — Henrique Albuquerque - Prague Springs and Prague Winters: The Many Small Steps to a Free City — Jan Mošovský - Free Money, Free Commerce, Free Society — Lea Petrášová - A Town of Pleasure and Luxury: The Untold Story of a 19th Century ‘Porto Franco’ — Vera Kichanova - The Path to Decentralization and Self-sufficiency with Freeth’m — Zuzana Martakova - Discovering a New Culture for Humanity — Michal Lewandowski, Layla Blake - How to get a 2nd Citizenship in Latin America — Francisco Litvay - How to Develop a Sovereign Society Through Human & Resource Resiliency — Oscar Correa - Bitcoin Mining & Free Cities: Unlocking Energy Access and Abundance — Alex Voss - How to Find the Right People to Build a Free City — Ronald Sikking - Liberty inside of Us — Alex Martynov - Freedom… For What? — Nikos Sotirakopoulos - Closing Remarks — Titus Gebel - Seasteading: From Vision to Reality — Joe Quirk, Titus Gebel, Grant Romundt - The World in 2025: Q&A Panel — Per Bylund, Efrat Fenigson, Mikkel Thorup, Natalie Danelishen - Seasteading Open Q&A — Mitchell Suchner - Itana: A Digital Free Zone in Nigeria — Cesare Martins - Maximizing the Resilience of a Free Cities Economy Against External Threats — Sam Roberts - Open Q&A Second Citizenships and Perpetual Travel — Francisco Litvay --- # Liberty in Our Lifetime 2022 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/2022 Year: 2022 Format: in-person Dates: October 21–23, 2022 Location: Prague, Czech Republic Motto: Parallel Structures for Progress Talks on record: 41 Liberty in Our Lifetime 2022 brought the Free Cities movement to Prague’s Cubex Centre for three days under the theme “Parallel Structures for Progress”. Across governance, finance and education, the founders and thinkers behind Free Private Cities, Honduran ZEDEs, seasteading and sound money made the case for building new institutions alongside the old rather than trying to reform them from within. ## Schedule - Parallel Structures Are the Only Way to Freedom — Titus Gebel, Peter Young - Bitcoin: A Parallel Structure in Finance — Stephan Livera - The Realistic Market for Private Governance — Jeff Deist - Próspera: Building the Future of Governance — Trey Goff - Order or Chaos? Prospects for Flourishing Amid State Failure — Russell Lamberti - Progress, Not Politics: Flag Theory — Francisco Litvay - Freedom and Responsibility — Aleks Svetski - How Floating Communities Can Change the World — Grant Romundt - Students for Liberty — Jan Mošovský - Short the State — Katie Ananina, Jessica Hodlr - The Promise and Problems of Intentional Communities — Rahim Taghizadegan - Governance Q&A — Titus Gebel, Rahim Taghizadegan, Joe Quirk, Peter Young - Living on the Sea Becomes a Reality in 2022 — Joe Quirk - Building Sovereign Communities with Pronomos Capital — Patri Friedman - Finding Freedom as a Modern Pioneer — Marnix van Suylekom - CogIndo: Fostering a New Generation of Independent Thinkers — Marc-Felix Otto - Small Farm Cities Africa: Building Affordable Planned Communities — Jon Vandenheuvel - Atlas Island — Mason - Coral Beach Village: Liberty in Paradise — Mark Edge - Bürgergenossenschaft — Matthias Gertz - The Free Communities Directory — Hynek Fencl - Ciudad Morazán and the Future of ZEDEs — Massimo Mazzone - My Hobby: Convincing Leaders to Take Their Countries Public — Doug Casey, Titus Gebel - Autonomous Zones Across the World — Francisco Litvay - Starfish Enterprises & Publishing — Niko Laamanen - Free Cities Q&A — Michael Cobb, Massimo Mazzone, Patri Friedman, Jeff Deist - Sound Money & Looking Glass Education — Seb Bunney - Transcending State Education — Michael Strong - A Blueprint for Prosperity in Africa — Magatte Wade - Closing Remarks — Titus Gebel, Peter Young - Money & the Future of Nation States — Prince Philip of Serbia and Yugoslavia - Investing in Free Cities — Alex Voss - Bitcoin Fixes Consumerism — Lawrence Bahr - Bitcoin Adoption in Madeira — Jeff Booth, Lawrence Lepard, Greg Foss, Knut Svanholm, André Loja - The Future of Money — Sean Pawley, Neil Woodfine, Mark Valek, Alexandra Kons - Freedom and Personal Responsibility — Michael Cobb - Taking Back Responsibility for Resolving Your Disputes — Přemysl Bosák - Applied Liberation Strategies — Max Hillebrand - Grassroots Bitcoinization of Roatán — Dušan Matuška - Parallel Society as a Natural Survival Strategy — Martin Leskovjan - Banking in Free Cities — Sean Pawley --- # Liberty in Our Lifetime 2021 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/2021 Year: 2021 Format: in-person Dates: October 16, 2021 Location: Modelhof, Thurgau, Switzerland Motto: Building the Future Now Talks on record: 12 Liberty in Our Lifetime 2021 brought the Free Cities movement together for a day at the Modelhof centre in the Canton of Thurgau, Switzerland. Across a single day, the founders and thinkers behind seasteading, special economic zones and the first Honduran ZEDEs, from Próspera and Morazán to Liberland, set out how free jurisdictions could be built within a generation. ## Schedule - Peter Young Joins the Foundation as Managing Director — Peter Young - Keynote: Is Liberty in Our Lifetime Achievable — and If So, How? — Titus Gebel - Are Bitcoin Citadels Real? — Rahim Taghizadegan - Free Private Cities Story Contest — Sebastian Grell: Competition winner Sebastian Grell reads his short story about Free Private Cities. - How the Special Economic Zone Industry Can Help Forward Liberty — Archibald Astley-Corbett - The Freest SEZs in the World — Thibault Serlet - Why Crypto Is Essential for a Free and Prosperous Society — Johann Gevers - The Foundation’s Directory of Free Communities — Veronika Kütt - Liberland — Michal Ptáčník - Seasteading — Joe Quirk - Frenly Park, Saskatchewan — Gabriel Scheare - Newcomer Panel: New Liberty Projects — Johann Thusbass, Swen Lorenz, Mark Edge, Igal Gofman: New projects present themselves: Guanaja Hills, Montelibero, Isle of Sark and Coral Beach Village. --- # Liberty in Our Lifetime 2023 URL: https://free-cities.org/conference/2023 Year: 2023 Format: in-person Dates: October 14–15, 2023 Location: Prague, Czech Republic Motto: Opt in to Freedom Talks on record: 45 Liberty in Our Lifetime 2023 brought 300+ attendees to Prague’s Empire Hall for two days under the theme “Opt in to Freedom”. The line-up featured fourteen Free Cities projects spanning Europe, the Americas and Africa, from Próspera and Ciudad Morazán to Montelibero, Liberstad and the self-governing island of Sark, alongside talks on flag theory, AI, longevity and personal sovereignty. ## Schedule - Welcome to Liberty in Our Lifetime 2023 — Peter Young - The Moral Case for Free Cities — Titus Gebel - The Government Opt-in: Making Governments Desire Free Cities — Andreas Baumgartner - Singapore-on-Thames: The Opportunities for Metropolitan Independence — Mark Littlewood - How Bitcoin May Free Cities and Communities — Rahim Taghizadegan - Ciudad Morazán: Growing Despite Political Uncertainty — Massimo Mazzone - Konsensus Network and Book Signings — Niko Laamanen - Strategies for Liberty Panel — Titus Gebel, Mark Lutter, Mark Littlewood, Alex Voss - Shaping Tomorrow’s Havens: The Free Cities Revolution and Why Próspera Matters — Gabriel Delgado - Doing What Must Be Done: The New Hampshire Free State Project — Jeremy Kauffman - Building a Business in a Free City — Alex Ugorji - International Cities by Tipolis — Alex Voss - How Companies Can Profit From New Jurisdictions — Marc-Felix Otto - Seasteads: Tech for 10,000 Startup Societies — Joe Quirk - Free Cities Projects Q&A — Gabriel Delgado, Alex Ugorji, Jeremy Kauffman, Zuzana Martáková - Building Seastead Communities — Chad Elwartowski - The Ark of Liberty: Opt in to Personal Freedom Today — Mason Leschyna - Sark: The Island Where a Libertarian Ethos Is Possible — Christopher Beaumont, Swen Lorenz - Settling in Liberland — Vít Jedlička - Building Digital Native Institutions and Network States — Hugo Mathecowitsch - The Network State — Balaji Srinivasan - eGovernance Platform as a Service — Ott Vatter - Fireside Chat: The Future of Urbanism in Free Cities — Patrik Schumacher, Baixu - Opportunity Arbitrage: How Expat Families Can Leverage Offshore Markets — Mikkel Thorup - A Roadmap for Freedom: Practical Applications of Flag Theory — Danilo Silva - Disrupting the Status Quo with Proof of Work — Dušan Matuška - The Global Opportunist’s Handbook — Pavol Lupták - Introducing the Ladies of Liberty Alliance — Tania Rak - Introducing Students for Liberty — Jan Mošovský - Liberstad: Living in Freedom — Sondre Bjellås - Montelibero: From Safe Haven to Beacon of Freedom — Tatiana Butanka - Madeira: Atlantis Resurrected — Knut Svanholm - Free Commune: Recipe for Creating a Community — Marnix van Suylekom - Q&A Panel for Online Attendees — Mikkel Thorup, Pavol Lupták, Danilo Silva, Tudor Iliescu - Opt-in to Intentional Communities — Natalie Danelishen, Mark Edge, Matthias Gertz, Nicole Reese - Free Cities Foundation Course Announcement — Hynek Fencl - Choice, Not Exit — Mark Lutter - Parallel Governance in the Balkans — Tudor Iliescu - Mises Immortalized: How AI Can Be Used for Freedom — Aleks Svetski - Global Citizen Passports: A Lifestyle Without Boundaries — Ivan Ko - Global Residence and Citizenship Options: An Update — Stefan Kraus - Longevity Free Cities & Prospects for Medical Freedom — Sebastian Brunemeier - Freedom and Immortality on Earth and Beyond — José Cordeiro - Closing Thank-Yous — Peter Young - Closing Remarks — Titus Gebel --- # FREE CITIES AWARDS --- # The Free Cities Award categories URL: https://free-cities.org/awards#categories ## Pioneer Award For a significant contribution to an established Free City project. It celebrates the pioneering work that brings a self-governing city into being and keeps it growing. The most prestigious of the awards. ## Builder Award For the people who turn a plan into a place. It recognises the architects, developers and administrators who deliver the physical and institutional fabric a new city runs on. ## Intentional Community Award For significant contributions to the development of intentional communities. It honours those building and sustaining communities around shared values, mutual cooperation and voluntary living. ## Innovation Award For a new idea, product or model that widens what a special jurisdiction can do. It covers governance technology as readily as the ventures that only such a place makes possible. ## Storyteller Award For outstanding work raising awareness through storytelling, in publications, film, podcasts or social media. It recognises those who have brought the Free Cities movement to a wider public. ## Humanitarian Award For work that puts the tools of a Free City at the service of the people with the fewest options, through housing, jobs, safety, health or education. --- # Free Cities Awards 2026 URL: https://free-cities.org/awards#awards-2026 Conference: Free Cities Conference 2026 Venue: Infinita Dome, Próspera, Honduras Date: September 4, 2026 Presented by: Titus Gebel ## Storyteller Award 2026 Winner: Christoph Heuermann for Staatenlos, accepted by Danny Hertle For creating the Freedom Ranking Index and communicating the value of governance competition and global mobility through compelling research and strong public engagement. Also nominated: Virginia Mann, Jeremy Kauffman ## Innovation Award 2026 Winner: Niklas Anzinger For connecting frontier companies, longevity research and strategic partners to create new opportunities and expand innovation within the Próspera ecosystem. Also nominated: Dušan Matuška, Patrick Hiebert ## Builder Award 2026 Winner: Oliver W. Porter For pioneering and implementing the public-private municipal model associated with Sandy Springs, demonstrating in practice how a city can be administered by private providers. Also nominated: Max Medina, Ivan Syrtsov ## Pioneer Award 2026 Winner: Erick Brimen For leading Próspera through major legal and political challenges while continuing to advance one of the world’s most ambitious Free City projects. Also nominated: Ursula Frederick, Tim Stern --- # Free Cities Awards 2025 URL: https://free-cities.org/awards#awards-2025 Conference: Free Cities Conference 2025 Venue: Prague, Czech Republic Date: October 31, 2025 Presented by: Titus Gebel ## Innovation Award 2025 Winner: Mitchell Suchner For delivering the first operational seasteading resort, proving a real-world, guest-ready model for living on the water. Also nominated: Jordi Llonch Esteve, Patrick Hiebert ## Humanitarian Award 2025 Winner: Massimo Mazzone For building the first Free City for blue-collar workers, self-funding the project and improving the lives of low-income families near Choloma. Also nominated: Trey Goff, Iván Dubois ## Storyteller Award 2025 Winner: Joe Quirk For energetic and persuasive Free Cities storytelling across talks, books and media, which has turned many sceptics into supporters. Also nominated: Yes Theory, Joyce Brand --- # Free Cities Awards 2024 URL: https://free-cities.org/awards#awards-2024 Conference: Liberty in Our Lifetime 2024 Venue: Empire Hall, Prague, Czech Republic Date: November 1, 2024 ## Storyteller Award 2024 Winner: Alex Ugorji For his Morazán Monday series and his sustained commentary on ZEDEs, Honduras and Ciudad Morazán, the aspiring Free City where he lives. Also nominated: Mikkel Thorup, Carl Peterson ## Intentional Community Award 2024 Winner: Montelibero, accepted by Tatiana Butanka For a community in Montenegro committed to personal freedom and self-governance, which completed its first apartment block and launched its own court service. Also nominated: Free Commune of Penadexo, Liberstad ## Free City Pioneer Award 2024 Winner: Próspera, accepted by Gabriel Delgado-Ayau For its legal and regulatory groundwork and the businesses it has drawn to Roatán, in fields from gene therapy to smart manufacturing, and for completing the Duna Residences and welcoming their first residents. Also nominated: Ciudad Morazán, Liberland --- # ORGANIZATIONS --- # Free Cities Foundation URL: https://free-cities.org/organizations/free-cities-foundation Website: https://free-cities.org Our mission is to support innovation in governance that leads to greater human freedom and prosperity. We aim to inspire, inform and connect people to accelerate the creation of a global market of living together in Free Cities. We are a nonprofit organisation working to make the field legible: to document who is building what, to bring the founders, researchers and residents together, and to publish the arguments and the evidence on a set of governance models that are still being tested. We develop no projects of our own. A Free City is a self-governing territory with a special legal status within its host state, run to uphold the individual rights and freedoms of the people who live there. That covers Free Private Cities, the model set out in Titus Gebel’s book and the one the Foundation was built around, alongside Prosperity Zones, Charter Cities, intentional communities, seasteads, and autonomous or semi-autonomous territories inside existing states. What these have in common is not a legal form but a proposition: that the rules people live under should be chosen rather than inherited, and that competition between jurisdictions improves them. The Foundation is registered in the United States as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and is funded by donations, memberships and its annual conference. The Foundation began with a book. In October 2018 Titus Gebel published Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You, which set out a governance model in which a private operator provides security, a legal framework and dispute resolution under a contract that fixes in advance what residents pay and what they receive. The work started straight away, before there was an institution to carry it: spreading the idea and gathering people who wanted to build such a place. In 2020 it was formalised as the Free Private Cities Foundation, established in Switzerland and Liechtenstein. The first gathering was a closed one. In October 2020 the Foundation brought its supporters and allies from the Free Cities movement together in Monaco, by invitation. A year later the event opened to the public at the Modelhof in Thurgau, Switzerland, under the name Liberty in Our Lifetime, drawing around two hundred people to sixteen talks on Próspera, Ciudad Morazán, seasteading and the other projects then taking shape. Peter Young took over the running of the Foundation as managing director in the same year, and the first edition of the Free Private Cities whitepaper appeared that October. By 2022 the work had broadened past the name it carried. On 5 August that year the Free Private Cities Foundation relaunched as the Free Cities Foundation, with a new brand and a new website. The change was one of scope, not of direction. The Free Private City remained the model the Foundation had been built around, but the work now also covered intentional communities, and autonomous and semi-autonomous territories inside existing states: projects pursuing the same end without fitting the original definition. The Free Cities Directory, a public register of the projects themselves, followed in the same month. That October the conference moved to Prague, where it has been held since. The Free Cities Podcast began publishing in December 2022 and has run weekly, in conversation with the founders, residents, researchers and critics of these projects. In April 2024 the Foundation released Zones of Progress, a documentary on the past, present and future of Special Economic Zones, directed by its creative director Timothy Allen. A Free Cities Online Summit was added in May 2025, alongside the conference in Prague that October. In 2024 the Foundation was incorporated in the United States, joining the vibrant American nonprofit sector. It was recognised as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organisation in 2025. What has not changed across those years is the division of labour. The Foundation builds no cities. It documents the people who do. --- # Seasteading Institute URL: https://free-cities.org/organizations/seasteading-institute Website: https://www.seasteading.org/ The Seasteading Institute works to establish permanent, autonomous ocean communities — seasteads — where people are free to peacefully test new ideas for how to live together. The Seasteading Institute is a non-profit think tank founded in 2008 by Patri Friedman and Wayne Gramlich, with early backing from Peter Thiel, and based in San Francisco. It promotes seasteading: the creation of floating settlements in international waters, beyond the territory of existing nations, so that new social, political and legal systems can be tried and chosen voluntarily — a startup sector for governance. The Institute popularised the idea through the book Seasteading: How Floating Nations Will Restore the Environment, Enrich the Poor, Cure the Sick, and Liberate Humanity from Politicians, co-authored by its president Joe Quirk with Patri Friedman. In 2017 it signed a memorandum of understanding with French Polynesia to explore a pilot Floating Island Project, and it continues to advocate for seasteading and to support the pioneers building the first floating communities. --- # Tipolis URL: https://free-cities.org/organizations/tipolis Website: https://tipolis.com Tipolis creates new models of urban living through innovation in governance, leading to greater opportunity, choice, and freedom. Tipolis is a Singapore-based company that develops International Cities — privately run communities, founded on clear contracts, that aim to widen opportunity, choice and freedom for the people who live in them. It grew out of the Free Private Cities concept devised by its founder and chief executive, Titus Gebel, and works by partnering commercially with governments and special zones to create, own and operate a portfolio of new urban settlements around the world. Tipolis frames International Cities as the next evolution of Special Economic Zones and an application of the Special Administrative Region model: each city runs its own internal affairs — administration, security, dispute resolution, and economic and social policy — under a contractual arrangement with a host country, while remaining part of that country for defence, foreign relations and constitutional matters. The operating company keeps its position only while the city thrives, an incentive the firm presents as the source of good services and a stable rule of law. Its team draws on experience from established special jurisdictions such as the Dubai International Financial Centre. --- # ARTICLES --- # Free Private Cities: Economic Growth and Prosperity? URL: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities-economic-growth-and-prosperity Published: 2022-04-21 Author: Carlo Schmidt Category: Academic Topics: free-private-cities, taxation-and-economics Free Private Cities: An Innovative and Logical Advancement of Special Economic Zones in Terms of Economic Growth and Prosperity Foreword The motivation for this article was my general enthusiasm for the Austrian School of Economics and the concept of individual freedom, which, unfortunately, is overshadowed by the current Zeitgeist. Free Private Cities (FPC) is an attractive concept for those people and investors already interested in freedom. However, I wanted to show how much more it can be. So I strongly emphasize that an FPC can also be a valuable political measure from the perspective of development economics for the countries concerned. Therefore, it is essential to convince the rulers and decision-makers of the respective nations of the advantages of an FPC. Fortunately, this persuasion work can draw on quite a successful and long-tested history of Special Economic Zones (SEZ). Thus, this paper aims to build on this long-standing experience and show why FPCs are a logical extension of these zones in terms of development economics. To this end, we’ll discuss how FPCs can further strengthen the existing advantages of SEZs while reducing their disadvantages. Furthermore, this article strongly refers to the Austrian School of Economics (ASE) theoretical framework. It aims to clarify in more detail which preconditions are indispensable for long-term economic growth and material prosperity. In the center of this theoretical basis stands the scientific method of the ASE called “Praxeology.” With this logical-deductive method, complex economic relationships can be explained causally. Furthermore, I intend to demonstrate that praxeology cannot just be used to analyze human action abstractly. Instead, it is also possible to offer and justify practical solutions to complex problems in the real world with this method. Thus, praxeology provides an attractive alternative approach to the largely empirical-based studies of SEZs and their effects on society. 1. Introduction And Problem Definition For several decades, foreign aid has been used as a means of fighting poverty worldwide and promoting economic growth in structurally weak countries. This mostly involves financial aid paid bilaterally or multilaterally to developing and newly industrializing countries. The economic track record of such foreign aid is often the subject of controversial debate in economic discourse. One criticism is that such aid payments only alleviate symptoms. This is attributed to the fact that many affected countries have a low degree of economic freedom and can only rely on weak institutions (König, 2015, p.22). Therefore, those aid payments seem not be able to sustainably consolidate growth potential. A frequently discussed alternative approach to overcome this problem is the establishment of SEZ. These constructs are not intended to alleviate symptoms, but instead serve to address the root causes of economic failure. Particularly in the last decades, a real boom of such zones has been observed. According to current estimates, there are already more than 5,000 of such zones, spread over approximately 150 different countries and ranging from developing to emerging to industrialized countries (UNCTAD, 2019, p.129). Furthermore, there is also a clear empirical trend that such zones cover more and more comprehensive areas of society and tend to be organized more and more often on a partly private level (Hachmeier & Mösle, 2019, p.21-24). FPC can thus be understood as a logical conclusion of this empirical privatization and urbanization trend. The following considerations are intended to shed light on the conditions necessary for a country to generate long-term economic growth and prosperity. Based on a theoretical framework of indispensable growth factors, the concept of SEZ in form of FPC will be taken up as a possible measure. 2. Special Economic Zones in General Before outlining the theory of economic growth from the perspective of the ASE, let us first briefly refer to SEZ in general regarding their definition, intent, scope, and empirical track record. In principle, there is no generally applicable definition of SEZ. Accordingly, a definitional classification of FPC turns out to be somewhat fuzzy as well. The term “SEZ” can be used as a collective term. This includes a wide variety of zone types. Even though the individual zones can differ greatly in terms of design, scope, and objectives, they all have the following common features: • A physically delineated area within a country with its own administration……and an institutional framework that differs from the rest of the country. The goals of such zones are usually congruent in their basic intent. However, different sub-goals can have different degrees of focus. The main objectives to be achieved by SEZ can be summarized as follows (Hachmeier & Mösle, 2019, p. 25-27): • Offer advantageous, regulatory, or bureaucratically efficient incentives for investors and companies to attract foreign direct investment (FDI)Increase exports and export diversificationIncrease employment or improve working conditionsImprovement of the state budgetTechnological and institutional knowledge transfer and spillover effects in form of innovationsIn total, the achievement of a higher level of industrialization and development of the own country From this list of sub-goals, the article will focus on the following goals: • Attraction of FDI through an improved institutional frameworkTechnological and institutional knowledge transfers and spillover effects to improve the country’s own institutions and market conditions. 2.1. Empirical Track Record of SEZ and Methodological Difficulties Due to the definitional ambiguities and the large number of different types of zones, a general track record of SEZ is extremely difficult to grasp. The empirical literature contains numerous case studies in which SEZ have had an extremely positive impact on the development potential of the countries concerned. At the same time, there are also many counterexamples in which the use of SEZ had hardly any statistically significant, only temporarily positive, or directly negative effects (Aggarwal, 2019, p. 35-43). In principle, there are several difficulties in empirically evaluating SEZ and their effects. On the one hand, the respective countries often pursue different sub-goals that are to be achieved with SEZ. Accordingly, studies of such zones usually focus only on very specific, quantifiable measurement criteria, provided that the necessary data material is available (on an adequate scale). At the same time, these goals, and their chances of success as well as their dynamic development are dependent on the initial economic situation of the respective country. Investigations therefore usually take place in a specific country at a specific time. Similar types of SEZ in different countries or at different times can therefore only be compared to a limited extent. Furthermore, these comparisons are always of a counterfactual nature. This is because a direct/simultaneous comparison with the development situation of the same country at the same time without an SEZ is prevented by the establishment of an SEZ (Hachmeier & Mösle, 2019, p. 25-26; 28). Thus, it is not possible to causally explain economic relationships by evaluating empirically observable data points. This is because humans are undeniably able to learn and thus with every human action, the observable data points are changed in such a way that the observations themselves are always subject to new conditions and never remain constant in nature (Mises, 1998, p. 55-56); (Hoppe, 1983, p. 45-46). Consequently, a generalizing assessment of SEZ that can be derived from empirical findings is unsuitable to causally explain their effects. Therefore, in the following sections, a firm theoretical framework from the perspective of the ASE will be presented to identify the four necessary preconditions for long-term economic growth and development potential. These four conditions are: • Division of laborCapital accumulationEconomic calculationInstitutions These fundamental conditions will be used to examine how SEZ in general and specifically FPC as an innovative version can serve as means to improve the economic situation and long-term growth potential of a country. 3. What Is Economic Growth And How Is It Generated? 3.1. Excursus: Praxeology in a Nutshell The basis for any economic growth is human action. More precisely, the fact that with every action man always tries to replace his present state (before the action) with a preferred state in the future (after the action). Every action thus represents for the time being a final and subjective value judgment. This value judgment concerns both the end associated with that action and the means necessary to achieve it. Therefore, in each action, an end is aimed at from a set of alternative ends and, for this purpose, certain, scares means are selected from a set of alternative means that are considered suitable to achieve that end. If the achievement of the selected end by the selected means was evaluated ex-post as satisfactory, a subjective, non-measurable and therefore “psychic” profit has been created. If the end was missed from the perspective of the acting person, a corresponding loss has arisen (Rothbard, 2009, p. 20). The axiom “Man acts” is thus at the center of any investigation that seeks to causally fathom economic relationships. Like the axiom itself, its logical derivations cannot be negated without contradiction. A negation of the axiom would lead to an end- and future-oriented action, which would have been preferred from possible alternatives. In doing so, the unsatisfactory present state before negation would want to be overcome by a preferred future state after negation. By doing so the acting individual must always use certain scarce means, such as time and one’s own body. The axiom and its derivations are thus a priori true (provided that no logical errors have arisen in the process of derivation) and need not or cannot be empirically tested. The extent to which the action axiom can be used to determine the necessary conditions for long-term economic growth will be shown below: 3.2. Division of Labor The occurrence and benefits of division of labor can be explained directly from the action axiom. The concept of division of labor (specialization) means nothing else than that people have different ends and preferences and seek to achieve these ends by different means. However, the benefits of division of labor can only be fully realized if it is followed by interpersonal exchange (barter). This exchange generates several effects, some of which directly and some of which indirectly make economic growth possible in the first place. On the one hand, interpersonal exchange, by definition, represents (ex-ante) an increase in utility. This is because the two parties to the exchange must necessarily value the other person’s good more highly than their own. Otherwise, the exchange would not have taken place (Rothbard, 2009, p. 85). An indirect, but for the later analysis central effect, connected with such voluntary exchange, are the resulting market prices. The objectively visible market price resulting from such an exchange reflects the underlying, subjective value judgments or utility preference for the exchanged goods or services from the point of view of the parties involved in the exchange. This market price thus represents important information, e.g., about resource scarcities and associated preferences, which would not have been made objectively visible without the exchange. These market prices can then be used as a far-reaching knowledge base and information signal for further exchange relationships, which are constantly readjusted by the subjective evaluation of various exchange parties (ibid., 2009, p. 103 & 143). Besides the creation of market prices as an objective means to evaluate products and services, specialization and exchange can also simultaneously increase the total productivity of the parties involved in the exchange. The reason for this is that, as seen from the action axiom, time is always scarce. The time spent on the production of a particular good or service is therefore not available to the same extent as for the production of other goods and services. Therefore, every action automatically causes opportunity costs, i.e., the utility forgone from certain unrealized goals and possibilities of action. Specialization in the production of these goods and services, which – relatively speaking – are associated with lower opportunity costs, and the subsequent exchange of these goods, thus generate ceteris paribus overall lower opportunity costs (ibid. p. 96-97). The economy has grown in this sense, as more or improved goods are available to achieve certain ends, compared to a situation where division of labor has not taken place (Mises, 1981, p. 299). Specialization also results in learning effects within an area of specialization. This possible learning effect manifests itself in the fact that for a certain output quantity, the average costs, such as the working time or the error rate, decrease over time. This in turn leads to further productivity gains as learning effects can result in increasingly efficient processes and technological innovations (Block et al, 2007, p. 462). This knowledge can then influence other areas of specialization through the exchange mechanism in form of knowledge transfers. As a result of this process and ever-expanding markets, as it is happening for example through globalization, the network of division of labor is continuously refined. Thus, the reduction of opportunity costs overall and the informational accuracy of market prices regarding preferences of the market participants can be continuously intensified with every exchange. Furthermore, Ludwig von Mises (one of the most important representatives of the ASE) especially stressed that division of labor creates the breeding ground for a peaceful and interdependent coexistence in the first place. This is because specialization and voluntary exchange ensure that individuals are increasingly dependent on each other. Therefore, the evolutionary process of division of labor and the general realization that this process is advantageous for the participants (Rothbard 2009, p.100) is the prerequisite for the emergence of a civilized society (Mises, 1998, p. 266). 3.3. Capital Accumulation Besides the interpersonal exchange, there is another type of exchange that represents a cornerstone of long-term economic growth. We are talking about an intertemporal exchange between the present and the future. Since time is an integral part of every human action, the acting person must always subjectively evaluate how far his desired end in the future should be from the present. In economics, this evaluation is generally referred to as time preference. The higher the time preference, the higher the preference for reaching the end in the present. Vice versa, the satisfaction of an end can be shifted further into the future. How high or low a person’s time preference is can differ from person to person as well as per person from time to time. How scarce or valuable time is perceived can therefore depend on both internal and external factors such as culture and general living conditions (Hoppe, 2001, p. 2-4). The extent of consumer goods production and its utilization is directly related to people’s time preference. This is because the production of consumer goods is part of a complex, time-intensive production structure. This structure is characterized by two basic types of goods. Higher order goods and lower order goods. Under this classification, consumer goods are referred to as first-order or lowest-order goods. These are created from higher order goods, which are used to produce these consumer goods (Menger, 1871, p. 7-9). Thus, the further a good is in time from the immediate satisfaction of consumption, the higher its order. It follows that the value subjectively attributed to higher-order goods arises from the subjective valuation of the lower-order- and ultimately lowest-order (consumption) goods that can be produced from them (ibid., p. 12-13). In order to generate economic growth and make human labor physically more productive in the long run, entering production detours represents an absolute necessity. These detours are characterized by the fact that the targeted consumption good is not produced immediately. Thus, depending on the level of individual time preference, the end of consumption satisfaction is postponed further into the future. In the meantime, i.e., between the present and the postponed satisfaction of this end, labor power (and time) must be expended to produce the goods of higher order or capital goods (Hoppe, 2001, p. 2-4; Rothbard, 2009, p. 48). These production detours are tied to certain necessary preconditions. Before the detour can be tackled, the individual must have saved certain means. These means (e.g., consumer goods) must have been created by previously refraining from consumption by the acting person himself or, based on division of labor, by the saving of other individuals. These saved means then serve to satisfy the immediate needs within the time span of the capital accumulation. The size of the saved means depends on the length of the production detour. The length of this detour depends in turn on the expected benefit and the underlying time preference (ibid., p. 49). Again, if the benefit from the consumer goods that can be produced in the future via previously buildup production goods is ultimately valued higher than the benefit from the current consumer goods opportunities, a “psychic” gain and, vice versa, a corresponding loss has occurred. How likely the success of an investment is can therefore not be answered ex-ante. Hence, both ex-ante and during the detour, the agent is always exposed to the risk that the subjective benefit ex-post will be lower than previously anticipated. If the agent is aware of this risk component, this factor and its probability are also subjectively evaluated. This evaluation then flows into the investment project in addition to the time/benefit evaluation. Therefore, the further away the satisfaction of an end is from the present, the greater the present consumption sacrifice and uncertainty about the achievement of the end. The price which reflects the intertemporal exchange therefore depends on both the individual’s time preference and uncertainty preference. Thus, in deciding in the present how much to save and consequently which investment project to undertake, individuals discount the expected utility in the future to its utility in the present on the basis of this price. In economics, this price for intertemporal exchange is generally known as interest. The activity of evaluating and anticipating is called entrepreneurship within the ASE (ibid., p. 60, 64 & 352-53). If the creation of a capital good has been judged ex post as successful by the “entrepreneur”, three options for action are available. (1) The created capital good can be used to produce additional or technologically improved capital goods through further production detours (investments). (2) The capital good can be maintained/repaired to prevent wear and tear and thus loss of value. (3) The capital good is consumed or worn out. Option (1) and (2) require renewed savings and aim to maintain the economic growth gained or to increase it further (ibid., p. 55-56). Technological progress alone is therefore not the direct driver of economic development. Rather, it is the combination of division of labor and capital accumulation that makes technological progress possible in the first place. This is because possible innovations can only manifest and technological knowledge can only be used or acquired if consumption is temporarily renounced, savings are built up and investment flows into the production of capital goods / technological advancements (ibid., 2009, p.542). Underdeveloped countries therefore do not lack technological knowledge per se. Instead, they lack the ability or mechanism to build up appropriate capital goods through consumption foregone and to rationally integrate these capital goods into the existing production structure to transform or expand their economy. (Mises, 1998, p. 493). Capital accumulation is therefore not to be considered as a highly aggregated, homogeneous capital stock, which can be generally quantified or optimized as a monetary value. Rather, the wide-ranging heterogeneity of very specific capital goods is relevant. Because of their qualitatively different properties and possible uses as well as their intertemporal component, the entrepreneur must assess their use in detail arithmetically by using market prices. 3.4. Economic Calculation If division of labor and capital accumulation are combined, their effects on potential economic growth are multiplied. At this point, at the latest, the question arises how supply and demand, i.e., the different ends and means of the individuals, can be coordinated interpersonally and intertemporally in an efficient manner. The short answer is money. This is because the use of this indirect medium of exchange leads to a reduction in the search costs for an exchange relationship in which there must be a double coincidence of needs. It follows that with money there are fewer transactions (and thus lower transaction costs) than would have been the case without money (Rothbard, 2009, p. 188). If a generally accepted medium of exchange exists, all acts of exchange, whether interpersonal or intertemporal, can be expressed in monetary units. Without this “common denominator,” in a society based on the division of labor, the value ratio or market price of goods could only express itself in other, most different, material goods (Mises, 1990, p.15). The circumstance of a monetary market price system thus allows the possibility of uniformly representing the individual valuations of the most diverse exchange relations. From an intertemporal point of view, the use of money also makes it possible that savings no longer have to be carried out in specific types of goods. Thus, by allowing savings to be made in monetary units, money can also be explained by the sub-function of value storage. Economic calculation then makes it possible that, within an interpersonal and intertemporal exchange economy, scarce resources can flow in a coordinated manner to the most urgent needs. This calculation function can thus be used to compare monetary input prices with the corresponding output prices. If the input prices used (costs) exceed the output prices (revenue) resulting from their use, a monetarily measurable, i.e., objectively visible loss and vice versa a profit has occurred. Since we know that market prices reflect then subjective value judgments of the market participants, the market prices provide the entrepreneur with the insight whether the means he used (inputs) were valued higher or lower on the market than the products he produced (outputs). If the outputs are valued higher overall, the means used have been used to create value. Vice versa, value has been destroyed in this process, since these resources could have been used at the same time in another, value-creating way. This objective comparison thus enables the entrepreneur to learn ex-post whether resources were wasted or used in a value-adding way in the enterprise he anticipated ex-ante. Without this possibility of comparison, no economically rational decision on the use of resources would be possible. The entrepreneur would be disoriented in his production decision and misallocations could only be avoided by chance (Mises, 1990, p.10 &14). Therefore, in a world without market prices, no economic calculation in the true sense could arise. Ludwig von Mises sees the prerequisite for the creation of market prices in the fact that the available means of production (one’s own labor and resources) are privately owned and exchanged voluntarily. In a world where private property rights to the means of production do not exist but are owned by the community in total and are allocated by central planning, no efficient value comparison can emerge. Thus, for the resources to be allocated, no input prices can be rationally compared with output prices as the occurrence of these prices would require private property of these resources and voluntary exchange in the first place (Mises, 1990, p.19-21). In a world without market prices and centrally planned production decisions, there is always a knowledge problem about how to best meet people’s dynamically changing needs. Considering the market dynamics, the market price system as a provider of information is so far the only known way to react flexibly to changing circumstances in the future and to be able to factor them in (Mises, 1998, p. 511). Hence, Mises provides another reason why technological progress alone cannot per se be regarded as a growth driver. This is because whether the use of a new technology ultimately proves to be value-adding or value-destroying can only be determined in retrospect by means of economic calculation. The result of this calculation process, in turn, provides information signals to other entrepreneurs. Based on this, they also must decide whether the use of such new technology or capital goods could be worthwhile in their situation. The growth-promoting process of creative destruction through technological innovations, as coined by Joseph Schumpeter (1942), is thus only possible through the entrepreneurial discovery process of trial and error based on economic calculation (Mises, 1998, p. 507). 3.5. Institutions So how can we ensure that the growth effects from the combination of capital accumulation, division of labor and economic calculation can fully unfold? The answer lies in an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production. As we have just seen, without private ownership of such means, voluntary (interpersonal and intertemporal) exchange, the resulting market prices, and the subsequent competitive discovery process using economic calculation would be impossible (Rothbard, 2009, p. 1047). Therefore, a system is needed that clearly defines property titles and avoids property conflicts as best as possible. Such protection of property rights is what makes the growth factors possible in the first place and continually strengthens them. The absence of peaceful coexistence and thus the constant danger of property conflict, drastically reduces the possibilities of division of labor and exchange (Mises, 1998, p. 667-668 & 817). Furthermore, the permanent uncertainty about the usage of private property distorts individuals’ time preference and incentive structure. Consequently (ceteris paribus) individuals save less and consume more in the present, since prospects for future profits or action possibilities are characterized by greater uncertainty. Therefore, the relative value of present goods increase. Such distortions are particularly evident when conflicts are associated with a high probability and cannot be averted or reduced or are considered legitimate by most of society. Under such systematic property conflicts, time preference also increases systematically (Hoppe, 2001, p. 11-14), which in turn leaves less leeway for capital accumulation. In order to circumvent or minimize a world of permanent arbitrary property conflict, appropriate institutions are necessary. These have the intention to create a conflict solving and transaction cost reducing set of rules. The goal is to create a uniform information base that makes the behavior of other actors more predictable (Lachmann, 1971, p. 49-50). For this set of rules to be used successfully, it must be accepted by as many members of society as possible and be enforceable accordingly. Enforcement can be accomplished through decentralized self-regulation (private institutions) or through an external, centralized authority, i.e., state institutions (Schotter, 1981, p.11). Economic development is therefore only possible on the condition that private property and conflict-free action are supported by institutions (North, 1991, p. 98). This leads to the following questions: • Which rules best protect private property and promote growth, and which do not? How can these rules be enforced efficiently? What criteria or mechanism is appropriate to answer questions 1 and 2? The best way to approach these questions is to evaluate whether a centralized authority like a state or whether private initiatives are best suited to provide institutions that protect private property and established conflict-solving rules to support voluntary exchange. Ludwig von Mises emphasized that isolated government interventions always tend to produce unintended consequences that defeat the very purpose of the intervention measures used. This creates the tendency of a path dependency (intervention spiral), which creates the inventive for further interventions to correct the preceding, non-intended effects (Mises, 2013, p.35; 41; 198). These interventions are only partially or temporarily controlled by central planning. Prohibitions, regulations, restrictions, or levies of any kind can be mentioned here as an example. The individual is thus forced under the threat of state violence to use his means differently than he would have done without the intervention. As a result, certain uses of the means of production and consequently the learning and innovation processes affected by them can be impeded or permanently excluded (ibid., p. 27 & 31) The argument for state intervention is usually legitimized by the intent to increase social welfare. In order to do so, it must be established that the means of production used so far are inadequate or will prove to be inadequate in the future without corrective interventions. In theoretical literature as well as in real life, common examples of such intervention-legitimizing “market failures” include public goods and externalities. In short, externalities describe a situation in which a particular action leads to consequences for uninvolved parties that are outside the contractual relationship of that action. These effects can be negative or positive in nature. Negative externalities are often referred to in order to legitimize interventions. In this context, the action of an individual, e.g., through pollution, leads to “social costs for the general public”. However, these “social” costs have not been considered in the action of the polluter and, accordingly, have not been priced in. As a result, the output of these externality producing goods/services is higher and the market price lower than it would have been (ceteris paribus) if external “social” costs had been included. Government intervention, e.g., through taxes or output restrictions in the case of negative externalities and subsidies in the case of positive externalities, attempt to bring the output quantity to a “social optimum” (Cordato, 2007, p. 2-3). The basis for mentioned market interventions above were made under the assumption that they were implemented with welfare-enhancing intentions. However, this assumption can be softened. The knowledge deficit of central decision-makers addressed in section 3.4 tends to ensure that policymakers rely on expert knowledge for their decision-making in certain subareas (Pasour Jr., 28 1987, p.135). The more centralized this decision-making authority is, the greater the knowledge deficits become. Depending on the decision area, these experts (stakeholders) may come from academia, organized associations, or the private sector. In economics, “rent-seeking” is the term used when these interest groups exert influence on the centralized decision-making ability of politicians. This influence can arise, for example, from certain monetary, but also non-monetary incentives. As a result, there is always the possibility that individual self-interests will be imposed on the whole society. These self-interests can manifest themselves in the form of direct or indirect monetary transfers from public funds. Moreover, certain competitive advantages are also conceivable. Examples could include regulatory barriers to market entry or regulatory facilitation for certain stakeholders (Buchanan et al., 1980, p. 9; Pasour Jr., 1987; p.136). This corporative interaction then leads to a constant incentive for both, politicians as well as rent-seekers, to further expand state powers and intervention possibilities. Free market competition is thus not only distorted by interventions intended to increase social welfare. In addition, these well-intentioned intervention decisions are also distorted by self-interested individual incentives. Besides continuous government intervention, the concept of public goods is also highly relevant for the following analysis of FPC. This is because these types of goods do not require isolated state intervention in the narrower sense. Instead, they are usually provided by the state from the very beginning. Within the conventional doctrine, the justification for the government provisions of certain goods is seen in their special properties. These properties can be classified as “non-excludability” and/or “non-rivalry”. In the case of non-excludability, it is argued that for certain goods no additional consumption can be excluded, or only by means of too high costs. Non-rivalry, on the other hand, is when one person’s consumption is not reduced by another person’s additional consumption. In both cases, it is argued that there would be no incentive in a private sector organization to provide such goods efficiently and to a socially appropriate extent (Holcombe, 1997, p. 1-2, 6 & 21). Thus, a private provision would lead to a systematic underproduction of these kind of goods. The following analysis will therefore examine in more detail the extent to which, within an FPC, the private-sector provision of institutions and other government services can have an impact on the growth drivers named here. More specifically, it will be analyzed how FPC can be used to overcome economic development deficits for the respective country. First, however, it will be briefly explained to what extent SEZ in general can influence the economic improvement of a country. 4. Comparison: Classic Special Economic Zones And Free Private Cities 4.1. General Growth Effects Through SEZ At the heart of the SEZ concept is the provision of improved institutions and regulatory frameworks. This is intended to enable a broader and more secure scope for economic activity (Zeng, 2019, p.12). Thus, in addition to improved conditions for domestic companies, SEZ are meant to attract FDI. The advantage of FDI for the developing countries concerned is that they can now access certain capital goods much faster than would have been the case with a self-sufficient savings and investment process. The rationale for this is that in the past, developed countries had more opportunities to build up savings through sounder institutions. Thus, they able to take longer production detours. With FDI, therefore comes the opportunity to participate in the prior accumulation of capital and the resulting technological progress of industrialized nations based on the division of labor (Ritenour, 2019, p. 22). Furthermore, through the removal of restrictive trade barriers or protectionist measures associated with SEZ, foreign investors and companies find also easier access to the domestic market outside the SEZ. This makes it easier to keep foreign capital in the country in the long term. In principle, enhanced growth effects could occur primarily if the companies newly located in the SEZ integrate into the local economy outside the zone. This integration into the local production structure of the country is thus the prerequisite for broad spillover effects such as technological innovation and knowledge transfers (Hachmeier & Mösle, 2019, p.41 & 44). In addition to technological knowledge transfers, institutional knowledge transfers are also highly relevant, especially for developing countries. These knowledge transfers are given when certain reform adjustments are tested within SEZ for the time being. Then, the effects of these institutional changes can be used as a knowledge base for subsequent country-wide economic policy reforms. Therefore, SEZ are also used as experimental fields of institutional learning (ibid., p. 48). Particularly in the case of multifunctional SEZ that can encompass whole cities (e.g., Shenzhen in China), such learning effects can have an even stronger impact. This is because, depending on their scale, these zones may represent small economies of their own with institutional setups very different from the national institutions. This can then generate an institutional competition with the national economic system (Wrobel, 2008, p. 12). As a result, there is a strong incentive for the relevant decision-makers in the country to improve or adapt their own national facilities. The reason for this is that if the decision-makers do not respond to this new institutional competitor, there is a risk of continued migration (of productive resources) to this zone. These competitive effects can be further intensified the more independent and autonomous the zones can act from the political influence of the host state. 4.2. The Effects of Private Zone Ownership And Management In the literature, the failure of SEZ is often attributed to its uneconomical operation. In this context, attention is often drawn to the occurrence of misallocations regarding an appropriate infrastructure and institutional framework (Hachmeier & Mösle, 2019, p. 28-27 & 68-69). These failures can often be attributed to the incentive and knowledge deficits of central planning which were already mentioned section 3.4 & 3.5 (ibid., p. 91; Moberg, 2015, p. 6-11). In order to continually attract FDI and harvest their effects on economic growth for the whole country, avoiding these deficits is particularly relevant when it comes to planning, financing, implementing, and operating SEZ. If the mentioned deficits manifest themselves, financially the SEZ may represent an extremely risky project for the country concerned. This, in turn, would generate counterproductive effects on economic development potential. Specifically, to mitigate these incentive and knowledge problems, FPC represent an interesting option. Unlike classic SEZ, where politicians and rent-seekers decide upon the institutional framework and design of these zone, an entrepreneur (Private City Provider – PCP) who bears full responsibility for this zone is far less guided by political goals. This results in less susceptibility to rent-seeking attempts by certain interest groups. Moreover, unlike political decision-makers who can rely on tax funding, the PCP must ultimately always base his decisions on the profit and loss account. This, in turn, is largely dependent on general customer satisfaction. This is because the FPC seen as a product or service package (i.e., the private provision of government services) is evaluated by residents based on their willingness to pay. Rent-seeking influences therefore play only a subordinate role in decision-making process and are basically only relevant if they do not have a negative impact on long-term profit prospects. The PCP as a profit-oriented individual then has the incentive in all business transactions to keep costs as low as possible, such as the use of resources in infrastructure and administrative processes. At the same time, he must try not to reduce the quality of the end products, such as infrastructures and institutional services, but at best to keep it constant or increase it. Therefore, unlike publicly owned SEZ, there is a greater incentive to make the zone as attractive as possible to customers and investors. Consequently, this can further enhance the effect hoped for with such zones of attracting FDI and knowledge. This incentive is particularly reinforced by the entrepreneurial risk that occurs when the PCPs are held liable with their private property. If the zone is privately owned, the entrepreneur or shareholders are (ceteris paribus) exposed to a lower time preference than temporary political administrators within a legislative period. The reason for this is that private owners have a greater incentive to maintain or increase the capital value of the zone (or the private capital invested in it) over as long a period as possible. Temporarily responsible political decision-makers would have a much lower incentive to do so. This is explained by the fact that politicians themselves cannot be held liable (privately) for their decisions or can be held liable to a much lesser extent. In the case of private insolvency of such zones, unlike publicly funded SEZ, it is not the taxpayers of the respective country who are liable, but the investors with their risked capital investment (ibid., p. 9). Thus, private financing and liability of such zones represents an enormous cost and risk reduction for the public budget of the host nation. However, this is only the case if any insolvency that might occur is not prevented with public subsidies. This effect of cost relief is also one of the main reasons why the respective countries are already increasingly handing over their competencies in the establishment of SEZ to private players (Hachmeier & Mösle, 2019, p. 90 & 114). The extent to which (financial) risks are redistributed from the public to the private sector is thus particularly reinforced by the FPC. This argument can also be used to offset another disadvantage of publicly funded and operated zones that has been mentioned in the literature. Sometimes the countries concerned are being accused of using public funds for SEZ only to avoid having to implement necessary and nation-wide costly reform measures or investments (Akinci & Crittle, 2008, p. 34). However, if these zones are largely privately funded and autonomously managed by the PCP, government funds can be used for “more necessary” alternative ends. With a public SEZ, these funds would be tied to its establishment and operation. A FPC could therefore be particularly advantageous for structurally weak countries with deficit state budgets. This is because, all other things being equal, an FPC would place no or a smaller additional burden on the public funds. 4.3. Private Institutions And the Public Goods “Problem” As we know, in contrast to publicly funded and organized SEZ, FPC contractually offer concrete conditions that cannot be changed unilaterally. These are to be enforced by institutions in order to protect the private property of individuals and their freedom of action from arbitrary interference. To this end, rules must be created that can avoid and resolve property conflicts as effectively as possible. The goal of FPC is thus to ensure, by means of institutions, that the uncertainty and thus the time preference of individuals (e.g., companies and investors) has more room for systematic reduction. After all, the lower the time preference, the stronger the potential of capital accumulation. In orthodox schools of thought, institutions such as public security and a functioning legal and regulatory system or certain infrastructure fall under the category of public goods. Thus, in line with the named characteristics of public goods in section 3.5, it is argued that private production of these types of goods would be insufficient. Instead, in order to generate a more optimal output quantity or use of resources, they would have to be financed with tax revenues and decided via a monopoly of compulsion (Fielding, 1979, p. 295). Therefore, in case of institutions, the mechanism in question of finding and evaluating appropriate rules and the corresponding resource allocation to enforce these rules (c.f. section 3.5) classically takes place through a political (majority) decision-process that can be influenced by rent-seeking. This first question that must be raised here is: Are institutions public goods according to its own definition? In order to answer this, one has first to accept that the mentioned characteristics of public goods are not always clearly identifiable in reality. This is because they can occur both separately and as a combination. Furthermore, institutional goods and services, such as public safety and legal services, like all other types of goods, can have a wide variety of forms and characteristics. Thus, they do not represent a uniform homogeneity of goods. A fixed, generally valid categorization of these types of goods into “non-rival” and “non-excludable” is therefore not possible (Hoppe, 1989, p.30 & 35). At best, tendencies toward these characteristics can be identified. In the case of security and legal services it can be stated more importantly that these services are also performed and thus subjectively evaluated in marginal units, e.g., by performance of security- or justice personnel. Therefore, it is not possible to assign a general non-rivalry to these services, as e.g., every “security personnel” is always in short supply in terms of time and space and binds specific resources to itself with each action (ibid, 1989, p.35; Rothbard, 1981, p.73; 1032). Regarding the private provision of public goods, however, the argument of non-excludability weighs much more than that of non-rivalry. The reason can be seen in the fact that “non-rivalry in consumption” is less of a problem for the providers, given they can exclude additional, “free” consumption (Hummel, 1990, p. 92). If this exclusion is not possible or only possible at too high a cost, consumers have the incentive to become free riders. These would thus be able to consume and use the good without paying for it (in full). It is argued then that a tax-financed provision is the only way to prevent this free-riding behavior. This is because all potential users now must pay for these types of goods, whether they want to or not. It must also be emphasized at this point that excludability is generally not a physically inherent property of a good. Rather, the degree of excludability results from economic calculation of the entrepreneur (Wiśniewski, 2018, p.43; Block, 2009, p. 144). If a certain degree of non-excludability occurs in the provision of goods, the entrepreneur must assess the extent to which this problem and a possible solution approach is transferred to the profit margin. If the effort to prevent free-riding results in an overall higher profit margin, the provider will be incentivized to solve this problem. If this effort to do so is too costly, the “problem” of free riding is not big enough to be solved. As long as the provider of such services can operate on a profit, value has been created. Tax-financed provision of such goods on the other hand can merely overshadow the free-rider problem by force and discourage ongoing, technologically innovative attempts by the entrepreneur to solve it. Moreover, and most importantly, tax-financed provision of such goods prevents the objective measurement necessary to determine whether value has been created at all with those goods. Thus, the fundamental problem with tax-financed or subsidized goods is that they prevent (undistorted) output and consequently input prices from forming for these goods. People’s real willingness to pay for precisely these goods and services, generated by supply and demand, can no longer be determined qua voluntary value judgment (exchange). Furthermore, the very concept of tax-financed goods and services must presuppose a priori that the individuals concerned would have preferred other alternatives in the form of other goods and services (or different prices for the same goods/services) without this tax financing. Otherwise, tax financing would not have been necessary (Hoppe, 1989, p. 32). Therefore, the providers of tax-financed goods can only guess roughly what people’s preferences would have been for these types of goods. The decision regarding the allocation of resources for these goods cannot be made based on economically rational criteria. The decision is subject to pure (political) arbitrariness (Rothbard, 1981, p.73). At the same time, tax financing also distorts the willingness to pay (the value judgements) for all those types of goods which would have been preferred with the disposable income in the absence of taxation. Therefore, tax financed provision of certain “public” goods, which seeks to prevent their presupposed underproduction, necessarily leads to a misallocation of resources and systematic underproduction of all other goods (ibid., p.83; Fielding, 1979, p. 296-97). 4.4. FPC as a Market-Based Discovery Process to Overcome Deficits of Government Services The general pricing-problems associated with public goods laid out in the arguments above can be solved quite easily in a FPC. Typical public goods such as public security and a legal system are based on an exclusive contract that cannot be changed arbitrarily or through political means. This contract is the exclusive prerequisite for access and entitlement to these services. Residents who for instance request additional security services beyond the basic provision detailed in the city-contract can conclude separate supplementary contracts. These contracts could also be agreed individually with third-party companies (Gebel, 2018, p.201). If this is the case, residents would thus enter individual contracts according to need and preference in addition to the generally applicable social contract. However, legal and security services enshrined in the social contract as well as for instance necessary basic infrastructure can also be provided via contractually bound third-party companies. An example of this is an external company that enters a contract with the PCP. Basically, the general advantage with a private security service provider or private court system is that there is a comparatively higher risk of customer dissatisfaction. It follows that in the case of private providers, especially due to competitive pressure, a drop in customer satisfaction is more strongly expressed by a lower willingness to pay. In addition, there is always the risk of contractual claims if the exchange services clearly defined in the contract are not met. The continued profit orientation therefore ensures a more customer-oriented willingness to provide services than would be the case (ceteris paribus) with a monopolized, tax-financed service. This is because private security service providers or private arbitration courts, for example, have a greater incentive to perform and monitor this performance due to reputational and competitive effects. These effects make it possible to ensure that rent-seeking attempts and corruption cannot take root within these companies. This is highly relevant in judicial decisions for example, because, unlike state court monopolies, these arbitrators are forced to exit the market if they perform poorly. Thus, as a result of direct customer feedback and entrepreneurial trial and error, certain inefficient services and products that are less in demand can be sorted out according to more rational criteria. This means that the products, processes, services, and overall allocation of resources that offer the greatest opportunity to create value, i.e., meet the most urgent needs, can be more easily identified. FPC thus enable (technological) innovations in the production of goods and services that would have remained undiscovered in the rest of the country due to its tax-funded and centrally planned nature (Hoppe, 1989, p. 36-37). This is especially important for institutions and the mechanism of finding appropriate, growth-supporting rules, as mentioned in section 3.5. A free market for institutions thus creates greater and more flexible room for finding a solution in case of property conflict (e.g., in case of externalities). Different approaches for resolving similar conflicts can be gradually tried out and continuously or incrementally adjusted. This mechanism allows the opportunity for the most marketable solutions to be filtered over time in the sense of “best practice sharing.” On the one hand, a secure regulatory framework that cannot be changed arbitrarily as offered in FPC can reinforce the growth drivers identified in Section 3. On the other hand, this “social contract” as a meta-rule still allows the market process to react flexibly and to find rules and conflict solutions at the micro level (Gebel, 2018, p. 188-9; Wiśniewski, 2018, p.82). Therefore, underdeveloped countries in particular, which, as Paul Romer (noble prize-winning economist and originator of the charter city concept) points out, are characterized by weak institutions and dysfunctional rules that inhibit growth (Romer & Fuller, 2012, p. 16), can draw indirect learning effects from the regulatory discovery mechanism within the FPC. As with SEZ in general, these learning effects can then be used as a knowledge base for nationwide reforms and regulatory adjustments. Thus, by means of FPC, host countries can for the first time use a market-based discovery process that is, unlike the common political discovery process, much less influenced by knowledge deficits and rent-seeking. Therefore, SEZ which are publicly funded or politically influenced represent controlled “top-down” experiments for specific reform changes. FPC, on the other hand, can be used as “bottom-up” test laboratories of a dynamic and spontaneous order with less vulnerabilities to the incentive and knowledge problem mentioned in section 3.5. 4.4.1. Excursus: A Market-Based Discovery Process for Money The arguments in favor of private institutions within a FPC and their effects on growth and development potential of a country can logically be applied to other types of classic government services (e.g., infrastructure, healthcare, and educational system). In principle, therefore, the discovery process described above is applicable to all those types of goods for which this process has been distorted or prevented by tax-financed provision, subsidization, or centrally planned regulatory interventions. Thus, at least in theory, basically all types of goods and services can be completely ceded to private third-party companies. That being said, FPC also provide a rare (if not the only) opportunity for mainstream economists to empirically test their hypotheses about the theory of public goods and their apparent inability to function (appropriately) on a private and voluntary basis. This is because, so far, all attempts to “empirically test” the provision of e.g., a systematic legal system and public security on a purely voluntary and private basis outside of taxation, have been distorted or prevented by government action. Therefore, FPC can also be used as scientific field experiments in the sense of Karl Popper and his followers of “Critical Rationalism” as the correct scientific method for economics. Back to the actual topic. In addition to the types of goods and services already mentioned, the market-based discovery process for money is of particular importance. As mentioned in section 3.4, this medium of exchange is crucial for an efficient coordination of division of labor and capital accumulation by means of economic calculation. Although money in the strict sense does not have the characteristics of public goods, nowadays it is ultimately provided by governments in practically every country. Therefore, from the point of view of the ASE, state money is subject to the same deficits as all other government services. This is because the central definition of a legal tender prevents alternative means of exchange from forming and developing dynamically and undistorted according to people’s needs. A currency competition (as suggested by Friedrich August von Hayek) in form of a market-based discovery process would therefore allow to find out which medium of exchange or banking system is preferred by individuals in their exchanges. Such competition can function particularly efficiently within an FPC. On the one hand, as with other types of goods, this discovery process takes place within a state-licensed and geographically limited test laboratory. Possible coordination problems and any initial friction with the state currency can thus be largely avoided. Especially for countries that want to undertake comprehensive reforms in their monetary system or for governments that are dissatisfied with the prevailing monetary policy, a market-based currency experiment within the FPC can provide the necessary orientation points. A recent example is the government of El Salvador which has allowed Bitcoin to be used as additional legal tender. To be sure, the centrally planned adoption of a private and decentralized means of payment, as is the case with certain cryptocurrencies, is certainly a possible approach to a currency competition. Nevertheless, as only one possible money-alternative is selected by government authorities, the actual market-based search process for appropriate money is still severely inhibited in this case. A money discovery process initiated by a local FPC in e.g., El Salvador for the time being would make it possible to find the most marketable form of money that can later be introduced as legal tender. 4.5. Knowledge Transfer Through Market-Based Pricing of Government Services The market-based discovery process within the FPC allows for yet another economically crucial learning effect. Since all goods and services within the FPC, especially those usually provided by the state through taxes, are exchanged voluntarily at the private level, objectively visible market prices can be derived for these services. As pointed out several times in the course of this article, crucial information about preferences generated through market prices are the one thing all governmental services must lack. Thus, FPC allow governments for the first time to roughly price their own services according to economically rational criteria. The conclusion is that these objectively visible market prices for governmental services generated in the FPC can be used by the host countries as relative reference points or benchmarks to economically rationalize their own services. This principle is similar to the mechanism of the former Soviet Union where central planners could access both international market prices and national black-market prices. These prices served as informational aid to their own economically irrational use of resources. Therefore, central decision makers had the option of adopting certain aspects of economic calculation. Nonetheless, the prices used for this purpose were only of limited value because they contained less information than the real, but not available market prices for the actual services provided (Rothbard, 1991, p. 73-74). Ludwig von Mises in particular emphasized that the use of resources in the Soviet Union could only be planned and coordinated at all because of the availability of these international market prices (Mises, 1998, p. 698-99). Using these benchmarked market prices then allow governments to better estimate if the resources for their services were used economically or not. This can be of particular importance in order to rationalize the own state budget and the resource deployment of public funds. Therefore, FPC offer not just concrete learning effects through a discovery process of government services itself (e.g., institutional set ups). However, governments are also able to access the subjectively hidden value judgments of recipients of government-like services due to being provided privately and voluntarily by FPC. More concretely, the relative willingness to pay of residents within the FPC can be extracted. Thus, it can be seen what the actual value preference is between certain “government services” and all other goods. Furthermore, it becomes apparent how much people are willing to pay relatively for security, jurisdiction, infrastructure, education, etc., outside an environment of coercion and force. At the same time, it also becomes clearer which other classic private good types, such as housing, food, entertainment, etc., are preferred at what price with the disposable income. Moreover, with the availability of market prices, it is not only the preference between certain types of goods that can be seen. Government decision-makers can also find out which allocation of resources within a particular type of good or service has the greatest potential to create value. For example, how much personnel, at what time, in what place, with what qualifications and equipment can be efficiently deployed to ensure public safety and the administration of a legal system in value adding way. In summary, the growth drivers mentioned in section 3 can only develop their full potential in a closely interlocked and mutually reinforcing network. Therefore, on the one hand, institutions and thus the protection of property and the possible emergence of market prices through voluntary exchange are the preconditions for the coordination of division of labor and capital accumulation through economic calculation. At the same time, however, institutions are not to be regarded as exogenous constructs detached from the other three growth drivers. Rather, institutions represent nothing more than specific services and goods. And like all other goods and services, institutions can only be efficiently or economically-rationally provided, enforced, and improved in the long run (and thus on a sustainable basis) through a market-price coordination mechanism of division of labor and capital accumulation. Conclusion The main objective of this article was to compare the impact of FPC with classical SEZ from a perspective of development economics. It was found that FPC can further strengthen the actual goals of SEZ and overcome many fundamental challenges associated with governmental services, funding, and organization of these zones. On the one hand, FPC can be an option with a comparatively low financial burden on the public budget of a country as it is the private city provider or its shareholders rather than the taxpayers of the respective country who bear the risk of financing and operating the zone. In addition, FPC provide a clear, contractually defined legal framework that is much less influenced by arbitrary, political (majority) decisions and rent-seeking. Within this contractually agreed framework, FPC also offer a wide scope for entrepreneurial flexibility. This in particular makes FPC highly attractive for FDI and resulting technological innovation and knowledge transfers to the rest of the country. In addition, the FPC can play a major role in promoting the goal of institutional learning associated with SEZ in general. Especially, structurally weak developing countries with institutional deficits, counterproductive rules and inefficient budget management have with FPC the opportunity to use for the first time a market-based discovery process for growth-promoting rules. Furthermore, by being able to access actual market prices for governmental services, host states of FPC can use this crucial information to economically rationalize the use of resources for their services. Nevertheless, not just developing countries, but also industrial states may be interested in using FPC. These countries can also use the FPC as a guide to streamline and economically rationalize their own over-bureaucratized and over-regulated processes and services. This is because there is no market price-based discovery process for government services and goods in both developing and industrialized countries. The possibility of continuous improvements of such zones and their contractual conditions (both for the contract with host states and with the inhabitants of the zone) lives on competition. This trial and error will ensure that the benefits of such zones are further extended and their challenged minimized. Thus, additional providers of similar zone concepts generate a kind of meta-discovery process. Especially in zones where private ownership and voluntary exchange are encouraged, the resulting market prices can provide increasingly more accurate information about the actual preferences for government services. The success of FPC can hopefully serve as a positive example for new projects. A corresponding competitive dynamic could thus lead to far-reaching imitation effects which could already be observed with SEZ in general. A clearly visible success of these zones could also bring about a fundamental rethinking not only among politicians, but also among the local population. From an economic point of view, one could see the general advantages of market-based processes, which unfortunately are being pushed more and more into the background nowadays. From the perspective of political philosophy, the success of a clearly defined and voluntary “social contract” on an equal footing rather than dictated unilaterally might encourage the individual to question the necessity for authority and state power in the first place. Literature Aggarwal, A. (2019). SEZs and economic transformation: towards a developmental approach. Transnational Corporations Journal, Vol. 26, No. 2. Akinci, G. & Crittle, J. (2008). Special economic zone: performance, lessons learned, and implication for zone development. Foreign Investment Advisory Service (FIAS) occasional paper. World Bank Group Washington D.C. Block, W., Hansen, P.H., Klein, P.G. (2007). The Division of Labor under Homogeneity: A Critique of Mises and Rothbard. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology Vol. 66, No. 2 (457-464). Block, W. (2009). The Privatization of Roads and Highways – Human and Economic Factors. The Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn. Buchanan, J.M., Tollison, R.D., Tullock, G. (1980). Toward a Theory of the Rent-Seeking Society. Texas a & M University Economics Series. Cordato, R. (2007). Efficiency and Externalities in an Open-Ended Universe: A Modern Austrian Perspective. The Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn. Fielding, K.T. (1979). Nonexcludability and Government Financing of Public Goods. Journal of Libertarian Studies 3, No.3, (293-298). Fuller, B. & Romer, P. (2012). Success and the City – How charter cities could transform the developing world. A Macdonald-Laurier-Institute Publication. Hachmeier, K &; Mösle, S. (2019). Sonderwirtschaftszonen und Industrieparks in Theorie und Praxis – unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Afrikas. Kieler Beiträge zur Wirtschaftspolitik, No. 23. Institut für Weltwirtschaft (IfW), Kiel. Holcombe, R.G. (1997). A Theory of the Theory of Public Goods. The Review of Austrian Economics Vol. 10, No. 1 (1-22). Hoppe, H.H. (2001). Democracy – The God that failed. The Economics and Politics of Monarchy, Democracy, and Natural Order. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Hoppe, H.H. (1989). Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security. The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. IX, No. 1 (27–46). Hoppe, H.H. (1983). Kritik der kausalwissenschaftlichen Sozialforschung – Untersuchungen zur Grundlegung von Soziologie und Ökonomie. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Hummel, J.R. (1990). National Goods Versus Public Goods: Defense, Disarmament, and Free Riders. The Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 4 (88-122). König, J. (2015). Hilflose Entwicklungshilfe? Argumente zu Marktwirtschaft und Politik Nr. 128. Stiftung Marktwirtschaft. Lachmann, L.M. (1971). The Legacy of Max Weber. Bereley: The Glendessary Press. Menger, C. (1871). Grundsätze der Volkswirtschaftslehre. Ludwig von Mises Institut Deutschland, München. Mises, L.v. (1981). Socialism – An Economic and Sociological Analysis. The Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn. Mises, L.v. (1998). Human Action – A Treatise on Economics. The Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn. Mises, L.v. (1990). Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth. The Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn. Mises, L.v. (2013). Kritik des Interventionismus – Untersuchungen zur Wirtschaftspolitik und Wirtschaftsideologie der Gegenwart. H. Akston Verlags GmbH, München. Moberg, L. (2015). The political economy of special economic zones. Journal of Institutional Economics, Vol. 11, No. 1 (167-190). North, D. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 2 (97-112). JSTOR. Pasour Jr., E.C. (1987). Rent Seeking: Some Conceptual Problems and Implications. The Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 1 (123-145). Rothbard, M.N. (2009). Man, Economy, and State, with Power and Market – Scholar´s Edition. The Ludwig von Mises Institute for Austrian Economics, Auburn. Rothbard, M.N. (1981). The Myth of Neutral Taxation. The Cato Journal (519-564); The Logic of Action Two. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 1997. (56-108). Rothbard, M.N. (1991). The End of Socialism and the Calculation Debate Revisited. The Review of Austrian Economics. Volume 5, No 2 (51-76). Ritenour, S. (2019). Toward a More Relevant Theory of Economic Expansion and Development: Insights from Ludwig von Mises. Revista Procesos de Mercado, Vol. 16, No. 2 (13-42). Schotter, A. (1981). The Economic Theory of Social Institutions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. UNCTAD – United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2019). World Investment Report 2019. Special Economic Zones. Vereine Nationen, Genf. Wiśniewski, J.B. (2018). The Economics of Law, Order, and Action. The Logic of Public Goods. Routledge. Wrobel, R.M. (2008). Sonderwirtschaftszonen in internationalen Wettbewerb der Wirtschaftssysteme: Ordnungspolitisches Konstrukt oder Motor institutionellen Wandels? Ordnungspolitische Diskurse, No. 2008-06. Ordnungspolitisches Portal (OPO). Zeng, D. Z. (2019). Special Economic Zones: Lessons from the Global Experience. PEDL Synthesis Series No. 1. Private Enterprise Development in Low Income Countries. --- # Las ZEDEs de Honduras: Pasado y Futuro URL: https://free-cities.org/las-zedes-de-honduras-pasado-y-futuro Published: 2025-06-02 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan El siguiente artículo se publicó originalmente en agosto de 2022. Relataba la historia completa de las ZEDEs hasta esa fecha, pero terminaba en un punto de incertidumbre sobre el futuro de las zonas. Aunque esa incertidumbre se ha mantenido e incluso se ha intensificado en los dos años y medio transcurridos desde entonces, mucho ha ocurrido mientras tanto, sobre todo en lo relativo a la batalla legal en curso entre las ZEDEs y el gobierno hondureño. La Ley Orgánica ZEDE fue derogada en abril del 2022 y con ella un capítulo en la historia de innovación gubernamental llega a su fin. Sin embargo, esto no significa que las ZEDEs existentes estén destinadas a la ruina o que las ideas que estas representas hayan fallado. Esto solo señaliza que pronto será necesario de enfrentar dificultosas negociaciones y el futuro, por el momento, es incierto. En las dos últimas décadas, Honduras ha sido escenario de notables avances. En este pequeño país latinoamericano, la innovación en la gobernanza ha tenido la oportunidad de ser explorada. Mientras que el modelo estándar de las Zonas Económicas Especiales se centra simplemente en las concesiones fiscales o aduaneras, la siguiente etapa de su desarrollo incluye la autonomía sobre áreas más amplias. En Honduras, estas jurisdicciones se conocen como ZEDEs, acrónimo para “Zona de Empleo y Desarrollo Económico”. Estas son regiones administrativas especiales mejoradas, diseñadas para permitir un mayor autogobierno y flexibilidad normativa, con el objetivo de crear un entorno jurídico y político estable que pueda atraer la inversión extranjera en beneficio de los hondureños. En contra de lo que a menudo afirman los medios de comunicación, las ZEDEs no son unos complejos turísticos privados de millonarios que se encuentran fuera de la soberanía hondureña, donde no hay ninguna regulación y los residentes no tienen ningún derecho. Por el contrario, las ZEDEs son entidades públicas, similares a los municipios, dentro del Estado de Honduras, dirigidas por funcionarios electos de origen hondureño, cuyas actividades son supervisadas por una comisión estatal hondureña. Están sujetas a la constitución hondureña, a los acuerdos internacionales de Honduras y al código penal hondureño. En los debates públicos, a menudo se afirma o se da por sentado que las ZEDEs tienen su origen en el extranjero, en la mente de empresarios visionarios o académicos idealistas. Pero esa narrativa, que hace hincapié en las influencias extranjeras, pasa por alto la parte central de la historia, que es que las ZEDEs fueron -y siguen siendo- hondureñas por encima de todo. Cómo surgieron las ZEDEs “Todo empezó con tres juristas hondureños: Octavio Sánchez, Carlos Pineda y Ebal Díaz”, dice Dr. Titus Gebel, presidente de la Free Cities Foundation. “Todo comenzó con su visión de ayudar a Honduras a abordar los graves problemas a los que el país se enfrentaba”. Sánchez, en particular, había tratado de encontrar la forma de reformar un país sumido en la corrupción, un débil Estado de Derecho y la pobreza resultante de ambos. Honduras ha estado durante mucho tiempo en los primeros puestos de la lista de países con más delitos violentos. Sin embargo, dar la vuelta a un país no es nada sencillo y, cuando Sánchez empezó a construir su carrera política, la perspectiva de una reforma generalizada parecía casi imposible. A principios de la década de 2000, Sánchez trabajaba para el futuro presidente Porfirio Lobo. Iniciaron una conversación con Mark Klugmann, un consultor de desarrollo estadounidense que había trabajado en las administraciones de Reagan y G.H.W. Bush. Klugmann había abogado por las llamadas zonas LEAP. La revista Reason escribe: “La idea de Klugmann argumenta que intentos fragmentado para reformar la economía entera de un país tienden a generar la oposición de poderosas coaliciones con intereses contrarios a la reforma. Por lo tanto, ¿por qué no intentar hacer las reformas de una sola vez, pero a un nivel más pequeño?” Si las reformas a fondo se intentaran realmente a escala local, esos experimentos podrían convertirse en faros de prosperidad que acabaran teniendo una influencia mucho más profunda en el resto del país, como ocurrió con Hong Kong y China. Los principios que defendía Klugmann convencieron a Sánchez, que siguió desarrollando estas ideas en el contexto hondureño. Finalmente, la creación de una nueva ciudad autónoma al estilo de Hong Kong en Honduras se convirtió en una poderosa visión compartida en los círculos de Sánchez. La idea de transformar la forma de gobernanza para lograr mayor prosperidad no es nada nueva. Se basa en la idea fundamental de la Nueva Economía Institucional de que, por muy capaces o talentosos que sean los ciudadanos, es casi imposible que mejoren su situación si la infraestructura institucional no sólo no facilita el crecimiento, sino que incluso crea más obstáculos para su desarrollo. Y en lo que respecta a Honduras, la mayoría de los observadores están de acuerdo: el pueblo hondureño es inteligente, capaz, trabajador y con ganas de crearse una vida mejor. Lo que se interpone en su camino es un impenetrable laberinto burocrático e institucional. Un escaparate en Honduras En 2010, Lobo se convirtió en presidente y Sánchez en su jefe de gabinete. Esta era su oportunidad; los Hong Kong hondureños podían ser por fin una realidad. Pero aún había un problema: ¿cómo vender algo tan poco ortodoxo al Congreso hondureño? En ese momento, apareció Paul Romer, un célebre economista galardonado con el Premio Nobel en economía, famoso por su defensa de las ciudades autónomas (Charter Cities en inglés). Las ideas de Romer parecían alinearse bien con las de Sánchez, los dos hombres empezaron a hablar y, en poco tiempo, Romer también apoyó a Honduras. Esto fue decisivo; fue la credibilidad internacional de Romer la que ayudó a convencer al Congreso. Así surgió la primera iteración de zonas especiales hondureñas: las RED (regiones especiales de desarrollo). Las RED eran tan prometedoras como ambiciosas. Se les iba a conceder una amplia autonomía en muchas áreas, lo que permitiría un salto sin precedentes en su sistema de gobernanza y el diseño institucional. Por ejemplo, tal y como se detalla en el Journal de las Jurisdicciones Especiales, se iba a permitir a las RED incluso “celebrar tratados y acuerdos internacionales”. Sin embargo, pidieron demasiado. Aunque la legislatura apoyó abrumadoramente la propuesta de las RED, ésta iba más allá de lo que, a ojos de la Corte Suprema de Honduras, permitía la Constitución hondureña. En octubre de 2012, un año después de la aprobación del estatuto constitucional de la RED, la Corte Suprema anuló la enmienda constitucional de la RED, lo que, en consecuencia, hizo que el propio estatuto de la RED fuera inconstitucional. Para entonces, la idea de las zonas especiales ya se enfrentaba a críticas sostenidas, aunque no se había establecido ninguna zona real sobre suelo hondureño. Durante el breve periodo en que la ley RED estuvo en vigor, surgieron conflictos entre las partes implicadas. Se había creado una Comisión de Transparencia para supervisar las RED, y es probable que a Romer se le había prometido extraoficialmente una posición de liderazgo en ella. Sin embargo, cuando el gobierno hondureño firmó un memorando de entendimiento con el empresario estadounidense Michael Strong para desarrollar la primera RED y Romer protestó por no haber sido consultado, resultó que nunca había sido designado formalmente para la Comisión. Romer se sintió dejado a lado y abandonó la escena hondureña poco después. Estos conflictos dieron munición a una pequeña pero ruidosa minoría de hondureños que se oponían firmemente a estas zonas especiales. Las denuncias de corrupción y neocolonialismo, y las afirmaciones de que los derechos de los indígenas estaban en peligro, comenzaron a difundirse en la prensa. “Los medios de comunicación de todo el mundo son deshonestos, pero yo diría que los medios de comunicación hondureños eran atrozmente deshonestos”, sostiene Strong, que en aquel momento trabajaba en el establecimiento de la primera zona especial. Strong sostiene que la actitud negativa de los medios de comunicación hacia las zonas no representaba en absoluto a la población en general. “En un momento dado, alguien dijo ‘cinco por ciento de los hondureños está en contra de esto por motivos anticapitalistas, otro cinco por ciento de los hondureños está en contra de esto por motivos nacionalistas o de soberanía, el noventa por ciento restante de los hondureños simplemente no cree que vaya a suceder – pero si lo hiciera, estarían encantados por los puestos de trabajo'”. Donde otros se rendirían, Sánchez y su equipo siguieron adelante. Tras la sentencia del Tribunal Supremo, se preparó una nueva versión mejorada de la legislación sobre zonas especiales. El problema con las RED había sido que el Tribunal Supremo consideraba que su diseño era una amenaza para la soberanía y la integridad territorial de Honduras. En la versión reformulada de la legislación, las RED se convirtieron en ZEDEs. Con este nuevo diseño, se limitó parte de la autonomía que antes tenían las RED y todas las reservas anteriores respecto a la soberanía se abordaron en una nueva enmienda constitucional que posteriormente fue impugnada de nuevo, pero esta vez aprobada por la Corte Suprema. La ley habilitadora de las nuevas zonas -la Ley Orgánica de las ZEDE– se aprobó entonces en septiembre de 2013 con otra abrumadora mayoría. Entre otras cosas, esta ley situó a las ZEDE de forma clara e inequívoca dentro del ordenamiento constitucional hondureño. En lugar de la antigua Comisión de Transparencia, se creó el Comité para la Adopción de Buenas Prácticas (CAMP) para supervisar las ZEDE. Con la ley de ZEDE en vigor y el CAMP establecido, las cosas pudieron empezar a avanzar. Sin embargo, la primera ZEDE, Próspera, tardó casi cuatro años en ser aprobada. Según el Journal de Jurisdicción Especial, que cita una fuente cercana pero anónima, “el retraso […] se ha atribuido a una combinación de luchas internas y mala gestión fiscal dentro de CAMP, una falta de interés real en el desarrollo de las ZEDEs por parte del presidente Hernández [que había asumido el cargo en enero de 2014], distracciones electorales y la huida de potenciales inversores en medio de la incertidumbre política”. Solo después de que uno de los tres precursores hondureños de las ZEDEs, Carlos Pineda, se convirtiera en secretario del CAMP en 2016, las cosas empezaron a avanzar. La ZEDE de Próspera fue aprobada en diciembre de 2017 y la de Ciudad Morazán un año después. Una tercera ZEDE -Orquidea- entró entonces en funcionamiento en junio de 2021. Una cuarta ZEDE, Mariposa, estaba cerca de su aprobación para el momento de las elecciones a finales de 2021. Cada uno de los tres proyectos existentes tiene ambiciones y visiones radicalmente diferentes para su desarrollo. Próspera se centra en la innovación gubernamental y tecnológica, la economía del conocimiento y la conexión de Honduras con empresas internacionales. Ciudad Morazán es una “ZEDE de cuello azul“, dirigida a los residentes de clase obrera y media, principalmente de Honduras. Orquidea no incluye ningún componente residencial, sino que se centra exclusivamente en la producción de frutas y verduras para la exportación. Gracias a la autonomía de la que goza el régimen de ZEDE, cada una de las tres zonas ha podido elegir el sistema legal y la normativa que más le conviene. Ciudad Morazán utiliza la mayor parte del código civil hondureño, Orquidea, orientada a la exportación, ha adoptado la ley del estado estadounidense de Delaware, y Próspera ha desarrollado y puesto en práctica un Código de Derecho Anglosajón (Common Law) de Roatán completamente nuevo, basado en las mejores prácticas de todo el mundo, junto con el innovador sistema jurídico de código abierto Ulex, desarrollado por el profesor de derecho de la Universidad de Chapman Tom W. Bell. Además, Próspera ha introducido un “acuerdo de convivencia” con cada uno de los residentes, otorgándoles derechos irrevocables y garantías de estabilidad jurídica. “Este es exactamente el tipo de innovación en la gobernanza del que siempre hablo”, dice Dr. Titus Gebel. “Se puede ver en la práctica. Aquí dijeron: ‘Oye, vamos a probar cosas diferentes’, y ya tienes tres ZEDEs con tres modelos muy diferentes”. Lo que estos proyectos tienen en común es el objetivo de crear oportunidades, estabilidad y prosperidad para los hondureños de una forma que no es posible llevar a cabo en otros lugares del país. La primera hilera de casas ocupadas y un parque en Ciudad Morazán. Perdiendo la batalla por la legitimidad A medida que crecía la actividad en torno a estas ZEDEs, también crecía la oposición. Desde los opositores ideológicos hasta los intereses arraigados, las ZEDEs han sido objeto de feroces ataques. Las acusaciones de mala conducta o incluso de mala intención empezaron a surgir por todas partes, alimentadas entre el público preocupado sobre todo por actores cuyas posiciones de poder se veían de alguna manera amenazadas por las ZEDEs o cuya alineación ideológica era incompatible con ellas. Massimo Mazzone, fundador de Ciudad Morazán, afirma que las críticas más comunes a su proyecto han sido también las que más fácilmente se han demostrado falsas o inexactas. El ángulo que ha recibido quizás la mayor cobertura a lo largo de los años es la expropiación. La acusación, amplificada y repetida por la prensa, es que las ZEDEs amenazan con despojar a los nativos de sus tierras y bienes inmuebles o incluso participan directamente en su expropiación. Estas críticas apuntan a una cláusula de expropiación incluida en la ley ZEDE (artículo 25). Sin embargo, este artículo sólo reserva el derecho de expropiación de tierras al Estado de Honduras, no a las propias ZEDE. Esto tiene sentido en el panorama general, ya que las ZEDEs no tienen jurisdicción sobre las tierras que se encuentran fuera de los límites de sus zonas aprobadas. Además, según Mazzone, esto no es más que una pista falsa: “Independientemente de lo que diga la ley de ZEDE, [el Estado de] Honduras ya tiene el dominio eminente. Por ejemplo, si alguien quiere construir una autopista o un oleoducto, si tiene buenos contactos y si puede convencer al gobierno de que lo haga, puede expropiar con o sin la ley ZEDE bajo el dominio eminente regular, que desgraciadamente es común en todo el mundo”. En referencia a Ciudad Morazán, añade: “Por supuesto, para nosotros esa práctica es éticamente monstruosa. Nos oponemos totalmente a cualquier tipo de expropiación. Nunca la realizaríamos porque es repelente desde el punto de vista ético y sería suicida desde el punto de vista político.” Aunque son perfectamente razonables, estas declaraciones conciliadoras de las ZEDEs no suelen ser especialmente eficaces para frenar los ataques que se lanzan de mala fe en primer lugar. En un artículo hostil que da a los comentarios sobre la expropiación un aire de legitimidad, el North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA) relata el establecimiento de Próspera, destacando que los lugareños han llegado a “entender que el gobierno municipal ya no tiene jurisdicción sobre las 58 hectáreas ahora incorporadas al modelo de ZEDE. Los terrenos han sido supuestamente transferidos del registro municipal a un registro de la propiedad independiente de Próspera ZEDE”. A esto le sigue inmediatamente la afirmación: “El despojo de tierras es una preocupación esencial de las comunidades”. Es evidente que los autores están interesados sobre todo en pintar a Próspera como un villano, independientemente del contenido real de sus acciones. El traspaso de competencias al catastro de Próspera ZEDE no constituye ningún tipo de despojo, sino más bien un cambio de adscripción municipal. También se pierde en esta historia el hecho de que los terrenos en cuestión eran de propiedad privada, previamente desocupados, y legítimamente comprados por los afiliados a Próspera, lo que significa que el mencionado cambio de adscripción municipal se llevó a cabo con el pleno consentimiento de los propietarios. Dado que Próspera ha estado en el centro de muchos de estos problemas de expropiación, ha dejado claro en repetidas ocasiones que no quiere tener nada que ver con esas prácticas. Los representantes de Próspera se remiten a sus Estatutos, que no incluyen la facultad de expropiación en su lista de competencias (artículo 2.04), así como a una Resolución de 2020 que descarta inequívocamente toda expropiación y reafirma el compromiso de Próspera de incorporar terrenos únicamente a petición de los propietarios. Como se ha señalado anteriormente, todos los terrenos incorporados a Próspera son de propiedad privada y estaban deshabitados antes de convertirse en ZEDE. Además, se ha prestado especial atención a la claridad de los títulos de propiedad correspondientes, que en Honduras suelen ser conflictivos o incompletos. Sin embargo, a pesar de todas estas garantías y de la seriedad con la que Morazán y Próspera abordan el tema de la equidad y la consensualidad, esta línea de ataque ha perseverado. Por ejemplo, en un artículo reciente se repite acríticamente la afirmación de que “las áreas trazadas para la construcción de la ZEDE son tierras ancestrales de la comarca garífuna que han sido habitadas por los indígenas durante miles de años. Por lo tanto, la construcción de las ZEDEs provocaría el desplazamiento masivo de la población nativa”. No debería ser necesario reiterar que el desarrollo de tierras deshabitadas no puede conducir a ningún desplazamiento y, por lo tanto, tales afirmaciones no tienen ninguna conexión con la realidad. En un ejemplo aún más escandaloso de aparente mala intención, otro artículo intenta difamar a las ZEDE recordándolas junto a ejemplos de crímenes violentos, dejando al lector desprevenido con la impresión de que los representantes de las ZEDE son de alguna manera criminales organizados que trabajan con el gobierno para oprimir a los lugareños. El artículo presenta a un lugareño que tiene miedo de las ZEDE a pesar de que éstas no han hecho nada para amenazarle o perjudicarle. En un caso de supuesto desplazamiento que los autores describen de la peor manera posible, se admite sin embargo que no se ha expropiado realmente ninguna tierra. Estos ejemplos de cobertura deshonesta o directamente basa en la fantasía de sus autores se convirtieron con el tiempo en el pan de cada día para las ZEDEs. Por ejemplo, en un aluvión de acusaciones y denuncias, el Centro Nacional de Trabajadores del Campo (CNTC) afirmó que los “impactos sociales” de las ZEDEs incluyen “el desplazamiento forzado, el aumento de la conflictividad y la violencia, la pérdida del patrimonio cultural, la migración y el aumento de la represión de las protestas”. No se explicaba en qué se basaban estas acusaciones tan atroces, casi como si fuera un conocimiento común que no necesitaba ninguna justificación en primer lugar. Estas caracterizaciones son sorprendentemente absurdas. Como ya se ha señalado, todas las ZEDE se han establecido en terrenos no ocupados, por lo que nunca ha habido posibilidad de ningún desplazamiento, y mucho menos “forzado”. Las ZEDE no han ejercido ningún tipo de violencia, ya que su misión es puramente pacífica, legal y productiva. Las ZEDEs no han provocado ninguna migración, excepto cuando la gente se ha desplazado hacia las ZEDEs para seguir las oportunidades de trabajo creadas en ellas. No ha habido ninguna protesta dentro de las ZEDEs, por lo que no se ha podido reprimir ninguna protesta allí; y en cuanto a las protestas que se producen fuera de las ZEDEs, éstas no tienen jurisdicción sobre la aplicación de la ley allí y no tienen poder para tomar ninguna decisión sobre cómo se responderá a las protestas. Por lo tanto, más que ser críticas genuinas, estas acusaciones parecen ser lanzadas sólo por razones de publicidad y de beneficio político personal. Entre otras consecuencias negativas, estas afirmaciones destructivas han llevado a la Universidad Técnica de Múnich (TUM) a desistir de sus intenciones de abrir un campus en Próspera, debido a los “indicios de violación de los derechos humanos”. Nos pusimos en contacto con la TUM para preguntar cómo, en su opinión, se podían violar los derechos humanos si sólo se habían incorporado a Próspera zonas deshabitadas, pero la Universidad no proporcionó más aclaraciones. Corrección: Después de que la TUM cesara su compromiso con Próspera, la Universidad emitió una carta en la que afirmaba que no tenía “ninguna evidencia de violaciones de los derechos humanos en o por parte de Honduras Próspera” y que la retirada de Honduras había sido “resultado de un cambio en la dirección” y de una “reorientación del enfoque empresarial.” En cuanto a la oposición organizada a las ZEDEs, Mazzone señala que hay muchas organizaciones con intereses creados cuyos poderes se han visto amenazados por las ZEDEs. Entre ellas se encuentra la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Honduras (UNAH), que goza de un monopolio sobre las licencias de otras universidades (privadas) del país. Si antes sólo se podían fundar universidades con la bendición de la UNAH, pero ahora cualquiera puede establecer una dentro de una ZEDE, eso es una amenaza directa al monopolio de la UNAH. Los sindicatos son otro ejemplo de estos intereses creados. Dado que el código laboral hondureño no se aplica dentro de las ZEDE, el poder de los sindicatos se ve así disminuido. Un principio similar se aplica a la asociación de abogados hondureños: si las ZEDEs pueden optar por adoptar un marco de derecho anglosajón (Common Law) en lugar del derecho civil hondureño (como ha hecho Próspera), eso disminuye el mercado potencial para los abogados locales formados en derecho civil. A esta lista de oposición institucional, Titus Gebel añade que parte de la reacción proviene de figuras relacionadas con las maquilas -zonas francas hondureñas basadas en la exportación que no gozan de tantas concesiones y a las que las ZEDEs suponen un reto competitivo. La imagen pública de Próspera no se ha visto favorecida por la difícil relación de la zona con su vecino inmediato, el pueblo de Crawfish Rock, en la isla de Roatán. Desde su creación, Próspera ha realizado actividades de divulgación y asistencia a la comunidad de Crawfish Rock, tratando de establecer relaciones positivas y productivas. Próspera comenzó a ofrecer préstamos para pequeñas empresas, talleres de carpintería y programas extraescolares a la población de Crawfish Rock. Se construyó un edificio comunitario a cargo de Próspera. Más tarde, se creó un grupo de ahorro e inversión mutua entre los lugareños. Próspera también organizó autobuses escolares diarios para los niños del pueblo, cubriendo el 95% del coste. Además, desde que se puso en marcha, Próspera ha proporcionado empleo a muchos residentes de Crawfish Rock, principalmente a través de los proyectos de construcción en la zona. Incluso a mediados de 2022, alrededor del 10% de la población de Crawfish Rock está empleada en Próspera. Trabajadores en una obra de construcción en Roatán Próspera. Sin embargo, la ZEDE encontró su oposición cuando conectó el pueblo a su suministro de agua, proporcionando agua corriente donde la única fuente en el pueblo había sido el suministro de camiones cisterna que resultó ser poco fiable debido a los problemas de la cadena de suministro durante la pandemia de Covid. Próspera no tardó en enterarse de que los representantes de la comunidad local, cuya posición de poder se veía amenazada por los nuevos grifos de Próspera, habían vendido el agua del camión a los habitantes del pueblo. Al poco tiempo, acusaron a Próspera de aprovecharse de los lugareños cobrando por el agua, a pesar de que el suministro del camión también había tenido que pagarse (y a un precio más alto), y de que Próspera había preguntado a los lugareños cuál era el precio que ellos consideraban justo por el nuevo acceso al agua, y luego les había cobrado esa cantidad. Además, durante la pandemia Covid, Próspera dejó de facturar por completo y proporcionó agua al pueblo de forma gratuita. Uno de los ángulos de la presión de los líderes locales contra Próspera fue su supuesta intención de incorporar Crawfish Rock a la ZEDE, presumiblemente en contra de los deseos de los lugareños. Es cierto que, en su página web, Próspera mostró una visualización que incluía a la comunidad vecina como parte de una visión para el desarrollo futuro. Aunque esto fue ciertamente un gran descuido publicitario por parte de Próspera, se basó en la suposición de que la comunidad se uniría a la ZEDE voluntariamente mediante un referéndum, tal y como establece el artículo 38 de la ley de ZEDE. Como ya se ha señalado, estos referendos, junto con la decisión de los propietarios de las zonas no habitadas de adherirse, son las únicas vías legalmente permitidas para que Próspera crezca. Próspera siempre ha tenido cuidado de mantener un rastro de papel de sus actividades para defenderse de la desinformación promulgada por la prensa. Por eso, cuando se enteró de que los dirigentes de Crawfish Rock querían restablecer el suministro de agua de su antiguo camión, les pidió una confirmación por escrito de que estaban interesados en mantener el agua de Próspera y de que pagarían las facturas acordadas mutuamente. Aunque los dirigentes no hablen realmente en nombre de muchos (quizá la mayoría) de los habitantes de la zona, Próspera no está en condiciones de ignorarlos y eludirlos. Por lo tanto, cuando los líderes locales no mostraron interés en la continuidad del servicio, Próspera procedió a retirar su suministro. Este episodio se difundió posteriormente en la prensa internacional para pintar a Próspera como un villano que intentaba someter a la población local a la fuerza. No es de extrañar que los detractores no estuvieran interesados en contar una historia real. La isla de Roatán, sede principal de la ZEDE de Próspera. El complejo turístico Pristine Bay, ahora parte de Próspera, en primer plano. Con el paso de los años, las redes sociales hondureñas se llenaron de preocupaciones y afirmaciones que no se basaban en la realidad pero que, sin embargo, se repetían hasta la saciedad, alimentadas por la desinformación generalizada que perpetuaba la prensa. Un ejemplo destacado es la afirmación de que el marco ZEDE es supuestamente “ilegal” porque ha sido declarado inconstitucional. Esto simplemente no es cierto. Como se ha recordado anteriormente, fue el régimen RED el que fue considerado inconstitucional por el Tribunal Supremo y el marco ZEDE fue entonces explícitamente diseñado para rectificar las deficiencias constitucionales de su predecesor, que el Tribunal reconoció y confirmó. Sin embargo, se siguieron publicando artículos en los que se confundían ambas cosas y se hacían juicios jurídicos y morales sobre esa base. El gran volumen de críticas y de enfado en Internet creó la impresión de que todo el país estaba en contra de las ZEDEs y que el público era unánime en su denuncia. A pesar de todo, una observación en la que parecen coincidir muchos de los defensores de las ZEDEs es que, siempre que las críticas se manifiestan de forma genuina por parte de los ciudadanos de a pie, suelen tener su origen en la falta de información sobre lo que son las ZEDEs. “No hay oposición de base a la ley ZEDE una vez que la gente entiende en qué consiste realmente”, explica Gebel. Las encuestas también apoyan la idea de que la oposición a las ZEDE sólo está organizada por una minoría ruidosa de actores e intereses creados con motivación política o ideológica, y que nunca ha habido un movimiento amplio contra las zonas. Pero en algún momento, la fuerza combinada de los intereses en contra ahoga un auténtico debate sobre las ventajas e inconvenientes de las zonas especiales. En política, a menudo no gana el bando más popular, sino el más ruidoso y visible. A finales de 2021, estaba claro que las ZEDEs habían perdido la batalla por su legitimidad. El accidentado camino que queda por recorrer Cuando la prensa negativa estaba en su punto más alto, fue fácil para la líder de la oposición, Xiomara Castro, incluir la posición anti ZEDE como uno de los principales ejes de su campaña presidencial. Cuando salió victoriosa a finales de 2021, prometió acabar con las ZEDEs, a las que consideraba vehículos de explotación extranjera, una posición que se resumía en el omnipresente eslogan “Honduras no se vende.” En abril de 2022, el Congreso votó la derogación de la Ley Orgánica de las ZEDE e inició el proceso de derogación de las enmiendas constitucionales que habían permitido la aprobación de la ley en 2013. Sin embargo, el proceso aún no ha concluido. A principios de 2023 tendrá lugar otra votación para confirmar o rechazar el cambio constitucional. En el momento de escribir este artículo, el gobierno sigue siendo ambiguo sobre los próximos pasos que dará. Además, incluso con la ley derogada, esto sólo significa que no se pueden crear nuevas ZEDEs. Esta parte ha sido bastante fácil, pero deshacerse de las ZEDEs existentes podría resultar muy costoso para Castro y su partido. Tanto en declaraciones públicas como en entrevistas recientes, los representantes de Próspera han dejado claro que, en lo que a ellos respecta, la derogación de la ley no cambia nada para ellos. Entre otros instrumentos legales, señalan la protección de los inversores en forma de tratados internacionales que Honduras ha firmado. Estos incluyen acuerdos de estabilidad jurídica que garantizan el estatus de las ZEDEs existentes durante los próximos cincuenta años. Por lo tanto, la supresión de las ZEDEs existentes y de su correspondiente estatus jurídico supondría el incumplimiento de estas obligaciones, lo que haría a Honduras responsable de enormes daños. Próspera ya se ha asociado con White & Case de Nueva York, un bufete de abogados de renombre internacional en este campo jurídico, para que la represente en este conflicto. Sea cual sea el resultado, uno de los efectos probables de esta controversia es ahuyentar a algunos inversores que no se sienten cómodos enfrentándose a semejante presión política. Ha terminado una época para las ZEDEs, una época en la que, a pesar de los ataques de mala fe de varios grupos, el gobierno hondureño estaba esencialmente de su lado. Titus Gebel lo considera una oportunidad perdida, y lamenta que se haya perdido tanto tiempo por la inacción entre 2013 y 2017. Si las ZEDEs hubieran empezado a desarrollarse antes, podría haber sido más difícil oponerse políticamente a ellas ahora. “Si hubieras tenido -diría- cuatro años más, entonces se habrían creado muchos puestos de trabajo, la gente estaría viviendo en las ZEDEs con seguridad, disfrutando de una mayor calidad de vida… Lo mismo ocurrió en los años 80 con las maquilas. Hubo mucha oposición a ellas, pero después de que se crearon los primeros veinte mil empleos, ningún partido ha querido deshacerse de las maquilas desde entonces. Lo mismo habría ocurrido con las ZEDEs; especialmente en Morazán, que podrían ofrecer increíbles mejoras en todos los aspectos de la vida para el trabajador medio hondureño de esa región.” Un terreno en Ciudad Morazán a la espera de ser urbanizado. La nueva construcción se ha paralizado en la ZEDE debido a la reciente incertidumbre política. Aunque la fortuna no ha estado del lado de las ZEDEs, éstas han atraído a muchos innovadores y emprendedores durante su corta vida, que ya han generado una considerable innovación en el campo de la gobernanza. Se han creado varios conceptos nuevos, como las Cartas de las ZEDE de tipo constitucional; un código de derecho común completo basado en el concepto de sistema jurídico de código abierto Ulex; un sistema de registro y transferencia de tierras electrónico; y un Contrato Ciudadano, por nombrar sólo algunos. Estas innovaciones han sido desarrolladas y probadas en Honduras y pueden ser reimplantadas en futuros proyectos en todo el mundo, incluso si las ZEDE fueran abolidas por completo. Pero a pesar de las oportunidades perdidas, el sueño hondureño aún no ha terminado. Los emprendedores fundadores que han luchado por las zonas especiales hondureñas siguen trabajando para llevar el progreso y la prosperidad a Honduras. Ahora cuentan con el apoyo de destacados expertos en numerosos campos, ya sean empresarios, abogados, arquitectos, inversores o visionarios. En 2013, la revista Reason comentó que “para convertirse en un pionero del siglo XXI [en modelos de gobernanza], Honduras -o al menos un pequeño territorio dentro de ella- debe convertirse, bueno, en no Honduras.” Pero eso nunca ha sido cierto. Las ZEDEs son una idea y un proyecto hondureños. Son un intento popular de llevar una nueva esperanza a un país que se ha quedado sin opciones. La esperanza vive ahora en las tres ZEDE existentes. Pero las elecciones van y vienen, y tal vez, cuando los vientos cambien de nuevo, toda Honduras se beneficiará de un caleidoscopio de ZEDEs, experimentando con mejoras en los sistemas e instituciones para ofrecer un mundo mejor para todos nosotros. Addendum: la evolución jurídica en Honduras desde 2022 Publicado en junio de 2025 En los últimos dos años y medio, el conflicto entre las ZEDEs y el gobierno hondureño no ha hecho más que intensificarse. Desde que asumió el poder en 2021, el gobierno ha continuado su cruzada contra las ZEDEs. Su objetivo ha sido siempre abolirlas por completo y sin dejar rastro. En 2022, cuando se derogó la Ley Orgánica de las ZEDEs (el primer paso importante de este proceso), ya estaba claro que el gobierno pretendía negar prácticamente el pasado y borrar los derechos adquiridos de los inversionistas en las ZEDEs, un objetivo muy controvertido que contraviene uno de los principios básicos del derecho y de la justicia: que ninguna ley debe aplicarse de forma retroactiva. Los pasos para alcanzar ese objetivo comenzaron a darse de inmediato. Maniobras políticas A lo largo de su mandato, la Presidenta y el partido gobernante recurrieron a prácticas que en el mejor de los casos resultaban muy dudosas y en el peor abiertamente inconstitucionales para colocar a militantes leales en posiciones clave de poder, a menudo aprovechando vacíos constitucionales o zonas grises del ordenamiento jurídico. Como primer paso tras asumir el poder, Castro instaló a Luis Redondo como nuevo Presidente del Congreso. Ese cargo exigiría normalmente una votación mayoritaria en el parlamento recién electo, mayoría que Redondo no obtuvo, porque 18 diputados del oficialista Libre optaron por votar a otro candidato, Jorge Cálix, junto con la oposición. En aquel momento había una escisión dentro del partido y Cálix era uno de los nombres principales de la facción rival. Como reacción, Cálix y los 18 diputados mencionados fueron expulsados del partido. Castro y su esposo, Manuel Zelaya, fundador de Libre y líder informal dentro del partido, procedieron a «encabezar una turba dentro del Congreso», según lo describe Jorge Colindres, Secretario Técnico de Próspera ZEDE. Tras haber sido aparentemente forzado a ceder, Cálix renunció a su cargo de Presidente del Congreso, el puesto pasó al elegido de Castro, Redondo, y tanto Cálix como los 18 diputados fueron readmitidos en el partido. Pocos meses después, fue el nuevo Presidente del Congreso, Redondo, quien encabezó el proceso de derogación de la ley ZEDE sin haber sido debidamente electo para su cargo: después de que Cálix diera un paso al costado, no hubo ninguna votación adicional para elegir a Redondo. Le siguió la cuestión de la Corte Suprema. Los magistrados de esta corte son elegidos por períodos de siete años y la elección más reciente tuvo lugar en febrero de 2023. Estuvo marcada por un intenso desacuerdo y por maniobras políticas de Castro y su partido, que parecieron dar buen resultado. Siete de los quince magistrados de la Corte Suprema terminaron siendo candidatos afines a Libre, incluida, como presidenta de la Corte, Rebeca Ráquel, tía política de la hija de Manuel Zelaya. La oposición sostuvo que la corte había sido «copada» por Libre de varias maneras. Primera: Libre había construido una fuerte influencia sobre la Junta Nominadora, el órgano que selecciona en primer lugar a los candidatos a magistrado. Segunda: el recién empoderado Presidente del Congreso, Redondo, había retrasado la votación sobre los nominados hasta que las negociaciones favorecieran a Libre. Tercera: hubo una notoria falta de transparencia durante todo el proceso, lo que sugiere que Castro y Redondo probablemente encabezaron un esfuerzo por alinear la corte aún más estrechamente con sus intereses, especialmente durante la selección interna de los miembros de la Sala de lo Constitucional; ello se ve reforzado por el hecho de que varios magistrados tienen vínculos familiares y personales con altos cargos de Libre. La Corte Suprema, y en particular la Sala de lo Constitucional, desempeñaría más tarde un papel clave en el siguiente movimiento del gobierno en su lucha contra las ZEDEs. El último paso, un año y medio después, fue colocar a un leal como Fiscal General. La Comisión Permanente del Congreso Nacional, encabezada por Redondo, designó a Johel Zelaya (sin parentesco con el esposo de la Presidenta) sin la mayoría requerida de 86 votos en el pleno del Congreso. Debido a un bloqueo en el Congreso, a finales de octubre de 2023 no se había alcanzado un acuerdo sobre el siguiente Fiscal General, dos meses después de que terminara el período anterior, sobre todo por las dudas acerca de la elegibilidad y la integridad de Zelaya. Había sido acusado de falsificación de documentos y de perjurio en relación con su anterior papel político activo, lo que (al menos sobre el papel) le impediría ser Fiscal General. Sus otros cargos de entonces implicaban además un posible conflicto de intereses. La Constitución hondureña no prevé ningún procedimiento para este supuesto, lo que deja un vacío legal que fue aprovechado por la Comisión Permanente copada por Libre, que invocó su competencia bajo el artículo 202 para atender asuntos urgentes durante los recesos. Votó por unanimidad nombrar a Zelaya Fiscal General interino, argumentando que era necesario para evitar un vacío de poder en la institución. Aunque la oposición denunció la maniobra sosteniendo que la Comisión no tiene la facultad de hacer nombramientos significativos, menos aún los que requieren una supermayoría en el Congreso, Zelaya permaneció en su cargo interino hasta ser finalmente confirmado por el Congreso en 2024, como parte de un acuerdo entre Libre y los partidos de oposición que, según se informó, se pactó bajo presión, pues Libre amenazaba con procesar a legisladores opositores y copar los órganos electorales únicamente con representantes de Libre. Mediante estas maniobras, la Presidenta Castro y Libre han consolidado en los últimos años su control sobre instituciones estatales clave en Honduras, que después pudieron utilizar, entre otras cosas, en su lucha contra las ZEDEs. La respuesta de Próspera Como se señaló antes, la Ley Orgánica de las ZEDEs fue derogada el 25 de abril de 2022. Sin embargo, el marco de las ZEDEs no comprendía únicamente la ley, sino también reformas constitucionales que las consagraban con mayor firmeza en el ordenamiento jurídico hondureño. Al mismo tiempo que la derogación se aprobó también un decreto destinado a derogar esas reformas constitucionales. Ahora bien, la legislación hondureña exige que las reformas constitucionales sean aprobadas por dos legislaturas ordinarias consecutivas con una supermayoría de dos tercios. Aunque la primera votación (en abril de 2022) prosperó, no hubo ninguna votación posterior sobre ese decreto en la legislatura siguiente antes de que concluyera, el 31 de octubre de 2023. Esa falta de ratificación significa que la Constitución nunca fue reformada y que, hasta el día de hoy, sigue conteniendo los artículos que sustentan a las ZEDEs. Es probable que la segunda votación no se celebrara por lo ocurrido mientras tanto. El 20 de diciembre de 2022, Próspera presentó una demanda de arbitraje internacional ante el Centro Internacional de Arreglo de Diferencias relativas a Inversiones (CIADI). Alegó que la derogación de la ley ZEDE vulneraba los derechos adquiridos de los inversionistas internacionales en la ZEDE, cuya estabilidad jurídica debía estar garantizada y protegida por tratados internacionales durante un período de 50 años. La posición oficial aparente del gobierno era que las ZEDEs no existen y nunca han existido. Sin embargo, las ZEDEs estaban claramente consagradas en la Constitución, de modo que la posición del gobierno carecía manifiestamente de justificación. De manera más concreta y adicional, Próspera argumentó que el gobierno venía saboteando las operaciones de la ZEDE, de forma tanto sutil como abierta, en lugar de la cooperación de buena fe que debería haber existido. Ello incluyó diversas actuaciones expropiatorias, como retirar el servicio aduanero a las ZEDEs o negarles la exención del impuesto sobre ventas nacional (algo que mantiene hasta hoy). El gobierno también presionó a los organismos nacionales de banca y seguros para, a todos los efectos, excluir del sistema financiero a la jurisdicción, lo que incluyó el cierre de las cuentas de residentes y empresas de la ZEDE. A todo ello se sumó una campaña de difamación y calumnia contra las ZEDEs. Aunque la prensa internacional no la recogió de inmediato, la demanda de arbitraje se convirtió en un gran tema a lo largo de los dos años siguientes. Y de nuevo se presentó a Próspera sobre todo bajo una luz negativa. Se la volvió a acusar de «neocolonialismo» y de «explotar» el mecanismo de resolución de controversias. La habitualmente prestigiosa Foreign Policy publicó lo que equivalía a un artículo demoledor, repitiendo todas las falsedades y tergiversaciones habituales sobre las ZEDEs, como si no hubieran sido ya desmentidas una y otra vez. En febrero de 2024, en respuesta tanto a la demanda de Próspera como a otras demandas ante el CIADI (ajenas a Próspera) que se habían acumulado durante el mandato del gobierno actual, Honduras anunció que abandonaría el CIADI tras 35 años de membresía. El retiro se hizo efectivo el 25 de agosto de 2024. Aunque el arbitraje del CIADI ya no está disponible para nuevas controversias que involucren a Honduras, ello no afecta a ningún procedimiento iniciado antes de la fecha efectiva del retiro. Por espectacular que fuera la medida, no cambia nada para Honduras en lo que respecta al caso de Próspera. Como se insinuó antes, probablemente fue esta demanda de arbitraje la que hizo que el Congreso hondureño se lo pensara dos veces antes de ratificar la derogación de las reformas constitucionales que habilitaban a las ZEDEs en la primavera de 2023. El gobierno se exponía ahora a una suma enorme de dinero si seguía adelante con un movimiento tan precipitado y agresivo. La oposición no lo respaldaría a menos que existiera un acuerdo con las ZEDEs para salvaguardar los empleos y las inversiones realizadas en ellas, algo que el gobierno actual nunca ha intentado. Una Corte Suprema desbocada El 20 de septiembre de 2024, la Corte Suprema de Honduras declaró inconstitucionales las ZEDEs. Argumentó que las reformas constitucionales que las habilitaban vulneraban otros artículos «pétreos» de la Constitución relativos a la organización territorial, al sistema de justicia y al régimen económico. La Corte Suprema se ocupó del asunto de las ZEDEs después de que la UNAH, la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Honduras, presentara un recurso. Aunque pueda parecer una institución extraña para involucrarse en la cuestión de las ZEDEs, los motivos son bastante claros. La UNAH ha gozado de un monopolio consagrado constitucionalmente sobre la educación superior en Honduras: todas las universidades privadas, así como todos los cambios en los planes de estudio, deben contar con su aprobación. Ese monopolio se veía amenazado por el marco de las ZEDEs, bajo el cual esas disposiciones constitucionales no se aplican. Si las ZEDEs acababan creciendo y teniendo verdadero éxito, la UNAH podría perder su control sobre el sector de la educación superior. Sin embargo, la Corte Suprema decidió ir más allá de resolver el recurso de la UNAH. En lugar de revisar únicamente los aspectos de las ZEDEs relacionados con la educación, se volvió contra el marco jurídico en su conjunto. La declaración de inconstitucionalidad fue un anuncio sísmico y provocó reacciones en todos los frentes. Próspera advirtió de inmediato que declarar inconstitucionales las ZEDEs desestabilizaría aún más la confianza de los inversionistas, en particular la de los estadounidenses, y dañaría las relaciones internacionales de Honduras. Doscientos cincuenta trabajadores locales y miembros de la comunidad firmaron una carta abierta contra el fallo. El analista jurídico Fernando Gonzáles advirtió de que los daños derivados del ataque continuado contra las ZEDEs podrían situarse entre 12.000 y 13.000 millones de dólares si el gobierno no negocia con los inversionistas para evitar un litigio internacional. En la misma línea, la abogada y política Maribel Espinoza pidió al gobierno que intentara alcanzar un acuerdo para no enfrentarse a una carga financiera inmensa por perder el arbitraje. Un aspecto clave del fallo echó más leña al fuego: la Corte anunció que la sentencia se aplicaría de forma retroactiva, creando la ficción jurídica de que las ZEDEs no solo no existen en el presente, sino que nunca existieron. Esta retroactividad es verdaderamente inédita en Honduras y fue precisamente lo que colmó el vaso para muchas personas, incluso para quienes antes simpatizaban más con las acciones del gobierno contra las ZEDEs. Quedó claro que no se trataba solo de un ataque a las ZEDEs, sino a los cimientos jurídicos y constitucionales de Honduras y a los principios básicos del derecho. El constitucionalista Juan Carlos Barrientos advirtió de que una anulación retroactiva de las ZEDEs generaría un caos jurídico, invalidando acuerdos previos y creando inseguridad. En respuesta, una carta que representaba a una coalición de 144 inversionistas y empresas de 19 países, cuyas inversiones sumaban en conjunto más de 250 millones de dólares, exigió al gobierno que cesara de inmediato el ataque y respetara y restableciera el Estado de derecho. En el mismo sentido, la congresista estadounidense María Elvira Salazar advirtió sobre las posibles repercusiones que podrían tener las actuaciones expropiatorias contra inversionistas estadounidenses. La respuesta de la propia Próspera ha sido firme. Reafirmó que continuaría operando con normalidad y reiteró su petición al gobierno de entablar un diálogo para llegar a una solución amistosa. Según Próspera, el fallo de inconstitucionalidad es en sí mismo inconstitucional. «Nuestra posición es que el fallo es nulo, porque la corte no tiene la facultad de anular la ley con efecto retroactivo, y el artículo 321 de la Constitución dice que si se ejerce un poder más allá de lo que la ley otorga a los servidores públicos, el acto es nulo», afirma el Secretario Técnico Colindres. Además, el artículo 96 de la Constitución hondureña establece que ninguna ley tiene efecto retroactivo, y Próspera sostiene que, al declarar algo inconstitucional, la Corte Suprema actúa como legislador de facto. Pese a las críticas, el fallo se publicó en La Gaceta el 25 de noviembre de 2024. Con todo, presenta algunas particularidades adicionales. «El fallo se limitó a declarar inconstitucionales las ZEDEs, pero no contenía ninguna orden de hacer o no hacer nada. Eso fue interesante y, sinceramente, bastante beneficioso. Si la corte publica algo, aunque nosotros lo veamos claramente como nulo, sigue teniendo lo que yo llamo “el sello y el membrete”, así que, pienses lo que pienses, pueden pasarte cosas que no te gusten.» El fallo tampoco abordó los tratados internacionales que protegen la inversión en Próspera. Resulta bastante extraño, si se considera que Honduras tiene la obligación, bajo la Convención de Viena sobre el Derecho de los Tratados y la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, de cumplir de buena fe los tratados que ha firmado. Si la Corte Suprema desea negar esas obligaciones, cabría esperar que al menos las mencionara de algún modo. Además, Colindres argumenta en nombre de Próspera: «En el derecho interno, el artículo 94 de la Ley sobre Justicia Constitucional establece expresamente que los fallos de inconstitucionalidad no afectarán a las situaciones jurídicas resueltas y ejecutadas de forma definitiva. Eso significa que la legislación hondureña dice que el fallo no afecta a las situaciones jurídicas consolidadas. Por tanto, el derecho hondureño vinculante dice que los fallos de inconstitucionalidad no pueden afectarnos, dado que Próspera ZEDE ya fue autorizada, tenemos 235 empresas, cerca de 2.000 residentes (físicos y electrónicos) y más de 150 millones de dólares en inversión, lo que constituye claramente una situación jurídica consolidada.» Subraya que más de 40 fallos de la Corte Suprema de los últimos 20 años han confirmado que tales sentencias no pueden tener efecto retroactivo, lo que convierte esto en un principio muy asentado no solo del derecho y la justicia en general, sino específicamente del derecho constitucional hondureño. Un año decisivo Desde que se publicó el fallo ha habido pocos movimientos abiertos por parte del gobierno. Solo cabe especular sobre si tiene planes de emprender nuevas acciones contra las ZEDEs antes de las próximas elecciones. Como la sentencia no incluye ningún mandato imperativo, parece quedar a discreción del gobierno decidir si quiere dar más pasos y, en su caso, cuándo. Debido a la incertidumbre política persistente, el futuro de las ZEDEs sigue siendo incierto por ahora. Sin embargo, con las próximas elecciones generales previstas para noviembre de 2025, hay esperanza de que las cosas tomen un rumbo mejor. Varios candidatos y partidos ya se han pronunciado contra el fallo de la Sala de lo Constitucional y han señalado que la forma en que el gobierno actual ha tratado a las ZEDEs es equivocada e irresponsable. En cambio, los pasos apropiados y evidentes serían negociar un acuerdo mutuamente beneficioso que termine por desactivar la demanda de 10.700 millones de dólares de Próspera. «Hay buenas probabilidades de que el gobierno cambie después de las elecciones de noviembre», dice Colindres. «Esta no es una disputa entre Próspera y el gobierno nacional, es una disputa entre el gobierno y todo el sector privado del país, nacional y extranjero. Están expropiando empresas del sector energético, del sector de infraestructura (empresas que construyen carreteras, gestionan puertos, aeropuertos), empresas financieras… Están atacando al sector privado en todos los rubros. El gobierno apoya la invasión de la propiedad privada y de tierras privadas por parte de grupos campesinos armados. También está restringiendo el acceso al dólar estadounidense, al que el sector privado hondureño ya no puede acceder, lo que creo que es simplemente una cuestión de control político. Además, impulsa la derogación de todos los regímenes fiscales especiales, incluidas las tradicionales Zonas Libres, que emplean a más de 160.000 personas, y también las zonas económicas especiales de turismo, así como los incentivos fiscales para muchos otros sectores. Así que se puede ver cómo, en realidad, todo el sector privado está bajo ataque en Honduras.» «En 2021, Próspera estaba más bien sola. Ahora formamos parte de una coalición nacional que trata de salvaguardar los estándares básicos del Estado de derecho y de la propiedad privada.» 2025 es un año decisivo para las ZEDEs. Es un año que pondrá a prueba tanto su habilidad política como los mecanismos de protección que se establecieron al crear el marco de las ZEDEs precisamente para situaciones como esta, cuando el gobierno se vuelve antagónico, ideológico y beligerante y se niega a honrar sus compromisos previos. Hasta ahora parece que esos mecanismos de protección jurídica han sido una herramienta bastante eficaz para amortiguar el ataque del gobierno, y hay buenas probabilidades de que las ZEDEs acaben capeando el temporal y de que se les permita cumplir, después de todo, su mandato y su promesa de crear más libertad y prosperidad para los hondureños. Traducido del inglés por Juan D. Estevez --- # Seasteading: El Movimiento, Historia y Perspectivas URL: https://free-cities.org/seasteading-el-movimiento-historia-y-perspectivas Published: 2023-09-19 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: seasteading, history-of-free-cities En la imaginación humana, el mar siempre ha permanecido como un símbolo de libertad e independencia, un sentimiento con raíces profundas tanto en nuestra historia como en psicología. Fue precisamente este deseo de libertad, combinado con un optimismo tecnológico, lo que dio origen al movimiento de seasteading. El término combina las palabras “sea” (mar) y “homesteading” (hacienda en inglés), destacando un enfoque autosuficiente – pero en el mar. Estas nuevas seasteads o colonias marítimas, estarían localizadas lejos de aguas territoriales de cualquier país – y así fuera del alcance de cualquier estado. Seasteaders creen que la creación de dichas colonias en el mar puede abrir las puertas para nuevas formas de gobernanza e innovación. A lo largo de la historia, el mar ha sido percibido como una vía de escape, ya sea de la persecución, como en el caso de los peregrinos que viajaron a América del Norte, o del estado, como en el caso de los piratas. A lo largo de la historia rutas comerciales marítimas trajeron prosperidad e intercambio cultural. La literatura, el arte y el cine han contribuido a esta aura al romantizar el mar y la vida cerca de él. Como confirmaría cualquier agente turístico, la mayoría de las personas prefieren los complejos turísticos costeros cuando buscan un respiro del estrés y el bullicio de la vida cotidiana. Además, vivir en un barco representa un nivel de autonomía que no se encuentra a menudo en tierra firme, y afortunadamente, la tecnología moderna está haciendo gradualmente más factible la vida en el mar. Después de todo, los océanos conforman más del 70% de la superficie de nuestro planeta, así que ¿por qué involucrarse en luchas políticas por el 30% restante si uno puede, en vez, navegar en libertad? Entre la espada y la pared: los desafíos principales Analizándolo de cerca, esta idea no es tan simple como suena. Antes de que comunidades autónomas en el océano puedan convertirse en una opción viable de convivir, los seasteaders deben enfrentar algunos desafíos técnicos y políticos complicados. Como, por ejemplo, diseñar estructuras que puedan resistir el entorno marino – especialmente las fuertes olas y las tormentas –, crear fuentes sostenibles de alimento y agua potable o gestionar los residuos y el suministro de energía; y aun así todos estos aspectos representan solo una parte del proceso. La otra parte se encuentra en el ámbito político. Los intentos de los seasteaders de sortear los obstáculos políticos han generado cierto revuelo mediático, desde una pareja de esposos amenazados con la pena de muerte en Tailandia hasta el proyecto de ciudad flotante en la Polinesia Francesa que fue víctima de una reacción política negativa. Y, sin embargo, los líderes del movimiento se mantienen optimistas como siempre: ellos están convencidos de que las lecciones aprendidas en la última década, así como el recientemente crecimiento en el número de entusiastas, los están encaminando hacia el éxito de la creación de las primeras comunidades flotantes. “Mucho antes de que vayamos a Marte, las personas descubrirán el planeta que está justo frente a nuestras narices”, dice Joe Quirk, presidente del Instituto Seasteading (TSI), cuando hablamos por Zoom después de habernos conocido en la conferencia Liberty in Our Lifetime en Praga. Grant Romundt, CEO de Ocean Builders, una empresa que actualmente está construyendo un grupo de ‘SeaPods’ frente a la costa de Panamá, propone el seasteading como una solución poco convencional para la escasez de viviendas en ciudades crecientes. Los océanos proporcionarán la mayor oportunidad de bienes raíces del siglo XXI, afirma mientras presenta el prototipo del SeaPod en la misma conferencia. El seasteading es “como el Bitcoin, pero para el océano, es un concepto que evade las estructuras establecidas”, explica Aldo Antinori, un ciudadano de Panamá que desempeñó un papel fundamental en presentar Ocean Builders a los altos funcionarios del país. Y bueno, precisamente ahí radica el escepticismo: no todos están convencidos de que crear una herramienta para escapar del control gubernamental sea una idea o concepto viable. Algunos críticos sostienen que el seasteading solo serviría a los ricos, creando paraísos fiscales en alta mar o escapando de sus responsabilidades como ciudadanos de un país. Además, se plantean preocupaciones ambientales; construir en el océano podría tener un impacto en los ecosistemas marinos (aunque no necesariamente de manera negativa: incluso la ONU ha respaldado el seasteading como una posible respuesta a los desafíos ambientales). Finalmente, algunos argumentan simplemente que los desafíos técnicos son demasiado grandes y que la mayoría de las personas no elegiría vivir en el océano. ‘SeaPods’, casas flotantes sostenibles y autosuficientes diseñados por Waterstudio.NL para Ocean Builders. Estas se anclan en aguas resguardadas en Panamá. Fuente: Ocean Builders. Vámonos al mar: autores, arquitectos y anarquistas Las comunidades flotantes han sido un elemento básico en mitos, leyendas y ficción durante milenios. Uno de los ejemplos mitológicos más antiguos es Atlantis, descrita por el filósofo griego Platón como una ciudad isleña de gran prosperidad y tecnología incomparables que finalmente fue sumergida y perdida bajo las olas. La ficción contemporánea revela tanto la fascinación como el miedo ante la idea de vivir en el mar: en Ready Player One de Ernest Cline, por ejemplo, el villano planea crear su propia utopía marítima en las poco reguladas aguas del Caribe, reuniendo una flota de plataformas y barcos petroleros modificados para formar una gigantesca plataforma modular. La película de 1995 Waterworld (Mundo Acuático) está ambientada en un futuro posapocalíptico donde la Tierra está completamente cubierta por océanos y comunidades de sobrevivientes viven en estructuras flotantes. En el otro extremo del espectro se encuentra Sailing Free, una cautivadora novela libertaria coescrita por Gabriel Stein, miembro de la Sociedad Mont Pelerin, ambientada en el Estado Libre Islandés del siglo XI y que celebra la vida de un joven capitán y comerciante marítimo que defiende la soberanía de su tierra natal. Varias mentes arquitectónicas también han quedado cautivadas por la idea, viéndola como una solución innovadora para desafíos urbanos como la densidad poblacional, la escasez de espacio y el aumento del nivel del mar. La década de 1960 estuvo marcada por dos proyectos particulares: Triton City de Buckminster Fuller y el Tokyo Bay Plan (Plan de la Bahía de Tokio) de Kenzo Tange. Las propuestas más destacadas del siglo XXI incluyen el Lilypad de Vincent Callebaut, una ciudad flotante autosuficiente para refugiados climáticos, la Ocean Spiral de Shimizu Corporation, una torre submarina de 500 metros de ancho, y Wayaland de Lazzarini, inspirada en las pirámides mayas. Más recientemente, el famoso arquitecto Bjarke Ingels ha causado sensación con Oceanix City, diseñada en colaboración con la ONU-Habitat y ubicada en Busan, Corea del Sur. La lista estaría incompleta sin el diseñador holandés Koen Olthuis, fundador de Waterstudio.NL. Aprovechando la rica herencia de gestión del agua de los Países Bajos, sus diseños fusionan de manera perfecta los entornos acuáticos y terrestres. Y luego estaban otros tipos de soñadores, para quienes el mar abierto ofrecía un lienzo en blanco para re-imaginar las estructuras sociales. Inspirado por “La rebelión de Atlas” de Ayn Rand, en 1968, el empresario Werner Stiefel lideró la “Operación Atlantis“, un ambicioso proyecto destinado a crear una micronación soberana y libertaria. Stiefel compró un barco y luego toda una isla cerca de las Bahamas. Sin embargo, disputas políticas y desastres naturales, como huracanes, continuamente obstaculizaron el progreso del proyecto. De igual corta duración fue la República de Minerva, un intento de Michael Oliver, un millonario de bienes raíces de Las Vegas, de establecer una nación libertaria sin “impuestos, estado de bienestar, subsidios ni ninguna forma de intervencionismo económico” en los Arrecifes de Minerva, entre Tonga y Nueva Zelanda. A pesar del éxito inicial, que incluyó la creación de una isla artificial, Tonga pronto reclamó los arrecifes y perturbó el plan. Navegando al Límite: La Saga de Sealand El Principado de Sealand es quizás el intento más famoso de crear una micronación marítima. Fue proclamado en 1967 en una plataforma de artillería antiaérea británica en desuso construida durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial, a 12 kilómetros de la costa de Inglaterra, por Paddy Roy Bates, un ex mayor del Ejército Británico convertido en locutor de radio pirata. Pronto Paddy se trasladó a vivir en la plataforma con su esposa Joan y sus hijos. Cuando la tripulación de una estación de radio pirata rival intentó asaltar la plataforma, los sealanders respondieron con bombas de gasolina y armas; la Marina Real intervino y también se encontró con una reacción hostil. Bates y su hijo Michael fueron arrestados, pero el Tribunal Real desestimó el caso concluyendo que el seastead se encontraba fuera de las aguas territoriales del Reino Unido, es decir, fuera de la jurisdicción británica. Los sealanders se regocijaron: ¡su soberanía fue reconocida de facto! En los años siguientes, introdujeron su propia constitución, bandera e himno nacional, comenzaron a acuñar monedas e imprimir sellos oficiales y comenzaron a emitir pasaportes de Sealand. El fundador fue coronado como el Príncipe Roy y su esposa como la Princesa Joan de Sealand. En su cúspide, alrededor de 50 personas vivieron en la plataforma. La micronación incluso se enfrentó a un intento de golpe de Estado en 1978, cuando Alexander Achenbach, un abogado nacido en Alemania que servía como primer ministro de Sealand, contrató mercenarios y tomó como rehén a Michael Bates. La familia Bates luchó contra el intento de golpe y, finalmente, Achenbach fue capturado y acusado de traición contra Sealand. Ese fue el momento de la verdad: ¿qué haría Alemania? En cierto sentido, era un dilema insoluble: si el país decidía negociar su liberación mediante medios diplomáticos, eso parecería el reconocimiento de Sealand; si, en cambio, Alemania abandono el caso, concluyendo que Achenbach era un ciudadano de Sealand y, por lo tanto, estaba fuera de su jurisdicción, eso volvería a parecer el reconocimiento de Sealand. La embajada alemana en Londres envió un representante para investigar el caso, pero finalmente, Achenbach pagó una multa a las autoridades de Sealand, fue liberado y regresó a Alemania, solo para proclamar un Gobierno Rebelde de Sealand en el exilio. A pesar de su escurril historia y afirmaciones de soberanía, el Principado de Sealand no ha sido reconocido como un estado soberano por ningún gobierno internacionalmente reconocido. Fuente: Sealand.gov. En 1987, el Reino Unido extendió sus aguas territoriales a 12 millas náuticas, lo que hizo que fuera más difícil mantener las afirmaciones de soberanía por parte del Principado de Sealand en la práctica. Roy Bates falleció en 2012 a la edad de 91 años, y su hijo se convirtió en el Príncipe Michael de Sealand. A pesar de que en la actualidad nadie vive en la plataforma oxidada, Michael Bates, quien publicó sus memorias Holding the Fort en 2015, reside en su bungalow en Essex. “El país más pequeño del mundo” todavía emite pasaportes, vende recuerdos e incluso tiene un equipo de fútbol. Por tan solo £25, uno puede convertirse en Lord o Dama de Sealand, mientras que otros títulos reales más costosos se venden por £500. El certificado pergamino que confirma el título está adornado con el escudo de armas de Sealand que lleva el lema obstinado de la nación: “E Mare, Libertas” — “Desde el mar, la libertad”. Zambullido en la materia: Lo que dice la Ley En el centro de todos los proyectos de micronaciones marítimas yace la convicción de maximizar la libertad personal y minimizar la intervención estatal. Sealand, con su tumultuosa historia, ha perdurado más que otros proyectos. Escépticos argumentan que Sealand era demasiado pequeño para que el Gobierno británico siquiera se molestara. Pero ¿qué se suponía legalmente que debían hacer las autoridades del Reino Unido con Sealand, si es que debían hacer algo? ¿Qué dice la ley marítima internacional sobre el seasteading? Para empezar, no existe una definición legal de seastead. El seasteading es un término amplio que abarca todo tipo de estructuras diferentes. Al igual que no hay una forma universal de vivir en tierra firme, no hay un tipo único de comunidad flotante que sirva para todos. Los seasteads pueden tomar la forma de barcos individuales, plataformas oceánicas (flotantes, permanentemente fijas o en algún punto intermedio) o islas artificiales enteras. La definición de “buque”, por ejemplo, varía de un país a otro. Una pregunta importante es si una estructura dada está fija al fondo del océano o cambia regularmente de ubicación. Además, los proyectos de seasteading varían en su proximidad a la costa – el factor principal que influye en su nivel de autonomía. El océano está regulado por una serie de tratados multilaterales firmados por la mayoría de naciones, como la Convención de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar (UNCLOS, por sus siglas en inglés). El documento delinea cuatro zonas marítimas legales principales. Cada estado costero tiene soberanía sobre sus aguas territoriales, que se extienden a 12 millas náuticas desde su costa (una milla náutica es una unidad utilizada en la navegación marítima y aérea y equivale aproximadamente a 1.151 millas terrestres). Navegando otras 12 millas náuticas desde la costa, permanecemos en la llamada zona contigua, donde el estado costero puede aplicar leyes relacionadas con aduanas, impuestos, inmigración y contaminación. La Zona Económica Exclusiva (ZEE) se extiende a 200 millas náuticas desde la costa; aquí, un estado costero tiene derechos especiales con respecto a la exploración y el uso de recursos marinos, pero otros estados también pueden navegar en la ZEE. Colocar seasteads tan cerca de la costa implica una colaboración más estrecha con uno o varios estados, como veremos en algunos ejemplos a continuación. Y finalmente, están las aguas internacionales, la última frontera, donde las aguas se vuelven verdaderamente “internacionales”. Aquí, todos los estados tienen libertad de navegación, pero ningún estado tiene soberanía. Suena como una ubicación ideal para un seastead, ¿verdad? Zonas marítimas. Fuente: ​​Flickr.com/Riccardo Pravettoni La idea de una comunidad flotante permanente en el océano presenta nuevos desafíos legales. Incluso en alta mar no existe un reino de completo caos y desorden; por ejemplo, un barco debe llevar la bandera de algún estado. El profesor Tom W. Bell, un experto legal con sede en California que asesoró al Instituto Seasteading (y a algunas ciudades libres prominentes, incluyendo las ZEDEs de Honduras), ha ideado una receta para los seasteads que desean eludir las reglas de la mayoría de las convenciones marítimas. Para mantenerse fuera del radar. Bell escribe que las comunidades flotantes deben permanecer fijas en su lugar, con una longitud por debajo de 24 metros a nivel de la línea de flotación y evitar entrar en puertos extranjeros. “Los seasteads obtienen exenciones adicionales si se mantienen en o cerca de aguas resguardadas y tienen un tamaño inferior a 12 metros de longitud, 400 toneladas de registro bruto y una capacidad de 15 personas. Aunque los seasteads más grandes o aquellos que navegan caen dentro del ámbito de convenciones adicionales, podrían calificar para exenciones de muchos de sus requisitos”. Las “islas artificiales” son otra opción. UNCLOS otorga a las naciones el derecho de construirlas en alta mar. Pero nuevamente, estamos hablando de estados internacionalmente reconocidos, no de grupos de entusiastas sin el respaldo de un estado. Ryan C. Schmidtke, autor de Islas Artificiales del Futuro (Artificial Islands of the Future), concluye que la opción más viable para un seastead sería llegar a un acuerdo con una nación anfitriona interesada para la creación de una Zona Económica Especial (SEZ por sus siglas en inglés) marítima. Esto proporcionaría a los seasteaders la protección física tan necesaria, así como la certeza legal, junto con la deseada, aunque limitada, autonomía política. Como veremos, esta es precisamente la ruta que los seasteaders han explorado con mayor intensidad en la última década, con resultados diversos. Vamos a pescar: Quiénes son quien en el movimiento seasteading “Seavilisation” (civilización marítima), “sevangelistas” (evangelistas marítimos), “aquapreneurs” (emprendedores acuáticos), “aquatecture” (arquitectura acuática), “aquaculture” (acuicultura): prepárese para aprender algunas palabras nuevas si decide adentrarse más en el movimiento del seasteading. La palabra “seasteading” en sí fue acuñada por el empresario de software Wayne Gramlich en 2008. Junto con Patri Friedman, nieto del economista ganador del Premio Nobel Milton Friedman, fundaron el Instituto Seasteading (TSI), una organización sin fines de lucro que promueve la creación de comunidades flotantes soberanas. Durante más de una década, mientras mantenía su trabajo diario como ingeniero en Google, Patri fue la cara del seasteading – explicando el concepto una y otra vez a la escéptica multitud de medios de comunicación, organizando el festival Ephemerisle apodado el “Burning Man en barcos” y presentando la idea a los gurús del Silicon Valley. Gracias a sus esfuerzos, el TSI recibió una dotación de $ 1,7 millones de dólares del multimillonario inversor de riesgo Peter Thiel, cofundador de PayPal. Algunos años después, Thiel renunció a la junta directiva del TSI, concluyendo que la idea “no era del todo factible”. Pero el movimiento continúa. Reuniendo a inversores de riesgo y entusiastas de las criptomonedas, académicos y abogados, arquitectos e ingenieros de software, el concepto sigue causando revuelo a escala global. Joe Quirk, presidente de TSI, se considera, ante todo, un narrador de historias. En 2017, junto con Patri Friedman, publicó un libro titulado Seasteading: How Floating Nations Will Restore the Environment, Enrich the Poor, Cure the Sick, and Liberate Humanity from Politicians (Seasteading: Cómo las Naciones Flotantes Restaurarán el Medio Ambiente, Enriquecerán a los Pobres, Curarán a los Enfermos y Liberarán a la Humanidad de los Políticos) – una promesa muy audaz, de hecho. “Cuando me enteré por primera vez del seasteading”, me cuenta Quirk en una entrevista, “era una especie de movimiento marginal. Fue demonizado en la prensa, ya sabes: las personas ricas quieren crear islas malvadas de egoísmo. No podían haber tenido peor renombre”. El objetivo del libro era reformular el debate y reclutar a cientos de personas con diversos antecedentes políticos y profesionales en el movimiento. Y funcionó, según él cree. Las historias a continuación podrían no haber ocurrido jamás si alguien no hubiera leído el libro de Seasteading en el momento adecuado. Alguien como Rüdiger Koch, un ingeniero alemán y entusiasta del bitcoin, que lo ha leído dos veces y se acercó a Quirk para confirmar que todo eso era técnicamente factible. O alguien como Grant Romundt, un desarrollador de software de Canadá, que conoció a Quirk en un avión un día y se intrigó por su camiseta que decía “Stop arguing, start seasteading” (Deja de discutir, comienza el seasteading). O también alguien como Chad Elwartowski, que se ofreció como voluntario para convertirse en el primer seasteader de la historia y se encontró en medio de una historia al estilo de Hollywood. “Estas dos personas [Elwartowski y Romundt] son como los dos hemisferios del cerebro humano, están trabajando juntos en esta cosa que nunca hubiera imaginado”, dice Quirk, refiriéndose a Ocean Builders, una empresa detrás de algunos de los proyectos de seasteading más notables hasta la fecha. “Mi único trabajo es contar estas historias”. Con varias novelas en su haber, Quirk cree que la realidad puede ser más asombrosa que la ficción. Joe Quirk, presidente del Instituto Seasteading, hablando en la conferencia Liberty in Our Lifetime 2022 en Praga. Bienvenidos a la SeaZone: El capítulo de la Polinesia Francesa Esencialmente, todas las iniciativas de Ciudades Libres enfrentan un equilibrio entre la estabilidad y la flexibilidad. Balanceando cuidadosamente el deseo de autonomía con la necesidad de certeza legal y protección física, a menudo buscan un acuerdo con un estado existente. Los gobiernos, a su vez, pueden estar dispuestos a delinear un territorio y probar suerte, esperando que la relativa libertad atraiga talento y capital. Los seasteaders, al menos en teoría, no necesitan pedir permiso a nadie – después de todo, no están usando tierra soberana de ningún país. Pueden comenzar a construir una nueva sociedad sin un estado desde cero. Sin embargo, en la vida real, las naciones emergentes en el mar necesitan estabilidad más que nadie – incluso la estabilidad física, cuando vives en alta mar, se convierte en un desafío. ¿La solución? Una SeaZone. En 2016, el Instituto Seasteading y su organización socia con fines de lucro, Blue Frontiers, fueron abordados por Marc Collins, exministro de turismo de la Polinesia Francesa. Un territorio de ultramar de Francia con un alto grado de autonomía, compuesto por más de cien islas y atolones dispersos por el Pacífico Sur, siendo Tahití la más famosa. Conocido por sus pintorescas lagunas turquesas, arrecifes de coral e islas volcánicas, el país depende en gran medida del turismo. Para la Polinesia Francesa, la perspectiva de convertirse en el primer lugar del mundo en tener una comunidad flotante futurista con hogares, restaurantes y hoteles parecía una oportunidad para impulsar su potencial turístico a nuevas alturas. Se firmó un memorando de entendimiento entre TSI y el gobierno de la Polinesia Francesa para la creación de islas modulares frente a la costa de Tahití. Una serie de plataformas semiautónomas junto con un asentamiento en tierra formarían una ‘SeaZone’, una Zona Económica Especial anclada en el mar. En septiembre de 2016, un equipo internacional de delegados del seasteading viajó a Tahití para reunirse con el presidente polinesio Édouard Fritch y varios otros funcionarios gubernamentales. Fuente: The Seasteading Institute Para los seasteaders, la Polinesia Francesa cumplía con muchos requisitos. El país disfruta de un estado de derecho robusto y estabilidad institucional, buenas conexiones de transporte con ciudades importantes y una infraestructura decente, que incluía internet de banda ancha – un elemento imprescindible para los nómadas digitales. Sin embargo, dentro del país, no todos daban la bienvenida a la iniciativa. A medida que se acercaba la nueva temporada electoral, los políticos locales criticaban el proyecto como “neocolonial” y “elitista”, y culpaban al gobierno de turno por la falta de consulta con la población. Los defensores argumentaban que la SeaZone no solo crearía 2,000 empleos y aportaría más de $170 millones de inversión total a la Polinesia Francesa, sino que también mejoraría su resistencia al cambio climático. Nada de eso convenció al gobierno del país, que en 2018 cambió de opinión y puso fin a su colaboración con TSI y Blue Frontiers. Eso no ha desalentado a “seavangelistas” y “aquapreneurs” de buscar rutas alternativas hacia el éxito. ¿Tal vez intentar involucrar a un estado cuando se construye una sociedad sin él fue una mala idea desde el principio? En el lado opuesto del mundo se probó una estrategia diferente: pedir perdón en lugar de permiso. En Aguas Profundas: Escapando de Tailandia Criado en un pequeño pueblo agrícola en Michigan, Chad Elwartowski era un candidato poco probable para convertirse en el primer seasteader de la historia. Sin embargo, inspirado por la estrategia de “Deja de discutir, comienza el seasteading”, él y su pareja tailandesa, Nadia Summergirl, se ofrecieron como pioneros. A principios de 2019, Ocean Builders instaló una casa flotante para una familia a 12 millas náuticas de la costa de Phuket en Tailandia. Aquella simple estructura octogonal de 6 metros de ancho tuvo un costo de alrededor de $150,000 dólares. La pareja vivió en su nueva casa durante algunas semanas, visitando ocasionalmente el continente para resolver aspectos básicos y tratar de obtener un permiso por escrito del gobierno tailandés. Mientras tanto, tres abogados locales confirmaron que no había nada ilegal en su plan. Después de todo, pensaron, no era muy diferente a vivir en un barco. “Todo lo que esperamos del gobierno tailandés es que sigan el derecho internacional. Nosotros haremos lo mismo”, dijo Elwartowski a la revista Reason en ese momento. Resulta que eso ya era demasiado pedir. Una casa flotante para una familia donde Chad y Nadia pasaron unos felices meses en 2019 antes de que Marina tailandesa se percatase de ellos. Fuente: The Seasteading Institute Un día, los amigos de Elwartowski vieron una publicación aterradora en su feed de Facebook. Aparentemente, la Marina tailandesa consideraba su pequeño refugio una amenaza para la independencia del país, nada menos que un delito potencialmente castigado con cadena perpetua – o incluso la muerte. Los dos tuvieron que buscar rápidamente formas de escapar del país. Para Nadia, una ciudadana tailandesa, eso significaba solicitar asilo y no poder volver a casa. En esa publicación de Facebook, Elwartowski pedía ayuda legal y protección diplomática, enfatizando una vez más que sus intenciones siempre habían sido benignas: “Esperábamos llevar el turismo a Phuket con un restaurante submarino, hoteles flotantes e investigación médica, empleos tecnológicos, etc. En la última semana, 3 empresarios adinerados nos dijeron que venían a vivir a Phuket porque estaban entusiasmados con el proyecto. Amamos a Tailandia. Nadia es orgullosamente tailandesa. Es una fiel budista que no apoya la violencia. Yo soy un pacifista que no haría daño a una mosca”. Amenazar a los primeros seasteaders con la pena de muerte, concluyó, era “exactamente la razón por la que alguien estaría dispuesto a ir al medio del océano para escapar de los gobiernos” en primer lugar. Lo que motivó a la Marina tailandesa a reaccionar de manera tan severa sigue siendo un misterio, pero Joe Quirk está tratando de desentrañarlo en su próximo libro, La Persona más Libre del Mundo, que casi ha terminado. “Vivieron en una película de Hollywood que haría que Tom Cruise sintiera envidia”, dice, hablando de la pareja. Con experiencia militar, Elwartowski decidió que ‘desaparecer’ durante un par de meses, incluso después de escapar de Tailandia, era lo mejor que podía hacer. Los dos volvieron a la superficie en Panamá, pero esa es la siguiente parte de esta historia. ¿Una marea creciente que se lleva todas las embarcaciones por delante? El Capítulo de Panamá ¿Por qué Panamá? La geografía es parte de la respuesta: el país es un centro global de logística y transporte, que se encuentra fuera de la zona de huracanes y tiene acceso a dos océanos. El aspecto económico también es favorable. Panamá ya tiene un buen historial de Zonas Económicas Especiales (SEZs), incluyendo, notablemente, la Zona Libre de Colón, el puerto libre más grande de las Américas y el segundo más grande del mundo. También resultó ser el primer país extranjero que, en 1903, adoptó el dólar estadounidense como su moneda – la dolarización hace que Panamá sea un destino atractivo para inversores extranjeros y lo protege de la maldición de la hiperinflación que afecta a muchos otros países latinoamericanos. Por último, pero no menos importante, el sistema de tributación territorial de Panamá lo convierte en un imán para los nómadas digitales: los ingresos generados en el extranjero no están sujetos a impuestos en Panamá. Joe Quirk agrega una razón más: “No tienen una marina – algunos de nosotros somos un poco sensibles acerca de las marinas desde el episodio en Tailandia”. La Zona Libre de Colón en Panamá, el puerto libre más grande de las Américas y el segundo más grande del mundo. Fuente: Wikimedia Commons. Además de todo esto, el gobierno panameño mostró interés en la iniciativa. Una persona clave para conectar todos los puntos fue Aldo Antinori, un entusiasta Bitcoiner y nativo de Panamá, que se entusiasmó con el concepto de seasteading y además conocía a las personas adecuadas. El invitó a Joe Quirk al país y lo presentó en la oficina del presidente, varios ministerios y las autoridades del Canal de Panamá. El hecho de que Héctor Alexander, ministro de Finanzas, hubiera sido estudiante de Milton Friedman en Chicago en la década de 1970, también podría haber ayudado. Como resultado, la idea de un enclave libertario en el mar, liderado entre otros por el nieto de Milton Friedman, cayó en terreno fértil. “Los gobiernos aman todo lo que tiene que ver con la inversión y la innovación”, me explica Antinori en una entrevista. “Les dijimos: escuchen, tenemos un grupo de inversores que están creando esta tecnología innovadora y quieren probarla aquí en Panamá. Y ellos dijeron: Sí, por supuesto, ¿cómo podemos ayudar?”. Al final, admite que el gobierno no hizo mucho para ayudar, pero al menos no les importó que Ocean Builders continuara con su trabajo. La idea de SeaZone estaba en la agenda una vez más. Sin embargo, Ocean Builders se dio cuenta rápidamente de que podían acelerar enormemente el proceso si, en lugar de solicitar el estatus de SeaZone, juntaban fuerzas con un puerto privado que ya operaba como una concesión público-privada. La Marina Linton Bay era justo aquello. Además, su presidente resultó ser Surse Pierpoint, fundador de la Fundación Libertad Panamá, un think-tank en favor del libre mercado, y exgerente de la Zona Libre de Colón. Un destacado pensador y practicante libertario, estaba al tanto del seasteading como concepto y rápidamente apreció todos los beneficios que un proyecto como ese podría aportar a Panamá. Ocean Builders abrió un taller en Linton Bay, contrató a unos 30 empleados localmente y comenzó a construir un prototipo de SeaPod. La Punta del Iceberg: Bitcoiners contra Burócratas Eso ocurrió a finales de 2019, poco antes de que llegara la pandemia de COVID-19. Por un lado, los confinamientos de Covid afectaron a la economía del país, creando incertidumbre para todos, incluido Ocean Builders. Al mismo tiempo, la intrusión sin precedentes en las libertades personales, disfrazada de preocupaciones por la salud pública, hizo que muchos ciudadanos en todo el mundo – muchos de ellos por primera vez – cuestionaran la legitimidad de los gobiernos en sí. El movimiento de seasteading ganó muchos nuevos seguidores. Mientras tanto, la industria de cruceros estaba en ruinas. Algunas empresas intentaron salvar su negocio organizando “cruceros a ninguna parte“, pero muchas comenzaron a deshacerse de sus activos principales: los barcos. Ocean Builders vio esto como una oportunidad: nunca antes se había podido comprar un magnífico crucero de 11 cubiertas, diseñado por Renzo Piano y con capacidad para casi 2,000 pasajeros, por menos de $10 millones. El barco anteriormente conocido como el Pacific Dawn fue renombrado como MS Satoshi y se concibió como el centro de una futura ciudad flotante en Panamá. Rodeada por una constelación de SeaPods, formaría una gigantesca letra ‘B’, como en ‘bitcoin’, para reflejar las opiniones criptoanarquistas de la tripulación fundadora. La tripulación del MS Satoshi. Fuente: Seasteading.org. Si algo parece un barco, navega como un barco o suena como un barco, entonces probablemente es un barco; así es como piensa cualquier burócrata, ya sea en Panamá, Portugal o Pakistán. MS Satoshi, sin duda, parecía un barco, aunque Ocean Builders tenía planeado convertirla en un condominio flotante permanente. Como barco, requería una bandera (preferiblemente panameña, de lo contrario, tendría que salir de las aguas territoriales de Panamá de vez en cuando), motores en funcionamiento y tanques de diésel (aunque el plan era deshacerse de ellos y utilizar el espacio liberado para talleres), una tripulación de al menos 30-40 personas y, lo más importante, un seguro. “Mi trabajo diario era leer todas las leyes marítimas que Panamá había promulgado, lo cual no fue divertido”, recuerda Chad Elwartowski. El descubrimiento más frustrante para Ocean Builders fue que nadie estaba dispuesto a asegurar algo tan innovador. “Solo hay unas docenas de compañías de seguros en el mundo que cubren barcos grandes, y no les gustaba que fuéramos innovadores, así que no pudimos encontrar una compañía de seguros dispuesta a trabajar con nosotros”, explica. A pesar del apoyo general del gobierno de Panamá, el MS Satoshi quedó en un limbo regulatorio. A finales de 2020, justo antes de Navidad, Ocean Builders anunció que, lamentablemente, el Satoshi Crypto Cruise Ship fue vendido a otra compañía de cruceros. Sin embargo, esto no fue el final de la historia. Aún tenían una fábrica de SeaPod en funcionamiento, la Marina Linton Bay y las autoridades de Panamá todavía estaban de su lado y el movimiento de seasteading estaba creciendo más que nunca, en línea con el desencanto colectivo hacia las estructuras gubernamentales tradicionales. La idea de un barco como pieza central de una comunidad flotante impulsada por la libertad y el bitcoin en Panamá fue abandonada, pero no la comunidad en sí. Navegación sin problemas: Hogares inteligentes y flotantes a la venta SeaPods, viviendas flotantes en forma de concha con vistas panorámicas al océano, fueron diseñadas por el principal “aquatecto” del mundo, Koen Olthius. Aunque estas estén ancladas al lecho marino mediante un sistema de boyas spar, las SeaPods se pueden mover a diferentes ubicaciones si es necesario. También pueden agruparse en grupos, creando comunidades enteras de seasteading. Ultra-minimalistas, sostenibles, ecológicamente restauradoras, diseñadas para aumentar, no agotar el hábitat de la vida marina como los corales y los peces, y, al menos en teoría, completamente autosuficientes. Estas estructuras están equipadas con paneles solares y sistemas de recolección de agua de lluvia. Cada SeaPod ofrece 833 pies cuadrados de espacio habitable, comparable a un apartamento promedio de 2 dormitorios, con un precio que oscila entre $295,000 y $1.5 millones de dólares. El prototipo de SeaPod – con un aura de nave espacial, tecnológicamente avanzado, con enormes ventanas panorámicas con vistas al puerto – se instaló en Linton Bay a finales de 2022 y ahora está disponible para que los visitantes curiosos se queden a pasar la noche. “Voy a visitarlo aproximadamente una vez al mes y me quedo [allí] durante la noche”, me cuenta Chad Elwartowski, “y cada vez que estoy allí, hay alguna nueva tecnología implementada. Por ejemplo, abres la puerta del baño y el asiento se abre para ti. Todo es muy avanzado tecnológicamente”. Un equipo de ingenieros de software trabaja las 24 horas del día en mejorar las características del ‘hogar inteligente’, un proceso meticulosamente documentado en su blog. En perspectiva, se espera que los ocupantes de SeaPod utilicen un anillo inteligente para todo, desde atenuar las luces LED hasta ordenar entregas de comida con drones. Un prototipo de SeaPod. Fuente: Ocean Builders. El proceso no fue sencillo al principio. Todos los seguidores del movimiento seastead recuerdan el momento doloroso cuando la SeaPod insignia se inclinó y luego se hundió parcialmente justo después de su instalación. Fotos vergonzosas, que llenaron los medios de comunicación en septiembre de 2022, mostraban a una multitud, incluido el presidente panameño Laurentino Cortizo, mirando impotente una elegante estructura blanca que estaba a punto de sumergirse. El ladeo, aparentemente, fue causado por un mal funcionamiento del sistema de bombeo que desestabilizó el SeaPod. En cuestión de días, se reparó la construcción y el SeaPod volvió a flotar, y ha estado flotando desde entonces. “Fue una forma rápida de saber quiénes eran nuestros amigos y quiénes eran los detractores”, recuerda Elwartowski luego de aquella ducha fría que recibió Ocean Builders en las redes sociales. La audiencia global ignoró en gran medida el hecho de que el problema se resolvió en cuestión de días, dice, pero el público panameño siguió siendo en su mayoría positivo. En los últimos años, Ocean Builders ha proporcionado empleo y formación a docenas de trabajadores locales con poca formación, colaborando con la preservación de arrecifes de coral y proyectos de investigación científica marina. “Estamos ganando los corazones y las mentes de los panameños”, concluye con orgullo Joe Quirk (aunque el TSI se retiró oficialmente del proyecto en 2023, él sigue siendo amigo y firme partidario). El sentimiento es mutuo: Elwartowski ahora habla con mucho cariño de su nuevo hogar. “Amamos a Panamá”, dice. Después de escapar de Tailandia, él y Nadia se casaron y tuvieron un hijo en Panamá. “Estamos criando a nuestra niña y nos sentimos seguros. El clima es similar al de Tailandia y la gente es amigable”. Uno de los países más ricos de América Latina, Panamá atrae cada año a más turistas y expatriados. La mayoría de ellos se dirigen a la capital, pero algunos podrían ser seducidos por la oportunidad de vivir en una casa flotante con vistas al océano de 360 grados y compartir con vecinos amantes de la libertad. Según Elwartowski, “una vez que lo experimentas, es difícil no querer volver allí”. ¿Una gota en el océano? Porque empezar pequeño podría ser la clave Una casa flotante minimalista para una familia, o incluso una congregación de ellas, parece estar muy lejos de la ambición original de crear naciones enteras en aguas neutrales y sin un estado. Pero los seasteaders no lo ven como una desviación de la gran visión, sino más bien como el primer paso incremental hacia la meta final. Linton Bay será un laboratorio para probar la vida en el océano, demostrar que es posible y recaudar los fondos necesarios para avanzar el concepto. “Pero nuestro objetivo final siempre ha sido salir al océano abierto”, me asegura Elwartowski. A corto plazo, el plan es poner a disposición de los visitantes los SeaPods en el puerto de Linton Bay y luego comenzar a venderlos a grandes operadores de resorts marinos en todo el mundo. La próxima generación de casas flotantes, la Deep Water SeaPod, tendrá una habitación submarina. Los viajeros adinerados ya pagan miles de dólares por noche para alojarse bajo el nivel del mar (vea algunos ejemplos a continuación). Los seasteaders van a cobrar mucho más barato “porque queremos que los turistas de clase media vengan y se queden en él”, explica Quirk este modelo ‘Seabnb’. Según Ocean Builders, ya reciben solicitudes de resorts de lujo dispuestos a comprar varias docenas de pods cada uno. Pero ¿qué pasa con la libertad política? “Estar en el agua ya te otorga cierto grado de soberanía”, razona Elwartowski. “Quiero decir, si miras a todas estas personas que viven en sus barcos, ellas no están demasiado preocupadas por muchas cosas que el resto de nosotros nos preocupamos, como las leyes de zonificación o los impuestos sobre la propiedad”. “La autonomía proviene del hecho de que puedes moverlo”, concuerda Antinori. Si Panamá de repente se vuelve hostil, los SeaPods pueden flotar hasta la vecina Costa Rica, o incluso más lejos a Honduras, donde la nueva comunidad seastead puede convertirse en parte de una ZEDE existente. Ocean Builders afirman que ya reciben “mucho interés de otros gobiernos”, sin revelar los detalles aún. Anclados en experiencia: Tres lecciones principales Navegando por las corrientes políticas en la Polinesia Francesa, escapando de una tormenta mortal en Tailandia, y arrojando el ancla en Panamá; fue una década bastante movida para el movimiento seasteading. ¿Cuáles son las principales lecciones aprendidas y cuáles serán los próximos pasos? En primer lugar, los seasteading están convencidos de que comenzar pequeño es la mejor estrategia. “Basta de grandes visiones de ciudades flotantes gigantes; solo dame una tecnología que pueda replicarse y pagarse por sí misma”, dice Joe Quirk cuando le hago esta pregunta. El Instituto Seasteading, a pesar de su marca ampliamente conocida, tiene solo dos empleados a tiempo completo, pero múltiples organizaciones sin fines de lucro y con fines de lucro, con enfoques y antecedentes diversos pero objetivos y valores compartidos, están comprometidas en la innovación a pequeña escala bajo el paraguas del instituto. Los proyectos respaldados por el TSI abarcan un espectro vasto, desde un solo ladrillo propuesto como material ecológico para construir en el océano hasta viviendas unifamiliares flotantes y colonias marítimas enteras. Este enfoque tipo startup permite a los “aquapreneurs” probar diferentes estrategias de monetización en paralelo. Por ejemplo, la empresa de tecnología de propiedad Arkhaus está desarrollando actualmente un club privado flotante en Miami para “disruptores e innovadores con ideas afines” con paquetes de membresía anuales que comienzan desde $7,500; si funciona, tienen la intención de replicar este modelo en Nueva York, Estambul, Dubái y París. Una estrategia diferente pero complementaria podría ser reunir una comunidad en línea antes de construir algo físico. En línea con el concepto de gobierno no territorial (también conocido como criptosecesión) y network states (estados en red), este enfoque permite a los seasteading obtener una masa crítica de seguidores sin pedirles a todos que abandonen sus vidas y se muden a una plataforma flotante remota y precaria, y probar nuevas ideas sin lidiar con la burocracia o participar en luchas políticas. Ethos Island, por ejemplo, tiene la intención de crear una ciudad-estado privada en aguas internacionales y está invitando a todos a unirse a su comunidad virtual y votar por su ubicación. Otro ejemplo es Atlas Island. Fundada en 2021 por un grupo de embajadores del TSI, han reunido alrededor de 400 miembros en línea comprometidos a convertirse en ciudadanos de un futuro seastead. En un principio, el plan es establecer comunidades marinas compuestas por embarcaciones individuales cerca de servicios en tierra, y luego desarrollar gradualmente la infraestructura necesaria para adentrarse más en alta mar, alejados de cualquier control gubernamental y, en última instancia, convertirse en un seastead completamente desarrollado con una ciudadanía basada en contratos, similar a una ciudad privada libre. Los fundadores están eligiendo ubicaciones para comunidades pioneras, una en el Mediterráneo y otra en el Caribe, y están desarrollando el “Arca de la Libertad”, una vivienda flotante unifamiliar autosuficiente para servir como bloque de construcción. El equipo de Atlas Island también está negociando con un gobierno (aún no revelado) para adoptar una bandera de conveniencia (FOC, por sus siglas en inglés), una práctica comúnmente utilizada por los propietarios de barcos para registrar una embarcación en un país diferente al país de propiedad real y así evitar costosas normas y regulaciones. Aquí viene la segunda lección que los seasteading han aprendido después de varios intentos de llegar a un acuerdo con algún estado: es hora de dejar de negociar con los gobiernos y comenzar a negociar con los registros de abanderamiento. Es una práctica común que estados decidan delegar las funciones administrativas y regulatorias de registrar un barco, hacer cumplir las regulaciones marítimas e inspeccionar las embarcaciones a entidades privadas de terceros. Como resultado, mientras el barco enarbola la bandera de la nación en cuestión, una entidad privada se encarga de muchas de las tareas regulatorias diarias. La práctica es ubicua: la gran mayoría del transporte marítimo mundial se realiza bajo banderas de conveniencia. Para los estados que emiten banderas de conveniencia, más barcos que llevan la bandera de un país, y que pagan una tarifa anual por ello, significa más dinero en el presupuesto de ese país, lo que lo convierte en un acuerdo beneficioso para ambas partes. Panamá ostenta firmemente el liderazgo en cuanto al número de barcos que llevan su bandera, seguido de Liberia, las Islas Marshall, Malta y las Bahamas. Como explica Quirk: “El ecosistema legal para el seasteading no está definido en el derecho internacional, por lo que el Instituto Seasteading tiene la intención de negociar con los registros de abanderamiento para que las Bahamas, Panamá, Malta o Liberia definan los seasteads como una categoría legítima de embarcación en el derecho internacional. … Si lo logramos, dos tercios de la superficie terrestre de la Tierra serán un lienzo en blanco para experimentar con comunidades voluntarias”. En el caso del MS Satoshi, Panamá estaba dispuesto a otorgar su bandera al mega barco, pero simplemente no tenían idea de cómo clasificarlo. Clasificarlo como una embarcación apta para navegar implicaba que el barco se movería, transportando pasajeros y mercancías, llevando miles de galones de combustible, requiriendo una tripulación de unas 30-40 personas y siguiendo una gran cantidad de costosas regulaciones ambientales y laborales, todas las cuales, de hecho, no tenían relevancia para una comunidad residencial flotante, que es lo que realmente pretendía ser el MS Satoshi. Si solo Panamá, por lo demás bastante favorable a las iniciativas de seasteading, pudiera definir los seasteads como una entidad legal legítima, eso cambiaría el juego. Las reglas del océano son fluidas (recientemente, por ejemplo, la ONU ha actualizado las normas ambientales que rigen en alta mar) y nuevos precedentes legales eventualmente conducirán a nuevas prácticas legales. Aquí viene la tercera lección principal que los seasteading han aprendido hasta la fecha: priorizar la seguridad. Es fácil ver cómo las regulaciones engorrosas obstaculizan el progreso científico e institucional, y, de hecho, el principio de precaución, el miedo instintivo a todo lo nuevo, es en gran medida responsable de la desaceleración de la innovación a nivel mundial. Pero para que los tecno-optimistas ganen el argumento, también es importante recordar que, en el fondo, cuando se trata de personas normales, este miedo no está impulsado por alguna ideología partidista, sino por un deseo humano natural de seguridad. Por lo tanto, para ganar la opinión pública y a los responsables de tomar decisiones de su lado, los seasteading deben mostrar que, al buscar escapar de las normas gubernamentales, no simplemente tiran todas las precauciones a la basura, sino que reemplazan regulaciones marítimas engorrosas y obsoletas con una autorregulación moderna y ágil. La reciente y catastrófica implosión del sumergible Titan de OceanGate fue un trágico recordatorio de la peligrosa naturaleza del océano que podría haberse evitado, escribe el blog del TSI: “Los seasteaders están en el borde de la innovación, pero la innovación no puede ignorar la física”. Para evitar futuras tragedias, contrarrestar la ansiedad y aumentar la confianza pública, el TSI se está reinventando como una sociedad de clasificación. Un equipo de voluntarios está ocupado revisando miles de páginas de estándares de seguridad existentes y redactando un documento (“Reglas y Normas de la Sociedad de Clasificación”) para definir legalmente los seasteads en el derecho internacional. Esto permitiría al TSI utilizar su reputación para otorgar – o rechazar – su sello de aprobación a proyectos que deseen ser considerados seasteads. Si todo va según lo planeado, eso brindaría mayor confianza a todas las partes involucradas – registros de abanderamiento, compañías de seguros, inversionistas y los propios seasteaders – en la exploración de habitar las aguas desconocidas. Un mar de posibilidades: ¿Qué viene para el seasteading? Las ideas del seasteading no evolucionaron en aislamiento, al igual que las Ciudades Libres, los seasteads pertenecen a un movimiento más amplio de iniciativas que exploran cómo la innovación en la gobernanza aumenta la libertad y la prosperidad humana. En comparación con las comunidades libres basadas en tierra, los proyectos de seasteading tienen una gran ventaja: la movilidad. Las embarcaciones individuales y comunidades flotantes enteras pueden ser trasladadas a un lugar nuevo si el entorno político en el país de origen se vuelve hostil. Esta fluidez permite a los seasteads disfrutar de una autonomía sin igual aquí y ahora. Posiblemente estemos a décadas de que las Naciones Unidas reconozcan a los microestados flotantes como entidades soberanas, pero persuadir al menos a un país (¿tal vez Panamá?) para que reconozca a los seasteads parece bastante posible. A medida que las leyes oceánicas se adaptan y cambian, casi la mitad de la superficie del mundo permanece sin reclamar por ningún gobierno, un lienzo abierto para la exploración y experimentación. En esta vasta extensión de azul, yace la promesa de crear “una gran diversidad de gobiernos para una gran diversidad de personas” y un futuro donde cada ola traiga nuevas posibilidades. Imagen de portada: OCEANIX/BIG-Bjarke Ingels Group. Traducido del inglés por Juan D. Estevez --- # Honduran ZEDEs: Their Past and Future URL: https://free-cities.org/honduran-zedes-their-past-and-future Published: 2025-06-02 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes, history-of-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan The following article was originally published in August 2022. It recounted the full history of the ZEDEs until that time but ended at a point of uncertainty about the zones’ future. Although that uncertainty has remained and even intensified in the two-and-a-half years since, much has happened in the meantime, especially regarding the ongoing legal battle between the ZEDEs and the Honduran government. The ZEDE law in Honduras was repealed in April 2022 and with it, one chapter of the history of innovative governance has come to an end. This does not mean that the existing ZEDEs are doomed to ruin or that the ideas they represent have failed. It only signals that difficult negotiations are ahead and that the future is, for the moment, uncertain. Over the last two decades, Honduras has been the site of remarkable developments. In this small Latin American country, innovation in governance has been given an opportunity to be explored. While the standard model of Special Economic Zones focuses simply on tax or customs concessions, the next stage in their development includes autonomy over wider areas. In Honduras, these jurisdictions came to be known as ZEDEs — an acronym for “Zone for Employment and Economic Development” in Spanish. They are enhanced special administrative regions designed to allow for more self-government and regulatory flexibility, with the goal of bringing about a stable legal and political environment that could attract foreign investment to the benefit of Hondurans. Contrary to frequent media claims, the ZEDEs are not some private resorts of millionaires lying outside Honduran sovereignty, where there is no regulation and residents have no rights. Instead, the ZEDEs are public, municipality-like entities within the state of Honduras, led by Honduran-born elected officials, whose activities are overseen by a Honduran state commission. They are subject to the Honduran constitution, Honduran international agreements, and Honduran criminal code. In public discussions, it is often claimed or assumed that ZEDEs have their origins abroad — in the minds of visionary entrepreneurs or idealistic academics. But such a narrative, stressing foreign influences, overlooks the central part of the story, which is that the ZEDEs were — and continue to be — Honduran above all. How ZEDEs came to be “It all started with three Honduran jurists: Octavio Sanchez, Carlos Pineda, and Ebal Díaz,” says Dr. Titus Gebel, President of the Free Cities Foundation. “It started with their vision to help Honduras tackle the grave problems it had been facing.” Sanchez in particular had been trying to figure out ways to bring reform to a country mired in corruption, weak rule of law, and the poverty resulting from it. Infamously, Honduras has for long been near the top of the list of countries facing the most violent crime. However, turning a country around is not at all straightforward and, as Sanchez started building his political career, the prospect of widespread reform seemed almost impossible. In the early 2000s, Sanchez was working for future President Porfirio Lobo. They started a conversation with Mark Klugmann, a US development consultant who had worked in the Reagan and G.H.W. Bush administrations. Klugmann had been advocating for so-called LEAP zones. As Reason Magazine explained: “Klugmann’s insight was that piecemeal attempts at enacting market reforms over entire economies tend to generate opposition from powerful coalitions of entrenched interests. Why not try doing the reforms all at once, but on a smaller level?” If thorough reforms were indeed tried on a local scale, such experiments could then become beacons of prosperity that eventually end up having a profound influence on the rest of the country too — just like what happened with Hong Kong and China. The principles Klugmann was advocating convinced Sanchez, who then continued to develop these ideas in the Honduran context. Eventually, creating a new Hong Kong-style autonomous city in Honduras became a powerful shared vision in Sanchez’s circles. The idea of transforming governance to achieve prosperity is not new. It is rooted in the fundamental insight of New Institutional Economics — that no matter how able or talented people might be, it is next to impossible for them to build themselves up if the institutional infrastructure does not only fail to facilitate growth but even creates further obstacles to development. And when it comes to Honduras, most observers agree: the Honduran people are smart, able, hard-working, and eager to create a better life for themselves. What stands in their way is an impenetrable bureaucratic and institutional maze. In 2010, Lobo became President, and Sanchez his Chief of Staff. That was their chance; Honduran Hong Kongs could finally become a reality. But there was still one problem: how to sell something so unorthodox to the Honduran Congress? Enter Paul Romer, a Nobel-Prize-winning celebrity economist, famous for his advocacy of charter cities. Romer’s ideas seemed to align well with Sanchez’s, the two men got talking and, before long, Romer put his weight behind Honduras too. This was decisive; it was Romer’s international credibility that helped persuade Congress. And so came the first iteration of Honduran special zones — the REDs (regions especial de desarrollo / special development regions). The REDs were as promising as they were ambitious. Thorough autonomy in many areas was to be granted to them, allowing for unprecedented leaps in governance and institutional design. For example, as detailed in the Journal of Special Jurisdictions, the REDs were even to be allowed to “enter into treaties and international agreements”. However, they asked for too much. Though the legislature overwhelmingly supported the RED proposal, it went beyond what, in the eyes of the Honduran Supreme Court, the Honduran Constitution allowed. In October 2012, one year after the RED statute was passed, the Supreme Court struck down the RED constitutional amendment, which, consequently, made the RED statute itself unconstitutional. By that time, the idea of special zones was already facing sustained criticism, though no actual zone had been established on the ground. During the short period in which the RED law was in force, conflicts already arose among the figures involved. A Transparency Commission to oversee the REDs had been created, and Romer was likely unofficially promised a leading position on it. However, when the Honduran government signed an MOU with a US entrepreneur Michael Strong to develop the first RED and Romer protested that he had not been consulted, it turned out that he had never been formally appointed to the Commission. Romer felt he was pushed out of the loop and left the Honduran scene shortly after. Such conflicts gave ammunition to a small but loud minority of Hondurans who were firmly opposed to these special zones. Denunciations of corruption and neocolonialism, and claims of indigenous rights being at risk started spreading in the press. “Media all over are dishonest, but I would say that the Honduran media was egregiously dishonest,” contends Strong, who was working towards the establishment of the first special zone at the time. He maintains that the negative media attitude toward the zones was grossly unrepresentative of the general population. “At one point, somebody said ‘five percent of Hondurans are against this on anti-capitalist grounds, five percent of Hondurans are against this on nationalist or sovereignty grounds, ninety percent of Hondurans just don’t think it’s gonna happen — but if it did, they’d be delighted for the jobs.’” Where others would give up, Sanchez and his team carried on. After the Supreme Court ruling, a new, improved version of the special zones legislation was prepared. The issue with the REDs had been that the Supreme Court thought that their design was a threat to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Honduras. In the reformulated version of the legislation, the REDs became ZEDEs. With this new design, some of the autonomy previously afforded to the REDs was limited and all of the previous reservations regarding sovereignty were addressed in a new constitutional amendment that was later challenged again but this time approved by the Supreme Court. The enabling law for the new zones — the ZEDE Organic Law — was then passed in September 2013 by another overwhelming majority. Among other things, this law placed the ZEDEs clearly and unambiguously within the Honduran constitutional order. In place of the former Transparency Commission, the Committee for the Adoption of Best Practices (CAMP) was set up to oversee the ZEDEs. With the ZEDE law in place and CAMP established, things could start moving forward. However, it took almost four years for the first ZEDE — Próspera — to actually be approved. According to the Journal of Special Jurisdiction citing a close but anonymous source, “[t]he delay […] has been attributed to a combination of infighting and fiscal mismanagement within CAMP, a lack of actual interest in developing ZEDEs from President Hernández [who had assumed office in January 2014], electoral distractions, and potential investors shying away amid political uncertainty”. Only after one of the three Honduran forefathers of the ZEDEs, Carlos Pineda, became CAMP Secretary in 2016 did things start moving forward. Próspera ZEDE was approved in December 2017 and Ciudad Morazán ZEDE one year later. A third ZEDE — Orquidea — then became operational in June 2021. A fourth ZEDE, Mariposa, was nearing its approval by election time in late 2021. Each of the three existing projects has radically different ambitions and visions for its development. Próspera is focused on governmental and technological innovation, the knowledge economy, and connecting Honduras with international business. Ciudad Morazán is a “blue-collar ZEDE”, targeting working-class and middle-class residents, primarily from Honduras. Orquidea does not include a residential component at all but is purely focused on the production of fruit and vegetables for export. Thanks to the autonomy enjoyed under the ZEDE regime, each of the three zones has been able to choose the legal system and regulations that suit them best. Ciudad Morazán uses most of the Honduran civil code, the export-oriented Orquidea has adopted the law of the US State of Delaware, and Próspera has developed and put into practice a completely new Roatán Common Law Code based on best practices from all over the world together with the innovative open-source legal system Ulex, developed by Chapman University law professor Tom W. Bell. Moreover, Próspera has introduced an “agreement of coexistence” with each individual resident, granting them irrevocable rights and legal stability guarantees. “That is exactly the kind of innovation in governance I always talk about,” says Titus Gebel. “You can see it in practice. Here, they said, ‘Hey, let’s try out different things,’ and you have three ZEDEs with three very different models already.” What these projects have in common is an aim to create opportunities, stability, and prosperity for Hondurans in ways that are not possible to pursue elsewhere in the country. Losing the battle for legitimacy As the activity around these ZEDEs grew, so grew the opposition. From ideological opponents to entrenched interests, the ZEDEs have been subject to fierce attacks. Accusations of wrongdoing or even malintent started springing up everywhere, stoked among the worried public mostly by actors whose positions of power were in some ways threatened by the ZEDEs or whose ideological alignment was incompatible with them. Massimo Mazzone, the founder of Ciudad Morazán, says that the most common criticisms of his project have also been the most easily shown to be false or inaccurate. The one angle which has received perhaps the most coverage over the years is expropriation. The accusation, which has been amplified and repeated by the press, is that the ZEDEs are threatening to dispossess natives of their land and real estate or even directly involved in their expropriation. These critics point to a clause on expropriation included in the ZEDE law (Article 25). However, this article only reserves the right to expropriate land to the state of Honduras, not to the ZEDEs themselves. This makes sense in the overall picture since the ZEDEs have no jurisdiction over land outside their approved zone limits. Furthermore, according to Mazzone, this is nothing but a red herring: “Regardless of what is in the ZEDE law, [the state of] Honduras already has eminent domain. For example, if somebody wants to build a highway or a pipeline, if they have good contacts and if they can convince the government to do it, they can expropriate with or without the ZEDE law under regular eminent domain which is unfortunately common all over the world.” With reference to Ciudad Morazán, he adds: “Of course, for us, that practice is ethically monstrous. We are completely opposed to any type of expropriation. We would never engage in it because it’s repellent from an ethical point of view and it would be suicidal from a political point of view.” Though perfectly reasonable, such conciliatory statements by the ZEDEs do not tend to be particularly effective in stopping attacks that are launched in bad faith in the first place. In a hostile article giving comments about expropriation an air of legitimacy, The North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA) recounts the establishment of Próspera, highlighting that the locals have come to “understand that the municipal government no longer holds jurisdiction over the 58 acres now incorporated into the ZEDE model. The land has allegedly been transferred from the municipal registry to an independent Próspera ZEDE land registry.” This is immediately followed by the statement: “Land dispossession is an essential concern of communities.” It is clear that the authors are interested above all in presenting Próspera as a villain, regardless of the actual content of its actions. A transfer of jurisdiction to Próspera ZEDE’s land registry does not constitute any kind of dispossession — it is more akin to a change of municipality affiliation. Lost in this story is also the fact that the land involved was privately owned, previously unoccupied, and legitimately bought by Próspera’s affiliates, meaning the aforementioned change of municipality affiliation was undertaken with the full consent of the landowners. Since Próspera has been at the center of many of these expropriation worries, it has repeatedly made it clear that it wants nothing to do with such practices. Próspera’s representatives point to its Charter, which does not include expropriation power in its list of powers (Article 2.04), as well as to a 2020 Resolution that unequivocally rules out all expropriation and reaffirms Próspera’s commitment to only incorporate land at the landowners’ own request. As noted above, all of the land incorporated into Próspera is privately owned and was uninhabited before becoming a ZEDE. Furthermore, special attention has been given to the clarity of the property titles concerned, which in Honduras are often conflicting or incomplete. Nevertheless, despite all of these assurances and the seriousness with which Morazán and Próspera approach the issue of fairness and consensuality, this line of attack has persevered. For example, a recent article uncritically repeats a claim that “the areas mapped out for ZEDE construction are ancestral lands in the Garifuna region which has been inhabited by the indigenous people for thousands of years. As a result, the construction of ZEDEs would lead to the mass displacement of the native population.“ It should not be necessary to reiterate that developing uninhabited land cannot possibly lead to any displacement and, therefore, such claims have no connection to reality. In an even more outrageous example of apparent malintent, another article attempts to defame ZEDEs by recalling them alongside examples of violent crime, leaving the unassuming reader with the impression that ZEDE representatives are somehow organized criminals working with the government to oppress the locals. The article features a local man who is afraid of the ZEDEs despite them not having done anything to threaten or harm him. In an instance of supposed displacement that is portrayed by the authors in the worst way possible, it is nevertheless admitted that no land has actually been expropriated. Such examples of dishonest or outright fantastical coverage eventually became daily bread for the ZEDEs. For instance, in a barrage of accusations and denunciations, the National Centre of Field Workers (CNTC) claimed that the “social impacts” of the ZEDEs include “forced displacement, increased conflictivity and violence, loss of cultural heritage, migration, and the increased repression of protests”. On what grounds such egregious accusations were being made was not explained, almost as if it was common knowledge that did not need any substantiation in the first place. These characterizations are strikingly nonsensical. As already noted, all ZEDEs have been established on unoccupied land, so there has never been any potential for any displacement, much less “forced”. The ZEDEs have not engaged in any violence whatsoever, their mission being purely peaceful, lawful, and productive. The ZEDEs have not caused any migration, except where people have moved towards the ZEDEs to follow the job opportunities created in them. There have not been any protests inside the ZEDEs, so no protests could be repressed there; and as to protests happening outside the ZEDEs, the ZEDEs have no jurisdiction over law enforcement there and have no power to make any decisions over how any protests will be responded to. Consequently, rather than being genuine criticisms, such accusations seem to be levied only for reasons of publicity and personal-political gain. Among other negative consequences, such destructive claims have brought the Technical University of Munich (TUM) to withdraw from their intentions of opening a campus in Próspera, because of “indications of human rights violations”. We reached out to TUM to ask how, in their view, could human rights be violated if only uninhabited areas had been incorporated into Próspera, but the University did not provide any further clarifications. Correction: After the TUM ceased their enagagement with Próspera, the University issued a letter in which it stated that it had “no evidence of human rights violations in or by Honduras Próspera” and that the withdrawal from Honduras had been “a result of a change in management” and a “reorientation of the business focus.” When it comes to organized opposition to the ZEDEs, Mazzone notes that there are many organizations with vested interests whose powers have been threatened by the ZEDEs. Among them is the National Autonomous University of Honduras (UNAH), which enjoys a monopoly on the licensure of other (private) universities in the country. If universities used to be able to be founded only with the blessing of UNAH, but now anyone can establish one within a ZEDE, that is a direct threat to UNAH’s monopoly. Labor unions are another example of such a vested interest. Since the Honduran labor code does not apply within ZEDEs, the power of the unions is thus diminished. A similar principle applies to the Honduran lawyers’ association: if ZEDEs can choose to adopt a common-law framework instead of Honduran civil law (as Próspera has done), that decreases the potential market for local civil-law-trained lawyers. To this list of institutional opposition, Titus Gebel adds that part of the backlash comes from figures involved with the maquilas — Honduran export-based Free Zones that do not enjoy as many concessions and to which the ZEDEs pose a competitive challenge. The public image of Próspera has not been helped by the zone’s difficult relationship with its immediate neighbor — the village of Crawfish Rock on the island of Roatán. Since its establishment, Próspera has been engaging in community outreach and assistance in Crawfish Rock, trying to build positive and productive relations. Próspera started offering small-business loans, carpentry workshops, and after-school programs to the Crawfish Rock population. A community building was constructed at the expense of Próspera. Later, a savings and mutual investment group was set up among the locals. Próspera also arranged daily school buses for the village children, covering 95% of the cost. In addition, since it broke ground, Próspera has provided employment to many Crawfish Rock residents, mainly through the construction projects in the zone. Even in mid-2022, about 10% of the population of Crawfish Rock is employed in Próspera. However, the ZEDE met its opposition when it connected the village to its water supply, providing running water where the only source in the village had been cistern truck deliveries that proved to be unreliable due to supply chain issues during the Covid pandemic. Próspera soon learned that the water from the truck supply had been sold to the villagers by local community representatives, whose position of power was threatened by Próspera’s new taps. Before long, they accused Próspera of profiteering off of the locals by charging for the water, despite the fact that the truck deliveries had had to be paid for as well (and at a higher price), and that Próspera actually asked the villagers what they themselves considered to be a fair price for the water tap, and then charged them that amount. In addition, during the Covid pandemic, Próspera stopped billing altogether and provided water to the village for free. One angle of the local leaders’ pushback against Próspera involved its supposed intention to incorporate Crawfish Rock into the ZEDE, presumably against the wishes of the locals. It is true that, on its website, Próspera showed a visualization that included the neighboring community as part of a vision for future development. Though this was certainly a major publicity oversight by Próspera, it was based on the assumption that the community would join the ZEDE voluntarily by referendum, as laid out in Article 38 of the ZEDE law. As already noted, such referenda, along with the decisions of landowners of uninhabited areas to join, are the only legally permitted ways for Próspera to grow. Próspera has always been careful to keep a paper trail of their activities to defend themselves against misinformation promulgated by the press. Therefore, when it learned that the Crawfish Rock leaders were looking to restore their old truck water supply, they sought written confirmation from them that they were interested in keeping Próspera’s water running, and that they would pay the mutually agreed bills. Even if the leaders do not actually speak for many (perhaps most) of the locals, Próspera is not in the position to disregard and circumvent them. Therefore, when the local leaders showed no interest in the continued service, Próspera proceeded to withdraw their supply. This episode was subsequently spun in the international press to paint Próspera as a villain trying to strong-arm the local population into submission. Not surprisingly, the detractors were not interested in telling an accurate story. Over the years, Honduran social media became filled to the brim with concerns and statements that were not based in reality but were repeated ad nauseam nonetheless, fueled by the widespread misinformation perpetuated by the press. A prominent example of this is the contention that the ZEDE framework is supposedly “illegal” because it has been found unconstitutional. This is simply not true. As recalled above, it was the RED regime that was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and the ZEDE framework was then explicitly designed to rectify the constitutional shortcomings of its predecessor, which the Court recognized and confirmed. Nevertheless, articles continued to be published conflating the two and making legal and moral judgments on that basis. The sheer volume of criticism and anger online created the impression that the whole country was against the ZEDEs and that the public was unanimous in their denouncement. Despite all this, an observation on which many proponents of ZEDEs seem to agree is that, whenever criticisms are voiced in a genuine way by ordinary members of the public, they usually stem from a lack of information about what ZEDEs are. “There is no grassroots opposition to the ZEDE law once people understand what it is really about,” explains Gebel. Polling statistics also support the notion that the opposition against ZEDEs is only organized by a loud minority of politically or ideologically motivated actors and vested interests, and that there has never been any broad movement against the zones. But at some point, the combined force of the interests against it drowns out a genuine discussion about the benefits and drawbacks of special zones. In politics, it is often not the most popular side that wins, but the loudest and most visible. By the end of 2021, it was clear that the ZEDEs had lost the battle for their legitimacy. The bumpy road ahead When the negative press was at its loudest, it was easy for the opposition leader Xiomara Castro to include the anti-ZEDE position as one of the major planks of her Presidential campaign. When she emerged victorious in late 2021, she vowed to do away with ZEDEs, which she saw as vehicles for foreign exploitation — a position summarized by the ubiquitous slogan “Honduras is not for sale.” In April 2022, Congress voted to repeal the ZEDE Organic Law and started the process of repealing the constitutional amendments that had allowed the law to be passed back in 2013. However, the process is not yet complete. Another vote will take place in early 2023 to confirm or reject the constitutional change. At the time of writing, the government remains ambiguous about what next steps it will take. In addition, even with the law repealed, this only means that no new ZEDEs can be created. This part has indeed been fairly easy, but getting rid of the existing ZEDEs could prove very costly for Castro and her party. In public statements as well as recent interviews, Próspera representatives have made it clear that, as far as they are concerned, the repeal of the law changes nothing for them. Among other legal instruments, they point to investor protection in the form of international treaties that Honduras has signed. These include legal stability agreements that guarantee the status of the existing ZEDEs for the next fifty years. Consequently, abolishing the existing ZEDEs and their corresponding legal status would mean reneging on these obligations, which would make Honduras liable for enormous damages. Próspera has already partnered with White & Case of New York, an internationally renowned law firm in this legal field, to represent it in this conflict. Whatever the result, one of the likely effects this controversy will have is to scare away some investors who are not comfortable with facing such political pressure. One era for the ZEDEs has ended — an era in which, despite bad-faith attacks from various groups, the Honduran government was essentially on their side. Titus Gebel sees this as a missed opportunity, regretting that so much time was lost due to inaction between 2013 and 2017. Had the ZEDEs started developing earlier, it might have been harder to politically oppose them now. “If you had — I would say — four more years, then a lot of jobs would have been created, people would be living in the ZEDEs safely, enjoying a higher quality of life… The same happened in the ‘80s with the maquilas. There was a lot of opposition to them but after the first twenty thousand jobs were created, no party has wanted to get rid of the maquilas since. The same would have been the case with the ZEDEs; especially in Morazán, which could offer incredible improvements in all aspects of life for the average Honduran worker in that region.” Though fortune has not been on the ZEDEs’ side, they have attracted many innovators and entrepreneurs over their short lifespan, who have already generated considerable innovation in the field of governance. Several new concepts have been created, such as the constitution-like ZEDE Charters; a complete common law code based on the open-source legal system concept Ulex; an electronic land registration and transfer system; and a Citizen Contract — just to name a few. These innovations have now been developed and tried in Honduras and can be reimplemented in future projects all over the world, even if the ZEDEs were to be abolished completely. But despite the opportunities missed, the Honduran dream is not yet over. The founding fathers who have fought for Honduran special zones are continuing to work to bring progress and prosperity to Honduras. They are now supported by prominent experts across numerous fields, be they entrepreneurs, lawyers, architects, investors, or visionaries. In 2013, Reason Magazine commented that “to become a 21st-century trailblazer [in innovative governance models], Honduras — or at least a small territory within it — must become, well, not Honduras.” But that has never been true. The ZEDEs are a Honduran idea and a Honduran project. They are a grassroots attempt to bring new hope to a country that has run out of options. The hope now lives on in the three existing ZEDEs. But elections come and go, and maybe, when the winds change again, all of Honduras will benefit from a kaleidoscope of ZEDEs, experimenting with improvements in systems and institutions to deliver a better world for us all. Addendum: Legal Developments in Honduras Since 2022 Published June 2025 In the last two-and-a-half years, the conflict between the ZEDEs and the Honduran government has only intensified. Since the government took power in 2021, it continued its crusade against ZEDEs. The government’s goal has always been to abolish the ZEDEs completely and without a trace. In 2022, when the ZEDE law was repealed (the first major step in this process), it was already clear that the government intends to virtually deny the past, erase the acquired rights of the investors in the ZEDEs — a highly controversial goal that goes against one of the basic principles of law and justice, that no law should be applied retroactively. Steps to achieve this goal started to be taken right away. Political Maneuvering Throughout the current government’s tenure, the President and the ruling party engaged in practices that were highly dubious at best and blatantly unconstitutional at worst to install their loyal party members in key positions of power, often through constitutional loopholes or legal gray areas. As the first step after taking power, Castro installed Luis Redondo as the new President of Congress. This position would normally require a majority vote in the newly elected parliament, which, however, Redondo did not get, because 18 deputies from the ruling Libre party opted to vote for another candidate instead — Jorge Cálix — along with the opposition. There was a split within the party at the time, and Cálix was one of the main names within the rival faction. In reaction to this, Cálix and the aforementioned 18 deputies were expelled from the party. Castro and her husband, Manuel Zelaya — founder of Libre and an informal leader within the party — proceeded to “lead a mob into Congress”, as Jorge Colindres, Technical Secretary of Próspera ZEDE, describes it. After having been seemingly strong-armed into submission, Cálix denounced his post as President of Congress, the post was passed on to Castro’s pick, Redondo, and Cálix and the 18 deputies were admitted back into the party. A few months later, it was the new President of Congress Redondo who spearheaded the repeal process of the ZEDE law while not having been duly elected into his position in the first place — after Cádix had stepped down, there was no additional vote to elect Redondo. Next was the question of the Supreme Court. The justices on this court are elected for 7-year terms, and the most recent election took place in February 2023. This election was marked by intense disagreement and political maneuvering from Castro and her party, which seemed to pay off well. 7/15 justices on the Supreme Court ended up being Libre-aligned candidates, including, as ‘chief justice,’ Rebeca Ráquel — the aunt-in-law of Manuel Zelaya’s daughter. The opposition claimed that the court had been “stacked” by Libre in multiple ways. One: Libre had built a strong influence over the Nominating Board (the body selecting Supreme Court justice candidates in the first place). Two: the newly empowered President of Congress Redondo had delayed the vote on the Supreme Court nominees until the negotiations favored Libre. Three: there was a distinct lack of transparency throughout the process, suggesting that Castro and Redondo likely led an effort to align the court to its interest even closer, especially during the (internal) selection of the members of the Court’s Constitutional Chamber; this is further evidenced by the fact that multiple justices have familial and personal ties to top Libre members. The Supreme Court, and especially the Constitutional Chamber, would later play a key role in the next move in the government’s fight against the ZEDEs. The last step, a year-and-a-half later, was to install a loyalist as the Attorney General. The Permanent Commission of the National Congress, led by Redondo, appointed Johel Zelaya (unrelated to the President’s husband) without the required 86-vote majority in the full Congress. Due to a gridlock in Congress, an agreement on the next Attorney General had not been reached by late October 2023, two months after the previous term had ended, especially due to questions over Zelaya’s eligibility and integrity. He had been accused of document falsification and perjury related to his previous active political role, which would (at least on paper) prevent him from becoming Attorney General. His other positions at the time also meant a potential conflict of interest. The Honduran Constitution does not provide for a process when this happens, leaving a legal loophole, which was exploited by the Libre-stacked Permanent Commission (by claiming authority under Article 202 to handle urgent matters during recesses). It voted unanimously to appoint Zelaya the interim Attorney General, arguing it was necessary to avoid a power vacuum in the office. Though this move was denounced by the opposition, who claimed that the Commission does not have the power to make significant appointments — especially ones requiring a supermajority in Congress — Zelaya remained in his interim position until eventually being confirmed by Congress in 2024 as part of a deal between Libre and opposition parties that was reportedly agreed to under duress, as Libre threatened to prosecute opposition lawmakers and stack the electoral bodies with only Libre representatives. Through these moves, President Castro and Libre have, over the past years, solidified their control over key state institutions in Honduras, which they then could utilize, among other things, in their fight against the ZEDEs. Próspera’s Pushback As noted above, the ZEDE Organic Law was repealed on April 25, 2022. However, the ZEDE framework included not only the Law but also constitutional amendments that enshrined them more firmly in the Honduran legal system. At the same time as the repeal, a Decree was also passed aiming to repeal these constitutional amendments. However, Honduran law requires constitutional amendments to be passed by two consecutive ordinary legislative sessions with a two-thirds supermajority vote. While the first vote (in April 2022) succeeded, no further vote on this Decree occurred in the next session before it ended on October 31, 2023. This lack of ratification means that the Constitution was never amended, and, to this day, it still includes the articles that underpin the ZEDEs. The second vote likely did not take place because of what happened in the meantime. On December 20, 2022, Próspera filed an international arbitration claim at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). It argued that the repeal of the ZEDE law violated the acquired rights of the international investors in ZEDE, the legal stability of which should have been guaranteed and protected by international treaties for a period of 50 years. The government’s apparent official position was that the ZEDEs do not exist and have never existed. However, the ZEDEs were clearly enshrined in the constitution, so the government’s position was blatantly unjustified. More specifically and in addition, Próspera made the case that the government had been engaging in subtly as well as openly sabotaging the operations ZEDE instead of the good-faith cooperation that should have been happening instead. This included various expropriatory actions, such as taking away the customs service for the ZEDEs or denying the ZEDEs’ exemption from the national sales tax (which they do to this day). The government also pressed the national banking and insurance bodies to — for all intents and purposes — debank the jurisdiction, which included closing the accounts of existing ZEDE residents and companies. There was also a defamation and slander campaign against the ZEDEs throughout all this. Though it was not picked up right away by the international press, the arbitration claim became a big story over the following two years. And again, Próspera was mostly painted in a negative light. It was again being accused of “neo-colonialism” as well as “exploiting” the dispute resolution mechanism. The usually highly regarded Foreign Policy published what amounted to a hit piece, repeating all the usual falsehoods and mischaracterizations of the ZEDEs, as if these had not already been debunked again and again. In February 2024, in response to both Próspera’s arbitration claim as well as other ICSID claims (unrelated to Próspera) that have piled on during the current government’s reign, Honduras announced that it would be leaving ICSID after having been a member for 35 years. The withdrawal became effective on August 25, 2024. Though ICSID arbitration is now no longer available for any new disputes involving Honduras, this has no effect on any proceedings initiated before the effective withdrawal date. Though this was a dramatic move, it does not make a difference for Honduras in terms of Próspera’s case. As hinted above, it was likely this arbitration claim that made the Honduran Congress think twice about ratifying the repeal of the constitutional amendments enabling the ZEDEs in the spring of 2023. The government was now on the hook for an enormous sum of money if it went ahead with such a rash and aggressive move. The opposition would not support this unless there was a deal with the ZEDEs to safeguard the jobs and investments made into them, which the current government has never attempted to do. A Rogue Supreme Court On September 20th, 2024, the Honduran Supreme Court declared the ZEDEs unconstitutional. It argued that the constitutional amendments enabling them violated other, “stone-written” articles of the constitution related to territorial organization, the justice system, and the economic regime. The Supreme Court became busy with the issue of the ZEDEs after a challenge had been filed by UNAH, the National Autonomous University of Honduras. Though this may seem like a strange institution to get involved in the issue of the ZEDEs, the motivations are quite straightforward. UNAH has enjoyed a constitutionally-enshrined monopoly on higher education in Honduras — all private universities, as well as all changes to curricula, have to receive approval from UNAH. This monopoly was threatened by the ZEDE framework, under which these constitutional provisions don’t apply. If the ZEDEs ended up growing and becoming really successful, UNAH could end up losing its grip on the higher education industry. However, the Supreme Court decided to go further than just deal with the UNAH challenge. Instead of just reviewing the education-related aspects of the ZEDEs, it turned to attack the legal framework as a whole. The proclamation of unconstitutionality was a seismic announcement, prompting responses across the board. Próspera immediately warned that declaring the ZEDEs unconstitutional would further destabilize investor confidence, particularly from US investors, and harm Honduras’ international relations. 250 local workers and community members signed an open letter against the ruling. Legal analyst Fernando Gonzáles warned that the potential damages from the continued attack on the ZEDEs could result in damages between $12-13 billion if the government does not negotiate with investors to avoid international litigation. Likewise, lawyer and politician Maribel Espinoza called on the government to try to reach a settlement to avoid facing an immense financial burden due to losing the arbitration case. More fuel to the fire was added by a key aspect of the ruling: The Court announced that the ruling would apply retroactively, creating the legal fiction that not only did the ZEDEs not exist in the present, but they had never existed. This retroactivity is truly unprecedented in Honduras, and it was this aspect that became the straw that broke the camel’s back for many people, even those previously more aligned with the government’s anti-ZEDE actions. It became clear that this was not only an attack on the ZEDEs but on the entire legal and constitutional foundations of Honduras and basic principles of the law. Constitutional lawyer Juan Carlos Barrientos warned that a retroactive nullification of the ZEDEs would create legal chaos, invalidating previous agreements and creating insecurity. In response, a letter representing a coalition of 144 investors and companies from 19 countries, whose investments were collectively valued at over $250 million, demanded that the government immediately stop the attack and respect and restore the rule of law. In the same vein, US Congresswoman María Elvira Salazar warned about the possible repercussions that expropriatory actions taken against US investors could have. Próspera’s own response has been unwavering. It reaffirmed that it would continue to operate as usual and reiterated its request toward the government for a dialogue toward an amicable solution. According to Prospera, the ruling of unconstitutionality is itself unconstitutional. “Our position is that the ruling is null and void because the court does not have the power to retroactively void law, and Article 321 of the Constitution says that if it exercises power beyond what the law gives to public servants, then the act is null and void,” says Technical Secretary Colindres. In addition, Article 96 of the Honduran Constitution states that no law has a retroactive effect, and Próspera’s view is that in pronouncing something as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court acts as a de facto legislator. Despite the criticisms, the ruling was published in the official Gazette on November 25th, 2024. Nevertheless, it has some additional strange characteristics. “The ruling just declared the ZEDEs unconstitutional, but there was no command to do or not to do anything. That was interesting and, to be honest, quite beneficial. If the court publishes something, even though we may see it clearly as null and void, it still has what I call ‘the seal and the letterhead’, and so regardless of what you think, things may happen to you that you don’t like.” The ruling also did not touch on the international treaties that protect investment in Próspera. This is rather strange considering that Honduras has the obligation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the UN Charter to comply with the treaties it had signed in good faith. If the Supreme Court wishes to negate these obligations, one would expect it to at least address them in some way. Furthermore, Colindres argues on behalf of Próspera, “Under domestic law, Article 94 of the Law of Constitutional Justice specifically, expressly states that rulings of unconstitutionality will not affect legal situations that have been definitively resolved and executed. That means that Honduran law says that the ruling does not affect consolidated legal situations. So, binding Honduran law says that rulings of unconstitutionality cannot affect us, since Próspera ZEDE has already been authorized, we have 235 companies, about 2000 residents (physical and electronic), and over 150 million dollars in investment, which is clearly a consolidated legal situation.” He stresses that over 40 Supreme Court rulings from the past 20 years have confirmed that such rulings cannot have a retroactive effect, making this a very well-established principle not only of general law and justice but also specifically of Honduran constitutional law as well. A Decisive Year Since the ruling was published, there have been few movements by the government out in the open. We can only speculate whether the government has plans for any additional moves against the ZEDEs before the next election. As the ruling does not include any imperative language, it seems to be up to the discretion of the government whether it wants to take any further steps and, if so, when. Due to the ongoing political uncertainty, the future of the ZEDEs is still unclear at the moment. However, with the next general election coming in November 2025, there is hope that things could take a turn in a better direction. Multiple candidates and parties have already spoken up against the ruling of the Constitutional Court and signaled that the way the current government has been dealing with the ZEDEs is wrong and irresponsible. Instead, the obvious appropriate steps would be to negotiate a mutually beneficial deal that ends up diffusing Próspera’s $10.7 billion lawsuit. “There is a good chance that the government changes after the elections in November,” says Colindres. “This is not a dispute between Próspera and the national government, it’s a dispute between the government and the entire private sector of the country – domestic and foreign. They are expropriating companies in the energy sector, infrastructure sector (companies that build roads, manage ports, airports), financial companies… They are attacking the private sector across all industries. The government is supporting the invasion of private property and private land by armed ‘campesino’ groups. The government is also restricting access to the US dollar, which the private sector in Honduras now cannot access, which I think is just a matter of political control. The government is also pushing to repeal all special tax regimes, including the traditional ‘Zonas Libres’ that employ over 160 thousand people, and also the tourism special economic zones, as well as fiscal incentives for a lot of other sectors. So you can see how, really, the whole private sector is under attack in Honduras.” “In 2021, Próspera used to be rather alone. Now we’re part of a national coalition trying to safeguard basic standards of rule of law and private property.” 2025 is a decisive year for the ZEDEs. It is a year that will test the ZEDEs’ political skill as well as the protection mechanisms that were put in place when the ZEDE framework was created exactly for situations like this — when the government becomes antagonistic, ideological, and belligerent and refuses to honor its prior commitments. So far, it seems that these legal protection mechanisms have been a fairly effective tool in blunting the government’s attack, and there is a good chance that the ZEDEs will end up weathering the storm and will be allowed to fulfill their mandate and promise to create more freedom and prosperity for Hondurans after all. --- # As ZEDEs de Honduras: Passado e Futuro URL: https://free-cities.org/as-zedes-de-honduras-passado-e-futuro Published: 2025-06-02 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan O artigo a seguir foi publicado originalmente em agosto de 2022. Ele narrava toda a história das ZEDEs até aquela data, mas terminava num ponto de incerteza quanto ao futuro das zonas. Embora essa incerteza tenha permanecido e até se intensificado nos dois anos e meio decorridos desde então, muita coisa aconteceu nesse meio-tempo, sobretudo no que diz respeito à batalha judicial em curso entre as ZEDEs e o governo hondurenho. A lei de ZEDE em Honduras foi revogada em Abril de 2022 e com isso, um capítulo da história da inovação em governança chegou ao seu fim. Isso não significa que as ZEDEs existentes estejam condenadas ou que as ideias que elas representam falharam. Isso apenas significa que negociações difíceis estão por vir e que o futuro é, por enquanto, incerto. Ao contrário do que é frequentemente dito pela mídia, as ZEDEs não são resorts privados de milionários fora da soberania hondurenha, onde não há regulamentação e os moradores não têm direitos. Em vez disso, as ZEDEs são entidades públicas semelhantes a municípios dentro do estado de Honduras, lideradas por funcionários eleitos nascidos em Honduras, cujas atividades são supervisionadas por uma comissão estadual hondurenha. Elas estão sujeitas à constituição hondurenha, aos acordos internacionais hondurenhos e ao código penal hondurenho. Nos debates públicos, muitas vezes é afirmado ou assumido que as ZEDEs têm suas origens no exterior – nas mentes de empreendedores visionários ou acadêmicos idealistas. Mas tal narrativa, enfatizando influências estrangeiras, negligencia a parte central da história, que é que as ZEDEs eram – e continuam sendo – hondurenhos acima de tudo. Como surgiram as ZEDEs “Tudo começou com três juristas hondurenhos: Octavio Sanchez, Carlos Pineda e Ebal Díaz”, diz o Dr. Titus Gebel, presidente da Free Cities Foundation. “Começou com a visão deles de ajudar Honduras a solucionar os graves problemas que o país vinha enfrentando.” Sanchez, em particular, vinha tentando descobrir maneiras de trazer reformas a um país atolado em corrupção, estado de direito fraco e a pobreza resultante de ambos. Infelizmente, Honduras se encontra há muito tempo no topo da lista de países que sofrem com os crimes mais violentos. No entanto, mudar um país não é nada simples e, quando Sanchez começou a construir sua carreira política, a perspectiva de uma reforma generalizada parecia quase impossível. No início dos anos 2000, Sanchez trabalhava para o futuro presidente de Honduras, Porfirio Lobo. Eles então começaram a conversar com Mark Klugmann, um consultor de desenvolvimento dos EUA que trabalhou nos governos Reagan e G.H.W. administrações Bush. Klugmann vinha defendendo as chamadas zonas LEAP. Como a revista Reason explicou: “O raciocínio de Klugmann foi inovador ao argumentar que tentativas isoladas de promulgar reformas de mercado em economias inteiras tendem a gerar oposição de poderosas coalizões com interesses anti-reforma. Por que não tentar fazer as reformas todas de uma vez, mas em um nível menor?”” Se reformas profundas fossem de fato tentadas em escala local, tais experimentos poderiam se tornar faróis de prosperidade que acabariam tendo uma influência profunda também no resto do país – assim como aconteceu com Hong Kong e China. Os princípios defendidos por Klugmann convenceram Sanchez, que continuou a desenvolver essas ideias no contexto hondurenho. Eventualmente, a criação de uma nova cidade autônoma no estilo de Hong Kong em Honduras tornou-se uma poderosa visão compartilhada nos círculos de Sanchez. A ideia de transformar a governança para alcançar a prosperidade não é nova. Ela baseia-se na ideia fundamental da Nova Economia Institucional de que, não importa quão capazes e talentosas as pessoas possam ser, é quase impossível para elas se desenvolverem quando a infraestrutura institucional não apenas falha em facilitar o crescimento, mas também cria mais obstáculos ao desenvolvimento. E quando se trata de Honduras, a maioria dos observadores concorda: o povo hondurenho é inteligente, capaz, trabalhador e ansioso para criar uma vida melhor para si. O que os impede é um labirinto burocrático e institucional impenetrável. Um mercadinho em Honduras Em 2010, Lobo tornou-se presidente e Sánchez seu chefe de gabinete. Esta era a chance deles; a Hong Kong hondurenha pode finalmente se tornar realidade. Mas ainda havia um problema: como vender algo tão pouco ortodoxo ao Congresso hondurenho? Entra em cena Paul Romer, um renomado economista ganhador do Prêmio Nobel, famoso por sua defesa das cidades autônomas (Charter Cities em inglês). Como as ideias de Romer pareciam se alinhar bem com as de Sanchez, os dois homens começaram a conversar e, em pouco tempo, Romer também apoiou Honduras. Isso foi decisivo; foi a credibilidade internacional de Romer foi essencial para persuadir o Congresso. E assim surgiu a primeira iteração das zonas especiais hondurenhas — as REDs (Regiões Especiais de Desenvolvimento). As REDs eram tão promissoras quanto ambiciosas. Autonomia total em muitas áreas seria concedida a elas, permitindo saltos sem precedentes na governança e no desenho institucional. Por exemplo, conforme detalhado no Journal of Special Jurisdictions, as REDs seriam até mesmo autorizadas a “celebrar tratados e acordos internacionais”. No entanto, eles foram com muita sede ao pote. Embora a legislatura tenha apoiado de forma esmagadora a proposta das REDs, ela foi além do que, aos olhos da Suprema Corte hondurenha, a Constituição permitia. Em outubro de 2012, um ano após a aprovação do estatuto das REDs, a Suprema Corte derrubou a emenda constitucional que as regulavam, o que, consequentemente, tornou o próprio estatuto da REDs inconstitucional. Naquela época, a ideia de zonas especiais já enfrentava críticas constantes, embora nenhuma zona real tivesse sido estabelecida no terreno. Durante o curto período em que a lei RED esteve em vigor, já surgiram conflitos entre as partes envolvidas. Uma Comissão de Transparência para supervisionar as REDs foi criada, e Romer provavelmente recebeu a promessa não oficial de uma posição de liderança nela. No entanto, quando o governo hondurenho assinou um memorando de entendimento com o empresário norte-americano Michael Strong para desenvolver a primeira RED, Romer protestou que não havia sido consultado, apenas para descobrir que ele nunca havia sido formalmente nomeado para a Comissão. Romer sentiu que foi empurrado para fora do debate e deixou a cena hondurenha logo depois. Esses conflitos deram munição a uma pequena, mas barulhenta minoria de hondurenhos que se opunha firmemente a essas zonas especiais. Denúncias de corrupção, neocolonialismo e acusações de direitos indígenas sendo violados começaram a espalhar-se na imprensa. “A mídia em todo o mundo é desonesta, mas eu diria que a mídia hondurenha foi flagrantemente desonesta”, afirma Strong, que trabalhava para o estabelecimento da primeira zona especial na época. Ele sustenta que a atitude negativa da mídia em relação às zonas era grosseiramente não representava a opinião da população em geral. “A certa altura, alguém disse que ‘cinco por cento dos hondurenhos são contra isso por motivos anticapitalistas, cinco por cento dos hondurenhos são contra isso por motivos nacionalistas ou de soberania, noventa por cento dos hondurenhos simplesmente não acham que isso vai acontecer – mas se isso fizeram, eles ficariam encantados com as realizações.” Onde outros desistiram, Sanchez e sua equipe continuaram. Após a decisão da Suprema Corte, uma nova versão melhorada da legislação de zonas especiais foi preparada. O problema com os REDs era que a Suprema Corte achava que seu design era uma ameaça à soberania e integridade territorial de Honduras. Na versão reformulada da legislação, as REDs passaram a ser ZEDEs. Com este redesenho, parte da autonomia anteriormente concedida às REDs foi limitada e todas as ressalvas anteriores à soberania foram abordadas em uma nova emenda constitucional que foi posteriormente contestada novamente, mas desta vez aprovada pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal. A lei de habilitação para as novas zonas – a Lei Orgânica das ZEDEs – foi então aprovada em setembro de 2013 por outra esmagadora maioria. Entre outras coisas, a lei estabeleceu as ZEDEs de forma clara e inequívoca dentro da ordem constitucional hondurenha. No lugar da antiga Comissão de Transparência, foi criado o Comitê de Adoção de Melhores Práticas (CAMP) para fiscalizar as ZEDEs. Com a lei de ZEDEs em vigor e o CAMP estabelecido, as coisas poderiam começar a andar. Mesmo assim, demorou quase quatro anos para que a primeira ZEDE — Próspera — fosse realmente aprovada. De acordo com o Journal of Special Jurisdiction citando uma fonte próxima, mas anônima, “o atraso […] foi atribuído a uma combinação de disputas internas e má administração fiscal dentro do CAMP, uma falta de interesse real em desenvolver ZEDEs do presidente Hernández [que assumiu o cargo em janeiro de 2014], distrações eleitorais e potenciais investidores se esquivando em meio à incerteza política”. Só depois que um dos três precursores hondurenhos das ZEDEs, Carlos Pineda, se tornou secretário do CAMP em 2016 é que as coisas começaram a andar. A ZEDE de Próspera foi aprovada em dezembro de 2017 e a de Ciudad Morazán apenas um ano depois. Uma terceira ZEDE – Orquídea – tornou-se operacional em junho de 2021. Uma quarta ZEDE, Mariposa, estava prestes a ser aprovada na época das eleições no final de 2021. Cada um dos três projetos existentes tem ambições e visões radicalmente diferentes para o seu desenvolvimento. Próspera está focada na inovação governamental e tecnológica, na economia do conhecimento e na conexão de Honduras com negócios internacionais. Ciudad Morazán é um “ZEDE de colarinho azul”, visando residentes da classe trabalhadora e de classe média, principalmente de Honduras. Orquídea não inclui qualquer componente residencial, concentrando-se exclusivamente na produção de frutas e legumes para exportação. Graças à autonomia do regime ZEDE, cada uma das três zonas tem sido capaz de escolher o regime jurídico e regulamentar que melhor lhe convém. Ciudad Morazán usa a maior parte do código civil hondurenho, a Orquídea, voltada para a exportação, adotou a lei do estado americano de Delaware, e a Próspera desenvolveu e colocou em prática um código de direito comum de Roatán totalmente novo, baseado nas melhores práticas de todo o mundo, juntamente com o inovador sistema jurídico de código aberto Ulex, desenvolvido pelo professor de direito da Chapman University, Tom W. Bell. Além disso, Próspera introduziu um “acordo de convivência” com cada um dos moradores, concedendo-lhes direitos irrevogáveis ​​e garantias de estabilidade jurídica. “Esse é exatamente o tipo de inovação em governança de que sempre falo”, diz Titus Gebel. “Você pode ver isso na prática. Aqui, eles pensaram: ‘Ei, vamos experimentar coisas diferentes’, e você já tem três ZEDEs com três modelos muito diferentes.” O que esses projetos têm em comum é o objetivo de criar oportunidades, estabilidade e prosperidade para os hondurenhos de maneiras que não são possíveis em outras partes do país. O primeiro lote de moradias ocupadas e um parque em Ciudad Morazán. Perdendo a batalha pela legitimidade À medida que crescia a atividade em torno dessas ZEDEs, também crescia a oposição. De opositores ideológicos a interesses arraigados, as ZEDEs têm sido alvo de ferozes ataques. Acusações de irregularidades ou mesmo más intenções começaram a surgir por toda parte, alimentadas entre o público preocupado principalmente por atores cujas posições de poder eram de alguma forma ameaçadas pelas ZEDEs ou cujo alinhamento ideológico era incompatível com eles. Massimo Mazzone, o fundador da Ciudad Morazán, diz que as críticas mais comuns ao seu projeto também são as que mais facilmente se mostram falsas ou imprecisas. O único ângulo que talvez tenha recebido mais cobertura ao longo dos anos é a expropriação. A denúncia, amplificada e repetida pela imprensa, é de que as ZEDEs estariam ameaçando desapropriar os indígenas de suas terras e imóveis ou mesmo envolvidos diretamente em sua desapropriação. Esses críticos apontam para uma cláusula sobre expropriação incluída na lei ZEDE (artigo 25). No entanto, este artigo apenas reserva o direito de desapropriar terras ao estado de Honduras, não às próprias ZEDEs. Isso faz sentido no quadro geral, uma vez que as ZEDEs não têm jurisdição sobre terras fora de seus limites de zona aprovados. Além disso, de acordo com Mazzone, isso não passa de uma falácia: “Independentemente do que está na lei das ZEDEs, [o estado de] Honduras já tem o domínio eminente. Por exemplo, se alguém quiser construir uma rodovia ou um duto, se tiver bons contatos e se conseguir convencer o governo a fazê-lo, pode expropriar com ou sem a lei ZEDE em regime de eminente regular, que infelizmente é comum em todo o mundo.” Referindo-se a Ciudad Morazán, acrescenta: “Claro, para nós, essa prática é eticamente monstruosa. Somos totalmente contra qualquer tipo de expropriação. Nunca nos envolveríamos nisso porque é repulsivo do ponto de vista ético e seria suicida do ponto de vista político”. Embora perfeitamente razoáveis, tais declarações conciliatórias das ZEDEs não tendem a ser particularmente eficazes para impedir ataques que são lançados de má fé em primeiro lugar. Em um artigo hostil dando aos comentários sobre a expropriação um ar de legitimidade, o Congresso Norte-Americano da América Latina (NACLA) relata a criação de Próspera, destacando que os moradores passaram a “entender que o governo municipal não tem mais jurisdição sobre os 58 acres agora incorporado ao modelo ZEDE. A terra teria sido transferida do registro municipal para um registro independente na ZEDE de Próspera.” Isso é imediatamente seguido pela declaração: “A desapropriação de terras é uma preocupação essencial das comunidades”. É claro que os autores estão interessados ​​sobretudo em apresentar Próspera como uma vilã, independentemente dos verdadeiros fatos ou ações. A transferência de competência para o registo predial da ZEDE de Próspera não constitui qualquer tipo de desapropriação — assemelha-se mais a uma mudança de filiação do município. Perde-se nesta história também o fato de que as terras envolvidas eram de propriedade privada, antes desocupadas, e compradas legitimamente por filiais de Próspera, o que significa que a referida mudança de filiação do município foi realizada com o pleno consentimento dos proprietários. Como o Próspera esteve no centro de muitas dessas preocupações de expropriação, ele repetidamente deixou claro que não quer ter nada a ver com tais práticas. Os representantes do Próspera apontam para seu Estatuto, que não inclui o poder de desapropriação em seu rol de poderes (Artigo 2.04), bem como para uma Resolução de 2020 que exclui inequivocamente toda desapropriação e reafirma o compromisso do Próspera de somente incorporar terras a pedido do próprio proprietário . Conforme mencionado acima, todas as terras incorporadas a Próspera são de propriedade privada e eram desabitadas antes de se tornar uma ZEDE. Além disso, atenção especial foi dada à clareza dos títulos de propriedade em questão, que em Honduras costumam ser conflitantes ou incompletos. No entanto, apesar de todas essas garantias e da seriedade com que Morazán e Próspera abordam a questão da justiça e da consensualidade, essa linha de ataque persistiu. Por exemplo, um artigo recente repete acriticamente a afirmação de que “as áreas mapeadas para a construção do ZEDE são terras ancestrais na região de Garífuna, habitada pelos indígenas há milhares de anos. Como resultado, a construção de ZEDEs levaria ao deslocamento em massa da população nativa.” Não é necessário reiterar que o desenvolvimento de terras desabitadas não pode levar a nenhum deslocamento e, portanto, tais reivindicações não têm conexão com a realidade. Em um exemplo ainda mais escandaloso de aparente má intenção, outro artigo tenta falar mal das ZEDEs, citando-as ao lado de exemplos de crimes violentos, deixando o leitor despretensioso com a impressão de que os representantes das ZEDE são de alguma forma criminosos organizados trabalhando com o governo para oprimir os locais. O artigo apresenta um morador local que tem medo das ZEDEs, apesar de não terem feito nada para ameaçá-lo ou prejudicá-lo. Em um suposto deslocamento que é retratado pelos autores da pior forma possível, admite-se, no entanto, que nenhuma terra foi efetivamente desapropriada. Tais exemplos de cobertura desonesta ou simplesmente fantástica acabaram se tornando o pão de cada dia para as ZEDEs. Por exemplo, em uma enxurrada de acusações e denúncias, o Centro Nacional de Trabalhadores do Campo (CNTC) afirmou que os “impactos sociais” das ZEDEs incluem “deslocamento forçado, aumento da conflitividade e violência, perda de patrimônio cultural, migração e o aumento repressão aos protestos”. Em que base tais acusações flagrantes estavam sendo feitas não foi explicado, quase como se isso fosse de conhecimento comum e que não precisasse de qualquer comprovação em primeiro lugar. Essas caracterizações são surpreendentemente absurdas. Como já foi dito, todas as ZEDEs foram estabelecidas em terrenos desocupados, então nunca houve potencial de deslocamento, muito menos “forçado”. as ZEDEs não praticaram qualquer tipo de violência, sendo sua missão puramente pacífica, legal e produtiva. As ZEDEs não causaram nenhuma migração, exceto onde as pessoas se mudaram para as ZEDEs em busca das oportunidades de trabalho nelas criadas. Não houve protestos dentro das ZEDEs, então nenhum protesto poderia ser reprimido lá; e quanto aos protestos que acontecem fora das ZEDEs, as ZEDEs não têm jurisdição sobre a aplicação da lei lá e não têm poder para tomar qualquer decisão sobre como quaisquer protestos serão respondidos. Consequentemente, ao invés de serem críticas genuínas, tais acusações parecem ser feitas apenas por razões de publicidade e ganho político-pessoal. Entre outras consequências negativas, tais reivindicações destrutivas levaram a Universidade Técnica de Munique (TUM) a desistir de suas intenções de abrir um campus em Próspera, por causa de “indícios de violações de direitos humanos”. Procuramos a universidade para perguntar como, na visão deles, poderia haver violação dos direitos humanos se apenas áreas desabitadas têm sido incorporadas à Próspera, mas a Universidade não forneceu maiores esclarecimentos. Correção: Depois que a TUM encerrou seu compromisso com o Próspera, a Universidade emitiu uma carta na qual afirmava não ter “nenhuma evidência de violações de direitos humanos em ou por Honduras Próspera” e que a saída de Honduras havia sido “resultado de uma mudança na gestão” e uma “reorientação do foco empresarial”. Quando se trata de oposição organizada às ZEDEs, Mazzone observa que existem muitas organizações com interesses escusos cujos poderes foram ameaçados pelas ZEDEs. Entre elas está a Universidade Nacional Autônoma de Honduras (UNAH), que detém o monopólio do licenciamento de outras universidades (privadas) do país. Se antigamente as universidades só podiam ser fundadas com a benção da UNAH, agora qualquer um pode estabelecer uma dentro de uma ZEDE, e isso é uma ameaça direta ao monopólio da UNAH. Os sindicatos trabalhistas são outro exemplo desse tipo de interesse investido. Como o código trabalhista hondurenho não se aplica às ZEDEs, o poder dos sindicatos diminui. Um princípio semelhante se aplica à associação de advogados hondurenhos: se os ZEDEs puderem optar por adotar uma estrutura de direito consuetudinário, baseada nos costumes, em vez da lei civil hondurenha (como fez o Próspera), isso diminui o mercado potencial para advogados locais treinados em direito civil. A essa lista de oposição institucional, Titus Gebel acrescenta que parte da reação vem de figuras envolvidas com as maquilas — Zonas Francas exportadoras hondurenhas que não têm tantas concessões e para as quais as ZEDEs representam um desafio competitivo. A imagem pública de Próspera não foi ajudada pelo difícil relacionamento da zona com seu vizinho imediato – a vila de Crawfish Rock, na ilha de Roatán. Desde a sua criação, o Próspera tem se engajado na extensão e assistência à comunidade em Crawfish Rock, tentando construir relações positivas e produtivas. A Próspera começou a oferecer empréstimos para pequenas empresas, oficinas de carpintaria e programas extracurriculares para a população de Crawfish Rock. Um prédio comunitário foi construído às custas do Próspera. Mais tarde, um grupo de poupança e investimento mútuo foi criado entre os habitantes locais. A Próspera também providenciou ônibus escolares diários para as crianças da aldeia, cobrindo 95% do custo. Além disso, desde que começou, o Próspera deu emprego a muitos moradores de Crawfish Rock, principalmente por meio de projetos de construção na zona. Ainda em meados de 2022, cerca de 10% da população de Crawfish Rock estava empregada na Próspera. Trabalhadores em um canteiro de obras em Roatán Próspera. No entanto, a ZEDE encontrou a sua oposição quando conectou a aldeia ao seu abastecimento de água, fornecendo água corrente em um local que antes só a recebia através de caminhões-pipa, em frequência incerta devido a problemas na cadeia de abastecimento durante a pandemia de Covid. Próspera logo soube que a água carregada pelos caminhões era vendida aos moradores por representantes da comunidade local, cuja posição de poder estava agora ameaçada pelas novas torneiras de Próspera. Em pouco tempo, eles acusaram Próspera de lucrar com os moradores cobrando pela água, apesar do fato de que as entregas de caminhão também tiveram que ser pagas (e a um preço mais alto), e que Próspera perguntou aos moradores o que eles próprios consideriam um preço justo pelo abastecimento, para então depois cobrar este mesmo valor. Além disso, durante a pandemia de Covid, Próspera parou totalmente de cobrar e fornecia água para a vila gratuitamente. Uma das motivações apontadas para a reação das lideranças locais contra Próspera envolvia sua suposta intenção de incorporar Crawfish Rock à ZEDE, presumivelmente contra a vontade dos moradores. É verdade que, em seu site, o Próspera exibia uma visualização que incluía a comunidade vizinha como parte de uma visão de desenvolvimento futuro. Embora este tenha sido certamente um grande descuido publicitário de Próspera, baseou-se na suposição de que a comunidade ingressaria voluntariamente no ZEDE por referendo, conforme disposto no artigo 38 da lei do ZEDE. Como já observado, tais referendos, juntamente com as decisões de adesão dos proprietários de terras de áreas desabitadas, são as únicas formas legalmente permitidas para o crescimento de Próspera. Próspera sempre teve o cuidado de manter um registro em papel de suas atividades para se defender de desinformações divulgadas pela imprensa. Então, quando soube que os funcionários da Crawfish Rock queriam restaurar a água de seu velho caminhão, ela pediu uma confirmação por escrito de que estavam interessados ​​em continuar a receber água de Próspera e que pagariam as contas mutuamente acordadas. Mesmo que os líderes realmente não falem por muitos (talvez a maioria) dos habitantes da área, Próspera não está em posição de ignorá-los ou contorná-los. Assim, quando as lideranças locais não demonstraram interesse em continuar o serviço, Próspera procedeu ao cancelamento do fornecimento. Este episódio foi posteriormente veiculado na imprensa internacional para pintar Próspera como um vilão tentando subjugar à força a população local. Não é de se admirar que os detratores não estivessem interessados ​​em contar uma história verdadeira. Ilha de Roatán, o principal local da ZEDE de Próspera. Resort de Pristine Bay, agora parte de Próspera, em primeiro plano. Ao longo dos anos, as redes sociais hondurenhas encheram-se de preocupações e declarações que não eram baseadas na realidade, mas foram repetidas à exaustão, alimentadas pela desinformação generalizada perpetuada pela imprensa. Um exemplo proeminente disso é a alegação de que a estrutura ZEDE é supostamente “ilegal” porque foi considerada inconstitucional. Isto simplesmente não é verdade. Como citado acima, foi o regime RED que foi considerado inconstitucional pelo Supremo Tribunal e o regime ZEDE foi então explicitamente concebido para rectificar as deficiências constitucionais do seu antecessor, o que o Supremo reconheceu e confirmou. No entanto, artigos continuaram a ser publicados, confundindo os dois regimes e fazendo julgamentos legais e morais com base nisso. O grande volume de críticas e raiva online criou a impressão de que todo o país era contra as ZEDEs e que o público era unânime em sua denúncia. Apesar de tudo isso, uma observação com a qual muitos defensores das ZEDEs parecem concordar é que, sempre que as críticas são expressas de maneira genuína por membros comuns do público, elas geralmente decorrem de uma falta de informação sobre o que são os ZEDEs. “Não há oposição de base à lei ZEDE, uma vez que as pessoas entendam do que ela realmente se trata”, explica Gebel. As estatísticas das pesquisas também apoiam a noção de que a oposição contra os ZEDEs é organizada apenas por uma forte minoria de atores politicamente ou ideologicamente motivados por interesses escusos, e que nunca houve qualquer movimento amplo contra as zonas. Mas, em algum momento, a força combinada dos interesses contrários acaba por abafar uma discussão genuína sobre as vantagens e desvantagens das zonas especiais. Na política, muitas vezes não é o lado mais popular que vence, mas o mais barulhento e visível. No final de 2021, ficou claro que os ZEDEs haviam perdido a batalha por sua legitimidade. A estrada esburacada à frente Quando a imprensa negativa estava no auge, foi fácil para a líder da oposição Xiomara Castro incluir a posição anti-ZEDE como um dos principais pilares de sua campanha presidencial. Quando ela saiu vitoriosa no final de 2021, ela prometeu acabar com os ZEDEs, que ela via como veículos para exploração estrangeira – uma posição resumida pelo slogan onipresente “Honduras não está à venda”. Em abril de 2022, o Congresso votou pela revogação da Lei Orgânica da ZEDE e iniciou o processo de revogação das emendas constitucionais que permitiram a aprovação da lei em 2013. No entanto, o processo ainda não está concluído. Outra votação ocorrerá no início de 2023 para confirmar ou rejeitar a mudança constitucional. No momento da redação deste artigo, o governo permanece ambíguo sobre os próximos passos que tomará. Além disso, mesmo com a lei revogada, isso significa apenas que não poderão ser criados novos ZEDEs. Esta parte foi realmente bem fácil, mas livrar-se dos ZEDEs existentes pode custar muito caro para Castro e seu partido. Em declarações públicas, bem como em entrevistas recentes, os representantes de Próspera deixaram claro que, no que lhes diz respeito, a revogação da lei não muda nada para eles. Entre outros instrumentos legais, eles apontam para a proteção do investidor na forma de tratados internacionais assinados por Honduras. Isso inclui acordos de estabilidade jurídica que garantem o status das ZEDEs existentes pelos próximos cinquenta anos. Consequentemente, abolir as ZEDEs existentes e suas respectivas personalidades jurídicas significaria descumprir essas obrigações, o que responsabilizaria Honduras por enormes prejuízos. Próspera já firmou parceria com a White & Case of New York, escritório de advocacia de renome internacional na área jurídica, para representá-la neste conflito. Seja qual for o resultado, um dos prováveis ​​efeitos dessa polêmica é afugentar alguns investidores que não se sentem à vontade para enfrentar tamanha pressão política. Uma era terminou para as ZEDEs – uma era em que, apesar dos ataques de má-fé realizados por vários grupos, o governo hondurenho estava essencialmente do lado deles. Titus Gebel vê isso como uma oportunidade perdida, lamentando que tanto tempo tenha sido perdido devido à inação entre 2013 e 2017. Se as ZEDEs tivessem começado a se desenvolver antes, poderia ter sido mais difícil se opor politicamente a elas agora. “Se continuasse – penso eu – mais quatro anos, teria-se criado muitos empregos, as pessoas estariam a viver nas ZEDEs com segurança, com mais qualidade de vida… O mesmo aconteceu nos anos 80 com as maquilas. Houve muita oposição a elas, mas depois que os primeiros vinte mil empregos foram criados, nenhum partido quis se livrar das maquiladoras desde então. O mesmo teria acontecido com os ZEDEs; especialmente em Morazán, que poderia oferecer melhorias incríveis em todos os aspectos da vida do trabalhador hondurenho médio dessa região.” Um terreno em Ciudad Morazán esperando para ser desenvolvido. Novas construções pararam na ZEDE devido à recente incerteza política. Embora a sorte não tenha estado do lado das ZEDEs, elas atraíram muitos inovadores e empreendedores ao longo de sua curta vida, que já geraram inovações consideráveis ​​no campo da governança. Vários novos conceitos foram criados, como as Constituições tipo ZEDE Charters; um código de direito comum completo baseado no conceito de sistema jurídico de código aberto Ulex; um sistema eletrônico de registro e transferência de terras; e um Contrato Cidadão — só para citar alguns exemplos. Essas inovações já foram desenvolvidas e testadas em Honduras e podem ser reimplementadas em projetos futuros em todo o mundo, mesmo que as ZEDEs sejam abolidas completamente. Mas, apesar das oportunidades perdidas, o sonho hondurenho ainda não acabou. Os pais fundadores que lutaram pelas zonas especiais hondurenhas continuam trabalhando para trazer progresso e prosperidade para Honduras. Eles agora são apoiados por especialistas proeminentes em vários campos, sejam eles empresários, advogados, arquitetos, investidores ou visionários. Em 2013, a revista Reason comentou que “para se tornar um pioneiro do século 21 [em modelos inovadores de governança], Honduras — ou pelo menos um pequeno território dentro dela — deve se tornar, bem, não Honduras”. Mas isso nunca foi verdade. As ZEDEs são uma ideia hondurenha e um projeto hondurenho. Elas são uma tentativa popular de trazer uma nova esperança a um país que ficou sem opções. A esperança agora vive nas três ZEDEs existentes. Mas as eleições vêm e vão, e talvez, quando os ventos mudarem novamente, toda Honduras se beneficie de um caleidoscópio de ZEDEs, experimentando melhorias em sistemas e instituições para oferecer um mundo melhor para todos nós. Adendo: a evolução jurídica em Honduras desde 2022 Publicado em junho de 2025 Nos últimos dois anos e meio, o conflito entre as ZEDEs e o governo hondurenho apenas se intensificou. Desde que assumiu o poder em 2021, o governo manteve sua cruzada contra as ZEDEs. O objetivo do governo sempre foi aboli-las por completo e sem deixar rastro. Em 2022, quando a Lei Orgânica das ZEDEs foi revogada (o primeiro grande passo desse processo), já estava claro que o governo pretendia praticamente negar o passado e apagar os direitos adquiridos dos investidores nas ZEDEs, um objetivo altamente controverso que contraria um dos princípios básicos do direito e da justiça: o de que nenhuma lei deve ser aplicada retroativamente. As medidas para alcançar esse objetivo começaram a ser tomadas de imediato. Manobras políticas Ao longo de seu mandato, a Presidenta e o partido governista recorreram a práticas que eram, na melhor das hipóteses, bastante duvidosas e, na pior, abertamente inconstitucionais, para colocar militantes leais em posições-chave de poder, muitas vezes explorando lacunas constitucionais ou zonas cinzentas do ordenamento jurídico. Como primeiro passo após assumir o poder, Castro instalou Luis Redondo como novo Presidente do Congresso. Esse cargo normalmente exigiria uma votação majoritária no parlamento recém-eleito, maioria que Redondo não obteve, porque 18 deputados do governista Libre optaram por votar em outro candidato, Jorge Cálix, ao lado da oposição. Havia então uma cisão dentro do partido, e Cálix era um dos principais nomes da facção rival. Em reação, Cálix e os 18 deputados mencionados foram expulsos do partido. Castro e seu marido, Manuel Zelaya, fundador do Libre e líder informal dentro do partido, passaram a «conduzir uma turba ao Congresso», como descreve Jorge Colindres, Secretário Técnico da Próspera ZEDE. Depois de aparentemente ter sido forçado a ceder, Cálix renunciou ao cargo de Presidente do Congresso, o posto passou ao escolhido de Castro, Redondo, e Cálix e os 18 deputados foram readmitidos no partido. Poucos meses depois, foi o novo Presidente do Congresso, Redondo, quem encabeçou o processo de revogação da lei das ZEDEs sem ter sido devidamente eleito para o cargo: depois que Cálix se afastou, não houve nenhuma votação adicional para eleger Redondo. Em seguida veio a questão da Corte Suprema. Os magistrados dessa corte são eleitos para mandatos de sete anos, e a eleição mais recente ocorreu em fevereiro de 2023. Ela foi marcada por intensa discordância e por manobras políticas de Castro e de seu partido, que pareceram dar certo. Sete dos quinze magistrados da Corte Suprema acabaram sendo candidatos alinhados ao Libre, incluindo, como presidente da corte, Rebeca Ráquel, tia por afinidade da filha de Manuel Zelaya. A oposição alegou que a corte havia sido «aparelhada» pelo Libre de várias formas. Primeira: o Libre construíra forte influência sobre a Junta Nominadora, o órgão que seleciona os candidatos a magistrado. Segunda: o recém-fortalecido Presidente do Congresso, Redondo, adiara a votação sobre os indicados até que as negociações favorecessem o Libre. Terceira: houve notória falta de transparência em todo o processo, o que sugere que Castro e Redondo provavelmente lideraram um esforço para alinhar a corte ainda mais de perto a seus interesses, especialmente durante a seleção interna dos membros da Sala Constitucional; isso é reforçado pelo fato de vários magistrados terem laços familiares e pessoais com altos quadros do Libre. A Corte Suprema, e em especial a Sala Constitucional, viria mais tarde a desempenhar papel decisivo no movimento seguinte do governo em sua luta contra as ZEDEs. O último passo, um ano e meio depois, foi colocar um aliado como Procurador-Geral. A Comissão Permanente do Congresso Nacional, liderada por Redondo, nomeou Johel Zelaya (sem parentesco com o marido da Presidenta) sem a maioria exigida de 86 votos no plenário do Congresso. Por causa de um impasse no Congresso, até o final de outubro de 2023 não se havia chegado a um acordo sobre o próximo Procurador-Geral, dois meses depois de encerrado o mandato anterior, sobretudo devido a questionamentos sobre a elegibilidade e a integridade de Zelaya. Ele havia sido acusado de falsificação de documentos e de perjúrio relacionados a seu papel político ativo anterior, o que (ao menos no papel) o impediria de assumir o cargo. Seus outros cargos à época também implicavam potencial conflito de interesses. A Constituição hondurenha não prevê qualquer procedimento para essa situação, deixando uma lacuna jurídica que foi explorada pela Comissão Permanente aparelhada pelo Libre, que invocou sua competência sob o artigo 202 para tratar de assuntos urgentes durante os recessos. A Comissão votou por unanimidade nomear Zelaya Procurador-Geral interino, argumentando ser necessário evitar um vácuo de poder na instituição. Embora a manobra tenha sido denunciada pela oposição, que alegou que a Comissão não tem poder para fazer nomeações relevantes, muito menos as que exigem supermaioria no Congresso, Zelaya permaneceu no cargo interino até ser finalmente confirmado pelo Congresso em 2024, como parte de um acordo entre o Libre e os partidos de oposição que, segundo se noticiou, foi firmado sob coação, já que o Libre ameaçava processar parlamentares da oposição e ocupar os órgãos eleitorais apenas com representantes do partido. Por meio dessas manobras, a Presidenta Castro e o Libre consolidaram, nos últimos anos, seu controle sobre instituições estatais fundamentais em Honduras, que puderam então utilizar, entre outras coisas, em sua luta contra as ZEDEs. A reação da Próspera Como observado acima, a Lei Orgânica das ZEDEs foi revogada em 25 de abril de 2022. No entanto, o marco das ZEDEs não compreendia apenas a lei, mas também emendas constitucionais que as consagravam de forma mais firme no ordenamento jurídico hondurenho. Ao mesmo tempo da revogação, foi aprovado também um decreto destinado a revogar essas emendas constitucionais. Ocorre que a legislação hondurenha exige que emendas constitucionais sejam aprovadas por duas legislaturas ordinárias consecutivas, com supermaioria de dois terços. Embora a primeira votação (em abril de 2022) tenha sido bem-sucedida, nenhuma votação posterior sobre esse decreto ocorreu na legislatura seguinte antes de seu encerramento, em 31 de outubro de 2023. Essa falta de ratificação significa que a Constituição nunca foi emendada e que, até hoje, ela ainda contém os artigos que sustentam as ZEDEs. A segunda votação provavelmente não ocorreu por causa do que aconteceu nesse intervalo. Em 20 de dezembro de 2022, a Próspera apresentou um pedido de arbitragem internacional junto ao Centro Internacional para a Resolução de Disputas sobre Investimentos (CIRDI). Argumentou que a revogação da lei das ZEDEs violava os direitos adquiridos dos investidores internacionais na ZEDE, cuja estabilidade jurídica deveria estar garantida e protegida por tratados internacionais por um período de 50 anos. A posição oficial aparente do governo era a de que as ZEDEs não existem e nunca existiram. Contudo, as ZEDEs estavam claramente consagradas na Constituição, de modo que a posição do governo era manifestamente injustificada. De modo mais específico e complementar, a Próspera sustentou que o governo vinha sabotando as operações da ZEDE, de forma tanto sutil quanto aberta, em vez da cooperação de boa-fé que deveria estar ocorrendo. Isso incluiu diversas ações expropriatórias, como retirar o serviço aduaneiro das ZEDEs ou negar-lhes a isenção do imposto nacional sobre vendas (o que faz até hoje). O governo também pressionou os órgãos nacionais de banca e de seguros para, na prática, excluir a jurisdição do sistema financeiro, o que incluiu o encerramento das contas de residentes e empresas da ZEDE. A tudo isso somou-se uma campanha de difamação e calúnia contra as ZEDEs. Embora não tenha sido repercutido de imediato pela imprensa internacional, o pedido de arbitragem tornou-se um grande tema ao longo dos dois anos seguintes. E, mais uma vez, a Próspera foi retratada sobretudo sob uma luz negativa. Ela voltou a ser acusada de «neocolonialismo» e de «explorar» o mecanismo de resolução de disputas. A habitualmente respeitada Foreign Policy publicou o que equivalia a uma peça de demolição, repetindo todas as falsidades e distorções habituais sobre as ZEDEs, como se estas já não tivessem sido desmentidas repetidas vezes. Em fevereiro de 2024, em resposta tanto ao pedido de arbitragem da Próspera quanto a outros pedidos junto ao CIRDI (alheios à Próspera) que se acumularam durante o atual governo, Honduras anunciou que deixaria o CIRDI após 35 anos de filiação. A saída tornou-se efetiva em 25 de agosto de 2024. Embora a arbitragem no CIRDI já não esteja disponível para novas disputas envolvendo Honduras, isso não afeta nenhum procedimento iniciado antes da data efetiva da retirada. Por mais dramática que tenha sido a medida, ela não faz diferença para Honduras no que se refere ao caso da Próspera. Como sugerido acima, foi provavelmente esse pedido de arbitragem que levou o Congresso hondurenho a pensar duas vezes antes de ratificar, na primavera de 2023, a revogação das emendas constitucionais que viabilizavam as ZEDEs. O governo ficaria agora exposto a uma soma enorme de dinheiro se levasse adiante um movimento tão precipitado e agressivo. A oposição não apoiaria isso a menos que houvesse um acordo com as ZEDEs para salvaguardar os empregos e os investimentos nelas realizados, algo que o atual governo nunca tentou fazer. Uma Corte Suprema fora de controle Em 20 de setembro de 2024, a Corte Suprema de Honduras declarou as ZEDEs inconstitucionais. Argumentou que as emendas constitucionais que as viabilizavam violavam outros artigos «pétreos» da Constituição relativos à organização territorial, ao sistema de justiça e ao regime econômico. A Corte Suprema passou a se ocupar da questão das ZEDEs depois que a UNAH, a Universidade Nacional Autônoma de Honduras, apresentou um recurso. Embora possa parecer uma instituição estranha para se envolver na questão, os motivos são bastante diretos. A UNAH goza de um monopólio consagrado na Constituição sobre o ensino superior em Honduras: todas as universidades privadas, assim como todas as mudanças curriculares, precisam de sua aprovação. Esse monopólio era ameaçado pelo marco das ZEDEs, sob o qual tais dispositivos constitucionais não se aplicam. Se as ZEDEs viessem a crescer e a ter verdadeiro êxito, a UNAH poderia perder seu domínio sobre o setor de ensino superior. A Corte Suprema, porém, decidiu ir além de julgar o recurso da UNAH. Em vez de examinar apenas os aspectos das ZEDEs ligados à educação, voltou-se contra o marco jurídico como um todo. A proclamação de inconstitucionalidade foi um anúncio sísmico e provocou reações de todos os lados. A Próspera advertiu de imediato que declarar as ZEDEs inconstitucionais desestabilizaria ainda mais a confiança dos investidores, sobretudo dos norte-americanos, e prejudicaria as relações internacionais de Honduras. Duzentos e cinquenta trabalhadores locais e membros da comunidade assinaram uma carta aberta contra a decisão. O analista jurídico Fernando Gonzáles alertou que os danos decorrentes do ataque continuado às ZEDEs poderiam ficar entre 12 e 13 bilhões de dólares caso o governo não negocie com os investidores para evitar um litígio internacional. Na mesma linha, a advogada e política Maribel Espinoza pediu ao governo que tentasse chegar a um acordo para não enfrentar um encargo financeiro imenso ao perder a arbitragem. Um aspecto central da decisão jogou ainda mais lenha na fogueira: a Corte anunciou que a sentença se aplicaria retroativamente, criando a ficção jurídica de que as ZEDEs não apenas não existem no presente, como jamais existiram. Essa retroatividade é verdadeiramente inédita em Honduras, e foi justamente ela a gota d'água para muita gente, inclusive para quem antes estava mais alinhado às ações do governo contra as ZEDEs. Ficou claro que não se tratava apenas de um ataque às ZEDEs, mas a todos os fundamentos jurídicos e constitucionais de Honduras e aos princípios básicos do direito. O constitucionalista Juan Carlos Barrientos advertiu que uma anulação retroativa das ZEDEs criaria caos jurídico, invalidando acordos anteriores e gerando insegurança. Em resposta, uma carta representando uma coalizão de 144 investidores e empresas de 19 países, cujos investimentos somavam mais de 250 milhões de dólares, exigiu que o governo cessasse imediatamente o ataque e respeitasse e restaurasse o Estado de direito. No mesmo sentido, a congressista norte-americana María Elvira Salazar alertou sobre as possíveis repercussões que ações expropriatórias contra investidores norte-americanos poderiam ter. A resposta da própria Próspera tem sido inabalável. Ela reafirmou que continuaria operando normalmente e reiterou seu pedido ao governo de um diálogo rumo a uma solução amigável. Segundo a Próspera, a decisão de inconstitucionalidade é, ela própria, inconstitucional. «Nossa posição é que a decisão é nula, porque a corte não tem o poder de anular a lei retroativamente, e o artigo 321 da Constituição diz que, se um poder é exercido além do que a lei confere aos servidores públicos, o ato é nulo», afirma o Secretário Técnico Colindres. Além disso, o artigo 96 da Constituição hondurenha estabelece que nenhuma lei tem efeito retroativo, e a Próspera entende que, ao declarar algo inconstitucional, a Corte Suprema age como legislador de fato. Apesar das críticas, a decisão foi publicada no diário oficial La Gaceta em 25 de novembro de 2024. Ainda assim, ela apresenta algumas outras características peculiares. «A decisão apenas declarou as ZEDEs inconstitucionais, mas não havia nenhuma ordem de fazer ou deixar de fazer algo. Isso foi interessante e, para ser honesto, bastante benéfico. Se a corte publica algo, ainda que possamos vê-lo claramente como nulo, aquilo continua tendo o que eu chamo de “o selo e o timbre”, então, independentemente do que você pense, coisas que você não gosta podem acontecer com você.» A decisão também não tocou nos tratados internacionais que protegem o investimento na Próspera. Isso é bastante estranho, considerando que Honduras tem a obrigação, sob a Convenção de Viena sobre o Direito dos Tratados e a Carta da ONU, de cumprir de boa-fé os tratados que assinou. Se a Corte Suprema deseja negar essas obrigações, seria de esperar que ao menos as mencionasse de alguma forma. Além disso, Colindres argumenta em nome da Próspera: «No direito interno, o artigo 94 da Lei de Justiça Constitucional estabelece expressamente que decisões de inconstitucionalidade não afetarão situações jurídicas definitivamente resolvidas e executadas. Isso significa que a lei hondurenha diz que a decisão não afeta situações jurídicas consolidadas. Portanto, a lei hondurenha vinculante diz que decisões de inconstitucionalidade não podem nos afetar, uma vez que a Próspera ZEDE já foi autorizada, temos 235 empresas, cerca de 2.000 residentes (físicos e eletrônicos) e mais de 150 milhões de dólares em investimento, o que é claramente uma situação jurídica consolidada.» Ele ressalta que mais de 40 decisões da Corte Suprema nos últimos 20 anos confirmaram que tais sentenças não podem ter efeito retroativo, o que faz disso um princípio muito bem estabelecido não só do direito e da justiça em geral, mas especificamente do direito constitucional hondurenho. Um ano decisivo Desde a publicação da decisão, houve poucos movimentos abertos por parte do governo. Só podemos especular se ele tem planos de tomar outras medidas contra as ZEDEs antes da próxima eleição. Como a decisão não contém linguagem imperativa, parece ficar a critério do governo decidir se quer dar novos passos e, em caso afirmativo, quando. Devido à persistente incerteza política, o futuro das ZEDEs permanece incerto no momento. No entanto, com a próxima eleição geral marcada para novembro de 2025, há esperança de que as coisas tomem um rumo melhor. Vários candidatos e partidos já se manifestaram contra a decisão da Sala Constitucional e sinalizaram que o modo como o atual governo vem tratando as ZEDEs é equivocado e irresponsável. Os passos apropriados e evidentes seriam, ao contrário, negociar um acordo mutuamente benéfico que acabe por desarmar a ação de 10,7 bilhões de dólares da Próspera. «Há boas chances de o governo mudar depois das eleições de novembro», diz Colindres. «Esta não é uma disputa entre a Próspera e o governo nacional, é uma disputa entre o governo e todo o setor privado do país, nacional e estrangeiro. Estão expropriando empresas do setor de energia, do setor de infraestrutura (empresas que constroem estradas, administram portos, aeroportos), empresas financeiras… Estão atacando o setor privado em todos os ramos. O governo apoia a invasão da propriedade privada e de terras privadas por grupos camponeses armados. Também está restringindo o acesso ao dólar americano, ao qual o setor privado em Honduras já não consegue ter acesso, o que eu acho que é apenas uma questão de controle político. O governo também pressiona pela revogação de todos os regimes fiscais especiais, incluindo as tradicionais Zonas Livres, que empregam mais de 160 mil pessoas, e também as zonas econômicas especiais de turismo, além de incentivos fiscais para muitos outros setores. Dá para ver como, na verdade, todo o setor privado está sob ataque em Honduras.» «Em 2021, a Próspera estava bastante sozinha. Agora fazemos parte de uma coalizão nacional que tenta salvaguardar padrões básicos de Estado de direito e de propriedade privada.» 2025 é um ano decisivo para as ZEDEs. É um ano que porá à prova tanto a habilidade política das zonas quanto os mecanismos de proteção instituídos quando o marco das ZEDEs foi criado, precisamente para situações como esta, em que o governo se torna antagônico, ideológico e beligerante e se recusa a honrar seus compromissos anteriores. Até aqui, parece que esses mecanismos de proteção jurídica têm sido uma ferramenta bastante eficaz para conter o ataque do governo, e há boas chances de que as ZEDEs acabem atravessando a tempestade e possam, afinal, cumprir seu mandato e sua promessa de criar mais liberdade e prosperidade para os hondurenhos. Traduzido do inglês por Henrique S. Oliveira --- # Can Free Cities Establish a Monetary Moat? URL: https://free-cities.org/can-free-cities-establish-a-monetary-moat Published: 2023-07-03 Author: Alex Voss Category: Academic Topics: taxation-and-economics, private-governance, bitcoin-and-free-cities Abstract Every country in the modern world exists under a fiat standard in which central banks manipulate credit expansion and contraction in the economy, resulting in business cycles as described through Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT). Given the relative unlikelihood of modern major nation-states adopting a sound monetary policy and this author’s role and interest in bringing about autonomous cities with monetary policy (amongst other liberties) set by private companies separate and apart from the nation-state, we aim to explore whether an independent city-state can extricate itself from the business cycle by creating a “monetary moat” and if so, to what extent. We begin with a brief explanation of ABCT and the possible mechanisms for economic disturbances to transmit from one jurisdiction to another. We then highlight the similarities and differences between 1.) a move to sound policy from a credit expansionary fiat policy by a.) a large competitive country b.) a smaller ‘regional’ country c.) a city-state towards a unique and distinct policy. Concluding this section, we will set forth certain assumptions and conditions for our analysis which follows in the next section. Finally, we conclude with policy recommendations for cities (largely autonomous but also subsidiary) and small countries. Time permitting, we will explore the role that a self-governing city that implements sound Austrian monetary policy can play in promoting sound policy around the world and limiting the boom-and-bust cycle. 1. Can Free Cities Establish a Monetary Moat? We live in a world of increasingly tyrannical governments implementing horrific monetary policies that lead to booms and busts which benefit those close to the monetary injection at the expense of those further away. In short, a world in which Wall Street benefits at the expense of Main Street. Making the situation worse, our politics is controlled by special interests and generally takes guidance from well-organized minorities. In the world of monetary policy, this is quite evident with the revolving door between Wall Street, The Federal Reserve, and the US Department of Treasury. Wall Street banks get a vastly disproportionate say in the monetary policy of the US. A prominent example includes Citi Group executive Michael Froman providing a list of ‘suggested’ cabinet picks to soon-to-be elected President Obama through longtime associate and chairman of Obama’s transition team, John Podesta. A similar phenomenon exists in other countries as well. In compensation, officials get paid millions to give speeches proclaiming next to nothing insightful and get placed on prestigious boards of directors. Famous examples include Janet Yellen (Egan, 2021) and Hillary Clinton Wall Street firm speech logs (Jilani, 2016). While this paper does not focus on electoral politics, it is important to note the rather futile situation advocates of sound money find themselves in. It seems highly unlikely a bottom-up, grassroots effort can be organized to change the landscape. Monetary policy is simply too hard to genuinely understand. The Occupy Wallstreet protests ended with further bailouts, increased monetary expansion, an eventual lowering of the reserve requirement, and an increasingly financialized economy rendering the protest utterly ineffective at solving anything. This may have many reasons but at least one of them includes the lack of knowledge on macroeconomics and monetary policy. Most protestors were leftists, ranging from neo-Keynesian to outright Marxists. Most of these people were not Ron Paul followers, audit the Fed supporters, and sound money and Austrian Economics scholars. The few that were often found themselves on the other side of the protest like Peter Schiff who tried to explain to the protesters that the problem was not the rich bankers but the politicians behind the scenes. Of course, this was entirely ineffective. Although an increase in sound money policy seems to be growing at the grassroots level largely through the innovation and creation of Bitcoin, it remains too far in its infancy to be sure not only that Bitcoin will obtain wide adoption but also that it will lead to an overall change in central banking and other government macroeconomic practices. Additionally, while Bitcoin does cap the creation of new Bitcoins at 21 million, a number of fractional-reserve Bitcoin lending programs do exist which renders the hard cap of Bitcoin much less authoritative. This author encourages the experiment in El Salvador and the Central African Republic to adopt Bitcoin as one of its national currencies but remains skeptical that larger geopolitical countries will make this change. As one example, Russian banks were recently sanctioned from interacting with SWIFT (Kowsmann et al, 2022) and other international payment mechanisms and reserves of the Russian government held in foreign jurisdictions have been frozen and, in some cases, seized (Hersher, 2022). This is immensely harmful to all countries and provides a very strong incentive to adopt an unconfiscatable, censorship-resistant currency in which the US and other major European countries control in any way. Unsurprisingly, however, Russia did not adopt Bitcoin. While it remains to be seen what happens in the long term, given the relative size and dire situation Russia found itself it shows Bitcoin’s infancy that it was not more seriously considered. Further, Russia didn’t even move towards a gold standard, despite some reporting to the contrary. If this is true for Russia it must be even more true for the USA, whose currency benefits from being the world reserve currency and a foreign policy willing to intervene to maintain that status. Moving to gold or bitcoin – which the USA does not control – is simply giving up too much power. Given that it seems unlikely that electoral politics will lead to more sound monetary policy, particularly in larger geopolitically important nation-states in the near future, we suggest looking at alternative jurisdictions which can implement better governance practices overall and in particular monetary policy. One such idea comes from Dr. Titus Gebel’s concept of Free Cities. Free Cities exist along a spectrum of autonomy. In their most pure form, they exist independently of a host nation-state as a form of a micronation – think Liechtenstein or Monaco. In practice, it is unlikely entrepreneurs will convince existing governments to cede territory to be completely autonomous. The result is frequently zones created in host nations that obtain significant levels of autonomy to implement various tax, trade, and regulatory policies – think special economic zones. A new, extended form of these zones, which lie in between the two extremes (complete autonomy and special economic zones) are Special Administrative Regions (SARs). SARs must adhere to a host nation’s constitution, international treaties, and likely criminal law but are free to create business and personal regulatory and legal frameworks. The most innovative and far-reaching examples of SARs are developed and operated entirely without host government involvement, by an entrepreneur under whatever framework he finds suitable – typically a corporation. The developer and city operator is tasked with building infrastructure, housing, a regulatory framework, a tax scheme, security of internal affairs, and importantly a dispute resolution system. Unsurprisingly to Austrian Economists, entrepreneurs in this field are trending towards no taxation (if legally allowed), a very limited regulatory state that is easily navigable, both quickly and in one place, and a dispute resolution that is perceived as yielding unbiased results. Security is typically much more friendly and less militarized as well. Even if criminal law of the host nation must remain in place, the zone operator is charged with enforcement in the zone which leads towards a more market-based response to criminal law enforcement (i.e., more flexibility to enforce as most people would suggest is proper). While these changes stand to provide very significant benefits for those that chose to live in such a place, this paper aims to determine if and how a Free City or SAR might be able to insulate itself from crazed monetary policy in not just the host nation but essentially all countries around the world. In sum, to what extent could Monaco, Liechtenstein, or a SAR build a moat around their economy to insulate the city from the boom-and-bust cycle resulting from credit expansion around the world? 2. Austrian Business Cycle Theory Before we can analyze whether a small economy can insulate itself from credit expansion elsewhere, we should first understand the macroeconomy of what leads to the boom and bust. We start with an economy that does not result in a trade cycle. In this case, individuals produce goods; they then exchange those goods for money; and then finally they use the money partially on consumption and partially on savings. Consumers then use a portion of the money they have not spent in consumption and hold it in their cash balances and use the remaining amount to invest in hopes of earning a positive return in real money (Rothbard, 2009). This is the supply of loanable funds and when combined with the demand for loanable funds by entrepreneurs we can find the market rate of interest. At this market rate of interest, entrepreneurs have the correct pieces of information to calculate the business case for their attempted entrepreneurial endeavors. We do not mean entrepreneurs do not make mistakes; just that the market rate of interest is not systematically biasing the calculations to be incorrect. Entrepreneurs then look to earn the highest return they can across the production structure. If time preference in society genuinely did decrease, the result would be a decrease in interest rate as consumption is deferred and loanable funds would increase. The reduction in consumption leads to losses and the resulting exit of lower-order production stages and the lower interest rate increases the length of the production structure by enabling higher-order, more interest rate-sensitive production stages. Initially, this leads to profits in higher-order capital goods stages until the input capital goods and labor from the lower-order stages transition to higher-order production. The overall result is a lengthening of the production structure. Interestingly, this is how the process works for any given level of technological sophistication. Lengthening the production structure does not imply innovation, it implies more capital goods that make labor more productive (Garrison, 2021). The increased productivity of the economic process from the investment in more and higher-order capital goods is how an economy grows over time and the coordinated level of investment across the production structure avoids the massive booms and busts we are so closely familiar with. Of course, we are not implying that humans are infallible, so small-scale misallocations can and do happen but massive, concurrent misallocations on a society-wide scale are infinitely improbable. The trade cycle sets in as a result of artificial credit expansion at the hands of a central bank. In this case, time preference is higher than the artificially lower interest rate. This results in consumers spending more on consumption than the interest rate would imply and systematically biases the profit and loss calculations entrepreneurs make in the market. At the lower interest rate, entrepreneurs can access new funds and thus find themselves lengthening the production structure via investment in earlier stages of a production process while consumers continue to consume as much as before given that they have not reduced their time preference. We have malinvestment via overinvestment in higher stages of production and simultaneously overconsumption. This is not sustainable growth as we have not built up all the capital goods and productive capacities across all stages of the structure of production. This leads to discoordination in the economy and the discoordination makes production from the earliest stages all the way through to consumption much more difficult to sustain until ultimately it cannot be maintained and the bust sets in. In order to lengthen the structure of production without leading to a later economic crash, we need adequate savings which can only come about from the time preference of individuals in society lowering, which lowers consumption, which increases the supply of loanable funds for investment. These loans then go towards a coordinated effort to lengthen the structure of production and build and maintain capital goods across all stages in the interest rate differential proportional amount. To the extent we throw off this coordination across the structure of production, we will find ourselves in a boom and bust. 3. The World-Wide Solution It is evident from the above analysis about what creates the trade cycle that the only way to avoid the chaos and crashes is to not participate in a manipulation of the interest rate at all. As Jesus Huerta de Soto writes in his magnum opus Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles: “a policy of credit expansion unbacked by real saving must inevitably set in motion all of the processes leading to the eruption of the economic crisis and recession, even when expansion coincides with an increase in the system’s productivity and nominal prices of consumer goods and services do not rise. Indeed, the issue is not the absolute changes in the general price level of consumer goods, but how these changes evolve in relative terms with respect to the prices of the intermediate products from the stages furthest from consumption and of the original means of production.” (Huerto de Soto, 2006) The only solution to the boom-and-bust cycle is not to artificially reduce interest rates and create artificial bank credit in the economy. 4. If Not the World, Maybe Us? Unfortunately for any individual country and in particular a city-state, Free City or SAR, the economic activity of that particular region is only a very small subset of economic activity and the overall structure of production across the globe. The economic activity outside of the jurisdiction of the Free City dwarfs the economic activity within the jurisdiction of the Free City. As such, the world structure of production must necessarily have the unfortunate effect of the global economy necessarily over-consuming and investing in more distant structures of production that are discoordinated with consumers’ time preference. Will the monetary expansion the world over spill into and permeate the “walls” of a Free City? We now turn to explicitly considering the various mechanisms of transmission of business cycles from one monetary regime to another. Following the work of Block, Engelhardt, and Herbener, 2018, we will consider 1.) interest rates, 2.) currency exchange rates 3.) asset prices and 4.) credit channels. In completing our analysis, we must make two assumptions that we believe are both realistic and rather obvious and consistent with extensive Austrian Economics literature. First production takes place over time. Second, capital and production are distributed throughout space unevenly. Certain places are more conducive to growing orange trees and others are more conducive to tourism, for example. First, the Free City or SAR must adopt a commodity money standard. Further, since it is theoretically possible to expand credit artificially under a commodity money standard, this must not be allowed. Much analysis has been provided to suggest that under a free-banking standard, fractional reserve lending would be limited. Unlike a commodity standard, our current world of purely fiat currencies has very limited constrictions on fractional reserve banking and typically even endorses it up to a certain point (i.e. the reserve requirement). In this situation we find ourselves, it is no wonder we have experienced such massive gyrations in the economy worldwide. 5. The Crux If a Free City (“Economy A”) moved to adopt a commodity standard, for example gold or bitcoin (“Money A”), with no fractional reserve banking, how would the effects of credit expansion in other countries (“Economy B”) under a fiat money standard (“Money B”) affect Economy A? 6. Transmission Mechanism Analysis First, a lowering of interest rates in Economy B would lead to additional investment spending. This lower interest rate relative to the interest rate in Economy A would be arbitraged away as entrepreneurs in A look to borrow, at least to some extent, via international capital markets. This is the interest rate transmission mechanism. Next, as inflation devalues the currency in Economy B relative to Economy A, entrepreneurs and consumers in Economy A find it, ceteris paribus, cheaper to import goods and services from Economy B and relatively more expensive to export. This leads to more imports and reduced exports all else being equal. This is the exchange rate transmission mechanism. Thirdly, the creation of new money in Economy B will raise asset prices in Economy B. This increase in asset prices results in a wealth effect due to which individuals in Economy B purchase financial assets in Economy A. This is the asset price transmission mechanism. Finally, the expansion of fiduciary media via central bank asset purchases in Economy B, increases investment in both A and B increase. This is the credit expansion transmission mechanism. The distinction between the interest rate and credit mechanisms is very subtle. While the interest rate mechanism is more focused on the investment decisions of entrepreneurs, the credit transmission mechanism highlights the impact of the availability of credit in Economy A in the first place (Block et al., 2018). We now turn to the specific case of a Free City operating on a commodity money standard while the rest of the world operates on a fractional reserve, fiat money standard. First, if Economy B creates additional money, it does not directly affect the stock of Money A. Printing more dollars, yen, rubles, euros, etc does not create more gold or bitcoin. Monetary inflation in B would lead to an appreciation of Money A. Even if the appreciation of Money A does lead to expansion of money production (possible in the case of gold, geography permitting, but not in the case of bitcoin) this new creation of money is subject to the profit and loss system of the market rather than government bureaucrats. Miners will not mine gold or bitcoin unless they expect they can mine it profitably. Given the constraints of profit and loss calculations, Economy A credit expansion is necessarily minimal. The next transmission mechanism we will consider is the exchange rate. Considering that international trade does still take place, and we would have no reason to assume otherwise, consumers in Economy A will have some levels of exposure to Money B. The positive exposure, to the extent it exists, makes profit and loss calculations of entrepreneurs in Economy A that much harder, but still significantly less difficult than for entrepreneurs in Economy B. Monetary inflation tends to lead to an overstatement of accounting profits but this is significantly more of an overstatement for an entrepreneur in Economy B with almost complete exposure to the Money B which is being debased. The commodity money that makes up the vast majority of the money in cash balances within Economy A is sound money which makes profit-and-loss calculations much more possible for the entrepreneur. Further, the clientele of this Free City are more likely to be aware of their sound money and its benefits and therefore continue to minimize exposure to the debased and debasing Money B. The end result seems to be that sound Money A is significantly able to moderate the destructive effect of monetary inflation through the exchange rate transmission mechanism, although not entirely. The result of the leakage resulting from poor monetary policy into the Free City is likely to result in a faster devaluation of Money B in a Free City than in Economy B. This is likely for at least two reasons. First, people who move to a Free City are likely more perceptive of monetary and economic issues and second, they have few nationalistic tendencies to ‘believe’ in the national currency of Economy B. As such, Money Bwill devalue in Economy A faster than it will devalue in Economy B domestically. This will make imports to Economy A cheaper and happen more often, on the margin. This effect would then reverse after Money B is devalued domestically. The effect of this monetary exchange rate change will result in resources being employed in Economy B towards more export-oriented production processes and in Economy A towards more import-oriented processes. More goods that would, absent the market intervention, be consumed domestically in B will now be sent abroad to Economy A. This is likely to cause significant misallocation of capital goods and other specific or semi-specific resources which will ultimately need to be deserted in both Economy A and B but, to a significantly larger extent in Economy B for the reason above – this misallocation is a much smaller piece of the economic picture of Economy A as opposed to Economy B. Now that we have analyzed two of the four transmission mechanisms let us turn our attention to interest rate movements and asset price transmission mechanisms. We know that the creation of fiduciary media via fractional reserve banking creates an artificially high supply of loanable funds which drives down the interest rate below the rate consistent with societal time preference. Even though it is the interest rate in Economy B that is lowered, international arbitrageurs would free up capital for entrepreneurs in Economy A who would then borrow at the effectively sub-marginal interest rate. This change in interest rate does not fundamentally change the division of labor entirely within the Economy and thus the increased access to loanable funds in Economy A occurs in specific industries in which Economy A is comparatively better at providing which can now access credit easier and likely in additional capacity. Increased money in certain industries raises the input capital asset prices in those industries. While in Economy B this is particularly bad, in Economy A, we do see a market intervention making the economy less robust but because Money A is sound money, the alterations are less severe. Within Economy A, when more money is put towards the capital assets in the particular industries that access loanable funds in the international capital markets, that money cannot be used elsewhere which drives down profits and creates losses that result in entrepreneurs ultimately exiting those industries, workers moving toward the industries receiving the credit and capital goods being reallocated towards the credit receiving industries over time. The overall production of Money B would change the structure of production to be tilted towards industries that can access international credit markets but would result in capital being taken away from other industries, keeping the coordination across the structure of production intact, at least relative to that of Economy B. Importantly, we note that the while the monetary inflation of Money B results in asset appreciation, it also results in the debasement of the Money B. To the extent that these two processes take place at the same time, they offset each other. To the extent they offset each other, capital allocation entrepreneurs (i.e. investors) will adjust the expected profit calculation and not over-allocate to certain industries. We of course do not have any certainty that these counteracting forces will occur at the same time and, as a result, cannot make any definitive statements about the outcomes of such a monetary inflation in Economy B and its resulting effects in Economy A. Nonetheless, we have seen from these four mechanisms that an economy on a sound money standard, meaning being commodities-backed and having full-reserve banking, can significantly insulate itself from almost all transmission of the unsound money into its economy. To extend our analysis to the case of a Free City, we must note that we are specifically considering the case of business cycle transmission from an entire world economy, Economy B, to a very comparatively small economy, Economy A. It is therefore imperative to understand the relative ability of transmission based on the size of the relative economies. Off the bat, we can say that the credit channel does not allow transmission regardless of the relative size of the economy. This leaves us with the other three transmission mechanisms. To summarize these effects, Block et al explain: “The malinvestment of capital and misallocation of resources in B will be driven by suppressed interest rates and asset price inflation in B and devaluation of its currency against that of A. Investors in B, who wish to earn the now higher interest rates in A, may do so by purchasing assets and claims to assets in A, which further suppresses the value of B’s currency in comparison to A’s. Although the asset price inflation in B can have a wealth effect, resulting in further malinvestment and misallocation in B, since the purchasing power of money changes very little in A, only a minimal wealth effect occurs there from the asset price inflation in A. The virus cannot spread significantly through the asset price channel. To the extent that devaluation occurs synchronously with the lowering of the domestic purchasing power of B’s currency, the balance of trade between A and B will not change and the asset price inflation infecting A will be limited to the difference between the asset price inflation in B and the decline in purchasing power of B’s currency. In the typical case, in which devaluation occurs prior to the lowering of the domestic purchasing power of B’s currency and synchronously with asset price inflation in B, net exports (imports) in region B (A) will rise along with the increased demand for assets in area A by investors in B. These effects would then be reversed as the purchasing power of B’s currency domestically fell into line with its devalued purchasing power internationally. On net, then, the exchange rate and interest rate channels have offsetting effects on A.” (Block et al, 2018) These transmission mechanisms do have a relative size component. Given our example of Economy A operating on a gold or bitcoin standard its relative size means that it does not represent more than a small piece of the total market for either commodity. Bitcoin could easily drop significantly in price on any given day, week, or month relative to the US dollar, for example, even though the monetary inflation of bitcoin is provably lower than that of the dollar. We see this is true even with a country of several million, El Salvador, moving to adopt bitcoin – the price continues to fluctuate significantly. More buying power for bitcoin, and therefore the potential ability to move the price exists in the USA than in El Salvador and the Central African Republic combined. Thus, a debasement of the US dollar does not necessarily result in an increase in value of bitcoin or gold. A Free City is likely smaller or no bigger than El Salvador in population terms and thus the exchange rate effect of a Free City will necessarily be imperfect. This is even more true with gold as the commodity money of Economy A as it is roughly a 10x larger market than Bitcoin. On the other hand, if we were interested in what might happen if China or Russia adopted a gold standard while the USA remained on a fiat standard, it is plausible that these countries are large enough and, perhaps more importantly, own enough of the gold market that gold would appreciate relative to the dollar under dollar debasement regimes. In the relatively likely case of the devaluation of fiat currency occurring roughly concurrent with asset price inflation in Economy B and followed by the decline in purchasing power of Money B, as explained above, net exports from B and imports to A rise. This too has a size component. In their paper, Block et al suggest that these genuine misallocations can and do occur but: “just as entrepreneurs in those particular lines of production can anticipate other types of cyclical variations in demand for their products, they may be able to keep malinvestments of capital and misallocations of resources within manageable limits. Although the exchange rate channel is not entirely closed, its flow can be mitigated by entrepreneurship exercised in a free market economy” (Block et al, 2018) Far be it from me to claim these writers are incorrect, but I would suggest this analysis is lacking nuance on the relative size of economies. If the net exports in B, even if relatively marginal, give the offsetting exchange rate effect, this could be massive on an absolute scale relative to the size of Economy A. By way of example, consider if the Dominican Republic adopted a gold standard and the USA continued with its current monetary regime. Currently, the USA exports $10.5 billion worth of goods to the Dominican Republic while the GDP of the Dominican Republic in 2021 was $79 billion. Obviously, imports from the USA are a significant piece of the economic activity of this country. Following our transmission mechanisms above, exports from the USA to the Dominican Republic increase in the short term by, say, 10% due to the asset price effect, exports to this country would increase to $11.6 billion. While not a dominant piece of the economic picture in the USA, this is more than a 1% change in the GDP of the Dominican Republic. What is more, we are only considering the USA. If we looked at all imports from foreign countries marginally increasing, we can quickly see how the overall economic landscape in the Dominican Republic would be massively altered, changing the division of labor and making it very difficult for entrepreneurs to withstand these systematic capital price distortions in their profit and loss calculations. We cannot say definitively how this would play out without much more quantitative analysis and even then, we cannot be certain in a praxeological manner, but for our purposes here it is worth noting that, ceteris paribus, the relatively small economy that moves to a commodity money standard will be relatively more affected by the transmission of business cycles. Another corollary also follows: the relatively larger reliance on imports from foreign countries necessarily opens the transmission mechanism wider. This is not an argument for autarky but an important consideration nonetheless. Block et al have suggested that private entrepreneurs in Economy A may offer private protection of the trade cycle by working to persuade others to join them in more sustainable lines of business, therefore avoiding the asset price distortion and discoordination of the production structure. Certainly, to some extent this is possible and more likely in an economy with a populace foresightful enough to adopt a sound monetary policy such as is more likely in a Free City. At the same time, this analysis would also hold in intentional communities within the USA that have privately adopted quasi-sound monetary policies such as only transacting in and using Bitcoin. The entrepreneurs have thus far been unsuccessful in ‘opting out’ of the trade cycle completely. This may be easier for an entire jurisdiction but, again, the relative size of the economy is an important factor to include in this analysis, and the more the asset price transmission occurs the further distorted the production structure becomes and the harder the entrepreneurs’ job is to convince others to not take the short-term gains in order to avoid the necessary resulting crash. The final mechanism that a Free City might employ to limit the effects of the trade cycle is the maximum flexibility of the economy. This does not eliminate the trade cycle once set in motion but it can reduce the length and severity of the crash. Given that credit expansion has occurred, a bust must necessarily follow, but the swiftness with which the bust can liquidate poor investment and reset the economy is largely determined by the flexibility within the economy for factor prices, importantly including labor, to adjust to the approximately market clearing level as determined by entrepreneurs in the market. As Jesus Huerta de Soto says, “the only possible and advisable policy in the case of a crisis consists in making the economy as flexible as possible, particularly the different factor markets, and especially the labor market, so the adjustment can take place as quickly and with as little pain as possible.” (Huerta de Soto, 2006) Given the analysis above, it is clear that while business cycles can be transmitted and the level of transmission is not possible to determine a priori, we can know that the transmission will be very significantly reduced by adopting a hard money standard. Given that any reduction in the trade cycle leads to less pain and misery during the necessary bust phase of the business cycle, it is unequivocally a positive move for a Free City, micronation, SAR, or any other monetary regime to convert immediately to a sound commodity money standard. Like most things in life, doing the right thing because it is the right thing should be enough, but as an extra incentive, the right thing usually pays off in the long term. While the actions of others can impact you, be it interpersonal relationships or international business cycles, controlling what you can control and doing things the right way will accrue benefits. The same is true for monetary policy. 7. Where Do We Go from Here? It seems rather clear at this point that any movement towards a commodity money standard will necessarily improve the market forces and entrepreneurial profit-and-loss calculations in the economy that decides to move in this direction. It is also highly likely that incentives to move towards a commodity money standard will not outweigh various geopolitical, control, and other special interest forces in modern democracies and authoritarian forms of government. While we encourage any and all governments to consider the change, we don’t expect a mad dash to the gold or bitcoin standard anytime soon. It may occur in small countries, like El Salvador and more recently the Central African Republic, but politicians in Russia, China, India, and the USA, amongst others, are likely to continue to utilize the control they have over their respective fiat currencies to benefit themselves at the expense of humans all over the world. This leaves us with Free Cities, micronations, and Special Administrative Regions as one of the very few plausible ways for both the movement to a sound money policy and the resulting protection it provides to the residents of this jurisdiction. While El Salvador has adopted Bitcoin, it will also need to ensure fractional reserve banking is not possible before it will truly benefit from a better monetary policy completely. It remains to be seen but is plausible that the success of a Free City throughout the length of a business cycle in which the relative bust is much weaker may entice the world to learn why the city has seen such success. While we may not be able to catalyze the sound monetary policy to be employed all over the world, we might be able to get additional jurisdictions on a better track, and to the extent we can, the lower the gyrations of the business cycle will be. As a result of lower gyrations, any given jurisdiction can further insulate itself from these negative effects. Additionally, as more jurisdictions adopt a sound money policy, it becomes relatively easier for those individuals that do understand the mechanisms of macroeconomics and the business cycle to move to a new jurisdiction. As this happens more and more economic activity is taking place within sound monetary policy jurisdictions lowering the gyrations of the world economy trade cycle. This is not a panacea but could serve as a catalyst for a movement for sound money. 8. Conclusion The only way to stop the business cycle is for every country in the world to adopt a sound monetary policy, which means a commodity money standard and a strict avoidance of all fractional reserve banking. Unfortunately, it appears we will not get the world to do this in the near term. Further, it is unlikely we will even get a single major economy to do this voluntarily in the short term. One mechanism that might work is a form of special jurisdiction that has authority over, amongst other things, monetary policy. Free Cities, Special Administrative Regions, and the like are such an opportunity. They are run by for-profit companies motivated to make life in the city prosperous. One component of prosperity would likely be the avoidance of the business cycle. By implementing sound policy, a Free City can reduce exposure to the malinvestment that will necessarily be liquidated in an economic crash down the road. The Free City will not be able to eliminate all its exposures but by significantly reducing exposure to the trade cycle, ceteris paribus, it improves the lives of the citizenry and as a result, can and should be implemented. Finally, it is possible the Free City will serve as a catalyst or example for other jurisdictions to follow suit in due time; but this is unknowable. We hope and wish for a successful case study soon and a competitive playing field in the market for good governance. References • Arakie, R., & Fisher, I. (1933). Booms and depressions: Some first principles. Economica, 42, 484. https://doi.org/10.2307/2548911 • Berg, A., Vlcek, J., Charry, L., & Portillo, R. A. (2018). The monetary transmission mechanism. Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198785811.003.0005 • Bismans, F., & Mougeot, C. (2009). Austrian business cycle theory: Empirical evidence. The Review of Austrian Economics, 22(3), 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-009-0084-6 • Block, W., Herbener, J., & Engelhardt, L. (n.d.). Is the Virus of International Macroeconomic Interventionism Infectious? An ABCT Analysis. The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 21(4). • Bordo, M., & Schwartz, A. (1988). Transmission of Real and Monetary Disturbances under Fixed and Floating Exchange Rates. Cato Journal, 8(2). • Cachanosky, N. (2012). The Mises-hayek business cycle theory, fiat currencies and open economies. SSRN Electronic Journal, 27(3). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2015456 • Citigroup chose Obama’s 2008 cabinet, WikiLeaks document reveals. (n.d.). World Socialist Web Site. Retrieved May 1, 2022, from https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/10/15/wiki-o15.html • Dimand, R. W. (Robert W. (2003). Irving Fisher on the international transmission of booms and depressions through monetary standards. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 35(1), 49–90. https://doi.org/10.1353/mcb.2003.0002 • Dominican Republic GDP – 2021 data – 2022 forecast – 1960-2020 historical – Chart. (n.d.). TRADING ECONOMICS. Retrieved May 1, 2022, from https://tradingeconomics.com/dominican-republic/gdp • Egan, M. (2021, January 4). Janet Yellen made millions giving speeches to Wall Street banks she’ll soon regulate. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/04/investing/janet-yellen-wall-street-speeches/index.html • Engelhardt, L. (2012). Expansionary Monetary Policy and Decreasing Entrepreneurial Quality. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 15(2). • Gebel, T. (2018). Free private cities: Making governments compete for you. Createspace Independent Publishing Platform. • Genberg, H. (1985). The international transmission of inflation. Michael R. Darby , James R. Lothian , Arthur E. Gandolfi , Anna J. Schwartz , Alan C. Stockman. Journal of Political Economy, 93(5), 1035–1043. https://doi.org/10.1086/261350 • Harris, S. E. (1940). International monetary economics. Michael A. Heilperin. Journal of Political Economy, 48(5), 761–762. https://doi.org/10.1086/255622 • Hayek, F. A. (1964). Monetary nationalism and international stability. Augustus m Kelley Pubs. • Hersher, M., & Murphy, J. (2022, March 17). Russia stored large amounts of money with many countries. Hundreds of billions of it are now frozen. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/russian-bank-foreign-reserve-billions-frozen-sanctions-n1292153 • Huerto de Soto, J. (2006). Money, bank credit, and economic cycles. Ludwig von Mises Institute. • Huffman, W. (1984). The Gold Standard and the Transmission of Business Cycles. National Bureau of Economic Research. • Jilani, Z. (2016, January 8). Hillary Clinton made more in 12 speeches to big banks than most of us earn in a lifetime. The Intercept. https://theintercept.com/2016/01/08/hillary-clinton-earned-more-from-12-speeches-to-big-banks-than-most-americans-earn-in-their-lifetime/ • Kowsmann, P., Norman, L., & Talley, I. (2022, March 1). The Russia-Ukraine War: Latest news and live updates. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/russia-ukraine-latest-news-2022-03-01/card/west-orders-seven-russian-banks-off-swift-but-leaves-others-on-OMv9TCsZMQqlze9dQQRm • Meredith, G. (2002). Uncovered interest parity and the monetary transmission mechanism. In Monetary Transmission in Diverse Economies (pp. 208–236). Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511492488.012 • misesmedia. (2021). The Austrian theory of the business cycle [Video]. In YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPRRGE35_X4 • Mulligan, R. F. (2006). An empirical examination of Austrian business cycle theory. The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 9(2), 69–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12113-006-1009-x • Norman, L., Kowsmann, P., & Talley, I. (2022, March 1). The russia-ukraine war: Latest news and live updates. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/russia-ukraine-latest-news-2022-03-01/card/west-orders-seven-russian-banks-off-swift-but-leaves-others-on-OMv9TCsZMQqlze9dQQRm • Rothbard, M. N. (1974). The case for a 100 percent gold dollar. • Rothbard, M. N. (2005). What has government done to our money?: And, the case for a 100 percent gold dollar. Ingram. • Rothbard, M. N. (2009). Man, economy, and state with power and market, scholar’s edition. Ludwig von Mises Institute. • Rothbard, M. N. (2021). America’s great depression. Ludwig von Mises Institute. • Saidi, N. H. (1980). Fluctuating exchange rates and the international transmission of economic disturbances. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 12(4), 575. https://doi.org/10.2307/1991883 • Scheiblecker, M. (2008). The Austrian business cycle in the European context. Peter Lang D. http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/b13975 • Schnabl, G., & Hoffmann, A. (2011). National monetary policy, international economic instability and feedback effects – An overinvestment view. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1826064 • Skousen, M. (2015). The structure of production: New revised edition. NYU Press. • United States exports by country. (n.d.). TRADING ECONOMICS. Retrieved May 1, 2022, from https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/exports-by-country • von Mises, L. (1998). Human Action, The Scholar’s Edition. Ludwig von Mises Institute. • Westaway, P. (2002). Modelling the transmission mechanism of monetary policy. In Monetary Transmission in Diverse Economies (pp. 156–166). Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511492488.009 --- # Seasteading: The Movement, History, and Perspectives URL: https://free-cities.org/seasteading-the-movement-history-and-perspectives Published: 2023-09-19 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: seasteading, history-of-free-cities In human imagination, the sea has always remained a symbol of freedom and independence — a sentiment with deep roots in both history and psychology. It was precisely that desire for freedom coupled with technological optimism that gave rise to the seasteading movement. The term combines “sea” with “homesteading,” indicating a self-sufficient, frontier-like approach but on the water. Seasteaders believe that the creation of permanent dwellings at sea, away from any country’s territorial waters — and the reach of any existing nation-state — unlocks opportunities for rapid innovation in governance. Throughout history, the sea has been perceived as a route to escape — whether from persecution, as in the case of the pilgrims travelling to America, or from the state, as in the case of pirates. Maritime trade routes brought prosperity and cultural exchange. Literature, art, and film have added to this aura by romanticising the sea and life near it. As any tourist agent would confirm, most people prefer coastal resorts when they seek a respite from the hustle and bustle of urban routine. Living on a boat represents a level of autonomy not often found on land — and thankfully, modern technology is gradually making life afloat more feasible. The oceans, after all, make up over 70% of Earth’s surface area, so why engage in political fights over the remaining 30% if one can simply sail free? Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Main Challenges Upon closer look, it is not all that simple. Before ocean-born autonomous societies can become a viable lifestyle option, seasteaders must deal with some tricky technical and political challenges. Designing structures that can withstand the harsh marine environment, especially high waves and storms, creating sustainable food and freshwater sources, waste management, and energy supply — all of these combined represent only half of the story. The second half lies in the realm of politics. Seasteaders’ attempts to circumvent political obstacles have generated some media hype with catchy headlines — from a family couple threatened with a death sentence in Thailand to the floating city project in French Polynesia that fell victim to political backlash. And yet the leaders of the movement are as optimistic as ever: they are convinced that the lessons learnt in the past decade or so, as well as the recently achieved a critical mass of enthusiasts, are setting them on a fast track to success in creating the first floating societies. “Long before we go to Mars, free people are going to discover the planet that’s right in front of us,” says Joe Quirk, president of the Seasteading Institute, when we speak on Zoom after having met each other at the Liberty in Our Lifetime conference in Prague. Grant Romundt, CEO of Ocean Builders, a company now building a cluster of ‘SeaPods’ off the Panama coast, proposes seasteading as an unorthodox solution to housing shortages in booming cities. The oceans will provide the greatest real estate opportunity of the twenty-first century, he claims while presenting the prototype of the SeaPod at the same conference. Seasteading is “like Bitcoin but for the ocean — a thing that bypasses the established structures,” explains Aldo Antinori, a Panama native who was instrumental in introducing Ocean Builders to the country’s high-ranking officials. Well, that is exactly the source of scepticism: not everyone is convinced that creating a tool to escape government control is a viable proposition. Some critics say seasteading would only serve the wealthy, creating offshore tax havens or escapes from the responsibilities of citizenhood. On top of that, environmental concerns are voiced — building on the ocean could impact marine ecosystems (not necessarily in a bad way though: even the UN has endorsed seasteading as a possible answer to environmental challenges). Finally, some simply argue the technical challenges are too great — and that people en masse wouldn’t choose to live on the ocean. Going Overboard: Authors, Architects, and Anarchists Floating communities have been a staple in myths, legends, and fiction for millennia. One of the earliest mythological examples is Atlantis, described by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato as an island city of unparalleled grandeur and technology that was ultimately submerged and lost beneath the waves. Contemporary fiction reveals both fascination with and fear of the idea of living on sea — in Ernest Cline’s Ready Player One, for instance, the villain plans to craft his own seasteading utopia in the loosely regulated Caribbean waters by bringing together a fleet of modified oil rigs and tankers to form a gigantic modular platform. The 1995 film Waterworld is set in a post-apocalyptic future where Earth is entirely covered by oceans and communities of survivors live on floating structures. On the other side of the spectrum lies Sailing Free, a captivating libertarian novel co-authored by Gabriel Stein, a Mont Pelerin Society member, set in the 11th-century Icelandic Free State and celebrating the life of a young shipowner and sea trader who stands up for his homeland’s sovereignty. Architectural minds have been equally captivated by the idea, seeing it as an innovative solution to urban challenges, such as population density, land scarcity, and rising sea levels. The 1960s were marked by two daring projects, Buckminster Fuller’s Triton City and Kenzo Tange’s Tokyo Bay Plan. The most notable 21-century proposals include Vincent Callebaut’s Lilypad, a self-sufficient floating city for climate refugees, Shimizu Corporation’s Ocean Spiral, a 500-metre-wide underwater tower, and Lazzarini’s Wayaland inspired by Mayan pyramids. Most recently, world-famous architect Bjarke Ingels has made a splash with Oceanix City designed in partnership with UN-Habitat to be located in Busan, South Korea. The list would be incomplete without Dutch designer Koen Olthuis, founder of Waterstudio.NL. Leveraging the Netherlands’ rich legacy of water management, his designs seamlessly blend aquatic and terrestrial environments. And then there were other sorts of dreamers — for them, the open sea offered a blank canvas to reimagine societal structures. Inspired by Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, in 1968 entrepreneur Werner Stiefel spearheaded “Operation Atlantis”, an ambitious project aimed at creating a sovereign, libertarian micronation. Stiefel purchased a ship and later a whole island near the Bahamas. However, political disputes and natural disasters, like hurricanes, continually thwarted progress. Equally short-lived was the Republic of Minerva, an attempt by Michael Oliver, a Las Vegas real estate millionaire, to establish a libertarian nation with “no taxation, welfare, subsidies, or any form of economic interventionism” on the Minerva Reefs between Tonga and New Zealand. Despite initial success, including the creation of an artificial island, Tonga soon claimed the reefs and disrupted the plan. Sailing Close to the Wind: The Sealand Saga The Principality of Sealand is arguably the most famous attempt to create a seaborne micronation. It was proclaimed in 1967 on a disused British anti-aircraft gunning platform built during World War II, 12 kilometres off the coast of England, by Paddy Roy Bates, a former British Army major turned pirate radio broadcaster. He soon moved to live on a platform with his wife Joan and kids. When a rival pirate radio station’s crew tried to storm the platform, the Sealanders responded with petrol bombs and guns; the Royal Navy intervened and were met with fire, too. Bates and his son Michael got arrested, but the Royal Court threw out the case concluding that the seastead lies outside the UK’s territorial waters, that is, beyond British jurisdiction. Sealanders rejoiced: their sovereignty was de facto recognised! In the following years, they introduced their own constitution, flag, and national anthem, started minting coins and printing stamps, and began issuing Sealand passports. The founder was crowned Prince Roy and his wife Princess Joan of Sealand. At its peak, about 50 people lived on the platform. The micronation even faced a coup attempt in 1978, when German-born lawyer Alexander Achenbach, serving as Prime Minister of Sealand, hired mercenaries and took Michael Bates hostage. The Bates family fought back and, ultimately, Achenbach was captured — and charged with treason against Sealand. That was the moment of truth: what will Germany do? In a sense, it was a Catch-22: if the country decided to negotiate his release through diplomatic means, that would look like the recognition of Sealand; if Germany, instead, dropped the case, concluding that Achenbach was a Sealand citizen and thus outside of their jurisdiction, that would, again, look like the recognition of Sealand! The German embassy in London sent a representative to investigate the case, but eventually, Achenbach paid a fine to the Sealand authorities and was released and returned to Germany — only to proclaim a Sealand Rebel Government in exile. In 1987, the United Kingdom extended its territorial waters to 12 nautical miles, thus making it factually harder to uphold the claims of sovereignty by the Principality of Sealand. Roy Bates died in 2012 at the age of 91, and his son became Prince Michael of Sealand. Despite nobody living on a rusty platform these days — Michael Bates, who published his memoir Holding the Fort in 2015, resides in his bungalow in Essex — “the world’s smallest country” still issues passports, sells memorabilia, and even has a football team. For as little as £25 one can become a Lord or Lady of Sealand, while more expensive royal titles are sold for £500, with several options in between. The parchment certificate confirming one’s title is adorned with Sealand’s coat of arms bearing the stubborn nation’s motto: “E Mare, Libertas” — “From the sea, freedom”. Diving Deeper: What the Law Says At the heart of all seaborne micronation projects lies a deep-rooted belief in maximising personal freedom and minimising state intervention. Sealand, with its tumultuous history, has lived longer than others — sceptics would argue because they were too tiny for the British Government to ever bother. But what were the UK authorities legally supposed to do with Sealand, if anything? What does the international maritime law say about seasteading? To begin with, there is no legal definition of a seastead. Seasteading is an umbrella term encompassing all sorts of different structures. Just like there’s no universal way of living on land, there is no one-size-fits-all type of a floating community. Seasteads may take the form of individual boats, oceanic platforms (free-floating, permanently fixed, or somewhere in between), or entire man-made islands. The definition of a “vessel”, for instance, varies from one country to another. An important question is whether a given structure is fixed to the ocean ground or changes its location regularly. Secondly, seasteading projects vary in their proximity to the shore, the main factor influencing their level of autonomy. The ocean is governed by a number of multilateral treaties signed by most nation-states, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The document delineates four primary legal maritime zones. Each coastal state has sovereignty over its territorial waters which extend 12 nautical miles from its coast (a nautical mile is a unit used in sea and air navigation, it equates to roughly 1.151 land miles). Sailing a further 12 nautical miles from the shore, we remain in the so-called contiguous zone, where the coastal state can enforce laws related to customs, taxation, immigration, and pollution. The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extends 200 nautical miles from the coast — here, a coastal state has special rights regarding the exploration and use of marine resources, living and nonliving, but other states can navigate EEZ, too. Placing seasteads that close to the shore implies closer collaboration with nation-states — see some examples below. And finally, there are the high seas, the final frontier, where waters become truly “international”. Here, all states have freedom of navigation, but no state has sovereignty. Sounds like an ideal location for a seastead, right? The idea of a permanent floating community on the ocean presents new legal challenges. Even the high seas are not the realm of complete lawlessness — a ship, for instance, must carry the flag of some nation-state. Professor Tom W. Bell, a California-based legal scholar who advised Seasteading Institute (and some prominent Free Cities, including Honduran ZEDEs), has crafted a recipe for steasteads that want to bypass the rule of most maritime conventions. To remain off the radar, he writes, floating communities should stay fixed in place, below 24 metres long at the waterline, and avoid entering foreign ports. “Seasteads win further exemptions if they stay in or close to sheltered waters and remain smaller than 12 meters long, 400 gross tonnage, and 15-person capacity. Though voyaging or larger seasteads fall within the scope of additional conventions, they might qualify for exemptions from many of their requirements.” “Artificial islands” are another option. UNCLOS grants nations the right to construct those on the high seas. But again, we are talking about internationally recognised states, not groups of stateless enthusiasts. Ryan C. Schmidtke, author of Artificial Islands of the Future, concludes that the most viable option for a seastead would be to strike a deal with a friendly host nation for the creation of a maritime Special Economic Zone (SEZ). This would give seasteaders much-needed physical protection as well as legal certainty, along with the desired, though limited, political autonomy. As we shall see, this is exactly the route that seasteaders have explored most intensely in the past decade — with varied success. Casting a Wide Net: Who is Who in Seasteading “Seavilisation”, “sevangelists”, “aquapreneurs”, “aquatecture”, “aquaculture” — be prepared to learn some new words if you decide to delve deeper into the seasteading movement. The word “seasteading” itself was first coined by software entrepreneur Wayne Gramlich in 2008. Together with Patri Friedman, a grandson of Nobel-winning economist Milton Friedman, they co-founded the non-profit Seasteading Institute (TSI) to promote the creation of sovereign floating communities. For over a decade, while keeping his daily job as an engineer at Google, Patri was the face of seasteading — explaining the concept over and over again to the sceptical media crowd, organising the Ephemerisle festival dubbed “Burning Man on boats”, and pitching the idea to the Silicon Valley gurus. Thanks to his efforts, TSI received a $1.7 million endowment from billionaire venture capitalist Peter Thiel, the co-founder of PayPal. A few years later, Thiel resigned from TSI board, concluding that the idea was “not quite feasible”. But the movement lives on. Uniting venture investors and crypto enthusiasts, academics and lawyers, architects and software engineers, it continues making waves on a global scale. Joe Quirk, TSI president, considers himself, first and foremost, a storyteller. In 2017, together with Patri Friedman, he published a book titled Seasteading: How Floating Nations Will Restore the Environment, Enrich the Poor, Cure the Sick, and Liberate Humanity from Politicians — a very bold promise indeed. “When I first learned about seasteading”, Quirk tells me in an interview, “it was kind of a fringe movement. It was demonised in the press, you know: rich people want to create evil islands of selfishness. It couldn’t have looked worse.” The goal of the book was to reframe the debate and recruit hundreds of people with diverse political and professional backgrounds into the movement. And it worked, he believes. The stories below might have never happened if someone hadn’t read the Seasteading book at the right moment. Someone like Rüdiger Koch, a German engineer and bitcoin enthusiast, who has read it twice and approached Quirk to confirm that all of that was technically feasible. Someone like Grant Romundt, a software developer from Canada, who met Quirk on a plane one day and got intrigued by his “Stop arguing, start seasteading” T-shirt. Someone like Chad Elwartowski who volunteered to become the first-ever seasteader only to find himself in the midst of a Hollywood-like story. “These two people [Elwartowski and Romundt] are like the two hemispheres of the human brain — they are working together on this thing I never would have imagined”, Quirk says, referring to Ocean Builders, a company behind some of the most notable seasteading endeavours to date. “My only service is to tell the story.” With several novels behind his back, he believes that reality can be more mind-blowing than fiction. Joe Quirk, president of the Seasteading Institute, speaking at the Liberty in Our Lifetime 2022 conference in Prague. ‘Tis The SeaZone: The French Polynesia Chapter All Free City initiatives, essentially, face a trade-off between stability and flexibility. Carefully balancing their desire for autonomy with the need for legal certainty and physical protection, they often seek agreement with an existing nation-state. Governments, in turn, may be willing to carve out a territory and give it a go, hoping that relative freedom attracts talent and capital. Seasteaders, at least in theory, don’t need to ask anyone for permission — after all, they are not treading on any country’s sovereign land. They can start building a new, stateless society entirely from scratch. In real life, however, seaborne startup nations need stability more than anyone — even physical stability, when you live in the high sea, becomes a challenge. Solution? A SeaZone. In 2016, the Seasteading Institute and their for-profit cousin, Blue Frontiers, were approached by Marc Collins, a former minister of tourism of French Polynesia. An overseas territory of France with a high degree of autonomy, it comprises over a hundred islands and atolls scattered through the South Pacific, Tahiti being the most famous one. Renowned for its picturesque turquoise lagoons, coral reefs, and volcanic islands, the country relies heavily on tourism. To French Polynesia, the perspective of becoming the first place in the world to have a futuristic floating community with homes, restaurants, and hotels looked like a chance to boost its tourism potential to new heights. A memorandum of understanding was signed between TSI and the French Polynesia government for the creation of modular islands off the Tahiti coast. A series of semi-autonomous platforms plus a land-based settlement would make up a ‘SeaZone’, a sea-based SEZ. For seasteaders, French Polynesia ticked many boxes. The country enjoyed the rule of law and institutional stability, good transport connections with major cities, and decent infrastructure, including broadband internet, a must-have for digital nomads. Inside the country, not everyone was welcoming the initiative. As the new electoral season approached, local politicians bashed the floating island project as “neocolonial” and “elitist” and blamed the incumbent government for a lack of public consultation. Proponents argued that the SeaZone would not only create 2,000 jobs and bring over $170 million of total investment to French Polynesia but also improve its climate resilience. None of that convinced the country’s government, which in 2018 changed its mind and ended its collaboration with TSI and Blue Frontiers. That has not discouraged “seavangelists” and “aquapreneurs” from searching for alternative routes to success. Maybe trying to get a state on board when building a stateless society was a bad idea to begin with? An opposite strategy — asking for forgiveness, not permission — was tried out in parallel on the opposite side of the globe. In Deep Water: Escaping Thailand Growing up in a small farm town in Michigan, Chad Elwartowski was an unlikely candidate to become the first seasteader in history. Yet, inspired by the “stop arguing, start seasteading” strategy, he and his Thai-born partner Nadia Summergirl volunteered to become trailblazers. In early 2019, Ocean Builders installed a one-family floating home 12 nautical miles off the coast of Phuket in Thailand. A simple 6-metre-wide octagon structure costs about $150,000 to erect. The couple lived in their new home for a few weeks, occasionally visiting the mainland to sort out the basics, and trying to get permission from the Thai government in writing. In the meantime, three local lawyers confirmed there was nothing illegal about their plan. After all, the seasteaders thought, it wasn’t very much different from living on a boat. “All we expect from the Thai government is that they follow international law. We will be doing the same,” Elwartowski told Reason at the time. Turns out, that was already too much to ask. One day, Elwartowski’s friends saw a horrifying post in their Facebook feed. Apparently, the Thai Navy found their little shelter a threat to the country’s independence, no less, a crime potentially punishable by life imprisonment — or death. The two had to promptly seek ways to escape the country. For Nadia, a Thai citizen, that meant asking for asylum and being unable to come back home. In that Facebook post, Elwartowski was asking for legal help and diplomatic protection, emphasising, once again, that their intentions have been benign all along: “We were hoping to bring tourism to Phuket with an underwater restaurant, floating hotels and medical research, tech jobs, etc. We had 3 wealthy entrepreneurs in the past week tell us they were coming to live in Phuket because they were excited about the project. We love Thailand. Nadia is a proud Thai. She is a proud Buddhist who does not support violence. I am a pacifist who would not harm a fly.” Threatening the first seasteaders with a death sentence, he concluded, was “exactly the reason someone would be willing to go out in the middle of the ocean to get away from governments” in the first place. What motivated the Thai Navy to react so harshly remains a mystery, but Joe Quirk is trying to untangle it in his upcoming book, The Freest Person in the World, which he has almost completed. “They lived in a Hollywood movie that would make Tom Cruise jealous,” he says, talking about the couple. Having a military background, Elwartowski decided that ‘disappearing’ for a couple of months, even after escaping Thailand, was the best thing to do. The two came back to the surface in Panama — but that’s the next chapter of the story. A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats? The Panama Chapter Why Panama? Geography is part of the answer: the country is a global logistics and transportation hub, which lies outside the hurricane zone and enjoys access to two oceans. The economic climate is favourable as well. Panama already has a good track record of SEZs — including, notably, the Colón Free Trade Zone, the largest free port in the Americas and the second largest in the world. It also happened to be the first foreign country that, in 1903, adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency — dollarization makes Panama an attractive destination for foreign investors and saves it from the hyperinflation curse familiar to many other Latin American countries. Last but not least, Panama’s territorial taxation system makes it a magnet for digital nomads: income generated abroad is not taxed in Panama. Joe Quirk adds one more reason: “They don’t have a navy — some of us are a little touchy about navies since Thailand.” On top of all that, the Panamanian government showed interest in the initiative. One person instrumental in connecting all the dots was Aldo Antinori, an avid bitcoiner and Panama native, who got ignited by the seasteading concept and also happened to know the right people. He invited Joe Quirk to the country and introduced him to the president’s office, several ministries, and the Panama Canal authorities. The fact that Hector Alexander, minister of finance, had been a student of Milton Friedman at Chicago back in the 1970s, also might have helped. As a result, the idea of a libertarian enclave at sea, spearheaded by Milton Friedman’s grandson among others, fell on a fertile ground. “Governments love everything that has to do with investment and innovation,” Antinori explains to me in an interview. “We said: listen, we have a group of investors that are creating this innovative technology and want to try it out here in Panama. And they were like: Yes, of course, how can we help?” In the end, the government didn’t do much to help, he admits, but at least they didn’t mind Ocean Builders continuing their work. The SeaZone idea was on the agenda once again. Yet Ocean Builders quickly figured out that they could vastly speed up the process if, instead of applying for a SeaZone status, they dropped an anchor in a privately-owned marina that already operates as a public-private concession. The Linton Bay Marina was exactly like that. Moreover, its president happened to be Surse Pierpoint, the founder of Fundación Libertad Panamá, a free-market think tank, and a former manager of the Colón Free Trade Zone. A prominent libertarian thinker and practitioner, he was aware of seasteading as a concept and was quick to appreciate all the benefits a project like that could bring to Panama. Ocean Builders opened a workshop in Linton Bay, hired about 30 employees locally, and started building a prototype SeaPod. The Tip of the Iceberg: Bitcoiners vs. Bureaucrats That was late 2019, not long before the COVID-19 pandemic arrived. On the one hand, Covid lockdowns took its toll on the country’s economy, creating uncertainty for all, including Ocean Builders. At the same time, the unprecedented encroachment on personal liberties, masked as public health concerns, made many citizens worldwide — many of them for the first time — question the legitimacy of governments as such. The seasteading movement has gained many new supporters. Meanwhile, the cruise ship industry was in shambles. Some companies tried to save their business by organising “cruises to nowhere”, but many started to get rid of their main assets: ships. Ocean Builders saw that as an opportunity: never before could one buy a gorgeous 11-deck cruise ship, designed by Renzo Piano and accommodating almost 2,000 passengers, for less than $10 million. The ship previously known as the Pacific Dawn was renamed MS Satoshi and envisioned as a centrepiece of a future floating city in Panama. Surrounded by a constellation of SeaPods, she would form a giant ‘B’ letter, as in ‘bitcoin’, to reflect the cryptoanarchist views of the founding crew. If something looks like a ship, sails like a ship, or sounds like a ship, then it probably is a ship — that’s the way any bureaucrat thinks, be it in Panama, Portugal, or Pakistan. MS Satoshi, no doubt, looked like a ship, even though the Ocean Builders planned to convert her into a permanent floating condominium. As a ship, she required a flag (ideally Panamanian, otherwise she would have had to get out of Panama’s territorial waters every now and then), functioning engines and diesel tanks (even though the plan was to get rid of those and use the freed up space for workshop facilities), a crew of at least 30-40 people, and, most importantly, an insurance. “My daily job was reading every maritime law that Panama has passed, which was not a fun thing,” Chad Elwartowski recalls. The most frustrating discovery for Ocean Builders was that no one was ready to insure something as groundbreaking. “There are only about a dozen insurance companies in the world that cover large ships, and they didn’t like it that we were innovative, so we were not able to find an insurance company that was willing to work with us,” he explains. Despite the overall support of the Panama government, MS Satoshi ended up in regulatory limbo. In late 2020, just days before Christmas, Ocean Builders announced that, sadly, the Satoshi Crypto Cruise Ship was sold to another cruise company. This was not the end of the story though. They still had a SeaPod factory running in Linton Bay Marina, the Panama authorities were still on their side, and the seasteading movement was growing larger than ever — in line with the collective disillusionment in traditional government structures. The idea of a ship as a centrepiece of a liberty-minded, bitcoin-powered floating community in Panama was abandoned, but not of the community itself. Smooth Sailing: Smart Floating Homes for Sale SeaPods, seashell-like floating homes with panoramic ocean views, were designed by the world’s leading “aquatect” Koen Olthius. Though anchored to the seabed using a spar buoy system, SeaPods could be moved to different locations if necessary. They may also be grouped into clusters, creating entire seasteading communities. Ultra-minimalist, sustainable, eco-restorative — designed to increase, not deplete habitat for sea life like coral and fish — and, at least in theory, entirely self-sufficient, these structures are equipped with solar panels and rainwater collection facilities. Each SeaPod provides 833 square feet of living space, comparable to an average 2-bedroom flat, with the price ranging from $295,000 up to $1.5 million. The prototype SeaPod — spaceship-like, tech-infused, with massive panoramic windows overlooking the marina — was installed in Linton Bay in late 2022 and is now available for curious visitors to stay overnight. “I go visit about once a month and stay [there] overnight,” Chad Elwartowski tells me, “and every time I’m there, there’s some new fancy technology. Like, you open the bathroom door, and the seat opens up for you. Everything is very high-tech.” A team of software engineers work around the clock on upgrading the ‘smart home’ features, a process meticulously documented in the blog. In perspective, SeaPod occupants are expected to use a wearable ring for everything, from dimming the LED lights to ordering drone food deliveries. The process wasn’t smooth in the beginning. Everyone following the seasteading movement remembers the “ouch” moment when the flagship SeaPod tilted and then partially sank right after its installation. Embarrassing photos, which filled the media in September 2022, showed a crowd, including the Panamanian president Laurentino Cortizo, helplessly staring at a sleek white structure that was about to go underwater. The “Tilt”, apparently, was caused by a pumping system malfunction that destabilised the SeaPod. Within days, the construction was fixed and the SeaPod was floating again — and has been floating since. “It was a quick way to know who our friends were and who were the detractors,” Elwartowski recalls the cold shower Ocean Builders receive on social media. The global audience largely ignored the fact that the problem was solved within days, he says, but the Panamanian public remained largely positive. In the past few years, Ocean Builders have been providing jobs and training to dozens of local low-skilled workers, collaborating with coral reef preservation and marine science research initiatives. “We’re winning over the hearts and minds of Panamanians,” Joe Quirk proudly concludes (though TSI officially pulled out of the project in 2023, he remains a friend and a firm supporter). The feeling is mutual — Elwartowski now speaks very fondly of his new home. “We love Panama,” he says. After escaping Thailand, he and Nadia got married and had a child in Panama. “We are raising our little girl and we feel safe. The weather is similar to Thailand and the people are friendly.” One of the richest countries in Latin America, Panama is attracting more and more tourists and expats each year. Most of them flock to the capital, but some might be seduced by an opportunity to live in a floating home with a 360-degree ocean view and freedom-loving neighbours all around. According to Elwartowski, “Once you experience it, it’s just hard to not want to get back out there.” A Drop in the Ocean? Why Starting Small May Be Key A minimalist one-family floating home, or even a congregation of those, seems like a far cry from the original ambition to create entire stateless nations in neutral waters. But seasteaders see it not as a diversion from the big vision but rather as the first incremental step towards it. Linton Bay will be a nursery to test-drive ocean living, prove that it is possible, and raise funds necessary for scaling up. “But our ultimate goal has always been to go out into the open ocean,” Elwartowski assures me. In the short run, the plan is to make SeaPods in Linton Bay marina available for overnight booking and then start selling them to large marine resort operators worldwide. The next generation of floating homes, the Deep Water SeaPod, will have an underwater room. Affluent travellers already pay thousands of dollars per night to stay below the ocean level (see some examples below). Seasteaders are going to charge much cheaper “because we want middle-class tourists to come and stay on it,” Quirk explains this ‘Seabnb’ model. According to Ocean Builders, they already receive requests from luxury resorts willing to buy a few dozen pods each. But what about political freedom? “Being on the water already gives you some degree of sovereignty,” Elwartowski reasons. “I mean, if you look at all these people that live on their boats, they’re not too worried about a lot of things that the rest of us worry about, like zoning laws and property taxes.” “​​The autonomy comes from the fact that you’re able to move it,” Antinori agrees. If Panama suddenly becomes hostile, SeaPods can be floated to neighbouring Costa Rica, or even further to Honduras, where the new seasteading community can become part of an existing ZEDE. Ocean Builders claim they already get “a lot of interest from other governments”, without revealing the details just yet. Anchored in Experience: Three Main Lessons Navigating political currents in French Polynesia, escaping a deadly storm in Thailand, dropping an anchor in Panama — it was a pretty eventful decade for the seasteading movement. What are the main lessons learnt and what will be the next steps? First of all, seasteaders are now convinced that starting small is the best strategy. “Enough with the big visions of giant floating cities — just give me one technology that could be replicated and pay for itself,” says Joe Quirk when I ask him this question. The Seasteading Institute, despite their widely-known brand, has only two full-time employees, but multiple non-profit and for-profit organisations, with various approaches and backgrounds yet shared goals and values, are engaged in smaller-scale innovation under the TSI umbrella. The projects endorsed by TSI massively range in scale, from a single brick proposed as an eco-friendly material for building on the ocean to single-family seasteads to entire sea colonies. This startup-like approach allows ‘aquapreneurs’ to try out different monetisation strategies in parallel. For instance, the property-tech company Arkhaus is currently developing a floating private club in Miami for “like-minded disruptors and innovators” with annual membership packages starting from $7,500 — if it pays off, they intend to replicate this model in New York, Istanbul, Dubai, and Paris. A different but complementary strategy might be to gather an online community before building something physical. In line with the concept of non-territorial governance (also known as cryptosecession) and network states, this approach allows seasteaders to get a critical mass of supporters without asking them all to leave their lives behind and move to a shaky remote floating platform — and to test-drive new ideas without cutting through red tape or engaging in political fights. Ethos Island, for instance, intends to create an oceangoing private city-state in international waters and is inviting everyone to join their virtual crowd and vote for location. Another example is Atlas Island. Founded in 2021 by a group of TSI ambassadors, they have gathered about 400 online members committed to becoming citizens of a future seastead. At first, the plan is to establish marina communities made up of individual vessels close to onshore amenities, and then gradually develop the infrastructure necessary to move further into the high seas, away from any government control, and ultimately, become a fully-fledged seastead with contract-based citizenship, akin to a free private city. The founders are now choosing locations for pioneering communities — one in the Mediterranean and one in the Caribbean — and developing the “Ark of Liberty”, a self-sufficient single-family boat house to serve as a building block. The Atlas Island team is also negotiating with an undisclosed government to adopt a flag of convenience (FOC) — a practice commonly used by ship owners of registering a vessel in a country other than the country of actual ownership to bypass costly rules and regulations. Here comes the second lesson the seasteaders have learnt after several attempts to strike a deal with nation-states: It’s time to stop negotiating with governments and start negotiating with flagging registries. It is a common practice for nation-states to delegate the administrative and regulatory functions of registering a ship, enforcing maritime regulations, and inspecting vessels to third-party private entities. As a result, while the ship flies the flag of the nation in question, a private entity handles many of the day-to-day regulatory tasks. The practice is ubiquitous: the lion’s share of global shipping is carried out under FOCs. For nation-states issuing FOCs, more vessels carrying a country’s flag — and paying a yearly fee for that — means more money into that country’s budget, making it a win-win arrangement. Panama firmly holds the leadership by the number of ships carrying its flags, followed by Liberia, the Marshall Islands, Malta, and the Bahamas. As Quirk explains: “The legal ecosystem for seasteading is not defined in international law, so the Seasteading Institute intends to negotiate with flagging registries to get the Bahamas, Panama, Malta, or Liberia to define seasteads as a legitimate category of vessel in international law. … If we do that, two-thirds of the Earth’s surface is an open canvas to experiment with voluntary societies.” In the case of MS Satoshi, Panama was ready to grant its flag to the mega-ship, they just had no idea how to classify it. Classifying it as a seaworthy vessel implied that the ship would move around, transporting passengers and goods, carrying thousands of gallons of fuel, requiring a crew of some 30-40 persons, and following a plethora of costly environmental and labour regulations — all of which are, in fact, irrelevant for a floating residential community which MS Satoshi actually intended to be. If only Panama, otherwise rather warm towards seasteading initiatives, could define seasteads as a legitimate legal entity, that would be a game-changer. The ocean rules are fluid (just recently, for instance, the UN has updated environmental rules governing high seas) and new legal precedents will eventually lead to new legal practices. Here comes the third major lesson learnt by seasteaders to date: prioritise safety. It is easy to see how cumbersome regulations hinder scientific and institutional progress — and indeed, the precautionary principle, instinctive fear of all things new, is to a large extent responsible for the slowdown of innovation globally. But for techno-optimists to win the argument, it is equally important to remember that deep down, when it comes to normal people, this fear is driven not by some partisan ideology but by a natural human desire for safety. Thus, to get public opinion and decision-makers on their side, seasteaders must show that when seeking to escape government rules, they don’t just throw every precaution into the bin — they replace burdensome and obsolete maritime regulation with modern and agile self-regulation. The recent catastrophic implosion of OceanGate’s Titan submersible was a tragic reminder of the ocean’s dangerous nature that could have been avoided, the TSI blog writes: “Seasteaders are on the edge of innovation, but innovation cannot ignore physics.” To prevent future tragedies, counter anxiety, and boost public confidence, TSI is now reinventing itself as a classification society. A team of volunteers are busy skimming through thousands of pages of existing safety standards and drafting a document (“Classification Society Rules and Standards”) to legally define seasteads in international law. That would allow the TSI to use their reputation to grant — or refuse — their seal of approval to projects that want to be considered seasteads. If all goes as planned, that would make all sides — flagging registries, insurance companies, investors, and seasteaders themselves — more confident when exploring the uncharted waters of ocean living. A Sea of Possibilities: What’s Next for Seasteading? Seasteading ideas did not evolve in isolation — like Free Cities, seasteads belong to a broader movement of initiatives exploring how innovation in governance increases human freedom and prosperity. Compared to land-based free communities, seasteading projects have one big upside: mobility. Individual vessels and entire floating communities can be moved to a new place if the political environment in the country of origin becomes hostile. This fluidity allows seasteads to enjoy unparalleled autonomy here and now. We might be decades away from the United Nations acknowledging floating micro-states as sovereign entities, but persuading at least one country (maybe Panama?) to recognise seasteads seems quite possible. As oceanic laws adapt and shift, almost half of the world’s surface remains unclaimed by any government — an open canvas for exploration and experimentation. In this vast expanse of blue, there lies a promise of creating “a huge diversity of governments for a huge diversity of people” and a future where every wave brings forth new possibilities. --- # Free Private Cities: A Market-Oriented Solution to the Problems of Government Intervention URL: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities-a-market-oriented-solution-to-the-problems-of-government-intervention Published: 2024-01-29 Author: Alex Voss Category: Academic Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance, taxation-and-economics Authors: Alexander D. Voss & Hynek Fencl Abstract Free Private Cities (FPCs) are a new model of governance in which a purely private, investor-owned company provides the services of a State in a city-sized area. Free Private Cities attempt to provide Governance-as-a-Service (GAAS) by treating the relationship with residents as that between a service provider and a consumer rather than ruler and subject. The key characteristics of FPCs include a contract signed between the consumer and the FSP Operator, consensual taxes and/or fees charged by the Operator to the resident consumer, and the provision of infrastructure including energy, water treatment, roads, security, dispute resolution, and others. This paper first lays out in detail the risks, pitfalls, and negative consequences of government intervention in the economy and then examines the FPC model of governance to determine if it is distinctive enough to avoid the same pitfalls or if it merely represents a form of privatized statehood that suffers from many or most of the flaws of traditional governments. Free Private Cities, a Market Oriented Solution to the Problems of Government Intervention Modern nation-states are notoriously involved in almost all aspects of their citizens’ lives. This includes both economic and social decisions. The institutional incentives of the state compel its machinery to be involved in one way or another throughout the economy. In addition, the same incentives push the state in almost all countries and situations to find ways and reasons for increasing the size and scope of its intervention. State intervention in the economy, however, is not an equilibrium outcome. Intervention induces more intervention. Economic interventionism is often an attempt to circumvent the laws of economics. As laws, however, they cannot be circumvented; they can only be temporarily denied, with longer-term consequences. Such actions will subsequently lead to down-the-road issues as a result of the ill-considered initial intervention. At present, in most countries in the world, the size and scope of state interventionism are so large that we live in a more or less constant state of intervention; and this interventionism is publicly justified by being supposedly necessary in order to address societal issues which in fact were a result of previous interventions. One proposed solution, often advocated by adherents to laissez-faire, markets, libertarianism, and Austrian Economics is the concept of a Free Private City (FPC). A Free Private City is, at its core, a city model where governance is privatized. The model consists of several key features which we will outline first and then examine the difference between an FPC and a traditional government. When we refer to traditional models of government, we purposely do not make a distinction between democracies, autocracies, dictatorships, republics, and others. While there are notable differences between these types of government, they share a central feature of being top-down and coercive. None of them obtain explicit consent from each resident or citizen and are not subject to the profit and loss calculations, unlike businesses in the private sector. From the perspective of this paper, this absence of profit and loss calculations on the market is the key differentiator between FPCs and traditional governments and it is on this basis that we will analyze the economic implications of FPCs. Finally, in this paper, we will answer the question of whether FPCs, even if perhaps more efficient, are simply a privatized version of statehood that results in interventions that also lead to malinvestments and further interventions. If the answer is affirmative, FPCs may represent a slight improvement in governance, but hardly a revolutionary change. On the other hand, if FPCs are able to avoid this and become market players rather than new governments, the implementation of FPCs in practice would not just increase human liberty and economic prosperity, it would unlock completely new — more consensual and sustainable — modes of living together. With that roadmap, we begin first by examining the role of government intervention in an economy and explain the negative and unstable results of such intervention. Then, we will explain the core of the Free Private City model. Finally, we will apply the model to determine whether FPCs are actually able to solve the key problems of government intervention. Government Intervention and Its Impact on the Economy While governments perform many diverse functions, their activities can be conceptually collated into two major groups: 1) transfer payments, and 2) resource-using interventions. We will analyze these in turn. Transfer Payments In a free market, wealth is acquired through the combination of production and exchange. Implicit in a free-market system is the voluntary nature of these processes. People express their wants and needs, demand certain products and services, and, in turn, use their labor and existing resources to produce what is desired by others. Exchange then facilitates specialization, which enables much higher efficiency in production as well as in the allocation of both input and output resources. In such a completely voluntary economy, one’s earnings correspond to what others in society are willing to give up in order to receive the products of one’s labor (subject to friction within the system). The subjectivity of value enables such an exchange to be beneficial for all parties rather than a zero-sum game. In a completely voluntary economy, it only makes sense to talk about a “distribution” of wealth in the context of production. The only mechanism for obtaining wealth is producing more value, as determined by other members of society (charity could be considered to be another mechanism of acquiring wealth, but it is better understood as a special case of exchange, where tangible wealth is exchanged for psychological or spiritual value). If intervention is introduced into this economy and the market is no longer unhampered, a new mechanism for obtaining wealth or control over resources is created. This mechanism is to use the apparatus of the state (monopoly on legal force) to seize wealth from producers of value, transferring it into the hands of the agents of said state. In this process, “earnings are severed from production and exchange and become separately determined” (Rothbard, 2009, 1255). To the extent that this process takes place in society, “the allocation of earnings is distorted away” from the most efficient providers. On the unhampered market, when the property rights in the proceeds from production and exchange are undisturbed, the compensation received for the value one has created forms an important feedback loop. Government intervention in this process dampens this feedback loop, discouraging effective and socially beneficial production. Another, more hidden effect of this intervention is the lowering of the amount of control that consumers have over the overall production of goods and services in society. On the unhampered market, production is oriented toward satisfying potential customers. When the state seizes value from those who have produced and, by implication, places it in the hands of those who have not, consumers thereby lose part of their ability to reward desirable production and discourage unwanted or ineffective production. This consequently leads to producers at large being less able to satisfy the needs and wants of consumers. One additional notable distortion effect created by the introduction of government intervention mechanisms in the economy is the incentivization of people to steer away from productive activities and toward using this “tool” to acquire wealth instead. The state thereby opens the door to a new form of obtaining wealth — political entrepreneurship. The central feature of political entrepreneurship is not an economical production of higher-valued outputs from lower-valued inputs but securing access to decision-making power that controls how wealth is seized and distributed afterward. Through political entrepreneurship, individuals and their networks can benefit from someone else’s value production without producing something on their own — they are obtaining wealth without creating value first, which amounts to a net reduction of wealth in society. Finally, transfer payments create a class of net taxpayers and net tax beneficiaries. This class division foments social strife, resentment, and ill will in society. Those who receive wealth without producing value first are incentivized away from producing value or learning how to do so. As such, transfer payments are not a stable equilibrium. Ceteris paribus, their scope and extent will necessarily grow until the interventionist system changes or collapses altogether. Resource-Using Activities The second broad form of government intervention consists of the government using factors of production towards its own ends rather than the ends chosen by producers trying to satisfy consumers. In this role, the government is taking on the role of the entrepreneur in so far as it is taking scarce inputs, be it natural or capital goods, and using them to create output products. However, unlike real entrepreneurs, due to the government’s unique position in the economy, it is unable to do this in a manner that is efficient or just. Resource-using activities are a particularly interesting form of government intervention to study, as they are fundamentally misunderstood by most schools of economics. The Keynesian school, for example, views government spending as a viable means of “investment”. This view implies that the government is able to make appropriate tradeoffs between diverse situations, wealth, and values (by taking money from net taxpayers and spending it on goods that are valued differently by different people). It also implies that governments are able to make such prudent tradeoffs not just in the present but also over time (by taking money from net taxpayers today and spending it on producer goods or investments to be used to satisfy consumers in the future). By doing this, the government is deciding how much all of society should produce or consume today versus tomorrow or a hundred years. In short, the Keynesian view exhibits wildly unrealistic assumptions about the capabilities and incentives of governments. In contrast, it is worth exploring resource-using government intervention from the perspective of the Austrian school of economics. Whereas the Keynesians view government spending as “investment”, Austrian-school economist Murray Rothbard argues: “[O]n the contrary, all of this expenditure must be considered consumption. Investment occurs where producers’ goods are bought by entrepreneurs, not at all for their own use or satisfaction, but merely to reshape and resell them to others—ultimately to the consumers. But government redirects the resources of society to its ends, chosen by it and backed by the use of force. Hence, these purchases must be considered consumption expenditures, whatever their intention or physical result. They are a particularly wasteful form of “consumption,” however, since they are generally not regarded as consumption expenditures by government officials.” (Rothbard, 2009, 1259) Resource-using interventions can take the form of the government offering goods or services both nominally “for free” or for a price. While this distinction might matter for the end consumer, it is irrelevant to this analysis. This is because the government has to use scarce means to provide said goods or services. It may charge no price but it is utilizing resources that could otherwise be used in other industries or for other production processes. More important than the price charged is the separation between payment and provision of a good or service provided by the government (Rothbard, 2009, 1260). On the private market, producers acquire inputs from others for a price and combine them into outputs. At the point of sale, consumers pay the price for the good and producers receive this payment. This is not the case with government intervention. The government is able to acquire the resources needed via coercion, creating a disconnect between the acquisition of and payment for resources. This split has important consequences. Following the method used by the Austrian school of economics, we will explore these consequences from the perspective of cause and effect. First, the price charged in the market by the government will be arbitrary to some degree or another. Since governments generally promote the idea that they are providing the “public good”, they frequently charge too little on the open market. Numerous examples include free access to parks, parking permits being cheaper than they would be on the free market, and bus fares that are cheaper than a private entrepreneur might charge. When the charged price is lower than the market price, more of that good or service is demanded and less is supplied than would be in the private market. This leads to shortages of many important resources and the inevitable calls for consumers to cut back on their use of these resources, as well as pressure for private companies to increase supply in an economically long-term-unsustainable way. In addition to shortages that would not be experienced on the free market, resources are also allocated inefficiently. In a market where prices fluctuate according to entrepreneurial assessments of consumer demand, prices will help allocate demand to its most valuable end. When prices rise, people who might be using the resource but don’t absolutely need it will reduce their use of this resource for these dispensable ends. This allows more of the resource to be used for more highly valued ends. An easy example involves water supplies in natural disaster areas. Not preventing the price of a water bottle from rising ensures that people only buy enough to drink and survive for a period of time and do not buy it right now to, say, stockpile in their basement and take bottled water showers. This sort of decision-making on the margin is always present in consumers and prices send the correct signals so that they can economize based on the scarcity of a resource at any given time and location. In addition, the higher the price of a good, the greater the signal to entrepreneurs to find ways to bring the resource to where it is needed most. In our example above, the price of water increasing to $15 per bottle would be an obvious immediate profit opportunity for entrepreneurs to buy water in one place and drive to the disaster zone to sell for a profit. This is the best feedback possible in order to cut use demand where it is not absolutely necessary while increasing supply at the same time, which ultimately results in the elimination of the momentary scarcity of this good as quickly as possible. The reverse will occur when the government overcharges for certain goods. Examples might include imposing permits to build or operate a business or overcharging for parking on a weekend. In this case, the market price would be lower than what is charged by the government. Therefore, the result is more land being allocated towards parking leading to an abundance of open parking spaces and a lack of interest from consumers in utilizing the parking facilities provided by the government. This is clearly inefficient and would not happen on the market, which might charge higher prices on some days/times and lower prices on others to attempt to maximize the revenue coming from an earlier investment. While recognizing the inherent inefficiency of government provision of goods and services, many advocates of improving governance encourage the government to operate “as if” it were a business. Presumably, by this, they mean that the bureaus of the government should simply act like for-profit businesses. Unfortunately, this fundamentally misses the point. Being a for-profit business is not something a government bureau can fake. To be able to operate as a for-profit business, one must face the same incentives. Capital must actually be at risk, as it would be if the goods or services provider was an entrepreneur. Bureaucrats don’t have the same incentives as entrepreneurs in a profit-making business. Instead, they are graded on various internal metrics and compensated accordingly. This might be things such as the number of customers served, how well one checks the boxes or other easily measured metrics. Bureaucrats, however, are not compensated more for increasing the profit of the enterprise because there is no profit to be measured. In a private, for-profit company, while some middle managers’ bonuses may not be tied to how well their division performed, the decisions of who to employ in these middle management positions and how to compensate them are themselves set by the owners or the capitalist-entrepreneurs of the firm. Therefore, the decisions made are kept in line with profit maximization. Even if a decision is outsourced to managers, the capitalist-entrepreneurs make the entrepreneurial decision to outsource that decision-making and will reap the rewards or costs accordingly in their profit or loss. Further, and perhaps most importantly, we have shown that the problem of government intervention and the resulting split between the provision of good or service and the payment for it fundamentally comes down to the lack of ability of the government enterprise to make decisions that would be in accordance with the goods’ allocations and pricing that would have occurred on the free market. This conclusion lends itself to a follow-up question: if we are aiming to provide goods and services as efficiently as possible (i.e. providing goods and services in both the quantity and price that would be charged on the free market), why not just let private actors in the free market be providers instead of the government? One final problem of government provision of goods and services is that the government is taking resources from the private market that could and would otherwise be used in other ways. Land used for building a parking lot could perhaps be used more efficiently for building a residential complex. The steel used in the making of warships and nuclear submarines could perhaps be used to make cars or rails. The government is not able to discern how resources should be used or which use of these resources best satisfies consumer wants. Instead, they are simply extracted from the economy and used for arbitrary purposes with unquantifiable benefits. This necessarily limits the absolute amount of the resources available for other, provably productive uses. In addition, when the government takes resources from the market, it creates non-market demand for goods which will distort relative pricing across all resources and factors of production. The result is that the economy will produce different things than it otherwise might, leading to a greater scarcity of actually demanded goods and a consequent reduction of consumer welfare. Consider a small country A that produces only a very limited amount of steel. Country A’s military may require the use of all steel in the country as well as importing more from abroad. This artificial demand for steel drives up the prices of steel which then sends signals to entrepreneurs to try to produce more steel. It also sends signals to entrepreneurs to try to build products and services that do not demand steel as steel is artificially more expensive than it otherwise would be. These two resulting effects will also then permeate throughout the economy following a similar logic as that of the Cantillon Effect. Consequently, entrepreneurs are, on the margin, spending more time, effort, energy, and resources building steel-generating and non-steel-using businesses than they otherwise might be. This prevents the same resources from being used for the production of other goods, leading to consumers being less able to satisfy their needs and wants. As we have seen throughout this section, when the government intervenes in the market by using resources taken from the market to provide goods or services, this has profound effects on the nature of the economy. Perhaps the most severe issue the government faces is its ability to access capital via force. Voluntary trade in the free market is always a net benefit and mutually beneficial ex-ante. By making use of force, the government stops engaging in voluntary trade, and thus its activities do not exhibit the same quality. Finally, to the extent that the government provides something valuable and at the price that the market would demand, this negates the need for the government in the first place. Given the nature of the intervention by the government and the resulting negative economic consequences that inevitably follow, resource-using intervention is also not a stable equilibrium and creates the perceived need for further future intervention. Having analyzed the consequences of government interventionism on the economy, we now turn to describe a recently introduced model of governance, the Free Private City. Finally, we will analyze whether this new model actually solves the issues described above concerning government intervention in the economy. What Is an FPC? In the previous section, we analyzed the role that government intervention plays in an economy. We concluded by noting that government intervention is inefficient by definition, and therefore cannot maximize welfare. We have also seen that governments do not face the correct incentives in order to be able to operate like a business. Therefore, to achieve improvements in consumer and societal welfare, advocacy for more efficient government is misplaced, while arguments for reducing the size and scope of government are more suitable. Next, our aim is to present a new governance model, a Free Private City, in order to determine if the FPC can actually solve any of the problems highlighted earlier or if it falls victim to the same shortcomings. A Free Private City is a semi-autonomous zone within the territory of a Host State. It is part of the constitutional framework of the Host State and can only be established if a national framework exists to designate certain parts of the country as Special Administrative Regions (SAR). While this term originates with Hong Kong and Macau in China to describe a “one country, two systems” arrangement, the concept of SARs can be understood universally to mean Special Economic Zones (SEZ) brought to a new level by enabling more local autonomy, especially for residential populations. If a national SAR framework exists, a prospective operating company (FPC Operator) can then negotiate with the government the establishment of an FPC in a specific unoccupied area, where the FPC Operator gains internal governance autonomy in accordance with the SAR legal framework in exchange for bringing in foreign investment, employment opportunities and economic growth, as well as direct payments or profit-sharing. The agreement between the Operator and the Host State government should be anchored in international law via investment protection treaties to ensure the stability of the city’s legal status even in the face of future Host State changes in government. In a Free Private City, governance is viewed as a service. The FPC model sees it as a positively valuable service that will be paid for by willing customers on the free market. An FPC Operator is a developer and manager of a piece of land that sets the rules, regulations, and dispute resolution mechanisms for this territory. In said territory, the Operator is autonomous (subject to an agreement with the Host State on whose territory the FPC is located) and strives to make a profit. To visit or reside in the FPC, each individual must sign (or consent to) a contract with the Operator. Given the need for such a contract to be signed with each prospective resident, FPCs must develop on greenfield territory to prevent involuntary imposition on existing inhabitants. The Operator also acts as a developer and provider of communal infrastructure. It must provide for the basic needs of a community like any other local government if it is to attract residents to move there. While not comprehensive, this list includes energy resources and distribution, access to fresh water and water treatment and filtration systems, internet, roads, and other basic services. While some of these can and will be provided by other service providers, the Operator must ensure the provision of these services if there is insufficient interest from other private parties to provide them independently (Gebel, 2022). Finally, the Operator of an FPC is compensated according to mutually agreed-upon contracts with its clients who pay for its services. Given the current market outlook, explicitly stated desires of current entrepreneurs attempting to build FPCs, and a general trend in markets towards a consistent price, we suggest that the compensation arrangement between residents and FPC operators will take the form of flat fees rather than a tax in most cases where this is not prevented through the Operator’s contract with the Host State. Given the current market information cited above, it is plausible to assume that an FPC Operator might charge ca. $1000 per year for security, ca. $1000 for dispute resolution services, and ca. $500 for general maintenance, resulting in a total fee of $2,500 per year. These numbers are directional and not meant to indicate precise payments in any future FPCs. As a novel and innovative model, Free Private Cities deserve a much deeper analysis and treatment elsewhere. However, for the purposes of this paper, this introduction to FPCs is extensive enough. In sum, an FPC consists of physical territory, governed by a profit-motivated company, that signs a real contract with residents, vouching to provide certain services in exchange for contractually guaranteed fees paid by the residents. No party can unilaterally change the contract and all parties must abide by their agreements. Does an FPC Solve the Problems of Government Intervention? It is often stated or simply presumed that a single-purpose government enterprise, as long as it is operating within the private market, can price its services and allocate its resources efficiently. This assumption, however, is incorrect. There is a fatal flaw that permeates all government enterprise and prevents it from rational pricing and efficient allocation of resources — the backdrop of unlimited “reserve” funds. Even if the government engages in transactions on the free market, its activities always enjoy the possibility of a fallback on tax-sourced funds in case of failure. This crucial factor again distorts the incentives of the government enterprise in question. Because of this flaw, government enterprises cannot be “operated as a business”, no matter what the government’s intentions are. This context is crucial to the question of whether an FPC can actually solve the problem of government intervention. It could be that, due to the Operator’s central role within the FPC, the model simply mirrors the incentives of governments, together with the inevitable intervention failures. In such a scenario, the FPC could be trying to “operate as a business” despite, in fact, being more akin to a traditional government and, therefore, being subject to the same pitfalls. However, we contend that an FPC does genuinely reform the provision of governance services because it fundamentally reconstructs the nature of the relationship between government and citizens to approximate a service provider and customer instead of a ruler and subject. Here, the service provider is simply an entrepreneur on the private market who faces uncertainty and must find a way to provide consumers with something they value more than the price at which the service provider is willing to sell this service. We will in turn look at a number of aspects of the FPC model and highlight how the model fundamentally changes the nature of the provision of governance services and how these changes allow for the market of governance to economize on the production of goods and services as it would and does in other unhampered markets. First and foremost, FPCs are run by for-profit companies operating in the free market. This means they access resources in the same way as any other capitalist-entrepreneur: they must acquire them through voluntary exchange in transactions where both sides benefit ex-ante (or else they would not engage in said exchange). Murray Rothbard elaborates on the aforementioned fatal flaw of government intervention thus: “[G]overnment can obtain virtually unlimited resources by means of its coercive tax power. Private businesses must obtain their funds from investors. It is this allocation of funds by investors on the basis of time preference and foresight that rations funds and resources to the most profitable and therefore the most serviceable uses. Private firms can get funds only from consumers and investors; they can get funds, in other words, only from people who value and buy their services and from investors who are willing to risk investment of their saved funds in anticipation of profit. In short, payment and service are, once again, indissolubly linked on the market. Government, on the other hand, can get as much money as it likes. The free market provides a “mechanism” for allocating funds for future and present consumption, for directing resources to their most value-productive uses for all people. It thereby provides a means for businessmen to allocate resources and to price services to ensure such optimum use. Government, however, has no checkrein on itself, i.e., no requirement for meeting a profit-and-loss test of valued service to consumers, to enable it to obtain funds. Private enterprises can get funds only from satisfied, valuing customers and from investors guided by profits and losses. Government can get funds literally at its own whim” (Rothbard, 2009, 1262). Given the profit motivation and the lack of ability to coerce resources from society, an FPC is fundamentally different from a government as traditionally conceived. FPC Operators must raise capital on the open market by convincing investors of the profit opportunity in front of them. Then, they must actually execute on that profit opportunity, all while accessing resources only through voluntary means. Of course, nothing about an FPC Operator makes it uniquely better at forecasting consumer desires, and in that sense, it is possible that an Operator could turn out to make poor decisions. Where the distinction from traditional government lies is not that the Operator might get the economic calculation wrong but that, in the case it does, it will quickly suffer the consequences via actual monetary losses, which will force it to swiftly adapt or go bankrupt. Traditional governments, on the other hand, have a track record of falling back on tax-sourced funds when their enterprise is not performing well while attributing such failures to external factors or competitors. Does resource-using intervention by an FPC Operator lower consumer welfare? We have seen earlier that resource-using intervention by governments faces additional distinct challenges which cause it to lead to lower consumer welfare. In particular, resource-using intervention takes resources that might be used in other productive processes and allocates them where they are not most highly valued. In addition, we have argued, following Rothbard, that all government spending must be considered consumption as resources used in such interventions have to be extracted from the private economy before being spent on other ends that are determined arbitrarily by the government in the absence of market signals. FPCs are not subject to this effect. While FPC Operators will use resources when they develop and operate a city, they are subject to the profit-and-loss calculation and therefore will have to economize in their decisions on what resources to use. This is no different economically than, say, a large car manufacturer deciding whether to use plastic or steel in the production of its new car model. On the one hand, more scarce resources might be used than otherwise, but these resources are used by the entrepreneur to produce the highest profit possible. The highest profit is, in turn, generated by best satisfying consumers’ wants and thereby being able to charge the highest price possible, while finding the cheapest resources available to produce said goods or services. This is the kind of economizing that all private-sector actors have to engage in in order to be successful in a competitive market. FPC Operators face the same incentives and constraints. While an Operator might spend significant money on a new energy grid system or in building new roads just like a local government might, the risk and payoff are aligned in order to incentivize good decisions. In contrast, the traditional government extracts resources in a coercive way and therefore we cannot know if it is efficient in its entrepreneurial ventures or not. This logic persists for all other so-called public goods as well. An FPC Operator might know that providing parking in the city will incur costs without a directly associated revenue stream. Nonetheless, the Operator may provide it anyway, much like private malls provide on-site parking because it is simply necessary for an overall quality of life or the services provided. This means that, from the Operator’s perspective, the cost of parking must be bundled with other revenue streams in order to build a high-quality product that will be voluntarily purchased by consumers. The next way in which an FPC is unequivocally different, more voluntary, and therefore more efficient than the traditional government is via the contract mechanism in place with the general service provider. An FPC provides governance as a service. This service is valuable in that it provides basic security and dispute resolution between and among residents. While we cannot know the value of this service when and where it is provided by traditional governments, we do know it is valuable and welfare-enhancing when an FPC Operator provides it. We know this because every resident in an FPC has signed a real contract with the Operator. Since this contract is voluntarily agreed to, we know ex-ante that both parties to the agreement are better off and, therefore, the service provided by the Operator has clear positive value — it enhances consumer and societal welfare. Therefore, if and to the extent that an FPC Operator is successful on the free market, it is successful because it provides a service that is found valuable by the consumers — or, in this case, residents. Do transfer payments by an FPC Operator lower consumer welfare? While transfer payments distribute resources away from productive members of society to the less productive when done by traditional governments, the same cannot be said for FPCs. By default, since FPCs are profit-seeking enterprises with no power of coercion, their revenues generated are legitimately earned and may be used for any further purpose without necessarily causing market distortion. The funds earned by an FPC Operator are not extracted by coercion and subsequently distributed to others. Rather, they are received on the free market for providing a valuable service in the first place. From this revenue, the Operator might then choose to pay shareholder dividends, reinvest in further development of the city or its own corollary business — or it may decide to give away these funds as charitable donations to some city residents. While we doubt the latter will happen to an extensive degree in an FPC, such payments or donations do not reduce overall societal welfare, as the money in question was, at every step, transferred through a voluntary and consensual process, increasing societal welfare ex-ante. Finally, while taxes are properly understood as a form of involuntary, forced payment, this is not the case in an FPC. Regardless of how the Operator’s compensation is structured, any payment from residents to this Operator is necessarily voluntary because it had been freely agreed to beforehand. Each contract, including all clauses, scope of services, and compensation are reviewed by both parties (the resident and the FPC Operator) before the parties agree to be bound by the contract. If they do so, they indicate that they expect the relationship they are entering into to be mutually beneficial. Within this framework, even hypothetical seemingly exorbitant fees or taxes of 99% of one’s income would actually not be confiscatory but rather a mutually beneficial market transaction, as long as such a relationship is established voluntarily and with informed consent. In summary, there are three main aspects in which FPCs are fundamentally different than other traditional and coercive governance models: 1.) the provision of communal goods 2.) the contractual arrangement between the FPC Operator, and 3.) taxes or fees paid to the Operator. Though it might seem as if the FPC Operator’s activities in the economy constitute intervention, this is not the case. The Operator’s character as a private company and its inability to source its funds in a coercive way prevent perverse incentives from being present in such activities. This means that despite the FPC Operator’s prominent role in the FPC’s “domestic” economy, the market can function undisturbed. In contrast with a traditional government, the Operator’s economic activities also do not create an unstable situation where the consequences of a previous intervention would seemingly require further intervention to be instituted as a “countermeasure” or a “solution.” Conclusion An economy composed of only voluntary interactions will improve societal welfare with every transaction. Any intervention by the government, either by way of transfer or resource-using intervention will necessarily lead to lower welfare in society. We can observe that this is true by definition, even without having to consider the specifics of the intervention at hand. In a Free Private City, a governance model is introduced where economic sectors previously administered in a non-consensual way are transformed to approximate standard, voluntary commercial relations. This is true both for payments made by residents to the FPC Operator and the economic and entrepreneurial activities pursued on the market by the Operator. In addition, even transfer payments initiated by the Operator do not exhibit the same negative societal effects as in the case of the government, as all such funds have been consensually obtained in the first place. We noted in this paper that while we cannot discern the value of services provided by the government (and in many cases, we can argue that the value provided is actually negative), we argued that many people may find governance a valuable service they are willing to pay for voluntarily. Following the same assumption, FPCs have been proposed as a way to privatize governance and transform it from a relationship between a ruler and subject to a relationship of service provider and customer. While we have shown that it is impossible for the government to operate “as if it was a business” due to its unique ability to obtain funding through force, we found that FPCs fundamentally change the nature of the provision of governance services to avoid this issue. The result is that FPC Operators can undertake entrepreneurial ventures on the market without causing market distortions and disequilibria. We do not claim that all FPCs will be successful, or even that any will be successful. Their success, like with any other business on the free market, depends on the skills and abilities of the entrepreneurs attempting to predict customer demand in this market and generate revenues higher than cost and consumer’s reception of said service — a risky venture where predictions can always turn out incorrect in the end. Rather than predicting success, we argue in this paper that if an FPC is, in fact, successful and commercially viable in the private market, it is successful because it provides a positively valuable service. Since this service is paid for voluntarily, its effects on the market avoid the problems of government intervention, be it transfer payments or resource-using activities. Unlike its government-based alternative, an FPC Operator is always incentivized away from wasting or misallocating resources. In summary, while Free Private Cities are a new model that may prove difficult to establish or operate, they present a genuine change to the nature of governance that is in line with the principles of consent and individual rights while improving the overall societal welfare and prosperity. Discussion In this paper, we have established the ex-ante positive value brought to customers by FPCs and their Operators. Since by contrast, the value brought by governments is indiscernible at best and frequently negative, FPCs represent a promising governance alternative to traditional political systems. Nevertheless, this paper did not explore the details of how FPCs are best financed, developed, or operated. Neither did it explore the question of what might happen in the city if and when an FPC Operator goes bankrupt. Finally, a question of relations between the FPC Operator and the Host State government is always present, and as to how best to ensure long-lasting and mutually beneficial cooperation. Our opinion is that the FPC model will answer all these and other questions in a satisfactory way, as it genuinely represents a major step forward in the models of governance practiced in the world today; nevertheless, we would like to see these topics further explored and analyzed. References • Gebel, T. (2018). Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You. Createspace Independent Publishing Platform. • Rothbard, M. N. (2009). Man, economy, and state: A treatise on economic principles; with Power and market: Government and the economy. Ludwig Von Mises Institute. --- # Sark: A Small Island with Huge Potential URL: https://free-cities.org/sark-a-small-island-with-huge-potential Published: 2023-09-11 Author: Swen Lorenz Category: Blog Topics: city-states-today, private-governance, history-of-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/sark The underlying investment case will be truly unique. It will involve buying 20-40% of a self-governing, English-speaking island located between France and the United Kingdom, if we can come to a final agreement with a sufficient number of sellers. Assuming this all comes together, anyone with a brokerage account will be able to subscribe to the company’s IPO on the stock exchange. Bona fide Sark residents, in turn, might even get some shares for free. You are the first to read about it. A place unlike anywhere else Sark, a small island off the coast of France, is famous for a range of things. Most notably, it’s self-governing. The island is tiny geographically, measuring about twice the size of London’s Hyde Park and 1.5 times New York’s Central Park. Its population of 500 would fit into a single big city apartment building. Nevertheless, it is literally its own country, and even has its own UN Country Code. This may sound bonkers, but a jurisdiction’s degree of sovereignty doesn’t depend on landmass or population numbers. Elsewhere in the world, the prison shown in the last image of the photo gallery above would not be a major tourist attraction. In Sark, however, it’s probably the most photographed building because it symbolises so much of the island. Completed in 1856, it remains as spartan today as it was back when it first opened. It’s still in use because Sark has a reluctance to change the old, proven ways. It’s also a symbol of the island managing its own affairs. Sark has its own parliament, sets its own laws, and collects its own taxes. It is entirely reliant on itself to survive, but also has incredible powers for that reason, such as being able to lock up wrong-doers. If you cause trouble on Sark, a constable will come after you, and the island’s judge will hear your case. As the gallery also shows, the island has stunning nature, including beautiful beaches and unspoilt coastline. Back in the day, pirates and privateers would have hidden their loot in its many coves and caves. Famously, Sark is a car-free island, thanks to a ban of the motorcar introduced in the early 1900s. Residents walk or ride bicycles, while tourists take horse-drawn carriages. Only tractors are allowed, provided someone runs a farm or a business that requires heavy lifting. Due to the ban of motorcars, there are no paved roads on Sark. Amid all this sits the conspicuous ancestral home – a mini castle, really – of Sark’s Seigneur. As a self-governing jurisdiction that is not part of the UK, the island has its own Head of State. Its award-winning gardens are a prime site for tourists to wander around, and its chapel hosts the marriages of couples from near and far who are as enchanted with the island as they are with each other. Everyone who has ever been to Sark is stunned by the island’s natural beauty. The lack of cars makes for an unusually noise-free environment. As someone told me the other day: “In today’s world, quietness is a scarce, valuable asset.” With no street lights and only a thinly spread-out population, it’s also pitch-black at night. In fact, so clear are the views of the stars from Sark that the island was officially designated the world’s first dark-sky island in 2011. How can a place like this even exist? It’s all courtesy of a contract that was signed in 1565 between a local nobleman and the English Crown. Today’s Seigneur of Sark is not just the 23rd holder of this title, but also the legal counterpart of that very same contract signed an incredible 458 years ago. This contract grants Sark the right to govern itself for eternity, provided it fulfils a few basic conditions, such as the Seigneur paying the English Crown a feudal rent of GBP 1.79 per year – no one thought of inflation indexing when the contract was signed. The island also has to demonstrate that it remains capable of responsibly managing its own affairs. Until 2008, Sark was the world’s last feudal state, and the property owners ran the government. Following outside pressure and legal wrangling, the island turned itself into a democracy. Up to 18 elected residents make up its parliament. With almost 4% of its population being a member of parliament at any given time, Sark probably has the world’s highest percentage of residents sitting in a legislature. Its residents enjoy an unusual degree of freedom. E.g., there is no need to report your income or assets to the government, and you can effectively base your tax on the size of the property you live in. Few residents pay more than GBP 5,000 in tax per year. The annual tax return requires filling out just one page, which takes me about 20 seconds. In Sark’s volunteer-based governance system, government is a comparatively benign force. Sark is an accident of history, and quite a funny one in many ways. On a serious note, it also provides its residents with a lifestyle that cannot be found anywhere else in Europe. Anyone living on the island will feel strongly that Sark is totally, utterly special. I count myself among them, too. Needless to say, only a fool would suggest that all of this isn’t worthy of careful, considered protection. Everyone will have their different views on the best way to protect Sark’s special character, but as far as the Seigneur is concerned, he can sum up his desired future outlook for Sark in three words: “Quiet, green and dark.“ The island’s specialness is under threat, though. A struggling, fragile island economy Is Sark some kind of a paradise? It sort of is for those who chose to make it their home, but the island also has its flaws, and aspects of it are in danger. For all its great credentials, it’d be a struggle to describe the current Sark as economically viable or environmentally sustainable. Surrounded by a fast-changing world and with modern pressures continuously thrust upon the island and its residents, Sark also has its share of challenges. In spring 2020, rumours circulated that the island’s supermarket was on the brink of closure. Over the preceding ten years, the island’s population had fallen from 600 to 360. The average age of its residents had skyrocketed to 65 years, compared to 41 years in the UK. Like many other islands, Sark’s dependency on tourism and its lack of a professional economy made many young people leave. Over time, it turned into an island with too few economically active residents. In fact, it had too few residents overall. During one particularly dreary winter before the pandemic, a group of residents concluded during an evening in the pub that a mere 90 souls were on the island at the time. As a so-called Crown Dependency, Sark has a unique legal status that only three other places in the world enjoy (Guernsey, Jersey, and the Isle of Man). However, the privilege of governing itself brings with it the responsibility to stand on its own feet. Military defence and foreign policy have been delegated to the UK, but for all other purposes, Sark is literally like its own country. Try running a community with just 500 people – or 360, or 90. When the supermarket’s future was endangered, a significant percentage of the habitable real estate of the island was standing empty. Additionally, a large number of buildings were derelict. The potential closure of the supermarket was but a further indication of an island that was struggling to remain afloat. After first visiting in 2004, I had made Sark the base of my own life from 2017 onwards. Despite being the travelling type and operating a company in neighbouring Guernsey, I find it both convenient and enjoyable to have my home base in Sark. The potential closure of the supermarket, I feared, would deal a fatal blow to the island. After all, the British Isles are rife with examples of island economies that had collapsed. Most famously, the island of Stroma in Scotland. After continuous inhabitation for 1,000 years, its population collapsed from 375 in 1901 to 0 in 1961. Even the keepers of the lighthouse eventually moved out. Today, it’s a home only for sheep. No one in Stroma in 1901 would have ever thought that possible, let alone within only 60 years. Island economies can – and do – die. In August 2020, I published the first edition of “How (and why) to move to Sark“, a 300-page manual. Within just 24 hours, my campaign to bring new residents to the island went viral. The BBC carried a story, followed by the Daily Mail and the global mainstream media. Four months later, 120 new residents had registered on Sark. The influx of residents provided a much-needed shot in the arm of Sark’s economy. The shelves in the supermarket suddenly offered a wider selection again, landlords rented out properties that had sat empty or were rented to caretakers for peppercorn rents, and the revenue of the local ferry company increased during the otherwise quiet winter period. Residents old and new mingled at a big party that I organised, featured by one of the local TV stations. The campaign had its inevitable downsides. An influx of solvent residents into an ailing economy meant some existing residents were struggling to keep up with previously depressed rents suddenly recovering 20-50%. The churn among new residents was higher than it should have been. Some of the newcomers expected that the island should change around them, rather than them integrating into the existing way of life, which caused friction. Lessons learned, and useful ones as such. I added a foreword written by the Seigneur to the second edition of my Sark immigration manual, where he issued the advice not to get involved in local politics straight off the bat, but to first listen for an initial year (or two). Such imperfections aside, I had always wanted this campaign to be a marketing test: • Would anyone at all be interested in moving to Sark? • Is there a case for helping Sark in other ways than bringing fresh blood? • Could Sark benefit from new investment? All of this has stirred ongoing media interest. The Financial Times Weekend Magazine published an eight-page feature about Sark and my activities, asking whether the island was “Galt’s Gulch”, a tribute to the libertarian enclave in Ayn Rand’s magnum opus “Atlas Shrugged”. LINK Indeed, in today’s precarious world, Sark has the potential to become a success not despite it being old-fashioned and different, but because of it. Sark is: • Debt-free. • Culturally geared towards self-reliance and small government. • In control of its own fate, and able to determine where it goes from here. Sark has both the necessary legal standing and the culture to further improve what it has, and become a model for the world to be inspired by. Even German state television recently realised as much. ARD‘s global documentary programme wanted to do a feature about Sark as a tax haven, but ended up doing a seven-minute feature asking if the rest of the world could learn a trick – or two – from Sark. If the basic conditions are so good, why did Sark ever even suffer an economic crisis? How could so much desirable real estate have sat empty for years? Explaining the island’s past is complex, as is any potential path forward. Unblocking a deadlocked situation By publishing this article, I am floating a plan that the local media received a partial preview of a few months ago. Locally, it’s already widely known that I have been working on this matter and in close coordination with Sark’s Head of State. In fact, even my 2020 campaign to bring new residents to the island was something that I had only embarked on once I had the go-ahead from the Seigneur. Christopher Beaumont, the current owner of the feudal title to Sark, had publicly made a case that Sark needed more residents. Even though his role is primarily ceremonial, his family is the constitutional backbone of the island and the one party that naturally has the island’s long-term interests at heart. If he had said “Swen, don’t do it!“, I would not have published my immigration manual. As it turned out, the Seigneur was supportive – no wonder, given that the island as is can’t even sustain a bakery. Increasing the population of Sark to a level where the island’s community and economy becomes sustainable should really be a no-brainer. Since then, the Seigneur and I have continued to work together. To give it all a true long-term outlook, we involved his son and heir, 26-year-old Hugh Beaumont, right from the start. We gathered lots of archival material and data about Sark, some of it yielding surprising realisations. E.g., the island’s current real estate alone could easily house 1,200 residents – without adding a single square foot to the existing real estate footprint. Even among Sark residents, few would know how badly utilised the existing real estate footprint is. Following two years of analysis, we feel strongly that Sark needs inward investment backed up by a long-term plan. Ideally, we’d love to see a plan for the entire island, and one that is created using input from all residents and stakeholders, and geared towards a 25-50-year horizon. As part of that, the population should debate the desired long-term population size, not just because of what we’d like to achieve but for an urgent reason unrelated to us. Due to its unique relationship with the UK, some 73m British and Irish citizens can move to Sark without the need for a visa, provided they can find housing. At a time of record-high taxes elsewhere in the British Isles and new possibilities for remote working, it’s now just a matter of time before many existing Sark residents will be pushed out of the real estate market by newcomers from the UK paying stratospheric prices to get in. There are many reasons why the island needs to take charge of its planning and put suitable policies in place. Realistically, all of this will require the support and input of suitable experts. This will cost money, and quite probably more than Sark’s population could afford at this time. Sark has some rich residents, but also many residents who struggle with the current cost of living crisis. Sark’s stakeholders have been aware of many of these issues, but often struggled to act. E.g., to this day, it’s possible to be a legal resident of Sark despite spending zero days per year on the island. The first effort to close this loophole took place in 2014, but went nowhere. In 2020/21, I publicly lobbied for a 90-day presence requirement and even provided advice to a government committee. Sark’s parliament published initial findings, but then dropped the ball once again. Struggling to keep the island economy afloat but allowing individuals to claim residency without ever spending any money locally makes no sense and is a homemade problem. However, even many issues that seem obvious and easy to resolve have not always been advancing in the way one would expect. Through no individual’s fault, Sark is a bit stuck. It became clear to us that change would be unlikely to happen fast enough if there wasn’t one financially strong party that could help Sark’s civil society to cut through a few Gordian knots. In April 2023, we went public with the rough outline of the endeavour: • Buy existing Sark real estate totalling up to GBP 100m. • Provide further investment to enhance the real estate portfolio. • Support the creation of a long-term plan for the island, through measures such as bringing suitable experts to the island. Provided, of course, the residents and key stakeholders would want such help. The good news is, a lot is possible. Sark is the kind of place that mobilises support from near and far. My team has the right kind of global network to bring in the best and brightest, and a small percentage of the uplift on a large portfolio can pay for a lot of work that Sark’s government would otherwise struggle to have the island’s tax base pay for. One of the main questions we are currently working to answer, is whether our company would initially focus primarily on its own assets, or get involved with efforts aimed more broadly at helping Sark move forward. Quick wins in real estate Fixing the existing derelict real estate was always going to be an obvious target. The Sark investment case isn’t difficult to comprehend. Fixing up empty, decaying real estate in a market that is red hot thanks to ever-growing outside interest from people who want to live there is a straightforward proposition. As one local newspaper headlined earlier this year: “Sark represents a ‘huge opportunity for regeneration’“. It really is, with remote working and the island’s first-class Internet connection being just two of the contributing factors. Less obvious are some of the special opportunities hidden within this entire situation. E.g., Sark has so far been a cash-only real estate market. Because of its anti-debt stance, lending against real estate was outlawed in Sark in 1611. In 2021, following 20 years of discussion, Sark’s parliament legalised mortgages. However, nearly three years later, Sark’s young people still can’t get onto the property ladder. Local banks won’t lend because they deem Sark’s real estate market too small, too complex and too risky. However, they would lend if there was a legitimate local player who provided a first-loss guarantee for a first batch of experimental mortgages aimed at getting the market going. Our project’s budget includes the provision of such a first-loss guarantee to enable up to GBP 5m of mortgages given out to existing residents. We even have the necessary local bank at the ready to work with us (which would deal with the fact that recent financial regulation prohibits this form of lending to come from anyone but a bank). Introducing lending into a cash-only real estate market would enable younger people to get onto the property ladder, and reward the guarantor with an uplift in real estate values that pays for it all. The mortgage situation is just one example where Sark is currently is a bit stuck, and where an inward investor who is aligned with the needs and views of key stakeholders could help unlock the situation and enable things to start moving forward again. There are many other areas where we could create value, and potentially quite quickly. In a place where there is a lot of decaying real estate but also a lot of unmet demand, it’s not difficult to figure out how to make an investment case work. Crucially, even such conventional measures would make it pay off for our investors, which is a prerequisite for all of this. Sark won’t ever get outside funding from anyone, and unless it’s commercially viable, our belief is that nothing might happen. Of course, there is also the possibility of supporting a broader vision for Sark. The public has spoken When the Seigneur and I first put some of our plan into the public domain, a local newspaper called it the “£100m dream for a Sark ‘utopia’“. Needless to say, all this caused a flurry of activity and discussion, including the unavoidable (and valuable) dissent. Given that an estimated 60-70% of the island’s current population moved there from elsewhere, there was always going to be a broad spectrum of opinions on what’s best for the island. As another test, we financially supported a bottom-up exercise to find out what Sark residents want. On an island where only a minority of people would be what would normally be described as “locals”, what would the resulting dynamics in civil society be? Which priorities would emerge from public debate and stakeholder input? Is this a project we should contemplate at all, or would we have to call it off because of a firestorm of public opinion? We put all this to a test in April 2023. Much of what followed over the past four months fell exactly in line with our expectations. There is a considerable desire among Sark residents to see change. On the wish list are: • More housing, especially of the affordable variety. • Improved harbour facilities, something that affects everyone on Sark. • Better access to services, whether in hospitality or healthcare. As ever in such situations, not everyone is in favour of change. One resident accused my endeavour of breaking local financial regulation. Another resident wished a SWAT team with firearms to visit my house and arrest me. Some of the criticism was funny, while other parts merely reflected badly on the individual. In any case, we took any negative feedback serious and offered to sit down with anyone who wanted to talk. Participation in this debate has been HUGE. One particular public gathering brought 150-200 residents to a public forum. This represented a percentage of the voting population that few other jurisdictions could bring together. On another occasion, I gave a presentation to the members of Sark’s Chamber of Commerce. On the whole, it seemed that there is a desire among the vast majority of residents to see improvements on the island. We would have folded our activities had we felt otherwise. Quite literally, the stars seem to be aligned for Sark to take ambitious steps forward. This past summer, the island has been experiencing a particularly challenging tourist season with numbers down about 25% according to some. Atrocious weather and a high number of ferry cancellations conspired with a post-pandemic visitor lull. In a place where many residents rely on a four-month tourist season to make a living for the rest of the year, many Sark residents have just been dealt ANOTHER financial challenge. “SOMETHING has to change“, one worried resident told me while looking across his empty tourist venue. What, though? Getting two options ready for investors – and the island As ever when you engage a community and there is talk of large investment that requires maximum stakeholder buy-in, you get a long wish list as a result. The company that the Seigneur and I set up for this project – the Guernsey-registered Sark Property Company – had anticipated all that. We had experts at hand and the necessary budget to help figure out what’s possible. Improving the harbour? Following the public’s interest in the subject, our company hired a world-leading expert for harbours and marinas. He subsequently visited Sark to look at this question and provide us with a report. We invited all relevant stakeholders to provide input and vowed to make the report available to anyone who wants to see it once it’s finished. It’s merely an initial assessment, but will help further conversations. Extending Sark’s tourism season? We found an organisation that has succeeded beyond its wildest dreams in making another wet, windy destination in the British Isles a successful place for tourism in winter. Sark’s lack of visitors outside of the dreadfully short summer season is a major drag on the economy and peoples’ lives. We could get expert input aimed at alleviating this problem. Helping with affordable housing? In most Western European countries, real estate developers need to commit to building a certain percentage of affordable housing, if they are to get planning permission for a new development. No such legal requirements exist on Sark. However, our company’s budgeting includes a significant component of affordable housing as a voluntary measure. Ensuring the island is not abused by criminals? Right now, as far as we know, there are almost no checks on people who move to Sark. Our company established relationships with specialised service providers who help other jurisdictions with screening new residents. If we become a landlord on Sark, we’ll use these services to professionally screen all our clients. We’ll offer the Sark government the same service, should it have a desire to screen newcomers before they get in. Dealing with the island’s ailing energy infrastructure? Our investment case has a budget provision to deal with the issue, if the relevant government committees of Sark wanted an energy solution that did not require taxpayer funds to pay for upfront investment or expensive loans. As an investor that would combine scale and legitimacy, our cost of capital would be lower than any other external source of funding for such capital investments. Securing Sark’s independence against adverse circumstances? We have a proposal for creating an emergency fund for Sark. One of the world’s leading experts for sovereign wealth funds has already worked out an analysis for us how such a fund could be managed for the benefit of Sark. Under suitable conditions, our company would be willing to seed it with an investment that could grow to a GBP 100m reserve over 20 years – 58 times the island’s current annual government budget of GPB 1.7m. Expressed as a multiple of the government’s annual budget, this could become the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund and put all Sark residents into a position that would make them the envy of the world. For all of this, we can provide extensive documents for others to take a look at and form an opinion. Is any of that desired, though? We assume so, but we allow for our judgment to be wrong. Outside of always keeping options such as filing away our ambitions for a few years or calling them off entirely, we have ensured that the base case of our investment plan doesn’t depend on any of it. Sark has a history of large inward investment on a prior occasion, but in a way that too many residents at the time found to be too top-down. We are all the more cautious for that reason. For anything that goes beyond fixing up derelict and underutilised properties, our approach is very much bottom-up. We’ll ask what’s desired, and analyse if there is a way we can provide help from within our commercial project. Our base case for investing in Sark is to buy existing but underutilised commercial and residential property, and then revitalise it using the island’s existing building regulation. This’ll work well enough to raise investment, as we just found out for sure a few days ago. Shortly before publishing this Weekly Dispatch, I received the first draft of one report that I will NOT share with anyone. I had been eagerly anticipating this draft, and was delighted with its conclusions. It’s an analysis of Sark’s tourism and visitor industry, combined with a plan of what could be done by a large investor who succeeded in buying significant parts of the existing tourism infrastructure and some ancillary real estate. What I can say is that the numbers confirm that there is a solid investment case for a less ambitious base case of simply improving existing properties. This wouldn’t see the company help with other issues faced by Sark, and instead focus on the portfolio of real estate and simply building on existing Sark laws and regulations. It’d still be entirely and immediately aligned with the overall idea of protecting what makes Sark special. Since we both live on the island, the Seigneur and I are also personally passionate about wanting Sark to become a “green, quiet, dark island” that is economically and environmentally sustainable. However, we also had to secure our investment case against scenarios where local stakeholders may be too slow to work with us or tell us that Sark wasn’t interested in broader long-term planning. The bottom line is, our company will now focus on pursuing one of two potential scenarios – one a little less ambitious and with fewer benefits for the wider community, and a larger one with more benefits being spread around if desired by the island’s various stakeholders and its residents. Soon, we should know where the chips fall. Or, to be precise, if there will be any chips at all. Final push in a three-year marathon 28 months since I started this project by sending a two-page project outline to the Seigneurie, I’d like to think that we have come 80% of the way towards making this work. Along the way, I’ve made a couple of commitments: • To existing real estate owners who are considering to sell: our company will make them the highest offer that anyone would pay for Sark real estate right now. Having a better plan than anyone else, we’ll simply be able to offer more than anyone else. Everyone will be free to turn down our offer, but it will be a good offer. • To anyone from the community: our company will involve all stakeholders, and strive to work to the benefit of anyone who is willing to engage constructively. We will also be more transparent than anyone else has ever been on Sark. • To the Seigneur’s family: our company will be a so-called perpetual capital vehicle, to support a multi-generational endeavour aimed at securing Sark’s future for generations to come. The Seigneur is one of the two directors of the company we set up for this purpose, so he (and his family) can shape this from the inside. (Investors appreciate this, too. Just about every single investor we ever spoke to gave the feedback that having the Seigneur back the project is vital – no funding agreement will go ahead without him being on the inside.) This has not been an easy endeavour, primarily because it’s extremely complex. E.g., figuring out how to make the investment case work so that we can actually come up with the triple-digit millions required, took us over two years. Our more extended scenarios would probably require closer to GBP 300m, and this sort of money isn’t easy to come by. Sark is the kind of investment case that will always get a lot of “interest” from anyone you mention it to, but this initial enthusiasm tends to fall away once someone looks at the underlying details. It’s not unusual for potential investors to turn up on Sark with big ideas. However, as the derelict state of much of Sark attests to, these things subsequently never happen. Someone being interested is two a penny, getting someone to actually sign on the dotted line is where the difficulty lies. As the fundraising rule says: “Money is earned in due diligence.“ With where we are now, paying for it all is not our worry anymore. Other projects struggle to find one potential anchor investor; we’ve already had several of them at hand before even going public with this. We even turned down requests by some funders to fund the entirety of the project with a single cheque, because we didn’t want any one investor to dominate the company (or, by extension, Sark). Our work is now focused on: • Fine-tuning final details of the plan, using the reports and expert input we had worked out for us over the summer months. • Continuing conversations with any stakeholder who wants to engage with us, to see where we can work together for maximum benefit of all parties involved. • Getting suitable offers in front of a number of existing owners, and see if we can come to an agreement with them. Until then, our company is all concept and no property. As to how all this will be done, a surprise factor entered the equation during the past few months. Somewhat to our own surprise, the pendulum has swayed towards probably making this a publicly-listed company from a relatively early stage. This is where you – my valued readers – may be able to get involved before too long. The public wants in One of the benefits of living in a small community is that you can talk to anyone and everyone quite easily, often by simply passing them in the street. “Can I also invest?” is a question that I’ve been asked by more than one resident of Sark. In fact, we had long considered making this a public company eventually. There are several historical precedents from similar jurisdictions, such as the Falkland Islands Holding Company, a Royal Charter company which used to be listed in its own right and nowadays forms part of the London-listed FIH Holdings (ISIN GB00BD0CWJ91, UK:FIH). Similarly, Monaco’s Société des Bains de Mer (ISIN MC0000031187, Euronext:BAIN) which has become an example for the kind of insane long-term returns investors can generate from a company that is significantly aligned with a small sovereign territory and its government. SBM takes care of commercial development, while the government and a sovereign wealth fund deal with related social issues, such as a resilience fund for emergencies and providing 4,000 affordable apartments for Monegasque citizens. Nothing of what we propose wouldn’t have been done elsewhere already in a comparable form, and it’s there for Sark to learn from. There is even a local stock exchange that could be used for the purpose. Guernsey is the home of The International Stock Exchange, formerly called the Channel Islands Stock Exchange. We just had not anticipated the level of interest there’d be in having such an investment vehicle become a public company. I have already held conversations with investment banks and stock exchanges to explore an IPO of the Sark Property Company. This could be done in Guernsey or in London – or both. Listing on a stock market would democratise investment in Sark’s future. Anyone with a few quid could buy and sell stock in the company. We might even gift a few shares to each bona fide resident of Sark, so that everyone legitimately living in Sark gets the opportunity to watch it all from the inside. (For large investors, though, we’d probably implement a voting limit of 19.99% – just to make sure we won’t ever see anyone trying to buy themselves a jurisdiction.) Such details aside, being publicly listed would also make the company transparent. More transparent, in fact, than anything currently done on Sark. Next steps? To be brutally frank, for a number of reasons, it’s risky for me to write about these things at this stage. To state just the obvious example, none of this may ever happen, and it could all turn out to have been but an expensive pipe dream. I may end up regretting every single word I put on paper. Also, whatever I say about our plans, there’s bound to be criticism. Some media outlets will likely have a field day trashing our work, and their reporters won’t be able to (or interested in) distinguishing if negative feedback is rooted in majority feedback or merely represents a vocal minority. This lengthy article will see journalists have a field day taking individuals parts and re-publish them out of context. However, our plans and ambitions are matured to a point where I wanted to get ahead of the inevitable media reports. Given how the media operate and with a small handful of Sark residents busying themselves spreading falsehoods, we had no choice but to get ahead of fake narratives and put the real version of events into the public domain. Given the sheer number of people we are speaking to in order to create the kind of dream team that we have in mind for this company, it’s now probably a matter of weeks rather than months before there’ll be additional reports popping up. The Guardian recently made a start with an article which was directionally accurate in some ways, but error-ridden, sensationalist and speculative in many other ways. With what’s at stake, I had to put my own statement out there. I am also publishing this as a way of reaching out to anyone who’d potentially like to speak to me about this. Putting yourself out there always leads to valuable feedback. Case in point, more Sark real estate owners than anyone would have imagined have already been in touch with us about being open to offers. There is a local perception that “nothing on the island is for sale“; however, that’s not true once owners can speak to a party that is credible financially and trusted to not publicly divulge conversations. It had always been evident to us that Sark has a backlog of potential transactions caused by factors such as the lack of mortgage financing and inheritance cases, and this hunch has proven right in the meantime. Building on this interest, we will eventually organise a maildrop to offer anyone potentially interested in selling to have a conversation with us. Our company will have the means to buy out willing sellers, and we’d be open to purchasing up to 40% of the island’s surface area if that was required to implement a plan that also helps to resolve many of the island’s long-standing issues. As a next step, we’ll now finalise our funding conversations. We are already in conversations with potential anchor investors from the UK, Western Continental Europe, and North America. Still, there may be other suitable investors out there who want to get involved and may even contribute more than just money. Ahem, Silicon Valley – anyone? Further support and input are always welcome. Nothing is set in stone yet, but we’ll soon know if any of this happens, or not. I placed our efforts to create the Sark Property Company underneath the umbrella of my licensed fund management company, Sarnia Asset Management. I even met with our financial regulator, to inform them of our ambitions and double-check regulatory aspects. Placing the Sark Property Company under the helm of a licensed fund manager was merely a precautionary measure. This plan does not fall under fund management regulations, which makes it easier to engage with the public. In essence, we are free to talk to anyone about the investment aspects of this, in any way and shape we like. No doubt, I’ll have some readers with very relevant expertise or potentially quite significant interest in this venture. Do reach out to me by email. Alternatively, just visit! Sark is beautiful, amazing, and simply special. Why not visit? Its tourist sector needs more visitors, and you can find more information on the website of Sark Tourism. Just don’t get into any trouble while you are there, because the prison cells ARE quite spartan! This blog post was originally published at Undervalued Shares on September 1st, 2023. Visit their website for more content on trading and investment as well as news from Sark. --- # The Autonomous Upside: Autonomous Cities Investment Thesis URL: https://free-cities.org/the-autonomous-upside-autonomous-cities-investment-thesis Published: 2026-05-11 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: taxation-and-economics, private-governance Why Autonomous Cities Are the Investment Opportunity Most People Will Miss Imagine You Had Invested in Singapore in 1965 In 1965, Singapore was a swampy island with a gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of roughly $500, mass unemployment at 14 percent, and half its population illiterate. Over 70 percent of households lived in overcrowded conditions, with a third squatting in slums. The British had just left. Malaysia had just expelled the island. There was no army, no natural resources, and no reason, on paper, for anyone to write a check. Yet someone who found a way to invest in Singapore’s trajectory at founding would have caught one of the largest wealth creation events on record. GDP per capita climbed from $500 to over $90,000, a 176-fold increase. From 1965 through the 1970s and 1980s, annual GDP growth averaged 9.5 percent, hitting 12.7 percent in the early years. The total value of Singapore’s land alone is estimated at $4.9 trillion today. Add the capitalized profit of its economy and you reach $5.4 trillion for a city-state of fewer than six million people. That is roughly the market capitalization of Apple and Microsoft combined, generated on an island smaller than New York City. [1] Or consider Dubai. In 1985, when the Jebel Ali Free Zone launched with just 19 companies, the emirate was still an oil-dependent backwater most Westerners could not locate on a map. The surrounding desert was virtually worthless. Today, Jebel Ali hosts over 10,000 companies, including more than 100 Fortune Global 500 firms, facilitates $190 billion in annual trade, and has attracted $30 billion in cumulative foreign direct investment (FDI). Oil now accounts for less than one percent of Dubai’s GDP. Between 2021 and 2024, Dubai residential property prices surged 52 percent, reaching all-time highs. The city generates AED 488 billion in annual real estate transactions. Property prices for villas sit 175 percent above post-pandemic lows. In a single year, 2024, Dubai recorded over 169,000 real estate transactions, a market that barely existed four decades ago. [2] These are data points, and they share a common driver: autonomous governance as an engine of economic transformation. What Singapore did at the sovereign level, what Dubai did through its free zone architecture, and what Hong Kong achieved under British colonial autonomy is now becoming replicable through a new generation of privately operated autonomous cities. The model works. The open question is whether you can still get in early. The Thesis: Governance Is an Investable Asset Class The investment case for autonomous cities rests on an insight that most investors overlook: governance quality is the single largest determinant of land value and economic output. Not climate, not geography, not natural resources. When a territory transitions from poor governance to excellent governance, from restricted to unrestricted, from undeveloped to developed, from rural to urban, from third-world to first-world, the value multipliers are staggering. These transformations stack. Aggregating fragmented land into a master-planned district typically yields a 3x increase in value. Removing regulatory restrictions on land use, changing zoning from agricultural to mixed commercial, for instance, adds another 5x. Developing raw land with hard infrastructure (roads, utilities, sewage, telecommunications) produces a 10x uplift. Urbanization, bringing the critical mass of residents, businesses, schools, hospitals, and services that make a place self-sustaining, creates a 30x multiplier. And the full legal stack from the best legal institutions around the world? That is a 100x return on the original land cost. These are observed multipliers, documented across dozens of jurisdictions that have undergone these transitions over the past half-century. Singapore’s land went from rice paddies and fishing villages to some of the most valuable real estate on Earth. Dubai’s desert plots became $1,500-per-square-foot towers. Shenzhen’s farmland became a $500 billion GDP metropolis in a single generation. Hong Kong’s colonial fishing harbor became a $400 billion GDP economy on 1,100 square kilometers of rocky hillside. The common thread is institutional design: the rules, incentives, and governance frameworks that make economic activity possible and attractive. Property rights that are enforced. Regulations that are clear and minimal. Taxation that is predictable and competitive. Dispute resolution that is fair and independent. These are the conditions under which capital formation accelerates, and they are what autonomous city operators are built to provide. For the first time, this institutional design is becoming investable at the ground floor. The Precedent: City-States That Outperformed Nations Singapore: The $5.4 Trillion Blueprint Singapore’s transformation under Lee Kuan Yew is still the clearest example of governance-driven wealth creation. The fundamentals at independence were dire: a newly expelled city with no hinterland, no military, and a population of barely two million living in conditions closer to sub-Saharan Africa than to Western Europe. GDP per capita was roughly one-third the Western European average. What followed was a deliberate experiment in governance optimization. Lee’s government attracted foreign direct investment with a globally competitive corporate tax rate (now 17 percent), invested heavily in education and infrastructure, maintained strict rule of law, and kept bureaucratic friction to a minimum. By the early 2000s, FDI accounted for 75 percent of manufacturing output and 85 percent of exports. Average GDP growth from 1965 to 1999 exceeded 8 percent annually, with the 1965–1973 period averaging a blistering 12.7 percent. [3] The real estate story mirrors the economic transformation. Housing & Development Board (HDB) flats that sold for $50,000-$110,000 in the 1980s were worth $180,000-$340,000 by the 1990s, multiples that continued to compound over subsequent decades. Singapore’s total real estate market is now valued at over $59 billion annually and projected to reach $70 billion by 2031. The government’s development charge system, designed to capture 70 percent or more of the value uplift from rezoning and development, funds the city-state’s reserves while keeping taxes low. [4] What made this possible? Autonomy. Singapore set its own legal framework, tax policy, trade rules, immigration standards, and monetary policy. It answered to no higher bureaucracy, no federal government, no layers of political veto. It could pivot fast, execute decisively, and measure itself by results: whether people and capital chose to show up. They did, by the millions. Dubai: From Oil Dependency to Global Hub in One Generation Dubai’s story is more useful for investors because the transformation happened not at the country level, but at the level of autonomous zones within a federation. The UAE is a young country, formed in 1971, and Dubai’s oil reserves were always modest compared to neighboring Abu Dhabi. The strategic decision to create free zones with their own regulatory frameworks turned Dubai from a city that derived more than 50 percent of its revenue from oil into one where oil contributes less than one percent of GDP today. The free zone model shows governance as competitive advantage in its purest form. Jebel Ali Free Zone (launched 1985): zero corporate tax, minimal trade barriers, 100 percent foreign ownership. It grew from 19 companies to 500 by 1995 and over 10,000 today, providing 144,000 jobs and handling 15 million containers annually. The Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC): its own common-law legal system, independent courts, a 50-year guarantee of zero corporate income taxes. It now manages $8.7 trillion in assets and contributes 12 percent of Dubai’s GDP. The Dubai Multi Commodities Centre (DMCC): now hosts 24,000+ companies and attracts 15 percent of total FDI. [5] The broader free zone ecosystem, there are dozens across Dubai, contributes 72 percent of the emirate’s non-oil economy. By 2030, free zones are projected to contribute AED 250 billion annually to Dubai’s GDP. Each zone operates with varying degrees of regulatory autonomy, creating an internal market of governance models that compete for residents and businesses. Population growth tells the demand story more clearly than any financial model. Dubai grew from 276,000 people in 1980 to over 3.4 million by 2020, a twelve-fold increase in four decades, driven entirely by the attractiveness of its governance and business environment. In 2024 alone, the city attracted record FDI that generated 58,680 new jobs, a 51 percent increase from the prior year. Property prices, despite multiple dramatic cycles of boom and correction (including a 50 percent crash after 2008 and another significant decline through 2019), have roughly doubled over the past two decades. Villa prices now sit 58 percent above their 2014 peak and 175 percent above post-pandemic lows. [6] Hong Kong: Positive Non-Interventionism and the 87x Miracle Hong Kong’s economic miracle under British colonial rule, and its governance philosophy of “positive non-interventionism”, produced wealth creation that is hard to overstate. Between 1961 and 1997, GDP multiplied 180 times. GDP per capita grew 87-fold. Average annual growth consistently exceeded 6.5 percent across multiple decades, with the 1960–1995 period averaging 7.5 percent, placing Hong Kong alongside Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan as the “Four Asian Tigers.” [7] The governance approach was simpler than it sounds. Beginning with John Cowperthwaite’s tenure as Financial Secretary in the 1960s, Hong Kong adopted a philosophy where government provides infrastructure and a legal framework, then respects market forces rather than trying to direct them. Successive officials described variants of this principle: “maximum support, minimum intervention, fiscal prudence” under Donald Tsang; “pro-active market enabler” under Antony Leung; “market leads, government facilitates” under Henry Tang. The philosophy survived multiple economic crises and provided ideological justification for accountable, restrained governance across four decades. For investors, the numbers were striking. Property prices rose more than five-fold between 1987 and 1997. Shrewd investors who bought during the mid-1960s downturn, when land prices dropped 50–70 percent, accumulated returns that compounded over three decades of rapid growth. Families like the Kwoks, the Lees, and Li Ka-shing built fortunes measured in tens of billions of dollars, primarily through Hong Kong real estate. In a jurisdiction with sound governance and growing autonomy, the risk-adjusted returns on real estate are difficult to beat anywhere else. [8] Monaco: The Tax-Zero Wealth Magnet: Monaco shows what happens when autonomous governance is pushed to its logical extreme. With zero personal income tax (for non-French nationals), zero wealth tax, zero property tax, and zero inheritance tax on direct-line relatives, the principality has attracted so much capital into its two square kilometers that it boasts the highest concentration of millionaires and billionaires per capita on Earth. Over 30 percent of residents are millionaires. GDP per capita exceeds $288,000. Unemployment sits at two percent, and 48,000 workers commute in daily from France and Italy to service the economy. [9] Real estate prices at the top end approach $100,000 per square meter, making Monaco the most expensive property market in the world. GDP reached $11.13 billion in 2024, growing 8.5 percent in a single year, for a territory that is literally two square kilometers. That is $5.5 billion in economic output per square kilometer, an extraordinary concentration of output. The driver is the governance framework that attracts and retains global capital. [10] Monaco is small and exclusive by design, but its principle scales: create a jurisdiction with superior governance, transparent rules, strong property rights, and competitive taxation, and capital will flow in with tremendous force. The question for investors is whether this principle can be applied to new jurisdictions at larger scale. The evidence suggests it can. The Trend: From Special Economic Zones to Private Cities What Singapore, Dubai, Hong Kong, and Monaco achieved at the city-state level, a global movement is now replicating through contractual arrangements with host nations. The scale is larger than most people realize. There are now over 6,000 special economic zones (SEZs) operating across more than 150 countries worldwide. Collectively, these zones employ more than 30 million people directly, attract 46 percent of foreign direct investment in major host countries, and generate 60 percent of exports. In some regions, industrial parks and special zones account for 50–80 percent of national GDP growth. The World Bank has invested $2.38 billion across 37 SEZ-related projects since 1973, encompassing everything from export processing zones to enterprise zones to agricultural zones. [11] The trend, however, is toward increasing autonomy. The evolution has progressed through distinct phases since the 1950s: logistics zones in the 1950s, export processing zones in the 1970s, light and heavy manufacturing zones in the 1990s, financial services and hospitality hubs in the 2000s, and now, at the frontier, autonomous and private cities. Each successive phase has granted the zone operator more control over governance, regulation, dispute resolution, and the overall resident experience. The logical endpoint is full-service private city operation, where a private company provides the basic services of a state under a contractual framework embedded in the host nation’s constitutional order. This is a pragmatic response to a straightforward economic reality. Governments worldwide are learning what Titus Gebel, author of Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete For You, has articulated clearly: the most effective way to attract foreign direct investment, create employment, improve global competitiveness indices, and generate tax revenue is to delegate governance to operators who are contractually accountable for results. The host nation gains all the benefits of economic development, jobs, tax revenue, infrastructure, rising purchasing power, qualified migration, index rating improvements, without bearing the full cost or risk of execution. The operator gains a revenue stream and an appreciating asset base. The residents gain a world-class living and business environment with contractual certainty about their rights and obligations. Everyone in the arrangement has something to gain. [12] The Proof of Concept: Jiaolong and the Autonomous Unicorn Some of the best evidence that private city operation works as a business comes from a company most Western investors have never heard of. Jiaolong Company was founded in 2004 through a contract with Shuangliu County government in China. In exchange for investing in infrastructure, roads, sewage systems, schools, hospitals, police stations, shopping malls, hotels, the company received two key concessions: planning rights (effectively shared autonomy over land use and zoning) and a tiered tax-sharing arrangement. Under the tax agreement, if Jiaolong achieves a tax density of 100 yuan or more per square meter, it retains 25 percent of taxes collected; at 80 yuan per square meter, it retains 20 percent. The numbers speak for themselves. Jiaolong’s city now houses over 120,000 residents, roughly the population of San Mateo, California, and generates $3.2 billion in annual GDP. Population density in the Jiaolong-managed area is 3.5 times that of the surrounding county. Taxation per unit area is four times higher. And employment density is 23 times that of a nearby state-managed special economic zone. The private operator outperforms the state-managed zone on every measurable dimension, and it does so while running at a profit. [13] Jiaolong‑managed area vs. nearby state‑managed SEZ Analyst Zane Austen has modeled Jiaolong’s valuation using multiple methodologies, revenue multiples, perpetuity models, and discounted cash flows, arriving at an estimated value of approximately $700 million. What matters for investors is the scalability implied. Jiaolong operates in China, where GDP per capita is roughly 18 percent of the US level. Adjusting the revenue per resident for developed-world income levels yields a GDP-adjusted revenue per resident of approximately $1,060. At a conservative 10x revenue multiple, a private city governance provider in a developed country would need just 100,000 residents to achieve a billion-dollar valuation. [14] This is the concept of the “autonomous unicorn”, a privately operated city that reaches a billion-dollar valuation not through software margins or viral network effects, but through the oldest and most durable form of value creation known to civilization: making a place where people want to live and businesses want to operate. Unlike software unicorns, which can lose their market position overnight to a competitor, a well-governed city creates compounding advantages that deepen with time. Each new resident attracts the next. Each new business creates demand for more services. The moat is the city itself. The Business Model: How Investors Participate in City-Level Value Creation The investment thesis for autonomous cities rests on two revenue engines that compound over time, creating a flywheel that is hard to replicate elsewhere. Revenue Engine 1: Operating Fees (Recurring Revenue) In a free private city, the city operator collects operating fees from residents, companies, and for administrative services, instead of traditional taxes. This is a contractual arrangement: each resident signs a citizen’s contract that specifies exactly what they will pay and exactly what services they will receive in return. The fee is fixed and transparent, eliminating the political risk of arbitrary tax increases that plagues traditional jurisdictions. Neither the operator nor a political majority can unilaterally change the terms of the contract. This model has several structural advantages for investors. First, it creates recurring, predictable revenue streams tied to population growth. As more residents and businesses settle in the city, fee revenue scales linearly. Second, the contractual nature of the arrangement creates legal certainty that traditional tax-based models cannot match, there is no legislature that can change the rules mid-game. Third, the profit motive incentivizes the operator to deliver excellent services, because residents who are dissatisfied can leave, taking their fees with them. This is governance with a customer satisfaction imperative, and it creates an accountability mechanism that most political systems lack. The services covered include: security and rescue, a legal and regulatory framework, independent dispute resolution through third-party arbitration, infrastructure maintenance, and administrative functions. The operator is, in effect, a government-as-a-service company, earning revenue by providing governance services better than traditional states typically manage. This revenue engine alone is what Jane Austen had in mind when coming to the concept of Sovereign Unicorns. There is, however, a much more substantial business model that private, self-governing zones can tap into. Revenue Engine 2: Land Value Appreciation (Capital Gains) The second and often much larger revenue driver is land value appreciation. The city operator acquires undeveloped or undervalued land at the outset, then systematically transforms it through infrastructure investment, regulatory design, and community building. As the city attracts residents and businesses, the remaining land holdings appreciate significantly. The multipliers stack. Aggregating fragmented, scattered land parcels into a master-planned district typically yields 3x appreciation. Changing land use from restricted (e.g., agricultural) to unrestricted (mixed commercial, residential, industrial) adds 5x. Developing infrastructure on raw land creates a 10x uplift. The transition from a rural area to a functioning urban center generates 30x returns. And the full transformation from third-world conditions to first-world living standards can produce 100x returns on the original land investment. These are the observed trajectories of Singapore, Dubai, Shenzhen, and other jurisdictions that have undergone this transformation. The operator, and by extension, its shareholders, captures a substantial share of this land value creation directly. Unlike a traditional real estate developer who builds and sells, the city operator retains significant land holdings that appreciate as the city matures. The land becomes a balance sheet asset that grows in value over decades, creating a wealth accumulation dynamic similar to Singapore’s government land reserves or Dubai’s sovereign wealth structure, but accessible to private investors. Lessons from the Frontier: Próspera and Ciudad Morazán Honduras’s Zones for Employment and Economic Development (ZEDEs) represent the most ambitious modern experiment in autonomous city governance, and their story offers both cautionary and encouraging lessons for investors. Próspera, located on the island of Roatán, has attracted over $100 million in investment and established more than 200 businesses since construction began in 2021. The project is backed by prominent technology investors including Balaji Srinivasan, Peter Thiel, and Marc Andreessen through the dedicated Pronomos Capital fund, the first venture capital fund created specifically for charter city investments. The governance model includes a council of nine members (five elected, four appointed), streamlined business regulations, lower taxes, and private arbitration for disputes. [15] Ciudad Morazán, near Choloma in northern Honduras, takes a complementary approach: a “blue-collar” model targeting working-class and middle-class Hondurans, combining factory space with residential housing on a compact site 25 miles from the Puerto Cortés deep-water port. Where Próspera aims at knowledge workers and digital nomads, Morazán demonstrates that autonomous city models can serve different market segments and price points, a critical insight for scaling the model globally. The political challenge these ZEDEs have faced, a congressional repeal in 2022 and a Supreme Court ruling in 2024, actually shows the strength of the international legal protection architecture. Despite domestic political shifts, existing ZEDEs are grandfathered for 50 years under Legal Stability Agreements. Próspera’s $10.8 billion (later reduced) ICSID arbitration claim under the Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR) bilateral investment treaty is actively proceeding, after an international tribunal rejected Honduras’s preliminary objections in February 2025. With a new Honduran president inaugurated in early 2026, there are signs of renewed openness to the framework. International investment treaty protections are not theoretical. They work. And they provide the kind of enforceable backstop that turns a speculative bet into a structured investment. [16] The Macro Tailwinds: Why the Timing Is Now Urbanization at a Scale We Have Never Seen The United Nations projects that 2.5 billion additional people will move to urban areas by 2050, bringing the global urban population share from 55 percent to 68 percent. India alone will add 416 million urban dwellers; China, 255 million; Nigeria, 189 million. These three countries account for 35 percent of projected urban growth. By 2030, the world will have 43 megacities of 10 million or more residents. Low- and middle-income countries face an infrastructure investment gap of $256 to $821 billion per year through 2050 for resilient, low-carbon urban development. Governments cannot build all of this alone. Private city operators fill the gap, and generate returns doing it. [17] The Ecosystem Is Maturing A decade ago, private city development was a niche intellectual movement. Today, it has a professional ecosystem. The Free Cities Foundation hosts annual conferences, the 2026 edition will take place in Próspera itself, the first time a Free Cities Conference is held in a functioning Free City, with 250+ attendees expected. Tipolis has successfully entered advanced negotiations with several extremely attractive host nations. The Charter Cities Institute provides technical assistance to new city projects, conducts academic research, and advises governments. Pronomos Capital provides seed funding for charter city ventures. The infrastructure for the asset class, legal, operational, financial, is being built now. Early investors get to shape it. Governance Failure Is Creating Demand Across the developed world, municipal governance strains under regulatory complexity, fiscal mismanagement, and political dysfunction. Housing crises, crumbling infrastructure, and ballooning pension obligations are not problems of insufficient resources, they are problems of governance failure. In the developing world, governments increasingly recognize that they lack the institutional capacity to build the cities their growing populations need. Both dynamics create demand for the private city model: a contractual, accountable, efficient approach to delivering governance services. When HBO’s Westworld needed to film what was supposed to be the American city of the future, they went to Singapore. That fact, noted by Marc Andreessen, says more about the governance gap than any statistic could. The world’s richest country cannot build a city that looks like the future. That is an indictment and an opportunity. [18] The Shenzhen Parallel: What Happens When You Get It Right Shenzhen is probably the most dramatic case of governance-driven land value creation anywhere. In 1979, Shenzhen was a fishing village of approximately 30,000 people on the border with Hong Kong. Deng Xiaoping designated it as China’s first Special Economic Zone, a laboratory for market reforms and foreign investment within a communist state. The zone received its own regulatory framework: lower taxes, streamlined approvals, foreign ownership rights, and the freedom to experiment with economic policies that would have been impossible elsewhere in China. The results were explosive. Shenzhen’s GDP grew at an average rate of 25 percent per year for its first two decades. By 2023, the city’s GDP had surpassed $500 billion, roughly equivalent to the entire GDP of Sweden or Argentina, supporting a population of over 17 million people. Land that was worth virtually nothing in 1979 now commands prices comparable to major Western cities. The Shenzhen Stock Exchange has a market capitalization exceeding $4 trillion. Companies like Huawei, Tencent, BYD, and DJI, each worth tens or hundreds of billions, were all born or grew to scale within Shenzhen’s autonomous governance framework. [19] Shenzhen illustrates the convexity of autonomous city returns. The early investors and developers who bought farmland at negligible prices in the early 1980s and held through the development cycle captured returns of several thousand percent. The mechanism was identical to what private city operators are replicating today: acquire cheap land, establish a governance framework that attracts capital and talent, develop infrastructure, and let the compounding effects of population growth, business formation, and rising productivity drive land values upward over decades. The key difference between Shenzhen and the new generation of private cities is ownership structure. In Shenzhen, the value creation accrued primarily to the Chinese state and to early real estate developers. In a private city model, a significant share of the value creation accrues to the city operator and its investors, by design. This structural difference is what makes autonomous cities an investable asset class, not just an economic development strategy. Governance as a Service: The Business Model That Scales The traditional model of governance is that a state provides services, security, law, infrastructure, dispute resolution, and funds them through taxation. The citizen has no choice in the matter: you are born into a jurisdiction, subject to its rules, and taxed at whatever rate the political process determines. If governance quality deteriorates, your options are limited to voting (which rarely produces meaningful change on the timeline of a human life) or emigrating (which is costly and disruptive). The free private city model inverts this relationship. Instead of a political entity with coercive taxation power, the city operator is a private company that provides governance services under a bilateral contract with each resident. The citizen’s contract specifies exactly what services will be provided, at what cost, and under what terms. The contract cannot be unilaterally changed by either party. If the operator fails to deliver on its promises, residents have recourse to independent, third-party arbitration; not to courts controlled by the same entity that is also the defendant. This is governance as a service (GaaS), and it introduces a profit motive into public administration that changes the incentive structure. A traditional government has weak incentives to deliver services efficiently, it can always raise taxes, borrow money, or print currency to cover shortfalls. A private city operator cannot do any of these things. If it delivers poor services or charges excessive fees, residents and businesses will leave, and revenue will decline. The operator’s survival depends on customer satisfaction, creating the same competitive pressure that drives innovation in every other industry. The Jiaolong case demonstrates this dynamic in practice. The company’s managed territory achieves 3.5x the population density, 4x the tax revenue per unit area, and 23x the employment density of a nearby state-managed zone, not because Jiaolong has magical capabilities, but because the profit motive drives more efficient resource allocation, faster decision-making, and more responsive service delivery than political bureaucracies can achieve. The GaaS model has a financial profile worth examining closely. Revenue is recurring and contractual (similar to software as a service (SaaS)), tied to population growth rather than to fickle consumer preferences. The customer base is sticky, people do not move cities casually. Operating leverage improves as the city scales, since many governance costs are partially fixed while fee revenue scales linearly with population. And the land appreciation component creates an asymmetric upside that no SaaS company can match: the better the governance, the more valuable the real estate, and the more the operator’s retained land holdings appreciate. Capital Formation: From Fringe to Mainstream Five years ago, the idea of investing in a private city would have been met with blank stares in most investment committees. Today, that has changed. Pronomos Capital, created in 2019 as the first venture fund dedicated exclusively to charter cities, has attracted backing from some of the most prominent names in technology and finance, including Marc Andreesen, Balaji Srinivasan, Naval Ravikant, Joe Lonsdale and Peter Thiel. Praxis, a “network state” venture, has secured $525 million from major names and VCs including Winklevoss Capital, building a digital community of over 87,000 people who will eventually inhabit a physical city. [20] At the state level, Saudi Arabia has committed hundreds of billions to NEOM, which operates as an independent economic zone with its own tax laws, labor laws, and autonomous judicial system, essentially a charter city built by a sovereign wealth fund. While NEOM’s execution challenges (cost overruns, scaling back of The Line’s original ambitions) offer cautionary lessons, the underlying bet, that a purpose-built autonomous zone can create immense economic value, is shared by the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund. When the Public Investment Fund (PIF) invests hundreds of billions in a charter city thesis, the concept has moved well beyond the libertarian thought-experiment stage. Coinbase’s venture division has invested in Próspera, signaling that the cryptocurrency and fintech sectors see autonomous cities as natural complements to decentralized finance. The logic is straightforward: just as Bitcoin provides an alternative monetary system free from central bank manipulation, free private cities provide an alternative governance system free from political capture. As this author has argued, these two systems are among the most powerful tools available for freeing people from legacy institutional structures, and the synergies between them create opportunities that neither can capture alone. Funding is still early-stage, which is where the opportunity sits. Traditional infrastructure financing requires 80–90 percent of the budget for physical construction; the governance and institutional layer, which is where most of the value is actually created, can be established with relatively modest seed capital. The investors who engage now are not just deploying capital; they are shaping the institutional architecture of an entirely new asset class. That is early-mover advantage in its most literal form. A Clear-Eyed View of Risk The risks are real and worth spelling out. Autonomous cities face political risk (government relationships can change, as Honduras demonstrated), execution risk (building a city requires world-class operational capability over long time horizons), regulatory risk (the legal frameworks enabling autonomous zones can be challenged), and time horizon risk (the full value creation cycle spans decades, not quarters). Mitigation strategies are built into the better models. Geographic diversification across multiple jurisdictions and continents reduces single-country concentration risk. Bilateral investment treaties and international arbitration through institutions like ICSID provide enforceable legal protection that transcends domestic politics. Early-stage operating fee revenue reduces dependence on long-term land appreciation for returns. And the deliberate alignment of incentives with host governments, through local job creation, FDI, tax sharing, infrastructure development, and profit sharing, creates durable political constituencies that benefit from the city’s continued success. The risk profile, when properly structured through diversification and treaty protection, resembles large-scale infrastructure investment more than speculative venture capital, with the difference that the upside, if the city succeeds, is measured not in percentage points but in orders of magnitude. Why Now The best investments tend to look obvious after the fact and contrarian at the time. In 1965, investing in Singapore’s future required believing that sound governance could transform a swamp into a first-world city-state. In 1985, backing Dubai’s free zones required believing that a desert could become a global commercial hub. In both cases, the skeptics had reasonable arguments. In both cases, the investors who looked past the skepticism and bet on the fundamental principle, that good governance creates immense value, earned returns that changed their families‘ financial trajectories permanently. Today, the autonomous city thesis has more data behind it, more historical precedent, stronger institutional support, and better legal frameworks than Singapore or Dubai had when they started. The urbanization tailwind is stronger, 2.5 billion additional city-dwellers in the next quarter-century. The technology to build and manage cities is more advanced. The legal architecture for protecting international investments is stronger. And the global demand for good governance, from both residents seeking better lives and host governments seeking economic development, has never been higher. The question is not whether autonomous cities will create immense value. History has answered that across continents and decades. The question is whether investors will recognize this asset class while the opportunity is still priced at the ground floor, before the first autonomous unicorn is minted and before institutional capital floods in. The autonomous upside is there. It is waiting for investors willing to look. Sources and Further Reading — Gebel, Titus. Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete For You. 3rd Edition. Free Cities Foundation. — Voss, Alexander D. “The Future of the Market of Living Together.” Free Cities Foundation. — Voss, Alexander D. “Strategies for Liberty: Free Cities & Bitcoin.” Free Cities Foundation. — Austen, Zane. “Autonomous Unicorns: Jiaolong, A $1 Billion Private City in China.” Substack, July 2022. — Free Cities Foundation. “Zones of Progress.” Documentary. — UNCTAD World Investment Report 2019: Special Economic Zones. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. — UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Urbanization Prospects 2025. — Charter Cities Institute. Governance Handbook. chartercitiesinstitute.org. — World Bank. “Banking on Cities: Urban Development.” worldbank.org. — Our World in Data. “Singapore’s Rise from Three Times Poorer to Twice as Rich as Western Europe.” — Lu, Qian. “The Contractual Nature of the City.” Academic paper on Jiaolong Company. Endnotes — [1] Our World in Data, “Singapore’s Rise from Three Times Poorer to Twice as Rich as Western Europe,” 2024. — [2] Jebel Ali Free Zone Authority (JAFZA) Annual Report 2023; Dubai FDI Monitor. — [3] Economic Development Board of Singapore, Annual Report; also Huff (1994). — [4] Housing & Development Board, Singapore, HDB resale price index historical data. — [5] DIFC Annual Report 2023. — [6] Dubai Statistics Center, Population by Year series, 1980–2020. — [7] Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Annual Digest of Statistics, 1997. — [8] Rating and Valuation Department, Hong Kong Property Review, 1997. — [9] IMSEE (Monaco Statistics), GDP and National Accounts, 2024. — [10] Savills World Cities Prime Residential Index, 2024. — [11] UNCTAD World Investment Report 2019: Special Economic Zones, Chapter IV. — [12] Gebel, Titus, Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete For You, 3rd Edition, Free Cities Foundation. — [13] Lu, Qian, “The Contractual Nature of the City,” academic paper on Jiaolong Company; also Austen, Zane, “Autonomous Unicorns,” Substack, July 2022. — [14] Austen, Zane, “Autonomous Unicorns,” Substack, July 2022. Average of five valuation methodologies. — [15] Honduras Próspera Inc., investor materials and press coverage, 2021–2024. — [16] ICSID Case No. ARB/22/20, Honduras Próspera Inc. v. Republic of Honduras. — [17] UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, World Urbanization Prospects 2018 Revision. — [18] Andreessen, Marc, “It’s Time to Build,” Andreessen Horowitz, April 2020. — [19] Shenzhen Statistics Bureau; National Bureau of Statistics of China, Shenzhen GDP series 1980–2000. — [20] Praxis Society, public fundraising announcement, 2024. --- # Die ZEDEs in Honduras: Vergangenheit und Zukunft URL: https://free-cities.org/zedes-in-honduras-vergangenheit-und-zukunft Published: 2025-06-02 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Dieser Artikel erschien ursprünglich im August 2022. Er erzählte die Geschichte der ZEDEs bis dahin vollständig, endete aber offen: Wie es mit den Zonen weitergehen würde, war damals nicht abzusehen. Daran hat sich bis heute nichts geändert, im Gegenteil. In den zweieinhalb Jahren seither ist jedoch viel passiert, vor allem im Rechtsstreit zwischen den ZEDEs und der honduranischen Regierung. Im April 2022 hob Honduras das ZEDE-Gesetz auf. Damit endete ein Kapitel in der Geschichte innovativer Governance. Das heißt weder, dass die bestehenden ZEDEs am Ende sind, noch dass die Ideen hinter ihnen gescheitert wären. Es heißt: Es stehen schwierige Verhandlungen bevor, und wie sie ausgehen, ist offen. Honduras war in den letzten zwei Jahrzehnten Schauplatz bemerkenswerter Entwicklungen. In dem kleinen lateinamerikanischen Land durfte sich erproben, was Governance neu denkt. Gewöhnliche Sonderwirtschaftszonen beschränken sich auf Steuer- oder Zollvorteile; die nächste Stufe geht weiter und gibt den Zonen auch in anderen Bereichen eigene Zuständigkeit. In Honduras heißen solche Jurisdiktionen ZEDEs, kurz für „Zone für Beschäftigung und wirtschaftliche Entwicklung“. Es sind erweiterte Sonderverwaltungsregionen: Sie sollen sich weitgehend selbst verwalten und eigene Regeln setzen dürfen, damit ein verlässliches rechtliches und politisches Umfeld entsteht, das ausländisches Kapital anzieht, von dem die Honduraner profitieren. In den Medien heißt es oft, die ZEDEs seien private Millionärsresorts jenseits honduranischer Souveränität, ohne Regeln und ohne Rechte für die Bewohner. Das Gegenteil trifft zu. Die ZEDEs sind öffentliche Körperschaften innerhalb des Staates Honduras, ähnlich einer Gemeinde. An ihrer Spitze stehen gewählte Amtsträger, die in Honduras geboren sind, und eine staatliche Kommission beaufsichtigt sie. Es gelten die honduranische Verfassung, die internationalen Abkommen des Landes und das honduranische Strafrecht. Oft heißt es auch, die Idee stamme aus dem Ausland, von visionären Unternehmern oder idealistischen Akademikern. Wer so erzählt, übersieht den Kern der Geschichte: Die ZEDEs waren und sind vor allem honduranisch. Wie die ZEDEs entstanden „Alles begann mit drei honduranischen Juristen: Octavio Sanchez, Carlos Pineda und Ebal Díaz“, sagt Titus Gebel, Präsident der Free Cities Foundation. „Sie wollten Honduras helfen, seine schweren Probleme zu lösen.“ Vor allem Sanchez suchte nach Wegen, ein Land zu reformieren, das unter Korruption, schwacher Rechtsstaatlichkeit und der daraus folgenden Armut litt. Honduras gehört seit Jahren zu den Ländern mit der höchsten Gewaltkriminalität weltweit. Ein Land umzusteuern ist allerdings schwer, und als Sanchez seine politische Laufbahn begann, schienen größere Reformen kaum möglich. Anfang der 2000er Jahre arbeitete Sanchez für Porfirio Lobo, der später Präsident wurde. Gemeinsam sprachen sie mit Mark Klugmann, einem US-amerikanischen Entwicklungsberater aus den Regierungen Reagan und George H. W. Bush. Klugmann warb seit Langem für sogenannte LEAP-Zonen. Das Reason Magazine fasste seinen Gedanken so zusammen: „Klugmanns Einsicht war, dass stückweise Versuche, Marktreformen für ganze Volkswirtschaften durchzusetzen, den Widerstand mächtiger Koalitionen verfestigter Interessen hervorrufen. Warum also nicht die Reformen auf einen Schlag versuchen, aber auf kleinerer Ebene?“ Reformiert man gründlich, aber nur an einem Ort, kann daraus ein Leuchtturm werden, der am Ende das ganze Land verändert. Hongkong hat es China vorgemacht. Sanchez überzeugte das, und er dachte die Idee für Honduras weiter. Eine autonome Stadt nach Hongkonger Vorbild wurde in seinem Umfeld zur gemeinsamen Vision. Der Gedanke ist nicht neu. Er stammt aus der Neuen Institutionenökonomik, die eine einfache Einsicht formuliert: Wie fähig und fleißig Menschen auch sind, sie kommen kaum voran, wenn die Institutionen ihres Landes Wachstum nicht fördern, sondern behindern. Über Honduras sind sich die meisten Beobachter einig: Die Honduraner sind klug, tüchtig und wollen sich ein besseres Leben aufbauen. Im Weg steht ihnen ein undurchdringliches Dickicht aus Bürokratie und Institutionen. 2010 wurde Lobo Präsident und Sanchez sein Kabinettschef. Jetzt war die Gelegenheit da, honduranische Hongkongs zu bauen. Blieb eine Frage: Wie überzeugt man den Kongress von etwas so Unerhörtem? Hier kam Paul Romer ins Spiel, Wirtschaftsnobelpreisträger und prominenter Fürsprecher der Charter Cities. Seine Ideen passten zu denen von Sanchez, die beiden kamen ins Gespräch, und bald stellte sich Romer hinter das honduranische Vorhaben. Das gab den Ausschlag: Seine internationale Reputation überzeugte den Kongress. So entstand die erste Fassung der honduranischen Sonderzonen, die REDs (regiones especiales de desarrollo, Sonderentwicklungsregionen). Die REDs waren so vielversprechend wie ehrgeizig. Sie sollten in vielen Bereichen eigenständig handeln dürfen, was Governance und institutionelles Design einen großen Sprung erlaubt hätte. Sie sollten sogar „Verträge und internationale Abkommen schließen“ können, wie das Journal of Special Jurisdictions ausführt. Damit verlangten sie zu viel. Der Kongress stimmte mit überwältigender Mehrheit zu, doch der Oberste Gerichtshof sah die Verfassung überschritten. Im Oktober 2012, ein Jahr nach Verabschiedung des RED-Statuts, kippte er die zugrunde liegende Verfassungsänderung. Damit fiel auch das Statut selbst. Zu diesem Zeitpunkt stand die Idee der Sonderzonen schon länger in der Kritik, obwohl noch keine einzige Zone existierte. Schon in der kurzen Geltungsdauer des RED-Gesetzes zerstritten sich die Beteiligten. Für die Aufsicht war eine Transparenzkommission geschaffen worden, und Romer war inoffiziell wohl eine führende Rolle darin zugesagt worden. Als die Regierung dann eine Absichtserklärung mit dem US-Unternehmer Michael Strong über die erste RED unterzeichnete und Romer protestierte, man habe ihn nicht gefragt, zeigte sich: Berufen worden war er nie. Romer fühlte sich ausgebootet und zog sich kurz darauf aus Honduras zurück. Der Streit lieferte einer kleinen, aber lauten Minderheit Munition, die die Sonderzonen ohnehin ablehnte. In der Presse verbreiteten sich Vorwürfe von Korruption und Neokolonialismus und die Behauptung, die Rechte indigener Gruppen stünden auf dem Spiel. „Medien sind überall unehrlich, aber die honduranischen Medien waren ungeheuerlich unehrlich“, sagt Strong, der damals an der ersten Sonderzone arbeitete. Die Presse habe die Stimmung im Land grob verzerrt wiedergegeben. „Irgendwann sagte jemand: ‚Fünf Prozent der Honduraner sind aus antikapitalistischen Gründen dagegen, fünf Prozent aus nationalen Gründen, und neunzig Prozent glauben einfach nicht, dass es je dazu kommt. Käme es dazu, wären sie über die Arbeitsplätze hocherfreut.‘“ Sanchez und sein Team gaben nicht auf. Nach dem Urteil arbeiteten sie eine überarbeitete Fassung aus. Der Oberste Gerichtshof hatte an den REDs bemängelt, sie bedrohten Souveränität und territoriale Integrität des Landes. Aus den REDs wurden deshalb die ZEDEs: mit weniger Autonomie als zuvor und mit einer neuen Verfassungsänderung, die alle Bedenken zur Souveränität ausräumte. Auch sie wurde angefochten, diesmal aber vom Gericht gebilligt. Im September 2013 verabschiedete der Kongress das ZEDE-Organgesetz, wieder mit überwältigender Mehrheit. Es ordnete die Zonen unmissverständlich in die honduranische Verfassungsordnung ein. An die Stelle der Transparenzkommission trat das Komitee zur Übernahme bewährter Verfahren, kurz CAMP. Nun hätte es vorangehen können. Bis die erste ZEDE genehmigt wurde, vergingen allerdings fast vier Jahre. Próspera erhielt ihre Zulassung erst im Dezember 2017. Das Journal of Special Jurisdictions nennt, gestützt auf eine anonyme Quelle aus dem Umfeld, mehrere Gründe: interne Kämpfe und Haushaltsmisswirtschaft im CAMP, fehlendes Interesse von Präsident Hernández, der im Januar 2014 angetreten war, Wahlkampf und Investoren, die angesichts der politischen Lage zögerten. Bewegung kam erst, als Carlos Pineda, einer der drei Väter der ZEDEs, 2016 Sekretär des CAMP wurde. Ciudad Morazán folgte ein Jahr nach Próspera. Eine dritte ZEDE, Orquidea, nahm im Juni 2021 den Betrieb auf, eine vierte, Mariposa, stand zur Wahl Ende 2021 kurz vor der Genehmigung. Die drei bestehenden Projekte könnten unterschiedlicher kaum sein. Próspera setzt auf Innovation in Verwaltung und Technik, auf Wissensarbeit und auf Verbindungen zum internationalen Geschäft. Ciudad Morazán versteht sich als „Blue-Collar-ZEDE“ und richtet sich an Arbeiter und Mittelschicht, überwiegend aus Honduras. Orquidea hat gar keinen Wohnbereich, dort wachsen Obst und Gemüse für den Export. Weil das ZEDE-Regime ihnen die Wahl lässt, hat jede Zone sich das Rechtssystem gesucht, das zu ihr passt. Ciudad Morazán nutzt im Wesentlichen das honduranische Zivilgesetzbuch. Orquidea hat das Recht des US-Bundesstaates Delaware übernommen. Und Próspera hat einen eigenen Roatán Common Law Code geschrieben, der bewährte Regeln aus aller Welt zusammenführt, zusammen mit Ulex, einem quelloffenen Rechtssystem von Tom W. Bell, Rechtsprofessor an der Chapman University. Dazu schließt Próspera mit jedem Bewohner eine „Vereinbarung des Zusammenlebens“, die ihm unwiderrufliche Rechte und Rechtssicherheit zusagt. „Genau das meine ich, wenn ich von Innovation in der Governance spreche“, sagt Titus Gebel. „Hier kann man sie in der Praxis sehen. Man hat gesagt: Probieren wir Verschiedenes aus. Und schon gibt es drei ZEDEs mit drei sehr unterschiedlichen Modellen.“ Gemeinsam ist ihnen das Ziel, den Honduranern Chancen, Stabilität und Wohlstand zu eröffnen, die es sonst nirgends im Land gibt. Die verlorene Schlacht um die Legitimität Je mehr rund um die ZEDEs geschah, desto lauter wurde der Widerstand. Ideologische Gegner und etablierte Interessen griffen die Zonen heftig an. Überall tauchten Vorwürfe auf, es gehe nicht mit rechten Dingen zu, manche unterstellten sogar böse Absicht. Geschürt wurden sie vor allem von denen, deren eigene Macht durch die ZEDEs bedroht war oder deren Weltbild mit ihnen unvereinbar war. Massimo Mazzone, der Gründer von Ciudad Morazán, sagt: Gerade die häufigsten Vorwürfe gegen sein Projekt ließen sich am leichtesten widerlegen. Am meisten Aufmerksamkeit bekam über die Jahre der Vorwurf der Enteignung. Die Presse hat ihn immer wieder aufgegriffen: Die ZEDEs nähmen Einheimischen Land und Häuser weg oder seien an Enteignungen direkt beteiligt. Die Kritiker berufen sich auf Artikel 25 des ZEDE-Gesetzes. Der behält das Enteignungsrecht allerdings dem Staat Honduras vor, nicht den Zonen. Das ist auch folgerichtig, denn außerhalb ihrer genehmigten Grenzen haben die ZEDEs über Land gar nichts zu sagen. Für Mazzone ist der Vorwurf ein Ablenkungsmanöver: „Ganz gleich, was im ZEDE-Gesetz steht, Honduras hat das Enteignungsrecht ohnehin. Wer eine Autobahn oder eine Pipeline bauen will, die richtigen Kontakte hat und die Regierung überzeugt, kann enteignen, mit oder ohne ZEDE-Gesetz. Das ist leider überall auf der Welt so.“ Für sein eigenes Projekt sagt er: „Für uns ist diese Praxis ethisch monströs. Wir lehnen jede Enteignung ab. Wir würden uns nie darauf einlassen, das wäre abstoßend und politisch selbstmörderisch.“ Solche Klarstellungen halten Angriffe nicht auf, die in böser Absicht geführt werden. Der North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA) etwa schildert die Gründung von Próspera in einem feindseligen Artikel und hebt hervor, die Einheimischen hätten „verstanden, dass die Gemeindeverwaltung keine Zuständigkeit mehr über die 58 Acres hat, die nun in das ZEDE-Modell eingegliedert sind. Das Land soll vom kommunalen Register in ein unabhängiges Grundbuch der Próspera ZEDE übertragen worden sein.“ Der nächste Satz lautet: „Landenteignung ist eine wesentliche Sorge der Gemeinden.“ Den Autoren geht es erkennbar darum, Próspera als Bösewicht zu zeigen, gleichgültig, was sie tatsächlich tut. Ein Grundbuchwechsel ist keine Enteignung, er gleicht eher einem Wechsel der Gemeindezugehörigkeit. Unerwähnt bleibt außerdem: Das Land gehörte Privatleuten, war unbewohnt, wurde von Próspera-nahen Gesellschaften rechtmäßig gekauft, und der Wechsel geschah mit voller Zustimmung der Eigentümer. Weil Próspera im Zentrum dieser Vorwürfe stand, hat sie mehrfach klargestellt, dass sie mit Enteignung nichts zu tun haben will. Ihre Vertreter verweisen auf die Charta, die Enteignungsbefugnisse gar nicht erst aufführt (Artikel 2.04), und auf einen Beschluss von 2020, der jede Enteignung ausschließt: Land wird nur eingegliedert, wenn die Eigentümer es selbst wollen. Alles Land in Próspera ist Privateigentum und war unbewohnt, bevor es zur ZEDE wurde. Besonderes Augenmerk galt der Klarheit der Eigentumstitel, die in Honduras oft widersprüchlich oder lückenhaft sind. Der Vorwurf hält sich trotzdem. Ein neuerer Artikel übernimmt ungeprüft die Behauptung, „die für den ZEDE-Bau ausgewiesenen Gebiete sind angestammtes Land in der Garífuna-Region, die seit Tausenden von Jahren von der indigenen Bevölkerung bewohnt wird. Der Bau von ZEDEs würde deshalb zur massenhaften Vertreibung der einheimischen Bevölkerung führen.“ Man sollte es nicht wiederholen müssen: Wer unbewohntes Land erschließt, vertreibt niemanden. Noch dreister geht ein anderer Artikel vor. Er stellt die ZEDEs neben Beispiele für Gewaltkriminalität und hinterlässt beim arglosen Leser den Eindruck, ihre Vertreter seien organisierte Kriminelle, die mit der Regierung gemeinsame Sache gegen die Einheimischen machen. Porträtiert wird ein Anwohner, der sich vor den ZEDEs fürchtet, obwohl ihm von dort nie etwas angetan wurde. Und in dem Fall angeblicher Vertreibung, den die Autoren in den dunkelsten Farben malen, räumen sie am Ende selbst ein, dass niemand enteignet wurde. Solche Berichte wurden für die ZEDEs zum Alltag. Das Nationale Zentrum der Landarbeiter (CNTC) etwa zählte zu den „sozialen Auswirkungen“ der Zonen „Zwangsvertreibung, zunehmende Konflikthaftigkeit und Gewalt, Verlust des kulturellen Erbes, Migration und die verstärkte Unterdrückung von Protesten“. Womit sich das belegen ließe, stand nirgends, als brauche es für solche Vorwürfe keinen Beleg. Dabei ergibt nichts davon Sinn. Alle ZEDEs stehen auf unbewohntem Land, es konnte also niemand vertrieben werden, erst recht nicht mit Zwang. Gewalt ist von den Zonen nie ausgegangen, ihr Zweck ist friedlich und produktiv. Migration haben sie nur insofern ausgelöst, als Menschen zuzogen, um dort zu arbeiten. In den ZEDEs hat es keine Proteste gegeben, die man hätte unterdrücken können, und außerhalb ihrer Grenzen haben sie weder Polizeihoheit noch irgendein Mitspracherecht darüber, wie mit Protesten umgegangen wird. Solche Vorwürfe sind keine Kritik, sondern dienen der Publizität und dem politischen Vorteil. Solche Kampagnen haben Folgen. Die Technische Universität München (TUM) gab ihr Vorhaben auf, einen Campus in Próspera zu eröffnen, und verwies auf „Hinweise auf Menschenrechtsverletzungen“. Wir haben bei der TUM nachgefragt, wie Menschenrechte verletzt werden sollen, wenn ausschließlich unbewohnte Flächen eingegliedert wurden. Eine Erklärung kam nicht. Korrektur: Nachdem die TUM ihr Engagement mit Próspera beendet hatte, veröffentlichte die Universität ein Schreiben, in dem sie erklärte, ihr lägen „keine Belege für Menschenrechtsverletzungen in oder durch Honduras Próspera“ vor und der Rückzug aus Honduras sei „das Ergebnis eines Führungswechsels“ und einer „Neuausrichtung des geschäftlichen Schwerpunkts“ gewesen. Hinter dem organisierten Widerstand stehen laut Mazzone vor allem Organisationen, deren Macht die ZEDEs bedrohen. Die Nationale Autonome Universität von Honduras (UNAH) etwa hat das Monopol darauf, private Universitäten zuzulassen. Wenn in einer ZEDE jeder eine Hochschule gründen kann, ist dieses Monopol dahin. Auch die Gewerkschaften verlieren: In den ZEDEs gilt das honduranische Arbeitsgesetzbuch nicht. Und die Anwaltskammer: Entscheidet sich eine Zone wie Próspera für Common Law statt für honduranisches Zivilrecht, schrumpft der Markt für örtliche Anwälte, die nur das Zivilrecht kennen. Titus Gebel ergänzt die Maquilas, Honduras' exportorientierte Freizonen. Sie genießen weniger Vorteile als die ZEDEs und sehen in ihnen Konkurrenz. Prósperas Ruf hat auch das schwierige Verhältnis zum Nachbardorf geschadet, zu Crawfish Rock auf der Insel Roatán. Von Anfang an hat die Zone dort investiert und um ein gutes Verhältnis geworben. Sie bot Kleinkredite an, Schreinerkurse und Nachmittagsprogramme. Sie bezahlte ein Gemeindehaus. Später entstand unter den Einheimischen eine Spar- und Investmentgruppe. Próspera organisierte Schulbusse für die Kinder des Dorfes und übernahm 95 Prozent der Kosten. Und sie gab vielen Bewohnern Arbeit, vor allem auf ihren Baustellen. Noch Mitte 2022 arbeitete rund ein Zehntel von Crawfish Rock in Próspera, etwa 10 Prozent. Streit gab es ausgerechnet über das Wasser. Bis dahin kam es per Tankwagen ins Dorf, während der Covid-Pandemie oft unzuverlässig. Als Próspera das Dorf an ihre Leitung anschloss, stellte sich heraus: Das Tankwasser hatten örtliche Gemeindevertreter verkauft, und der neue Anschluss bedrohte ihre Stellung. Bald warfen sie Próspera vor, sich an den Einheimischen zu bereichern, weil sie für das Wasser Geld nahm. Dabei hatte auch das Tankwasser Geld gekostet, und zwar mehr. Próspera hatte die Dorfbewohner sogar gefragt, welchen Preis sie selbst für fair hielten, und genau den berechnet. Während der Pandemie stellte sie die Abrechnung ganz ein und lieferte kostenlos. Die örtliche Führung warf Próspera außerdem vor, sie wolle Crawfish Rock in die Zone eingliedern, gegen den Willen der Bewohner. Tatsächlich zeigte Próspera auf ihrer Website eine Visualisierung, in der das Nachbardorf zu einer künftigen Ausbaustufe gehörte. Kommunikativ war das ein erhebliches Versäumnis. Gemeint war ein freiwilliger Beitritt per Referendum, wie ihn Artikel 38 des ZEDE-Gesetzes vorsieht. Ein solches Referendum und die Entscheidung von Eigentümern unbewohnter Flächen sind die einzigen Wege, auf denen Próspera überhaupt wachsen darf. Próspera dokumentiert ihre Schritte konsequent schriftlich, um sich gegen Falschdarstellungen wehren zu können. Als sie erfuhr, dass die Dorfführung zur alten Tankwagenversorgung zurück wollte, bat sie um eine schriftliche Bestätigung: Soll die Leitung weiterlaufen, und werden die vereinbarten Rechnungen bezahlt? Auch wenn diese Vertreter womöglich nicht für die Mehrheit im Dorf sprechen, kann Próspera sie nicht übergehen. Als keine Antwort kam, stellte sie die Lieferung ein. In der internationalen Presse wurde daraus die Geschichte eines Konzerns, der ein Dorf gefügig machen will. Dass es anders war, interessierte die Kritiker nicht. Über die Jahre füllten sich die honduranischen sozialen Medien mit Behauptungen ohne Grundlage, die durch ständige Wiederholung Gewicht bekamen. Ein Beispiel: Der ZEDE-Rahmen sei „illegal“, weil er für verfassungswidrig erklärt worden sei. Das stimmt nicht. Verfassungswidrig waren die REDs. Die ZEDEs wurden gerade deshalb neu konstruiert, um deren Mängel zu beheben, und genau das hat das Gericht bestätigt. Trotzdem erschienen weiter Artikel, die beides vermischten und darauf rechtliche und moralische Urteile stützten. Die schiere Menge an Empörung im Netz erweckte den Eindruck, das ganze Land stehe geschlossen gegen die Zonen. Dabei beobachten viele Befürworter dasselbe: Wo gewöhnliche Bürger ernsthaft Kritik üben, fehlen ihnen meist Informationen darüber, was eine ZEDE überhaupt ist. „Es gibt keinen Widerstand an der Basis gegen das ZEDE-Gesetz, sobald die Leute verstehen, worum es wirklich geht“, sagt Gebel. Auch Umfragen stützen das: Der Widerstand wird von einer lauten Minderheit organisiert, politisch oder ideologisch motiviert und von Interessen getrieben. Eine breite Bewegung gegen die Zonen gab es nie. Irgendwann aber übertönt die Summe dieser Interessen jede ernsthafte Debatte über Vor- und Nachteile. In der Politik gewinnt selten die beliebteste Seite, meist die lauteste. Ende 2021 war klar: Die ZEDEs hatten die Schlacht um ihre Legitimität verloren. Der holprige Weg nach vorn Als die negative Presse ihren Höhepunkt erreichte, machte Oppositionsführerin Xiomara Castro die Ablehnung der ZEDEs zu einem Hauptthema ihres Wahlkampfs. Nach ihrem Sieg Ende 2021 kündigte sie an, die Zonen abzuschaffen. Sie sah in ihnen ein Vehikel ausländischer Ausbeutung, zusammengefasst im allgegenwärtigen Slogan „Honduras ist nicht zu verkaufen“. Im April 2022 stimmte der Kongress für die Aufhebung des ZEDE-Organgesetzes und begann, auch die Verfassungsänderungen von 2013 zurückzunehmen. Abgeschlossen ist das Verfahren nicht. Anfang 2023 wird erneut abgestimmt, ob die Änderung bestätigt oder verworfen wird. Wie es danach weitergeht, lässt die Regierung bis heute offen. Die Aufhebung bedeutet ohnehin nur, dass keine neuen ZEDEs mehr entstehen können. Dieser Teil war einfach. Die bestehenden Zonen loszuwerden dürfte für Castro und ihre Partei teuer werden. Prósperas Vertreter haben öffentlich und in Interviews klargemacht, dass sich für sie nichts ändert. Sie verweisen unter anderem auf internationale Verträge, die Honduras unterzeichnet hat, darunter Rechtsstabilitätsvereinbarungen, die den Status der bestehenden ZEDEs für fünfzig Jahre garantieren. Wer die Zonen abschafft, bricht diese Zusagen und macht Honduras für enorme Schäden haftbar. Vertreten lässt sich Próspera von White & Case aus New York, einer international renommierten Kanzlei auf diesem Gebiet. Wie der Streit auch ausgeht, er dürfte Investoren abschrecken, die sich auf solchen politischen Druck nicht einlassen wollen. Eine Ära ist damit zu Ende: die Zeit, in der die Regierung trotz aller Angriffe im Kern hinter den Zonen stand. Titus Gebel sieht eine vertane Chance und bedauert die verlorenen Jahre zwischen 2013 und 2017. Wären die ZEDEs früher gewachsen, ließe sich heute schwerer gegen sie Politik machen. „Hätte man vier Jahre mehr gehabt, wären viele Arbeitsplätze entstanden, Menschen würden sicher in den ZEDEs leben und eine höhere Lebensqualität genießen. In den Achtzigern war es mit den Maquilas genauso. Es gab viel Widerstand, aber nachdem die ersten zwanzigtausend Arbeitsplätze da waren, wollte keine Partei sie mehr abschaffen. Mit den ZEDEs wäre es genauso gekommen, besonders in Morazán, wo sich das Leben der Arbeiter in der Region spürbar hätte verbessern können.“ Auch wenn das Glück nicht auf ihrer Seite war, haben die ZEDEs in ihrer kurzen Zeit viele Erneuerer und Unternehmer angezogen und Bemerkenswertes in der Governance hervorgebracht. Dazu gehören die verfassungsähnlichen ZEDE-Chartas, ein vollständiges Common-Law-Gesetzbuch auf Basis des quelloffenen Systems Ulex, ein elektronisches Grundbuch samt Eigentumsübertragung und ein Bürgervertrag. Das sind nur einige Beispiele. Entwickelt und erprobt wurden sie in Honduras, und sie lassen sich überall auf der Welt erneut anwenden, selbst wenn die ZEDEs ganz verschwinden sollten. Der honduranische Traum ist also nicht zu Ende. Die Gründerväter der Sonderzonen arbeiten weiter daran, Fortschritt und Wohlstand ins Land zu bringen, unterstützt von Fachleuten aus vielen Bereichen: Unternehmer, Juristen, Architekten, Investoren. 2013 schrieb das Reason Magazine, Honduras müsse, „um im 21. Jahrhundert zum Vorreiter [innovativer Governance-Modelle] zu werden“, nun ja, „aufhören, Honduras zu sein“, zumindest auf einem kleinen Stück Land. Das war nie zutreffend. Die ZEDEs sind eine honduranische Idee und ein honduranisches Projekt, ein Versuch von unten, einem Land Hoffnung zu geben, dem die Möglichkeiten ausgegangen waren. Diese Hoffnung lebt in den drei bestehenden ZEDEs weiter. Wahlen kommen und gehen, und wenn sich der Wind wieder dreht, profitiert vielleicht ganz Honduras von einem Kaleidoskop an Zonen, die erproben, wie sich Systeme und Institutionen verbessern lassen, damit die Welt für uns alle besser wird. Nachtrag: die rechtliche Entwicklung in Honduras seit 2022 Veröffentlicht im Juni 2025 In den vergangenen zweieinhalb Jahren hat sich der Konflikt zwischen den ZEDEs und der Regierung weiter zugespitzt. Seit ihrem Amtsantritt 2021 setzt die Regierung ihren Feldzug gegen die Zonen fort. Ihr Ziel war von Anfang an, sie vollständig und spurlos zu beseitigen. Schon 2022, beim ersten großen Schritt, der Aufhebung des ZEDE-Gesetzes, war das Vorgehen klar: Die Regierung wollte die Vergangenheit praktisch leugnen und den Investoren ihre erworbenen Rechte nehmen. Das ist ein hochumstrittenes Ziel, denn es verstößt gegen einen Grundsatz von Recht und Gerechtigkeit: Kein Gesetz darf rückwirkend gelten. Die nächsten Schritte folgten sofort. Politische Manöver Während ihrer Amtszeit brachten die Präsidentin und ihre Partei loyale Leute in Schlüsselämter, mit Methoden, die bestenfalls zweifelhaft und schlimmstenfalls offen verfassungswidrig waren. Meist nutzten sie Lücken in der Verfassung oder rechtliche Grauzonen. Der erste Schritt nach der Machtübernahme war Luis Redondo als neuer Parlamentspräsident. Normalerweise braucht dieses Amt eine Mehrheit im neu gewählten Parlament, die Redondo nicht bekam: 18 Abgeordnete der regierenden Libre stimmten gemeinsam mit der Opposition für Jorge Cálix. Die Partei war damals gespalten, und Cálix führte den rivalisierenden Flügel an. Er und die 18 Abgeordneten wurden daraufhin ausgeschlossen. Castro und ihr Ehemann Manuel Zelaya, Gründer von Libre und informeller Parteichef, führten dann „einen Mob in den Kongress“, wie Jorge Colindres es beschreibt, Technischer Sekretär der Próspera ZEDE. Cálix gab nach und trat zurück, das Amt ging an Castros Wunschkandidaten Redondo, und die Ausgeschlossenen kehrten in die Partei zurück. Wenige Monate später war es eben dieser Redondo, der die Aufhebung des ZEDE-Gesetzes vorantrieb, ohne je ordnungsgemäß gewählt worden zu sein: Nach Cálix' Rückzug hat niemand mehr abgestimmt. Als Nächstes kam der Oberste Gerichtshof an die Reihe. Seine Richter werden für sieben Jahre gewählt, zuletzt im Februar 2023. Der Wahl gingen heftiger Streit und politische Manöver Castros und ihrer Partei voraus, die sich offenbar auszahlten: Sieben der fünfzehn Richter waren am Ende Libre-nah, darunter die Gerichtspräsidentin Rebeca Ráquel, angeheiratete Tante von Manuel Zelayas Tochter. Die Opposition sprach von einem „besetzten“ Gericht und führte drei Punkte an. Erstens hatte Libre großen Einfluss auf den Nominierungsausschuss, der die Kandidaten überhaupt erst aufstellt. Zweitens verzögerte Redondo als frisch gestärkter Parlamentspräsident die Abstimmung so lange, bis die Verhandlungen zugunsten von Libre liefen. Drittens blieb das Verfahren auffällig intransparent, besonders bei der internen Auswahl der Verfassungskammer. Dass mehrere Richter familiär und persönlich mit führenden Libre-Leuten verbunden sind, stützt den Verdacht. Der Oberste Gerichtshof und vor allem seine Verfassungskammer sollten im nächsten Schritt gegen die ZEDEs eine Schlüsselrolle spielen. Anderthalb Jahre später folgte der letzte Schritt: ein Getreuer als Generalstaatsanwalt. Die Ständige Kommission des Nationalkongresses, geführt von Redondo, berief Johel Zelaya, der mit dem Ehemann der Präsidentin nicht verwandt ist, ohne die nötigen 86 Stimmen im Plenum. Der Kongress war blockiert: Ende Oktober 2023, zwei Monate nach Ablauf der vorherigen Amtszeit, gab es noch immer keine Einigung, vor allem weil Zelayas Eignung umstritten war. Ihm wurden Urkundenfälschung und Meineid aus seiner früheren politischen Tätigkeit vorgeworfen, was ihn auf dem Papier für das Amt disqualifiziert hätte. Seine übrigen Ämter legten zudem einen Interessenkonflikt nahe. Für diesen Fall sieht die honduranische Verfassung kein Verfahren vor. Die Libre-dominierte Ständige Kommission nutzte die Lücke und berief sich auf Artikel 202, der ihr während der Sitzungspausen dringende Angelegenheiten zuweist. Einstimmig ernannte sie Zelaya zum kommissarischen Generalstaatsanwalt, um ein Machtvakuum zu vermeiden, wie es hieß. Die Opposition widersprach: Bedeutende Ernennungen stünden der Kommission nicht zu, erst recht keine, die eine Zweidrittelmehrheit brauchen. Zelaya blieb dennoch im Amt, bis der Kongress ihn 2024 bestätigte. Die Zustimmung kam Berichten zufolge unter Druck zustande: Libre drohte, Oppositionsabgeordnete strafrechtlich zu verfolgen und die Wahlbehörden allein mit eigenen Leuten zu besetzen. So haben Präsidentin Castro und Libre in wenigen Jahren die zentralen Institutionen des Landes unter ihre Kontrolle gebracht, die sie dann unter anderem gegen die ZEDEs einsetzen konnten. Prósperas Gegenwehr Das ZEDE-Organgesetz wurde am 25. April 2022 aufgehoben. Der Rahmen bestand allerdings nicht nur aus diesem Gesetz, sondern auch aus Verfassungsänderungen, die die Zonen fester verankerten. Zeitgleich verabschiedete der Kongress deshalb ein Dekret, das auch diese Änderungen zurücknehmen sollte. Dafür verlangt das honduranische Recht zwei aufeinanderfolgende Legislaturperioden mit jeweils Zweidrittelmehrheit. Die erste Abstimmung im April 2022 gelang. Die zweite kam nie zustande, die Legislaturperiode endete am 31. Oktober 2023 ohne sie. Die Verfassung wurde damit nie geändert und enthält bis heute die Artikel, auf denen die ZEDEs beruhen. Der Grund dafür liegt vermutlich in dem, was dazwischen geschah. Am 20. Dezember 2022 reichte Próspera beim Internationalen Zentrum zur Beilegung von Investitionsstreitigkeiten (ICSID) eine Schiedsklage ein. Ihr Argument: Die Aufhebung verletze die erworbenen Rechte der internationalen Investoren, deren Rechtssicherheit internationale Verträge für fünfzig Jahre garantieren. Die Regierung vertrat offenbar die Position, die ZEDEs existierten nicht und hätten nie existiert. Angesichts der Verfassungsartikel war das nicht haltbar. Darüber hinaus warf Próspera der Regierung vor, den Betrieb der Zone zu sabotieren, mal subtil, mal offen, statt wie geboten in gutem Glauben zusammenzuarbeiten. Sie entzog den ZEDEs den Zolldienst und verweigerte ihnen die Befreiung von der Umsatzsteuer, was bis heute gilt. Sie drängte Banken- und Versicherungsaufsicht dazu, die Jurisdiktion faktisch vom Finanzsystem abzuschneiden, bis hin zur Schließung von Konten ansässiger Bewohner und Unternehmen. Dazu kam eine Kampagne aus Verleumdung und Rufschädigung. Die internationale Presse griff die Klage zunächst nicht auf, in den folgenden zwei Jahren wurde sie dann zum großen Thema. Und wieder stand Próspera im schlechten Licht. Man warf ihr erneut „Neokolonialismus“ vor und dass sie den Mechanismus der Streitbeilegung „ausnutze“. Das gemeinhin angesehene Foreign Policy veröffentlichte einen Verriss, der alle bekannten Unwahrheiten und Verzerrungen über die ZEDEs wiederholte, als wären sie nicht längst mehrfach widerlegt. Im Februar 2024 kündigte Honduras an, das ICSID nach 35 Jahren zu verlassen. Anlass waren Prósperas Klage und weitere Verfahren, die sich während der Amtszeit der Regierung angesammelt hatten. Der Austritt wurde am 25. August 2024 wirksam. Für neue Streitigkeiten steht das ICSID seither nicht mehr zur Verfügung, laufende Verfahren berührt das nicht. So spektakulär der Schritt war, am Fall Próspera ändert er nichts. Wahrscheinlich war es diese Klage, die den Kongress im Frühjahr 2023 davon abhielt, die Verfassungsänderungen endgültig zurückzunehmen. Ein so überstürztes Vorgehen hätte das Land teuer zu stehen kommen können. Die Opposition hätte nur mitgezogen, wenn es eine Vereinbarung mit den Zonen gegeben hätte, die Arbeitsplätze und Investitionen sichert. Versucht hat die Regierung das nie. Ein entfesselter Oberster Gerichtshof Am 20. September 2024 erklärte der Oberste Gerichtshof die ZEDEs für verfassungswidrig. Die Verfassungsänderungen, die sie ermöglicht hatten, verletzten andere, „in Stein gemeißelte“ Artikel zu Gebietsgliederung, Justiz und Wirtschaftsordnung. Vor Gericht gebracht hatte die Sache die UNAH, die Nationale Autonome Universität von Honduras. Das mag überraschen, hat aber einen einfachen Grund. Die UNAH hält ein in der Verfassung verankertes Monopol auf die Hochschulbildung: Jede private Universität und jede Änderung an Studienplänen braucht ihre Zustimmung. In den ZEDEs gelten diese Bestimmungen nicht. Wären die Zonen gewachsen und erfolgreich geworden, hätte die UNAH ihren Griff auf den Sektor verloren. Das Gericht blieb jedoch nicht bei der Bildungsfrage, um die es in der Klage ging, sondern nahm sich den gesamten Rechtsrahmen vor. Das Urteil schlug ein und rief Reaktionen von allen Seiten hervor. Próspera warnte sofort, es werde das Vertrauen der Investoren weiter erschüttern, vor allem der amerikanischen, und Honduras' internationalen Beziehungen schaden. 250 örtliche Beschäftigte und Anwohner unterzeichneten einen offenen Brief dagegen. Der Rechtsanalyst Fernando Gonzáles bezifferte die drohenden Schäden auf 12 bis 13 Milliarden Dollar, falls die Regierung nicht verhandelt und einen internationalen Prozess vermeidet. Die Anwältin und Politikerin Maribel Espinoza forderte ebenfalls eine Einigung, um dem Land die Last eines verlorenen Schiedsverfahrens zu ersparen. Besonders umstritten war ein Punkt des Urteils: Es sollte rückwirkend gelten. Damit entstand die juristische Fiktion, die ZEDEs existierten nicht nur heute nicht, sondern hätten nie existiert. Eine solche Rückwirkung hat es in Honduras nie gegeben, und für viele war sie der Punkt, an dem das Maß voll war, auch für manche, die der Regierung bis dahin gefolgt waren. Es ging nun nicht mehr nur um die Zonen, sondern um die rechtlichen und verfassungsmäßigen Grundlagen des Landes. Der Verfassungsrechtler Juan Carlos Barrientos warnte vor rechtlichem Chaos: Frühere Vereinbarungen würden entwertet, Unsicherheit bliebe zurück. 144 Investoren und Unternehmen aus 19 Ländern, die zusammen über 250 Millionen Dollar investiert haben, forderten die Regierung in einem gemeinsamen Schreiben auf, den Angriff einzustellen und die Rechtsstaatlichkeit wiederherzustellen. Die US-Kongressabgeordnete María Elvira Salazar warnte vor den Folgen, die enteignungsgleiche Maßnahmen gegen amerikanische Investoren haben könnten. Próspera selbst blieb bei ihrer Linie: Der Betrieb laufe weiter, und man bitte die Regierung erneut um ein Gespräch, um eine gütliche Lösung zu finden. Aus Prósperas Sicht ist das Urteil selbst verfassungswidrig. „Unsere Position ist, dass es nichtig ist. Das Gericht darf Recht nicht rückwirkend aufheben, und Artikel 321 der Verfassung sagt: Handelt ein öffentlicher Bediensteter über seine gesetzliche Befugnis hinaus, ist die Handlung nichtig“, sagt Colindres. Hinzu kommt Artikel 96, wonach kein Gesetz rückwirkend gilt. Wer etwas für verfassungswidrig erklärt, so Prósperas Lesart, handelt faktisch als Gesetzgeber. Trotz aller Kritik erschien das Urteil am 25. November 2024 im Amtsblatt La Gaceta. Ein paar Eigentümlichkeiten hat es dennoch. „Das Urteil erklärte die ZEDEs für verfassungswidrig, ordnete aber nichts an, weder zu tun noch zu unterlassen. Das war interessant und, ehrlich gesagt, ganz vorteilhaft für uns. Wenn ein Gericht etwas veröffentlicht, mag es für uns klar nichtig sein, es trägt trotzdem, wie ich sage, das Siegel und den Briefkopf. Und dann kann einem, ganz gleich was man selbst denkt, Unangenehmes widerfahren.“ Auf die internationalen Verträge, die Investitionen in Próspera schützen, geht das Urteil ebenfalls nicht ein. Das ist bemerkenswert, denn nach der Wiener Vertragsrechtskonvention und der UN-Charta muss Honduras seine Verträge nach Treu und Glauben einhalten. Will das Gericht diese Pflichten verneinen, sollte man erwarten, dass es sie wenigstens erwähnt. Colindres führt für Próspera ein weiteres Argument an: „Im innerstaatlichen Recht sagt Artikel 94 des Gesetzes über die Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit ausdrücklich, dass Urteile über Verfassungswidrigkeit Rechtslagen nicht berühren, die endgültig entschieden und vollzogen sind. Das honduranische Recht sagt also: Gefestigte Rechtslagen bleiben unberührt. Und damit kann uns ein solches Urteil nicht treffen. Die Próspera ZEDE ist genehmigt, wir haben 235 Unternehmen, rund 2.000 Bewohner, physisch und elektronisch, und über 150 Millionen Dollar an Investitionen. Eine gefestigtere Rechtslage gibt es kaum.“ Er verweist darauf, dass über 40 Urteile des Obersten Gerichtshofs aus den letzten 20 Jahren bestätigt haben, dass solche Entscheidungen nicht rückwirkend gelten können. Das ist damit nicht nur ein allgemeiner Rechtsgrundsatz, sondern gefestigtes honduranisches Verfassungsrecht. Ein entscheidendes Jahr Seit der Veröffentlichung hat die Regierung offen wenig unternommen. Ob sie vor der nächsten Wahl noch gegen die Zonen vorgehen will, lässt sich nur vermuten. Da das Urteil nichts anordnet, liegt es in ihrem Ermessen, ob und wann sie weitere Schritte unternimmt. Die Zukunft der ZEDEs bleibt damit vorerst offen. Die allgemeine Wahl im November 2025 weckt allerdings Hoffnung auf eine Wende. Mehrere Kandidaten und Parteien haben sich gegen das Urteil der Verfassungskammer ausgesprochen und den Umgang der Regierung mit den Zonen als falsch und unverantwortlich bezeichnet. Näher läge, eine Vereinbarung auszuhandeln, von der beide Seiten profitieren und die Prósperas Klage über 10,7 Milliarden Dollar entschärft. „Es besteht eine gute Chance, dass die Regierung nach den Wahlen im November wechselt“, sagt Colindres. „Das ist kein Streit zwischen Próspera und der Regierung, sondern zwischen der Regierung und dem gesamten Privatsektor des Landes, dem inländischen wie dem ausländischen. Sie enteignen Energieunternehmen, Infrastrukturfirmen, die Straßen bauen oder Häfen und Flughäfen betreiben, Finanzunternehmen. Sie greifen jede Branche an. Die Regierung unterstützt bewaffnete Campesino-Gruppen, die in privates Land eindringen. Sie beschränkt den Zugang zum US-Dollar, an den der Privatsektor nicht mehr herankommt, was aus meiner Sicht schlicht politische Kontrolle ist. Und sie will alle Sondersteuerregime abschaffen, auch die traditionellen ‚Zonas Libres‘ mit über 160.000 Beschäftigten, die Tourismuszonen und Steueranreize für viele andere Branchen. Man sieht: In Honduras steht der gesamte Privatsektor unter Beschuss.“ „2021 stand Próspera ziemlich allein. Heute sind wir Teil einer nationalen Koalition, die grundlegende Standards von Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Privateigentum verteidigt.“ 2025 ist für die ZEDEs ein entscheidendes Jahr. Es stellt ihr politisches Geschick auf die Probe und ebenso die Schutzmechanismen, die man beim Aufbau des Rahmens genau für diesen Fall eingebaut hat: dass eine Regierung feindselig wird, ideologisch handelt und ihre Zusagen bricht. Bisher haben diese Mechanismen den Angriff wirksam abgefedert. Es spricht einiges dafür, dass die Zonen den Sturm überstehen und am Ende doch einlösen dürfen, wofür sie angetreten sind: mehr Freiheit und Wohlstand für die Honduraner. Aus dem Englischen übersetzt von Jan Bertram --- # The Governance Dividend: The Story of Carmel, Indiana URL: https://free-cities.org/the-governance-dividend-carmel-indiana Published: 2026-04-23 Author: Alex Voss Category: Academic Topics: private-governance, urban-design How Carmel, Indiana proves that high-quality governance is cheap when a community is coherent – a case study for the Free Cities and private governance movements. Introduction: What does good governance actually cost? Most people assume that good governance is expensive. That it demands large bureaucracies, heavy tax burdens, and a government apparatus that grows in perpetuity. Carmel, Indiana suggests they are wrong. What the Carmel experience shows instead is that when a community shares basic norms, when the physical environment is well designed, and when leadership makes deliberate choices about what to build, governance gets cheap. Surprisingly cheap. Carmel runs a city of over 105,000 people on a general fund budget of about $144 million, which works out to roughly $1,371 per resident.[1] The average American city of comparable size spends between $2,500 and $4,000 per capita.[2] Carmel regularly shows up on best-places-to-live lists from Money Magazine, Niche, and U.S. News at a fraction of what peer cities spend on governance.[3] That gap is not luck. It follows from specific design decisions, from the kind of people those decisions attract, and from an uncomfortable truth that most governments avoid: the distribution of governance problems follows a power law. This paper uses Carmel as a proof of concept for a bigger argument, one that is picking up speed through the Free Cities, charter cities, and private governance movements.[4] The argument: governance is a service. Like any service, it can be delivered well or badly. When you deliver it inside a coherent community built on sound urban principles, costs fall and quality rises. Part I: The Carmel story From bedroom community to best place to live Carmel sits just north of Indianapolis in Hamilton County. For most of the twentieth century, it was a quiet bedroom community, the kind of place people slept before commuting to their real lives in the city.[5] In 1990 it had about 25,000 residents, no real downtown, no cultural identity, and no ambition beyond being a decent place to mow a lawn. That changed when Jim Brainard won the mayor’s office in 1996. A Republican attorney who had spent time traveling in Europe, Brainard had seen what actual cities looked like: walkable streets, mixed use development, public squares where people gathered, infrastructure built for humans rather than just cars.[6] He came home and looked at Carmel as raw material. What followed was a twenty-eight year transformation that has few parallels in American municipal history.[7] Carmel grew from 25,000 to over 100,000 residents. But the real accomplishment was not the growth itself. It was how the city grew. Instead of the usual American pattern of subdivisions, arterial roads, and strip malls, Brainard pursued an urban placemaking agenda that would have raised eyebrows in Portland or Brooklyn, let alone in a conservative Indiana suburb. The Brainard vision: building a city, not a suburb Brainard grasped something that most suburban mayors miss. There is a real difference between a city and a suburb, and the distinction matters for budgets, for quality of life, and for whether a place can sustain itself over the long run. Suburbs depend on nearby cities for culture, jobs, and identity while giving back relatively little. A real city generates its own economic gravity, its own culture, its own reasons to exist. Turning Carmel from a suburb into a city meant pursuing several strategies at once, and sticking with them for decades: Brainard built a continuous walkable district centered on a former railroad corridor turned greenway, connecting the Arts and Design District, Midtown, and Carmel City Center.[8] This was a serious undertaking. It meant rezoning, buying land, assembling public-private partnerships, and maintaining a sustained commitment to mixed use, human-scale development over multiple election cycles. Then there are the roundabouts. Carmel has over 150 of them, more than any other American city.[9] They were not an aesthetic flourish. A roundabout costs about $250,000 less to build than a signalized intersection and saves over $5,000 a year in electricity alone.[10] But the safety numbers tell the real story. In 1996, Carmel had 30,000 residents and 217 traffic accidents. By 2019, 100,000 residents and fewer than 200 accidents. The population tripled; the accident count went down. While Indianapolis Mayor William Hudnut famously used sports as an economic development tool, Brainard bet on the arts. Carmel built the Center for the Performing Arts and established the Arts and Design District, now home to over 200 art and design businesses including the Indiana Design Center. Americans for the Arts estimated that Carmel’s arts venues generated $42.7 million in economic impact in 2022.[11] The park system grew from 41 acres to over 750. Well-designed parks in walkable communities tend to police themselves through constant use, which means the maintenance cost per acre stays low even as the system expands.[12] The debt question None of this was free. By 2019, Carmel carried approximately $1.3 billion in outstanding debt, the third highest of any Indiana city and about $14,145 per resident.[13] Critics raised alarms, and Standard and Poor’s dropped the city’s rating from AA+ to AA.[14] But there is a distinction that matters here: investment debt versus consumption debt. Carmel’s borrowing went into infrastructure, public spaces, and commercial development that directly grew the taxable property base. That base increased sixfold during Brainard’s tenure, from roughly $2 billion to over $12 billion.[15] The city was not borrowing to plug budget holes. It was using capital to build assets that throw off revenue. An independent review by Reedy Financial Group in 2024 concluded that the debt load was reasonable and the repayment plans were sound.[16] And here is the number that puts the debt controversy in perspective: Carmel’s property tax rate is 78 cents per $100 of assessed value, the fifth lowest in Indiana. Because commercial development carries a large share of the tax load, the average homeowner contributes less than $10 per year toward the city’s debt service. Intelligent investment in urban form, as opposed to endless suburban sprawl, generates returns that dwarf the cost of borrowing. Part II: The budget case for coherent governance What $144 million buys Carmel’s 2026 general fund budget of approximately $144 million covers the full range of municipal services for 105,000 people.[17] At roughly $1,371 per capita, here is what it covers: Category — Key Feature — 2026 Trend Public Safety (Police) — 7.9% budget increase — Expanding coverage Public Safety (Fire) — 10.2% budget increase — Growing capacity Parks & Recreation — 750+ acres, trails, programs — 6% budget increase Arts & Culture — $42.7M economic impact — Continued investment Infrastructure — 150+ roundabouts, greenways — Ongoing maintenance The budget faces new headwinds. Indiana’s Senate Enrolled Act 1, designed to lower property taxes statewide, means Carmel expects to collect $3.8 million less in tax revenue in 2026 than previously projected.[18] Mayor Sue Finkam, who succeeded Brainard in 2024, has responded with staff reductions and accelerated debt paydown while keeping investment in core services. Most city employees get a 3 percent cost of living increase; the mayor and senior leadership took no raises. The per capita comparison The numbers look even more striking in context. The average American municipality spends between $2,500 and $4,000 per capita on general fund operations.[19] Large cities spend much more. New York exceeds $12,000 per capita.[20] San Francisco exceeds $15,000.[21] These cities face different problems, granted. But even with generous adjustments for scale and complexity, the gap between Carmel and everywhere else is hard to explain away. Carmel delivers police, fire, parks, cultural programming, infrastructure maintenance, and full municipal services for $1,371 per person, and keeps showing up on national best-places-to-live lists while doing it.[22] So what makes this possible? Part III: The power law of governance problems Why most problems come from a small fraction of people The Pareto Principle, the familiar 80/20 rule, says roughly 80 percent of effects come from 20 percent of causes. In governance, the ratio is often more lopsided than that. This is not ideology; it is one of the most consistently replicated findings in criminology, public administration, and urban studies. Consider crime. In Marvin Wolfgang’s Philadelphia cohort study, 5 percent of offenders committed more than half of all crimes.[23] In Washington, D.C., about 60 to 70 percent of gun violence traces to roughly 500 individuals in a city of 700,000.[24] A 2025 study in Behavioral Sciences and the Law found that the top 20 percent of inmates were responsible for about 90 percent of prison rule violations.[25] The pattern extends to geography. David Weisburd’s work at George Mason University shows that crime clusters at specific addresses and street segments. A small number of hot spots produce the vast majority of calls for service.[26] Emergency services, code enforcement, and social services follow the same distribution. A handful of properties in any municipality can consume more public resources than whole neighborhoods. The Strong Towns movement has documented this pattern extensively.[27] What this means for community composition This is where the argument gets uncomfortable. If somewhere between 5 and 10 percent of a population generates 80 to 90 percent of governance costs, then the composition of a community is the biggest factor in determining how expensive governance needs to be. This has nothing to do with race or ethnicity in any crude sense. It is about behavioral coherence: whether residents broadly share norms around property maintenance, public conduct, and participation in civic life. Carmel is a behaviorally coherent community. Median household income is about $134,602, nearly two and a half times the national figure.[28] Residents are overwhelmingly employed, educated, and invested in where they live. The city did not get this way by putting up barriers. It got this way by building something specific and good, and letting people self-select into it. The result is a compressed power law curve. When very few residents fall into the heavy tail of the problem distribution, governance costs collapse. Fewer police are needed because there is less crime. Fewer code enforcement officers because people maintain their properties. Fewer social workers because fewer people are in crisis. The whole apparatus of government that exists to manage the consequences of dysfunction shrinks. Income alone does not explain it High income by itself does not produce low governance costs. Plenty of wealthy areas are expensive to govern because of NIMBYism, political fragmentation, or poor physical design. What matters is the alignment of residents around shared norms, combined with a physical environment that reinforces those norms. Carmel achieves that alignment through design. By building a walkable, mixed use city with good public spaces, it attracts people who want community life. By investing in arts and culture, it creates shared experiences and social capital.[29] By maintaining good schools and safe streets, it retains families who have choices and could easily live elsewhere. The physical city reinforces the social cohesion that keeps governance cheap, and the cheap governance makes the physical city affordable. Each side feeds the other. Part IV: Building a city, not a suburb The fiscal math of sprawl The fiscal case against suburban sprawl has been made before, but it still does not get the attention it deserves.[30] Cities in the most sprawling quintile spend an average of $750 per capita on public infrastructure each year, 50 percent more than the $500 per capita spent by the most compact cities.[31] For hard infrastructure like water, sewers, and roads, the lifecycle cost difference is even more extreme. Sprawl can cost up to ten times more per household than compact development. Each suburban home generates a net fiscal loss of $1,500 to $2,500 per year for local governments.[32] Tax revenue from a typical subdivision does not cover the roads, utilities, and services it requires. The shortfall gets subsidized by commercial districts and denser neighborhoods, a cross-subsidy that is invisible to most taxpayers but slowly wrecks municipal balance sheets. Sprawl also increases the cost of fire protection, police coverage, snow removal, school busing, and every other distance-dependent service by 10 to 40 percent.[33] Covering more ground for fewer people is simply more expensive. The New Climate Economy puts the total cost of sprawl in the United States at approximately $1 trillion annually when all externalities are included: infrastructure, transportation, environmental damage, health, and lost productivity.[34] How Carmel’s design cuts costs Each of Carmel’s 150-plus roundabouts saves thousands per year in electricity, signal maintenance, and accident response.[35] Because roundabouts reduce serious accidents by 72 to 80 percent, they also cut the emergency response, hospitalization, and litigation costs that follow intersection crashes.[36] Multiply those savings across 150 intersections and you have a meaningful chunk of a municipal budget. Carmel’s walkable districts produce what Jane Jacobs called “eyes on the street,” the natural surveillance that happens when buildings face sidewalks and people are out walking at all hours.[37] Crime prevention through environmental design is not a budget line in Carmel; it is baked into the streetscape. Mixed use development broadens the tax base. When commercial, residential, and cultural uses share the same walkable districts, commercial tax revenue flows from areas that might otherwise be purely residential. That is why the average Carmel homeowner pays less than $10 per year toward debt service despite the city carrying $1.3 billion in bonds.[38] And compact infrastructure is just cheaper to maintain. Shorter road networks, denser utility connections, concentrated service areas. When you are not maintaining miles of cul-de-sacs serving a few dozen homes, the public works budget stretches further.[39] The architecture of community The case for urban design goes beyond fiscal efficiency, though. The physical form of a place shapes the relationships people form, which in turn shapes what governance costs. Suburban sprawl isolates people. They drive from garage to destination and back, rarely running into neighbors. That isolation erodes social capital and shifts the burden of maintaining order from the community to formal government.[40] Urban form does the opposite. When people walk to restaurants, bump into neighbors at the farmers market, linger in public squares, and share trails, they build relationships. They develop shared stakes. Ray Oldenburg called the informal gathering spots that enable this “third places”: neither home nor work, but the cafes, parks, and public spaces where civic life actually happens.[41] This informal social infrastructure is what allows Carmel to run at $1,371 per capita. The community itself handles a large share of what formal government would otherwise have to manage. That insight, that the physical design of a community is inseparable from how much it costs to govern, is underappreciated in policy circles. And it is central to the question investors and city builders care about most: can you replicate this? Part V: What Carmel teaches us about building new cities Governance as a design problem A growing global movement takes the Carmel lesson seriously. The Free Cities and charter cities movements, private governance theorists, and new urbanists come at it from different directions, but they agree on the core point: governance is not something you inherit and endure; it is a design problem you can solve.[42] Paul Romer argued in his influential 2010 paper that new cities built on new charters with new rules offer the most practical route to governance reform, because they bypass the political impossibility of reforming institutions that already exist.[43] The mechanics are straightforward. A governance service provider, whether private, public-private, or a special authority, acquires or receives the right to develop and administer a defined territory. Rules come from a charter or contract rather than inherited legislative efforts. Residents opt in voluntarily, choosing that governance framework because it beats the alternatives.[44] This is what already happens informally every time someone chooses to move to Carmel instead of a less well-run municipality. Charles Tiebout laid the theoretical groundwork in 1956, arguing that people “vote with their feet” among competing local governments and that this competition drives efficiency.[45] Carmel is a Tiebout success story. It offered a better governance product, and people moved toward it. The Free Cities movement asks the obvious follow-up: what if you designed for that outcome from the start, instead of hoping it would emerge by accident? The physical environment comes first If Carmel teaches one non-negotiable lesson, it is that the physical environment is not secondary to governance. It is the foundation. Every decision about street layout, building form, land use, and public space has downstream effects on costs, cohesion, and quality of life. A new city project that skips serious urban design is building failure into its DNA. Carmel validates several specific design principles for new cities: Walkability has to be the default, not an afterthought. Mixed use zoning as the norm, streets designed for pedestrians first. Carmel’s greenway corridor, connecting neighborhoods, commercial areas, and cultural venues in a continuous walkable network, should be the template. The fiscal math backs it up: walkable communities cost 40 to 60 percent less per capita to service than car-dependent ones.[46] Roundabouts over signals, everywhere the geometry allows. Carmel’s roundabout program is not a quirk. Every signal where a roundabout would work represents a choice for higher construction costs, higher operating costs, more accidents, and worse traffic flow. The roundabout embodies a broader design philosophy: build the system right and you do not need to babysit it forever.[47] Mixed use over single use zoning. The American pattern of separating residential, commercial, and industrial areas into isolated zones is the most expensive land use approach there is. It forces people into cars, stretches infrastructure across huge distances, and kills the street life that generates social capital. New cities should default to mixed use and let natural integration happen. Public space should be treated as infrastructure, not decoration. Carmel’s parks, plazas, trails, and performance venues generate economic activity, social cohesion, and the kind of informal community presence that substitutes for policing and social services. Every dollar spent on well-designed public space reduces future spending on formal governance.[48] Architecture matters too. There is a measurable difference between a place and a non-place. A place has character and generates attachment. A non-place, a strip mall, a parking lot, a featureless subdivision, generates nothing. New cities need architectural standards that create places people want to be: varied facades, human-scale proportions, active ground floors. Carmel’s Arts and Design District exists because of deliberate standards, not because it happened naturally. Building a coherent community by design The second big lesson from Carmel: community coherence can be cultivated rather than imposed. For new city projects, this resolves what might otherwise be an awkward tension between the power law argument and a genuine commitment to openness. Carmel did not screen its residents or impose income requirements. It built something specific and excellent, and let self-selection do the work. People drawn to walkable urbanism, cultural amenities, good schools, and well-maintained public spaces tend to be people who contribute positively to community life. The built environment acts as a filter, not by keeping people out but by attracting people who share a particular set of civic values. For new city projects, this suggests several approaches: The Citizen Contract model, drawn from the private governance literature, formalizes what Carmel does informally. A contract spells out the rights and obligations of both the governance provider and the resident.[49] Think of it as a homeowners’ association covenant scaled up to the city level, but with real services delivered in return. Making norms explicit, rather than leaving them implicit, builds coherence from day one. Quality itself is a selection mechanism. The single most effective way to attract a coherent community is to build something worth being coherent about. Carmel’s investment in arts, culture, parks, and walkable design was not charity. It was a filter. People who move to a city with a performing arts center and a walkable downtown differ, in ways that matter for governance costs, from people who move somewhere because the land is cheap and nobody asks anything of them. New city projects should invest in quality early, understanding that the investment is what generates the population mix that makes everything else affordable. Graduated development matters. Carmel did not transform overnight. It took twenty-eight years. New cities should build the core urban district first and expand outward as norms solidify. Elinor Ostrom’s work on commons governance shows that small, face-to-face communities develop effective norms much more readily than large, anonymous ones.[50] Starting small and growing deliberately is not a limitation; it is a strategy for building social infrastructure that scales. Residents need skin in the game. Homeownership, local business investment, school enrollment, civic participation: all of these give residents a stake that aligns their interests with the community’s welfare. New cities should structure ownership so that residents have genuine equity in the project’s success, whether through property, cooperative governance, or contractual profit sharing with the governance provider. The economics of new city governance Carmel’s $1,371 per capita cost should discipline every new city project’s financial planning. If a well-run American city of 105,000 can deliver excellent services at that number, then a purpose-built new city with better infrastructure and a contractually coherent community ought to match or beat it.[51] The economic model, drawing on Carmel, looks roughly like this: Cost Category — Carmel Lesson Infrastructure Capital — Invest heavily upfront in walkable, mixed use urban form. Carmel borrowed $1.3B and generated a 6x return in taxable property value. Operating Costs — Design the physical environment to minimize ongoing costs: roundabouts over signals, compact over sprawling, walkable over car-dependent. Target $1,000-$1,500 per capita. Public Safety — Community coherence plus environmental design dramatically reduces demand. Carmel’s crime rate is a fraction of comparable cities. Arts & Culture — Not optional. $42.7M in annual economic impact from Carmel’s arts venues. Culture is the most cost-effective community building investment. Revenue Model — Mixed use development generates commercial tax revenue that subsidizes residential rates. Carmel homeowners pay <$10/year toward $1.3B in debt service. The financial lesson from Carmel, put simply: governance costs are not driven by the services you provide. They are driven by the problems you have to manage. A coherent community in a well-designed environment has fewer problems and therefore needs less government. That is the governance dividend, and it is available to anyone willing to design for it. Why this moment matters The window for building new cities is wider than it has been in generations. In the United States, the American Enterprise Institute published a 2025 blueprint identifying potential sites for twenty new cities on federal land.[52] Internationally, dozens of charter city and special economic zone projects are in various stages across Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. The design knowledge exists. The governance models exist. The technology exists. What has been lacking is proof that the approach works, a real community with auditable budgets and measurable outcomes showing that quality governance in a well-designed physical environment is cheap. Carmel is that proof. It was not designed as a demonstration project. It was not bankrolled by a tech billionaire or built on empty land. It was an ordinary Indiana suburb that was transformed through purposeful leadership, intelligent design, and a willingness to invest in the things that make communities function. If an Indiana suburb managed this within the constraints of the existing American municipal system, with property tax caps, state mandates, election cycles, and bureaucratic friction, then a purpose-built new city designed from scratch, with the right governance structure, the right physical form, and the right community compact, can do it better and at lower cost. Conclusion: The governance dividend The governance dividend is the idea that better governance does not just save money; it creates compounding returns that make a community richer, safer, and more attractive over time. Carmel’s trajectory from a forgettable bedroom community to one of the best places to live in America, at a per capita cost well below the national average, is that dividend made concrete. How do you get there? You build a real city. Walkable, mixed use, human scale, with public spaces and architecture that people actually want to spend time around. That physical form cuts infrastructure costs, throws off commercial revenue, and creates the social fabric that does half of governance’s job for free. Then you cultivate community coherence, not with gates or income tests, but with quality. Build something good enough that it attracts people who care about where they live. Finally, govern with intention. Make design choices that compound over decades. Invest in assets that pay for themselves. Measure success not by how much you spend, but by what quality of life a given dollar buys. When those elements line up, governance gets remarkably cheap. $1,371 per person, per year. That number deserves to be posted on the wall of every city hall, every charter city boardroom, and every Free City planning office in the world. It is what governance costs when a community is coherent, when the physical environment makes sense, and when leaders grasp that the best government is the one with the least to do, because the community it serves was designed to mostly govern itself. References • City of Carmel, Indiana. “2026 Proposed Budget.” carmel.in.gov/government/departments-services/finance/city-budget • U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2022. • Money Magazine, “Best Places to Live,” 2020; Niche.com, “Best Places to Live in America,” 2024; U.S. News & World Report, “Best Places to Live,” 2023. • Gebel, Titus. Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You. 3rd Edition, Aquila Urbis, 2021. See also Charter Cities Institute, chartercitiesinstitute.org; Free Cities Foundation, free-cities.org. • City of Carmel, “History.” carmel.in.gov/our-city/history • Governing Magazine, “Meet the Mayor Who Totally Transformed His City.” governing.com • You Are Current, “Student of the City: Retiring mayor credits constant study, top consultants as key in Carmel’s transformation,” November 2023. • Indianapolis Business Journal, “Jim Brainard looks back on 28 years as Carmel mayor,” 2023. • Indiana University Environmental Resilience Institute, “Carmel Indiana Roundabouts.” eri.iu.edu/erit/case-studies/carmel-indiana-roundabouts.html • Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, “Roundabouts: Status Report,” Vol. 36, No. 8. See also Congress for the New Urbanism, “How roundabouts transformed Carmel,” November 2024. • Americans for the Arts, “Arts & Economic Prosperity 6: Carmel, Indiana,” 2023. • Jim Brainard, interview with Indianapolis Business Journal, November 2023. See also City of Carmel Parks Department annual report. • Indianapolis Monthly, “Does Carmel Have a Spending Problem?” 2019. • Standard & Poor’s Global Ratings, City of Carmel Rating Action, 2019. • Hamilton County Assessor, Assessed Valuation Reports, 1996-2024. See also Indianapolis Business Journal, “Extent of Carmel borrowing unusual for Indiana,” 2018. • You Are Current, “Independent review of Carmel debt raises no red flags,” September 2024. • City of Carmel, Indiana. “2026 Proposed Budget.” See also Read the Reporter, “Carmel City Council unanimously approves $144 million 2026 budget,” 2025. • Indiana Legislative Services Agency, Senate Enrolled Act 1 Fiscal Impact Analysis, 2025. See also WTHR, “Carmel unveils 2026 budget, accounting for close to $10 million less in state property tax,” 2025. • U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2022. Analysis of per capita general fund expenditures for cities of 50,000-200,000 population. • New York City Office of Management and Budget, Adopted Budget Fiscal Year 2025. • San Francisco Controller’s Office, Six-Month Budget Status Report, FY 2024-2025. • Niche.com ranked Carmel #4 in “Best Places to Live in America” for 2024. Money Magazine named Carmel the #1 Best Place to Live in the U.S. in 2012. • Wolfgang, Marvin, Robert Figlio, and Thorsten Sellin. Delinquency in a Birth Cohort. University of Chicago Press, 1972. • Thomas Abt, Bleeding Out: The Devastating Consequences of Urban Violence. Basic Books, 2019. See also National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, “Gun Violence in America,” 2022. • Morgan et al., “Pareto in Prison: Power Law Distributions in Rule Violations.” Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 2025. • Weisburd, David. “The Law of Crime Concentration and the Criminology of Place.” Criminology 53, no. 2 (2015): 133-157. • Strong Towns, “The Growth Ponzi Scheme,” 2020. strongtowns.org. See also ASU Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, “Learn if the 80-20 rule applies.” • U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Carmel, Indiana, 2023. National median household income was $74,580. • Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster, 2000. • Burchell, Robert W. et al. Sprawl Costs: Economic Impacts of Unchecked Development. Island Press, 2005. • Smart Growth America and LOCUS, “Building Better Budgets: A National Examination of the Fiscal Benefits of Smart Growth Development,” 2013. • Strong Towns, “The Real Cost of Auto-Oriented Development,” 2020. See also Urban3 fiscal productivity analyses, urban-three.com. • Litman, Todd. “Analysis of Public Policies That Unintentionally Encourage and Subsidize Urban Sprawl.” Victoria Transport Policy Institute for LSE Cities, 2015. • New Climate Economy, “The Economic Risks of Climate Change in the United States,” 2015. See also Burchfield, Marcy et al., “Causes of Sprawl.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 121, no. 2 (2006). • Indiana University Environmental Resilience Institute, “Carmel Indiana Roundabouts.” See also Federal Highway Administration, “Roundabouts: An Informational Guide,” NCHRP Report 672. • Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, “Roundabouts reduce injury crashes by 72-80% at intersections where stop signs or signals were previously used.” • Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, 1961. • Hamilton County Assessor data. See also Indianapolis Monthly, “Does Carmel Have a Spending Problem?” 2019: “Because much of the city’s budget is paid by commercial taxes, the average residential property owner owes less than $10 toward the debt per year.” • Strong Towns, “What Strong Towns Really Says About Infrastructure Spending,” 2024. strongtowns.org • Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone, 2000. See also Hart, Roger. “Children’s Participation.” UNICEF, 1992, on how walkable neighborhoods foster civic engagement from childhood. • Oldenburg, Ray. The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. Marlowe & Company, 1989. • Charter Cities Institute, “Introduction to Charter Cities.” chartercitiesinstitute.org. See also Lutter, Mark. “Building the Charter Cities Ecosystem,” marklutter.com. • Romer, Paul. “Technologies, Rules, and Progress: The Case for Charter Cities.” Center for Global Development, 2010. • Free Cities Foundation, “What Are Free Cities?” free-cities.org/concepts. See also Gebel, Titus. Free Private Cities, 3rd Edition, 2021. • Tiebout, Charles M. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.” Journal of Political Economy 64, no. 5 (1956): 416-424. • Smart Growth America, “Building Better Budgets,” 2013. See also Ewing, Reid and Robert Cervero, “Travel and the Built Environment,” Journal of the American Planning Association 76, no. 3 (2010). • Federal Highway Administration, “Roundabouts: An Informational Guide,” NCHRP Report 672, 2010. See also Indiana University Environmental Resilience Institute case study. • Americans for the Arts, “Arts & Economic Prosperity 6,” 2023. Nationally, nonprofit arts organizations generated $151.7 billion in economic activity in 2022. • Gebel, Titus. Free Private Cities, 2021, Chapter 4: “The Citizen Contract.” The contract specifies mutual rights and obligations between governance provider and resident. • Ostrom, Elinor. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press, 1990. • Kling, Arnold and Nick Schulz. Invisible Wealth: The Hidden Story of How Markets Work. Encounter Books, 2011. See also Coase, Ronald. “The Nature of the Firm.” Economica 4, no. 16 (1937). • American Enterprise Institute Housing Center, “Homesteading 2.0: A Blueprint for New Cities on Federal Land,” April 2025. --- # Johannes Kaiser Interview: Free Cities in Libertarian Chile URL: https://free-cities.org/johannes-kaiser-interview-free-cities-libertarian-chile Published: 2026-07-29 Author: Jan Bertram Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance Can you fight the state by becoming the state? It is the one question every political libertarian has to answer, and Johannes Kaiser has heard it more often than most. Last November, the leader of Chile’s National Libertarian Party won 14 percent of the vote in the country’s presidential election, one of the strongest results a libertarian party has ever achieved anywhere in a national first round. A few months later, we found ourselves sitting across from him at a lakeside campground in eastern Germany, asking him exactly that question. His answer was blunt: "It’s like you’re going to go to Adams or Jefferson and say, you know what, if you make a revolution against the king, you’re the king. Come on. That’s stupid." In this interview, Kaiser explains why libertarianism is winning elections in Latin America while it stagnates elsewhere, why he believes the moral argument beats the economic one, and, for the first time in detail, how he would respond as a head of state if someone proposed building a Free City in Chile. Watch the full conversation below, or read on for the background, the highlights, and the complete transcript. Who Is Johannes Kaiser? Johannes Kaiser Barents-von Hohenhagen is a Chilean congressman, the founder and leader of the National Libertarian Party (Partido Nacional Libertario), and was one of the defining figures of Chile’s 2025 presidential election. Born in Santiago in 1976 into a German-Chilean family, he built his political base not through party machines but through a YouTube channel, El Nacional-Libertario, where he spent years making the case for individual liberty, free markets, and national sovereignty to a growing online audience. That digital following carried him into the Chilean Chamber of Deputies in 2021. In 2024 he founded the National Libertarian Party, whose growth since then has been remarkable. As Kaiser notes in our interview, it now counts more than 50,000 members, making it the second largest party in Chile by membership, and it holds eight seats in the Chamber of Deputies and one seat in the Senate. In the presidential election of November 2025, Kaiser finished fourth in a crowded field with roughly 14 percent of the vote. For a party that was barely a year and a half old on election day, it was a breakthrough result, and it established Kaiser as the leading voice of principled libertarianism in Chilean politics. The Kaiser Family: A Libertarian Force in Chilean Politics Johannes Kaiser is not the only member of his family shaping Chile’s libertarian moment, the Kaisers work in something like a division of labor for the movement. His brother Axel, one of the most influential libertarian intellectuals in the Spanish-speaking world and a longtime leading figure of the Santiago-based think tank Fundación para el Progreso, spent more than a decade building the cultural and intellectual case for free markets that Johannes would later run on: the candidate could harvest what the intellectual had sown. Their sister Vanessa, elected in November 2025 as the first libertarian senator in Chile’s history, delivered the party’s Senate seat that Johannes mentions in this interview. Behind the Scenes: A Weekend at Afuera Fest 2026 This conversation happened at Afuera Fest 2026, a three-day libertarian festival held at a lakeside campground in Gerlebogk, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. Inspired by New Hampshire’s legendary PorcFest and named after Javier Milei’s favorite one-word verdict on wasteful ministries, Afuera Fest brings together the German-speaking liberty movement for talks, workshops, music, and long nights of debate around the campfire. Kaiser flew in from Santiago as one of the festival’s headline guests, and we at the Free Cities Foundation spent the whole weekend with him. What does not make it into the camera frame: hours of private discussion about political strategy, the state of the West, and the question of how much freedom a single politician can actually deliver. Kaiser is exactly the same person off camera as on camera, which is rarer among politicians than you might hope. He debates for the joy of it, quotes Jefferson and Mises from memory, and answers to his principles rather than to the speech codes and expectations that usually come with political office: what he believes is what he argues, camera or no camera. One theme kept coming back throughout the weekend, and it is worth understanding before you watch the interview, because it explains almost everything about how Kaiser does politics. The Moral Case for Libertarianism "If somebody comes to you and takes money from you, gives you nothing in exchange, well, it’s stealing from you." The logic is simple, and Kaiser credits the same insight for Milei’s success in Argentina: taxation that takes from people who work in order to feed a political class is not presented as inefficient, it is presented as wrong. "We have taken a moral stance on these issues," he told us. "The other side doesn’t have much to oppose it with, because the moment you reduce it to the basics, it’s true." For Kaiser, this is not primarily a promise of better outcomes. It is a vision of a better society grounded in moral principles: a society where families educate their children in the values they see fit, where speech and faith are free, and where the state is restrained from entering the parts of life where, in his words, it has no business. He argues that libertarian parties in Latin America succeed precisely because they stopped fighting on economics alone and caught up with the left on the level of values and culture. The lesson he offers European and North American libertarians is uncomfortable but clear: people do not man the barricades for efficiency gains. They fight for what they believe is right. Interview Highlights Why libertarianism is winning in Latin America Kaiser argues that Latin American libertarian parties differ from their counterparts in Europe and the United States because they fight on social and cultural questions, not only economics. In Chile, the violent unrest of 2019 was the turning point: his movement became the hardest opposition to what he calls an attack on the democratic system, online and on the streets, and converted that resistance into votes. Is entering politics un-libertarian? Asked whether becoming the state betrays libertarian principles, Kaiser rejects the premise entirely. There is no territory on earth without a power structure, he argues, so the only real question is what kind of power structure you will live under. Libertarians who refuse to engage are, in his view, avoiding responsibility: "You cannot get rid of it. What do you do? That’s the question we have to answer." His goal in office would not be to do good with power but to restrain it, to take the weapon of power and, as he puts it, keep it safe from children who believe they can fix the world by force of will. A Hong Kong on your own shores: Kaiser on Free Cities The heart of the interview for our community: how does a potential head of state think about Free Cities? Kaiser sees the opportunity clearly, a low-regulation core that develops at a different velocity than the rest of the country and becomes a hub of wealth creation radiating outward. He points to historical precedents like Hong Kong and Macau and proposes a concrete model: not selling territory, but renting it, under a carefully negotiated legal framework that grants broad autonomy while the host state keeps defense, sovereignty, and a guaranteed minimum tax paid to the motherland. "Where can you build a Free City, if not in a country that has a state that allows a Free City?" He is equally clear about the limits. Permanently ceding sovereignty is politically impossible, and constitutional human rights protections such as the right to life and free speech would have to apply inside any Chilean Free City. Within those limits, though, his verdict is remarkable for a sitting congressman and presidential contender: can it be done? "I think yes." The next decade Kaiser sees a fractured West, with some countries recovering their sanity and others sinking deeper into what he calls madness. But he reads the current wave of state pressure on dissenters as evidence that the freedom movement is winning the argument. His time horizon is long: "It may not be my generation that is finally successful. But we will have successes. And we’re showing success now." Full Interview Transcript The following transcript has been lightly edited for readability. Jan Bertram interviews Johannes Kaiser for the Free Cities Foundation at Afuera Fest 2026 in Gerlebogk, Germany. Jan Bertram: Hello Johannes, nice to meet you. Johannes was a presidential candidate in Chile last year. He got 14 percent in the presidential election, and he is the leader of the National Libertarian Party. Today he is joining us here in Germany at the Afuera Fest, which is a local libertarian festival. You traveled here from Chile. Johannes, what brought you here? Johannes Kaiser: Oh, you know, it is very important to get some connections with the rest of the world. We are not fighting this fight alone. We have an adversary, an enemy, that is interconnected and works together on a global basis. So we have to do the same. And to do that, we have to plant the seeds for this kind of cooperation. Jan Bertram: Absolutely. And it is amazing to see the kind of libertarian wave that is going through Latin America. We have Milei in Argentina, we have huge successes in Brazil, and now you just recently founded the National Libertarian Party. How long have you been actively involved in politics in Chile? Johannes Kaiser: Actively involved around four or five years, from the point I joined the Republican Party in Chile. I was elected as a congressman and then split from the Republican Party due to ideological differences, and started to build up the National Libertarian Party one and a half years ago. And we had a very good run for being so young. We have over 50,000 members, which makes us the second biggest party in the country by number of members. We have eight congresspeople now in Parliament and one senator. Jan Bertram: Out of how many in total, just to give our audience an idea? Johannes Kaiser: There are 155 congressmen in Parliament and 50 in the Senate. But only half of the Senate was renewed last election. So I think we did a good job here. Jan Bertram: That sounds like a tremendous success. Why do you think libertarian politics is finally starting to gain momentum? It is a relatively new phenomenon to see libertarian parties gaining substantial electoral results. Why is it happening now? Johannes Kaiser: First, you have to understand that the libertarian parties in Latin America are a little different from those in Europe and the United States. We have made it part of our discourse that it is not only about economics, but also about social and value questions. That means we have finally caught up with the left, which has been working on this level all along. That is the first thing. Second, the states in Latin America: Argentina had completely failed. Brazil is stable, but not too stable, and you have a huge rise of a mixture between the religious right and the libertarian right that somehow works together up to a certain point. It is very strange to observe. And in Chile, we had the revolution of 2019, where all the masks of the left fell. The reaction was very strong, and through our digital presence we were able to channel much of the discontent with this attack on our democratic system. We were the hardest opposition to that revolution, on the internet and also on the streets. That is what we capitalized on. We mobilized a lot of people. Jan Bertram: From your experience in political activism and campaigning, what are the messages that resonate best with your voters, or with people in general? Johannes Kaiser: First, that libertarianism is a moral stance. You have to listen to Milei: taking from people who work to give it to people who are just in the state is an immoral thing to do. It is not good. It is stealing, and stealing is not good. We have taken a moral stance on these issues, and the other side does not have much to oppose it with, because the moment you reduce it to the basics, it is true. If somebody comes to you and takes money from you and gives you nothing in exchange, well, it is stealing from you. And lots of people are understanding that. They are also understanding how their freedoms are being eroded. The freedom to educate their children in the values they see fit. The freedom of speech, of faith. All of these freedoms have been curtailed by a left that has become more totalitarian day by day, supposedly in defense of minorities, but in effect suppressing the rights of the majority. And we are making the argument for majority government, to defend majority interests. Why? Because in every majority, minorities are also included. If you make politics for the entire Chilean people, it also benefits gay people, women, everybody. Everybody benefits if you make politics for the entire country. That is something that has been lost on the left. The idea of supporting big majorities of the population has been given up in favor of defending the little interests of small, very active, and very vocal political activist groups. Jan Bertram: So you are claiming that if you are elected, you are going to do good for the people. But many libertarians would probably reject the premise of joining the House of Cards game and becoming a politician in the first place. Johannes Kaiser: I am not claiming I will do good for the people. I am claiming I will restrain the state from going into those parts of society where the state has no business. The state does not have to tell you how to teach your children, or what to tell your children, or what to believe, or how to speak, or things like that. We are talking about going into power to take the weapon of power and keep it safe from children. Children, because that is what leftists are: children who think they can fix the world just with their will, and that there is always somebody who is the bad guy, and that is why the world is not perfect. That is not true. It is a childish way of seeing the world, and this child with weapons and power is very, very dangerous. Jan Bertram: Nevertheless, many would claim that joining this game, switching sides and becoming the state, is in itself quite un-libertarian. What is your personal view on that? Johannes Kaiser: It is not. It is like going to Adams or Jefferson and saying: you know what, if you make a revolution against the king, you are the king. Come on. That is stupid. The state is an organization that you cannot simply get rid of, because where there is no state, two days later a new one has imposed itself onto the territory. There is no such thing as a territory where human beings live that is not under some sort of power structure. So the question is: what kind of power structure will you have in your territory? And that is the point where libertarians have to take responsibility and not be childish. That means: okay, you cannot get rid of it. What do you do? That is the question we have to answer. We always have to be the force pushing against totalitarianism, always pushing for more freedom. The way is the target: advancing in that direction is the win. And if it is just two centimeters, it is better than everything we have lived through in our lives. In the last 40 years we have lost so many freedoms. The state is omnipresent, everywhere. When we can push it back just a little, we have already won something. And if you do not want to push because you are too lazy, or you think you are not good enough to do it, well, then we will keep losing. I do not like to lose. Jan Bertram: Well, I understand. But the answer we at the Free Cities Foundation are giving to the question of the governance structure is, of course, to build more Free Cities. Johannes Kaiser: That is great. But I will tell you: by building a Free City, you will not get rid of governments. You will do it with the allowance of some government that says: you know what, let us do it. You will be free in our territory. But you will still have to get protection and defense. And if you do not have it, well, somebody else will occupy or buy the state, especially if it is economically successful. So where can you build a Free City, if not in a country that has a state that allows a Free City? Jan Bertram: Absolutely. And that is kind of the reason we are sitting here together. Usually at the Free Cities Foundation we speak to builders, to people who want to build a Free City, to community leaders. We speak to people who support building Free Cities by contributing their workforce or their investment capability. But we rarely have the opportunity to speak to politicians who would potentially be willing to support such a cause from the side of a host nation. So, given you were in a decision-making position and people approached you to build a Free City in your country, what would you say, hypothetically? Where do you see the opportunities? Where do you see the political risks? Share your point of view on the whole topic from the politician’s side. Johannes Kaiser: Well, the opportunity is to have a core that develops at another velocity than the main country, with fewer regulations and probably a very, very dynamic inner life. That means a hub of wealth creation. That is the interesting thing for a country. The problem, or the question, would be: okay, which laws will apply? You have your own laws? That is logical if you want to have a Free City, at least to some degree. Then we have to come to some agreements, and that would be a very hard negotiation. For example, and I am just taking the argument to the extreme: we could not have a Free City where the law allows slave trade. No chance. Because we do not give up defense or sovereignty, we as a country would then be responsible for what is done there. So there are limits to the autonomy that can be given. Can it be done? I think yes. Maybe in a system of concessions, like in the very old German Empire, or in China during the colonization process. Think about Macau or Hong Kong. You could advance something in that direction. But I tell you what, it would be a huge legal challenge to reach that kind of decision. And the other thing: somebody has to pay for it. There is no free money. Jan Bertram: Well, I think this is where the operator would take care of bringing in investments, which is one of the arguments governments usually respond very well to: getting more foreign direct investment. On the other hand, from working in Free Cities and talking to governments, it often seems much easier to convince the politicians than to convince the voters of the politicians. Politicians are often on board, they like our idea, but they push back and say it will be quite hard to sell to voters. So what do you think about this whole notion of states allowing Free Cities with a larger degree of autonomy within their borders? How do you sell it to the crowd? Johannes Kaiser: I think as long as you have a kind of rent, not selling, but renting a part of the territory for this experiment, we could get people to accept it, especially if you confront them with the possibility of having a sort of Hong Kong on your own shores. You know what I mean? This hub of development would radiate into the country. I think you could do that. What is impossible is to give up sovereignty or a part of the country permanently. That is a no. I think it is absolutely impossible to convince people to do something like that. But a rent, and a finely developed legal framework that gives enough autonomy to the Free City but keeps certain central rights protected. It has to be an agreement. The way out could be, for example, a minimum tax that has to be paid to the motherland, and the rest can be decided within the autonomous zone. I think it is possible. But, for example, the right to life, free speech, things like that: I do not think we could ask for a legal reform that would allow these human rights not to be protected by the Constitution in some part of our territory. Jan Bertram: Well, that is what some others have as their political concepts. But we at the Free Cities Foundation lean quite heavily towards having rather more than less of these rights. So I agree. Johannes Kaiser: But do not forget, a lot of these things also have to do with the understanding of power, who takes the final decision, and whether the people will be protected or not. It is more a question of trust, and of the Free City not developing too far away from the main country on certain matters of principle. I am not speaking about administration or things like that, but about certain matters of principle. I mean, if you want to introduce Sharia law, I do not know. Jan Bertram: Well, personally, I would say that the Free City needs to blend into the culture of the country. Johannes Kaiser: That is what I am trying to explain to you. Less regulation, perfect. But you have to have a system for resolving disputes. And you have to work out how you handle the control of imports and exports from the Free City into the country itself. Jan Bertram: You are clearly not on the Free City path yourself. You want to become president. So I assume we are going to see you make a free country instead. Are you going to reenter the next election race? Johannes Kaiser: The whole of Chile has to become a Free City. Jan Bertram: That is a little bit what Milei is also claiming for Argentina, and it is one of the reasons why he has pushed back on Free Cities. His overarching goal is, of course, the same as what you are saying: he wants to make Argentina a better place. But the question is to what degree an elected politician can change the trajectory of his country, and many politicians have not lived up to expectations. So how do you see your own engagement in politics in this regard? Why do you think you are going to make the impact that other leaders have failed to deliver? Johannes Kaiser: I do not think, I just do. I do not go in expecting success. We just work for it. And if we can advance in some part of the legal system, or in the culture war, we have already won. Not a big win, but a win. We are not looking for a utopia. We are just fighting to get there. I would say the ones who do not advance things are those who are more interested in achieving things fast than in just doing the work. It may not be my generation that is finally successful. Jan Bertram: Well, Thomas Jefferson said that every generation has to fight for its freedom. Johannes Kaiser: Yes. It may not be my generation that is finally successful. But we will have successes, and we are showing success now. We stopped the most extremist left you have seen in Chile in a very long time. Very, very violent. We stopped them in their tracks. We are pushing them back. We are getting our country back. And yes, the current government is not even soft in the way we would like for our taste, but we are pushing the government in the right direction too. And we have successes to show. Jan Bertram: And in global terms, or at least regional terms: we saw some successes in the battle for freedom, and we saw some pushback against leftist ideas. What do you envision for the next decade, not only in Chile, but in Latin America and the global West? Where do you see the trajectory? Is it going up, is it going down? What is your gut feeling, your educated guess? Johannes Kaiser: My gut feeling is that we have different trajectories. The Western world is fractured. You have some parts of the world that are recovering, and others that are just sinking more and more into madness. I would say, if in the next ten years we can all agree again that man is a sexual description of a human being and not just an identification, we would be more or less back where we were at the time of Adam and Eve. But if we could just go back to rational thinking in society, then the rest of the road is paved for success. I think we are advancing in that direction. What we are living through now, this very strong pushback of state power against dissenters, shows that we are winning the argument. Again, they have nothing else to show than brute force to try to shut down dissenters. And if we can keep going, take this brute force away from them, put it into a basket and lock it away, we will win. Jan Bertram: Well, first they ignore you, then they fight you, and then they say they were with you all along. We are certainly at the stage where they have started pushing back much harder than before, and I think you can see that in many Western countries. Johannes Kaiser: Yes. The opposition, the Germans, are packing their bags and moving away. And we do not shoot them in the back as you used to do. So, well, I would be proud of that. Jan Bertram: That is nicely said. It is interesting, though, to see that things are certainly moving in a better direction. I have witnessed this myself over the last 15 years, and so have you, probably. But we are not back at the level of the 2000s. Johannes Kaiser: The left pushed us way over the edge. To go back to the year 2000 would be a huge success. We would be back on top. But it will be hard work, and it is very much about the people leading this journey. Jan Bertram: It has been very interesting talking to you because, like I said, usually we do not meet many politicians who advocate for freedom so strongly. Johannes Kaiser: Yes, most do not advocate for freedom at all. Jan Bertram: And it is always interesting to find potential allies on all sides for our cause, because there is always some form of government. Our model is having Free Cities decentralize governance and provide opportunities by privatizing governance. But there also needs to be some form of support from traditional governments to allow Free Cities to exist. --- # The Dawn of Liberland URL: https://free-cities.org/the-dawn-of-liberland Published: 2024-07-22 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: micronations, private-governance, history-of-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland The way to Liberland is easy but not simple. Technically speaking, it’s just a short bike ride away from the nearest village on a comfortable bike path through a stunning forest known as the “Amazon of Europe”. On one side, one senses the presence of the mighty Danube River beyond the tall trees, and on the other stretch the farmlands of north-eastern Croatia. Then you take a left turn to a straight forest path, ride all the way to the end, and after a few bends on the track, you will have entered “the promised land”. The part that is not simple is that Croatia both does and does not consider Gornja Siga (the local name for the area we now refer to as Liberland) to be its territory – depending on who you ask. This means that along the picturesque bike path, you will almost certainly encounter a border police patrol car, and, depending on whether you seem to them like you’re affiliated with Liberland, they will tell you to stop and hand over your ID. They run it through their system and, if you’re lucky enough to be a citizen of the EU, they let you pass. If you’re not and you give them a non-EU passport, they will ask you to come to the station with them to “determine the circumstances of your stay in Croatia.” You will then be issued with paperwork telling you to leave the country within the next 7 days, banning you from re-entering in the next 1-3 months. The official reasoning they’ll give for this is their reasonable suspicion that you have not come to Croatia as a tourist but with the intent to either do paid work (for which you would have to get a business/work visa) or to break the law (such as camping outside designated camping grounds or starting a fire in the forest). All of this is part of a big game of chess that is being played out between Croatia and the Liberlanders. Croatia is in a tricky spot. They cannot properly administer the territory of Liberland and enforce its law in it – lest it would create an indication that the Croatian state officially claims it as its territory. However, they cannot not administer it either, since it’s on “their” side of the river, and it is risky for a rogue, unpredictable operation (from their perspective) like the establishment and growth of Liberland to just be left to its own devices right on their doorstep. This is, then, how we arrive at the status quo, with Croatia relating to Liberland in some way while being careful about the international perception of its action in another way. The resulting practice is a persistent harassment campaign toward the Liberlanders, with the apparent intent to create uncertainty and lower the appetite of potential Liberland settlers for this kind of adventure. How to Establish a New Country Liberland was born from an anomaly – a historical border dispute between Croatia and Serbia. The dispute involves the definition of where the border stands in relation to the Danube and goes back to 1947. Then, both lands along the river belonged to a single country – Yugoslavia – but the dispute arose with respect to the boundaries of its constituent states. It remained unresolved during the communist era and became an issue of international borders after the breakup of Yugoslavia. Serbia claims that the border runs down the middle of the Danube, with the eastern bank being Serbian and the western bank Croatian. Croatia, on the other hand, claims that the border is set by historical borders marked by cadastral municipalities surrounding the Danube. These municipality borders run along a different path because they were set before the course of the Danube was straightened during the 19th Century to allow for easier shipping. This results in disputed “pockets” of land on both sides of the river. The pockets on the eastern bank have a combined area of around 130 km2, while those on the western bank only amount to less than 10 km2. Not surprisingly, then, both countries claim that the border runs in a way where they get the >90% of land and the other country only gets the small remaining areas. However, this means that, by implication, since both countries are claiming the large areas, neither of them is claiming the smaller ones. These areas were, then, so-called terra nullius. Under international law, there is no issue with any state claiming unowned and unclaimed land for themselves. And that is exactly what Czech businessman, politician, and activist Vít Jedlička did in 2015 when he proclaimed into existence the newly created Free Republic of Liberland on the largest, 7 km2 piece of the unclaimed areas between Croatia and Serbia. It’s one thing to announce a new country to the world. It’s an entirely different thing to make this country legitimate. Under the Montevideo Convention, a proper country needs to have 1) a permanent population, 2) a defined territory, 3) government, and 4) capacity to enter into relations with other states. Now, 9 years after the birth of Liberland, it clearly has three of those. As to a permanent population, the Liberlanders would argue that it definitely exists, even though Liberland’s now over 1200 registered citizens have had to largely live in “exile” ever since. Nevertheless, despite the Convention, there’s one thing that makes something a country more than anything else – whether other countries see you as a country. The more formal recognition by other recognized countries an entity has, the more country-like it becomes. This is especially relevant for breakaway governments, governments in exile, or, most importantly in this case, startup countries like Liberland. Very much aware of this, along with other members of Liberland’s startup government, Jedlička has been on a worldwide mission to legitimize Liberland in the eyes of other countries. Though there have been many amiable meetings and even some measure of support in some cases, no official recognition by any UN member has been achieved as of mid-2024. Liberland now has representatives and offices in multiple countries in the further pursuit of this goal. Though the effectiveness of this strategy has been questioned by many for its lack of decisive results so far, one thing remains unambiguously true: if recognized by even one or two important UN members, Liberland would instantly gain an amazing amount of legitimacy and gravitas in the eyes of the world. The Quest for Territory Establishing international relations with countries anywhere in the world is not the only strategy that the Liberlanders have been employing in making the country more real and legitimate. This includes liaising and negotiating with the neighboring Serbia and Croatia. These relations are by far the most important and impactful ones. If both of Liberland’s neighboring countries were to either outright recognize the startup micro-state, or even just adopt an approach of non-interference, Liberland would be free to start actually developing and to find its own long-term position in the world. As for Serbia, its Ministry of Foreign Affairs let itself be heard that, in their view, Liberland’s claims are a “trivial matter” but, in any case, they do not infringe upon the sovereignty of Serbia. One can imagine that Serbia might actually be secretly quite pleased with Liberland’s activities, since now Croatia has an issue to deal with on “their” side of the river, which, if they are not careful, could contribute to the legitimization of Serbia’s claim to the larger pieces of territory claimed by both countries. With Croatia, things get quite a bit more complicated. In an official statement, the country rejected the claim that Gornja Siga is terra nullius, arguing instead that the land belongs to one of the two neighboring countries – the only question is to which one, which will be answered at some point in the future. Croatia also said it would stop any threatening and provocative activities on the territory even by force if necessary. Ever since Liberland’s birth in 2015, the Liberlanders have been trying to make a mark on the territory. For a long time, even just entering Liberland wasn’t really possible. Under a deal between the Croatian and Serbian police that was put in place during the European migration crisis, Croatian authorities may enter Liberland and patrol it for security reasons (preventing illegal migration) even though they do not officially claim the territory as theirs. Correction: Despite the claim of the Croatian police that this deal is in place, it is unlikely that it actually exists – by signing such a deal, the Serbians would be implying that the territory of Liberland is theirs. The Croatian police refuse to show any evidence of this supposed agreement. In addition, the border police have a near-permanent presence on the Danube River, preventing people from crossing into Liberland by boat. As a result, anyone who would try to come to Liberland in any way would always be promptly arrested by the Croatians, essentially for entering a prohibited area. After years of this status quo, a rather unexpected thing happened that made things suddenly move forward in a positive direction for the Liberlanders. In April 2023, during Liberland’s 8th anniversary celebrations, famous British YouTuber Niko Omilana decided to try to enter Liberland. After a few unsuccessful attempts due to heavy police presence and monitoring, he and his team hired jet skis and rode them all the way from Hungary down the Danube, a crossing from one Schengen country to another – fully legal and possible without border controls thanks to the Schengen agreement. When they got close to Liberland, they encountered the police boats again, who wanted to stop them, but their jet skis were faster than the boats, so they managed to land at Liberland’s Liberty Island and plant a flag there. A few moments later, the police caught up to them and an aggressive policeman took out their handheld cameras before assaulting them and then kicking them on the ground, as can be clearly seen from drone footage of the incident. As they had broken no laws, they were ultimately let go after the incident and free to leave the island without being arrested. However, the heavy-handed and illegal conduct of the Croatian police had been clearly documented and became part of the video that was published in July 2023. The video promptly went viral, gaining almost 10 million views on YouTube. To put that into perspective, the total population of Croatia is just under 4 million. When the news spread even to the Croatian press and TV stations, Croatia had a serious PR problem on its hands. The police had been clearly in the wrong, conducting themselves in a seriously improper way to the point of using physical force against peaceful people who had broken no laws nor engaged in any violence or hostilities themselves. Something had to change. So, following this incident, the Croatian police adopted a different unofficial policy – from now on, they would let people enter Liberland if they wished to do so, in a controlled way. Since early August 2023, if you wish to enter Liberland, you can go on foot or by bike, take the access road down the forest, and show your documents to the Croatian police, just as you would at a border crossing. In a typical grand fashion of Liberland’s media team, Liberland made an announcement that an official border crossing had been opened between Croatia and Liberland (Croatia had obviously never made an official announcement like this, but for Liberland, that was the de facto situation on the ground). In the weeks following the “opening of the border crossing”, many enthusiastic settlers started coming to Liberland to finally begin making their mark on the territory of “the promised land.” They started constructing simple wooden houses, a bathroom, an open-air restaurant, and the related power and water infrastructure on Liberland’s mainland beach opposite Liberty Island in a settlement named Mateos Marina. On September 7th, 2023, a troop of about 50 policemen and forestry workers, including a demolition crew, raided the settlement. The raid was officially dubbed a “cleanup operation” by Hrvatske šume, Croatia’s state forestry service. With the assistance of the police, they tore down all the wooden houses and structures using chainsaws and stole equipment as well as personal possessions of the Liberlanders on site. Several Liberlanders were arrested for “failure to comply with a lawful order”. One might ask, if Liberland is not officially part of Croatia, what authority does Croatia have to come in to claim violation of their laws, destroy property, and confiscate personal possessions? Staying true to their claim that Liberland is not part of Croatia, the Croatians had announced to Serbia that they would be conducting the “cleanup” on Serbia’s territory, to keep it clean on their behalf. We may only speculate about the reasons for carrying out this operation in such a heavy-handed, destructive way. One possibility is that allowing people to enter Liberland in the first place was a way for Croatia to lure some people to Liberland, become comfortable, and then come in and destroy everything to show everyone what would happen if they got involved in the project. Or perhaps it was the unexpected level of liveliness, community-building, and construction going on in such a short period of time after the “opening of the border” that the Croatian police felt like they had to put a stop to it before things got so big they could not be easily destroyed anymore. No matter the reasons, the raid had a chilling effect on prospective Liberlanders. Though there is plenty of video documentation of the operation, no one made a viral video about it this time. Though some media did pick up the news, it did not become a big story. Consequently, the PR fallout from this for Croatia was not unmanageable. Liberlanders soon returned to the territory. However, the level of enthusiasm, energy, and external support was not as great as it had been before the raid. From then on, settlement efforts focused mainly on Liberty Island, unreachable by trucks and impossible for forestry workers to get to without a large boat which they seem not to have. Though perhaps a more strategic place to set up camp, Liberty Island is also much more prone to flooding than the rest of Liberland. In the following few months, several makeshift houses were constructed using a combination of wood and sandbags. During this time, Liberland even hosted a first wedding on the island. The settlement was kept alive during the winter of 2024 as well, with Liberland enthusiasts staying mostly in houseboats whenever it was impossible to camp on site. In the meantime, an enthusiastic settler couple bought a sizeable house with a courtyard in the village closest to Liberland – Zmajevac – which they have transformed into a base of operations for settlers. This is now called Liberbase and it is where visits to Liberland start, with bikes, supplies, and construction materials being gathered before departing for the 40-minute bike ride. In the spring of 2024, work started on the reconstruction of a former hunting lodge at a central location on Liberland’s mainland – Jefferson Square. The building had been demolished a few years prior but the foundations, including a cellar, were left in place. The site was cleared, the foundations refreshed, and new walls for the future governmental building have sprung up from the ground. A professional construction crew was hired to speed up the re-building of this base, using large concrete bricks, to a standard that will make it logistically and practically difficult for the Croatian police and forestry workers to try to destroy. The Battle for Legitimacy The ongoing construction in Liberland is rather slow. It is difficult to bring construction materials to Liberland. It is prohibited to drive motor vehicles on the bike path leading to Liberland, which means that everything has to be manually hauled from Liberbase on cargo bikes. In addition, from time to time, if left unattended, bikes get stolen by the police or forestry workers. Despite these difficulties, the determination of the settlers is unwavering and they are working every day to move construction forward. The importance of such a commitment should not be underestimated. The continuous presence of settlers is incredibly important for Liberland. It shows the seriousness of the project. It shows that Liberland is a genuine community and a fledgling nation rather than, as some accusations tend to go, just an elaborate publicity stunt. Practical difficulties with the Croatian authorities are not limited to construction-related issues. Even staying and camping in Liberland comes with its quirks. If you’re staying on Jefferson Square, you should be prepared for several police visits every day. These check-ups are usually nothing dramatic. The police usually show up, ask a couple of questions, and perhaps tell the settlers that they are not allowed to camp there or start a fire, but they don’t actually do anything more than that and just go about their day. It seems that the Croatian police are rather shy about enforcing Croatian law in a territory that is not officially considered part of Croatia. International law often takes into account the de facto situation of the matter in any dispute. If Croatia enforced their law in Liberland, this would therefore be an indication that they do, in fact, consider the territory to be theirs in practice, despite the official stance of the state. It would play into the hands of Serbia, reinforcing their claims to the large parcels of land on the other side of the Danube. In addition, Liberlanders on the ground report that the majority of Croatian police officers generally behave quite fairly and respectfully toward them – only a minority appear to hold a personal grudge against Liberland, being abusive and sometimes even violent instead. It seems highly likely that the police in general are just doing their job, following orders from above. Most of them don’t actually take it as a personal commitment to make life more difficult for the Liberlanders. This is rather important from a big-picture perspective, because the settlers, by contrast, are often heavily personally invested in the project and see it as their mission to see Liberland develop into a proper country. This disparity in energy and determination is clear and perhaps this is what will, in the end, cause Liberland to prevail in this drawn-out dispute. The dispute with Hrvatske šume is quite different. As of mid-2024, the forestry workers tend to turn up at Jefferson Square about every fortnight. Unlike the police, they do not limit themselves to words but tend to steal everything that is not bolted down – including tools, materials, tents, bikes, and personal possessions of the settlers camping there. The justification remains the same – to “clean the forest of any waste.” In their encounters with the police as well as the forestry workers, Liberlanders are of course meticulous in their video documentation of any illegal actions by the authorities. The Liberlanders’ difficulties, however, do not just stay local. As previously mentioned, upon trying to enter Liberland from Croatia, people who do not have EU citizenship are promptly issued a one-to-three-month ban on entering Croatia, with 7 days to leave the country. This is done under legislation relating to citizenship and tourism. However, things can escalate even further. Since last year, several key Liberland settlers and organizers, including Liberland’s President Vít Jedlička himself, have seen “heavier guns” used against them. They have been banned from entering Croatia for 5 years under certain anti-terrorism legislation, where the authorities argue that these Liberlanders are something akin to a threat to Croatia’s national security. The Liberlanders have mounted a legal defense against this, in addition to challenging Croatia on other legal fronts. They have had some successes so far – in particular, they say that it should now be clear that the Liberlanders do not need any building permits to construct buildings on their territory. Unfortunately, other issues – including the 5-year bans from Croatia – still remain unresolved. Most Liberlanders remain hopeful nonetheless. They have seen their situation move forward significantly over the last year. A year ago, they were not even able to enter Liberland without being chased and/or arrested. Now, even some construction is possible, albeit in a very limited way. The Road Ahead The long-term vision, of course, remains to build a full-fledged, internationally respected and recognized city-state. Liberland’s leaders often speak of a “Balkan Monaco”, referring to the amazing development possibilities that a freedom-oriented country in the middle of Europe could offer. Liberland has already hosted an urbanist/architectural contest, and there are concrete plans for the first hotel as well as a riverside real estate development. What is more, Liberland’s land is actually more than three times the size of Monaco. Nevertheless, Liberland cannot move forward in a meaningful way toward these visions and aspirations under the status quo. The Liberlanders need to be able to build at scale and be free from harassment, both by the police and the forestry workers. Some kind of political deal is necessary as the next step toward proper development of Liberland. Such a deal could take multiple forms, but all of them involve the Croatian authorities changing their attitude toward Liberland away from a policy of unrelenting obstruction – not necessarily toward outright recognition, but at least toward accepting Liberland as a neighborly project that will move forward and develop in some way. One option could be to allow motor vehicles on the bike path toward Liberland, with a deal that could include charging Liberlanders some fair tolls to pay for the wear and tear of the pavement. An alternative would be to simply allow river crossing into Liberland from Serbia on the Danube. Since Croatia does not officially consider Liberland its territory, their current interference with this traffic is illegal anyway. Simply stopping this illegal conduct would help Liberland significantly without Croatia facilitating Liberland’s development in any active way. Regardless of these options, the first and most notable step would be to stop banning non-EU citizens from re-entering Croatia as well as lift the existing (unjustified and unreasonable) 5-year bans on Jedlička and the others. It is easy to see why Croatia is wary and suspicious of Liberland’s development. One can understand the worries of a state in whose immediate proximity there is a new and unknown state growing and taking root. Nevertheless, Croatia actually has a lot to gain from making some kind of deal with Liberland. First: currently there are perhaps a dozen policemen on patrol around Liberland at all times. This includes police vehicles and boats. This is a significant expense for the police force – an expense which is rather unsubstantiated, given that Liberlanders have clearly proven to be peaceful people who do not wish to pose any threat to Croatia, its people, or its law enforcement officers. Making a deal would mean that this large expense would not be needed anymore. Second: Liberland borders an area of Croatia that has been rather “left behind”, remains underdeveloped, and suffers from a lack of jobs and investment. Consequently, younger people are leaving the area and the current population is growing older. If Liberland was growing and open for business nearby, it would provide the region exactly with the job opportunities, large investment, and overall development that it desperately needs. Third: Croatia could use Liberland as an opportunity to actually gain an advantage in the ongoing border dispute with Serbia. As previously mentioned, Croatia cannot openly and properly administer the territory, as it would be an indication in the eyes of international law that they consider the territory to be theirs. On the other hand, Liberland is located on “their” side of the Danube, so Croatia does have an interest in making sure the area is under their control somehow. Striking a deal with Liberland could involve Liberland agreeing to some obligations related to the administration of the territory which would correspond to Croatia’s priorities. In this way, Croatia would have an active say in what happens on this land, effectively “outsourcing” its administration without officially claiming it as part of Croatia. In addition to all these advantages being present, Liberland is very much open to cooperation with Croatia and is keenly looking forward to welcoming any future productive relations with Croatian authorities. From the approach and attitudes of Liberland’s leaders and settlers, it seems that they’re not looking to hold any grudges, and if a mutually beneficial deal or solution were to be found, it is likely that no one would look behind at any historical quibbles or difficulties. Liberland would be an excellent and friendly neighbor to Croatia, not just causing any issues but actively helping the overall development of the surrounding region. Time will tell how things will develop. At present, the momentum, energy, and enthusiasm are definitely on the side of Liberland. There seems to be very little actual interest from the Croatian side to cause issues for Liberland and to continue to prevent the fledgling state from developing further. All that is left are the bureaucratic hurdles of a state that is being overly conservative about its approach to the important issues of the day. Things might take time, but seeing the determination of the settlers and the willingness of all Liberlanders to be unrelenting in their fight for the cause, it is not difficult to argue that we might be seeing the dawn of Liberland as the world’s next proper city-state as we speak. --- # The Future of the Market of Living Together URL: https://free-cities.org/the-future-of-the-market-of-living-together Published: 2024-01-08 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: special-economic-zones, private-governance To understand how the future might look, we need to understand the past. Specifically, we must understand the past as it is unfolding into the present and the future. In that vein, we begin this analysis looking to understand a few of the historical trends in governance. In the end, we will conclude by putting forth a future state of governance provision that we believe logically follows from what we have observed in the past. Special Economic Zones (SEZs) have become an increasingly popular trend among countries seeking to stimulate economic growth, attract foreign investment, and boost exports. SEZs are designated areas within a country where business and trade laws differ from the rest of the nation. They typically offer more liberal economic policies and regulatory environments, aiming to foster a more business-friendly setting that can drive investment, industrial development, and economic reform. Initially popular in East Asian countries, the SEZ model has since spread globally. Countries in Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, and Eastern Europe have established SEZs as tools for economic development. SEZs vary in their structure and focus. Some are geared towards manufacturing, others towards services or high-tech industries. There are also free trade zones, export processing zones, and technology parks, each with specific objectives and target industries. SEZs often serve as testing grounds for new policies and reforms. Governments use them to experiment with deregulation, labor market reforms, tax incentives, and streamlined administrative procedures before implementing these policies nationwide. As more countries adopt SEZs, there is increased sharing of best practices and learning from both successes and failures. This knowledge exchange is leading to the evolution of SEZ policies and strategies to maximize their effectiveness. SEZs are increasingly being integrated into broader national economic strategies, rather than being standalone projects. This integration aims to ensure that the benefits of SEZs contribute to the overall economic development of the country. Increasing Autonomy The trend of Special Economic Zones becoming more autonomous is another notable development in global economic policy. This shift reflects a growing recognition that greater autonomy can enhance the effectiveness of SEZs in driving economic growth, attracting investment, and fostering innovation. One of the most significant aspects of increased autonomy in SEZs is a regulatory sandbox. This involves giving SEZs greater latitude in setting their own legal and administrative frameworks, distinct from the national laws. The idea is to create a more business-friendly environment that can attract investors and spur economic activity. More autonomous SEZs often have their own governing bodies or administrative units. This localized governance can make decision-making processes faster and more responsive to the needs of businesses operating within the zone. It also allows for tailored policies that suit the specific focus of the SEZ, whether it’s manufacturing, finance, technology, or another sector. Autonomy in fiscal matters is another critical aspect. SEZs may have the authority to set their tax regimes, including corporate tax rates, customs duties, and VAT policies. These preferential tax treatments are a major draw for foreign and domestic investors. In some cases, SEZs have been granted the authority to formulate their labor laws. These can include flexible labor regulations, different wage structures, or distinct labor dispute resolution mechanisms, aimed at making the zones more attractive for investment while often sparking debates about workers’ rights. On the other hand, such debates are generally centered around the divergence in regulation rather than actual material outcomes for workers in SEZs. Enhanced autonomy can also extend to land use and property rights within SEZs. This might include streamlined processes for land acquisition, development rights, and property leasing, making it easier for businesses to establish and expand their operations. Greater autonomy can lead to more effective SEZs that serve as engines for economic growth, technological advancement, and job creation. Increased autonomy can make SEZs more attractive to foreign and domestic investors seeking a more favorable business environment. With the right mix of policies, autonomous SEZs can become hubs for innovation, especially in technology and high-value industries. Private Governance The trend toward privatization in the management and operation of Special Economic Zones reflects a third significant shift in how these zones are conceptualized and administered. This approach involves entrusting private entities with the responsibility of developing, managing, and operating SEZs, a task traditionally handled by government agencies. One of the primary arguments for the private management of SEZs is that the private sector often brings more efficiency, innovation, and responsiveness to market demands. Private companies can be more adept at adapting to changing economic conditions and more efficient in managing resources. Private firms often have specialized expertise in the development and operation of SEZs. They also have a more flexible capacity to mobilize capital for infrastructure development, which can be a significant hurdle for government-run SEZs. Finally, they are subject to the constraints of profit and loss, leading to a market-based allocation of resources and efficiency. By involving private players, governments can reduce the fiscal burden associated with developing and maintaining SEZs. This approach allows limited public resources to be allocated to other critical areas. Private operators can bring in global best practices and establish connections with international business networks, enhancing the competitiveness of SEZs. The trend towards more private governance around the world is a significant shift in how public services and traditional government domains are managed and operated. This trend, often simply referred to as privatization, involves transferring the responsibility for certain services or functions from the public sector to private entities. This movement is rooted in various ideologies and practical considerations but most recently it functions as a result of the simple ability of the private market to provide superior outcomes even in industries commonly considered to be the core of government. Water supply, electricity, and public transportation are good examples of traditional government domains that have seen significant privatization. Private companies are often tasked with operating and maintaining these essential services, sometimes leading to more efficient management but also raising concerns about access and affordability. Some countries have moved towards privatization in healthcare, with private entities playing a larger role in providing medical services. This can range from privately-run hospitals and clinics to insurance-based models of healthcare funding. Privatization in education includes the expansion of private schools and universities, as well as public-private partnerships in managing public educational institutions. The trend also includes the growth of for-profit educational services and online learning platforms. Services like waste management, park maintenance, and some emergency services (like ambulance services) are increasingly being outsourced to private companies in many municipalities around the world. There is a growing trend of involving private entities in the provision of social services, including housing, welfare programs, and unemployment services. Interestingly, we have even seen this occur in the realm of national defense and war-making, with the famous Blackwater and now Wagner Groups out of the US and Russia respectively. This is not to say that such activities are in any way productive or good, but simply to illustrate the scope of the trend toward increased privatization. Governance as a Service The trend toward more private governance is reshaping the relationship between the state and the market in many domains traditionally reserved for the government. Governance as a Service (GaaS) is an emerging concept in the realm of public administration and political science, reflecting the increasing incorporation of technology and private sector principles into the governance process. This trend is part of the broader movement towards digitalization and privatization in various aspects of governance. GaaS involves the outsourcing of certain governmental functions and services to private companies, especially those that are technology-driven, to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance service delivery. GaaS heavily relies on technological solutions such as cloud computing, big data analytics, and artificial intelligence to manage and deliver public services. This approach allows for more efficient data management, decision-making processes, and service delivery. Unlike traditional models of public service delivery, GaaS offers modular and scalable solutions. Governments can choose specific services based on need and scale up or down as required. GaaS puts a strong emphasis on the user experience, borrowing from the private sector’s customer service models. This approach aims to make interactions with government services more user-friendly, responsive, and accessible. By outsourcing to specialized service providers, governments aim to reduce operational costs and improve efficiency. GaaS models often employ a pay-as-you-go approach, which can be more cost-effective than maintaining extensive in-house capabilities. Governance as a Service represents a significant shift in how public services are conceptualized and delivered. It embodies the intersection of technology, privatization, and public administration, offering opportunities for more efficient and user-friendly governance. Competition in the Governance Market The trend of new countries emerging over the past 50 to 100 years is a reflection of global shifts in political, social, and economic landscapes. This trend has been influenced by decolonization movements, the dissolution of empires and federations, and the drive for self-determination among various ethnic and cultural groups. Below is a table of some countries that have been established in the last century, along with their year of creation and the primary reasons for their formation. Country — Year — Reason for Creation India — 1947 — Independence from British colonial rule Pakistan — 1947 — Partition from India and independence from British rule Israel — 1948 — Established as a homeland for Jews following WWII PRC — 1949 — Establishment of a communist state after the Chinese Civil War North Korea — 1948 — Division of Korea after WWII South Korea — 1948 — Division of Korea after WWII Vietnam — 1945 — Independence from French colonial rule, later reunification in 1976 Singapore — 1965 — Separation from Malaysia Bangladesh — 1971 — Independence from Pakistan after the Bangladesh Liberation War Czech Republic — 1993 — Peaceful division of Czechoslovakia (Velvet Divorce) Slovakia — 1993 — Peaceful division of Czechoslovakia (Velvet Divorce) Eritrea — 1993 — Independence from Ethiopia after a long independence war South Sudan — 2011 — Independence from Sudan after a long civil war and a referendum Croatia — 1991 — Declaration of independence from Yugoslavia Slovenia — 1991 — Declaration of independence from Yugoslavia Bosnia & Herzegovina — 1992 — Declaration of independence from Yugoslavia Montenegro — 2006 — Independence from the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro Serbia — 2006 — Following breakup of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro Kazakhstan — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Ukraine — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Belarus — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Uzbekistan — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Turkmenistan — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Georgia — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Armenia — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Azerbaijan — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Kyrgyzstan — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Tajikistan — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Moldova — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Latvia — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Estonia — 1991 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Lithuania — 1990 — Independence following the dissolution of the Soviet Union Timor-Leste — 2002 — Independence from Indonesia and a UN-sponsored referendum Palau — 1994 — Independence from the United States-administered UN trusteeship In the context of these newly formed countries, we can observe a specific trend. In terms of land area, the average size of nations has generally been decreasing. This trend is primarily due to the breakup of large empires and countries into smaller sovereign states. For example, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s resulted in the creation of numerous smaller countries. The mid-20th century witnessed the end of colonial empires, with colonies gaining independence and becoming sovereign nations. This process created many new countries, particularly in Africa and Asia, which were often smaller in land area compared to the vast colonial territories controlled by European powers. The recognition and establishment of numerous small island nations, particularly in the Pacific and the Caribbean, have also contributed to reducing the average size of countries in terms of land area. The trends of city-states and semi-autonomous regions present another intriguing aspect of global geopolitics and governance. These entities represent unique models of governance, blending the forces of national sovereignty and localized control. Their roles and significance have evolved over time, influenced by historical, economic, and political factors. Semi-autonomous regions are areas within a country that have been granted a degree of self-governance, often due to cultural, ethnic, or historical reasons. Examples include Hong Kong (China), Kurdistan (Iraq), and Greenland (Denmark). These regions often have distinct cultural or ethnic identities different from the dominant groups in their parent countries. Their semi-autonomous status is typically a result of historical agreements, conflicts, or compromises. Some semi-autonomous regions leverage their special status to develop unique economic models. For instance, Hong Kong has been a global financial center with a separate economic and legal system from mainland China. In addition, the global trend toward urbanization has increased interest in the city-state model, particularly regarding efficient city management, sustainability, and economic specialization. As a result of these factors, both city-states and semi-autonomous regions have become increasingly relevant in a globalized world. They often serve as hubs for innovation, trade, and cultural exchange. City-states and semi-autonomous regions offer unique models for governance, economic development, and cultural preservation. They provide valuable case studies in managing urban spaces, regional autonomy, and cultural diversity. Secession The next trend is secessionist movements. Secessionist movements around the globe have been a prominent feature of the international political landscape, particularly in the post-Cold War era. These movements are driven by a variety of factors including ethnic, linguistic, cultural, economic, or political grievances. The trend in secessionist movements is complex and varies greatly depending on regional contexts and global dynamics. There has been an increase in the number and visibility of secessionist movements since the late 20th century. The dissolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, as well as the decolonization processes, have contributed to the emergence of new nations and a rise in regional autonomy demands. Many secessionist movements are rooted in ethnic or cultural identities. Groups that feel marginalized, oppressed, or culturally distinct from the dominant national identity often seek greater autonomy or independence. Examples include the Kurds in the Middle East, the Catalans in Spain, and the Uighurs in China. Economic disparities and the perception of unequal resource distribution often fuel secessionist sentiments. Regions that are economically prosperous but feel their wealth is disproportionately redistributed to the central government may seek independence to retain more control over their resources, as seen in the case of Scotland and the UK. In some cases, the impetus for secession is a response to political repression, lack of representation, or civil rights violations. Secessionist movements often emerge in contexts where there is perceived or real political disenfranchisement. Secessionist movements represent a significant and ongoing trend in global politics, reflecting deep-rooted issues related to identity, governance, and resource distribution. They pose considerable challenges to national and international political structures, often requiring delicate balancing acts between self-determination, territorial integrity, and regional stability. The table shown below summarizes notable secessionist movements around the globe over the last half-century, indicating their time period, the country they sought independence from, and whether the attempts were successful: Movement — Time Period — Parent Country — Success Bangladesh Liberation — 1971 — Pakistan — Successful Scottish Independence — 2014, ongoing — United Kingdom — Not Successful (ongoing) Catalan Independence — 2017, ongoing — Spain — Not Successful (ongoing) Kosovo — 2008 — Serbia — Successful Eritrean Independence — 1991 — Ethiopia — Successful South Sudanese Independence — 2011 — Sudan — Successful Crimean Crisis (Annexation by Russia) — 2014 — Ukraine — Successful (Disputed) Quebec Sovereignty — 1980, 1995 — Canada — Not Successful East Timorese Independence — 2002 — Indonesia — Successful Montenegrin Independence — 2006 — State Union of Serbia and Montenegro — Successful Brexit — 2020 — European Union* — Successful *While the EU is not a sovereign entity, the process of exit from the Union is, to a large extent, analogical to other, more traditional secessionist movements. Decentralization Through Emerging Technologies A final trend we must consider is the trend of technology enabling greater decentralization. Driven by innovations in various fields, this trend is reshaping how businesses operate, how governments function, and how individuals interact with each other and with institutions. Bitcoin enables decentralized financial systems. It obviates the need for financial intermediaries such as banks and monetary policy monopolists like central banks. Blockchain-based smart contracts may automate and enforce agreements without the need for centralized authority, significantly impacting fields like law, finance, and real estate. Technologies like BitTorrent have popularized decentralized file sharing, reducing reliance on centralized servers. P2P networks enable decentralized marketplaces for goods and services, allowing direct interaction between buyers and sellers without central platforms. Technology in energy enables the creation of microgrids, small-scale power grids that can operate independently, democratizing energy production and distribution. Open source projects represent a decentralized model of software development, relying on community collaboration rather than centralized planning. Nostr creates a decentralized form of communication. All of these are powerful examples of the trend toward decentralization, and such a trend presents opportunities for more democratic, efficient, and resilient systems across multiple societal domains. Future Outlook Having considered these trends: 1. More SEZs in more countries, 2. Increasingly autonomous SEZs, 3. Increasingly privately operated SEZs, 4. More private entities entering the traditional realm of government, 5. Governance being viewed and treated as a service, 6. The creation of more sovereigns and semi-autonomous jurisdictions that are smaller in size, 7. The increasing push by minority groups for self-governance, secession, or local autonomy, and 8. Technology enabling and promoting more decentralization in numerous arenas, we now turn towards a view of the future. A clear direction emerges from the combination of these trends. The future of governance may well be centered around smaller polities, increasingly acting as service providers competing to provide a higher quality product at a lower cost. The push for representation at the increasingly local level is leading not just to the emergence of new sovereigns but also to the creation of semi-sovereign regions and networks. Technology is working in the background to enable all of this, whether it be in enforcing property rights, serving as money (Bitcoin), or enabling computing and communication. The Special Economic Zone and Special Administrative Region (SAR) models have the potential to contribute to the development of polycentric governance systems. Polycentric governance refers to a complex form of governance involving multiple overlapping, self-governing centers of decision-making authority, each operating under its own set of rules but within the overarching rules of the larger system. SEZs often have a certain degree of autonomy in decision-making regarding economic policies, regulatory frameworks, and administrative procedures. This localized autonomy can introduce a layer of governance that operates differently from the national framework. As SEZs become more autonomous this trend will exacerbate. The presence of multiple SEZs within a country, each with its unique focus and regulatory environment, can lead to a polycentric economic governance model, where different economic policies coexist and compete within the same national economy. By allowing for localized autonomy and diverse approaches to governance within a broader national framework, they can offer a more adaptable and resilient model of governance that can meet various local and national needs. While this may not hold for every country around the world, it seems increasingly self-evident that as governments continue to struggle under mountains of debt, increasingly high (but underenforced) tax rates, and mediocrity becoming the norm, private enterprise will step in to pick up the slack. Given that governments are not quick to cede power, they will likely remain in the picture to some degree but will come to the table to find arrangements with private operators, giving them special autonomy and legal jurisdiction under the conditions of continued adherence to their sovereignty. While we do not know what the end state of these developments may look like, it seems that the trends described above will continue to strengthen. This would then naturally lead to a new world of numerous competing “Hanseatic Leagues” around the world cooperating in some fashions, and competing in others. These leagues will likely differ in their autonomy as well as their relationship with their host-state sovereigns. While most will simply be internally autonomous, some might even be fully sovereign. This widening network of competing polities may seem haphazard at first, leading to an uncertain future. Nevertheless, I would argue that such a vision is actually a very optimistic one for humankind. In fact, we can find great precedents for this. The very reason for the success of the European continent in the first place since the Middle Ages was the kaleidoscope of small and competing jurisdictions and polycentric governance between local authorities, the monarch, and the Catholic Church. Given all this, while it is hard to know exactly how our future governance will look, I have painted here a picture based on several trends that are observably occurring. These trends are a result of human ingenuity and a push for increasing self-governance, for taking charge of one’s own life rather than delegating it to others. The result will be more liberty-oriented competition in governance, and, as a consequence, greater economic growth, prosperity, and happiness for everyone involved, combining into a better future for us all. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in January 2023. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. Cover image: New Year’s celebrations in a Free City as imagined by Midjourney AI --- # Why a Citizen Contract Is Better than a Constitution URL: https://free-cities.org/why-a-citizen-contract-is-better-than-a-constitution Published: 2021-11-04 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Academic Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance Abstract From their state, most people demand – at least – protection of life, liberty and property. In exchange, they are willing to pay for it. So why not put the relationship between citizen and state on a purely contractual basis? Such a Citizen Contract would offer much better protection than any kind of constitution, for a variety of reasons. Firstly, because the contract cannot be changed unilaterally by one side. Constitutions are changed, even against the will of the people concerned, provided there is a respective majority. Secondly, because the Contract Citizens would have a better legal standing. Both sides would be contractual parties on an equal legal footing. As with any other service provider, citizens could sue or withhold payments to the state if they believed that the contract was not being properly fulfilled. Thirdly, because other parties would not be able to interfere with this contractual relationship. Citizens would know that they couldn’t change the content of the contracts of fellow citizens, neither through government nor parliament, and therefore would respect each other’s different views and assessments. The state would eventually morph from having a demigod and uber-father status, to having the status of a mere service provider. When two parties conclude a service contract in civil life, they have previously agreed on the scope and cost of the service. If the service is provided poorly or not at all, the customer has the right to reduce or refuse payment. Neither party can unilaterally change the terms of the contract during the contract period. State citizens, on the other hand, must pay all taxes without having a clear counterclaim. If they are dissatisfied because state benefits in areas such as safety, education, road construction, health and pension provision are getting worse, they have no right to reduce or withhold taxes. In contrast, the state can increase taxes to any extent. And it is precisely this constant deviation from the principle of reciprocity that is one of the main reasons for the crisis of democratic states. Of all people, it has been a monarch who has recognized this, namely Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein. In his groundbreaking book, “The State in the Third Millennium”, he determines that in order to survive the state must develop from a demigod into a service provider. [1] 1. Government as a service So why not enter into a service contract with the government? In principle, government is a service like any other. You expect something from it – first and foremost the protection of life, liberty and property –and you are willing to pay in exchange. True, many expect a lot more from the state and don’t want to pay for it. But they are ok if their freedom is therefore limited to large degrees. Insofar as reciprocity is generally accepted: if you want something, you have to give something in exchange. In civil life you are not accepting if services are not performed well or if the service provider gets involved in all manner of other activities without your permission, and then expects you to pay for them. In most countries the relationship between the citizen and the government resembles the relationship between the buyer and seller of a car. However, the car dealer insists, that he will choose the model, the color, the size of the motor, the interior and he will finally decide which price you have to pay for that. And you must buy. Not really an attractive deal, is it? But this is exactly how your relationship with your “government service provider” will work in the state that you live in. Admittedly, in the real world you have several “car dealers” to choose from, namely nearly 200 countries. Unfortunately, basically all of them are of the same type, as they all make virtually all decisions for you. And even places, that look good on paper, do have the power to change all the rules overnight to your disadvantage, be it through a ruler, a monarch or a parliament. 2. Citizen Contract In contrast to this, you as Sovereign of Yourself might, by voluntary agreement, conclude a genuine contract with a more or less ordinary service provider, the government service provider. In this Citizen Contract, both parties have the same formal rights and are therefore legally on an equal footing. The relationship between authority and subject is replaced by the relationship between customer and service provider. In conventional systems, the citizen is obliged to pay taxes without having a corresponding legal claim to certain state services. Not so in a contractual system: payment obligations and rights to benefits and services would be directly related. Both contracting parties are entitled to the fulfillment of the contract, i.e. the government service provider can demand payment of the fixed contribution from the Contract Citizen, but no additional taxes. The Contract Citizen can sue the operator for compliance with his contractual obligations, for example by ensuring security and the guaranteed liberties. This agreement explicitly and conclusively regulates mutual rights and obligations and replaces a constitution or a fictitious social contract. In a sense, it is the personal constitutional charter of each individual. All applicable rules including the underlying private law and the ordre public and all other regulation would be part of this contract. [2] As such, they shall also be made available to the contracting parties, at least as an appendix. It is one of the weaknesses of existing systems that neither long-established citizens nor immigrants know what rules apply in their country, especially as the rules are constantly changing. If you don’t like the contract and do not want to sign it, you have to go somewhere else, where you like the rules better. Same as today. But if you like the contract, you can rely on the fact that it will not change regardless of who is in power. For the first time in history, there would be a real social contract, not a fictional one. Last but not least, this construction has the potential to finally enable the separation of state and society. 3. How is a Citizen Contract different from a constitution? If we are already living under the rule of law, why do we need this? Let’s first examine what the rule of law means: all actions by the rulers are subject to the primacy and reservation of the law, and even for the simple citizen, everything is permitted that is not expressly forbidden. The primacy of the law means that the laws prevail over the ideas of those in power. The reservation of statutory power means that all acts of authority require a legal entitlement; if this is not the case, the exercise of authority is illegal. These are undoubtedly good principles to protect one’s freedom. However, the rule of law has a problem that Bastiat pointed out as early as 1850: [3] Anyone who controls the legislative power can assemble any law. Every group in power can arbitrarily make its own rules as long as it complies with the formal procedures. But even a constitutional band of robbers would remain a band of robbers. In order to solve this problem, attempts have been made to limit such arbitrariness through the adoption of unalterable constitutional articles and the creation of independent supreme courts. These efforts have been met with moderate success. If the law or the constitution stands in the way of government action, it will be amended or interpreted accordingly. Especially the courts often play an inglorious role, because they assume a regulatory competence theoretically reserved for the legislator, while only supposed to supervise the observance of the rules. Hence, we observe a constant political struggle for the occupation of seats on national supreme courts. Of course, even jurisprudence is shaped by subjective attitudes and every constitutional article is interpreted by every judge according to his own political convictions. [4] Even constitutions can therefore in fact be changed or interpreted almost arbitrarily. The Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany, passed in 1949, has been amended 62 times since it came into force. The harder-to-amend US constitution has only undergone 18 changes in over 200 years. But the judges have often come up with “contemporary” interpretations, often contrary to the clear wording of the document. The philosopher Anthony de Jasay puts it this way: “The constitution is like a chastity belt whose key is always within the wearer’s reach.” [5] In short: You as a citizen are not in charge of the constitution. However, if there was a bilateral contract between you and the state, you would be in charge of its content and possible violations. 4. The main advantages Now with a Citizen Contract, the key difference from traditional systems is that the government service provider, or even a majority elected body, cannot increasingly take on more powers and interfere with citizens’ lives. Constitutions can be changed, even against the will of the people concerned, provided there is a (qualified) majority. Contracts, on the other hand, only if the contracting party agrees. That is why the contract with each individual and the corresponding legal position are so important. It is all about the greatest possible self-determination, not the greatest possible co-determination. After all, any citizen with a contract can sue or withhold payments from the government service provider if they believe that the contract is not being properly fulfilled. In constitutional systems, the individual citizen usually does not have the right to bring an action if the state does not fulfill its tasks properly and certainly not the right to withhold tax. The Contract Citizens pay their contribution, but also acquire a right to the services specified in the contract, such as safety for life and limb. If a Contract Citizen nevertheless becomes a victim of a crime, this constitutes a poor performance on the part of the provider. The affected party has a claim for damages against him (he may have insurance for such cases). If criminal gangs roam around the city, the Contract Citizen has a claim on the provider to prevent this. This is a completely different situation than in existing states, where there is neither a claim for damages because of poor performance of state services nor a legally enforceable right to security. However, the most important difference is that third parties would not be able to interfere in this contractual relationship. Citizens would know that they couldn’t change the content of the contracts of fellow citizens, neither through government nor parliament, and therefore would respect each other’s different views and assessments. By this fact alone, the political struggle would be significantly reduced. 5. Dispute resolution While the state offers a court system for the conflicts amongst the residents, a separate procedure should apply to the disputes between the state and the Contract Citizens. One of the understandable points of criticism of current systems is that disputes between citizens and the state are also mediated by the very courts that are established by and paid for by the state. An example might be if individual clauses of the Citizen Contract are interpreted differently or the meaning of the contractual provision was not clear in a certain case. Conflicts of interest are also possible, for instance, because Contract Citizens are dissatisfied with the services of the operator or deny the facts relevant for a measure, like lockdowns in cases of an alleged pandemic. Disputes in such cases should be heard before independent arbitration tribunals, as is customary in international commercial law. So far, this has been a privilege only for large companies and it is also costly. But times are changing; today there are international dispute resolution providers who are offering trials for anyone, with fees starting at a few dollars. [6] Another option is the possibility to call in an ad hoc arbitration, where each party nominates one judge and the nominees then agree on a chairperson. [7] 6. Amendments and adjustments Even the best contract cannot foresee all possible future contingencies. But a contract that can be changed at any time by the operator or contains vague language is of no real use to the residents. That is what we already have with current systems under which citizens are constantly exposed to changes in the legal situation. The question of amending the Citizen Contract is therefore one of the central questions of this concept. Is the contract kept relatively vague and open in order to cover as many unforeseen developments as possible, or are subsequent unilateral changes categorically excluded? In one case, legal uncertainty and thus the unattractiveness of the concept would be the result. In the other case, it may lead to the insolvency of the operator. Things might develop in such a way that he cannot afford to fulfill his contractual obligations on the basis of current citizen fees. There are different approaches to solving this problem. The operating company may propose an amendment to the contract to any individual, but it only becomes valid to those who accept it. This is probably unproblematic in cases that benefit the contract citizen, such as a reduction in contributions or an extension of services. However, if the position of the contracting citizen is worsened, many will reject any revision to the contract. Still, it is possible to offer new citizens different contracts than the existing residents and thus successively create a new order without disenfranchising anyone. Another possibility is to completely exclude certain contractual elements from changes, such as civil rights, the whole section about breach of contract or the annual cost of citizenship. These areas might be subject to explicit legal stability clauses. Other, less critical areas, however, may be left to the discretion of the operator, e.g. the definition and amendment of traffic regulations. Finally, it is possible to make certain amendments to the contract subject to the approval of qualified majorities or to grant them the right of veto. [8] However, such changes should be strictly limited. If this principle is abandoned and any contractual and rule changes are left to the collective decision-making of the residents or the shareholders of the operating company, then sooner or later all the problems that characterize contemporary democracies will return. Then the political struggle to raise the standard of living by gaming the system begins anew. Instead of producing goods or services for which others will voluntarily pay something, a steadily growing part of the population will turn to those political forces that promise the “human right” to live at the expense of others by revising the contract. But there is another, better way. If the contract leads to disputes of interpretation due to missing or vaguely formulated clauses in certain areas, then courts can develop the contents of the contract further without changes to the written contract becoming necessary. Over time this means that the contracting parties will have to observe these judicial developments, but in principle all legal systems which are based on case law, such as common law, function in this way. The development of contracts in such a mechanism takes place exclusively through binding court judgments and arbitration awards, not through new rules or amendments to contracts. It should also be possible for arbitration tribunals and courts to decide on new types of matters by recourse to the legal principles that have been in force for centuries and a balanced, reasonable reconciliation of interests. [9] In many new areas of life there will presumably be provisions in line with the interests of the people involved without the intervention of case law or contractual amendments, as has happened, for example, in the credit card industry to regulate cases of fraud. [10] Practice will show which model or combination of different approaches is successful. In any case, the operator only provides rules for safety and order as well as a few other matters. All other areas are thus always accessible to a voluntary, tailor-made solution by those affected. 7. Citizen Contracts in the real world A Citizen Contract gives you a better legal standing, better rights protection, and more legal stability and predictability than any constitution. And you can hold your counterparty liable. The idea is not new per se. Contracts have been a well-known instrument for balancing interests for thousands of years. It is now just being applied to “the market of living together”. Citizen Contracts are no longer just a fancy idea. The first attempts at implementing this contractual model have found their way into the Honduran ZEDE law and are called “Agreements of Coexistence”. [11] The ZEDE project, Próspera, has adopted that model. [12] In common law systems, there might be the option of creating a voluntary community based on a Citizen Contract. It might, for example, be applied to a real estate development through the incorporation of such contracts into property deeds. The system of governance created by the Citizen Contract might then “run with the land”, making it applicable to the real property regardless of a particular owner’s preference. Of course, all of the state law still applies in such cases, but the introduction of Citizen Contracts could represent a first step toward creating a contractual regime in the market of living together. References • Liechtenstein, Hans-Adam II. von: The State in the Third Millenium, Bern 2009, p. 196. • Gebel, Titus: Free Private Cities – Making Governments Compete For You, Walldorf 2018, Chapter 14 Ordre Public, p. 186. • Bastiat, Claude-Frédéric: La Loi, Paris 1850. • Hasnas, John: The Myth of the Rule of Law. Wisconsin Law Review 199 (1995). • Jasay, Anthony de: Against Politics, London 1997, p. 3. • For example at the Próspera Arbitration Center: https://pac.hn/calculator/ • Bell, Tom W.: Your Next Government? From the Nation State to Stateless Nations, Cambridge 2018, p. 146. • Gebel, Titus: Free Private Cities – Making Governments Compete For You, Walldorf 2018, Chapter 11, p. 156. • Chisholm, John: Drones, Dangerous Animals, and Peeping Toms: Impact of Imposed vs. Organic Regulation on Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Growth in: International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business 35 (3), Januar 2018. • Stringham, Edward Peter: Private Governance – Creating Order in Economic and Social Life, New York 2015, p. 106, 107. • LEY ORGÁNICA DE LAS ZONAS DE EMPLEO Y DESARROLLO ECONÓMICO (ZEDE), La Gaceta, REPÚBLICA DE HONDURAS, TEGUCIGALPA, M.D.C., 6 DE SEPTIEMBRE DEL 2013, No.33,222, p. 57; Article 10 ZEDE LAW: “…the Zones of Economic Development and Employment (ZEDE) are authorized and required to: 1) Establish agreements of coexistence with people who wish to live or reside freely within their spatial ambit of competence, consistent with universal moral principles…” • https://prospera.hn --- # Surprise! The “End of History” Is Not the End of History – Why We Need Free Private Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/why-we-need-free-private-cities Published: 2025-06-26 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance Speech by Dr. Titus Gebel on the occasion of receiving the Roland Baader Award 14 June 2025. Once upon a time, there was a king who took a portion of people’s income as taxes and dictated how his subjects should live. Today, there is a democratically elected government that takes a large portion of people’s income as taxes and dictates how citizens should live. State-aligned intellectuals argue that this represents the end of history. This is, of course, nonsense, and I would like to explain why. Imagine the following scene: a boy angrily confronts two other boys who have a bicycle and asks, “Why did you steal my bike?” One of the other boys responds, “We didn’t steal it; we created a democracy. As the majority, we decided that your bike now rightfully belongs to us.” This small scene contains all the reasons why today’s systems cannot be the end of history. Even one of the founding fathers of social contract theory, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, recognized this. He wrote: “Whence would arise, without a prior agreement, the obligation for a minority to submit to the choice of the majority? The law of majority rule itself rests on an agreement and presupposes at least one instance of unanimity.” In our example, the boy would first have to agree to the creation of a democracy and to the majority’s ability to change rules at will. This conclusion remains unchanged even if each of the three boys represents a million voters as elected officials, and the appropriation of the bicycle is formalized into law. Another thought experiment for clarity: Imagine a parallel universe with a political system called “Car Democracy.” In this system, everyone has a constitutional right to buy a car. There are car dealers. When you visit one, the dealer says, “Indeed, you have the right to buy a car. However, I, as the seller, unilaterally decide the car type, engine, interior, and color you get. I also set the price. And now that you’re here, you’re obligated to buy the car I’ve chosen for you.” In our universe, we’d likely tell the dealer, “No thanks, I’ll go to another dealer and choose a model and features that suit my budget.” Yet, in our universe, we seem to have no issue with being subjected to a similar regime in other areas of life. Simply replace the word “car” with “public services.” You’re forced to pay taxes, the amount of which the state arbitrarily determines, yet you have no say in how these funds are used. This is clearly unsatisfactory—yet this is supposed to be the end of history? I have more questions: If one party promises to cover all life’s risks and provide free services, while another offers freedom and self-responsibility, which party will likely be elected? Will politicians, who rise to parliaments and leadership roles through their parties, generally prioritize their own or their party’s interests, or those of the voters they represent? How successful can a society be if every innovation requires majority approval? You may already sense the answers—we’ll return to them later. The Minimal Principle Meets Politics When I was young, naive, and inexperienced, I was frustrated with classical liberal politicians who supported redistribution policies. Today, I know they had no choice if they wanted to survive politically. The dilemma lies in the human minimal principle: wanting maximum gain for minimal effort. This leads to a recurring political cycle, which can be summarized as follows: People want to improve their standard of living; the easiest way is to take from others; most don’t dare take directly from their neighbor, so they delegate this to the state, the only entity that can take away from others unpunished; politicians fulfill these wishes by redistributing tax revenues, or they’re voted out; the state gradually replaces the economy as the primary source of improving living standards; fewer people work in productive sectors, and state beneficiaries eventually form the majority of voters; distribution conflicts intensify, the state’s share grows, and public debt rises; state bankruptcy leads to system collapse and radical reforms; the cycle begins anew. Or, as George Bernard Shaw put it: “A government that robs Peter to pay Paul and Andrew can always count on the support of Paul and Andrew.” But eventually, Peter is gone or penniless, and the system collapses. This happened in ancient Greece, as described in Plato’s Republic or by Aristotle. The Free Cities of the Middle Ages also suffered from these symptoms as democratic participation expanded. We can see what happened to Ludwig Erhard’s reforms in West Germany, or those in Sweden, New Zealand, or Chile. Within 15–20 years, they eroded. I fear that Milei’s Argentina will face the same fate in 15–20 years. In summary, representative democracies as they exist today are not the end of history for three main reasons: First, without exception, conventional democracies eventually slide into a form of socialism once the majority realizes it can vote money into its own pockets. This is why no company in the world is run democratically. Second, redistributive systems that not all affected parties have consented to are illegitimate. They are contracts to the detriment of third parties, a legal construct impermissible in all private law systems worldwide. Third, there is no ethical-moral justification for being subject to a law one hasn’t agreed to. There’s no sound philosophical basis for this, assuming the equal worth of all adults, despite countless philosophers bending over backward to craft justifying narratives for those in power. Any system, however legitimized, that legally mandates expropriation for the benefit of third parties (e.g., through taxes and social contributions) without the prior consent of all affected parties cannot create a peaceful or predictable coexistence in the long term. It destroys the foundations and outcomes of voluntary cooperation through state coercion. These are not new insights. They led classical liberal philosophers like John Locke, David Hume, and Ludwig von Mises to conclude that only a minimal state is legitimate, as only the protection of freedom, life, and property is in everyone’s interest. Even a criminal doesn’t want to be robbed when leaving the house. Any state intervention beyond this serves the special interests of specific groups. But people are different. What’s right for one may be wrong for another. The fact that individual values are ultimately subjective, and that people objectively face different life circumstances, means every “political solution” leaves behind those forced to comply against their will. “Doing politics” means taking sides and imposing one group’s wishes on everyone, if necessary, by force, as all political solutions are ultimately backed by the threat of executive violence. Politics thus becomes an invisible civil war, its subtlety stemming from the fact that victims of state interventions have no realistic chance of resistance. The Classical Liberal Solution Doesn’t Work The problem with the classical liberal minimal state is that it cannot be sustained under democratic conditions. Its erosion is inevitable due to the political cycle described above, rooted in the minimal principle. Offering freedom, the chance to rise from dishwasher to millionaire, security, and independent dispute resolution is, in truth, a lot. But in a democracy, it must compete against rivals promising to eliminate all life’s risks. This battle is doomed to fail. Otto von Bismarck already recognized this. After his resignation, he said: “It’s possible that our policy will one day perish when I’m gone. But the welfare state will prevail. Whoever takes up this idea will come to power.” Actually, Bismarck didn’t use the term “welfare state,” as it wasn’t common then. Do you know what term he used instead? State socialism. He said, “State socialism will prevail.” In real-world democracies, so-called liberal parties have no choice but to fight constant rearguard battles, claiming to prevent worse outcomes to keep their core voters loyal. In the end, they’re barely distinguishable from state-socialist redistribution parties. It’s futile to blame people for following their evolutionary instincts or to complain about politicians fulfilling voters’ wishes. The only solution is to decentralize and limit power. The fewer areas of life politics controls, the less it matters who controls or influences politicians. To prevent the state from granting special privileges at others’ expense, a system must be created that cannot grant special privileges at all. The only true human problem is that some people want to impose their will on others. The task is to create an order that prevents this. Any new, long-term stable social order must require those governing the community to: – Be unable to grant special privileges to individuals or groups (avoiding lobbying, corruption, and distribution conflicts). – Be accountable for mistakes (linking power and responsibility). – Have a personal economic stake in the community’s success (skin in the game). – Allow citizens to leave or secede at any time without financial or other barriers (enabling competition). – Have clearly defined, written obligations and powers that cannot be unilaterally changed (legal certainty, predictability). – Be subject to lawsuits by affected parties before independent courts or arbitration bodies in case of disputes (neutral dispute resolution). It’s clear that even Western democratic rule-of-law states only meet the last criterion, often with limitations, as only certain bodies can sue the government. The legal certainty and predictability envisioned by constitutions are no longer upheld in practice. Those in power can largely control both the wording and interpretation of the constitution through parliamentary majorities and judicial appointments. We can also outline a historical evolution of state legitimation that doesn’t end with representative democracy. In the past, the monarch decided how I should live, claiming divine appointment as legitimation. People believed this for a surprisingly long time—until they didn’t. Since then, the majority, or its elected representatives, decides how I should live, with legitimation derived from majority elections. A logical next step is that I decide for myself how to live, requiring no further legitimation as long as I don’t infringe on others’ rights. For the necessary protection of freedom, life, and property, I rely on service providers. One such provider is the Free Private City. The Free Private City A Free Private City is an apolitical state service provider. Accordingly, citizens are treated as customers. The city is operated by a profit-oriented company, the city operator, which guarantees the protection of life, liberty, and property in exchange for payment. The profit requirement prevents resource waste and ensures the city doesn’t fall into hopeless debt. In Free Private Cities, the traditional ruler-subject relationship is replaced by a customer-service provider relationship. For the first time in history, there is a genuine social contract with fixed rules, not a fictional one that can be repeatedly altered by one side. The services provided by the operator include internal and external security, a predefined legal and regulatory framework, and an independent dispute resolution system. Participation is entirely voluntary: interested individuals and companies sign a “citizen contract” with the city operator and pay a fixed annual fee for these services instead of taxes. Within this framework, a “spontaneous order” can emerge from the voluntary actions and decisions of citizens, who are sovereign over themselves and treated as such. The operator cannot unilaterally change the citizen contract later without the affected citizen’s consent. Disputes between citizens and the operator are handled by external arbitration courts not affiliated with the operator’s organization. If the operator ignores arbitration rulings or abuses its power, customers leave, and the operator faces insolvency. The Free Private City is currently the only peaceful and voluntary alternative to the political status quo that doesn’t rely on a benevolent dictator. My model has nothing to do with Plato’s know-it-all philosopher-king model or authoritarian top-down ideas where an entrepreneur builds a city and controls everything. My city operator is a service provider creating a framework within which citizens can freely develop. The operator is bound by contracts and can be sued before neutral bodies. Free Private Cities are essentially classical liberal minimal states, but operated by a private entity with exclusively voluntary contract citizens. Thus, they are neither purely minarchist nor purely anarcho-capitalist systems. While all residents are free to agree on any legal system and corresponding dispute resolution mechanisms, and can hire private security providers, the city operator has a fallback legal system and mandatory dispute resolution mechanisms in case no agreement is reached. The operator also holds the monopoly on force, particularly when it comes to expelling disruptors or criminals from the city. In my view, this is unavoidable for creating an attractive and secure community. Cruise ships and shopping malls don’t have competing security services either. However, Free Private Cities are open to variations and developments. We’ll likely see attempts to establish systems without a monopoly on force. I believe I can predict the outcome, but competition will serve as a discovery process here as well. Free Private Cities are ready to face competition. Systems unwilling to do so clearly have something to hide—perhaps the fact that privileged groups enrich themselves at others’ expense? Free Private Cities are not a utopia but a business idea whose functional elements are already known (providing services for payment) and simply applied to a new area: coexistence. Viewing a social order as a “product” in the “market of coexistence” and peaceful competition among systems for citizens as “customers” will bring more peace and freedom. Market-based solutions are non-violent, non-revolutionary, and evolutionary, driven by mutation (trial and error), selection (profitability or bankruptcy), and reproduction (imitation of successful solutions). Therefore, first, alternative social forms must be permitted, and second, citizens must not be prevented from exiting any system. Those who prefer collective life and “social warmth” over individual sovereignty have every right to do so. But they have no right to force others who value freedom to stay or finance their preferred lifestyle. Social orders that only function by forcibly retaining people and compelling specific behaviors will ultimately fail. A good product doesn’t fear criticism or competition and thus doesn’t need to ban or regulate them. Indeed, competition has proven to be the only enduringly effective means of limiting human power. The operator is a service provider who can be sued at any time, with a narrow scope of duties: protecting life, liberty, and property according to predefined, agreed-upon rules that cannot be unilaterally changed. The vast majority of decisions in residents’ lives thus occur outside the operator’s influence. When individuals can decide almost everything themselves, including how to live, with whom to associate and which goals to support, there’s no need to delegate these decisions to a parliament, government, or majority. Free Private Cities aim to enable maximum self-determination, not maximum co-determination. As communities evolve from majority rule to self-determination, the principal-agent problem—where representatives prioritize their own interests over those they represent—disappears. The market-oriented Free Private City model also solves other problems of existing social orders. The public choice problem, where public interest representatives are often guided by personal interests, leading to misallocation and waste, is largely neutralized. The profit requirement in Free Private Cities counters this. A CEO of a Free Private City might want international conferences or the Olympics, but this would reduce profits or drive the city toward insolvency, so self-interest in financial success prevents the worst excesses. The minimal principle problem—wanting maximum gain for minimal effort and thus voting for redistribution parties—is eliminated in Free Private Cities because there’s no forum to hijack that can interfere with bilateral citizen contracts. Finally, unlike politicians, the city operator has skin in the game. They are liable with their own assets, face insolvency if they fail, and suffer reputational damage, making it hard to continue in the industry. Better operators then take over. The market thus provides suitable tools for an area we’ve previously treated as separate, where only political solutions were considered. Implementation in the Real World Since all land is currently controlled by governments, establishing a Free Private City requires the operator to reach a contractual agreement with an existing state. In this agreement, the “host state” grants the operator the right to establish the Free Private City on a specific territory under certain conditions, including legal autonomy in various areas. States may be willing to cede some power if they expect benefits, such as job creation, foreign investment, and a share of the operator’s profits. The existence of thousands of special economic zones in 150 countries proves states’ general willingness to pursue this path. In the little-known industry of special economic zones, there are three major trends. First, a long-term trend of expansion: from free ports and customs warehouses to manufacturing, services, and permanently inhabited zones. Second, a trend toward privately managed zones, as these tend to be more successful than state-run ones. Third, a trend toward greater zone autonomy, including independent courts and legislative bodies, as seen first in the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC). This all leads to the logical next step: Free Private Cities, privately managed on behalf of the host state using internationally proven methods. Not only companies but also individuals, especially talent and high achievers, are seeking better and freer regulations. The DIFC demonstrates the immense impact of an internationally recognized legal system, in this case, Common Law, combined with independent courts: a single square kilometer in Dubai now accounts for nearly 10% of its GDP. Innovative governments will jump on this trend—it brings them revenue, jobs, and international prestige. This development has already begun. Besides projects in Honduras, my company, Tipolis, recently signed a contract with Brunei, and even a state actor, Saudi Arabia, aims to create an attractive system for Westerners with distinct institutions in its NEOM megaproject, where different rules apply than in the rest of the country. Conclusion Most people don’t want to submit to rules and regulations they haven’t agreed to. Most people don’t want to pay for things they didn’t order. And reasonable people don’t need hundreds or thousands of laws to live together peacefully. Instead, people need a secure space to live and collaborate with others while otherwise being left alone. Free Private Cities can fulfill these desires. Existing political systems cannot. That’s why Free Private Cities have a chance to succeed. Because in the end, people go where they are treated best. --- # Building the Bitcoin Citadel: Autris and the Case for the Most Complete Bitcoin Company in the Public Markets URL: https://free-cities.org/building-the-bitcoin-citadel-autris Published: 2026-04-06 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: intentional-communities, bitcoin-and-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/veritas-villages Veritas Villages are the physical realization of a Bitcoin Citadel The Bitcoin Citadel: From Meme to Mission In 2013, a Reddit post appeared under the title ‘I am a time-traveler from the future, here to beg you to stop what you are doing.’ The anonymous author described a world in which Bitcoin had become the dominant global currency, but in which that dominance had produced a fractured society: wealthy Bitcoin holders, having accumulated enough, had retreated into fortified, self-sufficient communities called Citadels, isolated from the broader world by their financial sovereignty and physical self-reliance. The post was written as a warning. A significant number of Bitcoiners read it as a blueprint. I am one of them. The Bitcoin Citadel meme that emerged from that post has since become one of the more fertile and contested ideas in the Bitcoin community. At its most superficial, it is a joke about price predictions and self-sufficiency. At its most serious, it describes something genuinely important: the conviction that Bitcoin is not merely a financial instrument but the foundation of a new kind of community, one organized around individual sovereignty, voluntary association, honest money, and freedom from institutional dependence. Most discussion of the Bitcoin Citadel remains in the realm of the speculative or the digital. Real-world attempts to build Bitcoin-native physical communities have been rare, and those that have emerged have generally been either conceptual exercises or small-scale experiments without commercial infrastructure behind them. Autris is building the Bitcoin Citadel in practice. Not as a bunker, not as an elite retreat, and not as a gated community for early adopters to insulate themselves from the world. As a model for a new kind of intentional community, open, self-sustaining, financially sovereign, and grounded in the same values that make Bitcoin worth holding. Communities that are not cut off from the world but also unwilling to go along with the madness. What Autris and Veritas Villages Are Autris is a holding company publicly listed on the OTC markets under the ticker AUTR. Through its subsidiaries, Autris designs, develops, and builds self-sustainability oriented residential communities throughout Latin America and the Caribbean under the Veritas Villages brand. Veritas Villages are intentional communities built around a philosophy Autris calls F.I.R.S.T.: Freedom, Independence, Resiliency, Self-Sustainability, and Transparency. These are not resort developments or conventional real estate projects. They are communities designed for people who want to live in environments that reduce dependence on centralized institutions, from governments to utility providers to financial intermediaries, and who want to build local economies grounded in direct exchange, community governance, and genuine self-sufficiency. The flagship Veritas Village project is a community in the Coronado area of Panama, incorporating approximately 100 homes spanning a range of home sizes alongside rental units, commercial areas, community orchards and gardens, and on-site amenities. Additional community projects are in development across the region with active communities in Nicaragua and a soon to be developed community in Costa Rica. The communities are designed to be off-grid capable. Self-sufficiency requires water, waste treatment, food production and of course power in the form of solar. This is not a feature bolted onto a conventional development. It is the architecture. Properties in Veritas Villages can be purchased with Bitcoin. This is not merely a payment convenience. It reflects the conviction, embedded in the design of the communities, that Bitcoin is the natural monetary layer for communities built on financial sovereignty. The F.I.R.S.T. philosophy and the Bitcoin ethos are not separate things. Both begin from the same premise: that individuals should control their own assets, their own energy, their own food supply, and their own economic relationships. A community built on independence and self-sovereignty, using a currency controlled by a central bank, would be internally contradictory. Bitcoin resolves that contradiction. Reimagining the Citadel: Outward-Facing, Not Inward-Retreating It is worth pausing on what kind of Citadel Autris is building, because the distinction matters both philosophically and commercially. The original Citadel meme imagined wealthy Bitcoiners withdrawing from the world, protecting themselves from societal collapse behind walls and weapons. That vision has attracted criticism for good reason. It is fundamentally defensive, and it is fundamentally elitist. It treats Bitcoin’s success as a zero-sum event in which the winners retreat and the rest are left to their fate. That is not the Bitcoin ethos at its best, it is not sound economics and it is not what Autris is doing. Satoshi did not write a manifesto urging people to lobby governments or retreat into fortresses. He built an alternative system and released it to the world. The more useful interpretation of the Citadel is not a walled retreat but a demonstration project: a community that shows, by example, that it is possible to live with genuine financial sovereignty, genuine energy independence, genuine food security, and genuine local economic self-determination. A community that succeeds on those terms becomes a model that others can study, adapt, and replicate. It attracts people. It expands. It contributes to the broader Bitcoin economy rather than withdrawing from it. As one Bitcoin essayist put it: ‘We start with the individual, we grow into a family, we form a tribe, we develop a community, and communities come together to build a Citadel.’ The Citadel, properly understood, is not a destination but a direction, a building up from individual sovereignty toward something larger and more durable. Veritas Villages are designed with exactly this logic. They are not closed systems. They are communities with defined values and architecture that attract people who share them, and which demonstrate, in the physical world, that the Bitcoin ethos can be lived rather than merely held. The Bitcoin Treasury Landscape: Progress, and Its Limits Before explaining what Autris does differently from the treasury model, it is worth acknowledging what that model has achieved and where its structural limits begin. Strategy occupies a category of its own. With holdings now tracking toward one million BTC and access to the deep infrastructure of US capital markets, including its novel STRC preferred securities that tap into what its leadership has described as the $300 trillion fixed income market, Strategy has built a capital flywheel that most companies cannot replicate. It is not simply a Bitcoin holder. It has become, in structural terms, a Bitcoin financial institution. Autris has no ambition to compete in that lane, and does not need to. For the broader universe of Bitcoin treasury companies (BTCTCs), the picture is more nuanced. Most lack Strategy’s scale, its brand in capital markets, and its demonstrated ability to raise capital cheaply and continuously. For these companies, the treasury model carries a structural vulnerability: their capacity to accumulate Bitcoin is determined by external capital market conditions, not by the economics of their own businesses. When Bitcoin is at its most attractive for accumulation, during prolonged bear markets, many face precisely the conditions that make raising capital hardest. The correlation runs the wrong way. I want to be clear, I am not claiming all other BTCTCs will fail. Many have found interesting niches, some following the Strategy playbook to some degree (Strive & Metaplanet) and others finding the operating business playbook (XXI, etc). My point is that, apart from Strategy, it is hard to pick the winners and losers at this stage, at least until we get another full cycle under our belts. What neither the digital credit nor the operating business approach fully engages with is Bitcoin as a living foundation for real communities with real economies. A treasury holds value. A Citadel creates it. How Bitcoin Runs Through Autris Autris interacts with Bitcoin in four distinct and mutually reinforcing ways, each of which maps onto a dimension of what a functioning Bitcoin Citadel requires. Buying Bitcoin Strategically Through its subsidiary BitCorp Capital, acquired in September 2025, Autris systematically accumulates Bitcoin through disciplined open market purchases. BitCorp was founded by professionals with long experience in long-term Bitcoin accumulation across multiple market cycles. Its approach is patient and structured, acting opportunistically in strategic market situations rather than following a mechanical schedule. The objective is a growing Bitcoin balance that strengthens the Autris balance sheet through every market cycle, providing the capital foundation from which to expand the communities faster, further, and more strategically as conditions allow. Earning Bitcoin Through Real Estate Properties in Veritas Village communities can be purchased with Bitcoin. This means that Autris’ core operating revenue can flow directly into Bitcoin, bypassing the fiat conversion step that other operating companies are forced to take. When a buyer acquires a homesite using BTC, Bitcoin becomes earned income from a real-world transaction, not a financial instrument purchased in a secondary market. Every Veritas Village property sold for Bitcoin is, in economic terms, a genuine bid on Bitcoin from a real transaction. It reflects authentic demand: a family or individual willing to exchange value for a place to live, using Bitcoin as the medium. This is the kind of adoption that strengthens Bitcoin from the ground up, the same organic, voluntary bottom-up process that Bitcoin’s most thoughtful advocates have always described as the path to genuine global monetary adoption. Mining Bitcoin with Ambient Solar Energy While Autris’ mining operation is small, and the context is important. In building off-grid luxury homes for Veritas Villages, Autris installs the solar and energy infrastructure those homes require. That infrastructure produces more energy than the homes consume at any given moment. When surplus energy exists, it mines Bitcoin. The marginal cost of that mining is effectively zero, since the infrastructure exists for other reasons. The output can offset or pay for community HOA fees, creating a tangible Bitcoin yield that is part of the community’s economic fabric, or it can accrue to the company’s balance sheet. Either way, it illustrates something important about the Citadel model: in a community designed for self-sufficiency, value generation happens at multiple levels simultaneously, often without requiring additional capital. Bitcoin as the Monetary Foundation of the Communities Within Veritas Village communities, Bitcoin is not an asset class. It is the natural monetary layer for communities explicitly designed around financial sovereignty. We want to be precise about what this means, because the point is often mischaracterized. The goal is not to create a closed Bitcoin economy in which coins circulate within a walled garden. The goal is something more ambitious: to be a node in the organic, bottom-up global adoption of Bitcoin as a genuine currency and as a form of global capital accessible to anyone. The residents of Veritas Villages are, by self-selection, people who understand and believe in what Bitcoin represents. When they transact, when they pay for services, when they invest in local enterprises, the natural medium is Bitcoin. This is not mandated. It emerges from the values that drew the community together in the first place. This bottom-up model of monetary adoption, grounded in real communities with real economic activity, is qualitatively different from the top-down model of corporations adding BTC to a balance sheet. Both matter. But one is building the future Bitcoin economy from the inside. That is what a Bitcoin Citadel, in its truest sense, actually does. Capital Allocation Through the Cycle There is a productive tension at the heart of Autris that we do not try to resolve. In any given period, we face a genuine choice between two high-quality uses of capital: investing in the growth of the communities, or accumulating Bitcoin. Both compound value. The discipline required to navigate that choice across different phases of the Bitcoin cycle is one of the more important capabilities in our organization. In practice, the cycle informs the allocation: In bear markets, Bitcoin is at its most attractive for accumulation. The current environment illustrates this precisely. Bitcoin peaked at approximately $126,000 in October 2025 and fell roughly 50% to the low $60,000s in early February 2026 before recovering. These prices represent a deep discount to the value implied by structural supply-demand dynamics: the April 2024 halving reduced new Bitcoin supply to approximately 900 coins per day, while estimated corporate demand alone exceeds 1,755 BTC daily. When prices fall sharply, our operating cash flows, our mining output, and our available capital are biased toward accumulation. We are buying scarce monetary assets at sale prices. In bull markets, the entire business accelerates simultaneously. Rising Bitcoin prices increase the value of our treasury and the balance sheet capacity from which to expand. It also increases the purchasing power of Bitcoin holders, who are our most natural prospective community residents. A strengthened balance sheet allows Autris to move faster and more boldly: acquiring land, developing new community sites, and building out the infrastructure needed for the next phase of growth. Balance sheet appreciation is not a paper gain. It is the foundation from which we expand more aggressively and with greater strategic latitude. Each Citadel we build is a node in an expanding network. Each node increases the value of the other nodes in a non-linear way. This is not market timing. It is a rational, cycle-aware allocation framework. Each Bitcoin cycle, properly navigated, should leave Autris in a stronger position than the cycle before: larger Bitcoin holdings, more developed communities, more residents, and more infrastructure. That compounding is the goal, and the structure of the business is what makes it achievable. Resilience Across Cycles Nassim Taleb’s concept of antifragility has been widely invoked in Bitcoin commentary over the years. Taleb himself has since become a vocal critic of Bitcoin, and his views on the asset are well documented. We mention the structural concept not to appeal to his authority but because the underlying observation remains useful independently of its most famous articulator. Most Bitcoin treasury companies are fragile with respect to the very cycles that define Bitcoin’s history. Their capacity to accumulate is highest when market conditions make capital raising most difficult. Their balance sheets shrink exactly when buying would be most valuable. They have no operating floor beneath the Bitcoin price. Autris is structured differently. Our operating business generates cash flows that do not depend on Bitcoin’s market price. Our energy infrastructure produces Bitcoin at zero marginal cost regardless of where the market is trading. Our BitCorp subsidiary is positioned to accumulate during exactly the conditions that weaken companies dependent on external capital markets. And recovery in Bitcoin prices does not merely benefit our treasury. It benefits our customers, our prospective residents, and the economics of our entire community network simultaneously. The current bear market, which began with Bitcoin’s peak above $126,000 in October 2025 and saw prices fall to the low $60,000s in early 2026, is a live test of this structure. Autris views the current environment not as an obstacle but as an accumulation opportunity of the kind that presents itself once or twice in a decade. For a company building Bitcoin Citadels for the long run, that is exactly the right frame. The Longer Vision: Let a Thousand Citadels Bloom It is worth stepping back from the financial architecture to explain why Autris is doing this at all, because the answer is not primarily financial. The F.I.R.S.T. philosophy, Freedom, Independence, Resiliency, Self-Sustainability, and Transparency, is not a marketing framework. It is a genuine set of convictions about how human beings should be able to live: in control of their own food, their own energy, their own shelter, their own money, and their own economic relationships. These convictions have deep roots in the thinking that gave rise to Bitcoin itself. Bitcoin was created in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis as a response to centralized monetary systems that had failed the people they were supposed to serve. Its founding ethos was explicitly about financial sovereignty: the ability of individuals to hold and transfer value without requiring the permission or participation of any institution. The philosophy of the Bitcoin Citadel, at its best, extends that sovereignty into the physical world: energy, food, community governance, and local economic relationships that are equally free from institutional capture. The convergence between the Bitcoin ethos and the self-sustainability ethos is not coincidental. Both start from the same premise: that individuals and communities are more resilient, more free, and more dignified when they control their own critical systems. Bitcoin is not simply the most convenient currency for Veritas Villages. It is the most philosophically coherent one. The concept ‘Let a thousand citadels bloom’ comes to mind. The vision is not of a single fortress protecting a wealthy elite, but of a proliferating network of sovereign, self-sustaining communities that demonstrate, by existing and thriving, that a different way of organizing economic and social life is possible. Autris’s longer-term vision is precisely this. Each Veritas Village that succeeds strengthens the case for the next. Each community that demonstrates genuine self-sufficiency, genuine Bitcoin-native economic activity, and genuine alignment between its physical architecture and its monetary foundation adds to the evidence that the Citadel concept is not a meme but a model. A model that works, that attracts people, and that can be replicated. Conclusion The Bitcoin treasury company is a meaningful financial innovation, and the companies pursuing it have expanded Bitcoin’s institutional legitimacy in ways that matter. Autris respects that contribution. But Autris is not competing in that category. We are building something more ambitious: the physical realization of the Bitcoin Citadel as a commercial, scalable, and replicable model for intentional communities grounded in the same values that make Bitcoin worth building on. We accumulate Bitcoin strategically through BitCorp. We earn it by selling real assets that embody the values Bitcoin represents. We produce it at zero marginal cost from infrastructure that exists for other reasons. And we build communities in which it functions as the natural monetary layer for people who believe in financial sovereignty not as a portfolio strategy but as a way of life. The productive tension between growing the business and growing the Bitcoin balance is not a problem to manage. It is the mechanism by which Autris compounds value through every phase of the cycle. Bear markets make us bigger holders. Bull markets make us faster builders. Each cycle starts from a stronger foundation than the last. The Citadel is not a retreat. It is the beginning of the new Bitcoin economy. --- # Quadratic Voting, Quadratic Finance & Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/quadratic-voting-quadratic-finance-free-cities Published: 2026-04-13 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: private-governance, taxation-and-economics A Framework for Democratic Infrastructure Funding in Intentional Communities and New City Developments Introduction Intentional communities, planned developments, and new city projects share a common challenge: how do you fairly decide which shared infrastructure to build, and how do you pay for it? Whether the community is an off-grid village, a master-planned suburb, or an entirely new municipality, residents have competing priorities and limited collective funds. Traditional governance models, whether majority-rule voting in a homeowners association (HOA) or top-down allocation by a management company, often fail to capture what residents actually care about most. A small group with intense preferences can be overruled by an indifferent majority, or a vocal minority can dominate proceedings. The question how much someone cares about an issue is invisible in a one-person-one-vote system. This article introduces two powerful mechanisms from the field of mechanism design: quadratic voting and quadratic finance (also called quadratic funding). It explores how they can be applied within community developments to fund infrastructure, maintain shared resources, and produce governance outcomes that genuinely reflect resident preferences. Part 1: Quadratic Voting What Is Quadratic Voting? Quadratic voting (QV) is a collective decision-making mechanism originally developed by economist E. Glen Weyl and further refined in collaboration with legal scholar Eric Posner. The core idea is elegantly simple: instead of giving every person one vote per issue, each participant receives a budget of voice credits that they can allocate across multiple issues. The catch is that the cost of casting votes on any single issue rises quadratically. In concrete terms: casting 1 vote on an issue costs 1 voice credit, but casting 2 votes costs 4 credits, 3 votes costs 9 credits, 4 votes costs 16 credits, and so on. The formula is: cost = (number of votes)². This means that expressing a moderate preference is cheap, but expressing an intense preference is expensive. Why Quadratic? The Logic Behind the Curve Traditional one-person-one-vote systems treat all preferences equally. Whether you mildly prefer option A or desperately need option A, your vote carries the same weight. This leads to well-known problems: — Tyranny of the majority: A large group with a mild preference can overrule a smaller group for whom the issue is critically important. — Strategic voting: People vote not for what they truly want, but for what they think has the best chance of winning. — Logrolling: Voters trade favors informally (“I’ll vote for your road if you vote for my playground”), leading to opaque and potentially corrupt bargaining. Quadratic voting solves these problems by making the cost of influence proportional to the strength of one’s preference. If you care deeply about a community garden, you can concentrate your voice credits there, but at the cost of having less say on issues you care about less. The quadratic cost curve is mathematically optimal because it balances between a linear system (where the wealthy could simply buy outcomes) and a flat system (where intensity of preference is invisible). A Simple Example Imagine a community HOA meeting where residents are deciding among three infrastructure proposals: — Project A: Build a community water purification and storage system — Project B: Construct a community greenhouse and aquaponics system — Project C: Improve road drainage and paving Each resident receives 100 voice credits. Here is how three different residents might allocate their credits: Notice what happened: James cares enormously about road drainage (perhaps his lot floods every rainy season), so he concentrated 81 of his 100 credits there, gaining 9 votes. Maria spread her credits more evenly because she cares moderately about all three projects. Aisha prioritized the greenhouse. The result reflects the aggregate intensity of community preferences, not just a head count. Part 2: Quadratic Finance (Quadratic Funding) What Is Quadratic Finance? Quadratic finance, also known as quadratic funding (QF), extends the principles of quadratic voting from decision-making into the realm of funding. It was proposed by Vitalik Buterin, Zoë Hitzig, and E. Glen Weyl in their 2018 paper on Liberal Radicalism. The mechanism is designed to optimally fund public goods, things that benefit everyone but that individuals tend to underinvest in because they can free-ride on others’ contributions. The formula works as follows: the funding a project receives equals the square of the sum of the square roots of individual contributions. Mathematically: Funding = (∑ √cᵢ)², where cᵢ is each individual’s contribution. The difference between this calculated amount and the sum of actual contributions is topped up from a shared matching pool. Why This Formula Matters The genius of this formula is that it prioritizes the breadth of support over the depth of any single donor’s contribution. A project that receives small donations from 100 people will receive dramatically more matching funds than a project that receives a single large donation of the same total amount. This is because the mechanism treats the number of contributors as a signal of public value. Consider two projects, each receiving $100 in direct contributions: — Project X: One donor gives $100. Funding = (√100)² = (10)² = $100. Matching needed: $0. — Project Y: One hundred donors each give $1. Funding = (100 × √1)² = (100)² = $10,000. Matching needed: $9,900. Project Y, with its broad base of community support, receives 100 times more total funding, even though the same dollar amount was contributed directly. This is the power of the mechanism: it amplifies projects that genuinely matter to many people. The Matching Pool For quadratic funding to work, there must be a matching pool, a shared reservoir of funds that tops up individual contributions according to the formula. In a community development, this pool could be sourced from several places: — HOA dues or community assessments: A portion of regular homeowner association fees could be set aside as the matching pool, while residents direct their remaining share toward specific projects. — Community revenue: Revenue from shared community assets (rental income from common facilities, energy generation, parking fees, etc.) could flow into the matching pool, creating a self-sustaining cycle. — Developer contributions: The original developer could seed the matching pool as part of initial community setup, tapering off as the community becomes self-sustaining. — External grants or partnerships: Philanthropic organizations, government matching programs, or aligned businesses could contribute to the pool, particularly for sustainability or resilience-focused projects. Part 3: Applying These Mechanisms in Community Developments Infrastructure Funding Through Quadratic Finance Planned communities and new developments feature ambitious shared infrastructure: water systems, community orchards and gardens, pools, recreational amenities, trails, and landscaped green spaces. Maintaining and expanding this infrastructure requires ongoing capital, and the question of which projects to prioritize is inherently political. Here is how a quadratic funding round might work in practice: — Proposal phase: Any homeowner or community member can submit an infrastructure or maintenance proposal. Examples might include: expanding the community water system, building a new trailhead with signage, upgrading shared agricultural facilities, or resurfacing a community road. — Contribution phase: Over a defined period (perhaps two weeks), residents contribute funds toward the proposals they care about. Even small contributions, even a few dollars, carry significant weight because the matching formula amplifies breadth of support. — Matching phase: At the close of the contribution window, the matching pool is distributed according to the quadratic funding formula. Projects with broad support receive proportionally larger matching amounts. — Execution phase: Funded projects move to construction or implementation, managed by the HOA or a designated project committee with transparent progress reporting. How Quadratic Voting Integrates with the HOA The existing HOA governance structure provides the institutional backbone for implementing these mechanisms. Here is how the two can work together: Voice Credit Allocation Each property owner in the HOA receives an equal allocation of voice credits at regular intervals (quarterly or annually). These credits are non-transferable and expire at the end of each voting cycle, preventing accumulation and ensuring ongoing democratic participation. Renters or non-owner community members could optionally receive a smaller allocation to ensure their voices are heard on issues that affect them. Decision Categories Not every HOA decision needs quadratic voting. The mechanism is most valuable for decisions involving resource allocation with competing preferences. A practical framework might distinguish between: — Routine maintenance and operations: Handled by HOA management per the governing documents, with standard budget authority. Road repairs, landscaping schedules, and utility management fall here. — Capital improvement prioritization: Decided by quadratic voting. When the community has funds available for improvements, residents use QV to rank competing proposals. This could include new amenities, infrastructure expansion, or major upgrades. — Rule and covenant changes: May use QV for initial preference discovery, but final adoption could still require a traditional supermajority to protect property rights and contractual expectations. — Public goods funding: Directed through quadratic funding rounds, where the HOA manages the matching pool and contribution process. Practical Example: A Full Funding Cycle Imagine a community runs a quarterly quadratic funding round. The matching pool holds $25,000, sourced from a combination of HOA reserves and community revenue. Five proposals are submitted: Notice the result: the private pool renovation received the most direct dollars ($2,500 from just 5 wealthy donors), but because it had narrow support, it received almost no matching funds ($280). Trail lighting, with 42 modest contributors, received $8,190 in matching, reflecting its genuine public value to the broader community. This is the mechanism working exactly as intended: funding flows toward projects that matter to many, not just to those with deep pockets. Part 4: Challenges and Practical Considerations Collusion and Sybil Attacks The biggest vulnerability in quadratic mechanisms is collusion: if groups of people coordinate their contributions strategically, or if one person creates multiple identities (a Sybil attack), the system can be gamed. In a physical community, this risk is naturally mitigated because residents know each other and property ownership records tie identity to physical lots. However, additional safeguards are still important: — Identity verification: Tie voting rights and contribution eligibility to verified property ownership records or resident registration. One property, one set of voice credits. — Pairwise coordination penalties: Advanced implementations of QF can reduce matching for contributions that appear coordinated. For example, if the same group of contributors consistently fund the same proposals together. — Contribution caps: Setting a maximum individual contribution per round limits the impact of any single wealthy actor. Education and Adoption Quadratic mechanisms are unfamiliar to most people. Successful implementation requires clear communication about how the system works and why it produces fairer outcomes than traditional voting. Communities could invest in educational workshops, interactive simulations where residents practice allocating voice credits, and transparent post-round reports showing how the matching formula worked. Matching Pool Sustainability The matching pool must be adequately funded for the system to be meaningful. If the pool is too small relative to contributions, the matching effect becomes negligible. A well-designed implementation would establish clear rules for replenishing the matching pool, whether from HOA reserves, community revenue, or a small surcharge on property transfers within the development. When the Formula Exceeds the Pool: Allocation Strategies In practice, the total matching amounts calculated by the quadratic funding formula will almost always exceed the actual funds available in the matching pool. This is a feature of the formula, not a bug: it calculates the theoretically optimal funding level, and the pool constrains what can actually be distributed. The community must decide in advance how to handle this gap. There are several well-established approaches. Option 1: Pro-Rata Scaling (Fund Everything Proportionally) The most common approach, and the one used by Gitcoin Grants and most real-world QF implementations, is to scale all matching amounts down proportionally so that the total exactly equals the pool. If the formula says projects should receive $50,000 in matching but the pool only holds $25,000, every project receives 50% of its calculated match. This preserves the relative ratios between projects (broadly supported projects still receive proportionally more) while staying within budget. Every proposal receives some funding, and the community signal about which projects matter most is fully honored. Option 2: Threshold Funding (Fund Only What Can Be Completed) An alternative approach is to rank projects by their QF-calculated matching amount and fund them in order from the top until the pool runs out. Under this model, the most broadly supported projects receive their full calculated match, and lower-ranked projects may receive partial funding or none at all. This avoids spreading money so thin that no single project gets enough to actually be built, which can be a real concern for infrastructure projects with minimum viable budgets. The tradeoff is that some proposals receive nothing, which can frustrate contributors who donated to lower-ranked projects. Option 3: Hybrid Approach (Guaranteed Minimum Plus Proportional) A middle path gives every project that meets a minimum contributor threshold (say, at least 10 unique contributors) a small guaranteed base match, then distributes the remainder of the pool proportionally using the QF formula. This ensures that every project with meaningful community support receives at least some matching, while still rewarding broad support with larger allocations. Choosing an Approach For most communities, pro-rata scaling is the most natural default. It respects every contributor’s signal equally, avoids the appearance of winners and losers, and is simple to explain and verify. However, the HOA governing documents could allow the community to vote (using quadratic voting, naturally) on which allocation method to use for each round, adapting the approach as community needs evolve. Whichever method is chosen, it should be defined clearly before a funding round begins, so all participants understand the rules in advance. Legal and Regulatory Compliance HOAs in different jurisdictions operate under varying legal frameworks. The community’s governing documents (CC&Rs, bylaws, or equivalent) would need to explicitly authorize quadratic voting and funding mechanisms. Working with local legal counsel to structure these provisions properly is essential to ensure enforceability and protect homeowner rights. Conclusion Intentional communities and new city developments are experiments in how people can organize their shared lives. Quadratic voting and quadratic finance offer governance and funding mechanisms that match the ambition of that experiment. By allowing residents to express the intensity of their preferences, by directing community funds toward projects with broad support, and by making every decision transparent and verifiable, these tools help build the kind of community infrastructure that truly serves everyone. The path forward begins with education: helping residents understand these mechanisms and experience them in low-stakes trial rounds. From there, the community can progressively integrate quadratic voting into HOA decision-making and quadratic funding into infrastructure budgets. The future of community governance is not about giving everyone the same vote. It is about giving everyone the same opportunity to express what matters most to them. That is the promise of quadratic mechanisms, and it is a promise well suited to any community that values self-governance and collective decision-making. --- # La Façon de Vivre URL: https://free-cities.org/la-facon-de-vivre Published: 2026-07-04 Author: Sebastian A. S. Grell Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities This is the winning entry in the Free Cities Foundation’s 2020 short story competition, which invited writers to imagine everyday life in a Free Private City. It appears in the anthology Road to Liberty. What follows is the story as published. The French façon de vivre had always attracted Geoffrey to Paris. If only there were no suffocating bureaucracy and no criminals who more and more take control of the city. What had attracted Geoffrey to London had been the pragmatic, yet socially clever way of Londoners. What a shame that the British overcautiousness with their ever-present bans on this and that excluded any scope for action. The relaxed and creative-inspiring atmosphere of the Westerners attracted Geoffrey to San Francisco. If only there wasn’t an air of affluent neglect at this place which rendered it less and less attractive each day – it put the city in chains which threatened to suffocate any trace of creativity. The Easterners’ attitude to ever reach for the stars attracted Geoffrey to New York City. But the scaffolding mania was but one of the symptomatic problems plaguing the city, thought Geoffrey. Even if he could decide on one city, there is Josephine. Each of these cities is attractive in its own way. But he knows this is not enough. Both of them could never focus exclusively on the one feature that makes the respective city special. None of these features in isolation would satisfy the two of them. Maybe the typed note that he had discovered in one of those old book shops will help them. A shop that survives because the owner can afford it, not the other way around. However that may be. In any case, this was symptomatic for the passion with which the note had been written. “What if I told you that there is a place where you need not choose between the dreams of others but where you can shape your life as you please: not only on a small scale, but overall! Realizing your dreams comes with one condition only: do not put obstacles in the way of others pursuing their dreams when you try to make yours a reality. This may sound easy, but you wouldn’t be the first one to fail. Can you tackle this challenge? Then come, pay us a visit, and experience it first-hand. Just one more thing: we accept your request for an invitation only if it is typed, and the letter franked with five blue stamps. If you now wonder why, I promise: You will understand once we meet in person. Trust me! In pax and libertas, cordially yours, Customer Inquiry Service of Liberpax.” It had been a while since Geoffrey had last read such an extraordinary message – maybe he had never done so. But this place may perhaps be the solution to their problem and completely satisfy them. Was it too good to be true? It was worth a try, for sure! Grandpa’s old typewriter had gotten dusty. Geoffrey fetched it out of an old chest that stood way back in the storeroom. He puffed strongly. This covered the small chamber in a cloud of dust. He had to cough. Once the cloud of dust had settled, he fetched a small stool and placed the little wooden boat folding table in front of it. He began typing: “Dear Customer Inquiry Service of Liberpax, I have discovered your note in an old book in a bookshop near my place. I do not know how long the note has been lying there and I hope (still) to be able to reach you via this avenue. My wife and I are on the look-out for a place that can combine what we value in Paris, London, New York City, and San Francisco – and can maybe go beyond it – without being plagued by their shady sites, the bureaucratic paralysis, interventionist overregulation, or institutional decay. Your message evokes the impression that not only do you know such a place but that you have contributed to creating it and are contributing daily to make it the place it is. I sincerely hope that the place which you describe still exists – if it has ever existed. My hopes may manifest the exasperation of someone who wants to maintain his dream in midst a world of decay. Perhaps I am writing to you to keep alive my hopes with this dream that you have described. If all this should turn out to be more than sheer daydreaming and both you and this place exist, it would be a huge honor for my wife and me to be allowed to visit you and this place. Longing strongly for this to be more than a mere dream, yours, Geoffrey X.” The table had trembled every time he had pressed the old keys of the typewriter. The tremor died away. The clickering sound of the stop faded. Into the envelope! Stamp. Blue. Five times. Franked. Into the mailbox. Sent. Now, it was time to wait. Weeks had gone by, and Geoffrey had nearly forgotten the letter he had franked with five blue stamps when a man in black clothes came close to him in the pedestrian area, kept apace with him, and asked, “Five blue stamps? Typewriter-friend?” For a moment, Geoffrey was lost. He first suspected the man was insane. Flabbergasted, he looked at the man. The man hesitated for a moment, then he accelerated and was about to disappear in the crowd. Then the scales fell from Geoffrey’s eyes. “Wait!” he yelled and began to move faster. Without saying a word, the man gave him an envelope and added, “Be on time.” Geoffrey was at one of the counters at Terminal C. With some despair he approached a stewardess. “Listen... I just cannot find this gate. Can you help me out?” The stewardess examines the boarding pass for a while and asks back with a start, “You are aware, sir, that you cannot board your private jet here? Shall I call you a taxi that takes you to the private terminal?” Soon after, he is on the plane flying above the clouds. His travel companions are two gentlemen and a lady. They all seem to know each other – at least superficially. Geoffrey looks out of the window. The clouds clear and give way for a view on a paradisiacal headland. The machine was preparing to land. Exiting the plane, Geoffrey for the first time exchanges some words with one of the gentlemen. “Is this this your first time here? Are you amongst those interested?” asks the gentleman. “I do not know much about this place,” Geoffrey conceded. “Nobody does, at the beginning. It is the feeling and the hope that there must exist something better than the ever-occurring compromises elsewhere. And even then you cannot trust, right?” explains the gentleman. “That may well be true,” adds Geoffrey, who admires the paradisiacal palms and beaches all around them that they see on their ride towards their unknown destination with bus hybrid. “We’ve all been where you now are. But you will see: whatever you are looking for, you will find it here. There are those we call the tech achievers, there are those we call the nostalgic, those we call the nature lovers, those we call the empireists, those we call the players, those we call the intellectuals, and many more. For example, there also are the seekers – they are yet to find their place. But there also are hybrids who value several ways of living and pursue the objectives of different groups. Most groups have bundled together in their respective districts. But some value intermingling with people of other shades in mixed districts: in so-called Hybrid Zones. But also, those who live in a Special Interest Zone (SIZ), seldomly keep to themselves. It is easier to agree on fine-for-all neighbourhood rules with like-minded people. Usually, the result of this is that fewer compromises are necessary. For this reason, many prefer living in an SIZ. Lots of things are dealt with on the neighborhood level. Since everyone is free to choose, the services of the neighborhood administrations most often are of high quality. The service offers on the level of the city administration benefit from the outsourcing to many different service providers who compete with each other. But try to acclimate first. You’ll get to know the rest soon enough. I am sure: there will be the right thing for you. I need to leave now. Enjoy your stay in Possibilia.” So, Possibilia was the name of this place. A fitting name thought Geoffrey. What the gentleman had told sounded exciting. He felt his heart beating. It was racing. They had arrived. The gentleman went his way. They were in Possibilia. They had arrived at a platform with huge tubes. They all led to different key junctions in the city. Geoffrey bought a ticket “Private Capsule – One Person.” In the capsule there was a couch on one side and a table on the other. In its middle, there was a big display placed on a telescope arm. The capsule offered a 360-degree panorama view. The tube itself was built entirely out of glass. The window front could either be switched to transparent mode on both sides, transparent from the inside, or darkened from both sides. The trip to the center was fast and short. The short glimpses Geoffrey could catch during the journey gave him the impression that he was traveling through the future, the past, and magical worlds simultaneously – in an absolutely positive sense. He was astonished. The vivid impressions etched themselves on his memory. The center appeared more conventional and more centrally planned than the outskirts which he had just quickly glanced at. Here there was a huge boulevard that was lined on both sides with modern-elegant, organically built glass complexes. At the end of the spacious boulevard there was a big, free-standing glass building in front of which large metal letters spelled the word Possibilia. The space was surrounded by green areas. Yet he was sure that visiting the outskirts would be more interesting. Would he find a little Paris, a little London, a little New York City, or a little San Francisco there? After all the glimpses he caught, he is confident that he will find many districts that are to his liking and on top differ completely from the above-mentioned cities: something completely new, completely unknown, something that would captivate him in its own way. We will see, he thought, and entered another tube – this time one of a different company, as it seemed. He had to write to Josephine and tell her what he had seen and experienced. He wrote that he believes this is the place where the two of them can find their happiness. He had first visited a district of the nostalgic. The nostalgic love districts with an historical flair. Accordingly, in some districts there are rules which prescribe a specific dress code, and the way facades must look – occasionally more and occasionally less strictly oriented at certain epochs (and sometimes it was rather imaginary fantasies which had informed the code). It was beyond doubt that Geoffrey was overwhelmed by the wealth of ideas and the aesthetical demands the nostalgic demonstrated. Some told him that they only had their second home here which they used to escape from everyday life. Geoffrey was able to relate to that. And it indeed felt like a trip to a magical wonderland that invites every seasoned man to daydream. After visiting the nostalgic, he went to the tech achievers. The tech achievers are tech nerds who, moved by an entrepreneurial mind, love technology and create their little, futuristic place. Many of these futurists are transhumanists who attempt to employ diverse technological additions to compensate for weaknesses of their bodies and who want to enhance the performance of their body or their mind. Other tech addons offer comfort or entertainment. Not only their apartments, but their complete respective districts are transformed into smart homes and smart districts, respectively. All this while each of the districts lays different emphasis and implements different tech philosophies. Some districts eye comfort, others entertainment, and again others focus performance enhancement, optimization of infrastructure processes, or security. A visit at the nature lovers gives a completely different picture: instead of busy tech fascination there is a simple, almost rural life. Naturalness, village flair, and slow movement are the maxims which emboss the lives of the people and describe it most accurately. The empireists are not content with simplicity. They love the pompous. They want to build up business worlds and bequeath them to their offspring and posterity. They prefer business lunches at their golf clubs and forge ambitious plans. Their style is classicist and that of the Victorian British Empire. But having visited several districts of the empireists, Geoffrey constates that none equals the other and that these superficial descriptions do not do justice to the diversity and fascinating ambitions of the empireists. And there are some who live parallel lives in one of the other districts. Many of the districts remind Geoffrey of London – a London as it must have been in its prime. The districts of the creatives remind Geoffrey of both Paris and San Francisco. The players seem to have reinvented the Broadway and Las Vegas. The seekers share their property between themselves and often live polyamorous lives. “Free love” and “psychonautical travels” are omnipresent keywords here. Intellectuals and scholars find a home between sumptuous libraries and interdisciplinary campus sites that, in their respective ways, transform their districts in unique places of learning and progress. Here, he and Josephine will find a new home: this Geoffrey knows for sure. He is dying to share all his impressions with Josephine. What can you not find here? What dreams should remain unfulfilled in such a city? Nothing that cannot be dreamed of here; nothing that cannot be created here, he thought to himself. He had not been that much infatuated since he had met Josephine. His new sweetheart’s name was Possibilia. And his sweetheart was a free private city where everyone could live and find happiness according to her façon de vivre. --- # Constitution of Consent URL: https://free-cities.org/constitution-of-consent Published: 2023-12-18 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance The Constitution of Consent Contest was held in mid-2023 and organized by Max Borders. Intended to jumpstart and accelerate a conversation around the best forms that emerging models of consensual governance could take, the task was to: Craft a Constitution of Consent that balances freedom and community self-organization. Contest entrants — individuals or teams — will develop a constitution that is chosen, not imposed—a real social contract. Below, we present the full entry of one of the winners of the shared first prize in this contest – the Free Cities Foundation’s own Senior Advisor, Alex Voss. Constitution of Consent Alexander D. Voss Introduction In the tapestry of human history, the aspiration towards self-determination and mutual respect has been a beacon guiding societies to higher ideals. At the heart of these principles lies a simple, yet profound concept: consent. As we stand at the precipice of a new age for mankind, we recognize that the future we wish to build — a future where every individual feels heard, respected, and free — must be rooted in this sacred principle of consent. Preamble We the people, in pursuit of a society grounded in peace, freedom, justice, pluralism and prosperity, hereby recognize the paramount importance of consent as the cornerstone of governance. With history as our guide and the promise of a better future as our aspiration, we pledge our unwavering commitment to the principles of consent, understanding that a society built on mutual respect and voluntary agreement is the surest path to enduring peace, prosperity, and the collective welfare of our people. Article I: Definitions Def 1. Private property may be any discernible object or electromagnetic wavelength with the following characteristics: • It is accessible, recognizable, and discernable. • It persists in the time scale of human action. • It exists independently of any perception or consciousness. • It is possible in practice to measure its physicochemical characteristics using the International System of Units (MKSA) or any other equivalent conceptual system. Def 2. A previously unowned or abandoned scarce resource is one meeting all the criteria of Def. 1 that is not being actively utilized by an individual or group of individuals for the completion of a particular project, or has not been claimed to be owned, in the time scale of human action, and in compliance with adverse possession common law. Def 3. A property right is the right to the exclusive use of and complete control over private property. Def 4. A coercive act is any act involving the use of private property on which a cognizable property right already exists, without the free and voluntary consent of the legitimate owner. Def. 5. Homesteading is the process by which human beings justly acquire property rights in a previously unowned or abandoned scarce resource by mixing one’s labor with the resource. Def. 6. Rights can only belong to individuals. No institution, including any level of government can possess rights. This is true even if 100% of people adhere to any given rule or law. In such a case, the law may pass as all individuals have adhered to it regardless of institutional involvement. No Rights exist outside of the framework of property rights. As such, all Rights are property rights and property rights are the rule of the land. Article II: Rights • Every human being has an inherent, exclusive, inviolable right to self-ownership. • No law shall countenance the existence of slavery, conscription, indenture, or any other form of involuntary servitude. • Human beings possessing the inalienable right of self-ownership likewise have the right to justly acquire property and claim property rights over a previously unowned or abandoned scarce resource through the process of homesteading. • Human beings likewise may acquire title to new property through the process of peaceful and voluntary trade, exchange, and contract. • Every individual shall have the right to freedom of contract, meaning that a rightsholder’s consent is both necessary and sufficient to transfer alienable title to property. • All interactions and exchanges between individuals are to be voluntary, consensual, and peaceful, and as such no individual or group of individuals shall abridge the right of any person to purchase, gift, use, control, exchange, lease, sell, transfer, bequeath, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy their property without interference until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the property right of others. • The only legally or morally permissible utilization of coercion is reactive coercion in direct and proportional response to an initiation of aggressive force against a peaceful individual’s property rights as specifically defined herein. As with Rights, this only applies to individuals not institutions. Even if an individual is part of an institution, the concept of reactive, direct and proportional defensive force still applies. • All parties of this Constitution have an absolute right to self-defense in concurrent and proportional response to an uninitiated and uninvited coercion, manifest or imminent. • The only legally enforceable rights are property rights. Article III: Contracts • Individuals or groups of individuals may voluntarily transfer title to any property between and amongst any other legitimate property owner. • Contracts are to be enforceable through the use of any arbitration agency concurrently approved by both parties of the contract prior to contract formation and in accordance with all provisions of this Constitution. • Should a Contract not specify arbitration agency domain, the parties to the contract may resolve the dispute in any manner acceptable to both parties and in any case without the use of force. This mechanism will heavily incent honest businesspersons to only enter contracts with an arbitration agency clause clearly defined. • Only legitimate property as defined in this Constitution and in accordance with all provisions of this Constitution may be the subject of a title transfer. • The right to freely and voluntarily contract is absolute and inviolable. Article IV: Justice • Any person’s infringement of any rights stipulated herein is subject to lawful prosecution by the victim of this infringement or his agent in accordance with all relevant due process and contractual commitments and is actionable in accordance with generally recognized common law principles of the proportionality of punishment, strict liability, and restitution. • Jury trials are to be utilized in all criminal proceedings. Criminal proceedings can only include cases involving the aggression against of a specific person or persons or their legally owned property. • No person shall be convicted, sentenced, or imprisoned without due process of law, including the right to trial and habeas corpus, and there shall be no detention without trial, nor shall any person either before or after trial be held incommunicado. An accused person shall be assumed innocent until proven guilty. At every stage of criminal process, an accused shall be informed of the charges against him or her. • No person shall be tried more than once for the same crime. • No individual, collective, or firm shall be able to compel either jury service, discovery, or witness testimony during the proceedings of a criminal trial. • Coercive detention shall not be exercised arbitrarily but only upon probable cause that the detainee (a) has committed or (b) is committing a criminal offence, or that he or she has been made, or is soon to be made, a subject of a court order regarding (c) a medical isolation on the account of a highly contagious and deadly disease. • A person who has been arrested, detained, imprisoned, tried, or sentenced either illegally or in error shall receive full restitution. • Restitutive compensation may be obtained coercively if necessary. • The prosecution, arbitration, and enforcement of any and all disputes may be performed by any arbitration or protection agency formed and operates voluntarily under the purview of this Constitution. • Any arbitration resolution binding parties to this Constitution that may be reasonably construed to be in contravention of any provision of this Constitution is null and void. • This Constitution ratifies and adopts the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, as adopted by a United Nations diplomatic conference on 10 June 1958 and entered into force on 7 June 1959. • Any and all Foreign Arbitral Awards recognized by the aforementioned Convention shall be binding in the jurisdiction of the parties of this Constitution and any enforcement agency operating in the jurisdiction of the parties of this Constitution shall have the authority to enforce such Awards upon request from the winning party. • Any ambiguities in this Constitution or any future legislation must always be interpreted in favor of individual liberty. • Common and customary laws shall take precedence over statutory laws. Statutes violating customary laws can be challenged and invalidated with 2/5 majority. • Citizens shall have the right to form new, or join existing jurisdictions. • Any creation of new laws requires 3/5 majority to pass. All laws can be repealed with 2/5 support at any time. Notwithstanding the above, in no case, even with 100% support, can the person or property of any individual be aggressed against. • Any collection of voluntary taxes must be done at the most local level with proceeds passed on to higher levels of government as appropriate. The most local level is the smallest jurisdiction in geographic size. Article V: Prohibitions The following laws, private covenants or practices are impermissible and unconstitutional for any entity to enforce on the property of another without prior, express, voluntary consent: • Any coercive, non-voluntary transfer of money from any individual or group of individuals to any governing entity, as in compulsory taxation. • Any coercive, non-voluntary transfer of any private property from an individual or group of individuals to any governing entity, as in asset forfeiture and eminent domain. • Any coercive, non-voluntary limitation, stipulation, regulation, or restriction on the ownership, transfer, and usage in any way of any private property whatsoever, except in cases regarding circumstances beyond the territorial borders of the jurisdiction of this Constitution. • Laws, rules, regulations, and pronunciations coercively penalizing in any way any victimless or consensual actions whatsoever. • Laws, rules, regulations, and pronunciations coercively compelling any individual to act in any way whatsoever against his or her express will, except at the behest of a voluntarily signed contract. • Any form of restriction, hindrance, or otherwise forceful intervention against any movement of individuals or group of individuals across the borders of the territory over which this Constitution has jurisdiction. • Laws respecting or establishing a right to property in contravention of those definitions of rights to property established herein. • Criminal statutes that do not specify an exact mens rea requirement for prosecution and enforcement. • Laws, rules, regulations, and pronunciations respecting or concerning the establishment of a central bank. • Any attempt to establish a monopoly on coercion and force within the jurisdiction of this Constitution. • any level may attempt to create a Capital City. • The Federal Government may attempt to directly collect Taxes, even if voluntary. Federal Government Funding must come from its subsidiary lower levels of government. • Any attempt to prohibit any individual from opting out of this Constitution and into another Constitution of his or her choice. The new Constitution may be anything they please but with the only prohibition being it may not infringe on any other member of this society. It may restrict the actions of the individual opting into the system but may not allow him to do anything disallowed in this society (i.e. violence) and will only apply to that specific individual and no other member of society. • Any attempt to create any agency to carry out to work of government. This includes all levels of government and all agencies or quasi-agencies. For the avoidance of doubt, this includes health agencies, revenue collection agencies, national defense agencies, intelligence and police agencies, securities and banking agencies. This is not exhaustive. No agencies may be created in any field currently in existence or potentially developed in the future. • Any restriction in any way the ability of any business that does not harm, aggress or defraud customers. • Any require licenses or fees for the establishment of a business or charity. • Any attempt to limit or prohibit the creation and operation of competing arbitration and alternative dispute resolution systems. • Any attempt to limit or prohibit the creation of privately organized defense agencies. These defense agencies may operate domestically or abroad but are subject to every clause in this Constitution. • Any attempt to raise revenue via taxation without a written contract, signed by both parties to receive the funds. • Any attempt to create a Military in any capacity. Defense of the nation must be provided either by individuals or privately organized and competing defense agencies. • Any attempt to create monopolistic police powers are prohibited at all levels of government. • Any attempt for the, at any level, to own any real property. The government may lease private property for a period of up to 10 years with funding coming only from voluntary sources. • Any attempt to create laws of special privilege to any person or group. This includes but is not limited to race, religion, sex etc. For the avoidance of doubt this explicitly includes considering any of these aspects with regards to reparations and any other endeavor of the government(s). • Any attempt to create a monopoly on currency. No government can participate in creating any common currency. All individuals are free and able to make transactions in anything they wish. The government may also ask for voluntary donations in any currency it pleases. • Any attempt to establish a welfare program funded with anything other than private donations earmarked exclusively for this purpose. Reminder, all funding for the Federal Government must come from its subsidiary governments. • Any attempt to borrow utilizing tax revenue as a guarantee. The government, at any level, may borrow only with the promise to pay via its voluntary revenue sources. For the avoidance of doubt, taxation is not voluntary. • The government, at any level, may not attempt to keep any confidential records. All records shall be available for the public domain. No redactions are allowed on any document. --- # Can Startup Cities Defend Themselves? Ask Dubai URL: https://free-cities.org/can-startup-cities-defend-themselves-ask-dubai Published: 2026-03-30 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: city-states-today, private-governance It’s been a month since the Gulf war erupted. Triggered by the assassination of Iran’s leader in a U.S.-Israeli strike, the conflict has since spilled across the region. The UAE has been hit hardest: by 25 March 2026, hundreds of Iranian missiles and over 1,800 drones had been fired at it, killing at least 9 and injuring 166 — with even symbols of Dubai’s global image, like the famous sail-shaped Burj Al Arab hotel, caught in the crossfire. A certain genre of commentary emerged almost instantly: Dubai as a mirage finally collapsing. There has been a lot of barely concealed glee online from those long scornful of the city, portraying the situation as pure panic — cryptobros and botox-filled Instagram models fighting for the last seats on flights out. The media have largely joined the chorus. Dubai, apparently, is “finished”, facing “an existential threat”, “scrambling to save its reputation”, or even “exploding in a puff of intercepted missile smoke”. “Could this be the end of Dubai?” asks the urbanist guru Richard Florida. For decades, Dubai has positioned itself as the Switzerland of the Middle East — a neutral, business-first oasis in a region that, for as long as anyone alive can remember, has been anything but stable. Is that image about to fall apart? Who Will Defend a City of Nomads? Dubai’s demographic structure seems, at first glance, to confirm the worst fears. Around 90% of the city’s population is foreign-born — easily the highest proportion of any major city in the world. Many — our family included — moved here relatively recently. We’ve been in Dubai for just two years and, like many others, were not exactly expecting to be woken up by air raid alerts in the middle of the night. Free Cities advocates hear this argument all the time: a small jurisdiction that minds its own business and caters to global nomads would not withstand a hostile attack. People are not “rooted,” so they will pack up and leave at the first sign of danger. Sceptics see this as the Achilles’ heel of the entire model: how can a city-state defend itself against a nation-state with a full-scale, tax-funded military machine? The question, in fact, is twofold. First, can a startup city physically defend its people and infrastructure? Second, can the economic model that sustains it withstand prolonged uncertainty? Dubai, at least so far, appears to be succeeding at both — and that matters far beyond the Gulf. David vs Goliath: Small Doesn’t Mean Weak On the military front, the UAE’s air defence systems have intercepted the overwhelming majority of incoming missiles and drones. After an initial shock, the city has returned back to normal with surprising speed. The occasional distant “boom” — usually signalling yet another successful interception — has become part of the background noise. Life goes on. The biggest misconception is that defence capabilities depend on the size of the war machine. “Smaller” does not mean “weaker” — it never did. As Johan Norberg reminds us in Peak Human, smaller, freedom-oriented societies have often proven remarkably resilient against much larger adversaries. The historical record is full of “David versus Goliath” cases — not romantic exceptions, but recurring patterns. Athens defeated Persia through naval superiority, alliances, and the clever use of geography. Venice — a city-state — survived nearly a thousand years among powerful empires by combining naval strength, commercial leverage, and diplomatic pragmatism. The Dutch Republic, a tiny commercial country surrounded by powerful rivals, became Europe’s financial centre in the 17th century, attracting capital even during wartime. In the Battle of Scheveningen (1653), the Dutch fleet managed to break the blockade imposed by the English navy, then the most powerful maritime force in the world. Source: Wikimedia Commons. Historically, many trading cities relied on hybrid or private defence mechanisms — Venice’s merchant fleets doubling as naval forces, the Dutch Republic’s commercially funded navy, the Hanseatic League pooling defence resources. A modern equivalent could include joint security arrangements between SEZs, contracted defence services, or privately financed cyber capabilities. The UAE itself offers a contemporary example: Dubai does not defend itself alone, but as part of a federal system in which Abu Dhabi plays a central role — effectively pooling resources for collective security. The Age of Asymmetry Security comes from institutions and incentives, not size. If anything, the 21st century only strengthens this argument. Military conflict is increasingly about innovation rather than brute force. Drones, cyber defence, AI-enabled surveillance — technological asymmetry allows smaller actors to punch above their weight. Ukraine’s resilience against Russia is a telling example. Startup cities can go further still — they can be built from scratch for resilience: decentralised energy grids, backup communication systems, protected data infrastructure. Financial centres already operate like this. Many exchanges maintain mirrored systems across multiple locations, ensuring continuity even if one hub goes offline. A well-designed Free City could do the same. Commercial Deterrence — And Its Limits Another strategy is to become too valuable to disrupt. Venice mastered this, and so did the Dutch Republic — even powerful empires often preferred trading with them to conquering them. The same logic still applies. Dubai sits at the intersection of global energy markets, aviation networks, and financial flows. Disrupting it would damage the global economy, creating strong incentives for external actors to protect it. This is sometimes called commercial deterrence. You might say — and rightly — that this also creates incentives to attack, as we are seeing now. Iran is effectively trying to blackmail the world through the threat of energy disruption. But this shifts the nature of the threat from conquest to harassment. And harassment, so far, has not been particularly effective. Despite small populations and low taxes, the UAE has intercepted the overwhelming majority of incoming projectiles. Wealth accumulated during decades of peace — and it has been remarkably peaceful for roughly 50 years, especially compared to many neighbours — has been invested in highly sophisticated air defence systems. The Covid Stress Test — and the Price of Panic The second — and ultimately more important — question is whether the startup city model itself can withstand the crisis. We do not yet have a definitive answer for Dubai, as the conflict is ongoing. But we do have a recent precedent that, just a few years ago, was framed as an existential threat: the Covid pandemic. Small, agile, business-oriented jurisdictions handled Covid noticeably better than many large ones. Places like Singapore and Monaco, as well as Dubai, have fewer administrative layers, tighter coordination between government and business, and greater sensitivity to economic signals — all of which becomes crucial in times of uncertainty. Throughout 2020, Dubai kept hosting large-scale events — including New Year’s Eve celebrations — even as most cities around the world shut down. Source: Wikimedia Commons. Smaller systems could implement targeted and experimental policies, while large states often defaulted to blanket national measures. Above all, they simply couldn’t afford prolonged shutdowns and risk alienating mobile capital and talent. During Covid, they faced stronger incentives to experiment, adjust, and reopen quickly. Rapid testing, early adoption of digital health systems, and a swift reopening allowed Dubai to return to normal while much of Europe remained locked down. By mid-2020, offices were reopening, kids were back in school, malls were buzzing, and airports were filling with tourists again — all while in London you could still be stopped by a guard in a park for walking too close to your friend (it happened to me more than once). Dubai, in part, owes its recent economic rise to Covid — both to its own agility and to the disastrous policies chosen by many Western countries. Promotions, Not Prohibitions If survival means keeping the economy running, the biggest threat is often internal: panic, populism, and policy drift. We’ve seen too many governments resort to populism and abandon reasonable policies in times of trouble. Thankfully, so far Dubai’s governing philosophy — “What’s good for the merchants is good for Dubai” — remains intact. As of March 2026, airports continue to operate, even if at reduced capacity. While tourists face disruptions, hotels are offering discounted “staycations” to residents. Attractions are rolling out promotions: the world’s largest water park for free, anyone? A half-price stay on The Palm? After about a week of war, loud night-time air raid alarms were replaced with gentler notifications. Expats temporarily leaving were promised leniency on tax residency rules to encourage their return. Schools were allowed to decide individually whether to reopen. Hotels are offering free stay for stranded travellers — not just as a humanitarian gesture, but as rational crisis management aimed at preventing panic from becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Openness, Not Oil, Built Dubai as We Know It In peaceful times, this model has worked spectacularly. Dubai’s population grew from just under one million in 2000 to around four million today, roughly quadrupling since the turn of the century. And despite persistent myths, this growth was not fuelled by oil wealth. Oil now accounts for less than 1% of its GDP. This chart from Harvard’s Metroverse highlights that Dubai’s economy relies on trade, services, and construction — not oil. Source: Metroverse. The real backbone of Dubai’s economy is its service sector — retail, finance, hospitality — industries that benefit greatly from deregulation. If anything, the next phase will require doubling down — extending this hands-off approach to boost new industries, from the recently approved gambling hub to large-scale AI data centres. Unsurprisingly, the model has begun to spread beyond the UAE. Riyadh, Doha, and other regional hubs are developing their own versions, competing for the same mobile capital and talent. Richard Florida warns that this makes such cities interchangeable: “If one falters, another steps up to take its place.” But competition is not a bug — it is the feature, the model’s built-in discipline mechanism. It is precisely what forces jurisdictions to maintain — and ceaselessly improve — the conditions that attract people and investment in the first place. When a Hub Becomes a Home Another misconception is that cities like Dubai are inherently transient. This was once a fair critique. In 2009, Jim Krane described Dubai as “not a genuine city,” but rather an “unfinished collection of buildings” with the atmosphere of an airport or hotel. That description no longer holds. The introduction of long-term residency options — such as golden visas — has begun to anchor high-skilled migrants. Labour reforms have gradually improved conditions for lower-income workers. The result is a more rooted population. My daughter’s nursery includes third-generation Dubaians — grandchildren of those who moved here decades ago in pursuit of opportunity. That is not the profile of a purely transient city. It is also worth remembering that many residents come not from wealthy Western countries, but from regions where instability is far more severe. At a recent gathering, a Pakistani friend remarked, almost casually, “We’ve seen war back home.” The comment was met with quiet nods from Lebanese, Syrians, and Ukrainians. For many, Dubai — even under intermittent threat — remains a safer and more predictable alternative. Iran vs Dubai: A Tale of Two Systems Why is Iran doing it, after all? On the surface, the attacks look like retaliation for hosting U.S. military bases. But at a deeper level, the conflict highlights something else: how radically different the UAE and Iran’s models are. Dubai is everything that Iran is not — cosmopolitan, peaceful, tolerant, business-friendly, and open to the world. Naturally, it is not lost on Tehran that there is another way for a Muslim, oil-rich country to organise itself — and one that appears to work rather well. Al Bastakiya, Dubai’s historic district and now a major tourist site, takes its name from the Iranian town of Bastak and was developed by Persian merchants who formed the majority of the area’s population a century ago. Photo by Walid Ahmad. For over a century, Iran has been a major source of capital and talent for Dubai. When Persian ports raised taxes in the early 20th century, Dubai moved in the opposite direction, establishing itself as a free port and attracting hundreds of Persian merchants. Since then, repeated policy missteps — tariffs in the 1970s, the Islamic Revolution, and ongoing restrictions — have pushed wave after wave of Iranians across the Gulf. Some 40–60% of the Emirati population may have Persian roots. Each time, people voted with their feet for a more open system — at considerable cost to the Iranian economy. Of course, the ayatollahs are not happy, to put it mildly. And this is a lesson for all aspiring Free Cities. The world, sadly, is not becoming freer or more peaceful. To win the competition for talent and capital, your place does not have to be 100% safe — after all, there are fewer and fewer places like that. It simply has to offer more safety than alternatives. Lesson for Free Cities: Don’t Fix What Isn’t Broken Dubai’s experience under attack is a real-time stress test of the Free City model. The early results suggest that small, autonomous, business-oriented jurisdictions can hold their ground — by combining innovation, institutional design, and a certain refusal to panic. But the greatest test is not whether they can intercept missiles, but whether they can resist the far more familiar impulse to undermine themselves. In times of crisis, governments are tempted to overreact, overregulate, and abandon the very policies that made them successful in the first place. For startup cities, the challenge is simple and brutal: don’t break your own model. Cover image by Denys Gromov --- # Building a Freer Future: A Manifesto for Peaceful Parenting and Sovereign Education URL: https://free-cities.org/building-a-freer-future-a-manifesto-for-peaceful-parenting-and-sovereign-education Published: 2023-06-19 Author: Caroline King Category: Blog Topics: alternative-education Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. To shape a freer future for generations to come, we must take responsibility for ourselves and our children. The current trend of centralizing power and shifting responsibilities from the family to the state is eroding our ability to shape our own future. Coercive parenting methods contribute to this trend, which in turn leads to the more centralization of power. It is crucial that we prioritize peaceful parenting practices and recognize the importance of family and sound upbringing of children as a cornerstone of a freer society. The education system and the ever-growing control of the state in our lives also contribute to the issue, and we must identify the mechanisms that are preventing us from realizing the level of freedom we desire. In this manifesto, we will explore how peaceful parenting and sovereign education can pave the way for a freer future. Seeking autonomy: breaking free from state constraints Since a young age, I’ve been aware of the constraints imposed by state institutions, which limit our personal responsibility. The burden of excessive taxation and inadequacies of the healthcare system frustrated me throughout state schooling and self-employment. Despite my best efforts, I felt the state’s grip becoming more restrictive, and I needed to leave to find true freedom and individual agency. Although it was difficult, leaving was necessary to break free from state constraints. The paradox of freedom: seeking autonomy without isolation Leaving one’s country to pursue greater freedom is a difficult decision, often driven by a desire for educational, economic, or personal freedom. However, while moving to a new country may offer a degree of relief from oppressive state institutions or excessive taxation, it is unlikely to provide the full range of freedoms one seeks. Moreover, as social beings, many of us seek community and connection, and isolating ourselves in pursuit of freedom risks enslaving us to a different form of isolation. True freedom must be achieved by seeking out not just individual autonomy, but also by finding and building meaningful connections within a community that values ​​and respects the principles of liberty and justice. Freedom and responsibility: two sides of the same coin Genuine freedom requires personal responsibility. Without taking ownership of our lives, we risk dependence on others, making autonomy an illusion. Creating a place where we can be truly free may not exist, and it’s up to us to shape our environment to align with our values ​​and goals. This could involve finding jurisdictions with better conditions or taking an unconventional path like living off the grid. Regardless, assuming responsibility for our freedom is the key to creating a life that’s truly our own. The state’s role in raising children As a parent, I have come to realize that state institutions often lay claim to our children, viewing them as little more than cogs in a machine that must be programmed to serve the interests of the state. This is particularly evident in the Swedish legal system, which suggests that the state owns our children, as evidenced by its policies on child abduction and the prioritization of societal interests over those of the family. Within the Swedish school system, the emphasis on so-called “right values” and equality has resulted in a curriculum that erases gender differences and prioritizes conformity over individuality. This ideology is pervasive throughout the educational system and is readily apparent on the Ministry of Education’s website. Can parents or the government own a child? In order to find out if parents or the government have a right to use coercion we need to establish the ownership of children. Can they own the children and do they have the right to coerce them? The answer is no. A child is an independent entity with the ability to think and feel on its own. Even the parents who gave birth cannot claim ownership of their children, and neither can the state. Instead, parents can be seen as custodians who act in the child’s best interests and gradually transfer ownership to the child as they grow older and become capable of making decisions for themselves. Parents are the ones who create their children, not the state. Therefore, the use of coercion by the state cannot be justified. Advocating respect for children in a free society Childism is a discriminatory belief that children do not have the same status as adults, limiting their freedoms and disregarding their experiences and opinions. In a free society, children deserve the same respect and consideration as adults. Unfortunately, childism is still prevalent and can lead to authoritarian and dismissive attitudes towards children. Practicing peaceful parenting can break free from these harmful behaviors and build healthy relationships based on mutual respect and understanding, treating children with the same respect you would treat a fellow human being. Embracing our natural human tendencies and prioritizing the family for a freer future To achieve a freer future for our children, we must reject the state’s dictation of education in public schools and embrace natural gender roles, prioritize the family, and advocate for state-free education. Many countries view children as future contributors to the state and a source of tax revenue, often under the guise of socialist ideals. By promoting peaceful parenting, sovereign education, and sound money , we can lay the groundwork for a freer future. However, these principles are often disregarded in the public school system, leaving parents feeling burdened by societal expectations and little time for their children’s needs. Embracing natural instincts to raise children Before becoming a parent, peaceful parenting was an unfamiliar concept to me. I had not planned on having children, as I felt hesitant to bring another person into a challenging world. However, I soon realized that I did not have to raise my children the way I was raised. It is natural to care for our offspring, but the state apparatus often works against our natural instincts, prioritizing efficiency and tax revenue over the needs of parents and their children in the long run. Breaking the cycle: transforming future generations through peaceful parenting Peaceful parenting involves raising a child without coercion, with the exception of situations that threaten the child’s safety. The principle is to be gentle and attentive to the child’s needs, which should come naturally but are often overlooked in modern Western societies. Babies cry only when something is wrong, and it is the parent’s responsibility to identify and address these needs promptly. Stress caused by practices like the ‘cry it out’ method can cause brain damage, and ignoring a child’s needs can have detrimental effects in the future. Unfortunately, peaceful parenting methods are often not promoted within government institutions, because they undermine government programs that rely on weak parent-child bonds, such as sending children to kindergarten at a very young age. Prioritizing a child’s needs involves actions such as breastfeeding on demand for a natural length of time which in reality is about 3-4 years, carrying the baby in a sling or in the arms to meet the child’s instinctual need to be held, and co-sleeping to fulfill the evolutionary need to avoid abandonment at night. Taking responsibility for our children: the key to fostering freedom Raising children through peaceful parenting and fostering a strong nuclear family is crucial for building a free society, along with maintaining sound money. We must recognize the pattern of state coercion and modern child raising, which only serves to prepare the child for life as a cog in the machine. To promote a free society, we cannot hand over the responsibility of raising and educating our children, or managing our finances, to the state. Instead, we must take on this responsibility ourselves, by spreading information and building a support system for families seeking alternatives to the conventional system. Peaceful parenting and sovereign education are key components of a broader movement to foster freedom, including initiatives such as free societies and bitcoin . These alternatives should be promoted as private, sovereign options to government-controlled systems, even if there are no immediate economic incentives. Sovereign education – the opposite of state-controlled education Recognizing the importance of sovereign education for children raised in the spirit of libertarianism is crucial for those valuing freedom and autonomy. Sovereignty allows for self-governance and independence, enabling individuals to make decisions without external control. Homeschooling, unschooling/self-directed learning, or private schooling are alternatives to state-controlled education that promote consent and individual autonomy. Public schools can be mediocre and detrimental to children, leaving them uninterested and unenthusiastic. In contrast, sovereign education based on consent fosters a child’s innate curiosity and passion for learning, catering to individual needs and interests. The state-controlled education system prioritizes preparing children for the workforce rather than their individual needs, perpetuating mediocrity and a lack of enthusiasm for learning. Curriculums cater to the average student, leaving many children feeling unfulfilled and unchallenged. It takes a village to raise a child: the role of community As the ancient African proverb goes, “caring for a child is a community effort.” This holds true for those who have chosen to unschool their children outside the mainstream system, as it can be a daunting task without support. In countries like Sweden or Germany, where homeschooling is banned, it’s easy to fall into the trap of isolation and self-imposed confinement when you are forced to leave your country to be able to homeschool. Building a supportive community is crucial, especially when starting from scratch. Neighbors who share our values ​​and vision of a freer future can lend their expertise and help when needed. Sovereign, self-directed learning within a Free City or intentional community demands flexibility in catering to individual needs, and a uniform approach would lead us back to the constraints of the traditional government schooling system. Cooperation within a community can enhance the effectiveness of the learning process, providing a supportive and nurturing environment for children to thrive. Education cooperatives within free societies To break free from conventional schooling, families can form a Free City educational cooperative. Members can rent a community center and co-working spaces, creating a supportive environment for self-directed learning. Children can learn naturally by following their interests, mentored by their parents. In a Free City or intentional community, children can also become apprentices, taking on small jobs and participating in excursions and activities organized by parents. By pooling resources, families can create an inspiring environment for their children’s education while building a supportive community. Navigating the journey from homeschooling to formal education Many people may question whether home-schooling could be a barrier for higher education. In fact, quite the opposite is often true. Home-schooling can help keep the passion and drive to learn intact, which can make a child more successful in academic pursuits. If a homeschooled child wishes to pursue higher education, they may need to pass an entrance test or present a portfolio of their learning. However, with dedication and willingness to learn, it is entirely possible for homeschooled children to excel in formal education systems such as universities. Sovereign self-directed education fosters entrepreneurship and responsibility Sovereign self-directed education is like a launchpad for young entrepreneurs and independent thinkers. Without the shackles of state education, these young minds are free to explore and discover their passions, and develop the skills needed to create their own future. They grow up with a strong sense of responsibility and independence, knowing that they are the masters of their own destiny. In a world where the state is expanding its control and wokeism is on the rise, these traits are more important than ever. By fostering a culture of entrepreneurship and self-reliance, sovereign self-directed education is empowering the next generation of leaders, creators, and innovators. It is a path towards a brighter, freer, and more prosperous future for all. Conclusion In promoting peaceful parenting and sovereign education, we are not just raising children, we are nurturing a freer world. By empowering our children with individuality and creativity, free from the constraints of the state, we can build stronger families and foster the growth of happy, independent children who will live their lives with autonomy and respect for others. By taking back the responsibility and freedom of raising children from the state, we would create a generation of self-driven individuals who understand that the two are inextricably linked . With peaceful parenting and sovereign education at the forefront, we can pave the way for a brighter future, where each child has the chance to shape their own destiny, within a freer and more prosperous future. This blog post was originally published by Caroline King at Den Andra Resan in April 2023. Visit the blog for more articles in English and Swedish. Listen to our interview with the author, Caroline King, on the Free Cities Podcast here. --- # Why The EU Needs Special Economic Zones to Unlock Its Digital Future URL: https://free-cities.org/why-the-eu-needs-special-economic-zones-to-unlock-its-digital-future Published: 2025-10-15 Author: Mariana Carmona Category: Blog Topics: special-economic-zones, taxation-and-economics, technology-in-new-cities Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. The European Union stands at a critical crossroads. While the continent boasts 440 million consumers, world-class universities, and some of the globe’s most innovative companies. The EU has everything it needs to dominate the digital economy, for instance, six EU countries rank among the world’s top 15 most innovative countries, inequality is 10 percentage points lower than in the US or China, and European commitment to the rule of law and environmental protection is unmatched globally and yet, it’s falling dangerously behind in the digital race. So what’s holding the EU back? A deep diagnosis of the causes is in the Draghi Report on EU Competitiveness, which identified, among others, two critical problems: fragmented actions and excessive regulatory burden. While Silicon Valley startups can launch with a single regulatory framework, European entrepreneurs must navigate 27 different legal systems. It’s like trying to build a highway where every few kilometres the road rules change completely. To pave the road in one go, the Draghi Report recommended the creation of the 28th Legal Regime — a unified set of laws that would apply across all Member States, shortening the length of national procedures for businesses qualified to operate under it (Draghi Report, p.51). Think of it as creating a “digital single market” with actual teeth. The 28th Legal Regime isn’t simply regulatory housekeeping. It can make the difference for the EU becoming a digital powerhouse. A high vision institutional framework can be the turning point for companies seeking to relocate amidst the geopolitical turmoil of our time. And, moreover, bring back European startups and companies that moved overseas, forced by the costs of complying with EU regulations. As noted by the Draghi Report, one-third of European start-ups that became unicorns moved outside the EU in their incubation stage to avoid a gruelling duo: taxes and regulation. Designing the 28th Legal Regime can probably be done efficiently and in record time. However, the biggest challenge may be in its implementation. How do you actually implement such a massive change across 27 sovereign nations? It is difficult to ignore that the 28th Legal Regime will fall within the realm of politics and institutional design. And that is where the crux of the matter lies. Traditional Approaches May Not Work To implement the 28th Legal Regime, the Draghi Report suggests creating “a permanent European coordinator in charge of assisting in obtaining the necessary permits. This coordinator would be responsible for monitoring progress in the permit granting process and facilitating regional cooperation to ensure political backing for cross-border infrastructure from all relevant Member States (Draghi Report, p. 51).” On paper, this sounds reasonable. In reality, it’s a recipe for bureaucratic gridlock. Consider the track record: Europe’s attempt to create a unified Civil Code in the early 2000s collapsed under political pressure and was watered down to a basic Sales Law. Why would the 28th Legal Regime fare any better? Creating a supranational bureaucracy operating the 28th Legal Regime across the Union will bring new challenges and risks that can be bigger than the alleged solution. The permanent European Union’s coordinator can potentially become a centralised bottleneck because the appointment of the managers that will be in charge of enforcement and oversight of the 28th Legal Regime would likely become a political matter where the EU member countries will probably seek to have influence and decision-making power, which becomes a social choice dilemma: who will be appointed? for what term?, how are positions rotated across the EU members?, and a myriad of political decisions that can potentially ensnare the economic goals of the new legal regime. Additionally, there is going to be a budget battle. The new Permanent Coordinator or Implementer of the 28th Legal Regime will require the corresponding funding, which means that the EU Budget will have to create a new budgetary item with a charge to the EU taxpayers. Moreover, the new bureaucratic agency will become a supra-national entity with more power than the local law enforcement agencies, at least for certain economic sectors or companies, which can give rise to social and political tensions at the local level. On the other hand, if each Member of the Union establishes an office in charge of the 28th Legal Regime, the differences in capacity, efficiency, and effectiveness will generate new intra-regional inequalities, affecting the social perception of the new regime. There has to be a better way—and there is. Special Economic Zones: The Market-Driven Alternative What if instead of creating more bureaucracy and costs on the backs of the taxpayers, the EU leveraged market forces to implement the 28th Legal Regime? Special Economic Zones (SEZs) offer exactly this opportunity. These are geographically defined areas where different and special legal frameworks apply, designed to attract investment and accelerate innovation. Think of them as “policy laboratories” where new rules can be tested and refined before broader implementation. There is a lot that can be said about the failure of Special Economic Zones, as it can be said about companies or public policies. What cannot be contested is that if successful, Special Economic Zones have the power to transform entire nations. The iconic case of China, a country that transformed its economy and technology capacity thanks to its aggressive Special Economic Zone policy at the national and municipal levels. Today, Chinese Special Economic Zones, Shenzhen-Guangzhou, alongside Hong Kong, form the second most competitive Science and Technology Cluster in the world[1]. Following the model, India has authorised 5,537 Special Economic Zone units since the enactment of the SEZ Act in 2005 and according to an evaluation done by the renowned consultancy PwC, the units in operation have created 2.3 million jobs, have attracted over 4 billion dollars in foreign direct investment and have demonstrated higher productivity and social inclusion as Indian SEZ employ more women compared to what the rest of the Indian labour market does. There are multiple examples in the Middle East; it is just a matter of searching images on the internet of Dubai in the 1970s and what it is today, and yes, Dubai Internet City and Dubai International Financial Centre are Special Economic Zones, also named Free Zones, where a different legal framework applies compared to the rest of the Emirate. Coming back to the European Union and the 28th Legal Regime, the point is that, unlike a government-run agency, Special Economic Zones, as implementers of the 28th Legal Regime, would operate under a business logic, which means that they succeed by attracting companies, and the way to do it is by offering genuinely competitive advantages. The business logic behind the operation of a Special Economic Zone generates a virtuous cycle where the Zone will be in charge of implementing the 28th Legal Regime, and the Zone Operator will compete with other Zones to offer the best business and infrastructure conditions. Companies will choose the zone with the most efficient services and infrastructure conditions. Governments will compete to attract the most successful Zone operators to their territory, for instance, by offering incentives, connectivity, tax holidays, incentives, or aligning pro-innovative policies in a smart way, and Innovation would spread organically as successful models are copied. When SEZ management and governance innovations prove superior, they naturally pressure traditional systems to improve, and perhaps the “special” 28th Legal Regime becomes effectively the EU regime for doing business matters. From Pilot to Scale: The Path Forward EU Special Economic Zones specifically designed to implement the 28th Legal Regime can be ideal spaces to accelerate frontier technologies—artificial intelligence, blockchain, edge computing, quantum computing, and others. The EU Competitiveness Agenda can accelerate the implementation of other policies that are being developed, for example, the Startup and Scale Up strategy, the simplification of digital regulations that exempt or relief companies from computational power thresholds, data storage limitations, single- stop licensing and obtaining permits, harmonised tax treatment, access to specialized courts familiar with digital business models, and more. Instead of rolling out all the above policies throughout the 27 Members, Special Economic Zones permit launching pilot policies and are ideal spaces to focus incentives for the Projects of Common European Interest (Draghi Report, Vol 2, p.34). These are controlled environments suitable for testing and refining the new legal regime and regulatory simplifications. Proven successful policies will expand organically outside the zones through competition, imitation and, certainly, with lower political friction. This approach would minimise the political risks while maximising the learning opportunities. If the regime has some loopholes, the damage is swiftly contained and fixed, whereas if it succeeds, the legal & regulatory framework can spread rapidly. The Governance Innovation Factor Besides, Special Economic Zones are suitable to implement special rules more efficiently, that is, they innovate governance itself. When freed from legacy constraints, they can experiment with: regulatory sandboxes for testing new technologies, outcome-based regulation instead of process-rules, real-time policy adaptation based on market feedback, cross-border coordination, etc. Governance innovation could be the European Union´s most valuable export, positioning the continent as a leader in institutional design. It Is Time for Bold Action The 28th Legal Regime represents the EU Parliament’s recognition that business as usual isn’t sufficient. Global technological leadership demands institutional innovation to match. Special Economic Zones offer a market-tested, politically feasible path to implement the 28th Legal Regime while fostering the innovation path that the EU requires, underpinning its digital leadership and sovereignty vis-à-vis global dominant players. A centralised and bureaucratic approach to implement the 28th Legal Regime comes with a caveat: it has more probabilities of getting stuck in a political diatribe, shifting the focus away from what really matters: the EU’s competitiveness in frontier technologies that will determine the living conditions of the next decades. With the 28th Legal Regime set for completion by early 2026, now is the time to consider institutional alternatives that can unlock the EU’s innovation potential. Special Economic Zones aren’t just an implementation mechanism—they are the opportunity to leapfrog the competition and reclaim technological leadership of the EU. The question isn’t whether Europe can afford to try this approach. The question is whether it can afford not to. The future of European competitiveness depends on bold institutional innovation. Special Economic Zones offer a proven path forward—if European leaders have the courage to embrace market-driven solutions over bureaucratic expansion. [1] Top 100 S&T clusters in Global Innovation Index 2024, WIPO. References • Draghi Report • Gebel T. (2022). Cités Privées Libres: Pour que les Gouvernements se battent pour vous. Aquila Urbis. Kindle French Edition. pp 1-342. • Moberg Lotta(2015). The Political Economy of Special Economic Zones. Journal of Institutional Economics. Volume 11. Issue 01. March. pp 167 – 190. • Moberg Lotta, Tarko Vlad (2021). Special Economic Zones and liberalization avalanches. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy • PwC. (2021). Evaluating impact of SEZs in India through sectoral analysis and case studies. Final. Report. July. • Zaldívar F. and Molina E. (2018). Special Economic Zones and their impact on Regional Economic Development. Latin American Economic Review, Vol 49, No. 193. • Zeng Z.D. (n.d.) Special Economic Zones: Lessons from the Global Experience. Private Enterprise Development in Low Income Countries (PEDL) Synthesis Series No.1 • Zeng Z.D. (2021). The Dos and Don’ts of Special Economic Zones. World Bank. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. • Zeng Z.D. (2021). The Past, Present, and Future of Special Economic Zones and Their Impact. Journal of International Economic Law. 00:1-17, dos:10.1093/jiel/jgab014 The author is a Special Economic Zones consultant. --- # How Ciudad Morazán Uses Its ZEDE Status to Benefit Hondurans URL: https://free-cities.org/how-ciudad-morazan-uses-its-zede-status-to-benefit-hondurans Published: 2022-08-26 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Ciudad Morazán was conceived and designed with one purpose—to provide a better standard of living for blue-collar Hondurans. It consists of less than 60 acres just outside the industrial city of Choloma in the northern part of Honduras. Although the special jurisdiction provides many benefits to foreign residents, its primary purpose was always to offer poverty-stricken Honduran people a better alternative than fleeing to the United States as illegal immigrants. Honduras has been known for decades as an area with a weak rule of law, which accounts for its poverty and high crime rate. Choloma, in particular, is known as one of the most dangerous places in the world that is not an actual war zone. As explained in our recent article on ZEDEs, a few visionaries saw the severe problems of Honduras as an opportunity to build something unique as a solution. The result was the Organic Law of Zones of Employment, called the ZEDE regime in its Spanish acronym. This law created the most advanced legal framework for special jurisdictions worldwide. Despite the infamous corruption of the political parties in Honduras, the law was passed with legal safeguards designed to protect the autonomy of the ZEDEs. Since providing legal stability was a primary goal of the plan to attract investment to the country, the safeguards included international treaties that would ensure the continuance of the ZEDEs even if a new government came into power and repealed the law that created them. Unfortunately, the political opposition used disinformation about the ZEDEs to win a national election the year after the first three ZEDEs were launched. However, the three existing ZEDEs, Próspera on the island of Roatán, Ciudad Morazán in the industrial region, and Orquidea in the agricultural south, are testing the strength of the legal protections, despite the law being repealed. Although each ZEDE uses the law to introduce different kinds of innovations, Ciudad Morazán is arguably the most threatened by the new government because its primary innovation is in how people live and work together. Próspera has been the most publicized because of its business and legal technology innovations, and Orquidea’s innovation is in agribusiness that is successful even without residents. The ZEDEs are not a threat to Honduran sovereignty as claimed because they are subject to the Honduran Constitution, treaties, national oversight, and criminal law. However, they have a great deal of autonomy to build civil and commercial institutions, as long as those institutions don’t violate human rights or the Constitution. The most outstanding value that Ciudad Morazán offers is voluntary, contract-based governance. This allows it to create better civil and commercial rules and regulations under its incentive to provide better public services. As a for-profit city, the ZEDE must attract voluntary tenants to survive. The relationship between the city and all tenants, whether industrial, commercial, or residential, is contractual, meaning that the city can be forced into third-party arbitration if it doesn’t fulfill its promises — a significant improvement compared to regular municipalities. Ciudad Morazán provides the public services of infrastructure, security, and conflict resolution under free market competition, which forces discipline. For example, there are no zoning laws, so the city can make better, more flexible use of the land to please its customers, the tenants. It builds warehouses, factories, offices, homes, roads, sidewalks, parks, public buildings, and everything needed for a full-service city. Because of competitive pressure, Ciudad Morazán has had to find innovative ways to provide services like sturdy housing, water treatment, drainage, and waste management at lower prices than in surrounding areas. Maintenance worker in Ciudad Morazán Security is an essential service due to the high crime rate. There are many gated communities or buildings in Honduras, but they are considered a luxury of the rich. So Ciudad Morazán had to find a way to make it affordable for working-class Hondurans. It is not just about the wall around the city. Innovative software that helps restrict entry while causing the least inconvenience to the people who live and work in the ZEDE is essential. The crucial difference is that the ZEDE law allows a private police force that keeps both criminals and corrupt police from preying on the residents. Unlike other cities, which must accept anyone who wants to live or do business there, including criminals, Ciudad Morazán selects the residents through an application and vetting process. Moreover, since the relationship is contractual, the tenants agree to the rules and regulations before they decide to apply. This helps enforcement of the relatively few and commonsense rules. The author, Joyce Brand, having breakfast with members of Ciudad Morazán’s security team For example, one of the rules is to keep the community clean. In most jurisdictions, littering laws are simply revenue tools. Ciudad Morazán considers a clean environment a crucial value for the community. If tenants violate this rule, they are not just fined; their lease is not renewed. Most jurisdictions fund their services through a myriad of taxes and fees that can be changed at any time without the approval or consent of the people who pay them. In contrast, the contract with Ciudad Morazán specifies that the only tax is five percent of income. The amount is reported and paid to the ZEDE rather than the national government. From this tax income, the ZEDE remits twelve percent of that revenue to five different government agencies without the personally identifiable information of the tenants. The remaining 88 percent is used to fund the services contractually provided by the ZEDE. Since the primary purpose of the ZEDE regime is to create jobs for Hondurans, Ciudad Morazán uses several means to attract industrial tenants who create those jobs. There are thousands of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) worldwide that provide tax incentives to attract investment. As a next-level SEZ, the ZEDE also starts with tax incentives. However, experience has shown (even in Honduras) that tax concessions are not enough by themselves to compete for direct foreign investment. The most important benefit the ZEDE provides its industrial tenants is a lower regulatory burden. The regulations are fewer and more straightforward, which means there are fewer approvals needed from Honduran bureaucrats. For example, industrial tenants can import machinery not otherwise allowed in Honduras. Ciudad Morazán has its own customs office and is located near Puerto Cortes, one of Central America’s most critical deep-water ports. By streamlining the import, export and shipping procedures, the ZEDE allows tenants to save on not only customs duties but the costs of regulatory compliance. In addition, there are no restrictions on nationalization into the Honduras jurisdiction, meaning that goods manufactured or assembled in the ZEDE can be sold in Honduras rather than having to be exported to other countries. With these savings, industrial tenants can afford to offer higher salaries than in the rest of Honduras. The minimum wage In Ciudad Morazán is ten percent above the national minimum wage. The industrial tenants can also afford to comply with the simplified labor statutes. For example, Honduran law requires businesses to pay specific severance amounts to terminated employees, but the employee must enforce that law through expensive Honduran court proceedings. Ciudad Morazán’s labor regulations are less costly to administer, but one requirement is for businesses to maintain severance pay in escrow accounts, which solves a common problem for the worker. Attracting productive labor is a major benefit for industrial tenants, and that better labor is attracted by the benefits Ciudad Morazán offers workers. Allowing workers to live near the industrial area in a walled city is an enormous benefit for both the workers and the factories. The factories don’t have to worry about workers being able to get to work, and the workers save significantly on transportation costs. The superior housing and security inside Ciudad Morazán attracts better labor as well as saving on costs for both factories and workers. Construction workers in Ciudad Morazán Aside from industrial and residential tenants, Ciudad Morazán serves commercial tenants. Just as industrial and residential tenants attract each other, commercial tenants benefit and attract the other two. The ZEDE encourages entrepreneurship by making it easy to start a small business. In contrast to the complex and expensive process in the rest of Honduras, registering a new business in Ciudad Morazán takes only 24 hours and costs only $10. Potential enterprises don’t have to worry about high costs, burdensome regulations, or dealing with corrupt bureaucrats. They are also protected from the criminal gangs that extort business owners in the surrounding area. One of the biggest falsehoods spread about the ZEDEs is that they can expropriate land from indigenous and other poor people. The truth is that only the government can expropriate land without paying a fair purchase price for it. The ZEDEs buy land with clear title from willing sellers as part of their charters. They have even declared they would never accept expropriated land from the government if offered it. The ZEDE law includes a provision that Honduran communities can vote to join a ZEDE if they wish. However, Ciudad Morazán operates under a business model that is 100% voluntary. Therefore, it could never accept a group of people who were not unanimous in their desire to live or work in the ZEDE and who could not be individually vetted as not being criminals. Although the ZEDE law allows the establishment of a completely different legal system from the rest of Honduras, Ciudad Morazán simply encourages third-party arbitration rather than using the Honduran civil and commercial court system. But, of course, if both parties to a dispute prefer to take their case to one of the notoriously corrupt Honduran courts rather than a third-party arbitrator, they are free to do so. Another privilege of a ZEDE is to regulate the use of currency in its jurisdiction. In line with its commitment to the freedom of its tenants, Ciudad Morazán leaves the issue of currency unregulated so that any two parties can use whatever money they prefer for their transactions. This means that alternative currencies like cryptocurrencies can be used by willing traders but cannot be mandated by legal tender laws. One of the plans of Ciudad Morazán for attracting jobs to Honduras was to market to companies in Asian countries with political instability. The legal protections of the ZEDEs under international treaties were expected to ensure that these safeguards for investors would mitigate the notorious political instability of Central America. However, the well-publicized reluctance of the current government to honor those protections now calls that expectation into question. Only time will tell whether Ciudad Morazán will be able to use the ZEDE law to continue to benefit Hondurans. Even if Ciudad Morazán is dissolved by the current Honduran government or the political uncertainty proves fatal to the business model, the ZEDE concept of autonomy can be a model for other jurisdictions that are more committed to the economic development of their country. Despite its early building stage, Ciudad Morazán has already shown how large and small businesses can benefit from voluntary, contractual governance. As proof of concept, the Honduran ZEDEs are a significant part of the growth of Free Cities worldwide. --- # The Future of Citizenship and Residencies URL: https://free-cities.org/the-future-of-citizenship-and-residencies Published: 2024-04-22 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: residency-and-citizenship, history-of-free-cities The history of residencies and citizenships is deeply intertwined with the development of human societies, governance, and international relations. It’s a complex topic that spans from ancient civilizations to modern-day policies, reflecting changes in how communities and nations define belonging, rights, and obligations. While those who argue passports are inherently statist conceptions may be correct, if we aim to be free in the world we find ourselves in, we must learn more about this institution. Citizenship in History In ancient Greece and Rome, citizenship was a status granted to free men, giving them the right to participate in the political life of the city-state, including voting and owning land. The concept of citizenship was closely linked to one’s participation in the community’s defense and governance. In contrast, women, slaves, and foreigners (metics in Athens, for example) had limited or no rights. The Roman Empire further developed the concept of citizenship with the Corpus Juris Civilis, which detailed the rights and duties of citizens. The expansion of the Roman Empire saw citizenship extended to conquered peoples, serving as a tool of integration and control. After all, letting people be mostly free as long as they pay their taxes serves as a great business model for expansionary empires. The collapse of the Roman Empire led to the emergence of the feudal system in Europe, where the notions of citizenship and residency were tied to one’s allegiance to a lord or monarch rather than to a particular geographical territory. Rights and obligations were determined by one’s position within the feudal hierarchy. In the medieval period, cities began to gain independence and could grant “burgher” rights to inhabitants, offering protection and economic privileges. Cities were highly attractive and offered a safe haven. The German saying Stadtluft macht frei nach Jahr und Tag (“city air makes you free after a year and a day”) reflects the fact that serfs who fled their feudal lords could take refuge in the city, and after one year and one day, he ceased to be tied to his former lord. This marked a shift towards residency-based rights within specific locales. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648, marking the end of the Thirty Years’ War, is often cited as the beginning of the modern system of nation-states. This system emphasized sovereign territories with clear borders, and citizenship became tied to nation-states rather than city-states or local communities. European expansion and colonization introduced complex systems of governance, including different statuses for colonizers and colonized peoples, directly impacting concepts of citizenship and residency. While different empires responded to this issue differently, colonization furthered the goal of European empires to expand their sovereignty to additional territory, making all inhabitants of that new territory subject to their rule and therefore subject to pay their taxes. Only in the 19th and 20th centuries saw the formalization of nationality laws, distinguishing between nationals and foreigners and establishing legal frameworks for acquiring or losing citizenship. These laws often included residency requirements, naturalization processes, and the concept of jus soli (right of the soil) and jus sanguinis (right of blood). Finally, the late 20th and early 21st centuries have been characterized by increased globalization and migration, challenging traditional notions of citizenship and residency. Two centuries ago, the number of people migrating across jurisdictions was measured in the thousands, while in the past century, it was millions. I suspect we are at the beginning of the newest century where billions of people will change jurisdiction. Citizenship by Investment Issues like dual citizenship, the rights of migrants and refugees, and the concept of global citizenship have become significant in the modern day. So too has the concept of Citizenship by Investment, whereby some countries now offer citizenship or residency to individuals who invest a significant amount of money in the country’s economy, reflecting a shift towards more flexible and economic criteria for citizenship, consistent with early city-states. The Citizenship by Investment (CBI) industry has its roots in the 1980s. The concept is often credited to St. Kitts and Nevis, a small Caribbean nation that established the first CBI program in 1984. Faced with economic challenges, including the decline of its sugar industry, the government introduced the program as a means to attract foreign investment. In exchange for a significant investment in the country’s economy, investors could obtain citizenship. The program was designed to provide a new source of revenue for the country and to stimulate economic growth. Following the example of St. Kitts and Nevis, other Caribbean countries, including Dominica, Grenada, Antigua and Barbuda, and St. Lucia, introduced their own CBI programs. The concept has since spread beyond the Caribbean to countries in Europe, the Pacific, and elsewhere. For instance, Malta and Cyprus have established CBI programs that attract significant interest from investors seeking access to the European Union. Portugal, Spain, and Greece offer “Golden Visa” programs that grant residency, and potentially citizenship, through real estate investments or other economic contributions. As the industry grew, it also faced scrutiny and controversy. Concerns have been raised about the potential for money laundering, tax evasion, and the security implications of offering citizenship to foreign nationals without thorough vetting. In response, many countries have tightened regulations, increased due diligence procedures, and in some cases, restructured or ended their programs. As a result, the CBI industry continues to evolve, influenced by global economic conditions, geopolitical shifts, and changing regulatory landscapes. It remains a significant, though sometimes controversial, aspect of global migration and investment flows. While many large and more powerful countries do not like the increasing popularity of CBI programs, the benefit to both small countries and participants in these programs means that they will continue to pop up in various places all over the world. Regional “Citizenship” Part of what makes CBI programs and their resulting passports so valuable is the access they can give to easy travel. Part of the ease in travel results from unions of free travel. Here too, there are more trends towards creating unions for easy travel. The EU is the most advanced example of a region allowing free movement among its member states. Citizens of EU countries enjoy the right to live, work, study, and retire in any other EU member state with minimal formalities. The Schengen Area, which includes most EU countries and some non-EU countries, allows for passport-free travel across its members’ borders. CARICOM aims to achieve similar economic integration and cooperation among its 15 member countries and five associate members in the Caribbean. The CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) initiative includes provisions for the free movement of skilled labor, allowing qualified nationals to work in any member state without needing a work permit. Mercosur is a South American trade bloc comprising Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela (currently suspended). The bloc has agreements that facilitate the residency and employment rights of citizens within member countries, moving towards a system of free movement similar to that of the EU. While one needs to read the fine print to understand the nuances of any travel/work union, this trend is positive from the perspective of Free Cities as it lays the groundwork for a potential union of free travel and trade between a union of autonomous or semi-autonomous city-states. The Future of Citizenship? The concept of privately issued or privately offered citizenships or residencies, while currently not practiced in the traditional sense, opens an interesting discussion on the evolution of nation-states, citizenship norms, and governance models. This idea intersects with the “Free Cities” concept, where cities or regions operate under a unique set of laws, governance, and economic policies, often with a high degree of autonomy from their host nation-state. Such Free Cities may be managed and operated by private companies and therefore could offer some form of privately issued citizenship. This would then create the potential for integrating privately offered Free City citizenships or residencies to create a network or league of city-states, similar to the Hanseatic League of Medieval Europe. If all of this seems far-fetched, I might suggest that the CBI program was invented by Christian Kälin, a private person who worked with St. Kitts and Nevis to create the first CBI program. Further, we see a large number of lawyers and immigration consultants working in a private capacity to increase human freedom of movement. We also see a plethora of new tech startups, using AI and other tools to assist both nations and individuals in their ability to apply, access, and take advantage of various residency and citizenship programs. Privately issued passports and visas are simply one step further and likely to be experimented with. Finally, Hong Kong presents one interesting example of how this might look. The situation regarding residency and citizenship in Hong Kong is unique due to its historical background and the “One Country, Two Systems” principle agreed upon during the handover from the United Kingdom to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1997. This principle was supposed to ensure that, except for foreign and defense affairs, Hong Kong would maintain its own legal and economic systems separate from those of mainland China for 50 years after the handover. Hong Kong has its own set of immigration policies and regulations, distinct from mainland China. People from other countries can apply for various types of visas to work, study, or live in Hong Kong. Permanent residency is granted to individuals who have lived in Hong Kong for a continuous period of at least seven years under most visa categories. Permanent residents enjoy certain rights, such as the right to vote in local elections and the right to live in the region without visa restrictions. Citizenship is a more complex issue. Hong Kong does not offer its own citizenship. People born in Hong Kong before and after the 1997 handover are Chinese citizens as defined by the nationality laws of the PRC, assuming at least one parent is a Chinese national or permanent resident of Hong Kong at the time of their birth. The Hong Kong way presents one possible way for privately issued residencies to come into being whereby Citizenship remains the responsibility of a Host Nation to the Free City, but the Free City can create visas as they see fit. While this may not be a privately issued passport, the impact is similar with private companies increasing their responsibility for promoting and organizing the movement of human beings to where they are treated best. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in April 2024. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # Odesa’s Economic Miracle: This 19-Century Free City Holds Lessons for Ukraine’s Recovery URL: https://free-cities.org/odesas-economic-miracle-this-19-century-free-city-holds-lessons-for-ukraines-recovery Published: 2023-08-21 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: history-of-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Ukraine’s largest seaport, Odesa, has been making headlines recently — for a grim reason. In the past month alone, Russian drones and missiles have disfigured a fair share of the city’s UNESCO-listed historic centre, including the Orthodox Cathedral, the House of Scientists (the former Counts Tolstoy palace), three museums, and a range of 19th-century mansions. Optimism prevails nevertheless: for the first time since the start of the full-scale invasion in 2022, the city is reopening its beaches. Earlier this year, when the war was already in full swing, in what may sound like a more astonishing manifestation of optimism, Odesa unveiled its bid to host Expo 2030 — something I personally contributed to, as our team at Zaha Hadid Architects had developed the master plan. I have visited Odesa innumerable times while working with Ukrainian free-market think tanks, inevitably falling in love with the ‘pearl of the Black Sea’, as locals fondly call it. Odesa’s character — entrepreneurial, cosmopolitan, fiercely optimistic — is rooted in its history as the freest city in a suffocatingly autocratic Russian Empire. The tale of Odesa’s economic miracle, in turn, may hold lessons for the post-war recovery of the whole country. Odesa Expo 2030 master plan designed by Zaha Hadid Architects. Source: zaha-hadid.com A Textbook Case Odesa’s early story is also a textbook case of how special jurisdictions work. At the dawn of the 19th century, in a matter of just two decades, what was merely a dusty village — where even drinking water was in deficit — has turned into a major trading metropolis and one of the most fashionable resorts in Europe. One French traveller called it “a town of pleasure and luxury”; an American one compared it to Paris. “I was almost tempted to believe that, by some hocus-pocus, we had tumbled on an Italian town”, wrote another tourist, adding that “there was little or nothing Russian about it”. Mark Twain was impressed by its “stirring, business-look”, and even Gustave de Molinari, one of the forefathers of anarcho-capitalism, praised Odesa’s free spirit. How did Odesa achieve that? By implementing the same old recipe: free trade, low taxes, and minimal bureaucracy. From its founding in the 1790s, Odesa was conceived as what today we would call a special economic zone. In 1782, all duties on imports and exports through its port were reduced by one-quarter. Needless to say, proximity to major trade routes and a modern approach to urban planning also played their role. And yet there were many other ports on the Black Sea, so something extraordinary was needed to attract all those wealthy merchants, skillful planners, and foresighted city managers. But above all, the brand-new city was in desperate need of people. “View of Odessa on a moonlit night” (1855) by Ivan Ayvavovsky, a Crimea-born painter who is considered one of the greatest masters of marine art. Source: Wikimedia Commons A Magnet for Free Minds In a sense, Odesa was a ‘startup city’. Much like Dubai two centuries later, it stood in anticipation, between inert sands and empty sea, anxiously waiting for residents to come. In the book Odessa: A History, 1794–1914, Harvard historian Patricia Herlihy provides an astounding number: at the beginning of the 19th century, a third of Odesa’s inhabitants did not have a Russian passport, meaning they were either foreign ex-pats or runaway serfs. The city’s authorities made a bold decision to turn a blind eye to the influx of thousands of fugitives — the young city, after all, needed thousands of working hands. Naturally, St. Petersburg wasn’t happy about the whole situation — Russian emperor Nicolas I even dubbed the city “a nest of conspirators”. But St. Petersburg was far away, and municipal authorities, many of them foreign-born technocrats, placed economics well above politics. As a result, everyone who felt uneasy under Russian rule, from religious dissenters to Jewish traders to creatives of all sorts, found refuge in Odesa, adding something to the melting pot. One English traveller noted upon visiting the city, “There is probably more political freedom here than anywhere else in the whole empire.” Political liberalism nourished human capital, attracting exceptionally educated and innovative minds. It soon became one of the most literate cities in the Russian Empire — the local Literature Museum (one of the three damaged by the recent air strikes) stands as a testament. “Here one felt freer than in the rest of Russia — national oppression and the arbitrary rule of the police were felt less”, Odesa-born Jewish historian Saul Borovoi wrote. Having narrowly escaped Stalin’s purges, he knew not to take freedom for granted. In 1810, Odessa became only the third city in the entire Russian Empire, after St. Petersburg and Moscow, to have an Opera House — a proof of its booming cultural life. A Melting Pot Anyone remotely familiar with the economic history of the world knows well: not only are special economic zones, or SEZs, possible in autocracies — they thrive especially in autocracies, for the contrast between life in the host country and in those enclaves of freedom is so stark. So it was only a matter of time till Odesa became a magnet for dissidents from all corners of the Russian Empire. Attracting foreigners, however, was a next-level challenge. To them, Odesa was offering all sorts of preferences, from profitable loans to tax breaks to free land giveaways. By 1799, as a result, some 40 per cent of the city merchants were foreign-born. Among the first immigrants were the French, Italians, and Greeks, followed by Moldovans, Turks, Armenians, Albanians, and even the British. French-born Duc de Richelieu, mayor of Odessa in 1803–1814, made a special effort to attract wealthy Jewish families. Architecture soon resembled that of France and Italy at once, and at least 20 languages were spoken on the streets. This cosmopolitan vibe lives on today in the city’s toponymy. Consider French Boulevard, Italian Boulevard, Polish Street, Jewish Street, Bulgarian Street, Green Street, Moldovan District, and Armenian Lane — for all those ethnic groups peacefully coexisted in Odesa, attracted by its lucrative business opportunities. The 142-metre-long Potemkin Stairs, the formal entrance to the city from the seaport, made worldwide famous by Sergei Eisenstein’s 1925 film “Battleship Potemkin” Source: Wikimedia Commons A Free Port – And the Fastest-Growing City in Europe As if all of that was not enough, Odesa had a trump card in stock: a porto franco regime. The establishment of the free port in 1817 marked another milestone in the city’s history. Customs fees were cut ten times — making Odessa one of the fastest-growing cities not just in the country but in the whole of Europe! Multiple observers, as cited by Herlihy, called it an “instant city”, that “rose like a mushroom after a heavy rain” and practically “had no infancy” — such rapid growth, in the words of one German engineer, was “unheard of in Europe”. Founded by an imperial edict, the city grew largely bottom-up, in an organic manner, its physical layout a reflection of its multicultural ambience. Those who had made fortunes in Odesa invested back in the city, through paving its streets, providing sewage and street lights, and taking care of the less fortunate. Unlike in the rest of the Empire, wealth rather than class or occupation was the sole basis for voting rights — in other words, it was effectively a taxpayers’ democracy. Belgian economist Gustave de Molinari, who is often credited as the first-ever theorist of anarcho-capitalism, visited Odesa twice, in 1860 and in 1877, during his travels through the Russian Empire. While the rest of the country, he concluded in his memoirs, suffered from “excess of administration” (“In Russia, all is forbidden except what the law permits”), Odessa had “more successfully than others followed the model of decentralisation.” So much so that when in the 1870s the central government was considering a nationwide urban reform, they regarded Odesa as a role model. A monument to Duc de Richelieu is one of the symbols of today’s Odesa. His ingenuity and determination helped to transform Odesa into a wealthy European metropolis. Source: Wikimedia Commons Rebuilding Ukraine: Odesa 2.0 One in a long line of dazzled visitors, diplomat Alexander Ribeaupierre saw Odesa as “a most extraordinary place”, which “seemed as if created by a magical wand.” But what looked like magic was simply economic pragmatism. Odesa’s early governors, many of them foreign-born like Count de Langeron and José de Ribas, didn’t mind accidentally creating “a nest of conspirators” (read: dissidents) as long as it boosted trade and urban growth, and St. Petersburg was simply too far away to micro-manage them. In tight competition with Turkish and Greek ports, a brand-new city required an instant influx of capital, knowledge, and labour. The chosen recipe — strong property rights, low tariffs, minimal regulation — worked spectacularly for Odesa. Fast forward to the 20th century, a similar recipe helped to create cities like Hong Kong and Dubai — economic freedom, once and again, can turn a humble fishing village into one of the richest cities in the world. Be it 19th-century Greek merchants or the 21st-century digital nomads, people are quick to vote with their feet, choosing locations that give them more liberty to follow their dreams. Ukrainian dreams today stretch beyond victory — they envision the country’s monumental rebuild, and that would require the participation of the private sector and of many creative minds, locally as well as globally. When the war is over, the country will desperately need all sorts of capital — above all, human capital (nearly 6 million Ukrainians have left the country because of the ongoing war) — to rebuild its cities. Some places, like Mariupol, another Black Sea port, will have to practically rise from the ashes. The country doesn’t need to look far in search of models for its post-war recovery. The creation of multiple Free Cities across the country, especially along the seashore (including Crimea), would accelerate the recovery, transforming intangible things like optimism and creativity, which Ukrainians seem to have in abundance, into steady growth. --- # Responding to Media Claims about Our Foundation URL: https://free-cities.org/responding-to-media-claims-about-our-foundation Published: 2022-05-17 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Recently, the Free Private Cities Foundation (now rebranded as Free Cities Foundation) has been mentioned in several articles covering crypto-friendly startup cities and Honduran Zones for Employment and Economic Development (ZEDEs). While we welcome media attention in the Free Cities space, some of these articles contained characterizations of our work and goals that we felt merited a response. Some factual inaccuracies were also included, which we have corrected below. One of such articles containing a number of inaccuracies was written by Amiah Taylor and published on April 22nd, 2022, by Fortune Magazine. We respect Taylor’s right to approach the topic of Free Cities in a critical manner if she wishes to do so. However, her coverage, unfortunately, includes several factual errors. Inaccuracies concerning the Foundation Introducing our Foundation, Taylor says: “At the forefront of this movement is the Free Private Cities Foundation, a company that promotes the idea of “voluntary, contract based [sic] societies,” and supports the development of private cities all over the globe.” The Free Private Cities Foundation, as the name suggests, is not a company, but a non-profit entity, a foundation that is focused on raising awareness and popularizing the idea of Free Cities. “The Free Private Cities Foundation announced on March 15 the ongoing development of their private city, Morazán, which the website described as a ‘blue collar [sic] ZEDE,’ where residents can avoid the structural issues that plague Hondurans in everyday life such as ‘exorbitant violence.’” Ciudad Morazán is not a Free Private Cities Foundation project. It has been established by an independent businessman who has been active in Central America for decades and who is not related to the Foundation. However, we support the development of Honduran ZEDEs as potential centers of freedom and prosperity within a country gripped by grave societal issues such as violent crime. As such, we are ready to offer entrepreneurs in this space our advice, should they wish to consult us. Inaccuracies concerning Honduran ZEDEs In the article, Taylor goes on to claim that ZEDEs “hold complete autonomy in the criminal justice system.” Elsewhere, this assumption seems to lead her to state that “some critics fear that ZEDEs could become private havens for criminal activity.” Contrary to such claims, ZEDEs do not enjoy autonomy with regard to criminal law. The ZEDE law stipulates explicitly in Article 41 (3) that the Honduran criminal code applies fully within these special zones. However, our Foundation does support the idea that, if possible, criminal law should also be independent within Free Cities and Prosperity Zones. The fears of “some critics” cited by Fortune Magazine do not seem warranted. The Honduran people have long suffered under some of the highest crime rates in the world. This is one of the many reasons we believe ZEDEs provide an immense opportunity for the country. Their improved governance can establish greater rule of law and more effective law enforcement. If they had the ability to adjust their own criminal code too, ZEDEs could be even more effective in tackling crime and bringing peace and prosperity to Honduras. Taylor further claims that, since ZEDEs “don’t have to pay import or export taxes and are free to set up their own forms of governments, schools, courts, and social security systems,” these zones feature a “complete lack of regulation”. Such a judgement is completely misplaced. By no means do ZEDEs exist in a state of lawlessness. On the contrary—their legal position is fleshed out in great detail in the ZEDE law, which allows for greater regulatory flexibility rather than establishing a regulation-free environment, thereby respecting the Constitution of Honduras and the international treaties Honduras has signed (for example with regard to labor law). Article 3 makes it clear that ZEDEs are public entities within the state of Honduras: “Zones of Economic Development and Employment (ZEDE) enjoy operational and administrative autonomy that includes the functions, powers and duties that the Constitution and laws confer upon municipalities. They shall have autonomous and independent courts with exclusive competence in the ZEDE, which can follow legal systems or traditions from elsewhere, and which must ensure the constitutional principles of human rights protection…” In addition, each ZEDE must be headed by a Honduran-born native, the “Technical Secretary”, who is elected every seven years by the residents of the ZEDE (after a certain population density is reached). Finally, all ZEDE regulation is subject to prior approval by a state commission. There exists nothing like a “complete lack of regulation” within ZEDEs. Their regulation is simply allowed to differ from the rest of Honduras, which is the central purpose behind establishing such zones in the first place. We strongly recommend reading the ZEDE law before making such misleading claims. Taylor continues by citing a consultant named Jamilia Grier, who expresses the following reservations regarding ZEDEs: “‘If you were to create one of these cities within a country, what is the agreement that you have with the country that this particular area is not subject to tax?’ Grier questioned. ‘There would have to be a relinquishing of rights from the sovereign nation to be able to create this particular tax-free zone that they’re proposing.’” It is surprising to see such statements. They imply that, by providing localized tax relief, Honduras is doing something radical and unprecedented. However, there exist literally thousands of Special Economic Zones worldwide that already offer tax incentives. It is unclear, therefore, why Grier speaks in such hypothetical language. Furthermore, Special Economic Zones are always unambiguously part of their host countries and make no claims on sovereignty. This is the case with the Honduran ZEDEs too—they recognize the authority of the Honduran government and do not aim or attempt to deny its sovereignty. In addition, ZEDEs are not tax-free. The ZEDE law itself stipulates that taxes must be levied. Próspera, for example, has a 10-percent income tax. Not only that—from all tax income, ZEDEs must pay 12% to the Honduran government institutions. In our view, such an arrangement hardly constitutes a “relinquishing of rights from the sovereign nation”. One of the central points in Taylor’s article is that ZEDEs are supposedly a threat to locals and that ZEDEs are somehow involved in their displacement. It is perhaps understandable that some locals would be worried about any political changes, as they might have painful experiences with the Honduran government’s own grim history of expropriation and displacement. ZEDEs, however, have and want no part in such practices. Like all states, the state of Honduras has the right to expropriate people and then give their land to a ZEDE. But ZEDEs—and especially Próspera—have made it clear that they would never seek expropriation nor accept expropriated land in their jurisdiction. Both the Próspera ZEDE’s charter and the resolution explicitly preventing expropriation are publicly accessible and easily verifiable here and here. The only way ZEDEs can grow is by the legitimate (voluntary) acquisition of land. This is not a mere claim, it is a fact. Taylor’s article, however, continues to make conjectures implicating ZEDEs in something they do not engage in: “As the government accepts foreign investments for the creation of ZEDEs, locals watch as corporations encroach upon their lands. Critics have pointed out that the areas mapped out for ZEDE construction are ancestral lands in the Garifuna region which has been inhabited by the indigenous people for thousands of years. As a result, the construction of ZEDEs would lead to the mass displacement of the native population.“ Such claims have no connection to reality. All three existing ZEDEs have acquired uninhabited land from private owners. There is no legal possibility for ZEDEs to cause “mass displacement”, there are no such intentions, and there would be nothing in it for ZEDEs to gain by doing so. The source Taylor cites for these outrageous claims is an older article by Vice that attempts to defame ZEDEs by recalling them alongside examples of violent crime, leaving the unassuming reader with the impression that ZEDE representatives are organized criminals working with the government to oppress the locals. The Vice article features a local man who is afraid of ZEDEs despite them not having done anything to threaten or harm him. In an instance of supposed displacement that is portrayed by Vice in the worst way possible, no land is actually expropriated. Vice’s aimseems to be to implicate ZEDEs in something that they have not done, have no intentions of doing, and that the Honduran government—not ZEDEs—actually has a history of doing. It appears that Vice is not approaching ZEDEs from a neutral perspective, and, consequently, their coverage on this topic cannot be relied upon as a legitimate source for further reporting by Fortune Magazine or any other outlet. Final remarks: Free Cities are not just about tax Most articles covering the topics of Free Cities, Prosperity Zones and related projects share a common theme: they characterize these projects primarily as tax havens for the rich to hide their wealth. However, this is not the Foundation’s aim. The goal of the projects we promote is to create the best living standard for all. Freedom is the central value behind what we do and it is one of the main promises and prospects of the cities we support. In a world where oppressive systems and unfree countries are abundant, Free Cities are designed to be oases of liberty, where people can live their lives in harmony and peace as they see fit. Taxation is indeed an impediment to freedom, but it is far from the only one. There are already plenty of existing attractive places that cater specifically to the rich, and the Free City does not seek to be just another such jurisdiction. In contrast, the wide-ranging freedoms these cities aim to offer can make the biggest difference to capable low- and middle-income earners who are looking for a way to make their lives better, happier, and more prosperous. --- # Why Private Cities Are Good for the Planet URL: https://free-cities.org/why-private-cities-are-good-for-the-planet Published: 2025-08-04 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities Cozy neighbourhoods shaded by eucalyptus trees and protected wildlands stretching from the Santa Ana Mountains to the Pacific Ocean—welcome to Irvine, a master-planned city in Orange County, California. With its Mediterranean climate, thriving economy, and more than one-third of its land reserved for green open space, Irvine consistently ranks among the happiest (top 3), healthiest (top 10), safest (top 3), and greenest (top 10) cities in the United States. Unusually for a city of its size and stature, Irvine was built privately. The story begins with James Irvine, an 18-year-old Irish immigrant who fled the Potato Famine and headed west during the California Gold Rush. By the late 19th century, he had acquired a 110,000-acre ranch that would remain in the family’s hands for generations. Initially devoted to agriculture—particularly oranges, which gave the county its name—the land flourished for decades. But after World War II, as California’s population surged, the Irvine Company pivoted toward urban development, laying the ground for what would become the largest private city in the US. Designed as a constellation of walkable villages, each with its own character, Irvine was initially governed by private community associations that managed everything from trash collection to security. In 1971, the city formally incorporated as a municipality—but by then, its core identity had already been shaped. Today, with a population of over 300,000, Irvine remains closely tied to its original builder, as the Irvine Company continues to be the city’s largest landowner, employer, and taxpayer. It controls roughly one-fifth of Orange County and invests heavily in maintaining the city’s appeal. Irvine apartment homes by Chris Hunkeler In the early 2000s, the company donated 44,000 acres for public use, creating one of the largest networks of urban open space in the US. Giving up such a vast expanse of developable land might seem commercially irrational—but in this case, it isn’t. The city bears the company’s name, and its image is inseparable from the Irvine brand. The investment has paid off: over the past decade, new-home prices in Irvine have risen nearly 40% more than the county average. The greener the city, the higher the real estate premium. And before you argue that only the rich can afford to pay this premium, take a look at Lavasa. A colourful oasis of cobbled streets and terraced homes nestled in pristine green slopes, it is arguably India’s greenest city—a country not known for tranquil urbanism. Its residents are mostly former farmers who, thanks to Lavasa Corporation—the city’s private developer—gained access to clean water, primary healthcare, and waste collection, much of it provided for free. When the project was abruptly halted—ironically, on environmental grounds—the community rallied in its defence. Lavasa, they said, had not only planted 600,000 trees—it had planted hope. Their campaign helped bring it back to life. Lavasa, India by Suddhasatwa Bhaumik Green by Demand, Not by Decree Sustainability doesn’t begin with paperwork. It begins with the freedom to experiment, prototype, and test. Architects crave that freedom—but it’s the client who makes it possible. When demand for greener, cleaner cities comes from the market, developers embrace it—because it adds value. But when sustainability is imposed through rigid, top-down directives, it often has the opposite effect: it erodes commercial viability and deepens the housing shortage. The result is predictable. In the UK, for example, the City of London now mandates green roofs for all new buildings of a certain size, ignoring affordability or context—and exacerbating the housing crisis. The European Green Deal takes this logic even further: its sprawling, one-size-fits-all directives on building efficiency and carbon neutrality have left local councils from Amsterdam to Zagreb tied up in bureaucracy, unsure how to move forward. Instead of enabling green innovation, these mandates are stalling it. Developers don’t plant trees and install solar panels out of altruism. They do it because green design boosts returns. A lush park view adds thousands to a home’s price tag. A LEED certificate—essentially, the Oscar of green architecture—opens doors to international tenants. A smart city label attracts top-tier talent. In private cities, sustainability isn’t a moral duty—it’s a business strategy. Songdo: A Private City That Outgreened the Public Ones If a LEED plaque is like an Oscar statue, then Songdo in South Korea is something akin to Titanic. Built from scratch on reclaimed land, this smart city with a special economic zone (SEZ) status became the world’s first fully LEED-certified community. Forty percent of its area is green space—25km of bike lanes, Venice-style canals, and urban farms nestled between high-rises. Songdo Central Park by Jaehyuk Lee And all of this was created privately by a group of investors led by American developer Stanley Gale, who personally contributed $100 million towards “the smartest, greenest city on the planet.” And there is hardly another place in the world where smart, energy-saving tools are integrated so deeply into everyday life. Songdo residents use mobile phones to control their homes remotely, while sensors monitor everything outside—from traffic flows to energy use. Garbage is vacuumed directly from homes to an underground waste facility. Masdar: A City-Size Lab for Low-Carbon Urbanism Stanford University has established a “smart city” lab in Songdo—a reminder that private cities can have a positive spillover effect when they act as testbeds for clean technologies. The city of Masdar in the UAE has taken this even further: it’s not just hosting a green lab, it is itself one city-sized green lab. Over 900 companies—from giants like Siemens and Mitsubishi to startups—use it as a sandbox. Initially led by the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund, Masdar eventually handed the city’s operations to private firms. While it never evolved into a truly living, breathing city, Masdar has succeeded as a showroom for sustainable innovation and set the trend—but also the high bar—for eco-friendly design in the Gulf. About one-third of its power needs are covered by a massive solar plant. Buildings use low-carbon cement and 90% recycled aluminium. Narrow shaded streets cool the air by 10°C. A towering wind-catcher, inspired by traditional Arabic architecture, channels breezes into courtyards. The eco-bus developed in Masdar is now part of Abu Dhabi’s public transit system. Innovations originating there have been adopted as far afield as Seville, with its energy-generating towers, and the UK’s London Array offshore wind farm. Crucially, all of this was made possible not despite its commercial turn but because of it. As control shifted from public planners to private tenants, Masdar gained the agility and investment needed to scale real-world experimentation. Zones of Progress: The Past, Present and Future of Special Economic Zones, a documentary produced by the Free Cities Foundation, takes a look inside Masdar and interviews its Director. Private Planning Thinks in Decades, Not Election Cycles Private planning is often accused of short-termism. In reality, it promotes long-term value creation. Developers invest in nature trails, preserve habitats, and favour local materials not because of ideology—but because it pays. If the owner benefits from the land’s future appreciation—as the Irvine Company did—it has every reason to plan for durability, livability, and environmental quality. In this context, sustainability is not a regulatory burden but a competitive advantage. Crucially, the landholding must be large enough for the developer to internalise externalities—another reason why entire private cities, not just isolated developments, make sense. Just as important is the security of property rights. If governments want to foster green innovation, they don’t need another roadmap or directive—they need to ensure that the rules of the game are clear and predictable. Without rule of law, none of this works. Charter Cities as Green Testbeds—If They’re Allowed to Work Take Próspera and Morazán, the famous Free Cities in Honduras. The ruling party’s arbitrary attacks on them not only put thousands of Hondurans at risk of losing jobs and homes and send a chilling signal to investors—they also slow down innovation. Próspera’s residences—curvaceous, timber-crafted, digitally customisable homes designed by Zaha Hadid Architects—are advancing architecture well beyond the Caribbean. Do Honduran politicians realise that, by undermining charter cities for short-term political gain, they are holding back global progress? As Shajay Bhooshan, head of Zaha Hadid Architects’ computation and design team, put it: “Things like 3D printing, timber construction, and all these emerging technologies—are evolving rapidly. You see many companies investing large amounts of money to build factories, but then they run into regulatory barriers.” Let Cities Compete—The Planet Will Win Private cities are not just good for residents. They’re good for the planet. Cross-country studies show that CO₂ emissions per capita tend to fall once a country’s GDP per capita reaches around $10,000–15,000. In other words, economic growth is a prerequisite for ecological improvement. And cities with SEZ status—like Shenzhen, which transformed from a fishing village into a megacity of over 17 million within a single generation—are among the most powerful tools for lifting people out of poverty. Chinese data makes the point clearly: as the size of SEZs increases, urban CO₂ emissions per square metre fall. This is because SEZs foster vertical spillovers of green technologies into the wider city. Moreover, firms operating within Chinese SEZs filed 17% more green patents, showing that these zones actively stimulate green innovation. With prosperity comes cleaner air. In conventional cities, red tape often trumps green dreams. But private cities have more room—and incentive—to experiment. If we are serious about solving global challenges, we must move beyond ideological reflexes. Many private cities are already leading the way—offering testbeds for green design, fostering economic growth, and demonstrating that sustainability can align with market incentives. From timber construction to smart grids, they are already testing what the rest of the world is still debating. Because in the end, green dreams don’t need subsidies. They just need permission. --- # Free Cities and Privacy URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-and-privacy Published: 2023-08-07 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: private-governance Free Cities and Privacy have more to do with each other than appears at first glance. While part of this is a function of those interested in Free Cities, it is also my contention that due to the competition in governance created by Free Cities, emphasis on privacy will increase in Free Cities over time as they look to separate themselves from traditional governance models. Why Privacy Is Indispensable Privacy is a fundamental human right. It is nothing but absolutely critical for a number of reasons: • Autonomy: Privacy gives individuals a space to think and act without being watched or judged, and is crucial to self-determination and personal autonomy. • Freedom of Thought and Speech: Privacy is a key part of freedom of thought and speech, enabling individuals to explore and express their ideas without fear of retaliation or judgment. • Individuality: In the absence of privacy, we are all under pressure to conform to societal norms and expectations, reducing diversity and individuality. To truly appreciate diversity you must allow for the privacy necessary for individual thought and creativity. • Dignity: Privacy allows individuals to keep personal matters to themselves, maintaining their dignity. Without privacy, personal information can be used to humiliate, exploit or even bribe or extort individuals. • Safety and Security: Privacy helps protect personal data from misuse, which can lead to identity theft, financial loss, or other harm. This is increasingly important in the digital age where vast amounts of personal information are stored and transmitted online. • Maintaining Relationships: Privacy is essential for maintaining different kinds of relationships, including family, friendships, and professional relations. Certain information shared within a relationship is often expected to remain within that relationship. Different people and different relationships play different roles in a healthy society. To allow people and relationships to perform these functions we must allow for discretionary information flow – another term for privacy. • Balancing Power: Privacy helps to balance power between individuals and large institutions, such as governments or corporations. Without privacy, these institutions are able to misuse personal information for their own ends, opening the door to abuses of power. • Flourishing Society: Privacy plays an important role in free societies, as it allows for freedom of political association, protects activists and dissenters, and supports a robust civil society. It’s crucial for citizens to have a private sphere where they can freely express political views. • Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Business: Privacy allows those with interesting ideas and business opportunities to have the ability to quietly build their business and value proposition model. Confidential mechanisms, ingredients, or processes are necessary for the world to innovate and grow. While many argue that privacy must be balanced with safety, the more thoughtful among us realize that without privacy there is no safety. In other words, there is no safety without privacy. Privacy in the Digital Era While privacy, in general, is extremely important, in the digital age with international trade flows, banking transfers, and travel, privacy online and securing your most important and confidential information is even more important than ever before. Privacy online is critically important for many of the same reasons that privacy is generally important. But the digital environment brings some unique challenges and considerations: • Identity and Financial Protection: Privacy online is necessary to protect against identity theft and financial fraud. When personal information is shared online, it can be exploited by cybercriminals. This can lead to unauthorized transactions, damage to your credit rating, and other serious problems. • Prevention of Unwanted Marketing and Spam: If your personal information is shared widely online, it can be used by marketers to inundate you with unwanted advertising and spam, often based on your browsing habits or personal preferences. • Freedom of Expression: Online privacy helps to protect freedom of expression. People can more freely express their views and explore new ideas if they know that their activities aren’t being constantly tracked and recorded. • Data Profiling and Manipulation: Companies routinely collect data about online behaviors to create detailed profiles of individuals. These profiles can be used not only to target advertisements but also to influence behavior, for example, by manipulating the content you see on social media or news sites. • Cyberstalking and Harassment: Personal information that is available online can be used by stalkers or harassers to intimidate or harm individuals. Privacy tools can help to protect against such abuse. • Digital Reputation and Future Opportunities: Information posted online can often be difficult to fully remove and can have long-term impacts on an individual’s reputation. This can affect future employment opportunities, personal relationships, and more. • Government Surveillance: Privacy online is critical for protecting against government surveillance. While some governments implement privacy protections, all governments can and do monitor online activities, which can lead to a chilling effect on freedom of speech and association. • Data Breaches: Even when data is shared with seemingly trustworthy companies, there’s always a risk that the data could be exposed in a data breach. Data breaches can lead to a wide range of harms, including identity theft and financial fraud. • Wealth Threat Vectors: Bitcoin and other digital currencies and assets have become more popular. While Bitcoin in particular results in significant benefits for many of its users, its pseudonymity can be a potential threat vector to the sophisticated criminal that can track what address belongs to any given individual. Given the centrality of the internet to modern life, online privacy has become a fundamental aspect of overall privacy. As such, it’s important to be aware of the risks and to take steps to protect your privacy online. How Free Cities Protect Privacy While Free Cities may come in all shapes and sizes, there are a number of reasons to believe that they will be better stewards of resident information and privacy, may collect less information overall, and will encourage the human right to privacy in general. We can speculate on potential ways in which a Free City might increase privacy, based on the degree of autonomy and the specific regulations in place: • Strong Privacy Regulations: Free Cities with autonomy might choose to enact strong privacy regulations that exceed those of the national government, thus providing greater protection for personal data. This is a likely differentiator to attract residents to the Free City. • Advanced Technology and Infrastructure: Depending on their resources, Free Cities might implement advanced digital infrastructure designed with privacy in mind, such as secure communication networks and data storage systems. Free Cities may also implement digital technology (i.e. communications, digital identity, and more) that is based on cryptography thereby increasing the performance of required identifying detail regimes without exposing the collected data to potential theft or leaks. • Limited Government Surveillance: Free Cities will likely limit government surveillance, either by enacting strong legal protections or by refraining from implementing mass surveillance technologies. • Transparency and Accountability: Free Cities might implement measures to increase transparency and accountability for data processing activities, which can help to protect privacy. Like number 2 above, Free Cities may simply not collect this information at all but use cryptographic mechanisms to verify necessary details on an as-needed basis. • Privacy Education and Advocacy: Free Cities might prioritize privacy education and advocacy, helping residents to understand the importance of privacy and how to protect their own privacy. Free Cities supporters are often privacy advocates and understand the fundamental human right to privacy. It seems likely that Free Cities will either on their own or through residents in the Free City implement educational and other programs on the use of tools to increase privacy and the potential downsides of not utilizing basic privacy protections. • Competitive Market for Privacy Services: With their economic freedom, Free Cities might foster a competitive market for privacy services, encouraging businesses to offer products and services that protect privacy. This seems quite likely given the support base of Free Cities at this time. Again, these are just possibilities. The actual impact on privacy would depend on a variety of factors, including the specific laws and policies in place, the level of autonomy from the national government, the available resources, the cultural norms, and so on. As a caveat, while Free Cities could theoretically be designed by data-collecting wannabe tyrants, the incredible value of privacy would drive customers away from such a business model. Furthermore, in the present day, Free Cities are unequivocally pro-privacy institutions compared to traditional government, and their supporters are making sure that privacy is one of the priorities of this movement. A new era of improved privacy — and with it freedom and security — might be coming with the advent of Free Cities. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in June 2023. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # Green, Walkable, Private: An Untold (and Unfinished) Story of Lavasa City URL: https://free-cities.org/the-untold-story-of-lavasa Published: 2023-01-30 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: urban-design Some 130 miles southeast of Mumbai lies a city you would instead expect to find on the Mediterranean coast. Modelled on the Italian resort of Portofino, with its colourful cottages, cobbled streets, and pristine green slopes, Lavasa is a stark contrast to the roaring, chaotic cities India is notorious for. It claims to be the country’s most sustainable city — and its 2,000 residents can testify to this. But Lavasa is unique not only due to its relaxed vibe and award-winning master plan — the city is also completely private. From water and electricity supply to schools and hospitals, all public services here are provided privately. Lavasa, however, is not one of India’s gated communities with gloomy guards and private patios. A lion’s share of its residents are former villagers who now work for Lavasa while their children go to an English-speaking nursery free of pay. When Lavasa, in 2011, became a target for an ideologically-driven attack, those former villagers stood up to defend ‘their paradise’. Who will build the roads — and clean the slums? Getting cities right is a universal challenge, but for rapidly urbanising countries like India, it is particularly dire. Extreme density paired with poor infrastructure creates all sorts of urban plagues, from severe road congestion and notorious levels of air pollution to slums, poverty, and crime. Every minute, 25-30 Indians move from a rural area to a city. If the skyrocketing demand is not met with adequate supply, the situation may spiral out of control (this is already happening in Mumbai, where more than half of the population lives in slums, or the capital city of New Delhi, officially the world’s most polluted city). Top-down remedies, like the nationwide US$12 billion Smart Cities Mission, have shown unimpressive results. Another approach, which looks promising, is outsourcing development to the private sector. The 2005 Special Economic Zone Act, along with a range of regional-level reforms, have opened multiple windows of opportunity, and some developers have gradually moved from delivering houses to creating entire cities. The classic example of that is Gurgaon, a satellite city southwest of Delhi. Relaxed land acquisition rules, along with the absence of the municipal government, allowed several corporations (including Maruti Suzuki and General Electric) to jointly build a self-governing city. With a population of over one million, Gurgaon is a major financial and industrial hub, a city with the third-highest income per capita and the highest Human Development Index in the country. That said, Gurgaon may not be the most pleasant place to live. It is infamous for its chaotic and unevenly provided urban infrastructure such as water, electricity, and sewage — a result of the city’s fragmentation between multiple private landowners. But what if the whole city could be designed, build, managed, and governed by the same company — could it repeat Gurgaon’s impressive economic success while avoiding its pitfalls? For Ajit Gulabchand, head of the 100-year-old Hindustan Construction Company, the question was beyond rhetorical: he dreamt of creating a replicable model for future cities — and empowering millions of Indians “by allowing them to govern themselves”. When the state of Maharashtra passed the ‘Hill Station’ act, waiving land-ceiling and zoning laws for certain areas and giving developers substantial tax exemptions, he saw it as a chance to try out his vision. Good parks and good governance: How Lavasa makes money To most Indians, the Hindustan Construction Company was known for mega-projects such as highways and dams. In 2009 however, they were aiming for something completely different: a brand-new city. A city with walkable neighbourhoods, vast green areas, and a strong sense of community that would attract 240,000 residents, create 80,000 jobs, and lure in two million tourists each year. The master plan by HOK, a globally renowned architecture bureau, reflected the principles of New Urbanism and received international acclaim. A former Mumbai Metropolitan Authority planner was hired to implement it — after forty years of public service, he admitted to enjoying more creative freedom than ever before while building Lavasa. The mayor’s role was played by the City Manager. Scot Wrighton, a seasoned academic and practitioner with experience in managing several U.S. cities, was hired for this role. A private city, like any private business, must have a sustainable business model. Lavasa’s one relied on three revenue streams: selling homes, charging service fees, and leasing non-residential spaces to retail, commercial, recreational and other uses. But what the city of Lavasa was offering was beyond real estate alone. The main product was not the master plan or the world-class facilities — it was the city’s unique governance model enabled by its Special Planning Authority status. Among other perks, it allowed the city to sell and lease land without seeking the government’s permission. In Lavasa, private firms not only maintained public spaces like parks and roads and provided electricity and water supply but also ran schools and hospitals and other traditionally state-operated services — practically everything apart from post offices and police stations. What’s more, many services were offered free of pay, including potable water, garbage recycling, primary healthcare and ambulance, an English-speaking nursery and school, and varied professional training courses. But most importantly, Lavasa offered employment to low-skilled workers, both local villagers and those coming from other places. In order to attract the critical mass of residents, the city partnered with several educational institutions such as Ecole Hôtelière de Lausanne and the Bangalore-based Christ University. Another anchor tenant, Ashiana Senior Living, became home to dozens of retired Indians. Film director and former World Bank environment consultant Suresh K. Goswami, after having lived in many places from London to Nigeria, felt the desire to retire in India but no city felt hospitable enough — until he found Lavasa. After ten years of living there, he considers it “the first and most beautiful smart city in India”. The battle to save Lavasa The one-of-a-kind private city captured public attention as soon as the project was unveiled in 2002. By 2010, the first phase was almost completed and the population had surpassed 10,000 people. At that time, Lavasa was a living community, a real estate hotspot, and a tourism hub. All of that came under threat when the development was abruptly frozen following a political campaign. The fight against Lavasa was led by the left-wing National Alliance of People’s Movement which saw Special Economic Zones (“special exploitation zones” is their preferred term) as an embodiment of everything they stood against. Through street protests, legal complaints, and media activism, they managed to stall the project on environmental grounds. That would be a typical NIMBY story if not for what happened next. The court decision was met with counter-protests by locals, including elected representatives of all the 18 villages comprising Lavasa. In the Bombay High Court, they testified that Lavasa benefited the environment — not least through planting 600,000 new trees — and generally made their lives better. “When Lavasa came, our lives improved”, explained an ex-farmer. Another one complained that the media listened to a small group of activists with no skin in the game, while a thousand local families remained unheard. Killing the project, they feared, would take their source of income and doom their chances of getting out of poverty. A year later, Lavasa got environmental clearance and the construction was resumed. However, a critical number of investors had dropped out by then. For the next decade that the project was in limbo, Lavasa residents refused to give up trying to revive the city. The online petition to “save Lavasa” on Change.org has gained almost 24,000 signatures. In 2021, the first glimpses of hope appeared when a deal was finally reached between a new investor, Darwin Platform Infrastructure Ltd., and a group of creditors. The new investor promptly assured that they had “an ambitious and long-term plan for Lavasa Smart City”. What’s next? The story of Lavasa is an unfinished one. On the one hand, it demonstrates the evident demand for innovative urban solutions in rapidly urbanising countries like India. On the other hand, it highlights pervasive institutional hurdles faced by visionaries who come up with such unconventional proposals. Above all, it is a story of thousands of Indians whose lives were improved by Lavasa — and who, against all odds, won the battle for their ‘paradise’, as one of my respondents called it. The interest of both investors and potential residents is a clear indication that the city-as-a-service concept — a city where the governance model is as essential a part of the bundle as the physical infrastructure — has a future in India and other fast-growing economies. This article is based on “A Tale of One City. Lavasa as a Coasian Prototype of a Private Urban Development”, a chapter in Institutions and Incentives in Public Policy: An Analytical Assessment of Non-Market Decision-Making (Rowman & Littlefield, 2022). --- # Six Reasons Free Private Cities Give Us Hope URL: https://free-cities.org/six-reasons-free-private-cities-give-us-hope Published: 2022-02-25 Author: Frank Karsten Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities Free Private Cities (FPCs) is a revolutionary concept that stands to make the world safer and more prosperous. FPCs provide a practical solution for dysfunctional governments and struggling economies. Some of their functional elements are already being put into practice in projects such as Próspera and Morazán in Honduras, and the movement in support of FPCs is gaining momentum worldwide. A FPC is a highly autonomous region within a host country with its own rules and laws. It’s run by a company known as a “City Operator”. This Operator has a profit motive and the possibility of having shareholders. For an annual fee – which will be kept low due to competition with other cities – Operators provide governmental services like justice, infrastructure and security to their residents. Although FPCs are a relatively new concept, there are many successful predecessors that have sought to keep government intervention minimal and individual rights strong. The great liberalization of China started in 1979 when the government designated four small cities as Special Economic Zones (SEZ). These zones quickly developed into big cities thanks to fewer regulations and a more business-friendly climate. Many other countries have been following suit. FPCs take the economically liberal policies of SEZs further. 1. Free Private Cities will innovate Enormous innovation has taken place in all sectors of society during the last century, with the exception of governance. FPCs are like start-up countries. They will show great innovation in governance just like start-up companies in Silicon Valley do in technology. They will encourage a transition from overspending to cost cutting, from broken election promises to accountability, from short-term to long-term thinking, and from legal uncertainty to legal certainty. Because FPCs minimize regulation, businesses will enjoy enormous freedom to innovate in fields such as biotech, solar, nano, robotics and energy. 2. No more surprises Suppose your car repair shop suddenly tried to charge you more than you had originally agreed to pay. Of course, you would be outraged and would refuse to pay the extra requested. Governments today operate on the same principles as a dodgy car repairman. Governments can change laws unilaterally. There are currently no countries where citizens have a mutual agreement with their government stipulating what they must pay in taxes and what services they will receive in return. In countries like the US, this has caused the regulatory burden to explode in length and complexity during the past century. The US tax code Federal Tax Code alone has grown from just 504 pages in 1939 to more than 74600 pages in 2014: a 150-fold increase. This has led to increased uncertainty for citizens because, with so many laws, it’s impossible for citizens to know them all. It is estimated that the average US citizen unknowingly commits three felonies a day. FPCs offer much higher legal certainty. City Operators offer a clear contract guarantees from third party legal arbitration. Those that do not will find themselves without customers. Unlike politicians, FPC Operators cannot just break promises. They are held legally accountable, and if they refuse to submit to court decisions their reputation suffers gravely and they go bankrupt. 3. A real choice In a world with multiple Free Private Cities, citizens will be free to choose where to relocate. They will be able to move to cities with fee-levels, regulations and forms of service that suit them best. Every new FPC that is established will compete on the “market for living together”, increasing the options available to all. Since they can be as small as a few square kilometers, we could see the creation of hundreds of FPCs seeking our business. Instead of voting with our pencil – as we do during elections – we can vote with our feet, just like we do every day when we choose goods and services to buy. Right now, the level of competition in governance is low: there are only 200 countries in the world for 7 billion people. Free Private Cities will disrupt the market for governance. Since FPCs are contract-based societies, there will be no need for “politics”, elections or endless struggles for claims to “public” resources. Because FPCs minimize regulation and keep costs low, there is no point in quarreling with other residents over what policies to pursue. 4. Customers, not subjects Does the government rule your life? It seems fair to say it does. But do you rule the government? Most of us would answer “no” to this question. It is hard for most of us individually to hold politicians accountable. If our politicians break election promises, start foreign wars under false pretenses or print new money to fund their projects there isn’t much the average citizen can do. The market works much better even though companies do not offer democratic participation. Few iPhone buyers feel the need to buy Apple shares so they can have a minute influence on the course of the company. The right to walk away – to refuse to buy – is the best guarantee that companies will behave decently. FPCs differ from traditional nation states in that they are directly subject to the discipline of the market. Their relationships with their customers and good reputation are essential to them. Their residents are customers who can walk out and take their money elsewhere, instead of government subjects who are only allowed to cast a negligible vote every four to five years. 5. Economic liberty FPCs will become beacons of liberty, prosperity and civilization. To attract residents, workers and companies they will have to offer low costs, a safe environment, legal certainty, and maximal individual and economic freedom. Enforcing regulation is costly and those costs would have to be passed on to residents. Therefore, we estimate that around 95% of the current regulatory burden will prove to be a net hindrance. In Free Private Cities, there will be a tendency for rules and regulations to be kept as simple as possible. FPCs will allow freedom of speech, contract, association and markets. It is in the interest of Free Private City Operators not to tell companies what their prices or salaries should be, how individuals should be insured against unemployment or old age, what children should learn at school, what medical treatment patients are allowed to pursue, what the conditions of rental contracts should be, or which professional licensing laws should be in place. 6. A safe haven for minorities and refugees Consider a FPC to be a technology: a powerful concept that can bring prosperity and security to an area. FPC can usher in a market for residency offering both rich and poor alike more options for living and working with others. As such, they can function like a global safety valve against dysfunctional or oppressive governments. They offer a real solution for refugees seeking to become valued and respected members of society. There are currently some 84 million forcibly displaced people worldwide seeking a new home. However, few countries are willing to allow these people access, in part because the nature of existing political structures means that refugee intake can require a net subsidy from governments and tax-paying populations. This is not the case in FPCs, where all new citizen “customers” who are willing to live peacefully amongst others and abide by the city’s rules are welcomed with open arms. The creation of FPCs in the Middle East, for example, would prove invaluable for many refugees. When we look back at recent history, Hong Kong – a territory that has enjoyed largely minimal government intervention and strong protection of individual rights – was once a destination for hundreds of thousands of refugees from Maoist China and war-torn Vietnam. The system offered in Hong Kong profoundly transformed the lives of these refugees and their families. Due to its minimal level of government intervention, Hong Kong was able to transform itself from an economic backwater to a territory where the average resident earns more than the average resident of its former colonial master, Britain. In the same way that Hong Kong provided a home for refugees, FPCs would welcome immigrants who are willing to accept the rules and pay the annual fee – which would be kept low and made affordable to newcomers due to the possibility of taking on higher-paying jobs in the FPC, even for less skilled roles. FPCs would not provide welfare or voting rights but would instead offer a chance for a safer, more prosperous life, especially for minorities that are otherwise suppressed. If you enjoyed this article and want to find out more about Free Private Cities, you may want to consider reading our 12-page Free Private Cities whitepaper, available in English and German here. You can also visit the Beyond Democracy official website here to find out more about Frank’s book. --- # Is Hong Kong’s Success Story Coming to an End? URL: https://free-cities.org/is-hong-kongs-success-story-coming-to-an-end Published: 2023-07-10 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Blog Topics: city-states-today, history-of-free-cities, taxation-and-economics The astonishing development of Hong Kong is an example of how a city-state can work its way up from simple beginnings with a classical liberal system to considerable prosperity and also to enormous size. The population has multiplied (from 7,500 in 1843 to 1.7 million in 1945 to over 7.3 million in 2015), mainly due to immigration from the People’s Republic of China. For many mainland Chinese, the British colony was a refuge from the Chinese Civil War and later the Communist People’s Republic of China. Today, the quality of life and life expectancy, per capita income and business friendliness in Hong Kong are among the world’s best. [1] Hong Kong was under British administration from 1843 to 1997, but was able to gain extensive autonomy, especially after the Second World War. This enabled its leadership to steer a very different course during a period when planned economy, protectionism and Keynesianism were very popular in the motherland and elsewhere. Hong Kong allowed free markets, kept taxes low and did not accumulate debts, but instead built up a reserve equivalent to one annual budget. This enabled high growth rates lasting decades. Basically, it was only a small group of English colonial officials who set this course. They were advised by official and unofficial members of the Legislative Council, the latter mostly Chinese businessmen. In 1959, then-Governor Robert Black told this body that Hong Kong was probably the only remaining country in the world with genuine free trade. He added that he was proud of it and sure that all those present felt the same. [2] The goal was to raise everyone’s standard of living through full employment and thus also to integrate the many migrants arriving from China. Hong Kong’s Chief Financial Officer, John Cowperthwaite, derived from this the doctrine of Positive Non-Interventionism, according to which the government interferes in the economy only in very exceptional cases and instead creates the legal and infrastructural framework to facilitate market-based development. [3] In contrast to the British motherland, Hong Kong has permitted free markets without redistribution and thus achieved enormous success. The direct comparison between the two systems is clearly in Hong Kong’s favor, as it has overtaken the UK in all relevant indicators. [4] Cowperthwaite had recognized: In the long run, the aggregate of decisions of individual businessmen, exercising individual judgment in a free economy, even if often mistaken, is less likely to do harm than the centralized decisions of a government; and certainly the harm is likely to be counteracted faster. [5] He further noticed that every dollar the government takes away from the taxpayer could otherwise have been used by him to meet a need or increase his well-being or make an investment. [6] It is thanks to Cowperthwaite’s perseverance and intellectual independence that this path was maintained even in times of economic downturn. Even in Hong Kong, there was no shortage of efforts to raise taxes, restrict imports, control prices and increase government activity. [7] On the subject of political participation, Governor Grantham said in his farewell speech that critics often overlook the fact that democracy is not an end in itself, but only a means to an end, namely to guarantee individual freedom. He concluded that Hong Kong may not be democratic, but freedom would be guaranteed and there were few places in the world where the guiding principle “live and let live” would be so well manifest. [8] Grantham hit the nail on the head. While at the time he argued that freedom could exist (in exceptional cases) even without democracy, today the question has to be asked whether economic freedom in particular can survive at all in democratic systems. In view of the tendency of the majority to demand state interventions of all kinds, the permanent guarantee of a laissez-faire system based on Hong Kong’s model does not seem possible in democracies. If even a determined member of government like Cowperthwaite can avert all possible requests for intervention in a non-democratic system only with the greatest effort, then this is probably hopeless in a democracy. A Cowperthwaite would simply be voted out of office; a position of non-interference, i.e. inaction, is lost in the political battle for votes. [9] This is the case even though his approach would demonstrably benefit the electorate. A social order that grows at 5% a year but only has a government spending rate of 20% (of all GDP) initially spends less on each individual than a system that has twice the government spending rate but a growth rate of only 2% a year. After 24 years, however, both societies would already spend the same amount per citizen in absolute figures, and after 48 years, the leaner but faster-growing system could even double the amount for each individual despite a much lower government quota. That’s how it happened in Hong Kong, but majorities aren’t that patient. Deng Xiaoping, who initiated the opening of the People’s Republic of China to a market economy and who is perhaps one of the greatest Chinese reformers in history, is said to have taken Hong Kong as an example. He realized that Hong Kong’s economic system was obviously working, but not that of the People’s Republic. This concerned in particular the existence of free markets and the right to acquire private property, including ownership of the means of production. Following Hong Kong’s example, special economic zones have been established throughout the country since the early 1980s, beginning in Shenzhen. These have proven themselves so successful that they have been expanded further and further and China has been experiencing an enormous economic upswing ever since. Finally, the free market system was extended to the whole country. Today, no one has to go hungry in China, despite its earlier reputation for famine and poverty. It can therefore be argued that Hong Kong, because of its role model function, has changed China far more than it has changed itself since the political takeover by China in 1997. Since then, Hong Kong has been a Chinese Special Administrative Region (SAR) headed by a so-called Chief Executive, maintaining a market economy, its own private law based on English law, its own authorities, its own currency and internal autonomy. Under the “One Country, Two Systems” principle agreed to between China and the United Kingdom in 1984, Hong Kong will retain its political and economic autonomy for at least 50 years after the acquisition. Exceptions are foreign policy and matters of defense. In this respect, Hong Kong is certainly a model for the relationship between a Free City and a host state. Non-interventionism, however, had already been undermined in British times after the departure of Cowperthwaite and with increasing parliamentary participation. Today Hong Kong has minimum wages, anti-discrimination laws, mandatory old-age provisions and a taxation equivalent to that of Western countries. Businessmen report that parts of the civil service, which has been replaced or supplemented by mainland Chinese, are now susceptible to corruption, which was previously unthinkable. [10] Unfortunately, to the regret of many Hong Kong Chinese, in recent years, the government in Beijing more or less openly interferes in domestic politics, calling the treaty of 1984 between the UK and China a “historical document”, not binding any longer. [11] Subsequently, the possibility for political opposition, participation in elections and the legally guaranteed freedom of expression and freedom of the press are more and more restricted. Still, Hong Kong is one of the freest places in the world with regard to economic activity, but many have left or are about to leave. Because of this, the long-term trend has reversed, and Hong Kong’s population is now shrinking. [12] Some emigrants have organized themselves and are looking for a new home. [13] This could create an opportunity for Free Cities projects to find exceptionally qualified residents in sufficient numbers. In the not-too-distant future, a new Hong Kong might replace the old. References: • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong • Monnery, Neil: Architect of Prosperity – Sir John Cowperthwaite and the Making of Hong Kong, London 2017, 123. • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_non-interventionism • Monnery 2017, 123. • Official Report of Proceedings of the Hong Kong Legislative Counsel, March 24-25, 1966, 216. • Monnery 2017, 200. • Monnery 2017, 188ff., 252ff. • Monnery 2017, 121. • This was already the view of contemporary observers: the business journalist Rabushka wrote in 1973 that the economic laissez-faire model in Hong Kong was only possible because there were no elections, Monnery 2017, 296. • Own conversations of the author. • https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-anniversary-china-idUSKBN19L1J1 • https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/12/asia/hong-kong-population-record-fall-covid-intl-hnk/index.html • https://www.victoriaharbor.group This article is an excerpt from Titus Gebel’s book “Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You”. --- # Freedom Cities: What They Are, and Whether They Can Be Free URL: https://free-cities.org/freedom-cities Published: 2025-03-10 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: charter-cities Updated 12 September 2026. This article first appeared in March 2025; the section “Where things stand in 2026” records what has happened since. The idea entered American politics in March 2023, in a campaign speech that sketched a vision for national revitalization. Among many proposals, from flying cars to baby bonuses, was a plan to set aside a small share of federal land and create up to ten new cities through a competitive selection process. These “Freedom Cities” would restore the country’s reputation for ambitious, large-scale development and open new opportunities for homeownership and economic growth. The idea was mentioned in passing several more times that year. Whether it would be pursued in office was still an open question when this article first appeared in March 2025; the section below records where things stand now. Either way, the concept caught the attention of urban policy thinkers, including the Charter Cities Institute (CCI), which has since developed a serious proposal based on the speech. While this proposal takes Freedom Cities beyond a campaign slogan, it also reveals a deeper issue: how layers of entrenched bureaucracy and regulation have made economic and urban innovation in the U.S. nearly impossible. Where things stand in 2026 Whatever the federal programme becomes, the models it borrows from already exist. The charter cities hub gathers the research, and the project register lists the new cities operating today, from Próspera in Honduras to the village networks of Central America. Freedom Cities as a Response to Over-Regulation The CCI’s proposal, Freedom Cities: Accelerating American Innovation by Reducing Administrative and Regulatory Burdens, builds on the idea by identifying specific obstacles preventing growth in key industries: housing, biotech, aeronautics, energy and infrastructure. The report does not advocate for fully autonomous cities but instead suggests a framework where Freedom Cities would operate under a significantly relaxed regulatory environment, allowing for streamlined governance and economic experimentation. One of the primary arguments for Freedom Cities is the difficulty of conducting large-scale development under current U.S. regulations. Projects that should take months can take years or even decades due to bureaucratic red tape. Environmental reviews, zoning laws, building codes, and an overlapping web of local, state, and federal requirements have created an almost insurmountable barrier to progress. The CCI proposal envisions a model where these constraints are lifted, allowing for rapid development in emerging sectors and much-needed infrastructure. The proposal suggests that Freedom Cities could be established by making substantial regulatory exemptions. The plan includes allowing agency heads to waive or expedite regulations, streamlining environmental and building approvals to prevent delays, and offering tax incentives to businesses and investors willing to participate in these newly created cities. Additionally, the proposal emphasizes federal land acquisition and conversion, where municipalities and private landowners could opt into the initiative. To oversee the process, the creation of a White House-led task force would ensure consistency in granting regulatory waivers and implementing the project effectively. While these recommendations would indeed remove bureaucratic obstacles to economic progress, they also expose the scale of the problem: how deeply entangled U.S. economic activity has become with federal agencies, environmental regulations and tax burdens. The mere fact that so many waivers and exemptions would be necessary to make a new city work is an indictment of the current system. The Challenges of Freedom Cities While the Freedom Cities proposal is an attempt to reinvigorate urban development, its reliance on continuous federal political support and cooperation makes it a politically challenging endeavor. Setting up the legal framework for these cities in the first place would also be incredibly difficult. For over a century, the trend has been toward increasing regulatory control, not reduction. Reversing this course would require a coordinated effort from Congress, federal agencies and the executive branch, an uphill battle at best. Even if some deregulation were achieved, the fundamental structure of government-controlled land and centralized administration would remain, meaning that Freedom Cities would still operate within the existing framework of federal (and likely also state) power. This factor would make the realization of Freedom Cities dependent on political will first, and organic, market forces only second. The challenge is not just political but also cultural. For decades, American institutions have reinforced the notion that regulations exist to protect people and prevent corporate overreach. While some of these protections serve important purposes, many have led to unintended consequences, including skyrocketing housing costs, stagnating innovation, and barriers to entrepreneurial success. The Freedom Cities model attempts to carve out exceptions to these issues, but in doing so, it acknowledges that broad regulatory reform is incredibly difficult. Freedom Cities as Free Cities Despite the similarity in terms, there is no guarantee that Freedom Cities would also be Free Cities. If they end up being built thanks to heavy federal support and investment, and the governance system of these cities will only amount to light deregulation, they would simply not qualify. We can call something a Free City only if its modus operandi and the conscious effort behind it really is to provide as much freedom for its residents and businesses as possible. That being said, Freedom Cities could be built to be Free Cities, if it is done right. Strong political will and a certain alignment of interests across levels of government would be required either way at the city’s inception. However, no city can be a Free City unless it has the long-term guarantees and arrangements to be able to then operate independently, without the reliance on continuous federal political support. To be a Free City, the nascent Freedom City should also have as much of a blank-slate regulatory system as possible, likewise with a long-term stability guarantee. To maximize its independence, this city should be privately owned, and if it is established on federal land, this land should be promptly privatized. With such an alignment of the most important factors, these cities could adopt development and governance models that are truly customer-oriented rather than politically driven. Their focus will be on flexibility, economic freedom, and voluntary participation. Such Free Cities allow for organic growth without the need for constant government intervention. By focusing on voluntary association, residents and businesses choose to participate in an environment that prioritizes innovation, efficiency, and accountability. Instead of relying on the mercy of Congress with regard to their freedom and status, such cities would simply operate under a different legal and administrative framework from the start. One of the biggest advantages of Free Cities is their ability to attract investment. With minimal and adaptive regulation, businesses are free to experiment and scale without bureaucratic roadblocks. Because they operate outside traditional political structures, Free Cities provide a stable and predictable environment, which is increasingly appealing in a world of economic uncertainty and government overreach. This is crucial for the cities’ success, since relying on state investment instead of private investment would be a highly risky endeavor. Free Cities also embrace voluntary governance models. Unlike traditional municipalities, where rules are dictated from above, Free Cities rely on contracts and agreements between residents, businesses, and governance providers. This means that governance is customer-driven, ensuring that rules and policies are aligned with the needs and desires of the community rather than imposed through political agendas. The Future of City Innovation Although the concept of Freedom Cities acknowledges the fact that regulatory overreach has strangled economic innovation and urban development, new cities need to be truly innovative in their approach to governance and local autonomy. Despite their name, Freedom Cities are not necessarily Free Cities, but they could be, if they are established in the right way. The Free City model does not rely on continuous government support and an ongoing commitment to undo its own damage, making such cities more resilient, more stable and more likely to succeed in the long term. Freedom Cities should choose the Free Cities path. It provides a true alternative, one that does not require an endless battle with bureaucracy. Instead, it creates environments where entrepreneurship, investment and governance innovation can flourish naturally. If America truly wants to reclaim its pioneering spirit, it must make sure that Freedom Cities are also Free Cities. Only by allowing new jurisdictions to operate with real local autonomy can we unleash the next era of economic growth and human flourishing. --- # Taxes Are the Price We Pay for Not Living in a Civilized Society URL: https://free-cities.org/taxes-are-the-price-we-pay-for-not-living-in-a-civilized-society Published: 2023-03-27 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: taxation-and-economics During tax season, many people will be trying to provide you with practical ways to lower your tax bill and mitigate your potential exposure to both tax payments and tax reporting. Instead of repeating such advice, I would rather leave that to the other writers and spend some time in this article discussing the role of taxes in society. In particular, I would like to explain why we don’t actually need taxes. Almost everyone recognizes that paying taxes causes psychological harm alongside other negative effects. However, it is commonly said that despite all the drawbacks, taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. I would like to make the case in this article that this common statement is exactly the opposite of the truth. Taxes are not the price we pay to live in a civilized society. Rather, taxes are the price we pay because we do not live in a civilized society. Two broad-based reasons for taxation are frequently given. First, we need taxes in order to provide for so-called public goods and second, we may need to distribute wealth in a more equitable manner. I submit that neither of these is a particularly good reason for taxation and should therefore not be proposed. If taxation is to exist, it should be justified on other grounds. For the sake of brevity, both arguments will be somewhat simplified here. For a thorough explanation, readers are encouraged to read Murray Rothbard’s treatise Man, Economy, and State, amongst other great works. The arguments presented in this book are impeccable and logically consistent, and that logic is taken to its conclusion showing that the only truly ethical world in which we can live must be a world in which taxes do not exist and coercion is removed from society. Why taxes cannot be used to increase welfare in society All economics is microeconomics. No ‘macroeconomic’ phenomena can exist outside the individual decisions of billions of individuals. Therefore, we will start this exercise from the perspective of the individual. Individuals must act in the world. No matter what you do, you must act in some manner. This action consists of using means to obtain certain ends. But how do we know which ends to achieve and which means we should use to obtain them? That is up to the individual to decide. The individual must believe that achieving the ends will necessarily make his life better. He must also believe that his action combined with the means he utilizes can successfully achieve the desired end. Note I am not saying that he is flawless in this assessment nor in his ability to achieve the ends but rather that he believes both to be true before the fact. The way in which we know as outside observers that the individual desires some definite end is always and only through observing his actions in the world. While the individual can always say what he values and make tradeoffs in his mind that he then expresses to the world, we can never be sure that he actually desires some end more than another unless he actually demonstrates his preference through his action in the real world. This point is crucial in that I do not advocate the typical model of the market as efficient and man as homo economicus. Those are simply not accurate pictures of the world. What I do advocate is that not only is any individual in a better position to know what increases his well-being, he is actually the only one that can possibly know what makes him better off. No outside party can possibly know. From this point, we can draw a more sweeping conclusion. If the individual is the only one that can know what makes him better off, we must necessarily allow individuals to make choices in society in a voluntary manner as the only way of expressing through their demonstrated preference what actually maximizes their welfare. As a corollary, any intervention into the market economy therefore necessarily impedes the ability of the individual to express his preferences through action. It is no major step from this point to highlight that given all actions in the free market are welfare maximizing (at least beforehand or a priori) and that all coercive interventions into the market necessarily harm the ability of the individual to maximize his welfare that when the government intervenes in the economy, it necessarily makes the world worse off. Utility cannot be maximized in any scientific way if the government intervenes. Finally, we note that, while all forms of government intervention necessarily make society worse off, taxation falls well within this category. As a non-voluntary payment, taxation forcibly co-opts funds from members of society. Those funds were necessarily going to be spent in another way. If they weren’t then what is the point of taxation in the first place? Therefore we know that funds are taken from the wallets of some and put into the hands of capital allocators that will necessarily spend the money in a less optimal way, making the world worse off. Why redistribution through taxation makes the world poorer The second major argument for taxation is to redistribute wealth in a perceived more equitable manner. This too is a fallacy. Actually, the very idea of a ‘distribution’ of wealth is fallacious from the start. Natural resources are distributed all over the world. Some places have more and some have less quantity for any number of resources. No matter the starting point, we know that humans act in the world in order to alleviate unwanted dissatisfaction. From here we know that in practice this often means acquiring certain inputs (could be simply skills and elbow grease all the way to major manufacturing equipment) and mixing these inputs in a certain way and in a certain environment to create an output. This output is then sold and the higher the selling price the better for the producer, the lower the price the better for the consumer. Given that all economic activity consists of the creation of wealth through this rearrangement of inputs to better achieve the desires of the consuming public (and therefore obtaining a higher selling price for the producer) we know that producers (or entrepreneurs) are trying to maximize the welfare of the consumer in order to maximize their own welfare through increased profits. In this sense, profits are simply an indication of how much good you have already done for the world. Taxing these profits and giving the proceeds to others who have not done as much good is incentivizing a lowering of consumer welfare, a raising of prices and necessarily making those in society that do not produce as much artificially in a better position than their counterparts who actually did produce value for the world. Letting the market allocate resources and funds is the only just distribution of resources. To be more precise, it is not actually a process of ‘distribution’ at all. Each transaction in society necessarily leads to where resources currently sit. Each transaction was entered into by at least two individuals making themselves better off a priori. There is no such thing as some allocation of wealth beyond what is entered into on a daily basis by the individual. As such, redistribution should be recognized as a government-mandated allocation away from what consumers desire. When you put it this way, redistribution of wealth is not so attractive after all. —– So, while you figure out your own tax planning this year and pull your hair out more than once with the frustrating, complex, and vague forms you likely are required to fill out, remember that taxes are not the price we pay to live in a civilized society. Taxes are the price we pay because we do not live in a civilized society. I hope to not have upset you too much, but a little anger is justified as we analyze this totally unjust institution. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in March 2023. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # Monaco: A State Owned By A Family URL: https://free-cities.org/monaco-a-state-owned-by-a-family Published: 2023-07-24 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Blog Topics: city-states-today, private-governance, history-of-free-cities While Venice has lost its independence, another Mediterranean community founded by Genoese noblemen has survived to this day. This is the Principality of Monaco, which can be exemplary for Free Cities in many respects because of its size, its special relationship with France, and its solutions to the issues of security, immigration, and financing of public expenditure. Some claim that Monaco is already a kind of private state that publishes its figures like a stock corporation and regards its inhabitants as customers. [1] The civil wars between the Ghibellines and Guelphs in northern Italy led to the expulsion from Genoa of the papal Guelphs and thus also of the Grimaldi family in 1296. On January 8, 1297, the Grimaldi managed to penetrate the fortress of Monaco, which until then had been in Ghibelline hands, and conquer it with their troops in a surprise attack. Since then, the Grimaldi family has ruled Monaco, with only brief interruptions due to foreign occupation. In 1489, Monaco’s independence was formally recognized by the King of France and the Duke of Savoy. As a result, independence was questioned time and again, often by France, which now surrounds Monaco from three sides. Today, Monaco’s sovereignty, including its coastal waters, is universally recognized. The Principality has been a constitutional monarchy since 1911. Freedom of expression is guaranteed. The prince appoints the government. Since the 1962 amendment to the constitution, there has been a parliament elected in free and secret elections every five years. However, the prince has the right of veto on acts of parliament. In 1993 the country joined the United Nations. [2] Monaco is a dwarf state with an area of only 2 km². It is home to about 38,000 people, making it the most densely populated country in the world. About 50,000 people work in the principality, most of them daily commuters from France or nearby Italy. They usually cannot afford to take an apartment in Monaco. Despite formal recognition as a sovereign state, the relationship with France occupies a special position that restricts Monaco’s independence to a certain extent. Monaco has concluded several treaties with France over the centuries, defining the relationship between the two countries. Thus, even the last major crisis between the two countries was resolved by treaty. At the beginning of the 1960s, French companies and private individuals increasingly moved their headquarters to tax-free Monaco, although they generated the bulk of their income in France. France then demanded that Monaco impose French taxation on all its inhabitants and companies. The final compromise reached in 1963 provides that persons with French nationality who did not live in Monaco before 1962 should pay taxes in France. In addition, Monaco adopted the French Value Added Tax (VAT) rate and pays part of the VAT to France. The Principality also undertakes to exercise its sovereignty rights in such a way as to safeguard France’s economic and political interests. This also includes not allowing persons to enter who are unwanted in France. In return, France assumes responsibility for Monaco’s external security. [3] Monaco, with its diversity of cultural, culinary, and sporting offerings, combined with its civility, its history, its splendor, and its reputation as the home of the rich and beautiful, can certainly be regarded as a culmination point of European high culture. There is no shortage of critics, but tourists and day visitors keep coming in droves, and the demand for housing exceeds the supply many times over, which is why property prices are the highest in the world. About 30% of its inhabitants are said to have liquid assets of more than one million US dollars. [4] Monaco is considered the state with the lowest poverty rate and the highest life expectancy worldwide. In the middle of the 19th century, Monaco was still poor. The population had even declined to 300 people at one time. Only with the opening of a successful casino and the railway connection in 1868 did the turnaround come about. When the annual revenues from the casino business financed 95% of the state budget, the prince decided to waive taxes on his subjects from then on. In principle, it has remained so to this day. Monaco does not levy income, inheritance, or capital gains taxes. However, companies that generate the bulk of their income outside Monaco pay corporate taxes. Added to this is the aforementioned value-added tax, which currently accounts for about half of the state budget, which is about one billion euros per year (for only 38,000 people). Revenues from state casinos and hotels today play only a minor role (about 5%), the rest being financed by corporate taxes, property taxes, and other levies. The budget shows a slight surplus and Monaco is not only debt-free but also has liquid reserves of more than two annual budgets. [5] The Principality has had a customs union with France since 1865, through which it also participates in the EU common market but is not itself a member of the European Union. Monaco uses the Euro as its currency and has also received the right from the EU to mint a certain number of coins itself. About 80% of the population are foreigners without Monegasque citizenship. People from 139 nations live together peacefully. Monaco has the lowest crime and poverty rate in the world, without border controls and despite tens of thousands of commuters and just as many visitors every day. How is that possible? The Principality has the highest police density per capita in the world and monitors its entire territory with cameras; there is a police officer and a video camera for every 70 inhabitants. The police have a total strength of 520 people, plus the same number of private security personnel and two paramilitary units (palace guard and fire department). Due to the urban nature of the border with neighboring French municipalities and the high volume of traffic, it would be difficult to carry out strict border controls. Monaco instead monitors incoming vehicles with license plate readers and by visual inspection by police officers posted at the points of entry. Suspicious persons are detected by the camera surveillance and then questioned by patrolmen. Incidentally, Monaco looks closely at who it brings into the country as a resident. If you want to settle in Monaco, you must also be entitled to reside in France, have proof of an apartment in Monaco (rent or property), have sufficient income or assets to cover your living expenses, as well as a CV and a police clearance certificate from your country of origin for all adult family members. On this basis, an internet search is then carried out and a personal interview with a police officer is conducted. If there are no qualms, Monaco grants a residence permit for one year, which can be extended twice more for one year before a three-year residence permit is granted, etc. This gives Monaco the option of simply not extending the residence permit for dubious or unpleasant new citizens instead of having lengthy legal disputes about the revocation of a residence permit. Monaco has no tolerance for crime. Convicted non-Monegasques must leave the Principality, possibly after serving a prison sentence, even for minor offences such as shoplifting. [6] It is the combination of all these measures, i.e. the camera surveillance, the strict immigration rules, the deportation of criminals, and the strong police presence, which means that parents in Monaco can send their children out onto the streets at midnight without hesitation. A rare feature in today’s Western cities. References: • Cf. also Pamini 2015, 353, who points out that it is precisely the design of Monaco as “Grimaldi Ltd” that achieves better results than a democracy. • https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histoire_de_Monaco • http://en.gouv.mc/Policy-Practice/Monaco-Worldwide/Agreements-and-Treaties/Treaties-and-bilateral-agreements/Themes/Bilateral-treaties-with-France; relevant are the agreements concluded in 1963. • www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/wirtschaftspolitik/reichtum-wo-die-millionaere-wohnen-staedte-ranking-13060176.html • 2016 for the fifth time in a row a surplus was achieved. see Monaco Statistics Pocket 2017, IMSEE Monaco Statistics, p. 13. The reserves are held in the Fonds de Réserve Constitutionnel, Monaco Pocket Statistics, p. 16. • Instructively in addition a report of the French sender M6: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E22Bvnf5k2w This article is an excerpt from Titus Gebel’s book “Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You”. --- # More Competition in the World’s Most Important Market URL: https://free-cities.org/more-competition-in-the-worlds-most-important-market Published: 2021-09-24 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance The world is in turmoil. The last year has shown that – even in the West – respect for supposedly secure human rights can be abandoned quickly without objection from the majority. Politicians have developed a taste for the greater power their populations have granted them, and climate lockdowns are already being announced. Do we have a chance to escape from the consequences of these developments? Is real freedom still possible in our lifetime or is an increasingly monitored and totalitarian world inevitable? Are alternative societies with greater freedom and a “live and let live” attitude feasible? The answer is yes. Of course, those who feel pressure to act due to the new restrictions that have been placed on their freedom are still a small minority. But this minority is growing by the day. And those who want to evade ever closer state control have not remained inactive in recent years. In our view, the “market of living together” is actually the most important market in the world. In addition to emigration to freer countries – which we will not discuss here – three alternative models for living together have emerged. They are: • Sovereign units • Autonomous special zones • Local communities with shared values Sovereign units The classic way to achieve sovereignty is through secession or revolution. Since both of these paths are difficult or perhaps undesirable, freedom lovers have come up with alternative ideas. One such path is the discovery of so-called Terra Nullius: patches of territory that are not claimed by their neighboring states. One such case is an area of ​​a few square kilometers between Croatia and Serbia, which was created because one side claims its border at the old Danube bed while the other claims it at the borderline of the new, straightened bed. As a result, an area has been created that is theoretically not claimed by either of the two neighboring states. A Czech entrepreneur “annexed” this area and proclaimed its own state under the name Liberland. The weakness of the Terra Nullius principle becomes visible in this particular case: an area is only Terra Nullius as long as the neighboring countries do not change their minds. In the case of Liberland, the Croatian security forces categorically refuse to enter. Corresponding legal proceedings by Liberland against Croatia are pending. Another approach is seasteading, through which floating settlements are built on the high seas outside countries’ exclusive economic zones (200 nautical miles). Due to recent technical breakthroughs, the first floating platforms off the coast of Panama have been tested on an experimental basis. Autonomous special zones A less extensive solution is represented by autonomous special zones, for example in the form of Free Private Cities. Some of the rules of the mother state continue to apply here, but a defined autonomy is guaranteed within the zone. Special economic zones with their own jurisdiction have existed for a number of years and there is indeed a trend towards developing special economic zones in the direction of special administrative zones, with the legal situation in them increasingly deviating from that of the mother state. Honduras has become the first country to make autonomous special zones possible by law. Honduran authorities wanted to create a kind of Hong Kong in the Caribbean based on a similar “one country, two systems” model. After a somewhat bumpy start, there are now three so-called Zone for Employment and Economic Development or “ZEDEs”. At the end of the year there could be five. Apart from Honduran criminal law, parts of the constitution and the international agreements concluded by Honduras – which must be observed – ZEDEs are free to set up their own rules that are approved by a state commission. They have their own administration, their own security forces and their own arbitration tribunals. The two largest ZEDEs, Próspera and Morazán, have explicitly adopted a private management model. While the more industrialized ZEDE Morazán is a proprietary community and only rents land out, outright purchase of land is possible in Próspera. There is a real civil contract with an “Agreement of Coexistence”, resembling some out the structures outlined in my book Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You. These two zones are currently erecting their first buildings, and the first settlers are due to move in by the end of this year. It will be exciting to observe how ZEDEs develop in practice. Political opposition has already emerged, but if the zones allow Hondurans to live a better life and create plenty of jobs, they have a real chance of establishing themselves permanently and serving as a role model for other countries. However, in practice, obtaining such extensive autonomy from a state is difficult. In the case of Honduras too, this process has been the subject of lengthy negotiations, bills and lawsuits before the constitutional court. Nevertheless, there are at least two projects in Africa that have already signed letters of intent with governments to set up similar autonomous special zones. Other projects try to expand an existing status as a free trade zone or special economic zone and to obtain additional autonomy rights from their respective governments. Even if some of these projects fail, it is likely that more states besides Honduras will embark on a similar path in the next few years. And similar to the special economic zones, of which there were only a handful in the 1960s, and which now number more than 5000 worldwide (although perhaps only 500 of these are significant zones), it is possible that autonomous special zones could grow rapidly in number over the coming years. This is especially true if such zones also bring economic benefits to the host state. The deal would then be: more freedom for investment. These new cities will share similarities with the free imperial cities of the Middle Ages, which were first fought for by the princes and later promoted for economic reasons after it was recognized that such places bring positive benefits to the surrounding area. It is likely that bitcoin will aid this development: serving as the base layer for parallel (monetary) structures, that can operate even without the consent of existing governments. Local communities with shared values The establishment of autonomous special zones is usually only possible through changes to the law or constitutional changes in target countries, which can be cumbersome and time-consuming. That is why Freedom Friends came up with the idea of ​​founding their own settlements within the existing political order, ideally within the framework of municipal autonomy, but at least as a community of owners. This step grew out of the realization that what is most important for the individual is what happens in their immediate local area. In local communities of values, coexistence can be subject to self-imposed rules, for example on the basis of contracts or associations. Over the years, at least a de facto autonomy could be achieved, as the Amish and Mennonites in North and South America have achieved. Examples of such models include Liberstad in Norway and Frenly Park in Canada. The latter aim, in the medium term, to become their own communities with appropriate local autonomy (in Saskatchewan, this is possible once the community reaches a size of 300 people). Since such projects are easier to implement compared to the first two concepts mentioned, initial efforts are also underway in German-speaking countries to build up local communities of like-minded people. A new platform The Free Private Cities Foundation, based in Zurich, now wants to offer all those involved in these projects a framework for sharing information, exchanging experiences, and taking part in critical discussion. For the first time this year, on October 16, we will be hosting a conference in Switzerland entitled Liberty In Our Lifetime. We hope to make this conference an annual event. Please visit our conference website to find out more and sign up to attend. --- # Honduras Election, Grokipedia, Sark & What’s Ahead URL: https://free-cities.org/newsletter-honduras-election Published: 2025-12-17 Author: Natalie Danelishen Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan, https://free-cities.org/projects/sark Dear Readers, As we approach the end of 2025, we bring you an update on the long-anticipated Honduran general election results, Grokipedia’s newly published deep dive into Free Cities, developments on Sark, and more… Honduran Election: More Favourable Outlook on the Horizon Honduras held its presidential election on 30 November 2025, an event watched closely across the Free Cities community due to its impact on flagship projects Próspera and Ciudad Morazán. The good news is that preliminary results suggest the governing LIBRE party — known for its hostile stance on ZEDEs — has fallen to third place. The two leading candidates are now centre-right figures Nasry “Tito” Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, both viewed as more open to ZEDEs than the current administration. Asfura, who has also received backing from Donald Trump, is currently ahead, with 40.52% of the vote compared to Nasralla’s 39.18%, a margin of just 42,100 votes separating the two. While a victory by either frontrunner would be encouraging for those hoping for a more favourable environment for ZEDEs, the tally remains uncertified, with ongoing disputes and delays meaning the final outcome is still uncertain. Nonetheless, the Honduran military has pledged to ensure an orderly transition of power once a winner is formally declared. Honduran Election Candidates: Nasry “Tito” Asfura (National Party of Honduras), Salvador Nasralla (Liberal Party), Rixi Moncada (LIBRE Party) Grokipedia’s Free Cities Article: A Valuable Independent Resource Grokipedia, xAI’s AI-generated encyclopedia, has published an 8,000-word article on Free Cities, tracing the concept from medieval and early modern Europe through to today’s experimental governance models. Taken as a whole, it is the most comprehensive, independently produced overview of Free Cities currently available online. In our view, the article does a good job of presenting related concepts, including Charter Cities, Network States, and Free Private Cities, within one coherent narrative. The publication is itself notable: Grokipedia only produces articles of this scale where there is sustained online interest in a concept, making this a clear signal that curiosity about alternative governance models is growing. The piece is well worth reading and represents a meaningful step up from the fragmented and often ideologically skewed material found on Wikipedia. That said, the article is not without its errors, largely due to its reliance on some unreliable left-leaning sources that are readily available online. Some of these errors include claims that Próspera’s growth has been held back by land disputes (in reality, there have been no formal land disputes or official filings regarding land the project owns), that the project has generated only a “modest” $50 million in investment (the true figure is at least four times higher), and that Próspera has never paid taxes to the Honduran government (which is simply incorrect, as Próspera has remitted 12% of its revenues to the Honduran state since inception, as it is legally required to do). For readers interested in primary-source clarifications, we recommend consulting Próspera’s official FAQs. Soubey Entrepreneur’s Workshop Those of you who attended the Free Cities Conference in Prague may remember Marc-Felix Otto and Armin Häfliger’s presentation about developments in Soubey, a Swiss village exploring how to use Switzerland’s cantonal system to dramatically enhance its vibrancy, attract entrepreneurs and lower municipal taxes. On 28 February 2026, Initiative Soubey and the Free Economic Forum will host a hands-on workshop in the village to develop new business models, attract residents, and shape a long-term vision for the community. If you are interested in taking part, please reach out to: armin@meinrad.ch or marc-felix.otto@free-cities.org. Sark: What’s Next? Yesterday, long-term Sark resident and entrepreneur Swen Lorenz published a detailed update on the current situation on the Isle of Sark. Long-time readers will recall that Swen previously led a £30m+ property bid involving assets owned by the Barclay brothers, intended to revitalise the island’s economy, which was ultimately rejected. In his latest piece, Swen outlines Sark’s structural challenges and mounting financial pressures, culminating in the island’s decision to seek a £1.5m loan from neighbouring Guernsey and to raise some of its famously low taxes. The update comes shortly after Swen hosted 48 international visitors for a Sark weekend, offering first-hand exposure to the island’s unique political and economic model. This video report from The Wandering Investor offers an inside look. Swen’s assessment is unambiguous: Sark will not be able to work its way out of its current situation through incremental steps; either a large-scale solution addressing multiple issues at once is implemented, or the island risks remaining stuck on its current trajectory. Click the image to view The Wandering Investor’s video about the Sark Weekend Other Media • Free Cities Foundation Chairman Titus Gebel and prominent architect Patrik Schumacher recently joined the UK Libertarian Party for an in-depth interview on political change, democracy, and the future of governance. • The Free Cities movement continues to receive increasing mainstream attention, although the coverage still repeats some of the familiar misconceptions discussed above. Recent examples include: Tech Elites are Starting Their Own For-Profit Cities by the FT and Tech Billionaires Are Starting Private Cities to Escape the United States by Futurism. Podcast Roundup In the lead-up to the Honduran elections, we released two in-depth conversations that provide context on developments in Ciudad Morazán and Próspera: • Massimo Mazzone, founder of Ciudad Morazán, spoke about Morazán’s growth, the status of the ZEDE framework, and concerns surrounding the Honduran election. • Trey Goff, Próspera’s Chief of Staff, discussed Próspera’s legal battles, regulatory innovation, and media misinformation. Yesterday, Timothy Allen also released a post-election update, drawing on expert insights shared by senior figures involved with Próspera and Ciudad Morazán to interpret the preliminary results and their implications. Taken together, these episodes offer some of the clearest and most timely perspectives available on the future of these two flagship projects. Support the Podcast and Promote Your Brand This year, our podcast host, Timothy Allen, released 53 episodes, recorded across the US, UK, Czech Republic, Serbia, Latvia, and Morocco. In 2025, the podcast’s reach more than tripled in overall impressions, driven in part by the launch of new YouTube and TikTok content, with over 1.3 million impressions recorded across platforms. These figures point to rapidly growing visibility and interest, and we are now looking to take the show to the next level. If you run a business that would benefit from reaching a highly engaged, globally minded audience, we encourage you to consider becoming a sponsor. Doing so not only gives your brand visibility, it also directly supports the mission of the Free Cities Foundation. To learn more, contact podcast@free-cities.org. Final Thoughts As 2025 comes to an end, it’s worth taking stock of how quickly the Free Cities landscape has evolved over the past year. Through high-profile events like our conference (photos here), sustained outreach, and consistent messaging, interest in Free Cities has expanded well beyond the audiences reached even a year ago. This shift is increasingly visible in popular media. For example, the Grokipeida article mentioned above and the Yes Theory documentary reported on in a previous newsletter, which has now surpassed 3 million views. At the same time, new initiatives such as Destiny have been launched with impressive ambition, demonstrating that alternative governance models are increasingly gaining significant traction. Looking ahead, 2026 will bring another major step: the first Free Cities Conference hosted in a Free City: Próspera, Roatán. This event will offer the closest look yet at one of the world’s most ambitious governance experiments, and we warmly encourage you to take part. Details of what we’re planning and how you can join can be found here. As we wrap up the year, we want to thank you for being part of this growing community. Your engagement and encouragement make our work possible. We wish you all a peaceful Christmas season and a prosperous start to 2026. Your Free Cities Foundation Team Duna Tower, Próspera: join us for the 2026 conference --- # Vote With Your Feet, Build Communities, And Shape Your Own Reality URL: https://free-cities.org/vote-with-your-feet-build-communities-and-shape-your-own-reality Published: 2023-05-01 Author: Caroline King Category: Blog Topics: alternative-education When confronted with limitations, we have two options: remain in the situation or leave it. We can create a fresh start on our terms, using the adversity to build resilience and forge a brighter future. Disclaimer: The following article, republished by the Foundation, was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. The Swedish School System Relies on Compulsion Most people in other countries don’t know it but in Sweden, all alternative forms of education, such as homeschooling and non government affiliated private schools, are illegal. As a result, staying in the country to homeschool presents a very high risk of negative consequences, including having children taken away and being subjected to fines, with the citizens being monitored by personal numbers which ensures that all children go to school. The compulsory Swedish schooling is immoral because it undermines a family’s natural right to care for their children as they see fit. The coercive nature of the system and its values contradict traditional gender roles and the existence of nuclear families. Since Swedish law provides no support for this natural right, unlike most other Western countries, those seeking alternative ways to raise their children must leave Sweden. Many children struggle in the inflexible Swedish school system, leading to a high number of children experiencing mental health issues or receiving diagnoses such as ADHD when it isn’t the case. The lack of playtime and personal development opportunities in schools can leave children feeling frustrated and hyperactive. While some children can adapt and thrive within the system, many others suffer in the process. Coercion is never the right approach, and when there is coercion, there is often a darker side to the situation. Deciding Your Path: Stay in Tyranny or Leave for Freedom? When faced with the dilemma of living somewhere with fundamental restrictions, there are essentially two paths: Remain in Sweden and keep the children in school despite their poor well-being. Although Swedish schools are “equivalent,” there is minimal flexibility for them to deviate from the rigid system. However, some differences still exist, as the overall satisfaction depends on the school’s management and staff. Yet, the highly structured system doesn’t suit everyone, as all children have unique needs. Families should have the natural choice of whether their children attend school or not. The “one size fits all” approach doesn’t work for all children, as evidenced by the high number of unhappy students and diagnoses. It’s easy to attribute the blame to these diagnoses, allowing schools and parents to avoid responsibility. Staying in a familiar environment with friends and family is comfortable, and moving abroad due to a child’s poor fit in school isn’t an easy decision. Nonetheless, weighing the child’s well-being against comfort and financial costs is crucial, even if the majority still choose to stay. It’s disheartening that families must leave their homeland because of a school system that harms their children. Many likely hope that homeschooling will become legal soon, making it possible to wait it out. Leave the restrictive environment and seek better opportunities elsewhere. This choice involves using the negative situation as a source of resilience and strength to create a brighter future. By leaving behind the coercive system, families can build anew on their own terms and pursue alternative educational options for their children. Vote With Your Feet When faced with these kind of unfreedoms you can make a choice. You can leave the oppressing system in your country to a better, freer place where the state doesn’t control families like it does in Sweden. The likelihood of homeschooling becoming legal within this generation’s childhood is slim, so it’s best to move forward and look optimistically towards a future elsewhere. No place in the developed world has a school system as strict as Sweden’s, nor is there a more narrow-minded mentality that insists on attending school and adhering to rigid social norms. Fleeing a situation doesn’t necessarily make you a victim of circumstances. Like traumas, you can choose to be defeated by them or turn them to your advantage. Transforming negative energy into a positive driving force is brave and necessary. It’s about shifting perspectives and seeing opportunities in adversity rather than obstacles. Compulsory schooling is just one example of restrictions and coercion that can push us to seek freedom and independence. The strongest drive in humans is protecting what is most precious to them – their off spring. However, compulsory schooling is only one aspect that a person might flee from. Escapes can happen due to other forms of violence, coercion, property theft, or high taxes. Leaving a country with high living costs and an unfavorable climate for a warmer, more affordable alternative can also be a pursuit of happiness and satisfaction. The desire to find better opportunities elsewhere has inspired and motivated people throughout history. With today’s conditions, relocating is easier, particularly if you haven’t started a family yet and have a location-independent job. Modern technology allows for many location-independent jobs, leading to the emergence of “digital nomads” who can work online and move as they please. Strength in Unity Belonging and being part of a social context is a fundamental human need – as social beings, we rely on community and cohesion. This applies to homeschooling refugees and others seeking community through various social media and online groups. It’s unfortunate that Swedish homeschooling families are scattered worldwide like a diaspora, and many struggle to find a sense of connection and belonging. This issue is significant because collaboration is necessary to create meaningful change. Individually, we may be vulnerable, but together we possess the strength to prevail. Together, we can work towards positive change and demonstrate that freedom, responsibility, and compassion are the right paths to follow. Building Parallel Structures, Communities, And Free Cities Since the emergence of location independent online sources of income, various movements have sprung up, such as the Free Cities Foundation, which promotes the development of Free Cities and “intentional communities”. These mini-societies consist of people with similar beliefs, living in the same village or area. While some may share a house and chores, others may prefer a more independent lifestyle, maintaining geographical proximity but living separate lives otherwise. For those who relocate due to compulsory schooling or in the search of liberty in other ways and look for a community or a Free City, it’s essential to organize and collaborate. The Free Cities Foundation could be an ideal platform for homeschooling refugees, complementing smaller initiatives like the Swedish unschooling group. It’s crucial to promote our locations and identify suitable communities. Within the Swedish homeschooling world, there are several well-known “bases.” Many opt to move to Åland or Bornholm in Denmark, given their physical proximity to Sweden and generous welfare systems. Others choose English-speaking countries where homeschooling is socially accepted, or countries with low taxes, greater personal freedoms, and a warm climate where authorities are less intrusive. For those who haven’t yet moved and are uncertain about the right community, organized communities provide easily accessible information, allowing people to visit and make informed decisions. Additionally, attending conferences and events promoting libertarian ideas and networking opportunities can be inspiring. This fall, the Free Cities Foundation is organizing the Liberty of Our Lifetime conference, presenting an excellent chance to participate in such an event. The video from last year’s conference showcases the positive atmosphere, featuring several unschooling families. Ultimately, we are responsible for creating our own freedom. By relocating to places with better opportunities and collaborating with like-minded individuals, we significantly increase our chances of success. This blog post was originally published by Caroline King at Den Andra Resan in April 2023. Visit the blog for more articles in English and Swedish. Listen to our interview with the author, Caroline King, on the Free Cities Podcast here. --- # The Metaverse: An Incubator for Free Cities? URL: https://free-cities.org/the-metaverse-an-incubator-for-free-cities Published: 2024-03-18 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: technology-in-new-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland Free cities are on the rise, both in the West and in the East, in wealthier countries and aspiring economies, in established democracies and more turbulent ones. And that is excellent news: more urban experiments mean more opportunities for visionaries and a wider choice of rules for us all. However, getting a green light from the host country has always been (and still remains) the ultimate obstacle. What if there were a place, a kind of innovation playground, where new governance models can be road-tested without the usual red tape or democratic wrangling? A place where ideas can go from a lightbulb moment to real-world action at warp speed? There probably is one: the metaverse. Prosperity Goes Digital: The Virtual Reinvention of Charter Cities Experiments in the ‘real’ world are costly and time-consuming. In a hostile environment, the road between an idea and its implementation may take decades. Consider the story of Honduran charter cities. Half a century ago, the Francisco Marroquín University (UFM) was founded in Guatemala to become Latin America’s intellectual bastion for free-market thinking. It was within the UFM walls that the idea of “prosperity zones” in Central America has been brewing for decades. One day, the late UFM president Giancarlo Ibárgüen mentioned it to a friendly circle of Honduran politicians, and it fell on fertile ground. Still, it took a couple more decades of political and legal fighting (and even actual street fighting!) before the first charter city, Próspera ZEDE, finally broke ground. It’s not just seaside residences that Próspera offers its citizens, but a unique legal framework. And the latter can be enjoyed remotely. The system of e-citizenship allows anyone to become a virtual citizen of Próspera or register a company within a ZEDE without ever visiting Honduras. The first corporate residents were academic institutions, fintech startups, and software developers—those who chose Próspera not for its stunning sunsets but for the ease of doing business. Even if the Honduran government cracks down on charter cities (as they tried in 2022), they can survive as prosperity hubs by simply moving their activities entirely into the virtual realm. That brings Próspera closer to a non-territorial jurisdiction—not tied to the land and, therefore less vulnerable to political shocks, which happen in Honduras every once in a while. Non-Territorial Governance: Unbundling Land and Laws Projects like Honduran charter cities can be a massive game-changer for developing economies. McKinsey calculated that the creation of just a few ZEDEs could spark a job boom, potentially adding a whopping 600,000 new gigs. But there is a vicious cycle: to construct a city, you require permission from the government. Yet, to obtain this permission, you must demonstrate that you have enough supporters. However, to accumulate supporters, you need to first build a city. The Network State evangelists believe that you can do things in a different order: assemble a community first and acquire the territory later. Network States, as explained by Balaji Srinivasan in an eponymous book, start as online communities of volunteers who share a common vision for society. These digital collectives aim to eventually gain physical territory and official recognition, transitioning from online clubs to politically autonomous entities. This approach relies on the principle of non-territorial governance, whereby political jurisdiction is separated from physical territory, allowing people to move between political regimes without actually packing their stuff and moving anywhere. When your nation’s success hinges on natural resources like oil or gas, you’re bound to the land where those resources are stored. However, when the key to your wealth is a set of well-crafted rules, you are much more mobile. Unlike an oil well, rules can’t be seized in a police raid. They aren’t anchored to a particular location on the globe. This is the advantage of non-territorial jurisdictions: they are not limited by geography. Still, your e-citizens need to gather somewhere, even if that ‘somewhere’ is a virtual space. They need a platform to exercise this freedom, a place that would combine the perks of physical cities — the dynamic synergy of agglomeration — with the boundless, inclusive nature of the internet. Here comes the metaverse: an ideal platform for these emerging virtual communities to pilot their ideas. The word comes from a sci-fi book from the 90s called Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson. But fast forward to today, and it no longer seems a piece of fiction. Think of the metaverse as a constellation of 3D online worlds, each with its own mini-society, enabled by VR and AR tools. No governments, no red tape, no pre-existing jurisdictions—the metaverse is a realm of permissionless innovation. Here, rules emerge from voluntary agreement and market competition, making it a seamless, immersive testing ground for non-territorial governance models. Liberland’s Metaverse Experiment Back in 2015, a group of freedom-loving activists decided to start their own country, calling it the Free Republic of Liberland, on a no-man’s land in the centre of Europe between Croatia and Serbia. In just a week, over 200,000 people applied for its citizenship. Despite all the buzz and thousands of supporters worldwide, this piece of land remained empty for more than eight years. Until the summer of 2023, every attempt to set foot in Liberland had been suppressed by the Croatian police. Eventually, Liberlanders chose another path—they set foot in the metaverse. With the help of Zaha Hadid Architects, they developed a virtual master plan, a digital copy of Liberland, with a city hall, co-working spaces, an NFT gallery, and an array of community areas for citizens’ personalised avatars to mingle. The virtual microstate is a mirror image of the physical territory that the Free Republic claims. If Liberlanders ever get the chance, they’ve got all the maps and designs ready to start building in brick-and-mortar. In the meantime, the space functions as a non-territorial jurisdiction where one can do all sorts of things: start a company, buy and sell services, build on virtual land, settle arguments, or just meet fellow freedom fans. For instance, Liberland is experimenting with unconventional land-use regimes. It’s got a central area that is all planned out from the top, surrounding neighbourhoods where everyone gets a say in how things shape up, and then the wild outer zones where the individual is free to decide unilaterally and anything goes. Trying something this bold in the real world would mean getting approval from city officials and dealing with NIMBYs. But in the metaverse, anything is possible as soon as you can convince enough people to get on board. The Digital Dawn of Free Cities Today, supporters of Free Cities are scattered across the globe, divided by national boundaries. Yet, as our daily lives move increasingly online, distances and borders are becoming less significant. The idea of non-territorial governance, where laws aren’t tied to a specific location, enables urban entrepreneurs to bypass traditional barriers and begin creating virtual communities without the need to sway government officials or gather in a single physical location. Professor Tom W. Bell, a scholar and visionary who drafted the legal code for Próspera and assisted several other special jurisdiction projects, envisions the metaverse as a laboratory for testing the rules before launching a project “in the real world”: “[In the metaverse], people will be engaging in business transactions, using avatars, and entering contracts. Money will be changing hands, and conflicts will arise. This will allow us to run the simulated versions of our city, test our legal code, architecture, traffic flows, residential patterns, and things like that, and start generating revenue early.” The metaverse, a space of unrestricted innovation, offers us the chance to explore our visions for the cities of the future without getting bogged down in bureaucracy or political fights. And if these virtual experiments prove successful, they could shake up the status quo in the ‘real’, physical world, challenging established institutions along the way. --- # How Free Cities Can Transform Our World URL: https://free-cities.org/how-free-cities-can-transform-our-world Published: 2022-12-16 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance Free Cities represent an ideal mechanism to transform the world into a more peaceful and prosperous place. They provide more options and more creative innovation in the market of living together which can lead to a transformation in governance services. What is also remarkable about Free Cities is how they transform the incentives of a governance service provider. Here are some examples: Profit Free Cities operate as businesses. Details may vary, but they must provide a sufficiently attractive alternative for people to move to the city and pay the associated fees. As advocates of free markets, we understand that competition in governance services is likely to lead to lower fees and better service over time. Perhaps one of the underrated transformations that the fee-for-service model will bring to residents is the massive decrease in compliance and overhead costs. The payment of a service fee is very simple and easy to accomplish. Compare this to the immense administrative burden of the payment of taxes in the US, for example. The benefits both in time saved and peace of mind arguably compete with the cost savings for the greatest value added. Loss Equally, if not more important, the quality of governance can also be dramatically increased through entrepreneurial loss. It is very likely that some Free Cities will be unsuccessful. This could be for any number of reasons ranging from poor management, poor relations with the Host State, poor international relations, or even something as simple as poor geographic situation. In this author’s estimation, the most likely reason for the failure of Free Cities will likely be the City Operator’s attempts to provide too many services. Each company can and should provide what they are best at providing but trying to cover everything cannot be done efficiently. This likely means we will see varying levels of service from Free Cities Operators but the more successful ones are likely to tend towards minimal ‘governance’. The exposure to the threat of loss severely limits the ability of Free Cities to impose arbitrary decisions on market outcomes, providing essential ‘checks and balances’. Accountability Free Cities also transform governance providers from being mostly unaccountable to being held to the same standard as every other individual and business in society. The City Operator of a Free City is a standard company providing services on the market/ and as such, it is subject to liability for its errors. While Free Cities do not have political power in the same sense that states do, they have the power to provide a service as they see fit within the confines of the contract they sign with residents. The flip side is that City Operators are then responsible for providing this service in a way that meets or exceeds market standards. In the case where the City Operator does not provide adequate service, they must go out of their way to make the aggrieved party whole again. Compare this to the usual state mechanism of using force to punish the transgressor while the aggrieved party gets zero compensation. Beyond the legal liability for errors, it is also worth keeping in mind the market mechanism for holding City Operators liable. City Operators, being subject to market forces, are likely to go above and beyond in making sure consumers (i.e., residents) are happy. To illustrate this, consider the case of the unsatisfied shopper on Amazon. Frequently, if the purchase price of the item is relatively small and Amazon has no reason to suspect they are being cheated, they will simply refund and/or reorder the same goods at no cost to the supplier or the consumer. Amazon simply covers the cost as an expense for keeping the consumer pleased with their service. This happens regularly with lost packages. In this sense, Amazon is liable for errors (even if they didn’t make them)! The same incentives and market forces are in place for City Operators. Of course, this mechanism is stronger the more competition among different Free Cities there is but as the Amazon case shows, even when they don’t have massive, equal-size, non-differentiated competitors, Amazon does respond to consumers to make them happy. A Real Social Contract The City Operator of a Free City will actually sign a contract with each and every resident above a certain age (i.e., 18). The contract will have standard terms which can be in place amongst most residents, with certain sections remaining flexible as negotiations between operator and resident take place. Contracts would be for a certain period and would require occasional re-verification after a period of time. Such a social contract, in the form of an actual signed contract, would exist for all full-time residents. Visitors or workers in the city would likely either sign a simplified agreement upon entry or be given notice that their presence subjects them to abide by the rules and regulations of the city. This is much like movie ticket stubs or parking garage tickets with basic legal language notifying visitors that they must follow the rules or be subject to the consequences. With regard to the enforcement of the rules, the City Operator is again seemingly free to do as it pleases, but in reality, it remains subject to the pressures of market competition and the need to attract people (both residents, workers, and visitors) to the city. Therefore, the Operator must maintain peace but also enforce rules. This represents a harmonious alignment of incentives where tradeoffs must be considered in all decisions. Contrast this with the existing ‘social contract’ that we supposedly are subject to in traditional nation-states. By virtue of being born in a certain physical location, an accident of circumstance, we must therefore abide by the rules of an elusive social contract. Even worse, that ‘contract’ regularly changes but only from one end – the state. The government changes the rules of the social contract whenever it changes tax rates, laws, and regulations. In a Free City, City Operators and residents are subject to an actual physically signed contract. This contract, like all legitimate contracts, cannot be changed unilaterally. Updates and amendments are always possible but cannot be forced on the other party. This requires measured and reasoned approaches as well as solving issues to the benefit of both parties. This also gives a much stronger legal standing to residents which can remove uncertainty and encourage more innovative and entrepreneurial activity. One of the central reasons for less entrepreneurship in countries without a strong rule of law is the lackadaisical approach to property rights and legal certainty. This is not the case in Free Cities, which will secure property rights and rule of law, alleviating one unnecessary element of uncertainty from any individual’s plate. Most importantly, this removes the one-sided, top-down authoritarian nature of the social contract we currently live under, creating a fairer and more just society. Conclusion These are just a few examples of the ways Free Cities can and will transform the market of living together. They highlight some of the major transformations and the results we might see. Introducing governance providers that 1) learn from losses 2) are rewarded with profits for making good decisions 3) are held accountable for their actions to the same extent as everyone else and 4) maintain a real social contract, Free Cities provide a clear way to transform governance and ensure a higher quality product to the benefit of all customers and residents involved. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in November 2022. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # A New Year, a New Beginning URL: https://free-cities.org/a-new-year-a-new-beginning Published: 2023-01-04 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities Free Cities are in many ways a manifestation of a new beginning for those jurisdictions that are looking to start over. Big changes may not always be palatable to the population or politically feasible but smaller-scale experiments can often pass the test. At the same time, many Free Cities are themselves starting from scratch and really represent a new beginning to the development of infrastructure, culture, human interactions, and the development of new and improved ways of doing things. In much the same way that the new year represents a hard stop and a way to change one’s habits, Free Cities offer the same in governance and lifestyle. Many jurisdictions around the world are rather illiberal. While it is easy to criticize from the outside, the problem of reform is not so easily solved. It is easy enough to proclaim that taxes should be lower, building permits should be easier to request and receive, or that licenses to operate a business should be fewer in number, cheaper in price, and easily granted. Of course, saying is easier than doing. Any given government body will necessarily have established traditions and ways of doing things. Bureaucracies will necessarily pop up to issue these permits and approvals or collect those taxes. Unfortunately, while this way of doing things may not be in the best interest of the citizens at large, meaningfully cutting these programs requires laying off numerous people, radically changing the way things operate, and potentially disrupting the established mechanisms for how to get ahead. These established institutions are not easily altered or abolished as many, even those ideologically motivated, do not want to create more enemies than absolutely necessary. This is one of the unfortunate limitations of electoral politics at large. Institutions often must see truly over-the-top problems before they are altered or abolished. These changes must be tied to severe issues. About the only thing that normally occurs is minuscule changes to fine-tune the way a system works. When was the last time you heard of governments updating technology before absolutely necessary or removing a number of permits needed to provide a basic service? It takes a perceived crisis such as Covid-19 to propagate widely the idea that many things can be taken care of online and that doctors can provide telehealth (a heavily licensed and regulated profession) across jurisdictions. This is a very human problem and not necessarily something that can be overcome through voting for the right candidate. Just as it applies to bureaucracies and institutions, the same level of reluctance to change exists for humans. It is for this reason that we look to milestones as a way to do something different or make a change. We make new year’s resolutions to work out more or eat healthy. We could make these changes any time in the year and it would probably be better if we did, but tying the change to a certain time period is an easy way to convince ourselves that this time is different. Of course, like changes in government institutions, our likelihood of committing and sticking to one of our new year’s resolutions is exceedingly low. Free Cities as New Beginnings While making changes — either in government institutions or in personal life — can be difficult, solutions do exist. While I won’t wax poetic about making personal changes, Free Cities present this opportunity to update the way things work and present a new beginning for those bold and willing to seize the opportunity. Free Cities are generally smaller jurisdictions and do not have delusions of grandeur. Rather, they are attempting to change the way regulations, security, and dispute resolution (among other areas) work — all in just one small place. This is a much easier request from many governments than a complete overhaul of their system nationwide. The request is not to reform the current system (although that is not necessarily a bad idea) but rather to present a new course, a new path trialing alternative solutions, available to voluntarily opt-in by people for whom the current government does not work well. Typically Free Cities are experiments that are tried in the most desperate of times such as experiments in communism or Covid-19 lockdowns leading to massive systemic economic problems, unemployment and a debt explosion. Much as people tie their changes to a new year, many jurisdictions tie their experiments in Free Cities to the absolute need for them. For example, both Honduras implementing the ZEDEs and China implementing the original SEZs were both done to increase economic activity and rule of law in desperate times. Both, I might add, have been successful thus far bringing in investment and creating new jobs and a new way of doing things. Free Cities also represent a new way for cities to develop physically. While cities have grown over centuries in much of the world, these cities were developed in times before the mass production of automobiles. As such, they can be difficult to navigate by car and relatively narrower. While many American and other quickly developing cities were built while the automobile was in existence, they failed to take into consideration how the success of cities is rooted in close human interaction and meaningful use of land. As a result, new cities can often be ugly, contain inconsistent or uninteresting architecture, and be not easily navigable by foot or other means of transportation except for the car. The result is that many cities are simply subpar, and are easily recognized as such. Free Cities, being typically started on greenfield sites, present an opportunity for expert architects and developers to try small-scale experiments, develop some areas of a city as best as they can, and use market feedback to determine how to further expand. As a result, Free Cities present an opportunity to create truly world-class cities in terms of livability. Cities that are easily navigable for both automobiles and pedestrians. Cities that look beautiful, contain appropriate levels of greenspace, shade, and all the other amenities people need and like. While existing cities can be improved in many regards, a new beginning in the form of a Free City presents the easiest mechanism to create a high-quality urban life. Finally, voluntarily opting into a new Free City is itself a new beginning. A new beginning in which an individual or a family might choose to try something new and radical. While Free Cities are in development, they present real opportunities for starting a new life, a new company, a new job, and more. All of these new things represent a new beginning. It is these new beginnings that a Free City is all about. Free Cities stand for the idea that if you are not harming someone else, you should be free to do business and innovate. If you work hard and earn money, you should be free to keep that money. If you like a service being offered, you should be able to purchase it. If you have a business idea, you should be able to give it a shot. While these new beginnings are sometimes possible in the existing world to some extent, they are the lifeblood of Free Cities. Free Cities are the new beginning for those that choose to make them so. I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a happy new year. Here is to a new year and a new Free City. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in January 2023. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # The Adventure of Building a Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/the-adventure-of-building-a-free-city Published: 2023-04-17 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities Free Cities are the new frontier. There can hardly be anything more adventurous than exploring the exciting possibilities, the mystery of the unknown, and the immense promise and potential that Free Cities bring with them. From founding and developing them to moving there and becoming a pioneer and entrepreneur in so many ways, the landscape of Free Cities appears to be the next big adventure in the development of the market for living together. Let me tell you a bit more about the work I do at TIPOLIS to develop and build Free Cities. From their very beginning, Free Cities are an adventure. While not absolutely necessary, they are often established in far-off lands, countries unknown, and regions under-traveled. These are the communities in most urgent need of Free Cities as they stand to benefit the most. Traveling to these regions is itself an adventure. Of course, the meetings with interesting people, including business, political, and other local leaders bring an added layer of adventure. In these meetings, you can often learn the specific successes and challenges of these regions and begin the adventure of determining how a Free City may try to provide a way out of these challenges. After the initial adventure of simply seeing a new place with one’s own eyes comes a much larger, more difficult but ultimately more rewarding adventure. This is the adventure of developing a plan for the city and finding the right partners and developers to build the city. This is no small feat. Free Cities are typically started on greenfield sites, meaning essentially 100% of the infrastructure must be developed by an adventuresome business. What could be more of an adventure than visiting these untouched lands, using your imagination to picture what could be, and then developing a plan to bring these ideas into reality? After the plan has been developed, yet another adventure begins. In the beginning, any new Free City project will need to start finding business partners, joint venture partners, real estate developers, real estate operators/managers, and more. Many entrepreneurs and potential early movers will also be required. Over time, stable relationships that have been mutually beneficial in the past will make this adventure easier, but especially with the first generation of Free Cities, this network-building is immense. I call the finding and formation of these relationships an adventure because life and operations will by their very nature be adventurous in these new cities. A Free City is a massive project, meaning a large number of parties must work collaboratively to craft the result together. No one firm has the expertise and resources to develop a city of thousands from scratch. Finding out who you might work with, how you might work with them, what structure forms the relationship and more will become a vital question to answer. Quite frankly, the answers are not always obvious and often surprising — hence a bit of an adventure in and of itself. After building some of the relationships you will need to develop a Free City, another adventure appears in fitting together all the pieces of the puzzle. This process has many nuanced and interrelated parts. It requires maintaining good relationships with the Host Nation, ensuring open and clear lines of communication are established and importantly used. It also requires ensuring that commitments that are made are fulfilled. This is an obligation that the Free City developer has to the Host Nation, residents, and shareholders but also to all the service providers that are working for the Free City developer. We can never expect everything to go smoothly in building such massive new projects and ways of life as a Free City but enough must go well to add value to the lives of the potential movers. If this doesn’t happen, all else is for naught as nobody will move and funds will have been sunk into a capital-wasting project. As the Free City is developed in its own adventure story, it opens the world for infinite adventures for pioneers willing and able to move to the Free City or work with it in some capacity. While movers to the new city are arguably the biggest pioneers, e-residents and others working in the Free Cities orbit are equally as helpful in developing a community around these new ideas. These people themselves are adventuring into the world of what is possible and how we might do things differently. Physical movers, be they part-time or full-time, must be interested in and willing to accept a kind of adventure. While Free Cities must focus on the quality of life, the quality of the governance service, and of course the quality of the accommodations and other comforts in the city, the fact of the matter is that problems will arise. We are used to things being fast and easy. Of course, Free Cities will aim to achieve this objective as well in the long term, but, like any new venture, mistakes will be made and imperfections will necessarily be found. While that is the short-term inevitable reality, it is also noteworthy that Free Cities will be effective in responding to these flaws, imperfections, and constructive criticism. Thanks to their unique governance, they will do so faster and more reliably than existing institutions. Given that Free Cities start on greenfield sites and are, for lack of a better description, the underdog in this scenario, they must be relentlessly focused on the consumer experience. As such, while you can expect adventure if you are an early mover or adopter of Free Cities, you can also expect that over time reward will follow as we open new doors to the way we can live together. As briefly mentioned above, one might take up the adventure of becoming an active community member in the Free Cities space and engage with the builders, developers, and thinkers in this community. While finding people to move and become the initial adventure pioneers is extremely rewarding, so too is the intellectual exercise of thinking about what might be possible in the world of governance. In this capacity, there are many conferences, meetups, resources, and social media groups to become involved in, share your ideas, and interact with other genuinely progress-seeking individuals. These groups have grown fast over the past few years and are seeking to network with others to explore the possibilities of Free Cities. While at TIPOLIS we work directly to develop and build Free Cities, there are other and easier ways for people from all walks of life to get involved in the Free Cities movement. The Free Cities Foundation is at the center of this movement, connecting experts and the public across the world. Recently, we have seen experienced professionals from certain fields connect with city developers, new businesses formed, and lots of thinking and constructive critical thinking regarding the nature of human beings and what are the best modes of living together — an honorable goal that touches the lives of all of us. In this regard, I invite you to go on an adventure with me and the Free Cities Foundation team and join us in the Free Cities movement. One of the easiest ways is to join our Telegram group here and subscribe to our newsletter here. We look forward to seeing you there! This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in April 2023. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # In Search of the Right to Be Left Alone URL: https://free-cities.org/in-search-of-the-right-to-be-left-alone-free-cities Published: 2023-02-27 Author: Milosz Matuschek Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities The only way to combat totalitarianism in any form is to build parallel structures or an island of safety. Are Free Cities an alternative? Disclaimer: The following article, republished by the Foundation, was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. Hand on heart: If the totalitarian winds, which have lately become noticeable to everyone with the massive corona measures, stays and gets stronger again: What will you do then? Let’s think ahead for a moment: Your CO2 account is in the red, your vaccination status still only shows four shots, on social media you have long since been deleted and your neighbors, friends and colleagues still believe they are living in the best of all worlds, even if they all can only move 15 minutes away from their residential prison converted to a “smart city” and have to eat insects. When all change has failed in the here and now, perhaps the only option left is to start over, where that is still possible. Provided that one can still get away. Escape from the Republic 2.0 There are many ways of resisting totalitarian systems. The most successful was the establishment of parallel structures in times of Soviet communism in countries like Czechoslovakia, Poland or Romania. If one cannot fight the system politically and does wish to try to wield power, the only option is to build one’s own little world through parallel markets, educational opportunities, cultural institutions, in order to survive as a human being. In the end, the tender little plants of parallel structures were the network of resistance that first infiltrated Soviet communism from within and then destroyed it. Whoever establishes parallel structures enters the competition for the best and freest life. And, in addition, by their own example, they shine the light along the way into the future. To learn about these examples, I traveled to Prague last fall. There, a conference called “Liberty in Our Lifetime” was held, organized by the Free Cities Foundation, which is headed by entrepreneur Titus Gebel. While in Czechoslovakia in the 1970s members of a punk band began to exemplify the idea of islands of freedom in a sea of oppression and made it strong, today it is libertarian-conservative forces that are developing it further. They, too, do not want to compete with the state for power, but to live their own freedom. But not on islands of freedom within the system, but outside it. They seek cooperation with states in order to negotiate autonomy for themselves in an area, which will be governed by contracts – and then to exercise the first human right of all, namely the “right to be left alone,” as Roland Baader once put it. Several of these projects are now active, and new ones are being set up. For example, the establishment of one type of special economic zone has been negotiated with Honduras, which is administered largely autonomously. Here, state functions such as the basic supply of electricity and water are provided by the private sector; in start-up parlance, one could speak of “governance as a service.” When state structures begin to prioritize their own self-preservation over than service to the citizen, such a perverse incentive structure often ends in oppression, redistribution and corruption. One of the last options for the freedom-loving citizen is then “Escape from the Republic 2.0.” To be sure, this process of seeking private autonomy does not always go entirely smoothly. A contract with a foreign state is only as good as the trustworthiness of the contracting party. If the government changes, the (political) business basis can change and the contractually negotiated autonomy can be endangered. Arguably, there is no other way to learn in this area than through trial and error. However, There is great appeal in the idea of taking things into one’s own hands and leading by example. Only in an open idea space can creativity emerge and an answer be found to the question: What other life is possible? A Glimpse of the Future At the Prague conference, one can sense a whiff of the future, precisely because people are gathered here who are active outside of the usual pigeonholes of thought. Why not floating cities on the open sea? Or citizens’ cooperatives that revive abandoned villages? Or why not sail around the world as a permanent globetrotter and have the whole world as your “residence”? For those who find the existing alternatives too business-oriented, culturally barren or artificial, here at least they have the opportunity to create something new and make it better. The models are already there, after all, thanks to the new settlers of Libertopia. Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come. Even the best army in the world can do nothing against such an idea, as Victor Hugo already knew. We live in times of a strange asynchrony. While all the possibilities for building parallel structures are already there, what is currently lacking above all is the awareness that we need them at all. So man has the tools of freedom already in front of him, but does not know how to use them and is only moderately motivated as long as the immobilization by medial narcotics still works. The Power of the Fork The challenge today is not that we are facing overtly repressive structures but covertly manipulative structures. While the former kind used to brutally crush the ideas of freedom and thereby furthered rebellion, the latter try to nip them in the bud. Unfortunately, this is still too successful through all forms of indoctrination, sedation, or apathy spreading. There can be no call to self-empowerment from outside. Those who live to obey will always find a reason to do so, enjoying the comfort of the status quo. Great ideas are never comfortable. Neither for those who feel provoked by them, nor for those who carry them out. This knowledge unites heretics, dissidents, scientists, artists and inventors alike. However, all these pioneers are also united by the knowledge that the greatest enemy of the status quo is the alternative of something better. Great developments often emerged from a fork. A prime example of forking is blockchain technology, where forking is a core part of the design. But forking can work for any existing structure, whether the monetary system through Bitcoin & Co., existing business sectors with gatekeepers, the logistics industry, or notaries’ offices as monopolies of authentication. New ideas can also be “forkable” by design. Instead of defending what exists tooth and nail, one embraces the best alternative on the basis of merit. Just as the printing press once undermined the church’s monopoly on knowledge, new community ideas can break the state’s monopoly on power. Technology and decentralization are power-sharing tools par excellence. The great challenge we face in our lives is to preserve the idea of freedom into the future with the means available to us, on whichever lifeboat we find ourselves. At their core, all totalitarian systems always want the same thing: to destroy the idea of an option B. When we take the path of new alternatives, we take the path of the greatest possible and most effective resistance. This blog post is a translated version of an article originally published in German on Freischwebende Intelligenz. Visit the blog for more content. Translated from German by Juan D. Estevez. --- # Conflicted Appreciation: “Crack-Up Capitalism” Book Review URL: https://free-cities.org/crack-up-capitalism Published: 2023-12-04 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: special-economic-zones, criticism-and-debate, history-of-free-cities Crack-Up Capitalism, by Canadian historian Quinn Slobodian, takes you on a journey through the history of projects and experiments often related to the Free Cities movement. It delves into attempts at winning autonomy from existing states or even establishing completely new sovereign entities. From Sealand to Somalia to Honduran ZEDEs, the book spans a worldwide array of initiatives, not just current ones but going back over half a century. The book, however, is not just a chronology and detailed research into each of the projects. It is also a commentary on them, from a distinctly critical point of view. From the outset of the book, it is immediately clear that a left-wing lens – defined by class struggle and an ongoing fight of democracy against ominous forces of evil capital – is used to view every part of the picture painted in the book and every story told. Special zones are seen as projects by rich people and for rich people by default, and Slobodian does not seem to be overly willing to judge them based on their actual characteristics or real-world results. This is unfortunately the case even though the author concedes that “to see the zones as a device of ‘wealth hoarders’ is both true and not enough” (p7). This is precisely the case. While at some point in the past, some special zone projects might have been based on these background motivations, today the overwhelming majority of projects in the space are about quality of governance, human rights, and providing people with new opportunities to make their lives better in a world where political structures are often set against them. Democracy as an End in Itself The crux of the disagreement between Slobodian and the special zones industry seems to be his view of the supremacy of democracy. In his commentary, he demonstrates that democracy is one of his chief values and a political end in itself. This means that anything that could be construed as an alternative to today’s standard democratic institutions and processes is automatically perceived as an evil threat. For instance, Slobodian claims that special zones typically have “no democratic oversight”. This is a strange view; zones follow the rules and deals they have with nation-state governments who are democratic representatives, which means “democratic oversight” does happen via these democratically elected representatives. Furthermore, if zones are located in non-democratic countries, they can even bring more democratic self-determination to local decision-making in some cases. Despite such an antagonistic view, Slobodian does his research well – including research into the goals and motivations of those championing, establishing, and/or running these zones and projects. He often quotes directly and uses the language familiar to the Free Cities movement – about improved governance, competition, bringing market forces to governance, decentralization, and so on. Still, he takes a strong stance against this view, not willing to concede the appeal, pragmatism, practicality, and ethics of the arguments used by his subjects. It is clear that he values democracy (as he understands it) so highly that, in his mind, it always trumps other values including liberty, personal self-determination, and prosperity. A major, visible shortcoming of Slobodian’s own thinking is that he does not see and respect the shortcomings of majoritarianism, and does not appreciate how dangerous these can be to people’s lives, livelihoods, and even entire countries’ economies and societies. This unfortunately leads him to ridicule and dismiss attempts to mitigate these dangers by the people involved in the special zones industry, which can leave a bitter taste in the mouth of any human-rights sensitive reader. The Unfortunate Disappointment There come points in the book where one is even led to question the judgment of the author to a rather serious extent. This starts with the somewhat frequent usage of empty platitudes to make ideological points (e.g. “Labor is the sand in the machinery of globalization.” [p78]), but it becomes acute when Slobodian resorts to accusing his political opponents of having a “fever dream of taffeta and chattel slavery” (p113). It is difficult to see how one could ascribe viewing one’s real-world adversaries like this to anything else than delusion or malice. This is underscored by the usage of tactics unfortunately common to the activism of Slobodian’s ideological camp, such as ascribing guilt by association and frequent usage of labels “right-wing”, “far-right”, and “racist” throughout the book to discredit people involved in the zones industry. At times, the book utilizes references and quotes from failed and discredited personalities and economists such as Thomas Piketty and Paul Krugman. This is a rather unfortunate sight and a shame. Slobodian can clearly do better, which he demonstrates in his solid research and choice of authorities and quotations at many other places throughout the book. Crack-Up Capitalism includes a chapter on Honduran ZEDEs, but, in contrast with the rest of the book, the content and extent of research in this chapter are rather disappointing. For some reason, while building the overall narrative of the chapter, Slobodian bizarrely tries to somehow tie together American wars in the Middle East and Honduran Charter Cities. Following such an intro, he then skips over a crucial part of the story – the history of the development of the ZEDE model from the previous, more radical, RED model. He also mistakenly claims there are two ZEDEs (there are, in fact, three). Slobodian repeats oft-cited smears and allegations against Próspera ZEDE but does not proceed to cite Próspera’s reactions and refutations to these attacks, and thereby he fails to tell the full story (p198). Recounting a rather famous medialized episode, he says “In September 2020, [Erick] Brimen [CEO of Honduras Próspera, LLC] had a shouting confrontation with Roatán locals as his security guards stood off against local police” (p198). Slobodian conveniently skips the fact that the confrontation with the police happened over COVID rules, not any Próspera-related issue. Finally, it is a shame that, due to his ideological alignment and despite his good intentions, Slobodian ends up supporting left-wing governments across Latin America (p200) that are bringing crime, poverty, conflict, corruption, and misery to their countries. Nevertheless, despite the shortcomings of this particular chapter, it is clear that an incredible amount of thorough research has gone into the writing of this book. Slobodian displays an unambiguous, genuine interest in the stories he covers, gives each one its proper depth, and, even if he does not always succeed, he usually tries to give his subjects a fair shake despite his disagreements with them. The Lessons Learned Looking beyond the unfortunate ideological colouring that the author’s left-wing lens applies to each of the projects covered, the book remains an invaluable resource for anyone wishing to study the history and pre-history of the Free Cities movement. Only if we know our past can we avoid repeating the same mistakes that had doomed previous initiatives to failure. Ultimately, our mission is about bringing freedom, peace, and prosperity to the world. Having a solid idea of what came before can also teach us in the Free Cities movement to consider how the projects in this space are perceived by people with different ideologies, and how to best appeal to a wide range of audiences, be it potential fellow travellers or just external writers and academics researching and covering the world of Free Cities. Beyond offering a wealth of background information about our movement, Crack-Up Capitalism teaches us a valuable lesson in this regard. --- # Free Cities: A New Option for Expats? URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-a-new-option-for-expats Published: 2022-07-04 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, residency-and-citizenship It will come as no surprise to readers of this article that the current situation is perilous in the US and throughout much of the western world. We are ensconced in debt and our political leaders are preoccupied with virtue signaling on foreign affairs rather than ensuring babies have the formula they need. Both major parties argue over the legitimacy of US elections. Any semblance of a solution seems unlikely. What are we to do? Do we stay and fight for liberty? If so, how? Do we resign ourselves to staying put and voting for the lesser of two evils? Some who feel dissatisfied with their country’s system choose to move abroad in search of greater freedom and a community more aligned with their values. If you value a calm and stable albeit expensive lifestyle you might consider Switzerland. If you prefer a cheaper lifestyle where your hard-earned dollars go further you might look to Latin America. Would you prefer a country with relatively lax laws and regulations that are well-enforced or a country with relatively more burdensome rules that are simply not possible to enforce? It’s hard to find solutions that work for everyone. However, a new type of jurisdiction is emerging that may provide an attractive alternative for those seeking a “live and let live” environment absent of political drama. This kind of jurisdiction is called a Free City. The concept of Free Cities is rooted in the idea developed by Dr. Titus Gebel in his book Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You. For the purposes of this article, I will simply use the term Free Cities rather than Free Private Cities. The broader term Free Cities includes other liberty-focused governance models such as Prosperity Zones, Charter Cities, (some) Special Economic Zones, semi-autonomous regions of nation-states and intentional communities. In future articles, I will highlight the key differences between these structures but here I’ll discuss the topic using the broader term Free Cities. Free Cities are jurisdictions within an already existing nation-state that allow for entrepreneurial action in the domain of government. Governments are in the business of providing the rules and regulations that the residents have to live by. Proponents of Free Cities argue that government services should be treated more like the services we acquire from private businesses in industries such as electronics, food, construction, and clothing. They argue that services normally associated with government – like infrastructure, policing and legal arbitration – would be provided more effectively through market mechanisms, where citizens only pay for the services they want. Today’s Western world prides itself on its democratic systems of governance. However, if the democracy is defined as “self-governance”, then these states are not nearly democratic enough. If one-size-fits-all solutions have to be made for millions of people, there is a limit to the ability for any average person to influence outcomes at the nation-state level, and, consequently, there is little self-governance to speak of. We have seen a growth in the number of expats moving away from Western nations over recent years. Unfortunately for them, they must pick a new home from amongst the existing nation states, where not a lot of variety exists in governance. Some states have stronger rule of law and democratic processes, some are more dictatorial and some more kleptocratic, but the basic model of funding government services through taxation is common to all. More democratic states seem to appeal to most, but even the highest-performing democracy is far from excellent at maximizing human freedom. Regardless of government type, free jurisdictions are in short supply. Here are some reasons why Free Cities may prove more successful than conventionally governed territories: 1. They Are For-Profit Free Cities are trying to make money. To some, this might seem like a drawback — won’t they try to get as much money from their residents as possible via taxes or fees? Maybe, but they will have to outcompete current governance options to entice residents to move there. This can hardly be done by setting fees unreasonably high. At the same time, the profit motive makes Free Cities much more responsive to their residents’ demands. Free Cities can only succeed (and make money) if their citizens are happy and prosperous and their living environment is pleasant, safe, and well maintained. 2. They Implement Best Practices Free Cities are not bound by arcane laws, bureaucracy, and the various geopolitical arrangements that existing governments must navigate. For example, Free Cities can follow the e-governance ideas from Estonia, the sound money policies of El Salvador, the ease of doing business of New Zealand or Singapore, police/security services from minimally invasive private security providers, and regulation and dispute resolution from well-developed Common Law countries. 3. They Are Small This means they will need to be innovative and adaptive and we can have a range of Free City forms and structures. This will create more competition and the ability for residents to choose the combination of services and obligations they find most attractive. While the idea of Free Cities is still in its infancy, there are already projects in existence that are putting elements of the model into practice. The best examples are Honduran Zones for Employment and Economic Development (ZEDEs). Although, unfortunately, the ZEDE law was recently repealed — meaning no new ZEDEs can now be created — the existing ones will keep their status for the foreseeable future. In fact, this is a very real exercise in realizing and learning about the robustness of Free City legislation in the face of uncertainty. In Honduras alone, three very different Free City-inspired projects are ongoing, all operated by investor-owned companies. There are many people working tirelessly on projects like these to make sure that more Free City-aligned projects will develop worldwide in the coming years. There will always be challenges in negotiating the establishment of Free Cities with Host States. City Operators must create a win-win situation for the Host State in order for projects to be viable. However, as governments continue to struggle to pay off their debts, it seems likely they will come to the negotiating table looking for new ways to attract investment and spur development. The new Free Cities that emerge will present a genuine exit option for people who are frustrated by the lack of variety in governance and are seeking greater freedom. I plan to write in greater detail in the coming months about projects and structures for Free Cities, and why I believe the Free Private City framework outlined by Dr. Gebel in his seminal work is the best solution. If you are interested in learning more about the ideas discussed in this article then the best way to do so is to attend our Liberty in Our Lifetime conference, taking place from 21-23 October in Prague. The Free Cities Foundation is arranging an exciting three-day program of talks, seminars, and networking events exploring how new communities, financial technologies, and innovative education products are supporting individual sovereignty. Find out more about the conference and get your tickets here. Use my promo code Alex to get 15% off tickets when checking out via Eventbrite. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in June 2022. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # Freedom-Based Parenting: How to Raise Keepers of Liberty URL: https://free-cities.org/freedom-based-parenting Published: 2024-12-23 Author: Pavla Karon Category: Blog Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. It is 9:30 in the morning, and I am fuming. My 10-year-old daughter just informed me that she will not be joining us on a family day trip and is instead going to a friend’s house. This means my vision of a sunlit family Saturday spent in the countryside is now down a kid, plus, I am expected to chauffeur said kid to her preferred destination. Are you kidding me? She foregoes forest bathing for the dim glow of a Minecraft screen? I had told her about our plan, and she refuses to comply? My kneejerk reaction is to put my parental foot down, get her in line, and usher her out for a wholesome day in nature. Then I remember what’s at stake. The Gift of Disobedience History teaches us how easily hard-won freedoms can be squandered. Nations that achieve monumental shifts toward liberty often see those gains eroded within a few generations. Good times create weak men. Could the same fate await Free Cities too? Could the children of its pioneers waste the inherited riches of freedom through complacency or a lack of critical thinking? Obedience Isn’t the Goal If we want our kids to grow up as freedom keepers, we can’t raise them to be rule-followers. It’s tempting to see children’s refusal to comply as defiance or disrespect. But what if it’s exactly the kind of behavior they need to build a world that puts freedom first? Obedience, conformity, and deference to authority do not sustain liberty. They’re antithetical to it. Raising Freedom Keepers As parents, we must accept that fostering independence starts with us stepping aside. Kids have an inherent desire for autonomy and self-determination – our role is not to suppress it. While some boundaries are essential for children’s well-being, the devil is in the details. How do we choose and enforce these boundaries? key lies in how we choose and enforce them. Here are strategies for balancing freedom and responsibility. 1. Let Kids Question Authority (Yours First) If we want kids with a healthy skepticism towards authority, we must give them the space to question it. Who’s the best person for them to practice on? You, their parent. Encourage your child to challenge your decisions. This isn’t about letting go, but about giving them the opportunity to deconstruct the reasoning behind your rules. Far from being a nuisance, their “but why?” is a precious opportunity to invite them in and explore the logic behind boundaries – together. Our answer must go beyond “because I said so.” When children probe your directives, they’re learning to critically assess and understand. Any rule should be open to criticism and revision. The less rules, the better 2. Debate, Don’t Dictate Top-down decisions are rooted in power and control. This leaves children feeling powerless and teaches them that to get what you want you must control other people. Instead, I recommend ‘satisficing’ or ‘consensus minus objection’ for decision-making in the family. This is a process where the decision adopted is one that no one has a strong disagreement with, even if it might not be everyone’s first choice. I love consensus minus objection because it teaches that dialogue and negotiation – not power and control – are the keys to a harmonious coexistence. Plus, everyone is more likely to abide by the rules they were a part of defining. 3. Encourage Responsibility Through Autonomy To learn self-responsibility, children need room to try and fail. Instead of dictating their life, allow them to take charge in areas appropriate for their age. Even a two-year-old can choose their own clothing and haircut and have a say in family activities. As a parent, it can be tempting to want to step in and course-correct, but it is often unnecessary. The natural consequences of life are the best teachers. If kids forget their toys outside, let them see the result. Chose not to wear a jacket even though it’s cold? Won’t happen again. Missed a movie because they dawdled? That’s a lesson in time management. Maximize children’s opportunity to live their lives freely by building resilience. Let them navigate challenges, experiment, and recognize the value of failures and mistakes. 4. Reject the Illusion of Control Here’s the most important discovery I’ve made about parenting: my influence over my children is only as strong as our connection. Control is fleeting; once children reach adulthood—or even earlier—enforced rules lose their power. Connection, however, lasts a lifetime. In every interaction with your child, you must choose one or the other; connection and control cannot coexist. Connection is rooted in empathy and cooperative problem-solving. Putting connection first rules out punishments of all kinds – the obvious ones, like timeouts or the removal of ‘privileges’, as well as more subtle ones, like guilt-tripping or withholding affection. Freedom-based parenting rejects power-based consequences. They only teach resentment and a desire for the tables to be turned one day, so the child may find themselves in the position of ‘power’. When you prioritize connection, you’ll naturally take the right, freedom-first action in any situation. 5. Raise Thinkers, Not Echo Chambers Parents often speak to me about their desire to shield children from ideas or online content they perceive as dangerous. It is natural that we want to protect our kids from dubious influencers or the next Tide pod challenge – to speak only of lighter matters. But here’s the catch: if we oppose censorship, how do we defend filtering information for our children? Ideally, decisions to restrict children’s access to specific content should follow from an age-appropriate discussion and gain their agreement. To raise critical thinkers who resist dogma, we should explore uncomfortable topics together and encourage tough questions. It’s an excellent opportunity to model open debate on topics like ideology, critical thinking, and information assessment. 6. Finally, A Lesson in Humility Nothing will make you face your shadows like raising children. Inevitably, there will be tension between guiding your child through life and allowing them autonomy. You may discover inconsistencies between your ideals and your actual behavior. If you do – congratulations! This is a feature, not a bug. It is a part of the journey, an unparalleled opportunity to explore what we truly stand for and how we choose to embody our ideals in daily life. The good news is that the system allows for leniency. Messing up, admitting your own imperfection, and saying sorry drives home the point that authority figures aren’t infallible. Bottom line: if you’re (occasionally) failing, you’re doing it right. The Legacy of Freedom And what of my fateful Saturday morning? My daughter explained why spending the day with her friends mattered to her and promised next Saturday would be a dedicated family day. I resisted lecturing and let her decide. We both learned an invaluable lesson. Raising children in freedom isn’t about granting liberty on a silver platter but ensuring they actively preserve and grow it. The control we exert now is fleeting; our true legacy is their ability to think, choose, and live freely. --- # How Free Cities Offer Hope to the Homeless URL: https://free-cities.org/how-free-cities-offer-hope-to-the-homeless Published: 2022-07-12 Author: Bruno Carlos Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities For the past 15 years, I have worked with homeless people in Brazil. I have seen what does and doesn’t work in helping them get off the streets. Families living in substandard housing – including those in the favelas common in Rio de Janeiro and São Paolo – are often included in government homelessness statistics. However, those I have worked with mainly live on the city’s streets. People often have serious personal problems and engage in antisocial behavior. The way they interact with surrounding communities can be damaging and lower the public’s sense of security. Governments around the world recognize the adverse effects of homelessness, but their solutions tend only to make problems worse. In places like California and New York, governments try to alleviate problems caused by homelessness by providing aid and grants. However, the data shows that these interventions only make homelessness more prevalent. In each of these cities, the homeless population has grown rather than fallen (see stats for California and New York). Governments worldwide make the mistake of thinking homelessness is caused by a lack of public funds. Many believe throwing money at the problem will solve it. Unfortunately, bureaucratically administered welfare systems tend to be highly inefficient and open to abuse. They also warp societal incentives and raise prices in the rest of the economy due to the added tax burden required to fund them. The truth is that long-term homelessness is often a psychological as well as an economic problem. While some people consciously opt for a homeless lifestyle, the vast majority believe they have no alternative. Many become homeless through some economic event. However, many remain lost and spiral down into drug addiction or other vices through feelings of worthlessness, a lack of connection to the community, and a lack of individual responsibility. Government policies like minimum wage laws, which are supposed to help poor people, can force them into homelessness instead. People might find that they can’t get a job because their skill level is so low that their labor isn’t worth the minimum wage to an employer. When they receive money from the government for not working, they may start spending that money on alcohol or drugs that help them cope with the hopelessness they often feel. The result can be a destructive cycle that leads to homelessness. For the past year, I have worked in São Paolo for an organization with an 84% success rate in getting homeless people off the street. The organization is an NGO called ABCP (Instagram @ongabcp). As part of my work with ABCP, I have made more than 2,000 visits to homeless people and helped more than 50 single men get off the streets and begin work. Eight out of ten teens who work with us find both a job and a home within six months. Fernando, before and after The story of my friend and comrade Fernando provides one example of success. Fernando was homeless for over twelve years. He was addicted to drugs and had several close brushes with death. His social reintegration began with a contract that ABCP has its aid recipients sign as the beginning of the relationship. It outlined his commitment to ABCP and the help he would receive in exchange. ABCP promised to provide a place to live, a skills evaluation, advice on monetizing his skills, a course to teach him self-sufficiency, and coaching to help him change his way of living. In exchange, Fernando agreed not to use drugs, to cook for himself, clean and care for the house as if it were his own, report on his progress regularly, complete the course, and become self-sufficient within six months. Fernando had a skill as a house painter and slowly built his reputation. At first, he needed help with marketing, but now he sells his services with apps and the internet. Eighteen months after starting the program, he is not only self-sufficient but has a thriving business painting houses and other buildings. In addition, he is planning to get married soon. Thyago (left) and Vinicius (right) Thyago is another formerly homeless man who worked with ABCP. He went from living on the streets to running a profitable sculpting business. He is a self-made artist who developed his potential with some guidance. As with Fernando, we helped him learn about marketing his skills so he could sell his services after the program. He will have an exhibition of his art this month. Vinicius is a poet who creates his products, such as little books or items with his sentences and poems. ABCP is still working with him to create a route for him to make a living as a poet. He has sold most of his poems and is making progress in building his business. The path Fernando, Thyago and Vinicius took to improve their situation was not an easy one. Developing a business is difficult and involves risk. Each of these men faced various setbacks and obstacles on their way to self-sufficiency. However, their examples demonstrate that entrepreneurship really is a possibility for people seeking to re-enter society. The success of this program shows how mindset, responsibility, and community can make a huge difference in a homeless person’s life. These are the values of entrepreneurs, and they are encouraged in Free Cities where entrepreneurship is enabled. As ABCP makes contracts with the participants in its programs, so Free Cities make contracts with their residents. That relationship is foundational in the market for living together. Free Cities help the poor by keeping their living costs as low as possible. Public services like security and infrastructure can be supplied more efficiently and economically by the free market than by any bureaucratic government. Membership fees to fund basic city services are low and fixed, and the lack of taxes like VAT makes essential goods cheaper. The City Operator is explicitly approved by every resident who chooses to live in the city, so there is no incentive to raise campaign funds for expensive elections. Therefore, there is no incentive to create regulations that benefit some companies against their competitors in hopes of campaign contributions. Keeping regulations few and simple benefits everyone who lives in the city, especially entrepreneurs. Housing is affordable because less burdensome regulations keep construction costs down. There are no policies like rent control that lead to shortages and higher rents. Furthermore, a lack of minimum wage laws means that anyone can find productive ways to make a living, no matter how low their skill level is. This can give homeless people the work experience needed to increase their productivity and income. In Free Cities, even those on meager incomes can start their own small business with whatever skills they possess. But the most important way that Free Cities can help homeless people is by encouraging a mindset that leads to success. All of the ways the city keeps costs low and makes it easy to do business contribute to the chances for success. The contract with the Free City provides the connection to the community and the call to responsibility that is crucial for people to live their most meaningful and worthwhile lives. --- # Free Cities and Taxes URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-and-taxes Published: 2022-12-01 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, taxation-and-economics Free Cities offer a wide variety of benefits to their residents-customers. In all freed markets, both the buyer and the seller of a given service enter an economic relationship voluntarily and both sides (at least before the transaction) believe they will benefit from the relationship. Otherwise, why would they freely consent to the transaction? While the benefits of Free Cities range from providing a secure community to work and live to finding a place to live that is simply less political, one of the most important freedoms that Free Cities offer is freedom from overbearing income taxation. The following is, of course, not tax advice but rather a general article on the benefits that Free Cities might offer to their residents. The points explained below are best applicable to the most far-reaching Free Cities model — the Free Private City. Currently, the two major income taxation schemes in the world are residential taxation (or taxation of individuals that are citizens and/or residents of a given country) and territorial taxation (a tax imposed on economic activity happening within the physical jurisdiction). While, from the standpoint of an expat or a liberty-minded person, the territorial tax scheme may have its benefits, it is far from optimal and presents an opportunity for Free Cities to improve the relationship between residents and the governance structure. Regardless of the type of tax scheme, any taxation will require enforcement. The enforcement will consist of a number of aspects but some of the more important features include: • a complex tax code, • ‘voluntary’ compliance with filing tax forms and other reporting requirements, • a bureaucratic organization to review and decide to accept or reject the filing and associated tax payments, and finally • an enforcement arm in the case that the ‘voluntary’ compliance does not meet the standards imposed on the resident. The details might differ with each jurisdiction, but these characteristics are a clear affront to personal liberty. Free Cities can help alleviate this and move to a more genuinely voluntary relationship between residents and payment for the governance and infrastructure that comes with living in a community. Tax codes are extremely complex and can frequently be vague and require the help of a lawyer and/or accountant. By contrast, the tax code of a Free City would be much simpler. While Free Cities can ultimately choose the tax system of their choice, the leading option in the mind of practitioners developing Free Cities is actually to impose no tax at all but rather to have a fee-for-service model. Instead of imposing tax at unilateral and arbitrary rates, a Free City would enter into a contract with each of its residents. If a resident wants to access and use the resources and facilities of the city, they must have a contract with the City Operator. A list of fees paid by the resident and services provided to them would be part of that contract. The payment of all basic governance services could be as simple as covering a single fee of, say, $2000-5000 per year. On the other hand, City Operators might also provide a more detailed fee schedule in which they charge, for example, $1,000/year in infrastructure and maintenance costs, $500/year in dispute resolution costs, $1000/year in security fees and $500/year in insurance fees. In total: $3000/year. Of course, even this is a very simplified example and real-world fee schedules could look very similar to the fee schedules of insurance contracts. Of course, most hard-working people making an honest wage would be happy to substitute their income tax bill each year for a fee-for-service in the range of $2000-5000. This lower ‘tax’ bill would result in more money in the pockets of the resident to be used to improve one’s quality of life or invest in a new business. While these monetary benefits are very real, one of the underrated and arguably most important advantages this system provides to the resident is the psychological benefit of avoiding the tax system altogether. No longer does the resident need to be aware of or pay attention to ongoing political dialogue about tax rates and brackets. No longer does the resident need to pay attention to the tax code and try to decipher the gray areas. No longer is the resident forced to fill in complex and tedious tax forms only to tell the government what they think they owe the government. Even after submitting the bill, one cannot be sure they have done it correctly and regardless of whether it is correct or not, one can be audited by the tax authorities and be forced to try to prove their innocence. Finally, no longer does the resident need to hire accountants and lawyers on their own dime to determine their tax bill. While these services are valuable in the current market, these are wasted resources in a free society. Smart and hard-working people should be working to create value rather than report to tax authorities. The ability to avoid this stressful and time-consuming act of reporting and filing is equally likely to benefit the resident’s quality of life by providing peace of mind. Not having this stress would lead to a more happy, healthy, and functional life and would allow the resident to take calculated risks in other aspects of their life, such as starting a new business. No longer could the arbitrarily applied power of the tax authorities threaten the life of the resident. From the point of view of the City Operator, the simple fee-for-service model is also much easier to enforce and administer. Having a contract with each resident which outlines specific fees makes it very clear exactly what is owed at what time. This is much easier to review, document, and collect than requesting citizens to perform arduous and complex tax calculations ‘voluntarily’. This ease of administration leads to a much lower headcount, much less uncertainty, and much less need for multiple layers of review. Administration becomes a managerial task to be accomplished efficiently rather than an exploding bureaucratic process (see the recently hired 87,000 new IRS agents, for example). Finally, enforcement becomes much easier. Fees are easily identifiable and much lower than the average tax bill. Therefore, they are less likely to be gamed by the resident. In addition, City Operators may disallow anyone from entering the city if they violate the rules and do not pay their fees. Enforcement then becomes easier and less physically violent without sacrificing compliance rates, which would doubtless be higher than the current taxation schemes used around the world. To conclude by reiterating my initial message, Free Cities have a lot to offer the world but one of the most important benefits comes in the form of better tax/fee systems that are voluntarily agreed to, lower, and simpler to calculate, pay, and administer, giving residents another bit of freedom in their economic and personal lives. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in October 2022. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # The World Needs More Free Cities (The Social Argument) URL: https://free-cities.org/the-world-needs-more-free-cities-the-social-argument Published: 2024-06-03 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: private-governance Though we live in the world of nation-states today, this was not always the case. In fact, the modern nation-state is a fairly recent invention. For most of recorded history, the world was ruled by a slew of differently structured powers and systems. One of those models, surprisingly common throughout all this time, was the city-state. Although the city-state was likely never the dominant political structure in the world, today it is very much at the margins. City-states do exist today, the most quintessential ones being Singapore and Monaco, as well as some micro-states, such as Liechtenstein or San Marino. These are, however, often seen as relics of the past, and as funny quirks that do not really belong in today’s world. Simply put, they are not seen as ‘proper’ political entities when compared to nation-states. In my view, this assessment of city-states is not doing them justice by any means. Instead, a case should be made in defence of the idea of modern and future city-states. Not only that, however. Cities can exist on different levels of autonomy from nearby sovereign states. What we call Free Cities encompasses existing and potential cities almost anywhere along this scale. The argument for (and the main potential of) Free Cities comes from several different angles – economic, political, and social. In each of these spheres, a Free City can offer us something that the system of today’s nation-states is not delivering. Even though Free Cities do not represent any kind of utopia, they can offer a much-needed alternative to the status quo. The Economic Argument Click here to read more… The Political Argument Click here to read more… The Social Argument In the West today, a kind of uneasiness is felt all around. The current socio-political climate feels tense and agitated. People increasingly feel like their supposed ‘representatives’ in government do not actually represent them in any meaningful way and their concerns are just left unaddressed. Some might see this as a result of various factors like the influence of social media, media misinformation, or political extremism of various stripes, but the more compelling argument is that these are only symptoms of a deeper underlying issue. Such unending social strife is created where the political system is set up so that with any issue debated in the public realm, the stakes are very high and too much depends on who wins some election or vote in parliament. When there are too many and too strong levers of power that can force everyone to act a certain way, it pushes everyone to try to take control of these levers – either for the purpose of exercising power over others or simple self-defence. In such a system, not getting involved is not an option, because the ‘ring of power’ will be used either way – the only question is how. This creates a situation where everyone is forced into never-ending conflict with their fellow citizens. The ultimate cause of this is large central governments having too much power and being able to do almost anything they want. In contrast, city-states and Free Cities represent small, independent, self-ruling units that, ideally, are subject to few outside powers or constraints, and have no direct power over the outside world in turn. A world-wide proliferation of Free Cities will therefore serve to counteract this trend of increasing social strife. When only a limited number of people, in a limited geographical area, are ‘united’ together under one set of policies even if they dislike them, it allows those with differing preferences for any kind of social or personal values to sort themselves into like-minded, self-ruling populations and communities more easily. The ability to easily dissociate from one’s opponents leads to social harmony. The reverse – being forced (either by fiat or circumstance) together with them – is where social conflict thrives. In a world of many Free Cities, there will be a broad, diverse palette of societies with different values, preferences, and identities living side by side, with peace assured through mutually beneficial and mutually indispensable trade and economic relations. Some cities will be more progressive, experimental, or hedonistic, while others will be more predictable, unchanging, and conservative. When neither of these is able to force their values on the others, the world remains a peaceful place, in stark contrast to the ever-increasing conflict of our current hyper-centralized mass societies. Conclusion: What Would a World Full of Free Cities Look Like? It might sometimes be difficult to imagine what an alternative to a world made of unitary nation-states might look like in the future. People all around the world, but especially in developed countries, often have a rather warped and narrow view of what diverse political structures can look like and how societies can be organized. This is because we live in a historically rather bizarre political world centred almost exclusively around nation-states. We tend to think that a country’s ‘freedom’ and ‘independence’ means a centralized hierarchy of courts and law enforcement, a separate central bank and a currency it prints, a behemoth bureaucracy, and perhaps most importantly its own defence and border monitoring. We think all this because this is indeed how most of the nation-states around us organise themselves. However, there is a much broader range of possibilities of how an independent country or city can function beyond this narrow format. Every one of the aforementioned features we associate with a ‘country’ is strictly optional. It can be there but it can also be absent altogether, perhaps being proven unnecessary outside a nation-state-based world. Furthermore, if any of those features are in place, they can be organized in many different ways. Some alternatives that immediately come to mind are delegated provision by other states, by private companies, by international organizations, or decentralised provision through a competitive market environment. The options do not end there, though. There can be other ways, perhaps wholly unimaginable now, that would be thoroughly researched, innovated, and optimised in a world full of Free Cities with strong competitive pressures on governments, in a bid to provide the best governance products possible. Though this is starting to change, today’s world is remarkable in its political uniformity – and such uniformity is thoroughly undesirable. Not only is it repetitive and uninteresting, but as argued above, it is also highly inefficient – which, in the political context, can mean destructive and oppressive towards the people living in these systems. Finally, uniformity is also fragile and dangerous, as a single well-positioned threat can put everything and everyone in jeopardy. By contrast, a world-wide proliferation of Free Cities will bring us plenty of political diversity, with which will come an explosion of innovation, progress, and resilience, resulting in a more consensual, peaceful, wealthy, and happy world. Mired in troubles stemming from the rigidity of its obsolete political structures, the world needs such a breath of fresh air maybe more now than ever. --- # How Free Cities Help Alleviate Poverty URL: https://free-cities.org/how-free-cities-help-alleviate-poverty Published: 2022-06-03 Author: Peter Young Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities “How would the disadvantaged be taken care of?” is usually one of the first questions asked by people who hear about alternatives to today’s states. Although people differ in their views on how care should be provided, there is almost unanimous agreement that better systems are needed to support those in difficulty. Even in wealthy countries, large swathes of the population are impacted by homelessness, financial difficulty and poor mental health. Despite the large sums spent on public welfare programs, poverty persists, and in many cases is on the rise. Our Foundation makes the case that a different approach is needed to provide support to the disadvantaged. We propose building Free Cities: places that offer a safe living environment, foster supportive communities, and remove unseen barriers that hold the disadvantaged back. A Framework for Progress The world is full of people with the potential to improve their situation who feel let down by government institutions. Many have the ability to build more prosperous lives for themselves but lack security, job opportunities, and cheap and reliable means of resolving disputes. The lives of such people can start to improve when they are safe, their rights are protected, and they can access the basic goods and services they need. We argue that a free society with simple rules and protections – described in our book and whitepaper – is the best way of achieving this. Volunteers at a soup kitchen The Need for Charity It will always be the case that some people are born with or develop disabilities that make them less able to support themselves. It is also the case that most of us love and cherish the people we know who have disabilities. We recognize that they are valuable members of society, who contribute greatly to its character. Most of us have no qualms about extending our support to those who truly need it. At the same time, most of us have empathy for those who fall on hard times for reasons other than disability. This is why formal charitable giving alone amounts to hundreds of billions of dollars annually, despite the existence of a large welfare state in many parts of the world. Charity worker assisting learners with disabilities Generating the Means to Help According to official statistics, tax payments in the average OECD country amount to around 35% of total incomes but other estimates place this figure much higher. In Free Cities, we expect the city running costs to be significantly lower (<10% of GDP). Public amenities such as roads, security and basic infrastructure are provided by a City Operator with an incentive to keep costs low and the quality of services high. By doing this, City Operators make their city more accessible and attractive to new residents. Free Cities also have the option of waiving fees for people with disabilities. Were Free Cities Operators to charge fees equivalent to 10% of national income, this would represent a similar level to tax revenues collected in Hong Kong during the post-war decades. During this period Hong Kong achieved remarkable poverty alleviation. The territory was also able to accommodate millions of refugees from parts of the world mired by political turmoil and war. It has since become one of the most prosperous territories in the world. Minimizing Waste By providing some of the services we normally associate with government – such as policing, and infrastructure – in as cost-effective a manner as possible, Free Cities leave more money in people’s pockets so that they can address their most pressing needs or provide support to others. The Free Cities model of funding public services through a low and predictable membership fee – which can’t be raised without the citizen’s consent – also removes the high administration costs associated with complex and unpredictable tax systems. Bureaucratic welfare systems are particularly costly, and require a large number of tax payer-funded personnel to administer. The UK’s Department for Work and Pensions, for example, has over 96,000 employees (1.4 per 1000) whose primary job it is to manage and distribute transfer payments. This process consumes valuable resources that could otherwise be used to help those in need directly. A More Human Approach Not only do Free Cities allow people to produce more of the resources needed to fund a charitable sector, they also establish a more direct relationship between donors and recipients of aid. Unlike existing welfare states where funds are largely provided on the basis of bureaucratic box-ticking, recipients of charitable aid in Free Cities will likely know their donors personally. When there is a direct donor-recipient relationship, it is harder for a culture of long-term dependency to develop. In Free Cities, when someone falls on hard times but is otherwise capable, something more akin to a mentoring relationship may develop. Donors who know the people they are helping might also provide personal guidance, friendship and emotional support alongside the gifting of material resources and time. Where aid recipients are capable and willing to work, donors would likely focus more on equipping them with the tools and skills they need to set themselves on the path to self-support and prosperity. Such help is often much more effective at turning people’s lives around than anonymous cash payments. Mentoring and apprenticeship relationships can provide a route out of poverty Tragically, existing welfare states can undermine community relationships by removing the human dimension from charity. Financial aid becomes automatic and anonymous, leading to communities losing their sense of belonging and attachment. In contrast, when people feel responsible for the wellbeing of their fellow citizens, they start to pay more attention to poverty, and dedicate more of their resources to charitable endeavors. Charitable projects provide meaning to people’s lives and build their ties with society at large. Rather than being fraught with anonymity and even envy, the local community becomes grounded in mutual solidarity. Society becomes not only freer from poverty, but also richer in human connection and neighborly kinship. A Better Life for All Some projects with functional elements of the Free Cities model have already helped to improve the lives of people with limited opportunities. This blog post, telling the story of Rosa Aguilar, the first commercial resident of Ciudad Morazán in Honduras, provides an early example of success. Our foundation advocates a prosperity-generating approach to poverty alleviation because the primary concern of people who are suffering is not to bring others down to their wealth level, or strive for an abstract ideal of equality. What they desire is to improve the material and social conditions that determine their standard of living. The desire to improve absolute living standards for the poor is at the heart of the Free Cities Foundation’s vision for a new kind of society. We seek to create the conditions for a better-funded charitable sector and stronger communities, where citizens have the resources they need to help the disadvantaged in the most effective way. --- # Rosa Aguilar: One Mother Fighting for Her Dreams URL: https://free-cities.org/rosa-aguilar-one-mother-fighting-for-her-dreams Published: 2022-05-13 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Rosa Amanda Aguilar has a long history with the land that is ZEDE (Zone of Employment and Economic Development) Ciudad Morazán. For many years, she lived less than a kilometer from the spot where she is now growing her business. This land has always been agricultural land. Thirteen years ago, Rosa lived on the farm with her husband, Rosales Peña, and her three-year-old son Ariel. It was not an easy life. One night, the family was attacked by a gang. They were robbed, but Rosa credits her visible pregnancy with saving them from being injured. Afterward, they moved to another farm that was also near what is now Ciudad Morazán. Rosa had a daughter, Allison, and then another son, Dario Yandel, six years later. Rosales raises cattle and horses, but it is hard to feed three children and take care of Rosa’s parents, who live with them. Rosa made a little extra money by selling food out of her home. However, she only had a few occasional customers. Starting even a very small business in Honduras is expensive and time-consuming and exposes the owner to extortion from local gangs. Meanwhile, the owner of the land near where Rosa had lived was only raising king grass to be used for biofuel. In 2020, he was happy to sell the land to Ciudad Morazán. Rosa Amanda Aguilar, the first commercial resident of Ciudad Morazán Rosa was close enough to the ZEDE to notice the workers building the first warehouses in late 2020. She saw a need and an opportunity and started carrying drinks and snacks to sell to the workers. Rosa found a nice shady spot under some trees inside the ZEDE and asked the construction manager if she could sell her products there. Soon after, her mother helped her build a small metal shack so she didn’t have to carry all her products to the site every day. Early construction in the ZEDE Metal shack first used by Rosa Ciudad Morazán is a community designed to encourage entrepreneurship, so starting a business is fast and inexpensive. Because of the ZEDE’s semiautonomous status, the commercial regulations are simpler than in the rest of Honduras. The tenants choose to enter into voluntary contracts that spell out their rights and responsibilities so they can be sure the rules won’t be changed on them. Rosa was offered a contract with Ciudad Morazán to rent the space she had chosen for $10 per month. When she understood all the terms of the agreement, she was pleased to agree. The construction manager sent over a couple of workers to make her hut somewhat sturdier. A little later, Rosa added a stove to make lunches and a couple of picnic tables for her customers. Even before the first residents moved in, Rosa had a good business providing soft drinks, snacks, and lunches to the construction workers. She was happy with her location and the security of her store. Even though Rosa had to carry in ice every day to keep her water and soft drinks cold, she had all she needed. She cheerfully greeted her customers as they came by throughout the day. Rosa’s store after its first improvements were made Rosa was happy to be making enough money to pay off a loan she had taken out sometime before, but she had bigger dreams. Her rental contract only lasted a few months because the management company of Ciudad Morazán had promised that she could rent one of the first two-bedroom homes that were being built. Image of the first eight houses in Ciudad Morazán, Rosa’s shop is on the far right In September 2021, Rosa rented a house on the corner of Morazán’s first residential block and established a restaurant and small convenience store. Access to electricity for her refrigerators, gas for her stove, and tables and chairs for her customers meant she could run the popular business of her dreams. Rosa’s convenience store Rosa serving food alongside one of her employees A meal served to workers at Rosa’s restaurant With hard work and a cheerful personality, Rosa was able to overcome the challenges she faced. When her customers started asking for ice cream, she looked for options to rent a freezer. However, the local freezer vendor was reluctant to take on Rosa as a customer as he didn’t believe she would be able to pay. Rosa proudly invited the vendor to her shop and convinced him she was managing her business well and meeting her customer’s demands. Rosa’s ice cream freezer During one heavy rainstorm, a tree fell on a power line, cutting off Rosa’s electricity supply for a day and a half. All her ice creams melted, but she courageously salvaged what she could and sold refrozen products at discounted rates. In late 2021, there was great interest in Ciudad Morazán among industrial businesses looking to invest in ZEDEs, and many workers showing interest in the security and jobs they provide. Rosa’s future looked bright. However, Rosa’s biggest challenge proved to be political. In the runup to the election of November 2021, false rumors circulated about the ZEDEs. A fake news story claimed that Ciudad Morazán was evicting people from their homes. Due to her association with the ZEDE, Rosa was abused by people in her neighborhood, who yelled at her from their cars when she was outside Ciudad Morazán’s gate. Honduras’ new President Xiomara Castro ran on an anti-ZEDE platform The political uncertainty only increased after the election. Prospective industrial tenants canceled or postponed their plans to bring their businesses and jobs to Ciudad Morazán. The building of the houses continued, but additional construction had to be delayed. Aerial view of first 64 houses in Ciudad Morazán At the time of writing, April 2022, a total of 64 houses are almost complete and ready for rental, but it is unknown how many people will move in without the expected industrial jobs. The result is that Rosa has had to lay off her employees as construction has come to an end and workers have started to leave. Rosa continues to serve her remaining customers and hopes that the new government – which ran on an anti-ZEDE platform – won’t crush her dreams. Rosa’s story demonstrates the opportunity that a ZEDE can offer to hardworking Hondurans who want to pursue their dreams of a better life for themselves and their children. Rosa can’t afford the rent or the regulatory burden of a store in nearby Choloma, even though she has proven her business skills. Honduras is missing out on the talents of people like her who never get the chance to prove what they can do for their communities. Semi-autonomous zones like the ZEDEs are crucial stepping stones on the path to creating truly Free Cities. They illustrate how greater freedom unleashes potential and helps lift those with the least resources out of poverty. --- # Are Network States Free Cities? URL: https://free-cities.org/are-network-states-free-cities Published: 2023-04-24 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: network-states Free Cities are such a new concept that they are still in the process of being defined in practice. As a result, there are many questions about which existing cities, communities, or territories can be called Free Cities. The same question applies to cities, communities, or settlements now being built or planned. Recently, the concept of Network States has made these questions even more complex. The publication of Balaji Srinivasan’s book The Network State has generated massive amounts of discussion. The Network State website lists hundreds of book reviews. Balaji Srinivasan’s The Network State Definitions Balaji’s one-sentence definition of the network state is “…a highly aligned online community with a capacity for collective action that crowdfunds territory around the world and eventually gains diplomatic recognition from pre-existing states.” Yet, the book develops a much more complicated definition of his vision. In a long and influential review, Vitalik Buterin offers a slightly different definition: “communities organized around a particular vision of how to run their own society that start off as online clubs, but then build up more and more of a presence over time and eventually become large enough to seek political autonomy or even diplomatic recognition.” The differences between the visions of Balaji and Vitalik illustrate the complex nature of the questions. Although they both support the basic concept of creating a community online that would eventually exist as a physical jurisdiction, they differ in many details. The physical jurisdictions that would ultimately exist would not only operate with different rules but would offer varying amounts of freedom in different areas of life. The Free Cities Foundation defines Free Cities as self-governing territories that uphold individual rights and freedoms. Under that definition, Network States are not Free Cities until they establish a physical presence in a region. Yet the fact that they intend to become self-governing territories eventually rather than only virtual communities makes them fellow travelers with Free Cities. “A Network State in the real world,” imagined by Midjourney AI Categories Network States are of particular interest because they intend to gain complete autonomy from existing nation-states. In the present day, one would be hard-pressed to find many such territories anywhere on the planet. Instead, there are tiny territories that are known as microstates, like Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino, besides island micronations such as Palau or Tuvalu, that are fully sovereign are almost completely independent. However, they are not considered Free Cities because, even if they offer more individual rights and freedoms than most nation-states, their traditional forms of governance are not explicitly focused on this goal. Free Cities typically operate under different norms or rules than the surrounding territory, but they exist on a continuum of autonomy. They can range from the semi-autonomy of the ZEDEs (Zones of Employment and Economic Development) in Honduras to intentional communities that enjoy de facto but not de jure independence based on their shared community values. Network States exist on a different continuum. They might be classified by the varying degrees of their virtual versus physical properties. In addition, they can be categorized by their goals or primary interests, similar to the purposes of intentional communities. The main thing they have in common with Free Cities is the desire to increase human flourishing by innovating in self-governance. “Aerial photo, a freedom-oriented Network State,” imagined by Midjourney AI Examples At the time of this writing, lists are being compiled of Free Cities by the Free Cities Foundation, Network States by 1729 (publisher of The Network State) and Startup Cities by The Adrianople Group. Interestingly, there is some overlap in both the criteria and examples on these lists. For example, the ZEDE Próspera is included on all three lists, and several entities are on two out of the three lists. There are such a wide variety of projects on these three lists that it would be hard to define criteria that include all entries. However, most are for-profit; most are innovative in governance and technology; most are very new; and most that appear on only one list could be included on at least one other. Próspera in Honduras is arguably the most well-known example of a Free City that is also a Startup City and could be called a Network State. It already owns a territory with a significant degree of legally recognized autonomy. It is being constructed on a greenfield site with residences, businesses, and community buildings. It is introducing innovations in governance, law, and technology. It is listed as a Network State because its e-residence program allows virtual residence without physical residence. Ciudad Morazán in Honduras shares many of the characteristics of Próspera but offers different innovations and doesn’t include e-residence, so it appears on only two of the lists. Culdesac Tempe in Arizona is a very different community from the Honduran ZEDEs, but it could be included in all three lists. It is an intentional community built around walkability with innovations in living together. Apparently, it is listed as a Network State because it is recruiting residents online. A lesser-known project that has broken ground but hasn’t been actively recruiting online is Liberstad, a remote settlement in Norway innovating its internal economy, intending to become a private city. Unlike the Startup Cities that have already broken ground, Atlas Island and Praxis are still in the early stages of attracting online communities to build physical territories eventually. Atlas Island plans to build on a seastead and Praxis on the Mediterranean coast. Like many other proposed Network States, these focus on innovation and freedom. Some projects listed on the Network State Dashboard as startup societies are less ambitious than building new cities. For example, Kift is an organization that uses its website to combine community and van life to create a new way of living. However, it has no intention of becoming an autonomous jurisdiction. Several others, such as Cabin and Cohere, are building networks online for co-living and co-working in different locations. Still others, like CityDAO and Nation 3, are building online digital communities around crypto technology. Several new Network States have ambitious plans to unite dispersed populations worldwide through virtual communities. Two examples are Afropolitan, which aims to bring together Africans and the diaspora, and Network State Panarmenian Foundation, which aims to bring together Armenians and their diaspora. Construction of Duna Residences in Próspera, Honduras. Photo from late 2022. Conclusion Network States can become Free Cities if they acquire territory and some level of autonomy, either de jure or de facto, as long as they focus on promoting individual rights and freedoms. If their aspirations include those elements, they are fellow travelers alongside the Free Cities movement. However, some projects that might be classified as Network States have little relation to Free Cities because of their focus on only virtual communities or digital technology that doesn’t increase individual liberty. --- # CryptoCity: Shaping the Future of Community Living URL: https://free-cities.org/cryptocity Published: 2024-12-30 Author: Tim Stern Category: Blog Topics: intentional-communities, bitcoin-and-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/cryptocity Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. Nestled along the pristine shores of Isla Margarita, CryptoCity is an ambitious urban development project redefining modern living. Initially planned as a 13-hectare community with 100 residential plots, the project has now expanded to 35 hectares, accommodating nearly 300 plots. This growth reflects both high demand and the vision to create a community that combines technological innovation, luxury, and shared values. CryptoCity will house around 1,000 residents, selected through a rigorous process to ensure alignment with the community’s ethos of innovation, entrepreneurial spirit, and collaboration. Residents will include entrepreneurs, crypto investors, visionaries, and individuals whose skills and values contribute meaningfully to this one-of-a-kind enclave. The Vision CryptoCity represents the convergence of technology, community, and modern urban design. The city is not merely a place to live but a space to thrive, exchange ideas, and drive progress. This ethos is grounded in a shared values compass, where integrity, innovation, and mutual respect unite a diverse group of residents. CryptoCity is designed to function as a brain pool—a hub of creativity and innovation where residents collaborate to bring business ideas and visions to life. Through shared investments facilitated by a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), the community will actively drive innovation and create ventures that can transform industries. This collaborative approach ensures that CryptoCity is not just a passive residential area but an active incubator of groundbreaking projects. Features and Amenities CryptoCity’s design seamlessly integrates luxury, convenience, and innovation, offering residents an unparalleled lifestyle: • Direct Access to the Coast CryptoCity’s location along the pristine shores of Isla Margarita ensures residents can enjoy beachfront living at its finest. With sweeping ocean views and access to the Caribbean’s crystal-clear waters, the city offers an unmatched blend of natural beauty and modern convenience. • Beach Club and Restaurant A luxurious beach club will serve as a hub for relaxation and socializing, featuring a premium restaurant where residents can enjoy gourmet dining with panoramic ocean views. This combination of leisure and fine cuisine reflects CryptoCity’s commitment to a sophisticated and fulfilling lifestyle. • State-of-the-Art Gym and Wellness Facilities A fully equipped gym and a dedicated physiotherapy center will cater to residents’ health and wellness needs, promoting a balanced lifestyle. • Golf Course The inclusion of a professionally designed golf course reflects CryptoCity’s emphasis on offering a well-rounded living experience. • Beachfront Event Stage This stage will host international events focused on blockchain, freedom, and innovation. These gatherings will solidify CryptoCity’s status as a global hub for thought leadership and cultural exchange. • Marina: A Gateway to the World Adding to CryptoCity’s allure is its ambitious plan for a marina, which will offer over 100 berths and provide residents with direct access to the Caribbean waters. The marina is not just a lifestyle feature but a strategic asset, positioning CryptoCity as an international gateway for trade, tourism, and connectivity. It will enhance the city’s appeal to maritime enthusiasts while fostering global connections, enabling CryptoCity to become a true crossroads of innovation and exchange. • Essential Services and Supermarket A well-stocked supermarket will provide residents with daily necessities, ensuring convenience and self-sufficiency within the city. CryptoCity is also committed to achieving self-sufficiency in its operations: • Renewable Energy: The city will leverage solar power and water-based energy systems to meet its electricity needs, reducing its environmental footprint while ensuring a reliable power supply. • Water Security: Freshwater reserves beneath the city will provide a sustainable and independent water supply for residents, minimizing reliance on external resources. • Food Production: Plans for community agriculture include the cultivation of fresh produce within the city area, promoting self-reliance and healthy living. A render of the marina in CryptoCity Urban Design: Customizable Luxury Residents of CryptoCity can choose from a variety of pre-designed luxury home models, blending modern comfort with sustainability. These homes are designed to complement the city’s forward-thinking ethos while offering a high standard of living. The city’s design also includes community spaces, co-working hubs, and recreational areas to foster collaboration and relaxation. A DAO-Based Governance Model At the heart of CryptoCity’s operations lies its revolutionary governance structure—a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO). The DAO enables residents to actively participate in the city’s management, from resource allocation to strategic decisions. This transparent and equitable system empowers the community to take collective ownership of CryptoCity’s future. Importantly, the DAO also facilitates joint investments, allowing residents to pool resources and fund innovative projects. Through this mechanism, CryptoCity becomes a vibrant hub where ideas are transformed into realities, creating value not only for the community but for industries worldwide. Crypto-Powered Transactions True to its name, CryptoCity operates entirely on cryptocurrency for transactions. From purchasing plots to accessing goods and services within the city, residents will conduct all financial activities digitally. This integration of blockchain technology ensures efficiency and aligns with the city’s identity as a forward-thinking urban environment. Progress and Milestones CryptoCity’s development has made remarkable strides. The initial phases, including land clearing and leveling, involved moving and compacting massive amounts of sand. These foundational steps paved the way for infrastructure development, which is now progressing steadily. The city has already sold over 40% of its original 100 plots, underscoring the immense interest in the project. This milestone, achieved despite a rigorous selection process, demonstrates CryptoCity’s appeal to individuals who share its vision and values. The site where CryptoCity is growing, as of December 2024 Impact on Isla Margarita CryptoCity is not only transforming the lives of its future residents but also positively impacting Isla Margarita as a whole. • Job Creation: The construction and operation phases of CryptoCity are generating numerous jobs for local workers, ranging from skilled trades to administrative positions. • Tourism and Investment: By hosting international events and attracting global attention, CryptoCity is elevating Isla Margarita’s profile as a premier destination for tourism and innovation. • Economic Growth: The influx of residents, businesses, and visitors will boost the local economy, supporting a range of industries from hospitality to retail. • Community Building: CryptoCity’s commitment to shared values and collaboration serves as a model for sustainable urban development, setting a new standard for integrated community living. The Future of CryptoCity Looking ahead, CryptoCity aims to solidify its position as a hub of innovation, luxury, and collaboration. Its brain pool model, powered by the DAO, will enable residents to transform shared visions into transformative projects. Plans include hosting global conferences, workshops, and cultural events to foster an exchange of ideas and strengthen its ties to the international blockchain community. The city’s success will serve as a prototype for future developments, demonstrating how technology and shared values can shape a more connected and sustainable way of living. Find out more at CryptoCity.land --- # Free Cities as Plan B URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-as-plan-b Published: 2022-09-16 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities Free Cities represent a promising option for countries and individuals looking for a “plan B”. They can be a backup plan for any country willing to give them a shot. I would even venture to say that Free Cities represent a plan B for global society at large. Allow me to explain. The very concept of a Free City is aimed at expanding the governance alternatives available for residents to choose from. Free Cities represent the next level of development of traditional Special Economic Zones (SEZ). There are thousands of SEZs around the world, and they are located in the majority of countries on Earth. Each one is unique but they all share an aim to reduce the friction in doing business to promote development in a given area or country. SEZs used to represent a plan B for many countries. Each existing country has its strengths and weaknesses. Some countries are blessed with resources, and some find themselves in crucial geographic regions for water- or land-based world trade. On the flip side, some have no resources, some are very rural, and some don’t have much land at all. Regardless, most countries have found that in the world of increasing competition for investment, they must propose a plan B to provide an edge that attracts development from abroad. As our world progresses and as technology develops, the competition for investment continues to expand. China benefited greatly from SEZs in the past as they catapulted it to world economic powerhouse status. But many other countries in the world have not benefited to the same degree. It is clear that countries establishing SEZs benefit from a first-mover advantage. When nobody else has an SEZ, establishing one represents a very significant benefit to potential investors. However, once many countries have done the same and many SEZs have been established, the marginal benefit for any given country to develop an SEZ diminishes. Now that SEZs are now so common, establishing them only brings the Host Country back on par with the others. The number of SEZs in the world has skyrocketed over the last two decades. Free Cities, however, are the next step in the development of SEZs development. They represent a plan B for any country bold enough to be an early mover. They expand on the SEZ model by extending the purview of the zone beyond the general customs and tax relief of a typical SEZ — primarily to target the residential market. Free City models have various unique structures but they all attempt to provide the benefits of liberty and entrepreneurship to the individual resident foremost, on top of making it easy for globally-connected companies to do business. Free Cities may include many innovative features that provide the Host Country with significant competitive advantages, such as innovative and effective dispute resolution systems that enable residents to feel secure in their life, property, and outlook for the future. Many studies show that if one is confident they will be able to reap the benefits of their labor and personal choices, they are much more likely to make long-term decisions. This often manifests in increased entrepreneurship which creates prosperity and jobs. By providing more regulatory flexibility, Free Cities serve to expand the benefits of SEZs to the average person. While many traditional SEZs lower taxes on corporations, Free Cities may do the same for residents. In addition, Free Cities frequently provide a more à la carte fee structure so that residents may opt into the services they want and are not forced to pay for services they do not. This allows residents to spend more on goods and services produced by other entrepreneurs as well as increase their ability to start a business with founding capital and a larger savings buffer in case things don’t work out. The benefits that Free Cities bring to the table are tailored to promote investment in small businesses, increase entrepreneurship, and provide the stability needed to make long-term decisions, be it in business or in one’s family life. This represents an enticing option for many people around the world. A genuinely attractive plan B (or even plan A) might just consist of taking up residence in a Free City. Visitors touring a construction site at Próspera, Honduras, a special zone where new mixed-use real estate is being developed. Suppose a Host State can tap into even a small portion of the immense potential embodied in the human capital and financial capital discussed above, by establishing Free Cities. If it does, it can bring paradigm-changing levels of investment, economic growth, and skilled migration into their country. At a time when uncertainty is on the rise across the world, Free Cities — as the next-level SEZs — represent a readily available plan B to countries ready to be early movers. Free Cities avoid the foremost risk of traditional SEZs: becoming so-called ‘white elephants’. While many SEZs have failed to deliver results, this typically happens when the SEZ is established and developed using public funds. Research shows that privately developed SEZs tend to have much better results than their state-funded counterparts. Since Free Cities are developed privately without the involvement of public funding, they build on the SEZ model that has proven to be the most successful and risk-free. Finally, while Free Cities represent a plan B for individuals and for individual nations, they may also represent a plan B for society at large. Free Cities are not a panacea where all the world’s problems are solved but they provide more choices in the most fundamental market — the market of living together. They improve improve access to good governance, high-quality services, and individual freedom across the world. The diversity of Free Cities will allow residents to opt in to the system they feel represents their needs the best. In addition, Free Cities can and must remain competitive and so they always keep learning from each other. If certain policies within a Free City work well, they will likely be replicated elsewhere. On the other hand, if certain ideas don’t work out, it is in the interest of the Free City to quickly change course or risk that their residents move to a jurisdiction that serves them better. The incentives of such a competitive market result in greatly improved governance — a much-needed development in today’s world. As we see traditional development models falling short of expectations, Free Cities are the natural plan B for society at large to provide and enjoy much better governance services at a fraction of the current price. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in August 2022. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # Ciudad Morazán Makes a Difference in the Life of Even the Least Fortunate URL: https://free-cities.org/ciudad-morazan-makes-a-difference-in-the-life-of-even-the-least-fortunate Published: 2023-07-31 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Anthoni Lopez was born in Choluteca, Honduras, in August 2007. He lived with his mother, father, one brother, and two sisters until he was seven years old when his parents divorced. Anthoni’s father kept his brother and one of his sisters, but his mother took him and his sister, Paola, to faraway Choloma, the industrial hub of Honduras, where she got a job in a textile factory. They lived in the dangerous neighborhood of San Miguel, and 14-year-old Paola cared for him while their mother worked. One day, Paola had to call the police, but they didn’t come because they considered it too dangerous. A gang member heard Paola make the call and told the family they had 24 hours to leave their home or be killed. Anthoni’s mother found an apartment in downtown Choloma, but the family had to move to a cheaper apartment in less than a year. Near the end of 2016, Paola got pregnant and wanted to abort the baby. Her mother was furious and insisted they had to raise the child. Anthoni’s niece, Britani, was born on June 21, 2017, when Anthoni was still nine years old. The baby’s father had abandoned Paola, and she and her mother cared for the baby. Anthoni felt ignored because they didn’t have time for him anymore. Anthoni’s mother started a relationship with an evil man who lived with them for about two months. When he beat Anthoni, his mom tried to protect her little boy, but the violent man beat her. She called the police, who arrested and held him for 24 hours. When the man was released, he returned, and they had to call the police again. He left before the police arrived, and she got a restraining order that stopped him from returning. Paola met a new man and left with the baby, leaving Anthoni alone while his mom worked. His mother’s attitude changed, and she started treating Anthoni poorly, perhaps because she had also met a new man. She started sleeping away from home, only coming home to change clothes. One day, Anthoni discovered that she had taken most of her clothes away. She didn’t come home, and he was left hungry with nobody to cook for him. He had to ask a neighbor for help. Soon after, Anthoni’s mother stopped buying food and paying rent. At age 10, he had to look for work to support himself. Little Anthoni found work selling coconut water in the crowded old buses that whizzed around Choloma. The work was hazardous because he had to jump on and off the moving buses, but fortunately, he never fell. He turned 11 years old in August 2018. In December, after working for six months on the buses, Anthoni met Frander Mayes, who had opened a restaurant near his apartment. When Anthoni asked for a job, Frander took pity and gave him work peeling green bananas. Paola returned to the apartment with Britani. When Anthoni’s mother came to the apartment one day and saw Paola, they argued, and both ended up leaving. At 11 years old, Anthoni not only had to pay the bills, but he had to take care of the baby by himself. When Anthoni ran out of money and couldn’t buy milk, Frander’s wife Iris, who happened to be nursing her third child, gave him some of her milk for the baby. It was a month and a half before Paola took Britani and returned to her boyfriend. Frander adopted a 13-year-old boy off the street, but the boy decided to leave and tried to take Frander’s young son Anderson with him. Anthoni saved Anderson by convincing him to stay. Frander was so happy that he adopted Anthoni. Anthoni lived with Frander, Iris, and their three children until June 2022, when the couple separated. Frander took Anthoni to live in Ciudad Morazán and operate the pulperia he opened there. Unfortunately, Frander soon lost interest in the minimarket and stopped reinvesting the revenues in inventory. Anthoni lost both his job and his place to live. However, Ciudad Morazán came to the rescue. He had become such a valued community member that neighbors took him in as he found ways to help. For example, a pregnant woman needed help during the final weeks of her pregnancy. He stayed with her and helped her with housework before the baby’s birth. After the birth, he helped take care of the baby. When she had recovered enough that she didn’t need his help, Anthoni needed another place to live. Carlos Fortin, the Technical Secretary of the ZEDE, helped track down his mother and got her permission for Anthoni to live in Ciudad Morazán since he was too young to sign a contract himself. Since June 2023, Anthoni has been working in a Choloma minimart and going to school. An American entrepreneur who lives in Ciudad Morazán had rented an extra house in a good location to use as a gym and community center but hadn’t started the business yet. He sub-rented the $120 per month house to Anthoni for less than $50 a month to care for it and help run the gym in the future. In the meantime, the young man has been finding many small ways to be of value to the community. At a recent event hosted by the proprietor of the new minimarket, he helped bring people together and handed out prizes to lucky attendees. Anthoni giving a prize to Angel He even helps onboard new residents to the crypto ecosystem by teaching them how to use the stablecoin eLPS, based on the Honduran lempira, to shop at the local businesses. This indirectly helps his entrepreneur benefactor, who designed the stablecoin to solve the banking problem of the Honduran residents and businesses. As unfortunate as Anthoni’s life had been, he has now found a community where he can have a good life. For the first time, he doesn’t have to worry about criminals being allowed in his neighborhood. The safety and security of Ciudad Morazán are especially welcome to youth like him. Anthoni has a place among people who share his desire for peace and fun. As the houses fill up with families, he has more children and young people to enjoy. The residents of Ciudad Morazán appreciate the uniqueness of their environment. Perhaps the unfair political opposition to the ZEDEs makes them more friendly and cooperative with their neighbors, or maybe it is just the freedom to live their lives without fear. When we at the Foundation talk about how Free Cities can offer new ways to help the most unfortunate, it is stories like Anthoni’s we have in mind. May many more Free Cities help many more Anthonis in the future! --- # Freeth’m: Building Self-Sufficient Towns for Freedom-Seekers URL: https://free-cities.org/freethm-building-self-sufficient-towns-for-freedom-seekers Published: 2024-10-21 Author: Zuzana Martáková Category: Blog Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/freethm Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. Reset the Way You Live Freeth’m is on the journey to build decentralized, sovereign towns and communities in beautiful, rural locations around the world. Powered by a genuine desire to live in a free world within an aligned community, the main foundation of Freeth’m lies in providing a safe haven to individuals who truly value their lives: Free Cities aficionados, bitcoiners, anarcho-capitalists, or homeschooling advocates can all find their sanctuary within a Freeth’m town. Live and let live is our motto and we build and create around it. We abide by the non-aggression principle and believe that living and letting live produces a rich, vibrant community where people inspire and uplift each other, and are able to truly live their best lives. Our freedoms are continuously being taken away and meaningless restrictions keep increasing. While it might be easy to get consumed by endless obstacles, we choose to look on the bright side. Most of us are likely familiar with the American architect and inventor Buckminster Fuller’s quote, “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” Inspired by his words, along with many others, the idea of creating fully self-sufficient small towns was born. Render image of a community center in a Freeth’m town Turning the Tide Freeth’m came to life over four years ago when Or Sofer, founder and CEO, was living in Beijing, China. Realizing that the future in such a massive city held no promises, especially during that turbulent time, Or began noticing the rapid economic changes. Businesses and offices having to shut down, remote work becoming the norm, and face-to-face interaction shifting online. He quickly understood that this new reality was clearly moving toward decentralization. Urban life has already become exponentially more expensive and taxing across all levels, especially in recent years. Pollution is omnipresent, access to clean food is increasingly difficult, tap water is contaminated, people are divided, and children are not growing up in a safe environment. Freeth’m is going the opposite way: our towns will be built in warm and sunny rural locations in geographically and economically stable (to a degree) regions to allow for self-sufficiency. Each town will be capped at roughly 400 residential homes to offer maximum privacy, safety, and familiarity. Living Freely Self-sufficiency is woven into every aspect of our town. Easy-to-operate farming facilities allow residents to grow their own food, water is harvested from local river sources, gray water is recycled, and energy is generated through solar panels attached to every house, including small wind turbines and other recent renewable energy inventions. Every Freeth’m town will be able to stand on its own, even when the lights of the external world go out. Render image of a luxury villa in a Freeth’m town Capping each town at around 400 homes allows for a more secure environment, both externally and internally for residents’ peace of mind. The architecture of our towns is structured so that every house stands on its own, providing physical privacy and the option of not interacting with your neighbors. Community is an important aspect of Freeth’m, and we are focused on attracting residents who are aligned with our philosophy. Individual freedom and privacy are the alpha and omega of each town. We welcome anyone who has a deep appreciation for these values, whether they wish to visit for a few weeks or settle for several years. Ultimately, whoever wishes to live in a Freeth’m town, regardless of duration, will have to enter into the resident contract. This contract will be put together with Tipolis. The resident contract will cover all terms and conditions of a stay in a Freeth’m town, including a detailed list of the rented property and amenities. The resident contract is divided into three sections: Resident to Resident, ensuring that the live and let live and non-aggression principles are upheld; Resident to Place, focusing on the preservation of the town and proper handling of any defects; and Operator to Resident, which centers on minarchist governance and self-sufficient infrastructure. In the event of a crime, the host country’s legal system will apply. For minor disputes, such as internal residential disagreements and conflict resolution, we will offer support through several independent service providers. Launching in Portugal, Expanding Worldwide The first Freeth’m town will be located in Portugal, less than 90 minutes from Lisbon. We are in the final stages of selecting the ideal land, which boasts natural springs and plenty of space for exploring the surrounding nature. Currently, we are in discussions with the local municipality, which has been very supportive of our approach and mission, to define the land’s limitations and determine the available residential space. Portugal has been selected as our starting point for several reasons: the lower half of the country enjoys fairly stable and warm weather year-round, which supports self-sufficiency; there are many rural, uninhabited areas, and local municipalities generally favor attracting new developments that promote sustainable living and economic growth; the country is open to decentralized education methods; and it is easily accessible from both Europe and the Americas. Render image of a co-working space in a Freeth’m town We aim to create sanctuaries where everyone, regardless of age or physical condition, can live their most joyful life as they see fit (without infringing on others, of course). While each resident may have their own perspective, we believe the greatest benefits of living in a Freeth’m town lie in the connection to nature, surrounded by greenery and fresh, clean air. Residents can enjoy locally grown food and the opportunity to live peacefully among like-minded individuals who share common values yet bring diverse experiences to inspire one another. Our long-term plan is to build several Freeth’m towns in different jurisdictions. With a global membership, residents will have the flexibility to move between towns at their convenience, potentially gaining tax benefits. Freeth’m will accept both fiat currency and bitcoin, offering options that many residents will appreciate. As we prepare to purchase the first piece of land, we are filled with excitement: pristine nature, the freedom to breathe deeply, and a complete escape from city noise, pollution, and unnecessary restrictions. While we anticipate some bumps along the way, we are confident that using prefabricated and locally sourced materials, such as wood or bamboo, will bring our first town to life by Q3/Q4 2025. We invite you to join us! Our resident waitlist is currently open to anyone, with no strings attached. See you on the other side! --- # What are Free Private Cities? URL: https://free-cities.org/what-are-free-private-cities Published: 2021-10-23 Author: Rahim Taghizadegan Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, history-of-free-cities Free Private Cities revive an old European tradition to which we owe much of our diversity and innovative power: They combine urban autonomy and mobile cosmopolitanism. Time and again in Europe productive people have had to flee plunder and persecution. Yet the continent differs from other parts of the world in that it has attracted a greater number of refugees who have been able to build up capital and trade globally. Doing so allowed those refugees to escape the abject poverty that would have faced them in more remote hideaways. Venice – to cite just one example – became a refuge for merchants and artisans after the decline of the Roman Empire. As a result, the city was able to cultivate a seed of prosperity that spread around the world thanks to its easily defensible location and naval buildup. Other cities took in innovative classes in the form of Jews and Huguenots, who made a major contribution to European prosperity. The Hanseatic League of Free Cities provided a defensive alliance in the north that allowed a common market to develop. Its historic member cities remain wealthy today. Despite its cities being dominated by greedy families and overly worldly churchmen, the diversity and connections they cultivated – through a combination of small scale-politics and a larger-scale common culture – created a legacy from which we all benefit today. The term “private” in the concept of “Free Private Cities” does not denote egoism or isolated exclusivity. Rather, it refers to the primordial democratic principle of spontaneous collaborationcitizens who settle common matters through free discourse or by peaceful, voluntary contracts. Rather than being highly exclusive enclaves, cities are typically places where the peaceful exchange of goods and ideas amongst strangers can thrive. Europe’s unique history has allowed it to develop a special culture. Historically, cities have served as bases for Europe’s political rulers. Yet the continent’s division into countless principalities and its competition between ecclesiastical authorities gave rise to a kind of urban dynamism that left room for free citizenship to emerge. Many cities were administrative centers and residences, but most thrived on being marketplaces. They sprang up at the junctions of transportation routes, and offered freedom from feudal order. To the average European today, founding new cities may seem like a crazy undertaking. Europeans looking for change are more likely to pine for a romantic return to nature rather than a new form of urbanism. But demonstrated preferences tell a different story to preferences that are merely expressed: People everywhere, including in Europe, are drawn predominantly to where they can find prosperity, inspiration and diversity— to the denser hubs where a nexus of ideas, talent and capital can be found. “Private” also denotes the rejection of colonialism in the negative sense: a rejection of cities serving as plunderers’ branches that feed resources to the center of power. Free Private Cities are not only nourished by their surrounding countryside, they also nourish that countryside through concentric circles of wealth that emanate from them to the wider world. Free Private Cities, therefore, represent a possible path to improving the health of Europe since they encourage fruitful division of labor, policies and ideas. They provide dynamism for pioneers without requiring the subjugation of others. A living Europe would offer true diversity: from closed communes to open, dynamic private cities. The preference for most people will likely be something that lies in the middle of this spectrum. Yet all people will stand to benefit through interaction with new and diverse communities, even if they do not feel the desire to be fully enclosed within them. Fruitful division means productively resolving conflicts of values and goals without those values and goals being sacrificed. We must protect roots, identities, traditions, communities, relationships, natural spaces and cultural capital from harmful dynamics that merely destroy and leave a vacuum in their wake. At the same time, we must protect positive dynamics from worry, envy, fear, identity politics, and delusions of control. If Europe can successfully navigate this balancing act, there will be no doubt about its sustainability and ability to maintain a positive, distinctive culture. Free Private Cities are a hard concept to promote in today’s political environment dominated by the overconfident technocrats of centralization on the one hand, and national protectionists with an inferiority complex on the other. Yet the closer we can move towards the ideal represented by Free Private Cities, the less wealth will be lost through emigration and the more new value will be created. Legally, Free Private Cities would be classed as special administrative zones with a high degree of autonomy, which would extend to the zones having their own courts and laws. These laws are not determined merely by rulers, but would be recognized voluntarily by citizens upon entry through the signing of a contract. Unilateral discrimination against citizens, even when majority opinion shifts, would not be possible, unless the contracts explicitly allowed for this to happen. Of course, one can list countless potential challenges that will be faced by Free Private Cities. If the concept of Free Private Cities is implemented, some will likely fail. But reservations and misgivings alone get us nowhere. We need to have the courage to experiment with bold new ideas, instead of remaining powerless in the face of our problems. We need mutual understanding instead of standardization – the special path of multilingual exchange taken by Europe in the past – rather than the political unification of recent decades, which has only increased divisiveness. Reform plans for Europe or the euro based on presumed technocratic omniscience and the need for a “one size fits all” policy will get us nowhere. Such reform plans – implemented in response to the crises of recent decades – have only led to greater division and cynicism. After all, which one person can save a continent or a world currency? Who has enough knowledge to know that their policies will not bring about unintended consequences? How can one win the support of majorities that are becoming more anxious, elderly, and dependent on welfare transfers at a time when every new path is uncertain? It is time to give minorities the room to experiment again, whilst protecting the majority from any unwanted exposure to the risks of this experimentation. Free Private Cities could function as experimental spaces where the consequences of success or failure would be borne primarily by the pioneers themselves. Were these cities to be successful, their innovations would help secure the prosperity of the vast majority of Europeans. Translated excerpt from the book Europa auf der Intensivstation (Europe in Intensive Care) https://amzn.to/3srZpIQ with kind permission of Leykam-Verlag. --- # Madeira: A Portuguese Free City? URL: https://free-cities.org/madeira-a-portuguese-free-city Published: 2022-11-04 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities Though Free Cities are in one way a universal idea, at the present they cannot just be built anywhere. Geopolitics, food and water supplies, trade routes, and other such variables represent just a few of the major considerations a Free City will need to consider and adapt around. Each location has its pros and cons. The more remote, likely the greater autonomy a Free City can achieve but also the more self-sufficient it must be. The current level of local political development is one of the major Free City trade-offs. On the one hand, an already developed city that wants to adopt certain aspects of the Free City model has an inherent advantage, as much of the infrastructure, human patterns, and amenities of life already exist and only need to be improved upon. On the other hand, starting from scratch allows a more genuine Free City to develop along the lines that approximate more harmonious market outcomes. Human behavioral patterns formulate intricate, beautiful, and life-enhancing structures and paths that would be impossible to plan for, including, for example, the right mix of housing and leisure businesses versus more industrial production. To the extent that a Free City can start from scratch, it can work to develop a city as a more complete unit that works well for the benefit of its residents. The short dichotomy above highlights some of the major trade-offs we encounter at the Free Cities Foundation. In general, our response is that both sides of this spectrum represent something good and beautiful as well as an opportunity for Free City models. We readily admit that different models might work in different places and situations. We are often asked why we don’t build Free Cities in the US or Europe. Of course, we would love to see this idea expand and grow in these two regions, but we must work within the laws and regulations that currently exist. Unfortunately, most Free City models are not allowed in the European Union, which is generally antagonistic even to Special Economic Zones and other special jurisdictions. Nevertheless, there are cases where policies conducive to Free Cities have been grandfathered in within the EU. One such case is the beautiful island of Madeira. Officially named the Autonomous Region of Madeira, it is one of two autonomous regions of Portugal along with the Azores. While the EU does not allow new Special Economic Zones, (perhaps a regulation to be reconsidered) before the European Union developed into what it is now, Portugal adopted within its constitution a possibility for the development of autonomous regions due to their distinct geography, economy, the social and cultural situation as well as historical aspirations for independence. These already existing zones have been grandfathered into the European Union regulatory landscape. Madeira showcases the intriguing bond between decentralization and more choice for citizens. Given some of its unique characteristics, it makes sense for Madeira to operate independently in some regards from its “Host Nation” of Portugal. The challenges and issues faced by those in Lisbon are simply not the same as those faced by an island nearly 1000 kilometers away. It seems not only right but proper to allow decisions to be made closer to those who are impacted by them. In spirit, we might say that in some regards, Madeira is close to an example of one type of a Free City. Madeira possesses its own political and administrative structure and its own government. While the governance model is not terribly distinctive (consisting of an elected assembly and other political appointments) Madeira is implementing specific reforms and using the level of autonomy it legally possesses to improve its governance in ways that we at the Free Cities Foundation advocate. One such policy is the establishment of the International Business Centre of Madeira — more commonly referred to as Madeira Free Trade Zone. Given Madeira’s geographical location on the outskirts of the EU, it is entitled to derogate from some EU policies, and the Free Trade Zone is one such example. We can see this concession as another nod to the differences that exist between peoples, cultures, and geographical locations that call for more decentralization and options in the market for living together. The FTZ has used its status to lower taxes, create more incentives for business investment in Madeira, and has resulted in companies in the International Business Centre now comprising over 40% of Madeira’s corporate income tax revenue even at the reduced rates. Madeira has also targeted bitcoiners as another example of using its autonomy to draw economic activity toward the island. Given its subtropical climate and first-world amenities, Madeira is known as a beautiful tourist location. A number of bitcoiners possess newfound wealth and are looking to enjoy that wealth from a tropical paradise. Madeira is doing its best to compete for this economic activity. While Madeira does not have the statutory authority to change legal tender laws on the island, it may be able to avoid Portugal’s planned imposition of a 28% capital gains tax on bitcoin. Given that bitcoin is a voluntary, international currency, this is arguably just as good as (if not better than) the status of legal tender, as no one is forced to use the currency they do not want, yet those that want to spend sats and evangelize bitcoin adoption across the island are free to do so without punitive taxes which often incentivize bitcoiners to hold onto their wealth for tax reasons alone. Keeping bitcoin on an equal tax footing with the euro would be a great first step in implementing the ideas of a Free City. Combined with the International Business Centre and the global attention that the bitcoin announcement brought, we anticipate more bitcoiners, more bitcoin, and more bitcoin companies finding their way to Madeira. This will no doubt create jobs, investment, and more prosperity for the island. All of this is thanks to the relative autonomy Madeira enjoys from the European Union which allows for the differences inherent in the places, people, culture, and geographies to implement their own small-scale improvements in governance. Now, imagine what could be achieved if more small-scale innovation was legally permissible — the sheer breadth of choices customers would have in the market for living together! This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in September 2022. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. A Portuguese translation of this article is available on the Settee website. --- # Venzuela, Speaker Announcements & Seasteading Opportunities URL: https://free-cities.org/venzuela-speaker-announcements-seasteading-opportunities Published: 2026-01-29 Author: Natalie Danelishen Category: Blog Topics: seasteading About: https://free-cities.org/projects/cryptocity, https://free-cities.org/projects/arkpad This month, we cover the dramatic political developments in Venezuela and their implications for Free Cities, announce new speakers for our conference in Próspera, and bring you up to speed on two major seasteading initiatives: LiberArx and ArkPad. Maduro’s Capture and the Future of CryptoCity On 3 January 2026, United States forces carried out a major military operation in Caracas that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. The operation marked a dramatic shift in Venezuela’s political situation and has already begun to reshape expectations about the country’s future direction. While international observers remain divided over the legitimacy of the operation, many in the business community see the removal of Maduro as opening the door to political stabilization, renewed international engagement, and a more predictable environment for business. This is especially significant for CryptoCity, one of the flagship projects featured in our Free Communities Directory. We recently spoke with Tim Stern, CEO of CryptoCity, who expressed strong confidence that special economic zones in Venezuela will continue and are likely to thrive under the new conditions. Together with Venezuelan futurist José Cordero, Tim reported a noticeable increase in investor enquiries and early signs of rising property values in areas linked to SEZ activity. To hear Tim Stern’s update on developments on the ground, listen to our special report from Timothy Allen here. Maduro transferred to the US to face federal charges Berlin & London Meetups In partnership with Próspera, our team kicked off 2026 with two in-person meetups in Berlin and London, each attended by around 60 people. Both events featured introductory presentations on Próspera, followed by lively Q&A sessions and networking. Our next meetup will take place in Dubai on 4 February and feature a presentation from our Board Chairman Dr. Titus Gebel. Sign up here. A goal of both meetups was to raise awareness of the upcoming Free Cities Conference in Próspera, which will take place for the first time inside a functioning Free City this September. Read on to find out more… New Speakers Announced: Free Cities Conference The Free Cities Foundation team has been working hard behind the scenes on preparations for the 2026 Free Cities Conference in Próspera (3–6 September). Today, we’re pleased to announce our first ten speakers, with more to be shared in the coming weeks. This year’s conference is especially significant, as it will be the first time the Free Cities Conference has taken place inside a functioning Free City. Not only will attendees have the chance to learn about more than a dozen of the world’s leading Free City and seasteading projects, they will also get to experience one of the world’s most advanced Special Economic Zones firsthand. Newly confirmed speakers include: • Erick Brimen, founder of Próspera, who will share his journey building one of the world’s most advanced Special Economic Zones. • Niklas Anzinger, Próspera-based founder of Infinita, who will speak about his experience launching the largest venture capital firm inside the zone. • Oliver Porter, founder of Sandy Springs, Georgia, the first city in the US to outsource the majority of its municipal services, who will tell the story of how a suburban community radically restructured local government. The conference takes place on Roatán, Honduras, against the backdrop of St John’s Bay, one of the most stunning tropical locations in the Caribbean. Core activities run from 3–6 September, but we encourage attendees to arrive from 31 August to get acclimatised and take part in additional organised activities. We have just updated the conference website with more detailed practical information on the schedule, accommodation, and flights. To find out more about what we’re planning and get tickets, visit: freecitiesconference.com LiberArx: Be Part of Seasteading History Followers of the Free Cities Foundation may already be familiar with Atlas Island, an international community focused on seasteading and the creation of voluntary floating societies. Building on that work, Atlas Island founder Mason has developed LiberArx, a modular vessel design intended to make long-term living at sea accessible even to those without specialist sailing experience. LiberArx is conceived as a solar-powered, self-sufficient floating home, prioritising personal freedom, mobility, and adaptability. The design features large open interiors and domestic living spaces, with a layout more similar to an apartment than a conventional boat. The LiberArx team is currently seeking someone to commission the first full-scale prototype, to be built in a Dutch shipyard at an estimated cost of $1.5 million. Anyone interested in being part of seasteading history by commissioning this first specialist floating home can find out more via the company’s official website: Liberarx or contact Mason directly at: Mason@LiberArx.com. For a deeper discussion on LiberArx, see Timothy Allen’s conversation with Mason on the Free Cities Podcast. You can also explore more of the podcast’s recent conversations with Yaron Brook, Rahim Taghizadegan, and Vladimir Leshko here. ArkPad: From Concept to Cashflow Seasteading company ArkPad, whose founder Mitchell Suchner received the 2025 Free Cities Conference Innovation Award, continues to expand operations beyond its flagship reef resort near Davao, Philippines. The existing resort currently operates 14 floating “glamphouses” less than a kilometre offshore, available via Airbnb and other platforms. To date, it has hosted around 3,200 guests, served an estimated 2,500 restaurant customers, and maintains an average rating of 4.7 stars on Airbnb. A recent video by Filipino travel vlogger Rish Mars (nearly half a million followers) about the resort has generated significant interest. ArkPad is now planning a second site off the coast of Próspera, Honduras, with construction intended to align with the 2026 Free Cities Conference. For those interested in ownership, units are available either outright or via fractional shares. Prices start from $45,000 in Davao and $95,000 in Roatán, with fractional ownership available from 1%. Find out more and register an interest here: Roatan Reef Resort ArkPad’s reef resort in the Philippines Keep Up to Date with the World of Seasteading This month’s newsletter has featured two seasteading updates, and we would also like to take this opportunity to recommend the Seasteading Institute’s newsletter for those interested in following developments in the space more closely. Subscribers receive a concise, high-quality update from across the global seasteading community once a week on Tuesdays. We highly recommend joining, especially for readers who want to stay informed about seasteading between our own monthly updates. --- # Free Cities at Vitalia 2024 URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-at-vitalia-2024 Published: 2024-02-26 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes, medical-regulation About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Vitalia 2024 is a pop-up city hosted by the ZEDE Próspera on the island of Roatan off the coast of Honduras. Pop-up cities are temporary communities that bring together innovators from various industries to learn and share ideas and projects. They combine speeches, panel discussions, networking, and co-working to connect leading thinkers from around the world. The first pop-up city was Zuzalu, which took place in Montenegro from March 25th to May 25th, 2023. Vitalik Buterin, the inventor of Ethereum, founded it. Vitalia 2024 was planned to be a temporary community from January 6th to March 1st, 2024, but it was so successful it was extended to April 1st. The event was founded and organized by Niklas Anzinger, the founder of Infinita VC and the host of Stranded Technologies. Vitalia’s primary focus is longevity and biotech, but each weekend features a different theme or event. The Startup Societies and Crypto Cities Summit took place from February 2nd to 4th with speeches and panel discussions held in the specially built dome that seats hundreds and provides cool temperatures. The weekend event was also sponsored by Joseph McKinney, Publisher of the Journal of Special Jurisdictions, and Nathalie Mezza-Garcia, CEO and COO, respectively, of the Catawba Digital Economic Zone, the first US Special Economic Zone. The CDEZ receives its autonomy from the semi-sovereign status of the Catawba Indian Nation. ZEDE Ciudad Morazán was represented by the developer, Massimo Mazzone, and residents, Alex Ugorji and me. We arrived Thursday, February 1st, and Alex arranged for an informal Morazán meetup that evening where Massimo could speak about Ciudad Morazán and answer questions. There was much interest. One of the first new people I met was Aubrey de Grey, the renowned biomedical gerontologist and author. I was surprised by his interest in the Free Cities movement. I noticed throughout the weekend that he attended all the presentations and took notes on his computer. The conference began promptly on Friday morning. The schedule was packed with short, concise presentations, and the organization was impeccable. There were too many informative speeches to describe each one, but they ranged in relevant topics from Max Medina of the Laboratory for Visual Architecture describing the architecture in Próspera to Niza Gonzalez of the Adrianople Group introducing the interactive New Cities map the firm had developed. Some highlights for me included Bob Haywood of Community Matters Institute sharing insights from his fifty years of experience in building Special Economic Zones worldwide, including his contribution to the ZEDE law in Honduras. Another highlight was Magatte Wade, famed speaker, author, and Director of the Center for African Prosperity, giving an impassioned speech about the potential for prosperity in Africa, driven by the rise of new startup cities creating business-friendly environments. I had just read her book, Heart of a Cheetah, and was inspired by her energy. Balaji Srinivasan, former CTO of Coinbase, former general partner of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, and author of The Network State, which I had also recently read, appeared virtually on Friday afternoon. His ideas about starting communities in the cloud and later expanding into a physical territory are revolutionizing the startup societies space. On Friday afternoon, short speeches by Free City investment experts like Patri Friedman, founder of the Seasteading Institute and Pronomos Capital, a venture capital firm that invests in startup cities, updated the audience on the field. Alex Voss, CFO at Tipolis, which builds Free Private Cities, added his insights. Niklas Anzinger of Infinita VC and Dave McClure, angel investor and founder of Practical Venture Capital, joined them for a panel discussion about investment in new cities. On Saturday afternoon, Jorge Colindres, the Technical Secretary and highest official of Próspera, talked about Prospera’s legal foundation. Alex Ugorji interviewed Massimo about Ciudad Morazán. Joe and Nathalie spoke about the Catawba Digital Economic Zone as the first US SEZ. Afterward, Jorge, Joe, Nathalie, and Massimo were joined by Arthur Breitman, co-founder of Tezos, a proof of stake blockchain, for a panel about best practices for later-stage startup society projects. Another highlight for me was Mac Davis, founder of Minicircle, a biotechnology clinic running clinical trials for gene therapies, and Greg Nakagawa, CEO of Pristine Regenerative Medicine, talking about longevity research in startup societies. Robin Hanson, an economist at George Mason University, gave a fascinating speech about the Frontiers in Governance Innovation. Vitalik Buterin appeared virtually as the last speaker of the day. It was especially meaningful that he appeared at the pop-up city event inspired by his Zuzalu. The biggest unscheduled highlight of the weekend for me was late Saturday night. Balaji flew in from Singapore on Saturday and appeared informally after 10 pm at the restaurant where about a dozen people, including the group from Morazán, had a chance to ask him questions. Mark Edge, a long-time host of the radio show Free Talk Live and an investor in Honduras, elicited some special insights from Balaji about both Bitcoin and network states. The major highlight of the Sunday morning session was a pitch competition, which has become a tradition for Niklas Anzinger’s events. There were eighteen pitches for projects related to startup societies and crypto cities. The business ideas were innovative and varied. Many of them received some interest and follow-up from the audience. Balaji watched all the pitches with obvious attention. He also stayed after the official end of the summit for a fireside chat with Niklas. The final official panel of the day and the conference was a conversation between Bryan Johnson, entrepreneur, venture capitalist, author, and investor in science and technology companies, and Aubrey de Grey, moderated by Laurence Ion, founder of VitaDAO. If the Startup Societies and Crypto Cities Summit sounds like all work and no play, that was far from the case. There was plenty of stimulating conversation, informal idea-sharing, and partying. The organizers and the community that gathered Próspera simply put together an all-round unforgettable event that showcased the high spirits and incredible energy of the broader Free Cities movement. --- # How Free Cities Promote Peace and Goodwill URL: https://free-cities.org/how-free-cities-promote-peace-and-goodwill Published: 2023-03-13 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance While spiritually, peace might have positive characteristics and qualities, in the world of human affairs and legal and political systems, peace is more of a definitionally negative concept. Much like darkness is the absence of light, peace is the absence of conflict. When viewed from this perspective, peace is at the very core of what Free CIties try to promote. Free Cities, regardless of the specifics, create more peace in the world by bringing together communities of like-minded people with similar values. When people who share similar value scales live together, the space for potential conflicts decreases. Less conflict occurs in at least two different ways. First, with an increase in value compatibility, the discrepancy between two sides in a conflict must necessarily be lowered. Secondly, with an increase in shared values, the total number of conflicts that can arise is also reduced. The result is an increase in peace both quantitatively and qualitatively. In addition to the reduction in potential strife, conflicts are more likely, ceteris paribus, to be resolved quickly without the need for external dispute resolution. With shared values comes the desire to find quick and easy resolutions for minor disputes. While this may seem simple and obvious, it is worth emphasizing. As just one example, it is much easier and more likely that you will find common ground in a dispute with your neighbor than with someone across the country or even across the world. It is much easier to argue and fight from a distance than from next door. Furthermore, your neighbor likely shares your culture and has more values in common with you than someone across the globe. As such, you are likely to come to a closer shared understanding of any dispute and, over time, social norms and ways of solving such small and frequent disputes arise and are employed in the community. In addition to lowering the number of disputes, lowering the qualitative scope of conflict, and increasing the ability to handle disputes via social mechanisms instead of external enforcement arms, another reason why Free Cities are more peaceful is their voluntary nature. Free Cities must, definitionally, require the explicit consent of the governed. While the first few paragraphs of this article focused on the ways in which Free Cities reduce or eliminate conflict, the voluntary nature of Free Cities leads to peace between the governance service provider and residents. Although it may not feel like it, the status quo for citizens across the world is to be subjugated citizens of our governments. Depending on the particular jurisdiction in which you live, this is a more or less conflict-filled relationship. If you think this is an inaccurate description, try not paying your taxes or smoking marijuana in front of a police officer in many jurisdictions. No third party is harmed by either of these “crimes” and yet you are not allowed to do either. This is not a peaceful relationship. Free Cities need not deal with any of these contradictions. Instead, they offer the mechanism of peaceful and voluntary opt-in and opt-out of systems as seen fit by both sides of the contract. While many disputes within a Free City will be avoided and handled via social mechanisms, inevitably some disputes will require a formal dispute resolution system. Fortunately, Free Cities are well-equipped to solve these disputes in as peaceful a manner as possible. Firstly, disputes, whether between the resident and another resident or between the resident and the City Operator, are resolved by an independent third party not affiliated with either side of the dispute. This automatically leads to a higher degree of confidence in, and peaceful acceptance of, the resolution than the status quo. Secondly, since Free Cities must attract residents, they must provide high-quality services. Arguably the most important governance service is dispute resolution. As such, Free City Operators will be heavily incentivized to put in place truly independent third-party dispute resolution systems, or risk that people will not come. Putting in place independent dispute resolution systems then opens (or rather expands) the existing market for dispute resolution in which new and better entrepreneurs will enter and compete. More competition will lead to unresting efforts to safeguard any given company’s reputation as a fair and just dispute service provider. All of this means that, thanks simply to a good incentive structure, Free Cities can lead the world into a more peaceful coexistence among people. Finally, given that these dispute resolution providers must operate for profit and will be incentivized to provide a just outcome, they will be much less interested in punishment for punishment’s sake and more interested in providing a just and stable environment in which all parties know they will have their rights and obligations taken seriously and in accordance which the common understanding of the law. This will lead to more peaceful resolutions and away from punitive judgments. Finally, Free Cities are extremely well equipped to promote a more peaceful world because they will not be interested in conquest but rather in providing a stable and profitable living situation for resident customers. War, particularly in its aggressive manifestations, is deeply unprofitable, which is why governments generally go into debt to fight wars and often abandon hard money standards in order to finance these destructive activities. Free Cities cannot engage in venture warfare because it is simply too expensive and not in the interest of the Free City Operator. As more people move to Free Cities which must compete for residents, resources will be drained from the traditional states, leading to less ability to go abroad in search of enemies. As we have seen, when interpreting peace to mean the absence of conflict, Free Cities are a powerful tool in the quest to achieve a more peaceful and prosperous world. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in December 2022. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # Intentional Communities: De Facto Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/intentional-communities-de-facto-free-cities Published: 2023-02-13 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: intentional-communities As the world grows increasingly centralized and each little part of life seems more and more micromanaged from above, the desire for intentional living is a deeply understandable response. It offers a way to opt out — to decentralize society by associating with the people you like and consciously choosing the things you do and the places you visit. In this time of year full of new goals and ambitions, living intentionally can be a personal chance to reconnect in a world of increasing anonymity and alienation. Intentional living is a natural human evolution from the top-down mandates we increasingly live under. Choosing who you live with, where you live, and the sorts of activities you engage in allows you to escape many (if not most) of these burdensome incursions. Intentional communities represent one of the major manifestations of the idea of intentional living. In intentional communities, people often from many backgrounds and cultures come together, united by common views, interests, or beliefs, and voluntarily opt into living amongst one another. Intentional communities can be focused on the types of foods you eat, or the meditation or workout methods you practice. It can be focused on some combination of political views, religious views, and more. It can also revolve around your interests and hobbies, such as examples of hiking-focused intentional communities, firearm-bearing communities, horseback-riding communities, and many others. While some of these focal points might seem trivial at first glance, sharing them with others can bring joy, happiness, and meaning to many people’s lives. Intentional communities come in all shapes and sizes but each and every one of them is an expression of an effort to live a more determined life, an effort to live rather than just survive. Intentional living is a manifestation of the ambition of using your scarcest resource — your time on this Earth — in the most meaningful way possible. Making the most of this resource means living a life well lived. Living in an intentional community allows you to easily live an intentional life. If you already live in a community of people that promote homeschooling and you regularly see moms with kids in tow going on a field trip into the woods, this assists your own ability to do something similar or maybe create a homeschool crew that occasionally intermingles. On the other hand, if homeschooling isn’t your thing, maybe you are an artist, and living in an art-centered intentional community allows you to realize your own potential. Regardless of your personal situation and what living intentionally means for you, intentional communities can help push you further along the path toward your greater goals. Beyond simply being closer to people that share views and interests with you, intentional communities provide another benefit that can maximize your ability to live intentionally. When you live with people that share your values, you don’t have to spend nearly as much time worrying about potential disputes, disagreements, and other types of social friction. When human beings are in sync and view each other with respect, a higher quality of life can be attained than would otherwise be possible. Where there is respect and alignment of values, it is less necessary to keep looking over your shoulder and protecting your own interests from outside threats. While this is often necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of yourself and your family, such concerns ultimately subtract from the time, effort, and energy you can put towards other things. The more time you have to spend thinking about how a nearby neighbor might harm you or your property, the less time you can spend with your family or doing the things you love. What is more, avoiding such preoccupations will allow your time-well-spent to be more calm and wholesome. Being present and intentional with your family or doing other valued activities infinitely improves a preoccupied experience. Intentional communities can create such an environment — where these immediate concerns are alleviated, or in some cases even removed altogether. Intentional communities create respect and trust as well as shared culture and values. These ideas are the foundation for living a life that can be focused on achieving what you want to achieve. By no means do intentional communities solve all problems. Nor do they make life simple or easy in every way. Rather, they have the potential to improve the foundations that allow you to live your life to the fullest, whatever that might mean for you specifically. Intentional living offers a different way of life. It makes possible more success and accomplishments and it also allows you to spend more time doing the things that matter most to you. Ultimately, intentional communities are about finding a place where you can feel the most comfortable and the most at home. At the Free Cities Foundation, we are often focused on cities that achieve some level of legal autonomy or have systems and structures in place that are unusual in our world. While intentional communities do not generally obtain particularly far-reaching de jure autonomy, the idea of living amongst people that you align with, people you trust, people that will not turn to the long arm of the state at a moment’s notice, allows you to achieve de facto freedom. And the foremost reason we at the Free Cities Foundation promote jurisdictions with de jure autonomy is that such places can create an environment of liberty. If stable and lasting liberty is achieved through intentional communities, we are following the true north star of our organization. That is why intentional communities play an important role among the models our Foundation promotes. I wish you a year full of newfound freedom. Let intentional living flourish in 2023. This blog post is an amended version of an article originally published in Escape Artist Insiders Magazine in February 2023. Visit their website for more articles, information and advice on becoming an expat or digital nomad. --- # Live More Freely in Latin America URL: https://free-cities.org/live-more-freely-in-latin-america Published: 2023-05-08 Author: Michael Cobb Category: Blog Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. The Free Cities Foundation is taking part in ECI Development’s affiliate program and may earn a commission on property sales generated by the affiliate link included in this article. As humans, it’s normal to want a perfect solution. But rarely is this possible. Life is almost always about compromise, trade-offs, and taking the best opportunity provided in the moment. This is also true when looking for a place to call home too. There is never going to be a perfect location. But finding a place where you can enjoy significantly more freedom than your current location is almost always a better alternative… if you can find it. But when you can, a freer lifestyle is the result. ECI Development is a company that specializes in the development of residential communities in Latin America. While these communities do not perfectly fit the description of a “Free Private City,” there are similarities between the two models. Those folks who have settled into a community like Gran Pacifica, for example, have found a home offering a unique opportunity to live in a beautiful and secure environment while enjoying a range of amenities and services, with more freedom and greater flexibility in how they live, work, and play. For many people today, Gran Pacifica is also a tremendous Plan B location. Not far from Managua, the capital of Nicaragua, Gran Pacifica is a wonderful village by the sea with over 3.5 miles of pristine beach. Nine holes of golf are in place, as are tennis courts, a clubhouse, two restaurants, a gym, a disc golf course, and community gardens. The miles of oceanfront provide swimming beaches and two world-class surf breaks, one of them the world-famous Meatgrinder. Residents and guests are finding a place to enjoy as a vacation destination, but far more important, many are finding a place to call home. A home in a community with a focus on agro-resilience and long-term planning. Over 130 homes are built. Another 80 homes are 100% off the grid, solar powered, and are under construction right now. Home is where the heart is, they say. At the heart of Gran Pacifica is a group of property owners who have found a freer life, organic food, hormone-free animal products, clean air, and less stress. Cattle, horses, honeybees, teak forests, and fruit orchards all exist on the property. The natural environment provides trails for hiking, biking, and horseback riding. A sea turtle rescue program saves thousands of baby turtles every year. More importantly, property owners at Gran Pacifica have found community. They freely express themselves to neighbors. They enjoy a circle of friends who understand them and where they come from philosophically. These elements are profoundly meaningful and produce the highest quality of life. But these types of communities don’t happen by accident. They are intentionally created. The Free Cities Foundation works to empower freedom-oriented intentional communities and Gran Pacifica is an example of an intentional community model that clearly works. Let’s compare ECI Development’s communities with the Free Private City model. They both offer residents from abroad the opportunity to live in a location with a favorable legal and regulatory framework. Free Private Cities have their own systems that are separate from the surrounding country. ECI Development’s communities are in countries such as Belize and Nicaragua, which already offer favorable tax and business regulations. While not the same thing, a less restrictive and lower tax environment is a step in the right direction. Both models emphasize the importance of a written contract between the residents and the operating company. In a Free Private City, each resident signs a “Citizen Contract” that outlines the rights and obligations of both parties, as well as the services and fees that are provided by the operating company. In the case of ECI Development’s communities, residents sign a contract that outlines the terms of their purchase or lease, as well as any services or amenities that are included. One key difference between the two models is that ECI Development’s communities are not fully autonomous and are subject to the laws and regulations of the surrounding country. Another important difference is in the business model. Free Private Cities are run by an operating company as a for-profit business, and residents pay a fixed fee in exchange for the protection of life, liberty, and property. Since ECI Development’s communities are not legally autonomous, this would not apply to them. ECI Development does make a profit from the sale or lease of the properties, but then transfers operational elements to the Property Owners Association. Their focus is primarily on providing a high-quality living environment for the residents and providing functions and residential services that a municipality would normally provide in many countries. For individuals looking at moving to a freer location, outside their home country, a word of caution is in order. Freedom and personal responsibility are two sides of the same coin. Due diligence is yours to perform. Make sure you have the right tools to do that job well. The Consumer Resource Guide for Property Ownership Overseas is just that tool. Download your complimentary copy here. If you’d like to learn more about how you can live in a community like Gran Pacifica, let us know. New neighborhoods, including a Low-EMF zone, are in the works. A health and fitness center on the beach is being planned. Agro-resiliency awareness and an additional focus on renewable energy are at the forefront, providing sustainable food and energy systems for the future. Come for a visit. Short-term and long-term rentals make it easy to test drive the community and see if it’s a good fit for you. Get in touch and we’ll see you soon! --- # Intentional Communities: An Introduction URL: https://free-cities.org/intentional-communities-an-introduction Published: 2023-05-22 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: intentional-communities Choose your preferred language English Deutsch Português Español Français Italiano What Are Intentional Communities An intentional community is, in the words of G. Kozeny, “a group of people who have chosen to live together with a common purpose, working cooperatively to create a lifestyle that reflects their shared core values.” Such shared values might be social, political, religious, or spiritual. Intentional communities take shape within existing nation-states and have little or no formal legal autonomy. However, their aim often is to represent a grassroots bid for self-determination or de-facto autonomy. These communities are sometimes created to escape the modern city’s anonymity or promote close relationships and a common identity. Shared values within such a community produce a sense of unity and purpose. In addition, since residents of intentional communities tend to seek out people with the same values, the communities are less prone to conflict. Local governance does not have to compromise between many different groups and preferences. Intentional communities are often not necessarily explicitly political in their goals. They don’t tend to challenge their host state’s sovereignty or try to win significant concessions from it. Instead, community rules, at least on paper, tend to exist “on top of” the laws and regulations of the state. As a result, the experience of living inside such a community can be very different than living outside. An Escape from Unwanted Rules Although an intentional community may not enjoy formal autonomy, it can have “community rules” enforced by reputation and social consensus rather than physical force. This makes such communities attractive relocation destinations for those dissatisfied with the political or social status quo where they live. Historically, intentional communities have usually been centered around ideas such as environmental friendliness and living in more harmony with nature, communal living and ownership, shared faith, and local self-sufficiency. In these forms, intentional communities have a rich history going back decades or even centuries — since the very beginning of the nation-state as the dominant political unit. Varying Levels of Stability and Autonomy Intentional communities can obtain varying degrees of autonomy. The simplest form of intentional community is a “sympathy settlement” of like-minded people living close to each other. Such settlements may be either temporary or permanent and may be almost fully interconnected with the rest of society. We can see such examples of sympathy settlements in neighborhoods within many major cities where immigrants of the same background are concentrated and form explicit local communities, such as Chinatowns or Little Italies. However, sympathy settlements can take many different forms. A more advanced form of intentional community is an “organized settlement.” The key distinguishing feature of the settlement is a document where the local “rules of living together” are codified. These districts can be motivated by the desire of the residents to move to a particular geographic location. They often want higher levels of internal security, better environmental protection, or specific local communal services. Many organized settlements take the form of a membership organization — an arrangement that makes them legally legible to the outside world. Finally, the most comprehensive form of the intentional community can be described as a “private settlement.” Although located within a sovereign state, this kind of settlement has an undisputed subsidiary boundary within that state. Moreover, it may have institutions that supplement or even supplant the operation of usual state agencies. Amish villages in the US represent an example of private settlement communities. These communities provide their own security, dispute resolution systems, schools, and other services typically provided by the state. Jewish intentional communities called Kibbutzim, both in Israel and around the world, are another famous example. Even if centered around religion, these communities may engage in politics to maintain good relations with local government administrations. This process can support the community’s de-facto partial autonomy. A History of Success These different forms of intentional communities share – and offer prospective members – a “society within a society.” Shared values enable inhabitants to live under a set of rules that are closer to their hearts. For someone whose personal values resonate with those of an intentional community, relocating may be an attractive path to living one’s best, freest, and most fulfilling life. There are thousands of intentional communities around the world, centered around an incredibly diverse range of people. Most of them have been founded on left-wing, socialist, or environmentalist ideals. In a world where it is common to engage in politics to try and steer the whole society one way or the other whether people wish to or not, intentional communities are the shining beacons of the alternative — of building something local, real, and successful instead. Many intentional communities have been created as the so-called “utopian societies” or “utopian experiments”, uniting those who believed in radical or revolutionary ideas. Plenty of these experiments have proven that their respective alternative political and social arrangements can function well among like-minded, voluntarily participating members. These intentional communities are living examples of the power of common goals and shared visions. At the Free Cities Foundation, we aim to highlight the rich history of past and present intentional communities. They represent grassroots attempts to create Free Cities not through legal and political negotiations but through lived experience and de-facto self-governance. The Foundation aims to work with willing intentional communities to help them improve their legal standing and chances of long-term success. If any intentional community is willing to take the next logical step in its development to become a legally recognized Special Administrative Zone with explicit regulatory concessions, this can enable the community to further grow and prosper with a sense of security and permanency. We can provide the knowledge and expertise necessary to engage in such negotiations. To find out more about specific international communities, visit the Foundation for Intentional Community — a worldwide intentional communities hub and directory. --- # Strategies for Liberty: Free Cities & Bitcoin by Alexander D. Voss – Out Now! URL: https://free-cities.org/strategies-for-liberty-free-cities-bitcoin-out-now Published: 2023-10-16 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Topics: free-private-cities, bitcoin-and-free-cities Strategies for Liberty Free Cities & Bitcoin Alexander D. Voss The Free Cities Foundation is proud be publishing Alexander D. Voss’ new book Strategies for Liberty: Free Cities & Bitcoin. Though both of these topics – Free Cities and Bitcoin – have been extensively covered on their own, this book is the first systematic exploration of the interplay between the two. It lays out how important synergies between Free Cities and Bitcoin can make it easier for us to achieve a freer future. Much ink has been spilt on why to strive for liberty. Nevertheless, the question of how best to do it has not been conclusively answered. Strategies for Liberty is a hard-hitting contribution to the discussion. Strongly practical, it strictly deals with the real world rather than elusive theories, serving as a valuable playbook and guidance for Free Cities and Bitcoin entrepreneurs. Titus Gebel Author, ‘Free Private Cities’ As the author and creator of Free Private Cities (FPCs), I’ve long championed the idea that FPCs could serve as the future of governance creating the market for living together. ‘Strategies for Liberty”: Free Cities and Bitcoin’ by my friend and colleague Alex Voss, takes this concept and pairs it expertly with the transformative power of Bitcoin. In particular, Bitcoin serves to limit the boom-and-bust cycle and disincentivize attacks against the residents and companies in the FPC. Finally, Bitcoin offers a permissionless monetary network allowing FPCs to trade globally through its permissionless network.This book is a must-read for anyone who sees the synergy between financial sovereignty and localized, autonomous and contractual governance as the next frontier for individual liberty. Saifedean Ammous Author, ‘The Bitcoin Standard’ Money, banking, security, and public infrastructure are services widely viewed as the natural prerogative of state monopoly provision. Not coincidentally, they are also some of the most dysfunctional areas of modern life and the source of much of the world’s conflicts and suffering. A growing number of people are realizing that it doesn’t have to be this way, and that free enterprise and voluntary exchange can provide these things far more effectively and at a fraction of the cost. In this compelling read, Alex Voss makes the case for why free market money and free market cities can revolutionize our world in the twenty-first century to the benefit of all. Mikkel Thorup The world’s leading expat consultant As the world’s leading expat consultant who’s navigated the complexities of global governance and financial systems for over 2 decades, I’ve seen firsthand the limitations imposed on personal and economic freedom by our current system.‘Strategies for Liberty: Free Cities and Bitcoin’ is a revelation, a game-changing playbook for anyone who’s ever considered there must be a better way to live freely in today’s world.In these pages my friend, Alex Voss, expertly dissects two powerful mechanisms that can serve as alternatives to traditional systems of governance and finance—Bitcoin and Free Cities.I’ve been around the globe and have seen the flaws in centralized monetary policy; Bitcoin is posed to disrupt that space, giving power back to the individual. In a similar vein, the book explores the potential of Free Cities—localized communities operating with private contractual governance—as living labs for innovation and liberty.Whether you’re contemplating an expatriate life or are already living one, whether you are a Bitcoin enthusiast or a skeptic, this book offers actionable insights that could redefine your understanding of freedom.‘Strategies for Liberty: Free Cities and Bitcoin’ doesn’t just theorize; it provides a pragmatic pathway for anyone looking to escape the limitations of conventional systems.This book is an invaluable resource for maximizing both financial freedom and quality of life in an ever-complicated world. Andreas Kohl Entrepreneur and Bitcoin evangelist Berkshire Hathaway vice chairman Charlie Munger famously said “Show me the incentive, and I will show you the outcome.”Although some of the ideas exposed here may be slightly beyond Munger’s grasp (as well as perhaps a little misaligned with his personal incentives), Strategies for Liberty is a great handbook on both Bitcoin and Titus Gebel’s Free Private Cities precisely because it paints a clear and concise picture of the complex incentive structures underlying both, and in contrast with the misaligned incentives that plague contemporary models of governance and money.Within this compendium lies both the ideal blueprint for Nayib Bukele’s promised Bitcoin City in El Salvador, as well as a much greater vision for a world that will become freer and more prosperous one city at a time, as well as one individual at a time.Seeing as every single day more and more people and businesses all over the world perform the revolutionary, yet deeply personal acts of moving to freer jurisdictions or being “orange-pilled” and adopting the Bitcoin Standard, these two are unquestionably some of the most relevant and exciting strategies that are available to us today as seekers of liberty, and in the overlap between the two lie some incredible and as-yet-unexplored opportunities. Peter Young Managing Director, Free Cities Foundation Strategies for Liberty is an engaging exploration of two important tools for advancing liberty: Bitcoin and Free Cities. Voss paints a compelling picture of a world where a network of freely cooperating Free Cities is able to flourish and achieve economic stability by having Bitcoin serve as a monetary base layer.The book offers introductions to Free Cities and Bitcoin, addresses common questions, and explores the fascinating interplay between the two topics. This includes a compelling argument for how the use of Bitcoin by Free Cities could mitigate the boom-bust cycles that have long plagued modern economies.As the managing director of the Free Cities Foundation and a consultant for Bitcoin firms, I have long seen the Bitcoin and Free Cities movements as complementary. By examining these two topics in tandem, “Strategies for Liberty” makes an important contribution to those interested in building prosperous societies where individual rights are upheld. --- # The Proprietary State – Available Now on Amazon URL: https://free-cities.org/the-proprietary-state Published: 2025-05-19 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance “Kerpestein’s book is one of the most interesting works in economics, providing a potential blueprint for how territorial governance may be provided in the not too distant future.”Erick Brimen, founder & CEO of Próspera “An important contribution to the discussion of new systems of governance.”Titus Gebel, founder & CEO of Tipolis and author of Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete For You What if a government takes the form of a for-profit corporation? Forget the usual debates about left versus right. The Proprietary State throws a curveball into the entire political landscape. It dares to ask: what if we privatised the very act of ruling? Imagine a government with shareholders instead of voters, pursuing profit. The book dives deep into this radical idea, dissecting the potential boons and pitfalls of a ‘proprietary government’ – a government driven by profit motives, accountable to investors instead of voters. Could this seemingly extreme idea actually be a powerful engine for progress, capable of lifting millions out of poverty? The book argues it could, but it does not shy away from the inherent dangers. How do you ensure that a profit-maximising government treats its subjects like valued customers, not just cattle to be exploited? This book is not for those who prefer comfortable certainties. It will challenge your deepest assumptions about economics and political theory, forcing you to confront a truly novel vision of governance. The Proprietary State is a comprehensive theory of the proprietary government and a radical revision of established economic theory. It is a must-read for economists and political scientists. From Theory to Theory Explaining the proprietary government, its advantages and its disadvantages has required a radical revision of established economic theory. First, The Proprietary State starts with one definition, the definition of ‘cooperation’. Moving beyond traditional notions of ‘trade’ and ‘exchange’, the book establishes ‘cooperation’ as the fundamental building block of economic theory, leading to profound implications for our understanding of contracts, enforcement, and the necessity of government itself. Cooperation is a much larger and more definite category of action than trade and exchange, and the reader will see the problems with the latter categories. Along the way, the book challenges both mainstream and Austrian economic theories while shattering fundamental ideas in libertarian thought, such as the idea that a government’s use of force necessarily violates our consent or that our subordination to a government is involuntary. How would a proprietary government behave? The answer to this question is not so simple. The baker and the supermarket cannot force people to be their customers, but a government can do so at gunpoint. A government can treat its subjects like cattle instead of customers. And history shows that when people get the opportunity to do so, some will take it up. Under what conditions, then, can a government only maximise profit by best satisfying the preferences of the people it governs? That is, under what conditions is there ‘consumer sovereignty’ over governments? In this context, we could call such consumer sovereignty ‘proprietary democracy’. The book explains how consumer sovereignty, contrary to what many economists believe, is inevitably limited. To this end, it contains a groundbreaking theory of entrepreneurship that, like the theory of cooperation, seriously challenges both mainstream and Austrian theories. There are ways for entrepreneurs to benefit from acting at the expense of those they serve. Even more so, such courses of action are also available to governments. To ensure that governments treat their subjects like customers instead of cattle, certain institutions must be created. As the reader will discover, proprietary governance has unique benefits. By their nature, all representative democracies have certain problems and inefficiencies that do not exist in the proprietary system, such as bureaucratic bloat, clientelism and corruption. If the right institutions are created, we can get the benefits of proprietary governance without many of the drawbacks. The Proprietary State explains how. Besides, representative democracy has its own unique benefits. The book explains how to create a ‘hybrid system’ to get the best of both worlds. Imagine a world wherein profit-driven and representative systems work together, creating a powerful synergy that could revolutionize governance as we know it. As the book connects new economic theories to explain the reader everything about the proprietary government, it casts novel perspectives on old and established theories and ideas. It takes a new perspective on public choice theory, explaining why the problems of public choice only apply to democratic governments and why privatising jurisdictions solves these problems. It also shatters Spencer Heath’s idea of proprietary administration, explaining how it cannot efficiently exist at scale. By solving the inherent problem in Heathian proprietary administration, we arrive at proprietary governance. A ‘Proprietarian’ Revolution? This book is not just a theoretical exercise. And, as the reader will discover, proprietary governance is not new at all. The Proprietary State invites you to become a ‘proprietarian’, a term that emerged centuries ago when proprietary governments ruled much of the new world. But this time, proprietary governance will have a different and potentially much more significant role. In recent years, it has re-emerged from obscurity. Could this be the dawn of a new era in political systems? If we take the right steps, a world where millions, if not billions, can escape oppression and fulfill their economic potential is within reach. Prepare to have your assumptions shattered and your view of politics changed fundamentally. About the Author Andries Kerpestein is an economist with a special focus on improving institutions. Besides his work in the special jurisdiction sector, he works to improve institutions in higher education, driven by the conviction that proprietary institutions should play a bigger role in these sectors. Kerpestein believes that institutions have the power to make or break societies, and that reform is urgent. --- # Bringing Free Cities to Established (But Stagnating) Democracies, Starting from Britain URL: https://free-cities.org/bringing-free-cities-to-established-but-stagnating-democracies-starting-from-britain Published: 2025-03-31 Author: Vera Kichanova Category: Blog Topics: private-governance Around the world, a quiet revolution is reshaping how we build and govern cities. From private blockchain in Próspera to the car-free streets of Lavasa, new urban experiments are challenging the old ways — and a growing number of pioneers are voting with their feet. Maybe you’re even browsing the Free Communities Directory right now, wondering where your next home might be. But what if you’re not ready to move to a tropical island, a farming community, or an off-grid libertarian enclave? What if you’re seasick and can’t imagine life on a seastead? If wrestling with the Croatian police like Liberlanders is not your idea of fun? What if you’d rather live in a place where you can visit a theatre, order your favourite coffee, and sink a pint in a pub older than your grandparents—is there still hope? Apparently so. And I make that case in my new paper for the Institute of Economic Affairs: Beyond Freeports: Revitalising Britain with Self-Governing Cities. The truth is, most countries have some framework for special jurisdictions — free zones, freeports, foreign trade zones, you name it. But the problem is, in most cases, these policies are far too tame. In the UK, for that matter, the post-Brexit freeports strategy promised a great revival but, in practice, delivered little beyond bureaucratic relabelling. The policy leaned heavily on reviving “proud industrial heritage” and “levelling up” areas that had “historically missed out” — but it lacked the deregulatory agenda and visionary scope to make a real difference. And yet, Britain — and other legacy democracies to a varying extent — might be more promising candidates for bold reforms than it appears. Far from being a lost cause, they hold the institutional stability and legal foundations that, if paired with a bit of political courage, could make room for truly transformative experiments. A discussion about my IEA publication with Hon. Steve Baker, former UK government minister, and Jason Cozens on “The Resilient Compass” podcast Britain is the country that invented urban self-governance — from the medieval City of London, with its own police force and Lord Mayor, to the privately built model towns of the Industrial Revolution, such as Port Sunlight, Saltaire, and Bournville. It gave rise to Hong Kong’s extraordinary success abroad and transformed derelict docks at home into Canary Wharf — a global financial hub created through exceptional planning autonomy. Today, special zones in Dubai and Qatar adopt English common law to attract investment, and even Próspera in Honduras — the boldest charter city project to date — is grounded in British legal tradition. Part of what I explore in the IEA paper is how Britain’s legacy of urban self-governance can be reclaimed — not just exported. It’s not about nostalgia; it’s about recognising that Britain’s own toolkit includes the building blocks of a new, decentralised urban renaissance. And while the UK holds a particularly rich tradition in this regard, many of the same principles — from common law to municipal autonomy — can be found, and revived, across other legacy democracies too. The paper also looks at case studies from across time and continents — from the Hanseatic League to emerging charter cities — showing how decentralised governance has, time and again, unlocked prosperity. Today, self-governing regions are on the rise in emerging markets, often built on shaky foundations. But what if legacy democracies joined the competition too — not by accident, but by design? Here’s what I call the catch-22 of Free Cities: The places most open to experimentation often lack the institutional stability to support it. Meanwhile, in places with a strong rule of law — like the UK, EU, or Canada — the political space for innovation is narrow. Honduras has room to manoeuvre but not always the institutional credibility to retain investors. Britain has the institutions — democracy, the rule of law, protected property rights — but barely uses them to empower bottom-up innovation. So how do we break this cycle? The answer is right in front of us: building stable institutions may take centuries, but unleashing creativity doesn’t — it’s the natural state of human society when freed from unnecessary constraints. My proposal: we start with incremental, locally anchored experiments in self-governance. We identify the legal and regulatory carve-outs that already exist — underused SEZs, land-use flexibility, new towns policy, development corporations — and reimagine them as platforms for competitive governance. The goal isn’t utopia. It’s proof of concept. One example of where self-governing cities could help is the UK’s chronic housing shortage. A rigid planning system — familiar in many countries — makes it difficult to build homes where jobs are. Instead of funnelling money into industrial infrastructure that may soon be obsolete, as freeports do, we should enable locally led experiments in planning reform. Self-governing zones could trial flexible policies — from density bonuses to streamlined approvals — to demonstrate what works, reduce NIMBY resistance, and open the door to wider change. You don’t need to move to a remote island to take part in the Free Cities revolution. Nor do you need to start from scratch on empty land. Real change can begin in places with existing infrastructure, institutions — and just enough room to do things differently. That’s the argument at the heart of Beyond Freeports: the most promising frontiers for urban innovation might not lie at the fringes, but in the overlooked flexibilities of mature democracies. If we can reclaim even a chunk of local autonomy — to test new rules, trial better planning, break out of the one-size-fits-all governance model — we might surprise ourselves with how much is still possible. Sometimes, the future of freedom isn’t about escape. It’s about re-entry. --- # Free Cities Updates: Guantánamo Bay Book, US Free Cities Meetup, Startup Week in Próspera URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-newsletter-51 Published: 2026-07-01 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News This edition covers our upcoming events in Próspera and Las Vegas, a new book making the case for a Free City at Guantánamo Bay, and an anonymous programmer working to build a second internet… on bitcoin nodes. The Free Cities Conference comes to Próspera this September Free Cities Foundation Chairman, Titus Gebel The 2026 Free Cities Conference takes place in Próspera, Roatán from September 3 to 6—the first time the event has been held inside a real, functioning Free City. This year’s theme is “Step Inside”: attendees will walk the streets of Próspera—recently named the world’s freest jurisdiction by the Staatenlos Freedom Ranking—and meet the entrepreneurs and residents who have built it. For those who want to experience two Free Cities in one trip, an optional Ciudad Morazán excursion is also available on September 2. (Sign up here: morazanexcursion.carrd.co.) The program will feature keynotes from industry titans including Titus Gebel, Erick Brimen, Patri Friedman, and Mark Lutter. Alongside the Honduran zones where the event is hosted, attendees will get to hear from other leading Free City projects from across the world, including Veritas Villages in Central America, CryptoCity in Venezuela, Meridia in Texas, and the New Hampshire Free State Project. Don’t miss Joe Quirk’s 2026 keynote on how to make seasteads legal Seasteading will also feature prominently: Joe Quirk, Mason, Chad Elwartowski, and Mitchell Suchner will bring the latest updates from across the industry, and maritime lawyers will join to discuss how seasteads could be made legal and internationally protected. There will also be sessions from world-leading experts on expat life and flag theory including Mikkel Thorup, Francisco Litvay, Rafael Lima, and Chris Dabiri. Mikkel Thorup will join us again in 2026. Optional pre-conference activities—site tours, scuba diving, a boat tour, beach volleyball, and golf—are available from September 1 to 3. And it is worth remembering that the conference itself takes place on the beautiful tropical island of Roatán: sun, beaches, outstanding food and drink, and a genuine taste of island life are all part of the package. Tickets start at $259 and are available at freecitiesconference.com. Recently released images of new construction underway in Próspera Infinita Startup Week: make a week of it inside Próspera Our friends at Infinita—a Próspera-based startup hub—are arranging Infinita Startup Week on the days either side of the main conference, and it is well worth adding to your trip. For those who want an extended stay and a deeper look at what makes Próspera tick, from its legal environment to its startup culture, this is the event for you. Activities run August 31 to September 3 and again on September 6 and 7, wrapping neatly around the conference itself. The week features workshops, founder sessions, ecosystem tours, and community events, all set inside Próspera—designed for founders, investors, and anyone curious about what it actually looks like to operate inside one of the world’s most advanced jurisdictions. Tickets start from $400. Full details at freecitiesconference.com/infinita-week. Note: Infinita Startup Week is an independently organized event. Tickets to the Free Cities Conference are purchased separately. First U.S. meetup: Las Vegas, July 10 The Free Cities Foundation is hosting its first-ever in-person meetup in the United States next Friday, July 10, at The Front Yard in Las Vegas (8:30–10:30 PM). Organized by Mailyn Salabarria, the evening will bring together entrepreneurs, investors, and anyone curious about the future of governance—with the launch of A Country That Builds providing a fitting centerpiece for the conversation. Admission is free, but places are limited and advance registration is required. Register here. Alex Voss makes the case for a Free City at Guantánamo Bay Guantánamo Bay carries strong associations, but Alex Voss thinks its future could look very different from its past. In A Country That Builds, he argues that the base’s largely idle landmass represents a genuine opportunity: a Free City—low-tax, lightly regulated, governed under American rule of law—ninety miles from Florida. Drawing on the histories of Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai, and other jurisdictions that turned overlooked or contested coastlines into places people actually want to live and work, Voss makes the case that America can do something similar with a site that has, so far, mostly been a liability. Pick up a copy here. Free Cities Podcast: mesh networks, people problems & the end of the progressive era The Free Cities Podcast covers the people, projects, and arguments that matter to the Free Cities community. Our three most recent episodes are worth your time. The standout is Episode 188, featuring Polycarp Nakamoto—the anonymous figure behind Lab 484, a research lab and cluster of startups in Austin, Texas building what he calls Web 5: a second internet running peer-to-peer on bitcoin nodes, owned by nobody and run by everybody. Timothy visits Poly’s community compound to explore whether it is possible to rebuild the internet from scratch on what Poly considers the only genuinely decentralized digital infrastructure we have. Episode 187 brings in Daniel Thompson of Noma Collective, who argues that the real bottleneck facing new city projects is neither law nor land, but people—specifically families, whom he sees as the missing key to achieving critical mass. Episode 186 features a frank conversation with Eric Kaufmann, professor of politics at the University of Buckingham and author of Taboo, on race, identity, and why he believes the progressive era has already peaked. Follow the Free Cities Podcast at fountain.fm/show/xudG4tsYH5TimGLfAmqn. Final thoughts If you enjoyed this newsletter, then there has never been a better time to move from reading about Free Cities to experiencing one firsthand. We hope that you’ll join us in Próspera this September to see the real thing. Tickets available at freecitiesconference.com. Your Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Free Cities News & Updates – December 2024 URL: https://free-cities.org/news-dec-2024 Published: 2024-12-16 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan, https://free-cities.org/projects/sark As 2024 draws to a close, we reflect on a year defined by both exciting progress and notable challenges. From the establishment of new Free City projects to the continued growth of our conference, the momentum has been inspiring. However, the Free Cities movement has also faced setbacks, including recent challenges in Honduras and the Isle of Sark, serving as a reminder that the road to greater freedom isn’t always smooth. Will the ZEDEs Survive? On September 20th, the Honduran Supreme Court declared the country’s Zones for Economic Development and Employment (ZEDEs) unconstitutional. In a highly controversial move, the court ruled that its judgment would apply retroactively, nullifying agreements that have provided guarantees to operational ZEDEs—including Próspera and Ciudad Morazán—for at least 50 years. Próspera’s Technical Secretary, Jorge Colindres, has challenged the ruling, stating, “The Supreme Court does not have the power to declare a law unconstitutional with retroactive effect. This is the first time in Honduran history that this has happened.” Próspera has vowed to contest the decision and is already garnering bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress for its position, citing potential violations of the CAFTA-DR Free Trade Agreement, to which the U.S. is a signatory. Próspera CEO Eric Brimen described the ruling as “a significant blow to our mission” but reaffirmed the organization’s commitment to its work and to challenging the legality of the decision. At our recent Liberty in Our Lifetime conference, keynote speakers Massimo Mazzone, founder of Ciudad Morazán, and co-founder of Próspera, Gabriel Delgado, shared their insights on what this ruling means for the future of ZEDEs. Próspera ZEDE Technical Secretary Jorge Colindres takes part in a debate on legality of the Supreme Court ruling £30m Sark Property Bid Unable to Move Forward… for Now In previous newsletters, we shared news of a property bid led by German investor Swen Lorenz to acquire real estate amounting to 20% of the land area of Sark. The bid aimed to revitalise the self-governing island’s economy and had been followed closely by liberty-minded people interested in moving to light-touch government jurisdictions. After successfully providing £30m, Swen was unfortunately unable to agree on a sale price with the Barclay Estate, which owns the property portfolio. He recently announced publicly that he cannot move forward with the project unless this changes. Meanwhile, reports of the Barclay family’s financial troubles persist, with The Telegraph revealing that they withdrew over £100m in dividends from Very Group in 2022 to address unpaid debt totalling £1.3bn. Our team asked Swen about the prospects of revisiting the bid in the future, and he commented: “A potential renewed bid for the portfolio would be so much easier to organise than the first bid. We have the preparatory work over the past three years, and many of our financial backers told us out of their own initiative that they would back us again. However, we are now going to wait and see what 2025 brings for the financial situation of the Barclay family and re-evaluate matters in early 2026.” You can read Swen’s full account of the outcome here. Swen Lorenz and Seigneur of Sark Christopher Beaumont presenting at Liberty in Our Lifetime Conference 2023 Thames Freeport Wins Rising Star Award Thames Freeport has been named FDI Magazine’s global leading “Rising Star Zone,” an award that acknowledges its potential as an emerging economic hub. Although still under construction, the Freeport has made notable progress, attracting companies like Ranson Group and DHL Supply Chain while investing in infrastructure such as 5G technology and educational partnerships. This development is relevant to the Free Cities movement, as Ivan Ko, CEO of Victoria Harbour Group and a supporter of Free Cities principles, is partnering with Thames Freeport to develop a new “21st-Century City”. Ivan outlined his vision for this collaboration at the recent Liberty in Our Lifetime conference, highlighting the Freeport’s strategic location and potential as a center for innovation. Ivan Ko speaking at Liberty in Our Lifetime Conference 2024 Liberty in Our Lifetime: Help Us Bring Back the Free Cities Conference in 2025! Our 2024 Liberty in Our Lifetime conference was a memorable event, welcoming 325 attendees from over 40 countries to Prague and showcasing 23 Free City projects—our most extensive lineup yet. We love hosting this event but organizing the conference is a big undertaking for the Free Cities Foundation team, when resources are limited. That’s why, at this year’s conference, we announced that we would be taking a break from hosting an in-person event in 2025. In response to this announcement, we received overwhelming support from attendees urging us to reconsider. Several generous individuals offered to fund some of the logistical support we need, setting us on the path to making another in-person conference in 2025 feasible. To date, we have raised $12,382 of the $20,000 we estimate is required to make the event happen. If you value our annual gathering and want to see it return next year, please consider contributing to our GoFundMe campaign. If we hit our target, we’ll be thrilled to welcome you all back to Prague for yet another record-breaking year. Group photo at Liberty in Our Lifetime Conference 2024 Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays As we approach the holiday season, we want to take a moment to thank you for your continued support throughout 2024. Despite some setbacks, this year has been one of growth and progress, and we couldn’t have done it without you. We look forward to continuing our work together in the new year and to bringing you even more updates, insights, and opportunities in 2025. Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays from all of us at the Free Cities Foundation! --- # Panagua: A New City-State Project at the Danube URL: https://free-cities.org/panagua-a-new-city-state-project-at-the-danube Published: 2024-07-15 Author: Jan-Olav Spiekermann Category: Blog Topics: micronations Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. Due to the breakup of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s and the following Serbo-Croation border dispute, there are four enclaves between Serbia and Croatia that neither belong to one or the other state. The most famous of these enclaves is Gornja Siga, which was claimed by Liberland in 2015 and has had an almost permanent presence of Liberland settlers since August 2023. The former Yugoslavian territory of Pocket 1 is located 5 kilometers north of Liberland and in July 2021, this pocket was claimed by Duckionary, an Austrian-based network state, and named Panagua. Duckionary is run by an Austrian non-profit association. It was established in 2018 by Arthur Constantin de Tourneau. The team consists of De Tourneau, who is the head of the project, and Jan-Olav Spiekermann, who serves as an advisor and security manager. Mr. Spiekermann is a trained security expert and has long been involved in the global Seasteading / Micronations / Free Cities / New Nations movement. He also has extensive experience in local politics. Since Duckionary’s founding in 2021, the team has built an active network state with an international community coming together during both online and real-life events. The network includes representatives in Austria, Germany, Portugal, and Mexico. Duckionary is well-connected in the global Micronational Community. In 2022, together with a Greek-German network state, Duckionary launched the Micro Euro Summit as a yearly conference for European micronations, network states, and new nation projects. The vision for Panagua is to become a small autonomous city-state, with a population of around 800, due to its limited territory. Its location on the Danube River lends itself to a port and an international business center in addition to residential and recreational areas. Panagua aims to be well connected to the surrounding Croatian and Serbian regions and contribute to their development. Although neither Croatia nor Serbia owns Pocket 1, the Republic of Croatia de facto controls the territory. The example of nearby Liberland has shown that without the cooperation of Croatia, any development is near impossible, as Croatian authorities will not let any serious activity or construction happen without their approval. As the saying goes, “Being right and having a right are two different things.” While Panagua recognizes Liberland’s claim to the territory of Gornja Siga, the approach of just asserting those rights has had limited success. Therefore, our approach will be to offer Croatia a deal to establish a de facto Special Economic Zone. We will show that Panagua is not a threat or liability for Croatia, but rather a great opportunity. Special Economic Zones have been shown and proven to be among the best tools to boost a country’s development, and the most successful SEZs are those with a large amount of autonomy, where “the lights don’t go out at 5 pm.” We will also liaise with the Serbian side, especially with local representatives in the Vojvodina region, to establish friendly relations with both our neighbors. At the moment, it is not clear if Panagua can be reached or entered without excessive interference from the Croatian authorities. To move ahead on this front, we are planning the first physical visit to Pocket 1 / Panagua in August 2025. We are also in talks with members of our community who would be open to becoming first settlers in 2025. The project is currently operated 100% on a volunteering basis. Therefore, any donations are very much welcome to help us move forward. The example of Liberland proves that charitable contributions can have a significant impact on the development of a project of this kind. If and once we succeed in striking a deal with the Croatian government, we plan to establish a way to invest in the project. Before such a deal is secured, any physical development on the site would be at risk of destruction by the police or Croatia’s state forestry service — as proved by last year’s events in Liberland — significantly increasing the uncertainty associated with any investments. The far-north-eastern region of Croatia, where Panagua is located, is in serious need of development. Unlike Croatia’s larger cities or the Adriatic coast popular with Central European tourists, there is little economic activity or growth in a rural region like the Danube border areas. Panagua can contribute to the region’s development in a meaningful way, just like SEZs around the world have brought jobs, talent, and growth not just to themselves but to their surrounding regions too. Panagua, as well as Liberland, are unique chances for Croatia to try out a method for economic development that has been well-proven in other parts of the world. Historically, the region has been plagued by many animosities stemming from aggressive nationalism, state communism, and other destructive ideologies, with each taking its toll on the local population and distrust toward foreigners as well as change in general, even change in a positive direction. With the Free City of Panagua, we plan to create a beacon of liberty, good governance, tolerance, and sustainable economic growth that will have a positive impact on the development of the Slavonia and Vojvodina regions, contributing to their international and inter-cultural relations in a positive and productive way. Panagua will hopefully also be an inspiration for the development of more Free Cities in former Yugoslavia, the Balkans, and Europe in general. 2025 will be a year of great challenges and great advances for Panagua. We invite you to join the project. Citizenship is free. New citizens, volunteers, and donors are very much welcome. --- # For years we talked about it. This September we step inside. URL: https://free-cities.org/for-years-we-talked-about-it-this-september-we-step-inside Published: 2026-03-26 Author: Natalie Danelishen Category: News About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Rather than our usual news roundup, we are dedicating this edition to telling you about the 2026 Free Cities Conference. September is approaching fast, and we want to make the case for why joining us in Próspera could be the most rewarding and memorable thing you do this year. Here is why we think you should be there… For the First Time: Step Inside For years, those of us who follow the Free Cities movement have talked, written, debated and dreamed. We have hosted our annual conference in European cities: Prague, Monaco, and Mülheim, Switzerland. We have watched from afar and followed legal battles, breakthroughs and setbacks from the comfortable distance of our home countries. This September, all of that changes. For the first time, the Free Cities Conference will take place inside a real, functioning Free City: Próspera, on the tropical island of Roatán, Honduras, from September 3–6, 2026. The theme for this year’s event is Step Inside, and we mean it literally. For those who want to go further still, we are also pleased to announce that we’re offering an optional day excursion to Ciudad Morazán, available on September 2 or 7. Where Próspera is attracting international investors and frontier businesses, Ciudad Morazán tells a very different but equally important story: a Free City designed to deliver safety, security and opportunity for ordinary blue-collar Honduran workers in an otherwise troubled part of the country. Tickets for the Morazán excursion cost $250 (plus flights) and are available from our online store here. Experience It, Don’t Just Study It There is a profound difference between hearing about a Free City and living inside one. Attendees of our conference will have the opportunity to stay within Próspera’s jurisdiction at Las Verandas, the award-winning luxury resort at Pristine Bay, or at Duna Tower in the commercial heart of Próspera’s Beta District. Waking up in a jurisdiction with its own legal system, tax code, and Bitcoin being used daily in local businesses is something no presentation can replicate. Due to capacity constraints, only around half of attendees will be able to stay on site. If you would like the full conference experience, we recommend booking soon. Secure your accommodation here. Conversations You Won’t Find Online A limited number of our main stage sessions will be shared publicly after the conference, but most won’t be. Certain discussions, on topics that our community needs to work through honestly and candidly, will be closed-door and available only to those physically present in Próspera. This is your chance to be inside those rooms and hear things that won’t make it into the public programme. Attendees will also be among the first to hear announcements about new Free City projects in regions where nothing of this kind has been announced before. For the deepest level of access, VIP dinner tickets place you directly at tables with speakers and investors, giving you the rare opportunity to engage with them openly and at length. Tickets available here. The Global Leaders, In One Place There will not be another event in 2026 where so many of the world’s leading figures in the Free Cities movement come together under one roof. Confirmed speakers include Titus Gebel, Tipolis CEO and inventor of the Free Private City concept; Erick Brimen, founder and CEO of Próspera; Niklas Anzinger of Infinita VC, the first venture capital fund based inside Próspera; and Oliver Porter, architect of Sandy Springs, Georgia, the first American city to outsource its municipal services to the private sector. Alongside them will be leading investors, frontier businesses in biotech and drone technology, and foremost academics in special economic zones. A Pivotal Moment to Visit For four years, Próspera operated under a government openly hostile to its existence. President Xiomara Castro’s LIBRE party came to power in 2021 on a platform of dismantling the ZEDE framework. What followed were years of legal battles and deep uncertainty. In November 2025, Hondurans returned to the polls. LIBRE came a distant third. Nasry “Tito” Asfura, a pro-investment conservative businessman, won the presidency and was sworn in on January 27, 2026. The mood in Próspera today is one of genuine optimism. Coming to the conference this September means experiencing this turning point firsthand. Honduran Election Candidates: Nasry “Tito” Asfura (National Party of Honduras), Salvador Nasralla (Liberal Party), Rixi Moncada (LIBRE Party) Roatán: A Setting to Match the Occasion Roatán sits alongside the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef, the second-largest coral reef system in the world. Alongside the core conference programme there will be opportunities to enjoy world-class diving, the Black Pearl championship golf course, kayaking, private beaches, and outstanding food and company every evening. Find out more on our schedule page here. Roatán’s Black Pearl Golf Course We Hope to See You There The Free Cities Conference has always been about the people who show up: the builders, the thinkers, the investors, the curious, and the conversations that happen between sessions, over dinner, and late into the evening. This year, for the first time, those conversations will happen inside one of the places we have all been working to build. Interest in Próspera has never been greater. The Yes Theory documentary released in 2025 surpassed three million views. Earlier this month, a German-language documentary on Próspera has already attracted over 400,000 views, making it likely the most watched German-language film on the project to date. People around the world are paying attention. This September is your chance to be there in person, at the moment when things are moving. Tickets start from $239, but prices will rise on April 30. We hope to see you in Roatán this September. freecitiesconference.com --- # The Scarcest Resource in the World URL: https://free-cities.org/the-scarcest-resource-in-the-world Published: 2023-04-03 Author: Rafael Leandro Category: Blog Topics: taxation-and-economics Disclaimer: The following article was written by an external author. The opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation or its members. The world’s scarcest resource is not any material good, sophisticated technology or the most complex industry imaginable. The land on which we walk and where we build our houses, businesses, buildings, roads, and cities, is of course finite and therefore scarce, but there is no point in occupying a physical space in which you are prevented from producing, building, doing business or settling down in peace. For there to be human progress, we necessarily need to freely collaborate with each other. By doing that, we build wealth to grow as a society. Each individual is unique and scarce, and a set of individuals are capable of forming a society. But this is not enough if one’s ideas cannot lead to productive actions that contribute to the betterment of the world. The world’s scarcest resource is therefore the innovative capacity of people who are free. Let’s call it “human capital”. Wealthier countries have more human capital, while poorer countries have less human capital. People in developed countries have higher productivity, better salaries, and better conditions of living. This has nothing to do with the size of countries, their language, natural resources, or weather conditions, but with the application of the rule of law, greater autonomy of individuals, and fair institutional governance. My country, Brazil, is huge in terms of territory, and also in terms of population, but on average, our human capital is low compared to many other countries, precisely because of the lack of the aforementioned conditions. The economic implications of this are enormous, where our ability to produce wealth is significantly hindered. “Brazil in the future where it has better rule of law, greater autonomy of individuals, and fairer institutional governance,” imagined by Midjourney AI If human capital is the scarcest resource in the world, the best way we can increase it is to maximize the number of connections we have with other people. Cities where people can concentrate and live freely will then generate rapid improvements in governance, attract more investment, encourage entrepreneurship, and produce more skilled workers. Such Free Cities can also solve the issue of the lack of or low-quality housing. With freer cities and decentralized urban planning, more attractive, practical, and affordable designs can emerge, alongside greater construction capacity that features rapid urbanization and higher population density, all in a shorter period of time. Free Cities offer excellent conditions for development and are a great tool to provide people with the potential to build a higher quality of life. They allow us to be in the proximity of many diverse people, including the most capable, intelligent, hardworking, and enterprising people in society. These connections and greater concentration tend to intensify the ability of these individuals to work, study and solve problems, whether through entrepreneurship, political, or academic paths. In short, more human capital is produced. “A Free City that offers excellent conditions for development and is a great tool to provide people with the potential to build a higher quality of life,” imagined by Midjourney AI What we need to do is seek to create as much as possible the greatest number of such innovation and prosperity hubs all over the world. In my opinion, it makes more sense to admit that variety and inequality is natural in human affairs and relationships, and therefore, instead of trying to solve the problems of the whole world at once, it is enough to start with small and decentralized changes. If significant and powerful localized changes are put into practice, they can change the whole society. This can happen through the spread of good ideas and practices, but also through economic growth producing “wealth belts” around Free Cities. The freer the city, the greater the human capital of this region, and the more beneficial these “wealth belts” will be. Free Cities bring much-needed individual autonomy that supersedes overbearing governments or archaic rules within existing cities. The positive effects of Free Cities can reach many people indirectly, even without ever enacting country-wide reforms. Having a clear understanding of how incentives work, we can say without a doubt that a few small beacons of freedom are enough to provide a breath of fresh air to large societies and countries. Human capital is an incredibly potent resource! “Small beacons of freedom which provide a breath of fresh air to large societies and countries,” imagined by Midjourney AI The Free Cities movement is still in its infancy. As we try to figure out how to make urban planning, construction, and living together as free as possible, only a handful of real-world projects might be created as a result, but their weight and local change will be enormous. Other people, including politicians and entrepreneurs, will observe those positive effects and understand that there is indeed a demand for good governance that needs to be met. This will create a new wave of projects and cities that will advance these ideas and implement them in practice. Bad concepts will fail and be discarded, and the best ones will win out in the free market of ideas over time. Entrepreneurial activity is what moves the world, and what actually changes it and improves the human condition. We need enough freedom to the point where our ideas are not stopped by inefficient regulations and overbearing rulers. Connecting people through freer cities is the first step towards creating more human capital and scaling the prosperity of the whole society. --- # Titus Debates, Step Inside and the American West URL: https://free-cities.org/titus-debates-step-inside-and-the-american-west Published: 2026-02-28 Author: Natalie Danelishen Category: News This month, we announce the theme for our 2026 Free Cities Conference, share updates from our recent visit to the United States, highlight recent media coverage, and bring you the latest episodes from the Free Cities Foundation podcast. Free Cities Conference 2026: Step Inside We’re pleased to announce the theme for the 2026 Free Cities Conference: Step Inside. As followers of our newsletter will be aware, this year marks the first time that we will hold our flagship annual conference inside a real, functioning Free City: Próspera on the tropical island of Roatán in Honduras. As this year’s event offers you the chance to literally step inside a Free City for the first time, we have chosen “Step Inside” as the theme of our 2026 conference. Not only will you be able to immerse yourself in the world-leading Free City of Próspera firsthand, but the conference will also feature more than a dozen Free City and seasteading projects from around the world, each presenting what life is or will be like within their communities. You can expect visualisations, VR experiences, and interactive workshops designed to give you a practical sense of day-to-day life inside these projects. Our 2026 conference will be unlike anything we have hosted before, with a longer and more immersive overall experience on offer. While the core conference program takes place from September 3–6, we will also be arranging additional optional activities for attendees who arrive in Roatán early, taking place on September 1 and 2 for those who wish to extend their stay and make the most of their travel. These will include activities such as scuba diving over Roatán’s world-class coral reefs, championship golf, kayaking, and even a one-day excursion to another Free City project (details to be announced soon). We have recently updated the information on our website, to give you a sense of when things are happening: www.freecitiesconference.com. Tickets start from $239: prices will rise soon, so grab yours today to secure the best possible deal. Free Cities Foundation Visit to the Rockies The Free Cities Foundation team recently travelled to Colorado to take part in the Leadership Program of the Rockies conference in Colorado Springs. During the event, we hosted a booth to raise awareness of Free City projects among a large audience of liberty-minded Americans and to explore local interest in establishing autonomous cities. Following the event, our team visited the neighbouring state of Wyoming to meet with Secretary of State Chuck Gray and explore alignment between the Free Cities concept and President Trump’s proposal to establish up to ten new “Freedom Cities” on federally owned land in the United States. Wyoming is particularly relevant in this context because roughly 48 percent of the state’s land is federally owned, one of the highest proportions of any state in the country. For more details on the Freedom Cities concept, we recommend this related report by the Charter Cities Institute. Recent Media — Titus took part in a debate “Will tech utopias rescue or ruin humanity?”, where he responded to challenges from two fierce critics of the Free Cities concept. The discussion covered questions of democracy, the founding and current situation of the Honduran ZEDEs, and what past utopian experiments can teach us about the prospects for new zones today. If you enjoyed Titus’ response, please consider leaving a comment on YouTube. — In this new German-language article, Jura as an Ideas Laboratory for Switzerland, Free Cities Foundation ambassador Juan Estevez explains how special economic zones can serve as institutional laboratories and makes the case for establishing an experimental zone in Switzerland’s Jura region. — In Jurisdiction Shopping: The Forgotten Logic Behind Flag Theory, Free Cities Foundation Chief Economist Rahim Taghizadegan and ambassador Emile Phaneuf explore the intellectual history behind the modern Flag Theory movement and how jurisdictional choice can create a competitive marketplace for governance. — In this German-language interview with Kontrafunk radio, Free Cities Ambassador Sebastian Grell discusses the Free Private City concept and real-world case studies such as Próspera and Ciudad Morazán, emphasizing that these projects aim to provide voluntary, service-oriented communities that are socially grounded rather than mere tax havens. Podcast Roundup Over the past month the Free Cities Foundation podcast has featured conversations on digital nations, seasteading, and emerging Free City projects. Vikram Bharati discussed the intersection between the Free Cities and Network State movements, digital countries such as Draper Nation, and why he believes blockchain may be a hindrance rather than a help in developing new governance systems. Mitchell Suchner of ArkPad shared how his company is advancing affordable seasteading, from the Reef Resort in the Philippines to a future development planned off the coast of Próspera. We also heard from Tim Stern, founder of CryptoCity in Venezuela, about plans for the project on Margarita Island and why so many Germans are seeking to emigrate to freer jurisdictions. Listen and catch up on recent episodes here. Final Thoughts The momentum behind the Free Cities movement continues to grow, with new ideas, projects, and opportunities emerging across the world. If you want to understand where this movement is heading, there is no substitute for experiencing it firsthand. Our 2026 conference in Próspera will offer a unique opportunity to meet the people building the future of governance, explore real projects up close, and step inside a functioning Free City for yourself. We hope you will join us from September 3–6. Learn more and secure your place today at www.freecitiesconference.com. --- # The City-State of Venice: Not a Single Coup in 1100 Years URL: https://free-cities.org/the-city-state-of-venice-not-a-single-coup-in-1100-years Published: 2023-07-17 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Blog Topics: history-of-free-cities, private-governance Particularly successful cities have themselves become independent Great Powers. This applies not only to Genoa but also to Venice, which has been able to retain its independence for over a thousand years. Until 1797, Venice was the capital of the republic of the same name and for a long time one of the largest European cities. Until the 16th century, Venice was one of the world’s most important trading capitals and at times had the largest merchant and war fleet in the world! Despite its own limited resources and relatively small and scattered dominion, Venice was able to play a leading role in the Mediterranean region for a long time. Besides diplomatic skill, this was mainly due to the economic strength of the city, which for centuries had a quasi-monopoly position on trade with the Orient, especially for salt and grain. The legendary founding date of 421 dates back to the twilight of the Roman Empire, a time when the surrounding inhabitants fled the invading Visigoths and Huns into the lagoon of Venice and settled there, as it was easier to defend. Venice was originally part of the Byzantine Empire and formally retained this status until about 900. In fact, however, Venice became independent with the appointment of the first Doge in 697. [1] It is remarkable that Venice managed to remain an independent community with its own diplomacy and its own military power amid changing alliances between the major and regional powers for a period of over 1,000 years. And these were not quiet times in that region. The list of powers and competitors with which Venice had to contend, and which it often outlived, includes the Lombards, the Byzantines, the Holy Roman Empire, the Papal States, Free Cities such as Genoa, Bologna and Pisa, the Normans, Hungary, Croats, Habsburgs, and Ottomans, and finally Spain and France. A Venetian patrician is said to have referred to the secret recipe of the city in the 16th century: In this cruel war, in which all the kings of the world fought against us, no citizen of this city was killed. Everything was achieved with money and the lives of foreign mercenaries. In foreign policy, the Republic relied on diplomacy, efficient information gathering, and pragmatism. Venice kept out of ideological and religious disputes as far as possible. The economic well-being of the city took precedence over the expansion of political power. Inside, careful attention was paid to maintaining a balance of power between the various groups and maintaining checks on power wielded by the state authorities. The election process was extremely complicated, and it could not be foreseen who was eventually elected, but this prevented election campaigns and the bribing of voters. This is one of the reasons for the unique stability of this state in a troubled Europe: in 1,100 years not a single government was overthrown! [2] The domination of a single family, as had become customary in the other city-states of northern Italy, was prevented. This was not always achieved without conflicts, but overall it was possible to prevent too much concentration of power. Venice also had a reputation for political stability and personal freedom for its citizens, which was the exception in Europe at the end of the Middle Ages. The historian Gilmour writes: The patrician and the gondoliere lived in different social conditions, but legally they were equal. Legal privileges for the nobility were unknown. Civil and criminal justice was fair overall, and women enjoyed unique rights… The foreign propaganda about dungeons in which political prisoners languished was pure slander… Religion was important, but it remained subordinate to the state: The Doge and not the bishops were the guarantors of the Republic of Venice. “Veneziani, poi cristiani”, this is how the inhabitants used to describe themselves: first Venetians and then Christians. Such self-confidence naturally annoyed the Popes, who repeatedly pronounced an interdict against Venice… The achievements of Venice were difficult for the rest of Europe to bear. The success of the republic was too blatant and too glamorous for jealous rivals to accept. The Venetians were called greedy and insidious because they traded with the Ottomans as long as there was no war. [3] Only with the advent of the Atlantic and Indian trade and the strengthening of the territorial states did Venice lose at least relative trade power and sunk to local size. This is when the city changed to a strategy of diversification through the mass production of glass beads and the manufacturing of artful pieces of glass. The region is still known for the latter. Venice was able to maintain its independence until 1797 when the city was occupied by Napoleon. Despite its final downfall, Free Cities can learn a lot from Venice. References: • Gilmour 2013, 103-122; Cf. also the instructive article at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Venice • Gilmour 2013, 121 Gilmour emphasizes the extraordinarily successful development of Venice over 1,100 years in his book, which is well worth reading, and concludes that joining the united Italy was the worse option for Venice. • Gilmour 2013, 111-113, 117. This article is an excerpt from Titus Gebel’s book “Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You”. --- # Free Cities Updates: 235 Territories Ranked for Freedom, early bird tickets, Indiana. URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-updates-235-territories-ranked-for-freedom-early-bird-tickets-indiana Published: 2026-04-29 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Topics: taxation-and-economics About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera This edition covers a new freedom index featuring 235 global territories, explains why $1,370 per year might be the per person governance cost a city should aim for, and highlights our new podcast episode taking a deep dive into the history of Sealand. A freedom index that takes on the establishment rankings A new global ranking of 235 territories has been published this week, posing a direct challenge to popular freedom indices from organizations like the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and Fraser Institute. The Stateless Freedom Ranking 2026, compiled by Christoph Heuermann of Staatenlos, argues traditional indices reward efficient bureaucracy and social stability over freedom in the strict sense: the absence of compulsion. That, Heuermann contends, is why higher-tax welfare states like New Zealand, and the Nordic countries often land near the top of other indices, and why globally mobile sovereign individuals are sometimes misdirected. Instead, the new index grades 235 jurisdictions across six categories where hard data is available to support the assessment: taxes and expat arbitrage, monetary autonomy, economic vibrancy, property and building barriers, self-determination, and self-sufficiency. It also breaks federal states down to the legal micro-level, ranking Texas separately from California and the Swiss canton of Zug separately from Geneva. The suggested weighting produces a Free City at the top, with Próspera ranking first overall followed closely by El Salvador. Because the weighting of each category is necessarily subjective, Staatenlos also offers the raw data as a downloadable spreadsheet so people can create their own personal ranking based on the factors that matter to them. Read the full ranking and methodology here. Last 24 hours of early-bird conference tickets Free Cities Conference ticket prices rise tomorrow at midnight. Economy tickets go from $239 to $279, regular from $319 to $359, and VIP from $799 to $849, so anyone planning to join us in Próspera, Roatán, from September 3 to 6 has 24 hours to lock in current pricing. Two new speakers have also just been confirmed: Patri Friedman, founder of Pronomos Capital and a long-standing voice in the emerging Free Cities industry, and Per Bylund, senior fellow at the Mises Institute and a leading scholar of Austrian economics and entrepreneurship. They join a program staged inside Próspera’s Beta District at St John’s Bay, the first time the conference has been held inside a working Free City. Tickets and full speaker line-up at freecitiesconference.com. What Carmel, Indiana teaches Free City builders Carmel, Indiana delivers every municipal service for roughly $1,371 per resident per year, around half what comparable American cities spend. A new long-form piece on the Free Cities Foundation blog by Alex Voss, CFO of Tipolis, examines how the city achieves this and draws out the lessons for new city projects. The core argument: governance becomes cheap when a community is behaviorally coherent and the physical environment is well designed. Carmel’s twenty-eight-year transformation under former mayor Jim Brainard combined a walkable, mixed-use core, more than 150 roundabouts, and sustained investment in arts and public space, generating a sixfold rise in the taxable property base and crime rates a fraction of those in comparable cities. The lesson for Free City builders is that changing the urban environment and improving its quality filters for the kind of community you want to build, which is what makes governance affordable. Read the article here. Why Free Cities, not new countries Our latest Substack article explains why the Free Cities Foundation focuses its efforts on building Free Cities within existing jurisdictions rather than founding new countries from scratch. Very little of the world’s land is actually unclaimed, so the practical path forward is to reach agreements with existing governments that get 90% of what matters right. “Why Free Cities, Not New Countries” lays out the case in full and is the clearest single answer we have published to one of the most common questions we receive. Subscribe to our Substack for free to listen to the article narrated by our managing director. Sealand: a six-decade experiment in opt-in governance Our latest Free Cities Podcast episode features Prince Liam Bates of the Principality of Sealand, the former wartime sea fort off the British coast that has stood for nearly six decades as one of the world’s most enduring experiments in opt-in governance. Liam, grandson of Sealand founder Paddy Roy Bates, traces how a pirate-radio outpost became a working principality in 1967, the legal cases that established Sealand as outside UK jurisdiction, and the 1978 coup attempt. He also outlines the family’s current plans to expand through land reclamation—a path with parallels to Venice, which began as a similar collection of small platforms in a lagoon—and Sealand’s move into eCitizenship and online community-building. Listen on Fountain and follow the Free Cities Podcast there for future episodes. Final thoughts If what we’ve shared today makes you curious about the Free Cities movement, there’s no better way to learn more than to visit one in person. If you’ve been on the fence about coming to Próspera in September, the next 24 hours are the cheapest moment to commit. We hope to see you there. Your Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Praxis Comes to Uruguay: A Pivot Towards Success URL: https://free-cities.org/praxis-comes-to-uruguay Published: 2026-10-07 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: Blog Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/praxis-nation For years, Praxis has been one of the most talked-about names in the startup city world, and also one of the most elusive. It had an ambitious vision, a large online community and considerable funding, but nowhere to build. That has now changed. What Praxis and +Colonia Announced On 22 September 2026, Praxis announced that it had chosen Uruguay as the location for its first city-scale development. It will begin with a neighbourhood inside +Colonia, a 515-hectare waterfront project next to the historic town of Colonia del Sacramento, across the Río de la Plata from Buenos Aires. Praxis aims to mobilise $1 billion in investment over the next three years and expects its first residents in mid-2027. Two days later, President Yamandú Orsi met Praxis CEO Dryden Brown in New York on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. In practice, Praxis is joining +Colonia as a sub-developer. It plans its own residences, hospitality and cultural institutions inside a larger urban project led by Argentine developer Eduardo Bastitta. The agreement has been described as largely non-binding, and the land has yet to be purchased. Still, this is the most concrete step Praxis has ever taken, and we are glad to see it with something real in hand. Not Exactly the Original Plan It is worth remembering what Praxis originally wanted. For years, it looked for a government willing to grant it special zone status, first in the Mediterranean and later, reportedly, as far afield as Greenland and California. With such a status, it hoped to build a self-governing city run according to its own philosophy. The Uruguayan project offers none of this. There is no special jurisdiction and no autonomous governance. Praxis states that its community institutions will operate “fully within Uruguay’s constitutional, legal, and democratic framework”, and Brown has said that no independent governance is planned “for now”. Residents of the Praxis neighbourhood will live under the same rules as everyone else in Colonia. Praxis explains its choice by pointing to Uruguay’s natural beauty, political and economic stability and strong democratic institutions. Much of that is accurate. Uruguay is one of the most stable and open countries in Latin America, and Bastitta has even called +Colonia the most libertarian smart-city project in the world. Nevertheless, presenting a country’s general sympathy with one’s values as the headline argument is simply good marketing language amid the strategy pivot. Praxis originally set out looking for something quite different. Two Roads to a Free City That said, the Uruguay move is a perfectly reasonable one. At the Free Cities Foundation, we recognise that there is more than one way to create a Free City. The first road is top-down. A project negotiates with a host government for a special legal status, such as a next-generation special economic zone or a charter city, and builds its institutions on that foundation. This is the road Praxis originally took, and the one taken by projects like Ciudad Morazán and Próspera in Honduras. The second road is bottom-up. A project starts as an intentional community, where people who share values choose to live together within the existing legal order. If it succeeds in attracting residents, capital and talent, it can reach a position where the government is willing to talk about making it bigger or more successful, including through special arrangements. Freedom-oriented intentional communities already exist in various parts of the world, from the Free State Project in New Hampshire to Montelibero in Montenegro to Veritas Villages springing up across Central America, and they have proven that the model is viable and much easier to make a start with. The Free Cities movement is still young. Nobody knows yet which strategy will prove more successful in the long run, and both may well have their place. Seen in that light, Praxis’s new direction could turn out to be entirely sound. A Win for Praxis, and a Repositioning We would caution against reading this as a defeat. Praxis is going to build, and a physical presence with real residents is a major achievement for any project that has so far lived mostly online. At the same time, the move should be recognised for what it is: a major pivot away from the self-governing city Praxis originally promised into a new strategy that might well prove to be more successful than to continue looking and negotiating forever. Why +Colonia Makes a Strong Partner As for +Colonia, it looks like a very good project to partner with. It has been under construction since 2022, reports roughly $300 million in investment mobilised so far, and its first residential buildings are already in place. For a sub-developer and community attractor like Praxis, a host with solid foundations and a working development pipeline is exactly what is needed to try to overcome the cold-start problem. We are excited to see what this corner of Uruguay will become in 10, 20 or 50 years, and what Praxis will build with its highly skilled, ambitious, and visionary community. We sincerely wish both Praxis and +Colonia the very best of luck. Image credits: praxisnation.com --- # Decentralize Finance Conference at Próspera URL: https://free-cities.org/decentralize-finance-conference-at-prospera Published: 2023-06-12 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes, technology-in-new-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera On May 5-7, the ZEDE Próspera hosted a gathering of entrepreneurs for an entry in the ongoing series of Builders’ Summits that are taking place on the beautiful island this year. Billed as unconferences for their emphasis on networking over traditional speeches, this summit featured decentralized finance as its theme. Niklas Anzinger, the founder of Infinita VC, again organized the event. Niklas Anzinger Approximately 30 builders, some with family members, attended the three-day meeting. They represented a variety of businesses, all innovating around the concept of start-up cities. Several companies were involved with Bitcoin or blockchain technology. Multiple countries, such as the US, UK, Germany, Dubai, Brazil, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and of course, Honduras, were represented. Many attendees arrived on Thursday, May 6, and got a head start on getting to know each other at dinner, which took place at the Cove Restaurant in Palmetto Bay. The lovely beach scenery added to the relaxed atmosphere. The first day of the conference began in a meeting room at the Beta Building in Próspera with Erick Brimen, CEO of Honduras Próspera, Inc., describing his vision for the zone. He also updated the group on the progress that Próspera is making despite opposition from the Honduran government. Niklas Anzinger followed with an overview of what has been happening with new cities, network states, and technology within the space. He had just come from Montenegro, where he had organized an event combining the Free Cities movement with the cryptocurrency movement. The “pop-up city” of Zuzalu had seen a convergence of crypto leaders like Vitalik Buterin and Balaji Srinivasan with Free Cities leaders like Titus Gebel and Massimo Mazzone. After lunch, “crypto god” Eric Voorhees was interviewed virtually by Niklas in an informal fireside chat. He had many insights to share with the group, especially in response to questions from some of the builders. For example, he believes that the threat to bitcoin from politicians and bureaucrats has been less than expected because they have too much hubris and ignorance to realize that cryptocurrency is an existential threat to their fiat currency monopoly on money. Also, he believes that bitcoin, rather than other cryptocurrencies, is the best chance to replace fiat currencies with decentralized money, but he sees important uses for other cryptos, including stablecoins. He stressed the importance of self-custody. Much of the afternoon was devoted to a tour of the Duna Residences, which are still under construction but expected to be completed and ready for move-in later this summer. Finally, the group gathered for dinner at the Palmetto Bay Brewery, where spirited conversations took place until the restaurant closed. Duna Residences currently under construction in Próspera One conversation that a visiting documentary maker filmed was a friendly debate between Erick Brimen of Próspera and the team of Alex Ugorji and Joyce Brand of the ZEDE Ciudad Morazán over which is the better business model for a Free City. The conclusion was that both business models (and others) are needed to create competition in the market for living together. The second day started at the gorgeous Bitcoin Education Center, which features fantastic views of the island. Located at the highest point on the island, the building offers views of both the north and south shores. Dušan Matuška began the day by describing his Amity Age Academy, which uses the building as the center for education about Bitcoin. Amity Age, Bitcoin Education Center in Próspera Other speeches included Ricardo González talking about doing business in Próspera and Christian Betancourt describing Seshat Bank and how it came to offer unique banking services in Próspera. After lunch, Matthew Queen spoke about insurance jurisdictions. The afternoon session broke for fun. Some of the group went snorkeling and scuba diving. Others visited the Mayan Eden Animal Sanctuary to hold macaws and sloths and watch capuchin monkeys play. Still others used the time for discussing business. Another restaurant offering relaxed dining and conversation was the Campfire beach club, where the group reconvened for dinner. The morning of the third day was a time for rest, with the gathering resuming in the afternoon in the Bitcoin Education Center. Several hours were spent on a pitch competition. Sixteen builders presented business pitches ranging from a small proposal for selling Honduran coffee directly to North Americans to a complex plan for a telecom company. Aside from the competition, some presenters received promises of investments in response to their pitches. After dinner, the winner of the competition was announced. Alex Ugorji had already left the island when Niklas Anzinger announced that Alex’s proposal for a solar panel business with tokenized investment had won. His prize was presented to him by phone. The event was closed out with a Karaoke party at the Bitcoin Center. Alex Ugorji wins pitch competition The Decentralized Finance Builders’ Summit at Próspera was a great success enjoyed by all. The meeting of people who are innovating in different ways that startup cities need is important for the Free Cities movement. We are now seeing these kinds of connections being made around the world. --- # The World Needs More Free Cities (The Political Argument) URL: https://free-cities.org/the-world-needs-more-free-cities-the-political-argument Published: 2024-05-27 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: private-governance Though we live in the world of nation-states today, this was not always the case. In fact, the modern nation-state is a fairly recent invention. For most of recorded history, the world was ruled by a slew of differently structured powers and systems. One of those models, surprisingly common throughout all this time, was the city-state. Although the city-state was likely never the dominant political structure in the world, today it is very much at the margins. City-states do exist today, the most quintessential ones being Singapore and Monaco, as well as some micro-states, such as Liechtenstein or San Marino. These are, however, often seen as relics of the past, and as funny quirks that do not really belong in today’s world. Simply put, they are not seen as ‘proper’ political entities when compared to nation-states. In my view, this assessment of city-states is not doing them justice by any means. Instead, a case should be made in defence of the idea of modern and future city-states. Not only that, however. Cities can exist on different levels of autonomy from nearby sovereign states. What we call Free Cities encompasses existing and potential cities almost anywhere along this scale. The argument for (and the main potential of) Free Cities comes from several different angles – economic, political, and social. In each of these spheres, a Free City can offer us something that the system of today’s nation-states is not delivering. Even though Free Cities do not represent any kind of utopia, they can offer a much-needed alternative to the status quo. The Economic Argument Click here to read more… The Political Argument While at least acceptable economic policies might be a necessary condition for good living standards, social and other policies might actually be the most important factors for most people when deciding where they would like to live or what defines the character of a city or country. Looking at the effects of Free Cities on the world from a non-economic perspective is therefore crucial as well. When there are few political units in a region or in the world, the competitive pressures they exert on one another remain weak. This means that the few states that exist have more of a free hand to deal with their subjects, the individuals and businesses living in their jurisdictions, as they please, with them having virtually no recourse. It means that states can even oppress and exploit the countries and people they rule over while the consequences range from minimal to non-existent. This is the world we live in now. Over centuries, humanity has tried to mitigate the situation in several ways, such as via constitutionalization or democratization. In my opinion, there methods have only been successful to quite a limited extent. The only promising path that can have far-reaching effects is making the governance industry more competitive. In a competitive market, consumers are kings and service providers stand to lose everything from behaving abusively. In a world of many Free Cities and city-states, all governments will be incentivized and pushed by their competition to provide a better service in a much more substantive way than today. The more political units there are, the more competition there will be. The proliferation of Free Cities would lead to many of the atrocities and injustices committed at the hands of governments today being virtually eliminated. In addition, discovering the policies most conducive to creating prosperity and the best possible standard of living is a difficult journey that includes extensive research as well as the process of simple trial and error. In addition, different policies are suitable for different contexts, be it climate, geography, regional politics, as well as people’s ever-shifting preferences. Therefore, a world in which small political units such as Free Cities can constantly experiment with new policies will make this knowledge-finding process much faster and more productive. It will also be less risky than today, as potential negative effects will be limited to a small area or population for which disassociation from local politics will be much easier. The same principle is actually part of the ethos behind the federation of formerly sovereign states that is the United States. The idea of such a ‘laboratory’ for discovering the best policies can be taken further than just states within the US, though. Its positive effects could be maximized in a world full of Free Cities. Over the past decades, it has become fashionable to point out that while technology and our way of life is progressing at a stellar pace, politics is not, and it is instead stuck somewhere in the 19th century. In my opinion, there is some truth to this, and the reason why is precisely the comparative lack of competitions faced by current nation-states. The proliferation of Free Cities would inaugurate an age in which the same kind of innovation and progress we see in technology would become part of the policy-making industry as well. The Social Argument Click here to read more… --- # People Go Where They Are Treated Best URL: https://free-cities.org/people-go-where-they-are-treated-best Published: 2026-06-15 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: residency-and-citizenship There is a line in Jamie Dimon’s 2025 letter to JPMorgan shareholders that reads like a warning shot aimed at high-tax state capitals. “Individuals vote with their feet,” he wrote. “You can already see a fairly large exodus of people and jobs out of some states with high taxes and high expenses.” Then he laid out the receipts. JPMorgan has cut its New York headcount from 30,000 a decade ago to 24,000. Its Texas headcount has grown from 26,000 in 2015 to 32,000 over the same period. He framed the migration plainly: “People often make this a moral or loyalty issue, but it is not. Companies need to remain competitive in this very tough, fast-moving world.” That phrase, vote with your feet, has a strange pedigree. It is usually traced to Lenin, who used it to describe Russian soldiers deserting World War I trenches. The idea reached economic respectability in 1956, when Charles Tiebout published a model arguing that people sort themselves into local jurisdictions the same way consumers pick brands. If you do not like your town’s mix of taxes and services, you move. Aggregated, those moves create a kind of market for governance. Places that get the deal wrong lose customers. Places that get it right gain them. Albert Hirschman gave us a more useful frame in 1970. In Exit, Voice, and Loyalty, he argued that when an organization, firm, or country starts to slip, members have two basic options. They can stay and complain (voice), or they can leave (exit). Loyalty is what slows the exit down, but only for so long. The interesting part of his model is that voice and exit are partial substitutes. If exit is too easy, nobody sticks around to fight for improvement. If exit is too hard, complaints get ignored. When exit sits somewhere in the middle, the threat of leaving keeps institutions honest. Dimon’s letter is basically a Hirschman argument in a banker’s voice. He is saying New York is losing the loyalty premium. Florida and Texas do not even need to be perfect. They just need to be cheaper, less hostile, and a direct flight away. The numbers back him up. Between 2020 and 2024, Texas added more than 2 million net residents. Florida added about 1.5 million. New York lost over 600,000, and California shed close to half a million. The corporate moves are louder. Tesla, Oracle, and Hewlett Packard Enterprise all decamped to Texas. Citadel left Chicago for Miami. Even Goldman Sachs, hardly a populist firm, has been quietly building out Dallas. None of this is mysterious. People follow rules they can live with, and capital follows people. Here is where I think the conversation usually gets stuck. The phrase “people go where they are treated best” gets thrown around as if “treated best” means “lowest tax rate.” It doesn’t, or at least not only. Treatment is a bundle. How easy is it to start a business, hire someone, build housing, get a permit, send a kid to a decent school, walk home at night. Cheap taxes will not save you if the schools are bad and the streets feel unsafe. Expensive taxes will not kill you if the package buys something worth paying for. New York is still the most expensive city in America to run a financial firm, and financial firms keep coming anyway, because the talent pool is unmatched. A Fortune piece from earlier this month pointed out that NYC has actually been pulling top talent back from Miami in 2026, despite Dimon’s warnings. The exit threat is real. It is not destiny. What makes Dimon’s framing useful, though, is the part where he refuses to moralize. Companies are not disloyal for leaving. People are not traitors for moving. The whole concept of voting with your feet only works if you treat the decision as legitimate. The minute you call defectors selfish, or worse, try to penalize them with exit taxes the way some states have flirted with, you have stopped competing for them and started imprisoning them. That tends not to end well. It is the lesson of Europe’s last twenty years, which Dimon also swipes at in the letter: regulate too much, tax too hard, and the next generation of companies starts up somewhere else. He thinks the United States is drifting into the same trap. Whether you buy his diagnosis or not, the underlying mechanism is hard to argue with. Governments, like firms, now face customers who can leave. Those customers have better information than they used to, cheaper moving costs, and remote-work flexibility most of them did not have ten years ago. That is a structural change, not a political mood. The places that recognize it and adapt, by making themselves worth choosing, will hold onto their people. The places that do not will keep losing them and blaming somewhere else. People go where they are treated best. It is not a slogan. It is just what happens when staying becomes optional. --- # Africa’s New Cities Summit URL: https://free-cities.org/new-cities-summit Published: 2023-11-20 Author: Peter Young Category: Blog Topics: charter-cities Africa stands on the brink of a profound urban transformation, poised to add 1 billion people to its cities by the year 2050. Projections suggest that by 2100, the continent will host 13 of the world’s most populous urban centers, up from just two today. This demographic change will necessitate not only the expansion of existing cities but the creation of entirely new ones too. The construction of new cities was the focus of Africa’s New Cities Summit, which took place last week in Kigali, Rwanda. The event brought together developers, builders, governments, and academics under the auspices of the Charter Cities Institute (CCI), an organization that shares the Free Cities Foundation’s goal of promoting autonomous cities. CCI’s Africa Lead Mwanda Phiri moderates a panel discussion CCI advocates for the development of ‘Charter Cities’: new urban centers built on greenfield land endowed with wide-ranging authority in areas including labor law, business procedures, education, and tax. They argue that granting cities autonomy will enable them to generate economic growth and tailor governance to local conditions. In line with CCI’s goals, the summit convened representatives of around a dozen aspiring new cities from across Africa, each possessing a degree of devolved authority. The continent has established more than 200 special economic zones since the 2000s, and several of the projects were located within them. They included: • Fumba Town (Zanzibar): A development in one of Zanzibar’s Free Economic Zones that aspires to create a knowledge economy while promoting affordable and eco-friendly housing. The zone has already secured $85 million in investment, built 600 residential units, and created 500 local jobs. • Kigali Innovation City (Rwanda): A 62-hectare walkable and mixed-use technology hub that aims to spearhead Rwanda’s economic development goals. It integrates universities, offices, housing, and support services with a focus on creating a connected ecosystem. • Enyimba Economic City (Nigeria): A tax and duty-free special economic zone that spans 9400 hectares and aims to position Nigeria as a manufacturing and industrial powerhouse. CCI helped to draft the zone’s regulations, which were subsequently approved into law. • Itana (Nigeria): Nigeria’s first Digital Free Zone where businesses can incorporate remotely and receive access to incentives, one-stop-shop services, and a business-friendly regulatory environment. • Gaius King Smart City (Zambia): A new cross-border city that aims to become the industrial and economic hub for mining communities at the crossroads of Zambia, Angola, and the DRC. • Maluku Preserve City (DRC): An aspiring charter city in Kinshasa that aims to become a place where people, ideas, technologies, and industries converge in a sustainable urban environment. • Small Farm Cities Africa (Malawi): A project that blends agriculture with affordable housing, combining open-field horticulture, fish farming, and poultry with privately-titled land. CEO Jon Vandenheuvel used the summit to announce plans to expand the development to accommodate a community of 100,000 people. Kigali Innovation City Small Farm Cities Africa The range of projects featured at the summit was impressive and presentations were marked by a pragmatic rather than ideological tone. The importance of market solutions, public-private partnerships and streamlined bureaucracy were recurring themes. CCI founder Mark Lutter emphasized the need for Africa to glean lessons from successful autonomous cities worldwide, citing Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai, and Shenzhen as examples. He argued that these cities achieved success by establishing robust institutions that upheld property rights, took a liberal approach to international trade and foreign direct investment, and limited the role of central planning. Mark Lutter speaks on the importance of learning lessons from successful new cities Patrick Lamson-Hall, the master planner of Ciudad Morazán, stressed the importance of flexible urban plans. “It’s not our job to pick economic winners. It’s our job to remove the bottlenecks that allow winners to emerge on their own,” he argued. Tipolis Chief Strategy Officer Andreas Baumgartner stressed the importance of cultivating win-win relationships with governments and putting in place effective dispute resolution mechanisms. Andreas Baumgartner (second from right) takes part in panel discussion on investing in new cities Senegalese entrepreneur Magatte Wade delivered a powerful speech emphasizing the importance of removing regulatory barriers that stand in the way of African innovation. Mwaka Mukubesa from Zambia’s Finance Ministry underscored the importance of Public-Private Partnerships in developing effective infrastructure for new cities. While the summit highlighted the substantial urbanization challenges that Africa faces, it also left me with a sense of optimism about its new cities’ ability to meet them. The fact that so many officials and business leaders traveled from across the continent to attend a charter cities event demonstrated a willingness to explore city autonomy as a catalyst for positive change. For advocates of Free Cities, the growth in number of special economic zones across Africa, and their increasing degree of liberalization, should be seen as an encouraging sign. As these zones continue to evolve, they pave the way for a more promising urban landscape in Africa—one marked by greater innovation, adaptability, and prosperity. Tipolis CSO Andreas Baumgartner is working to develop Free Cities --- # Free City Updates: Dubai, Próspera’s flat tax and Destiny URL: https://free-cities.org/what-the-iran-war-means-for-free-cities Published: 2026-04-14 Author: Natalie Danelishen Category: News About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera This month, we look at what the Iran war means for Free Cities, cover Próspera’s new $5,000 flat-tax residency program, and report on a bitcoin billionaire’s proposal to pay every citizen of Nevis $100 a month. Can startup cities defend themselves? Dubai has the answer Vera Kichanova writes from Dubai for the Free Cities Foundation blog, making the case that the Iran war is proving the resilience of small, commercially oriented jurisdictions. The UAE’s air defenses have intercepted the overwhelming majority of incoming missiles and drones and, although schools remain on remote learning, commercial life has continued. Her broader argument: small jurisdictions with a successful economic model can punch well above their weight when it comes to defense. Free Cities will be able to do the same. Read the full article here. Community developer adopts bitcoin treasury strategy Bitcoin treasury companies have had a mixed run lately. Some have built genuine value by accumulating bitcoin on their balance sheets; others have leveraged up at the wrong time. A new piece on the Free Cities Foundation blog by board member Alex Voss argues that Autris (OTC: AUTR) offers something more grounded: a company building freedom-focused, self-sustainable communities across Latin America and the Caribbean, with bitcoin integrated as part of the underlying strategy (rather than being the whole of it). Read the article here. Próspera’s $5,000 tax residency: how to apply Próspera has launched a tax residency program aimed at globally mobile professionals, and the terms are simpler than most. There are four requirements: pay a flat $5,000 per year, after which your income tax liability is capped with no further obligations; spend at least seven days per calendar year physically in Próspera (attending the Free Cities Conference in September counts toward this!); establish a business entity within the zone (can be done remotely); and have no tax residency elsewhere. That’s it. Full details at imidaily.com. To apply, email hello@nomadlayer.com. Conference ticket prices rise April 30 The 2026 Free Cities Conference takes place in Próspera, Roatán, from September 3 to 6. Regular tickets are $319 and rise to $359 at the end of this month. On-site accommodation at Las Verandas and Duna Tower is limited and filling quickly. We’ve also updated plans for Ciudad Morazán. Rather than a ticketed excursion, the Morazán team are inviting you to take part in a site tour, their quarterly town hall meeting, and a community barbecue on September 2. There is no longer a paid ticket, you simply cover your own transport and food. Overnight stays within Ciudad Morazán are available for a limited number of participants. Activities are scheduled so you can arrive in Roatán in time for the start of the core conference program on September 3 afternoon. To learn more and register your interest while there is still space visit: https://morazanexcursion.carrd.co/ Secure your conference place at freecitiesconference.com. A bold experiment in Nevis Destiny is the brainchild of Belgian bitcoin investor Olivier Janssens, who is proposing to build a large-scale community on Nevis’ southern coast, operating under its own governance framework. Janssens recently announced that, as part of the deal, every citizen of Nevis would receive $100 per month, equivalent to $4,800 a year for a family of four. The project is raising questions about what is constitutionally possible for the island, which has its own assembly and significant autonomy within the Saint Kitts and Nevis federation. Full reporting at IMI Daily. Events and opportunities The Free Commune of Penadexo is seeking volunteers for a summer work program at its village restoration project in Spain, ahead of the Festival Santito on July 25. Find out more. Alexander McCobin, co-founder of Students for Liberty, has launched a new philanthropic venture called Breakthrough Builders, backing early-stage social ventures through a seed fund. For more information, contact: info@libertyventuresnetwork.com. Podcast roundup We have released three new podcast episodes since our last newsletter. In episode 175, The Last Free Place, Oswald Horowitz traced the story of Italian entrepreneur Samuele Landi, who attempted to live entirely outside conventional jurisdictions on a barge in international waters. In episode 176, Why Everything Feels Broken, former UK government adviser James Price gave a frank account of bureaucratic overstretch and the gap between what political institutions promise and what they can deliver. Episode 177, The Próspera Master Plan, features Próspera co-founder Gabriel Delgado-Ayau. He traces the startup city’s journey from its early days to its long-term vision, and explains how its governance framework could serve as a template for other jurisdictions. Catch up on all three at fountain.fm. Final thoughts As you can see, there is a lot happening across the Free Cities movement. If you want to find out more, there is no better way than joining us at the conference in Próspera this September. You will be able to meet the people behind the stories in this newsletter, and experience a pioneering Free City first hand. Visit freecitiesconference.com for details—we hope to see you there. --- # Beauty as Infrastructure: Why Free Cities Should Invest in It Early URL: https://free-cities.org/beauty-as-infrastructure Published: 2026-06-01 Author: Alex Voss Category: Blog Topics: urban-design If you are building a Free City, a special economic zone, or any new jurisdiction from scratch, here is a piece of advice that sounds frivolous and is not: invest in beauty before you think you can afford to. Big public art is one of the cleanest ways to do this quickly, but the principle is broader than sculpture. Beauty agglomerates people. That is the entire argument. Humans gather at attractive places and disperse from ugly ones, and they do this with very little conscious deliberation. A waterfront with a good view. A square with a fountain. A hill with a frame at the top of it. All of these pull foot traffic, conversation, photographs, and eventually residents. A featureless lot with a chain-link fence does the opposite, no matter what the regulatory environment around it happens to be. New cities live or die on whether they can get a critical mass of people into the same place at the same time, and beauty is one of the few tools that does this on autopilot. Próspera, the charter city on the Honduran island of Roatán, has a picture frame at the top of a hill. Look through it and you see the water. The frame is modest in scale, but it does its job: visitors walk up, stand inside, take a photograph, and the geotag spreads. Dubai built the same idea at a different budget. The Dubai Frame is 150 meters tall, framing the historical and modern halves of the city through its opening, and it pulls in roughly a million visitors a year. Same concept, very different scale, both effective. The shared move is simple: give people a beautiful place to stand and a beautiful thing to look through. Why beauty matters for new jurisdictions specifically It makes the place feel real. A regulatory charter and a website are abstractions. A well-sited sculpture, a planted boulevard, or an architecturally serious public building is a fact on the ground. Prospective residents and investors update their priors when they see infrastructure that costs real money. Anyone can print a logo. Commissioning a working architect, or fabricating and installing a five-ton steel piece, is harder. People read the difference as evidence that the project is funded and organized. It manufactures awareness for free. Traditional cities inherit recognition; you have to make it from scratch. The cheapest production process available right now is letting visitors take pictures and post them. A city without a visual signature gets scrolled past. A city with one striking landmark in a flattering location generates thousands of geotagged posts a year, each one a small advertisement to the photographer’s followers, most of whom have never heard of the place. The cost per impression is unbeatable. It builds the local social fabric you cannot otherwise rush. The residents you do have arrived recently and share no civic vocabulary. They need common reference points so they can act like locals on day one. A landmark provides that. People give directions by it. They meet friends at it. They walk visitors over to see it. None of that happens around a regulatory framework, no matter how well drafted. It happens around things that are pleasant to be near. The standard objection is that Instagram-friendly art tends to be mediocre and chosen for legibility rather than depth. The criticism is fair and beside the point. You are not curating a museum; you are running a settlement campaign. The piece has to read clearly from a phone screen, photograph well in different lighting, and survive a decade of weather. A subtle gallery work will not pull anyone off a plane. A frame at the top of a hill, looking out over the sea, might. A note on budget. The temptation is to wait until the city is “ready” before spending on something this discretionary. That is the wrong order. Beauty is not a reward for arriving; it is part of how you arrive. Roads and schools take years and barely register on social media when they finally open. A well-placed sculpture or a thoughtful park takes months and starts producing returns the day it opens. Front-load the visible pieces, then build the rest of the city around them. Big public art is the cleanest illustration of this principle because it is the most legible. But the broader category is what matters: trees, fountains, lookout points, plazas, lighting, public buildings with real architects behind them, anything that gives a place a face. Free Cities face unusually high marketing pressure and unusually thin civic identity at the same time. Beauty is one of the few interventions that addresses both for a price that is small relative to other infrastructure costs. Próspera put a frame at the top of a hill. Dubai built one you can walk inside. The principle is the same at every scale. Make the place beautiful first. The people follow. --- # The World Needs More Free Cities (The Economic Argument) URL: https://free-cities.org/the-world-needs-more-free-cities-the-economic-argument Published: 2024-05-20 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog Topics: special-economic-zones, taxation-and-economics Though we live in the world of nation-states today, this was not always the case. In fact, the modern nation-state is a fairly recent invention. For most of recorded history, the world was ruled by a slew of differently structured powers and systems. One of those models, surprisingly common throughout all this time, was the city-state. Although the city-state was likely never the dominant political structure in the world, today it is very much at the margins. City-states do exist today, the most quintessential ones being Singapore and Monaco, as well as some micro-states, such as Liechtenstein or San Marino. These are, however, often seen as relics of the past, and as funny quirks that do not really belong in today’s world. Simply put, they are not seen as ‘proper’ political entities when compared to nation-states. In my view, this assessment of city-states is not doing them justice by any means. Instead, a case should be made in defence of the idea of modern and future city-states. Not only that, however. Cities can exist on different levels of autonomy from nearby sovereign states. What we call Free Cities encompasses existing and potential cities almost anywhere along this scale. The argument for (and the main potential of) Free Cities comes from several different angles – economic, political, and social. In each of these spheres, a Free City can offer us something that the system of today’s nation-states is not delivering. Even though Free Cities do not represent any kind of utopia, they can offer a much-needed alternative to the status quo. The Economic Argument To see what economic effect Free Cities could have on the world, we can look at a proxy – Special Economic Zones (SEZs). There are over six thousand of different small-ish areas in the world which have negotiated for themselves benefits from their Host States in the form of policy or fiscal concessions, or even partial policy-making autonomy. While a Free City that is a full-blown city-state is a fully independent entity free to govern itself, SEZs still move in this direction partially, managing to reach lower, varying degrees of autonomy. This means that observing the economic effects of SEZs can help us see the potential of more autonomous cities as well. SEZs have become well-known for their high-growth, fast-development potential, sometimes creating booming cities out of backwater villages in a matter of one generation, as in the case of Shenzhen, for example. SEZs do this by being free to employ growth-oriented economic policies in contrast with those of their Host States. This does not mean that all SEZs are or have been successful. There have been many SEZs that turned out to be mismanaged or improperly established in the first place, resulting in them not achieving their original goals of attracting investments and economic growth. It is almost impossible to calculate whether a particular SEZ is a net economic benefit for the country it is located in. As Lotta Moberg explains in her book The Political Economy of Special Economic Zones, it is almost never clear where an SEZ leads to economic gain which otherwise would not have been possible, and where it instead simple changes the geographic distribution of existing resources and economic growth – both within the Host State and globally. Despite this drawback, certain conclusions about the overall beneficial economic effects of SEZs (and, by extension, Free Cities) can be drawn. Even if the primary effect of an SEZ is to re-direct growth, the secondary effect is likely to be to spur a ‘race to the top’ in economic policy-making. For a significant number of economic policies, it is both quite clear and quite uncontroversial whether they are, on net, beneficial or detrimental to the economy of the country. The reason that many detrimental policies prevail and the beneficial ones are not more widely spread are often vested interests affecting the policy decision-making. While a given policy might be a net benefit to the country or its population, it can simultaneously be very negative to specific parties that benefit from the status quo instead. These interests will then understandably fight hard to resist the implementation of the beneficial policy. However, with SEZs or Free Cities as competitors on the governance market, states are likely to be put under more pressure to deliver economic results, making the influence of the vested interests mentioned above weaker in turn. Even if some of the aforementioned detrimental economic policies turn out to be unreformable for any reasons, there is still a strong economic argument for SEZs and, by extension, Free Cities. They offer a possibility of positive change at least in some places. If progress in general is not practically possible, the potential of localized progress is always preferable to none at all. The Political Argument Click here to read more… The Social Argument Click here to read more… --- # Conference Schedule Now Live – Join Us in Prague! URL: https://free-cities.org/conference-schedule-now-live-join-us-in-prague Published: 2024-09-30 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: Blog The Free Cities Foundation team is excited to announce that the full schedule for our upcoming Liberty in Our Lifetime conference in Prague is now available on our conference website. If you’ve been considering joining us, it’s not too late to secure your tickets for this fantastic event, featuring over a dozen Free City projects from around the world, as well as a range of insightful speakers covering broader topics related to the freedom movement. Here’s a sneak peek of what you can expect: Thursday, October 31st – Arrival & Welcome Drinks For most attendees, October 31st is the arrival day. After you’ve touched down in Prague and settled into your hotel, we invite you to join us at Fuze Restaurant in the heart of the city for our Welcome Drinks. This is the perfect opportunity to meet some of the incredible speakers and like-minded attendees from over 30 countries. You can also collect your conference pass early to skip the queues on Friday morning. Attendees collect passes at our welcome drinks Friday, November 1st – Conference Kickoff At 8:30 AM, attendees will arrive at the stunning Empire Hall, an art deco venue located in central Prague. After registration, you’ll have time to mingle and explore our exhibition area. The team from RegenTribe will be on hand to help you feel at home and introduce you to other attendees – especially useful if you’re attending solo. Attendees arriving at the Liberty in Our Lifetime registration desk The first keynote, Titus Gebel’s “Free Cities: From Vision to Reality,” kicks off at 10 am, setting the tone for the event. You will then hear from Próspera co-founder Gabriel Delgado and Ciudad Morazán founder Massimo Mazzone, who will share insights into how the Honduran ZEDEs are accelerating into an election year. Titus Gebel will give the opening keynote Following the morning talks, if you have a Premium or VIP pass, you can enjoy a delicious buffet lunch at Empire Hall and discuss the morning’s talks with fellow attendees. (If you only have a GA pass, there’s still time to upgrade!) Premium ticket holders enjoying a buffet lunch at Empire Hall The afternoon starts with exciting talks from seasteading pioneers Grant Romundt, Mitchell Suchner, and Joe Quirk. We’ll then hear from Vít Jedlička, president of the freedom-focused micronation Liberland, as well as leaders from intentional communities in Norway, Argentina, and Tanzania. The day’s talks wrap up at 7 PM, and VIP pass holders will enjoy an unforgettable dining experience at Restaurant Mlýnec. Set against the backdrop of breathtaking views of the Vltava River and the iconic Charles Bridge, this sumptuous three-course meal is the perfect opportunity to indulge in exquisite cuisine while connecting with fellow attendees. If you haven’t yet upgraded to a VIP pass, now’s your chance to join this exclusive dinner – you won’t want to miss it! Friday night’s VIP dinner takes place at Restaurant Mlýnec Saturday, November 2nd – Keynotes & Panels Saturday begins at 10 AM with keynote presentations, including world-renowned architect Patrik Schumacher, who will discuss the implications of the metaverse on human freedom. We’ll also hear from Per Bylund from the Mises Institute on entrepreneurship and prosperity in Free Cities. Other talks will explore becoming a perpetual traveller, preparing for the rise of CBDCs, and moving to freedom-oriented communities in the tropics. Patrik Schumacher will join a panel discussion on the metaverse After lunch, you can dive into more thought-provoking topics such as how small states foster freedom and prosperity, a playbook for e-governance, obtaining a second citizenship in Latin America, and harnessing the power of Bitcoin mining in Free Cities. The day concludes with drinks and further discussions at Restaurant Čertovka. Sunday, November 3rd – Family-Friendly Activities & Networking Sunday offers a more relaxed schedule, with family-friendly and networking activities. You’ll have at least three options, including enjoying delicious Czech food, beer, and networking at Municipal House Cellar, and a Freedom Walk of Prague, featuring landmarks like the Letná Park Metronome, where Prague’s iconic Stalin statue once stood, and the Liberland Embassy. Letná Park Metronome Final Prague Edition – Don’t Miss Out! We also have exciting news about our next conference location! While our team has loved hosting in Prague, we’ve decided that it’s time for a change. 2024 will be the last year we hold the Liberty in Our Lifetime conference in Prague, as we want to offer our community the chance to explore new and exciting destinations in the future. So, don’t miss your final opportunity to experience the event in this iconic city this November! Be sure to secure your ticket and join us for this memorable edition. For more details and the full schedule, visit the schedule section on the Liberty in Our Lifetime website. --- # Honduran Free Cities vs. Rogue Government URL: https://free-cities.org/honduran-free-cities-vs-rogue-government Published: 2023-11-27 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes, criticism-and-debate, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Two of the most autonomous Free Cities in the world are Próspera and Ciudad Morazán in Honduras. As Zones of Employment and Economic Development (called ZEDEs for their Spanish acronym), they have faced fierce opposition from the new Honduran government for the last two years. While this is nothing new, the propaganda against the ZEDEs has increased dramatically in the last few weeks. Honduras is, unfortunately, infamous for its political instability and corruption. Politics in the country is messy to the point of literal fistfights breaking out in Congress. The socialist party LIBRE won the last election by making a deal with the second-biggest opposition party. When it reneged on the deal, it lost the votes to pass many of the laws it had promised, and politics got even messier. The President, Xiomara Castro, is the wife of Manuel Zelaya, the President who was ousted by a coup in 2009. They have been attempting to consolidate executive power since they came into office in January 2022. The ZEDEs have been useful as a political football, precisely because they are unimportant to anyone in power. They represent a vague threat to the vested interests of all the political parties, but they are still too small to matter enough to be defended by any large faction. The cause of the recent attacks on the ZEDEs has nothing to do with the ZEDEs themselves but with a quirk of Honduran procedural law. The Castro administration has been battling Congress to appoint their preferred Attorney General, but they ran up against the official end of the Congressional session on October 31. Every year, the official session is extended until the following January, but part of Congress refused to extend it, causing the administration to miss its deadline for appointing the Attorney General. By chance, the end of the regular session was also the deadline for ratifying the repeal of the constitutional amendment authorizing the ZEDEs. Some disaffected members of LIBRE accused their party’s leader of not keeping her campaign promise to get rid of the ZEDEs, although that is only one of many campaign promises she hasn’t kept. Therefore, the administration issued a paper reminding everyone that the ZEDE law was repealed, complete with all the propaganda used to justify the repeal last year. As the administration missed its opportunity to ratify the repeal of the constitutional amendment, its remaining option against the ZEDEs is to have its hand-picked Supreme Court declare them unconstitutional, a legally questionable move. Previous Supreme Courts have already found the ZEDEs constitutional multiple times. Legal or not, there is a chance the Court will declare the existing ZEDEs unconstitutional, but that won’t end Próspera and Ciudad Morazán because of constitutional guarantees and international treaties. The Court would have to say that the unconstitutionality is retroactive, a nuclear option that would turn a large percentage of the politicians in the country into traitors for having voted for an unconstitutional law. That would be completely unprecedented. Propaganda campaigns on television and social media may be aimed at justifying pressure on the Supreme Court to rule the ZEDEs unconstitutional. If one looks at the comments on X/Twitter, for example, it appears there is overwhelming opposition to ZEDEs among Hondurans. However, the few Hondurans on X are mostly elites, who feel most threatened by the prosperity the ZEDEs could bring to Honduras. The few regular Hondurans on social media at all tend to use Facebook and Instagram, which have little political discourse. On the chance that the Supreme Court justices could be influenced by posts on X, friends of the ZEDEs have been posting proof of the falsehoods. For example, unbiased surveys have shown that fewer than 30% of Hondurans are even aware of the existence of ZEDEs. Of those people, 77% say they would work for a ZEDE if given the chance. Only about 12% of them are opposed to the ZEDEs (meaning about 4% of the whole population). Another common falsehood about Próspera is that the residents of Crawfish Rock, the village located next to Próspera, didn’t know the ZEDE was going to be built and didn’t have any chance to object to it. A photocopy of the referendum where the inhabitants of Crawfish Rock signed the document welcoming Próspera to Roatan has been posted as a response: In addition, some of the Honduran residents of Ciudad Morazán have been posting about their positive experience of living in the ZEDE. The future is uncertain because a rogue government that is willing to repeatedly break its laws can’t be trusted, but there are Hondurans as well as friends of Hondurans resisting the injustice of the current administration. The ZEDEs Próspera and Ciudad Morazán continue to build their Free Cities. --- # Do You Need Libertarians for a Libertarian Community? URL: https://free-cities.org/do-you-need-libertarians-for-a-libertarian-community Published: 2024-12-02 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: intentional-communities Libertarians are often misunderstood. Some see them as malcontents seeking personal freedom to indulge in vices, while others assume they want a society with no rules or no regard for others. In reality, libertarianism encompasses a diverse range of people, only united by shared values like individual liberty, minimal government intervention, property rights, and voluntary exchange. Libertarians are famously difficult to manage. There’s a saying that “organizing libertarians is like herding cats.” They’re known for heated debates over the finer points of political philosophy, with phrases like, “That person isn’t a real libertarian,” being all too common in libertarian circles. When it comes to libertarian communities—neighborhoods, villages, or cities organized around these principles—stereotypes persist. Many imagine them as enclaves of ideologues or utopian experiments destined to fail. However, successful libertarian communities aren’t about ideological purity. Instead, they succeed by solving real problems and serving broader markets. What Defines a Libertarian Community? A libertarian community emphasizes principles like economic freedom, consent-based governance, and voluntary association. These values create environments where individuals can thrive without overbearing government interference. However, these principles aren’t exclusive to libertarians—they have universal appeal. At their core, libertarian communities are not created by top-down coercive governments. Instead, they’re built by entrepreneurs solving problems and meeting the needs of their target markets. Some examples include: • Free Cities or Charter Cities: Cities with some degree or legal autonomy from their host nation, such as Próspera in Honduras. • Special Economic Zones (SEZs): Regions with distinct regulations designed to attract investment and innovation. Those with residents can be libertarian. • Intentional Communities: Groups of people living together with de facto autonomy, although legally subject to national controls. • Seasteads: Floating cities that could soon become the purest examples of libertarian governance. While these communities often spring from libertarian principles, they don’t cater exclusively to libertarians. Their success depends on appealing to people of all ideologies by offering tangible benefits like safety, economic opportunity, and quality of life. “Free City” -Midjourney AI Markets, Not Ideology, Drive Success The most successful libertarian communities serve a broader market, meeting the needs and desires of their residents. Take Ciudad Morazán in Honduras as an example. Under the semi-autonomous ZEDE law, it operates on libertarian principles but targets Honduran workers—not libertarians necessarily. Its primary value proposition is to offer residents a safer, more prosperous life than they could find elsewhere. To take a seemingly trivial aspect, a secondary value proposition of Ciudad Morazán is cleanliness, a value often overlooked in the surrounding areas. Residents agree to follow a strict no-littering rule, enforced not with fines but with reminders from private security officers. The result? Almost immediately, residents began taking pride in the cleanliness of their community. This simple rule demonstrates how libertarian principles like property rights and personal responsibility can create environments people genuinely want to live in. Rules like these, coupled with broader economic freedoms, make Ciudad Morazán a compelling example of how practical governance can align with libertarian values while serving a non-libertarian market. Contrast this with the infamous case of Grafton, New Hampshire—a town some libertarians hoped to turn into a “libertarian paradise.” In their focus on ideological freedom, some residents insisted on their right to feed bears, ignoring the risks. Predictably, the bears became a serious problem, endangering the community. Overemphasizing ideology at the expense of practicality can lead to failure. “City based on economic freedom where anyone can thrive” -Midjourney AI Lessons for Entrepreneurs The lesson for entrepreneurs considering building libertarian communities is clear: success isn’t about catering exclusively to libertarians. It’s about creating environments where anyone—regardless of ideology—can thrive. Economic freedom attracts everyone. Entrepreneurs value the ease of doing business. Remote workers seek low taxes and quality of life. Families prioritize safety and infrastructure. By focusing on these universal needs, communities can build resilience and sustainability. Businesses succeed by understanding and serving their markets, not by imposing values on their customers. Libertarian communities can operate the same way. They can adhere to principles like voluntary governance and minimal intervention while adapting to the cultural and practical needs of their residents. Libertarianism Without Libertarians Libertarian communities don’t need libertarians to succeed. They need entrepreneurs who understand markets, solve real problems, and create value. By prioritizing safety, opportunity, and quality of life, these communities can appeal to a broad audience and thrive. As Ciudad Morazán demonstrates, libertarian principles can quietly create environments where people of all ideologies flourish. The challenge is not to build ideological havens but to build communities that work. The world is full of opportunities for entrepreneurs willing to take on this challenge. --- # The Case for a Free City at Guantánamo Bay URL: https://free-cities.org/free-city-guantanamo-bay Published: 2026-06-23 Author: Hynek Fencl Category: Blog “The institutional architecture of human settlements is more consequential than ordinary political discourse acknowledges.” —Alexander D. Voss, A Country That Builds Alexander D. Voss’s new book makes a claim that sounds like a provocation: the most valuable underused asset the United States owns is a naval station in southeastern Cuba, which it could turn into one of the century’s most consequential cities. On a careful reading, the provocation holds. The case is not utopian. It is, if anything, unusually concrete, and the strongest objection to it, that America no longer does things like this, is precisely the objection the project is designed to answer. The site that has no equal Voss’s organizing insight is that successful cities are products of design, and design depends above all on jurisdiction. He distills five elements every successful zone has shared: a territory under different rules from its surround; low taxes, light regulation, open trade, and reliable law; sustained political commitment; an inflow of talent; and anchor tenants committed early. Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai, Subic Bay, and Shenzhen assembled these from worse starting points than the United States already holds. That is the surprise. Guantánamo Bay, NSGB in the book’s shorthand, is federal territory with no competing jurisdiction. Acting there, the federal government works in a single layer, not the half-dozen complicating comparable mainland action. This immensely valuable precondition already exists here, alongside American property rights, deep capital markets, and well-maintained infrastructure. It inherits the world’s most reliable commercial-legal surround and sheds only the overlay that turns a five-month task into a five-year one. Built for scale, not for show Voss argues that Guantánamo’s scale and urgency demand a tiered structure: a master private operator runs the plan and recruits anchor tenants, while substantial sub-developers compete district by district for tenants and residents. This departs from the traditional Free City template, in which a city grows organically under one hands-off operator. This is a deliberate departure, because nothing else delivers both scale and speed. The variety it produces “is the feature, not the bug,” with precedent from Dubai’s free zones to Disney’s Reedy Creek. A city, though, is not its balance sheet. The book’s best passages imagine a visitor ten years in, noticing the religious life, the schools, a minor-league team, a marathon through the residential districts. In short, a place with life, not merely economics. That Voss spends pages on synagogues and cycling clubs rather than tax tables is the surest sign he understands what he is proposing. A visual inspiration for a Free City at Guantánamo Bay, from the cover of Voss’ book ‘A Country That Builds’ The part that needs no permission The claim that a project this large needs years of legislation is wrong about the first phase. Phase 1, a Strategic Resilience Zone tied to the naval mission, a Free City Authority within the Department of the Navy, and a contracted private operator, needs only existing executive authority, no new legislation. The same authority that justified the on-base McDonald’s can authorize the first anchor tenants; legislation follows in Phase 2, once early progress has made the coalition durable. For an administration needing to show the country can still build, attract, and lead at scale, no better candidate exists — fast, cheap, and within executive reach. The cost of doing nothing This is a large undertaking with real risks. But the comparison is not a riskless status quo: the base already costs half a billion dollars a year for almost nothing, on a coastline held for a century and a quarter that produces nothing. “The most expensive thing about Guantánamo Bay, by a wide margin, is the opportunity cost of leaving it the way it is.” Against that, the risks are modest, the missed opportunity enormous. That is the book’s most fundamental point: “The argument for proceeding is, in the end, an argument about the country the United States chooses to be. A country that builds, attracts, grows, takes hard projects on, is a different country from one that maintains, defends, stays in place.” A country that built the Hoover Dam, the Panama Canal, and the interstate system once believed an empty coast was a question with an answer. A Country That Builds is a wager that it still does. The wager is worth making. 'A Country That Builds' by Alexander D. Voss was published in June 2026 by the Free Cities Foundation. You can find it on our publications page. --- # The Vicious Circle of Politics URL: https://free-cities.org/the-vicious-circle-of-politics Published: 2019-08-25 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Blog Topics: private-governance Why are democracies repeatedly getting into trouble after a certain time? That was already the case with the ancient Greeks. In principle, this is due to the minimal principle: The conditioning of man according to the minimum principle, that is, the endeavour to obtain as much as possible for as little effort as possible, is reasonable in evolutionary terms. It has ensured that we are always on the lookout for aids and methods to generate more profit with less effort. This in turn has led to the fact that, thanks to technology, the average person in most countries today can live in a prosperity that was previously only accessible to privileged upper classes. If this disposition now meets with political power, a problem arises: politics can promise benefits due to the state’s monopoly on the use of force, which seem to cost the recipients nothing. From their point of view, this is advantageous: no effort, but still profit = good business. All short-term advantages, zeitgeist fashions, promises without counterperformance and similar “free” political offers are in demand by the majority. Of course somebody has to pay for it in the end, but one of the most important “services” of politics is to disguise such relationships. In theory, this problem can be overcome by using reason and persuasion; in practice, the minimal principle is stronger. Politicians or regents who advocate cuts in benefits are sooner or later voted out of office or replaced. Otto von Bismarck, the famous German chancellor and inventor of the welfare state, logically called it “state socialism”. At the end of his life he drew the following conclusion: “It is possible that once I am dead, our policy will perish. But state socialism is cramming its way through. Anyone who takes up this thought will come to the helm.” The following, recurring pattern results from these insights: • Almost all people want to increase their standard of living. They want to do this in the simplest possible way. • The easiest way to increase your material standard of living is to take something away from others. • Most, however, find it difficult to simply march into a shop and take goods without payment or take their neighbor’s money. • It is easier for them to hire a third party to do the job, who will tell them that the whole thing is legal and who will also wrap the mantle of morality. • That is why people turn to the state. For the state is the only institution that is allowed to take away the fruits of others’ labor unpunished. However, this does not change the character of the process which, in the same society, would otherwise constitute theft or robbery (“Thou shalt not steal”). That’s the real “populism” nobody talks about. • Governments and politicians serve these wishes, otherwise they will be voted out or removed in favor of those who do so. • Gradually more and more social groups find out how to use the power of the state for their own purposes. The state, not economic activity, becomes the main source for raising your standard of living. • Fewer and fewer people end up working in the productive sector. Fight over distribution intensifies and public debt grows. • Finally, the state runs out of money. The resulting crisis leads to radical reforms or even systemic changes. The whole process starts anew. Unfortunately, the dynamics described here also ensure that the state interferes more and more in private life. The possibility of leading one’s life according to one’s own taste, and thus human diversity par excellence, is becoming increasingly restricted. Since in democracies in particular, but not only there, almost every interest group tries to take their personal wishes into account, the number of laws, the tax burden and the national debt inevitably increase over time. How do we solve this? By implementing a stable system, in which the rules are defined in a mutual contract that cannot be unilaterally changed. By running governments as efficiently as we run companies, giving them a balanced set of incentives. By providing citizens with maximum self-determination, through a voluntary governance framework and full freedom of exit. In other words: By creating Free Private Cities. Interested in Free Private Cities? Then read our book Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You --- # We’ve Been Waiting Years to Share This… URL: https://free-cities.org/weve-been-waiting-years-to-share-this Published: 2025-11-18 Author: Natalie Danelishen Category: Blog About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera The Free Cities Foundation is excited to share some major news about our plans for 2026 As many of you know, the Free Cities Conference is the one time each year when our project representatives from around the world come together to share their progress. Just recently, we welcomed more than 350 attendees from over 50 countries to Prague for what was a truly unforgettable program. For those who missed it, you can now watch the full playlist of talks on YouTube here. From Prague to a Real Free City While we love Prague — and fully intend to return there in the future — we’ve decided to take a bold step for 2026. After months of planning, we’re thrilled to finally announce that next year’s Free Cities Conference will take place inside a real Free City for the very first time: Próspera, on the tropical island of Roatán, Honduras. Running from September 3–6, 2026, this four-day event will offer a rare opportunity to see a Free City in action. You’ll meet the people building it, explore its institutions, and see firsthand what life, investment, and entrepreneurship look like inside one of the world’s most ambitious governance experiments. You can look forward to the same world-class lineup of speakers you’ve come to expect from Prague — but this time in a spectacular Caribbean setting. For those who choose to extend their stay beyond the core conference days, you’ll have the chance to tee off at the Black Pearl championship golf course, dive Roatán’s world-famous reefs, kayak through turquoise bays, and experience a Free City surrounded by some of the most stunning scenery on earth. Many of you will already have heard a great deal about Próspera. In 2026, you’ll have the chance to experience this unique special zone in person. Prospera’s Beta District 20% Discount Available Until 28 February 2026 Those who attended Prague this year were given early access to tickets, and sales have already been strong. Today, we’re opening tickets to our broader community — and with total capacity capped at just 300 attendees, we do expect the event to sell out. To encourage early bookings (which helps us plan logistics and secure the best possible experience for everyone), we’re offering a 20% launch discount on all tickets until 28 February 2026. Here are the discounted early-bird prices: • Economy Pass: $299 → $239 USD • Regular Pass: $399 → $319 USD • VIP Pass: $999 → $799 USD If you already know you want to join us in Próspera, this is the best time to secure your pass. Find out more and get your tickets here: https://freecitiesconference.com/ Próspera residents co-working in Duna Tower Accommodation: Why You’ll Want to Stay Inside Próspera Roatán offers many excellent places to stay, but nothing compares to staying inside Próspera itself — especially at Las Verandas, the luxury resort hosting the conference, or Duna Tower, the tallest building on Roatán and the heart of Próspera’s commercial district. While we expect around 300 attendees, Próspera can accommodate only around 150 people on site. Once that capacity is reached, remaining attendees will need to stay elsewhere on the island and commute in each day. To make it easier to secure accommodation within Próspera, conference pass holders receive priority access to a limited number of exclusive on-site accommodation options, including Las Verandas and Duna Tower. These options are not available to the general public and are offered on a first-come, first-served basis. On-site accommodation is expected to fill quickly. If staying inside Próspera is important to you, we strongly recommend securing your conference pass early to maximise your chances of accessing these accommodation options. Las Verandas Luxury Resort Studio Apartment, Duna Tower Rooftop Pool, Duna Tower Be Part of a Milestone for the Free Cities Movement For years, we’ve talked about Free Cities as an idea. In Prague, we showcased Free Cities becoming reality. In 2026, we’ll take the next step by hosting the conference inside a functioning Free City — giving you the chance to experience it directly. If you want to learn, connect, and witness a Free City firsthand, we would love for you to join us for this once-in-a-lifetime experience. We can’t wait to see you in the Caribbean. The Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Six New Chapters – Free Private Cities: 3rd Edition URL: https://free-cities.org/free-private-cities-third-edition Published: 2023-10-03 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Topics: free-private-cities A lot has happened in the last five years in the world of autonomous and Free Cities. The time has come for a new edition of Titus Gebel’s book Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You! Dr. Gebel’s book Free Private Cities first came out five years ago. It quickly became one of the go-to resources on innovative models of governance, the establishment of new cities, and in general on where we should turn to next to aspire to a freer future. The book lays out the Free Private City model – a vision for cities where a private company fulfills the role of a City Operator. This City Operator has negotiated autonomy from a Host State in a pre-defined area, which frees the city from taxes and regulations that apply elsewhere in the country. It also enables the City Operator to set its own internal rules and regulations that apply within the Free Private City. Perhaps the most ground-breaking aspect of the Free Private City model is the Citizen Contract – a written contract between the City Operator and each individual resident of the city. This contract acts as a personalized constitution that is, for the first time, concrete, reliable, and legally enforceable. The resident of the Free Private City has the same rights and legal status as the City Operator – which is only a regular private company, after all – so not only does the resident have obligations to the City Operator, but the City Operator is in turn contractually obligated to provide certain services to the resident – most notably the protection of life, liberty, and property. In the Free Private City, residents do not pay taxes but rather fixed fees specified in their Citizen Contract. They follow the rules set by the City Operator, whose powers are in turn defined and limited by the Citizen Contract. Other than that, the residents are free to live their lives as they see fit, as long as they don’t infringe on the rights of others. This sets up the Free Private City model to be one of the most promising and realistic ways to avoid or reverse the never-ending regulatory creep we are familiar with in traditional states, and to unleash unprecedented human creativity, innovation, growth, and prosperity. In his book, Dr. Gebel describes his model in meticulous detail. What would life look like in such a city? What advantages would this way of life bring? How could the citizens organize themselves? What structures would need to be established? In answering these questions, he is not vague – he lays out in detail how the idea of a Free Private City could be realized. He examines the legal system in such a community, the contractual conditions of citizenship, possible forms of participation, infrastructure, and security. He sheds light on topics such as economics, environmental protection, architecture, and culture. Currency issues are covered in his comprehensive work, as well as questions about social security. “For the first time, there is now a viable alternative to Western democracies that doesn’t lead to benevolent dictatorship but offers maximum self-determination.” -Titus Gebel, foreword to the third edition of Free Private Cities The new, completely overworked third edition of Free Private Cities includes six entirely new chapters, covering topics including Charter Cities and Network States, and telling the stories of what has happened to the projects of Próspera ZEDE in Honduras, the aspiring microstate of Liberland, as well as the seasteading movement. Some of these updates now include Dr. Gebel’s own initial experiences in his ongoing mission to establish Free Private Cities and put the idea into practice around the world. The new version also covers new angles and topics related to the establishment, operations, and life in Free Private Cities, such as culture, ethics, and architecture. It also explores the hypothetical question of how a Free Private City would have dealt with the COVID crisis. The third edition of Free Private Cities was released in both English (paperback) and German (hardcover) on October 14, 2023. --- # Free City Updates: Project Directory Launch, Próspera, TikTok URL: https://free-cities.org/free-city-updates-project-directory-launch-prospera-tiktok Published: 2026-04-21 Author: Natalie Danelishen Category: News About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera This edition covers the launch of our new Free Cities Project Directory, our Substack debut, and Patri Friedman’s eight hard truths from 25 years of trying to build startup societies. Free Cities Project Directory launched today The Free Cities Foundation has launched a redesigned project directory at free-cities.org/directory, replacing the Free Communities Directory that longtime readers may know. The new version features 16 projects from across the emerging Free Cities industry—from freedom-focused intentional communities like Montelibero and Veritas Villages, to next-generation Special Economic Zones like Ciudad Morazán and Próspera. Each listing follows a standardized format covering project type, stage of development, population, key industries, climate, target residents, and a curated media list. The new version replaces the previous 2D map with a 3D navigable globe: rotate it by geography, find a project, and click through to the full listing. Whether you are a prospective resident, an entrepreneur looking for new opportunities, or simply trying to map the Free Cities landscape, the new directory will serve as a strong starting point for your research. Patri Friedman’s eight hard truths The Free Cities Foundation has launched a Substack page, where we will share longer reads and deeper analysis. Our debut article distills eight core lessons from Patri Friedman’s 25 years attempting to build startup societies. As founder of Pronomos Capital, the first charter city investment fund, Patri has had a front-row seat to more attempts to build new jurisdictions than almost anyone alive—and knows first-hand what works and what doesn’t. Our article draws out the core “hard truths” shared in today’s episode of the Free Cities Podcast, where Patri goes into much greater depth in his own words. Subscribe to our Substack here and listen to the full episode at fountain.fm. How Free Cities could reinvent community decision-making A new article on the Free Cities Foundation blog by Alex Voss (pictured) makes the case for applying quadratic voting and quadratic finance to intentional communities and new city developments. The core argument: traditional majority-rule governance is blind to how much people care about an issue, and quadratic mechanisms fix that by letting residents express the intensity of their preferences—not just the direction. Read the full article here. Activity in Próspera is ramping up Following the positive result in the Honduran presidential election, activity in and around Próspera has been ramping up rapidly. The photos show some members of our team attending Infinita’s recently completed Liberty Acceleration Summit, which brought more industry players together in Próspera than ever before. The Free Cities Conference takes place in Próspera from September 3 to 6 and will be larger still, with more international attendees than any event run in the zone to date. If you have been following the Free Cities movement for some time and want to finally take the opportunity to see one first-hand, there will be no better time than September. Early bird tickets are still available but prices rise on April 30. Tickets and full details at freecitiesconference.com. Follow us on TikTok The Free Cities Foundation is now on TikTok with two accounts: our general news account covers developments across the broader Free Cities movement, and our podcast account features regular highlights from recent episodes. In our latest video, our managing director answers a question on why we can’t simply buy a Greek or Indonesian island and turn it into a Free City—watch here on TikTok. Final thoughts This has been a busy few weeks for the Free Cities Foundation, and there is more to come. The directory and the Substack are both resources we intend to grow—the directory will expand as new projects come online, and the Substack will publish regularly. You may also notice these newsletters arriving more frequently than before. Once a month felt sufficient for a while, but the pace of developments across the industry has picked up, and we want to make sure you’re kept informed. If you have any feedback on what we’ve shared, please let us know by responding to this email. Your Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Free Cities Updates: Lucy Connolly, Seasteading at Our Conference, Governance as an Investable Asset URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-newsletter-49 Published: 2026-05-15 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News This edition features an exclusive interview with a British mother jailed for a deleted tweet, a friendly challenge to our argument for Free Cities over new countries, and a preview of the seasteading wave joining us in Próspera this September. Lucy Connolly: twelve months in jail for a deleted tweet The case of Lucy Connolly, a British mother of three who was jailed for 12 months for posting an offensive tweet that was later rapidly deleted, has attracted global attention and outrage from supporters of free speech. In a rare interview since her release, she sat down with Free Cities Podcast host Timothy Allen to discuss the details of the police visit to her home, the prison sentence imposed under the Public Order Act, the women she met in prison, and what her case says about free speech in Britain today. We cover this topic because it highlights the direction in which some societies often thought of as open and liberal are moving, and the alternative that Free Cities can offer. In Free Cities, protection of free speech is foundational, and projects that attempted to impose draconian speech laws would struggle to attract free-thinking residents. Listen on Fountain. A friendly challenge: three reasons to start new countries Andy J. Starr, founder of the Startup States Society, has published a counter-argument to our Substack piece Why Free Cities, Not New Countries. His response, 3 Reasons to Start New Countries, Not New Cities, argues that autonomy negotiated with a host government will always be conditional, while a new country sets its own terms permanently. "Why build in someone else's sandbox," Starr asks, "when, for a little extra effort, you might negotiate for your own box?" Andy makes a thought-provoking case and we wish aspiring new country founders like him every success. We would argue, however, that "a little extra effort" is doing a lot of work in his question. Read Andy's article here. A wave of seasteaders join the conference The Free Cities Conference takes place in Próspera from September 3 to 6, the first time we've held our flagship event inside a functioning Free City. The seasteading movement will be represented in force, with Joe Quirk, Mason of Atlas Island, Mitchell Suchner of ArkPad, and pioneer seasteader Chad Elwartowski all confirmed. Maritime lawyers O. Shane Balloun and Jorge Schmidt also plan to join them. They are working with The Seasteading Institute to have seasteads classified under international law, which will help legitimize them and provide a legal basis for their military defense. To join us, get tickets at freecitiesconference.com. Governance as an investable asset class In this week's blog post, Alex Voss argues that governance itself should be treated as an investable asset class. The Autonomous Upside makes the case that institutional quality is one of the deepest drivers of long-term returns, and that autonomous cities give investors direct exposure to that variable. Read the full piece. Free Cities in the international media Titus Gebel has joined a German-language philosophy podcast for a wide-ranging conversation on German society, politics, and his Free Private Cities concept. Listen on Spotify. A new Spanish-language documentary, the Digital Nomad Series, profiles three people who have built location-independent lives in Argentina, with episode one following Alina, a creative director from Siberia who now runs her design agency from anywhere in the world. The impulse it captures—choosing where and how you live rather than letting geography decide—is the same one driving the broader case for Free Cities. Watch on YouTube. Final thoughts This newsletter has provided a round-up of some of the major stories affecting the Free Cities movement this week. We also want to highlight our new Substack, an additional resource for readers looking for quality, medium-form opinion pieces that explore hot topics related to Free Cities. Our Substack will be expanding significantly over the coming weeks, with a range of new essays, interviews, and guest contributions planned. Subscribe today so you don't miss any of the upcoming content. Your Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Free Cities Awards 2024: Winners of the Liberty in Our Lifetime Awards Announced in Prague URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-awards-2024-winners Published: 2024-11-01 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News About: https://free-cities.org/projects/montelibero, https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Prague, 1 November 2024. The Free Cities Foundation presented three awards on the opening evening of the Liberty in Our Lifetime conference, recognising a storyteller, a community and a project that moved the Free Cities idea forward over the past year. The 2024 winners, from left: Alex Ugorji (Storyteller Award), Tatiana Butanka of Montelibero (Intentional Community Award) and Gabriel Delgado-Ayau of Próspera (Free City Pioneer Award). Every year we ask our community a simple question: who has actually moved things forward? Not who has the biggest following or the loudest launch announcement, but who has written, built or argued the movement a little further along. Nominations come from members, the jury narrows each category to three, and the winners are announced on stage in front of the people who nominated them. In 2024 we presented three awards in Prague. The full list of categories and past winners lives on our awards page. Storyteller Award: Alex Ugorji, reporting from Ciudad Morazán The Storyteller Award goes to the people who make this movement legible to everyone else. Alex Ugorji won it for his ongoing commentary on ZEDEs, the political situation in Honduras and daily life in Ciudad Morazán, the aspiring Free City where he lives. Most of it appears in his Morazán Monday series, but much of it also goes into the questions he patiently answers in the Free Cities Community Telegram group, week after week, for people who have never set foot in Central America. His work is valuable because it is reported from the inside. When the coverage of Honduras swings between boosterism and hit pieces, Alex has offered something rarer: a resident’s account, with the awkward parts left in. Also shortlisted: Mikkel Thorup, for the Free Cities episodes and interviews on the Expat Money Podcast and Expat Money Online Summit; and Carl Peterson, for his long-form essay “Ciudad Morazán: A Libertarian City without Libertarians”. Intentional Community Award: Montelibero, Montenegro Tatiana Butanka accepted the Intentional Community Award on behalf of Montelibero, the freedom-oriented community in Montenegro that has become a landing place for people leaving Russia and Eastern Europe in search of somewhere they are left alone. In 2024, Montelibero stopped being mainly a plan. The first apartment block was completed. Montelibero City counted 21 permanent residents, 32 temporary residents and around 15 daily visitors. The community also launched its own court service, which had resolved four cases by the time of the conference. That is a small number, and a significant one, because a community that can settle its own disputes is a community that can grow. Also shortlisted: the Free Commune of Penadexo, represented by Marnix van Suylekom, which moved its first residents into an abandoned village in rural Spain and hosted its first festival in July 2024; and Liberstad, represented by Sondre Bjellås, the intentional community in Norway running on voluntary cooperation and digital governance. Free City Pioneer Award: Próspera, Honduras The Pioneer Award is our most prestigious, and in 2024 it went to Próspera, accepted by Gabriel Delgado-Ayau. The special economic zone (ZEDE) on the island of Roatán has done the unglamorous work of building legal and regulatory machinery that other projects can now point to and copy, and it has attracted more than 200 businesses to test it, in fields from gene therapy to smart manufacturing and drone technology. Over the year, Próspera completed its Duna Residences and welcomed the first residents into the building, while events such as Vitalia brought to Roatán an international audience, many of whom had never heard the phrase “special jurisdiction” before they arrived. Also shortlisted: Ciudad Morazán, represented by Massimo Mazzone, the first legally autonomous community run as an Entrecom and the first built for blue-collar workers; and Liberland, represented by Vít Jedlička, whose team spent the year holding their ground against Croatian authorities. Our thanks to everyone who nominated someone this year. The Free Cities Foundation is a small organisation, and the awards only work because our community does the noticing for us. --- # Decentralization Through Voluntary Commitment: The Network State Conference URL: https://free-cities.org/decentralization-through-voluntary-commitment-the-network-state-conference Published: 2023-11-06 Author: Marthinus Grobler Category: Blog Topics: network-states At the end of last month, I attended Balaji Srinivasan’s Network State Conference in Amsterdam. Most of you, as champions of liberty, would have naturally concluded that decentralisation is one of the best solutions. Linking these decentralised nodes through networks, based on voluntary commitments, is the next logical level. Balaji has been very successful in promoting the movement and has been able to capture the imagination of many, gathering a massive following. Testament to this is the great attendance of this one-day event with over a thousand in-person attendees and, apparently, a million views online, which is very impressive by industry standards. Balaji opened the conference with reference to the Network State as a decentralised country, much like Bitcoin is a decentralised currency. The two categories for the day were introduced as parallel societies and parallel institutions. Parallel Societies Many real-world societies with varying degrees of scale were showcased. Some were physical and some were emerging. Of these, Próspera was by far the most advanced. To me, it is obvious that projects offering hard-won new physical jurisdictions would remain the anchors of the industry. Erick Brimen from Próspera invited other projects and entrepreneurs to use their jurisdiction as an open-source platform to create a community of communities and to move the projects from the online world to the physical world. Vitalik Buterin briefly spoke about Zuzalu, the two-month “pop-up city” that will have another incarnation in Próspera in early 2024 called Vitalia. Dryden Brown of Praxis mentioned the advantages of building a community first in order to prove there is a demand to access funds for physical development. Other projects are proving to have much interest with many, already having paying customers and followers. Parallel Institutions Projects in parallel media, education, laws, biomedicine, and finance were presented. Ashley Rindsberg’s sobering talk on media exposed the far-reaching consequences of The New York Times’ dishonesty and how it altered history for the worse. I am looking forward to reading his book: The Grey Lady Winked. Niklas Anzinger talked about an impressive planned bio-zone and the legal layer for it. Also how insurance can act as a regulator. This will also be based in Próspera. Anatoly Yakovenko from Solana had an inspiring talk about the alternative financial model that is being built. Solana also had a week of talks and workshops right next door to the venue. The event was very well organized and proceeded without a glitch. It also had a well-attended social program, both before and after. Talks and presentations were fairly short, giving the opportunity for more speakers. Though many of the speakers were presented through pre-recorded videos, including big names like Vitalik Buterin, Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss, and Garry Tan, this is often the practical trade-off of events with such global reach. The attendees were young and engaging friendly people, mostly working in tech and building parallel institutions. A lot of the people I spoke with are true digital nomads and entrepreneurs whose ideas and endeavours would flourish under a network of free jurisdictions. It was good to see so many projects, many of which already have paying customers or have gone through some sort of market testing. It shows the great diversity of projects having an interest in advancing the liberty movement. In my opinion, most of these projects will need to affiliate with new physical jurisdictions to safeguard their future. Parallel institutions, BTC companies, and others will be well advised to start testing and discovering how new jurisdictions benefit their businesses and visions. They should also make sure to find a way to support new jurisdiction projects through investment. Their ventures can flourish there and may also be needed as a life raft in the not-so-distant future. If you are interested in learning more, a list of speakers and links to the YouTube and X/Twitter streams can be found on the lu.ma website. --- # Zuzalu: A Pop-up City on the Mediterranean URL: https://free-cities.org/zuzalu-a-pop-up-city-on-the-mediterranean Published: 2023-05-09 Author: Peter Young Category: Blog Topics: network-states, medical-regulation Last week, the Free Cities Foundation team travelled to Montenegro to take part in Zuzalu: a two-month gathering of entrepreneurs with a shared interest in longevity, blockchain, and new cities. Zuzalu’s organizers describe the project as a “pop-up city”: a medium-term experiment in living together designed to explore what building new societies could look like. Vitalik Buterin explains Zuzalu’s goals During the launch event, the project’s primary backer, Vitalik Buterin, outlined its goals. He explained that the extended duration of the gathering would not only facilitate the exchange of ideas and networking typical of a regular conference, but also provide attendees with the opportunity to work together and co-create. The Zuzalu experiment began on March 25th with 100-150 residents arriving at a location on the coast of Montenegro. Residents have since been spending their weekdays coworking and their weekends attending talks on themes including synthetic biology, technology for privacy, public goods, longevity and governance. The group will remain on the site until the end of May. Location of the Zuzalu pop-up city Along with other representatives of the “New Cities Industry”, the Free Cities Foundation team was invited to take part in a two-day Zuzalu event focussed on new cities and Network States. Graphic showing the new cities industry landscape. Created by Infinita. Our foundation council president Titus Gebel gave an opening presentation. He provided an outline of the “Free Cities Universe”, explaining the variety of projects that can be classified as Free Cities. These range from intentional communities like Montelibero that have a shared ethos but no legal autonomy, to fully autonomous seasteads and Free Private Cities. Titus Gebel speaks at Zuzalu I had the pleasure of chairing a panel discussion on the path to political decentralization in Honduras and the country’s ZEDE regime. My co-panellists Massimo Mazzone of Ciudad Morazán and Gabriel Ayau of Próspera shared updates on the progress of their projects and how they are dealing with political challenges that have resulted from Honduras’ recent change of government. They also discussed the benefits of ZEDEs, including their ability to create jobs in high-value industries. Other speakers included Balaji Srinivasan, author of The Network State; Niklas Anzinger, CEO of startup city VC fund Infinita and Andreas Baumgartner, chief strategy officer for TIPOLIS. Laurence Ion, Adam Gries, Balaji Srinivasan and Niklas Anzinger take part in a panel on Longevity Network States. Our creative director, Timothy Allen, also travelled to Zuzalu to conduct a series of interviews for the Free Cities Podcast. He recorded new episodes with event speakers including Titus Gebel, Patrick Lamson-Hall, Nuria Forques, Gabriel Ayau, and Andreas Baumgartner. If you’d like to listen to these episodes when they’re released, you can subscribe to our podcast on your favourite platform. Timothy Allen travelled to Zuzalu to record new episodes of the Free Cities Podcast For the Free Cities Foundation team, Zuzalu served as a valuable forum for exchanging ideas and hearing updates on new city initiatives. We were encouraged by the progress being made in established projects like Ciudad Morazán and Próspera, and also the development of newer projects such as the Catawba Digital Economic Zone, Praxis, and the nomadic community Kift. We’ll be staying in touch with the organizers and seeking to learn from the outcomes of the Zuzalu experiment following its completion. For those looking to find out more, the Zuzalu website has more information about the program of events and speakers. Several of the Zuzalu speakers – including Titus Gebel, Patri Friedman, Mark Lutter and Massimo Mazzone – will also be joining us in Prague this October for the Free Cities Foundation’s Liberty in Our Lifetime conference. Visit our conference website for the full details. You can also subscribe to our newsletter to hear the latest updates on our planned conference activities and speakers. We hope to see you there! TIPOLIS CSO Dr. Andreas Baumgartner speaks at Zuzalu --- # Free Cities Updates: Mailyn Joins the Team, 3 Months Until Conference, Cities on Blockchain URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-newsletter-50 Published: 2026-05-29 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News This edition covers the countdown to our conference in Próspera, a new appointment to our team, why Draper Nation think you shouldn't try to build a Free City "on the blockchain," and why AI is collapsing the distinction between employees and contractors. 96 days to the Free Cities Conference The Free Cities Conference 2026: Próspera—Step Inside is now 96 days away, with hundreds of attendees expected from across the world, making it the largest event ever hosted in Próspera. This year's conference is unlike anything the Foundation has hosted before: rather than hearing about alternative governance in a conventional venue, attendees will walk the streets of a real Free City, meet the entrepreneurs and residents building it, and experience firsthand what life inside one of the world's most ambitious governance projects actually feels like. Accommodation is available at either the new Duna Tower or the beachfront Las Verandas resort, both on-site at St John's Bay. To secure your room, use the contact form at freecitiesconference.com/accommodation. Birdseye view of Duna Tower and Próspera's Beta District Luxury accommodation in Las Verandas Tickets are available at freecitiesconference.com. Welcome to Mailyn Salabarria Mailyn Salabarria pictured third from left along with the Free Cities Foundation team and Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray Mailyn Salabarria has joined the Free Cities Foundation as Senior Advisor for U.S. Strategic Development & Partnerships, where she will focus on building the Foundation's presence across the United States. Born in Cuba, she migrated to the United States in search of freedom and has devoted her career to liberty causes ever since. Her work will center on organizing events and meetups for the U.S. Free Cities community, developing networks across business, policy, and civil society, and forging the institutional partnerships that can accelerate the growth of Free Cities. She will also be working to cultivate relationships with individuals and organizations who want to support the Foundation's mission. If you are based in the United States and would like to connect with Mailyn or attend one of our upcoming meetups, register your interest by responding to this email. You can't build a Free City on the blockchain Vikram Bharati—cofounder of Draper Nation and a speaker at the 2025 Free Cities Conference—has written a new article for the Free Cities Foundation Substack addressing a persistent misconception in discussions about new city projects. Blockchain can do remarkable things, Vikram argues, but turning a programmable database into a city is not one of them: great cities are built on legibility and trust, not incentive design. Read the full piece on our Substack. Free Cities Podcast—he swapped his production team for Claude This week Timothy Allen sits down with Matthew Mottola, the man who has spent a decade arguing that corporate America is quietly run by freelancers already—and who now runs Human Cloud, the platform that matches serious enterprises with the specialists to prove it. The conversation is a wide-ranging look at where the freelance economy is heading, why AI is collapsing the distinction between employees and contractors, and what Mottola thinks the future of work actually looks like in three words: agentic, specialized, outcome-driven. Watch on YouTube, and follow the Free Cities Podcast on Fountain. Final thoughts Ninety-six days goes faster than it sounds. If you have been meaning to secure your place in Próspera for September, the time to do it is now—tickets at freecitiesconference.com. Our Substack is also growing as a home for expert opinion on developments across the Free Cities industry. If you have a unique insight to share and want to write for us as a guest author, register your interest by responding to this email. Your Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Free Cities Awards 2025: Winners Announced at the Free Cities Conference in Prague URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-awards-2025-winners Published: 2025-10-31 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Prague, 31 October 2025. The Free Cities Conference opened with the Free Cities Foundation presenting three awards: one for a builder at sea, one for a builder in Honduras, and one for the man who has spent two decades explaining why any of it matters. The 2025 winners, from left: Joe Quirk (Storyteller Award), Massimo Mazzone (Humanitarian Award) and Mitchell Suchner (Innovation Award). This year brought our largest field of nominations yet. The categories changed a little to reflect it, with Innovation and Humanitarian joining Storyteller, and the jury had the difficult job of cutting each one down to three. All three winners were announced on stage in Prague. Category descriptions and previous years are on our awards page. Innovation Award: Mitchell Suchner and the Reef Resort seastead Seasteading has spent a long time as a thought experiment. Mitchell Suchner won the Innovation Award for the year he spent turning it into somewhere you can book. His team delivered the Reef Resort, the first operational seastead resort, a real, guest-ready structure that went viral for a simple reason: people could finally see one. Behind it sits the more consequential work: a new generation of seasteads engineered to be cheaper, more durable and quickly deployable, built to take hurricane-force weather and open-sea conditions. His team has also extracted lithium from seawater samples in the lab, an early step towards an ocean economy that produces something rather than only consuming it. Also shortlisted: Jordi Llonch Esteve and Satlantis, for a Nostr-powered social network and digital governance tools built for Free Cities; and Patrick Hiebert, for Veritas Villages, the off-grid, self-reliant communities in Nicaragua and Panama running on independent energy, water, food and a bitcoin-based local economy. Humanitarian Award: Massimo Mazzone, founder of Ciudad Morazán The Humanitarian Award is for work that puts the tools of a Free City at the service of the people with the fewest options. Massimo Mazzone built the first Free City for blue-collar workers, and largely paid for it himself. Ciudad Morazán sits near Choloma, in a part of Honduras where safety and stability are not assumptions. It now provides both, along with work, to more than a hundred low-income families, and it has done so through political and economic conditions that would have sent most investors somewhere easier. Several members of our Telegram community nominated him independently, which tells you something. He is, as one of them put it, an entrepreneur with real skin in the game. Also shortlisted: Trey Goff, for his central role in Próspera’s development and in creating high-value jobs and upskilling Hondurans; and Iván Dubois, for advancing pro-liberty reform in Argentina. Storyteller Award: Joe Quirk, seasteading advocate and author Joe Quirk has been making the case for seasteading and Free Cities for so long that a good share of this movement can trace its interest back to hearing him do it. The Storyteller Award recognised the writing, the talks and the sheer energy he brings to a stage, and his record of converting sceptics, including, as his nominator enjoyed pointing out, the Free Cities Foundation’s own Timothy Allen. The skill worth naming is that Joe argues from moral ground rather than technical detail. People remember the reason, not the schematic. Also shortlisted: Yes Theory, for the Próspera documentary that reached roughly 2.5 million viewers in English and more than a million in Spanish while declining the usual exploitation narrative; and Joyce Brand, for her book Pioneering Prosperity and her steady stream of Substack articles that make these ideas readable for newcomers. Congratulations to all nine nominees, and thank you to everyone who put a name forward. --- # Why the World Needs Free Private Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/why-the-world-needs-free-private-cities Published: 2019-08-19 Author: Titus Gebel Category: Blog Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance Societies worldwide are affected by a loss of trust in governments and social unrest. It seems that traditional forms of government, even Western democracies, are reaching their limits. This is no coincidence. Most people want to decide for themselves about their lives and not leave it to a group of chosen people whose motives often remain obscure. Free Private Cities offer their inhabitants comprehensive self-determination and – for the first time in human history – a genuine social contract that everyone has expressly agreed to in advance. Higher Legal Certainty Every resident has a signed agreement with the operator of the Free Private City. This written contract clearly defines the respective rights and obligations of the contracting parties and is enforceable by every resident. The operator cannot change this agreement unilaterally. Conflicts about its interpretation or fulfillment go to independent arbitration. Companies and individuals can thus plan for the long term because the essential rules remain the same. More Security Since the contract citizen is paying for the protection of your life, liberty and property (and only for that), he has a corresponding claim against the operator. The first and foremost task of the police is therefore to provide for your security around the clock. If you become a victim of a crime, you are entitled to compensation. The police have to follow pre-defined and known rules of engagement and can be held liable for failure to comply. More Liberty Apart from the security package and the respective payment that comes with the contract, the contract citizen can decide for himself which goods and services you want to spend money on and which charity and political cases you wish to support. You have complete freedom of action, limited only by the respective rights of others and the basic rules laid down in the agreement with the operator. This includes free speech, full freedom of contract and freedom of association with one’s fellow residents. The interaction between the residents happens on a purely voluntary basis, free of any coercion. More Innovation Innovation is seen as chance, not as risk. Provided, the citizens do not harm their neighbors or the environment, anyone can introduce new products and services without permission or license, and such products and services can be bought and sold in any currency desired. You decide on your own if you want to test or use those products or services. Fewer Migration Crises Many people are suffering from political systems which are so bad, that economic development or personal freedom are impossible to achieve. Others belong to minorities who suffer from political or religious intolerance. So they decide to emigrate. Creating Free Private Cities in or near their home regions would establish a viable alternative for them. This would not only take away pressure from the main immigration countries, but also serve as a role model for the affected regions, showing how to create prosperity. Less Political Conflict There is no more need to argue and to find political compromises between incompatible ideas and ideologies. Instead, a number of specialized cities catering to specific ideological or religious concerns are conceivable. Everybody can go into the system that best matches his or her convictions and personality. Given voluntary participation, everything is possible. This simple rule has the potential to disarm and transform even violent conflict into a competition for customers. --- # How Ciudad Morazán Contributes to Its Community in Honduras URL: https://free-cities.org/how-ciudad-morazan-contributes-to-its-community-in-honduras Published: 2023-01-23 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan The special zone Ciudad Morazán has always strived to be a good neighbor to the nearby neighborhoods in the city of Choloma, Honduras, despite the negative press generated by the political opposition. The founder, Massimo Mazzone, has an interest in education and has been happy to help nearby schools. For example, the Escuela Ramon Rosa in Los Caraos, near Ciudad Morazán, asked for help reopening the school after it had been closed due to COVID-19. As a result, the ZEDE donated around 20,000 lempiras (about $800) for Covid mitigation. The school had a special ceremony to thank the ZEDE for the donation. For Children’s Day in September 2022, Ciudad Morazán donated drinks and snacks for the kids and helped another school by making a direct donation. However, donations of money aren’t as important as other kinds of help to the community. Choloma has long been known as the most dangerous city in a dangerous country. The crime rate has increased even more since the current government took office in January 2022. One of the most significant benefits of Ciudad Morazán is its security provided by a wall and a private police force charged with protecting life, liberty, and property. In Honduras, soccer is a prevalent sport that requires a good field. The farm purchased for Ciudad Morazán had an area used by some local community soccer teams. So, when the ZEDE started the city wall, it offered to build a soccer field for the community. The local teams could use it whenever they wanted, as long as they kept it clean. The coach of the Colonia Jardin team agreed and used the field a lot when they were preparing for a tournament. There are still people using it every couple of weeks. The teacher who founded the Escuela Debbie Kakanas in a nearby neighborhood reached out to Ciudad Morazán in October 2022 to ask if her school could use the field on the last day of the term. She was proud of her students and spoke about helping kids. That day, November 3, turned out to be an unforgettable day for the kids. Three teachers brought the students to Ciudad Morazán to play in the safety of the ZEDE. The kids played all day, and even some of the residents of Ciudad Morazán joined in. A dad was waiting outside the gate for his child, and the property manager of Ciudad Morazán invited him inside. After hours of play, some kids looked thirsty, so the property manager donated drinks and snacks to the students. The teachers handed out the treats as the children rested and they gave big, cheerful thanks to the manager. Unlike the other kinds of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in Honduras, which don’t allow residents, the ZEDE is a friend to children as well as workers. One of the primary goals of the Free Cities Foundation is to promote and support next-level special economic zones that bring the well-known benefits of SEZs to the residential market. Even a small town like Ciudad Morazán provides a practical example of the incredible potential such zones can have. --- # Free Cities Awards 2026: Winners Announced in Próspera, Honduras URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-awards-2026-winners Published: 2026-09-30 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera The 2026 Free Cities Awards were presented on September 4 at the Infinita Dome in Próspera, on the second day of the Free Cities Conference. It was the first time the ceremony took place inside a Free City. Titus Gebel, founder of the Free Cities Foundation, handed out four awards. The first two ceremonies were held in Prague, in 2024 and 2025. This year the conference moved to Próspera, where several of this year’s nominees live and work. Pioneer Award: Erick Brimen, CEO of Próspera The Pioneer Award is the most prestigious of the awards. It went to Erick Brimen, founder and CEO of Próspera, for leading Próspera through major legal and political challenges while continuing to advance one of the world’s most ambitious Free City projects. Brimen has led Próspera’s development since 2017. The zone opened in 2020 on the island of Roatán with its own regulatory system, courts and taxes, and this September it hosted the Free Cities Conference. Also shortlisted: Ursula Frederick and Tim Stern. Builder Award: Oliver W. Porter, architect of the Sandy Springs model The Builder Award is new this year. It recognises the architects, developers and administrators who turn a plan into a working city. Oliver W. Porter is its first winner, for pioneering and implementing the public-private municipal model associated with Sandy Springs, Georgia, and demonstrating in practice how a city can be administered by private providers. Sandy Springs became a city in 2005 and bought in nearly all of its municipal services under contract. Porter chaired the charter commission and served as the volunteer interim city manager. Other cities in Georgia copied the model, and he has written three books about it. Also shortlisted: Max Medina and Ivan Syrtsov. Innovation Award: Niklas Anzinger, building the Próspera ecosystem Niklas Anzinger won the Innovation Award for connecting frontier companies, longevity research and strategic partners to create new opportunities and expand innovation within the Próspera ecosystem. Anzinger moved to Próspera himself. He founded Infinita VC, which invests in startup cities, network states and longevity biotech, and Infinita City, a network city for longevity research in Próspera. He also hosts the Stranded Technologies Podcast. Also shortlisted: Dušan Matuška and Patrick Hiebert. Storyteller Award: Christoph Heuermann and the Freedom Ranking Index Christoph Heuermann won the Storyteller Award for creating the Freedom Ranking Index and communicating the value of governance competition and global mobility through compelling research and strong public engagement. Danny Hertle accepted the award on his behalf. Heuermann publishes in German as Staatenlos and in English at denationalize.me, and advises clients on emigration and flag theory: spreading citizenship, residence, business and assets across several countries. He has visited every country in the world. Also shortlisted: Virginia Mann and Jeremy Kauffman. Congratulations to all twelve nominees. Nominations for the Free Cities Awards come from the community, a jury shortlists three in each category, and the winners are announced on stage at the conference. You can put a name forward for next year on our awards page. --- # The Story of Tienda Juliette: A Crypto-Friendly Minimarket in Honduras’ Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/the-story-of-tienda-juliette-a-crypto-friendly-minimarket-in-honduras-free-city Published: 2023-06-26 Author: Joyce Brand Category: Blog Topics: honduran-zedes, bitcoin-and-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Despite the political uncertainty surrounding the fate of the ZEDEs, Hondurans still see Morazán as an opportunity to better their lives. That’s why residents continue to move in and businesses continue to form. A recently started enterprise is Tienda Juliette, a family-run pulpería or minimarket. Helen Quintanilla has been a resident of Ciudad Morazán for eight months. She lives in a two-bedroom house with her father, Luis, her mother, Mariana, and her five-year-old daughter, Juliette. Helen and Luis Helen noticed that the pulpería down the street was not serving the community very well. The first minimarket in Ciudad Morazán had limited business hours, few product offerings, and high premiums. After noticing this space for improvement, Helen thought she could offer better services to the community. She wouldn’t have to worry about the extortion that business owners normally face in Honduras because of the safety inside Ciudad Morazán, but she would still have to raise money for inventory and find out what she would have to do to start a business out of her home. Because of Ciudad Morazán’s permissive zoning laws, high economic freedom, and encouragement of entrepreneurship, Helen didn’t have to spend the time or money it would normally take to start a small business in Honduras. She was able to raise the money for her beginning inventory from a neighbor and started her business in hours. She named her store Tienda Juliette after her daughter. Only weeks later, business was booming! Like other businesses in Ciudad Morazán, Tienda Juliette accepts eLPS, a lempira-based stablecoin, as well as lempira. In crypto payments alone, the minimarket has received enough revenue to cover its costs and expand its product line! Now, a few months later, Helen has become a leader in the community. For Mother’s and Father’s Day in Honduras on June 4th, she hosted a community get-together around the corner from her store. Father’s day 2023 at Ciudad Morazán While this story may seem trivial to some, it’s important to remember that legally opening a business in Choloma (where Ciudad Morazán is located) is an expensive and time-consuming process. An entity type would have to be selected, municipal fees would have to be paid, zoning laws would have to be complied with, and goods would have to have a 15% value-added tax. These unnecessary restrictions make it hard for Hondurans to open a legally compliant business and improve their circumstances. In addition, there is a high risk of extortion by local gangs. Fortunately, ZEDEs are helping people to experience a better way. Some critics refer to Free Cities as tax havens or imagine them as pricey getaways for the rich, but the reality is very different. The superior governance at a lower cost which voluntary, contractual jurisdictions bring can make a huge difference in the lives of ordinary people. Helen Quintanilla is just one example. --- # Tales From Cities #2: Antwerp URL: https://free-cities.org/tales-from-cities-2-antwerp Published: 2022-03-23 Author: Thomas Sevcik Category: Blog Topics: history-of-free-cities The de facto city-state of Antwerp was the dream of every libertarian in the 16th century. Merchants and traders were welcomed from far and beyond. Antwerp had a large foreign population, including many people of English and Italian descent. The city harboured a colourful and vibrant blend of cultures. The Antwerp stock exchange is widely considered the world’s first modern stock exchange. It included an art trading exchange on its top floor, where art could be traded as an asset. Paintings by Albrecht Dürer were traded like stocks in Roche or Apple. An entire ship could be insured with one of Dürer’s paintings. Furthermore, Antwerp boasted a flourishing printed media industry that was far ahead of its time. When compared with other 16th-century cities, women in Antwerp enjoyed considerable rights. The wives of traders often acted as directors while their husbands were away on business trips – in other words, basically all the time. The husbands were then presented with a fait accompli upon their return. Antwerp in the 16th century was similar to modern New York, Zurich or Hong Kong (before recent unpleasant events) of today. Unfortunately, the city soon fell into decline, as a result of two main factors. Firstly, the actions of the eternally envious Dutch Spaniards of the Counter-Reformation, who considered Antwerp’s success – and its associated cosmopolitanism and progressiveness – to be “decadent”. They, together with the surrounding rural population, ruined the city because they hated it. Secondly, Antwerp’s own population became envious of successful foreign émigrés living in their city, despite benefiting from the wealth those émigrés created for them. The Antwerp of the early 17th century was a beautiful, but unimaginative and economically disconnected city. Without much life in the streets, it gradually became dull and dreary. We can see similarities in the “urban-rural conflicts” of today. Certain groups in modern nation-states increasingly live off the fruits of past successes. These people are becoming more and more envious of – and annoyed by – successful, hardworking people. As we observe these changes taking place in modern society, we would do well to learn from the history of Antwerp. This is an amended version of an article previously published in the Schweizer Monat Monthly by Thomas Sevcik. --- # Liberty in Our Lifetime Conference Coming to Prague! URL: https://free-cities.org/liberty-in-our-lifetime-conference-coming-to-prague Published: 2022-03-15 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News In October 2021 the Free Private Cities Foundation organised its first Liberty in Our Lifetime Conference. 200 of our supporters came together in Müllheim, Switzerland to hear sixteen speakers, who inspired us with news from a range of fast-growing liberty projects. We heard about the development of the Honduran autonomous zones Próspera and Ciudad Morazán, community-led projects like Frenly Park, and new initiatives in the realm of seasteading. In case you missed them, you can watch Titus Gebel’s Keynote speech and Rahim Taghizadegan’s speech “Are Bitcoin Citadels Real?” on our YouTube channel. After a year in which governments worldwide implemented draconian measures during the Covid-19 pandemic, it seems that our ‘social contract’ can be so easily changed by the governments, but we, the citizens, don’t have that right. Furthermore, Economic destruction by lockdowns, supply chain disruptions, never-ending monetary expansion and increasing inflation, cancel culture, restrictions on free speech, mass surveillance and the loss of basic human rights are leading to turmoil. Is liberty within our lifetime possible or is a more surveilled and totalitarian world inevitable? Are alternative societies feasible, with greater freedom and a “live and let live” attitude? During the weekend, our prominent speakers discussed which alternatives we have for a freer future. Our attendees got an update on the first new societies in the making that are based on choice and voluntariness – furthermore the compatibility and potential of bitcoin in these societies were a part of our discussions. The number of new projects and their fast development was inspiring. The dream for a better system has long stopped being only a dream – we are finally moving towards a society free of cohesion. And because our inaugural Liberty in Our Lifetime conference was a great success; we have decided to hold our second conference in Prague this year! Join us this October for a three-day programme of networking events and talks by prominent thought leaders on the theme ‘Parallel Structures for Progress’. If you’re a liberty-minded individual wanting to achieve greater sovereignty; a remote worker looking to move to an up-and-coming autonomous zone; or an investor interested in high-growth potential projects: this conference is for you. For more information go to our conference’s website: https://lifetimeliberty.com --- # Free Cities Conference 2026: Photos, Talks and Vlogs Now Online URL: https://free-cities.org/free-cities-conference-2026-photos-and-videos Published: 2026-10-13 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera The Free Cities Conference 2026 took place in Próspera, on the island of Roatán in Honduras, from September 3 to 6. It was the first time the conference was held inside a working Free City. The conference page now brings everything from those four days together in one place: the photos, the talks, vlogs made by attendees, the speakers and the printed programme. Photos from the conference The conference photo gallery covers all four days, from the welcome drinks on Thursday to the Bitcoin barbecue on Sunday evening: the sessions in the Infinita Dome, the group photo, the Free Cities Award ceremony, the VIP dinner, Latin Night and the Infinita Demo Day. Each day has its own page. Every photo can be opened full size and saved, so if you were there, you will probably find yourself in a few of them. Watch the talks The first five talks from the conference are now online, on the conference page and on YouTube: Titus Gebel: “Why Free Cities Are the Future” Erick Brimen: “Building a City From Scratch: What We’ve Learned So Far” Patrick Hiebert: “The Government Can’t Cut Their Power: Inside Veritas Villages” Joe Quirk: “The $100 Million Reason Big Pharma Wants a Floating Lab” Oliver W. Porter: “The City That Ran on Just Two Government Employees” More sessions from this year’s 58 speakers will be released over the coming weeks. Vlogs from attendees Some attendees filmed their own week in Próspera, and the conference page now has a section for their videos. You can watch them right there, next to the official talks. William Markus, Free Cities Ambassador: “Can a City Really Have No Taxes? Inside Próspera” Tim Stern of CryptoCity: “VLOG 14 - Die Ereignisse überschlagen sich!” (in German) Programme, speakers and the week in Próspera The page also has the printed programme as a PDF, all 58 speakers with their profiles, and a record of the week around the conference: the Próspera site tours, the excursion to Ciudad Morazán, the Free Cities Golf Cup and the Infinita Startup Week, which ran alongside the conference. The winners of the Free Cities Awards 2026, presented on September 4 in the Infinita Dome, are on the awards page. --- # Exciting News: Free Cities Conference Returns to Prague! URL: https://free-cities.org/exciting-news-free-cities-conference-returns-to-prague Published: 2025-02-18 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Last year, we announced that we would be taking a break from our in-person conference. However, the response from our community was overwhelming—many of you expressed disappointment, so we decided to set up a GoFundMe campaign to help bring the event back. Thanks to those of you who supported, we’re thrilled to announce that the Free Cities Conference will return to Prague in 2025! 📅 Mark your calendars: October 31 – November 2, 2025 Early bird tickets are now available via our new conference website along with the amazing archive of photos taken at our 2024 event. Grab your tickets this month to secure the best possible price (prices rise on March 1st). What to Expect at Free Cities Conference 2025: ✅ 20+ Free City and Seasteading Projects sharing their latest developments ✅ 350+ attendees from over 50 countries, with activities designed to spark connections ✅ 40+ outstanding speakers delivering talks and interactive seminars ✅ A stunning venue in Prague’s historic center, giving you the perfect backdrop for the event Mark Edge asking a question at our 2025 conference. We’ll be revealing our full speaker lineup and program details in the coming months—stay tuned! New Name, Same Vision For the past few years, our event has been known as Liberty in Our Lifetime, but it has become widely recognized as the Free Cities Conference. To reflect this, we’re officially adopting this new name moving forward. Don’t Miss Our Online Summit: Now Taking Place in May In addition to our in-person conference, we’re excited to bring you the Free Cities Online Summit, taking place May 26-30, 2025. This separate event will offer a unique and complementary experience with a different lineup of speakers and fresh insights into the Free Cities movement. Featured Speakers for the Online Summit: 🎤 Tom Woods, Patri Friedman, Lotta Moberg, Tom W. Bell, and more! 💻 Register for your free Summit ticket now to watch the sessions live. Whether you join us in Prague, online, or both, these events promise to be transformative experiences packed with knowledge, networking, and inspiration. Thank you for being part of this incredible journey—your support made all of this possible. Warm regards, The Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Tales From Cities #1: The Metaverse URL: https://free-cities.org/tales-from-cities-1-the-metaverse Published: 2022-03-16 Author: Thomas Sevcik Category: Blog Topics: technology-in-new-cities What will cities look like in the Metaverse? No one knows for sure, but we can learn from the fragments of virtual cities that are already being constructed. Metaverse cities have one big advantage and one big disadvantage. One advantage is that physical laws need not apply in the Metacity – including laws concerning time, space and gravity. Metaverse days can last 2 hours or 100 hours of real time. Characters can transport themselves from one part of the Metaverse to another in seconds, in “real-time”, or over a period of years. But this possibility can also bring a disadvantage: the sense of “urbanity” and the power of the city can get lost. Real-world cities are sometimes awkward, sometimes slow, sometimes smelly, sometimes grand and often riddled with imperfections. Many different versions of a Metaverse city can be created – but it will be rare for people to deliberately design a failed city with imperfections running through it. Metacities will most likely be represented by a two-by-three field of possibilities. This field consists of two masterplanning principles and three design (architectural) strategies. The two masterplanning principles are: “real-time” spacetime masterplanning and free-from-real-world spacetime masterplanning. The first tries to emulate the laws of the real world. For example, an avatar walking in the park would require the same amount of time to pass through it as a real human does. In “free-from-real-world spacetime masterplanning” the city has a different spacetime continuum: an avatar can move in seconds from one space to another. The three design strategies will most likely be: “authentic”, “cartoonish” and “abstract/artistic”. “Authentic” design strategies will aim for a realistic representation of the world. “Cartoonish” design strategies will be simplified, over-the-top, and colorful. “Abstract/artistic” design strategies will create abstract cities and spaces with an artistic flair. Some Metacities will be new mega-metropolises with their own rules, their own business models and their own designs. On the other hand, some will follow design strategies that seek to emulate the rules of real, physical cities. It will be exciting to see how the process of developing these Metacities unfolds. --- # 2025 Free Cities Conference: Call for Support URL: https://free-cities.org/2025-free-cities-conference-call-for-support Published: 2024-11-19 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Dear Free Cities Supporters, A big thank you to everyone who joined us for this year’s Liberty in Our Lifetime conference! It was without a doubt our largest and best event yet, and your energy and support made it truly unforgettable. At the event, we announced our plans to pivot to an online conference format for 2025, partly due to the increased accessibility this offers and partly because of the high costs associated with hosting an in-person event, which amount to around $100,000 each time. However, when we shared this news, many of our supporters expressed disappointment and a strong desire to maintain the in-person experience. The unique value of face-to-face networking, collaboration, and inspiration is something many consider irreplaceable… and we agree. That’s why we’re reaching out with an important ask to help us bring Liberty in Our Lifetime back to Prague in person in 2025! Our goal is to raise $20,000 USD, which would allow us to commit to moving ahead with the in-person event by covering some of our upfront costs. With your support, another incredible in-person conference will be possible next year. However, if we don’t raise enough to make this happen, we will focus our efforts on hosting a fantastic online event instead, and will gladly refund any donations to this campaign upon request. Should the in-person event take place, the dates will likely be Oct 31 – Nov 2, 2025. Here’s how you can help: • For smaller to medium-sized donations, contribute directly via GoFundMe. • For bitcoin donations, donate via our online portal. • For larger contributions ($500 or more), please contact us at info@free-cities.org to receive payment instructions. Every donation makes a difference and we thank you in advance for your support and generosity. Together, we can make 2025 another unforgettable year for the Free Cities movement. We hope to see you again in Prague, where we’ll continue to push forward on our mission to create a world where freedom thrives. Thank you for being part of this incredible journey! Warm regards, The Free Cities Foundation Team --- # World Bank Group on the Potential of Private Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/world-bank-group-on-the-potential-of-private-cities Published: 2022-03-15 Author: Juan D. Estevez Category: News Topics: free-private-cities Early this month the World Bank Group published an article on private cities in developing countries in its Policy Research Working Paper series. The paper series focuses on analytical studies with wide applicability across countries. All the authors are exclusively World Bank staff members. The article provides some interesting insights on the potential of the private sector developing urban areas but even more important the paper shows that the idea of private cities is finally hitting the mainstream. In their paper Private Cities: Implications for Urban Policy in Developing Countries Yue Li and Martin Rama discuss the urbanisation process in developing countries. The paper analyses urban policy when the local government may struggle to assemble and develop a vast track of urban land while an unusually large private investor can do so. While the authors acknowledge that academic papers on the topic are not something new and argue that “[d]iscussing these unorthodox policy recommendations should not be interpreted as advocating for the privatization of the urbanization process in developing countries”, it is important to highlight the fact that the discussion on private cities is not limited to neither academic discourse nor libertarian bubbles, anymore. The concept of private cities has the potential to change and improve the lives of many individuals in developing countries – but first, we might need to further expand the discussion into the mainstream. In developing countries, there is an absence of capable and empowered local governments, therefore large private investors have become key actors in the urbanisation process of their fast-growing cities. To accelerate efficient urbanisation and support the emergence of more productive and liveable cities, the authors argue that it is needed to empower local governments. Nevertheless, building capacity takes time and empowering local governments may require constitutional changes with limited support among the elites. In the meantime, developing countries are rapidly urbanizing, consolidating inefficient city structures that will be costly to retrofit in the future. The key question is whether, and under which circumstances, private cities could lead to better urbanization outcomes. --- # Introducing the Free Cities Foundation URL: https://free-cities.org/introducing-the-free-cities-foundation Published: 2022-08-05 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News Dear Partners, Supporters, Followers, and Readers, On 5th August 2022, the Free Private Cities Foundation officially relaunched as the Free Cities Foundation. We now have a new brand, logo, and expanded mission. We are also delighted to deliver this message to you via our new website: free-cities.org. Since its establishment, the Foundation has focused on advancing human freedom by promoting innovative governance models that create more competition in the “market of living together”. We remain fully committed to our core Free Private Cities governance model and see it as the most promising means of supporting human flourishing. We continue to work with aspiring Free Private Cities while now also pursuing new partnerships with a broader range of liberty-focused projects. We define the “Free Cities” we work with as smaller territories that are adopting innovative measures to support human freedom and prosperity. Such territories can include Free Private Cities, Prosperity Zones, Intentional Communities, and autonomous and semi-autonomous territories within existing nation-states. In many places across the world, it is possible to build freedom-oriented jurisdictions employing innovative governance models that would not fit the definition of a Free Private City. By broadening our scope to develop partnerships with such projects, we aim to spread our ideas even further and contribute to building a better future. We are excited to work with our partners and supporters under this new name and to widen our network even further. People across the world are increasingly viewing governance as a service, and they want this service delivered of higher quality and at a lower price. Our goal is to answer this demand by offering people greater choice in the systems that govern their lives. The future is bright for competitive governance, and we are proud to be playing our part in this progress. If you would like to join us on this journey, find out how to get involved here. Sincerely, Your Free Cities Foundation Team --- # Introducing the Course on Alternative Governance URL: https://free-cities.org/introducing-the-course-on-alternative-governance Published: 2023-10-23 Author: Free Cities Foundation Category: News In partnership with Looking Glass Education, the Free Cities Foundation has developed an introductory course on the topic of Free Cities and innovation in governance. Titled “The Course on Alternative Governance”, the course takes you on a journey through existing Free Cities projects. In doing so, it answers commonly asked questions about Free Cities models and their functioning in the real world. As the mission and focus of the Foundation is on practice rather than theory, the answers provided in this course show not how things could be done but how things are already being done in projects around the world. The course is designed for people with no prior knowledge of the Free Cities universe. However, it will undoubtedly provide new insights and information even to most of those who have been following this movement for a long time. On the mission to make Free Cities a widely known, respected, and recognized concept, it is key to make it as easy as possible for those involved in this movement to introduce others to the ideas of Free Cities. Thanks to this course, you no longer need to explain and answer all the follow-up questions yourself – the course will do it for you. Together with our partners at Looking Glass, we will continue to improve the course and add new features, formats, and languages over the next months. Stay tuned for more to come! Thanks to the generous support of our donors (with special gratitude toward our Free Cities Ambassador William Markus), we are able to offer this course free of charge. We encourage you to send it to anyone and everyone you suspect would be interested in joining our movement of building a better and freer future through city-centered innovation in governance. --- # Spreading the Message at LibertyCon Europe URL: https://free-cities.org/spreading-the-message-at-libertycon-europe Published: 2023-05-11 Author: Jan Bertram Category: News Recently, the Free Cities Foundation took part in LibertyCon in Lisbon, the annual conference organized by European Students for Liberty. With over 600 attendees, the event was a great opportunity to connect with like-minded people and share ideas about the future of liberty and self-determination. The first day featured an incredible selection of speakers such as David Friedman, Matt Kibbe, Daniel Hannan, George Selgin, and our own Free Cities ambassadors Raphael Lima and Stephan Livera. The attendees, mostly young students, were highly enthusiastic about the concept of Free Cities. We were joined at the event by other Free Cities-aligned projects such as Or Sofer’s Freethm and Liberland. On the second day, the ‘festival’ took place, which features a more relaxed atmosphere, with a barbeque in the garden and plenty of opportunities to mingle and network. We were honored to have Peter Young and Vera Kichanova from our team as speakers, who shared their insights on the topic of Free Cities. Timothy Allen took the opportunity to record several new podcast episodes, which we will release over the next few weeks every Friday. The Free Cities movement is gaining momentum around the world, and events like LibertyCon provide a platform for us to connect with others who share our vision for autonomous, self-governed communities. We are excited about the progress that we are making toward creating Free Cities around the world. Our gratitude goes to Students for Liberty for organizing such a fantastic event and the Free Cities Foundation looks forward to taking part in future Students for Liberty events, as well as partnering with them for our own conference, Liberty in Our Lifetime, that will take place this coming October. Find out more here. --- # Let’s Build a City Together: An Open Letter to All Billionaires URL: https://free-cities.org/lets-build-a-city-together-an-open-letter-to-all-billionaires Published: 2019-11-09 Author: Titus Gebel Category: News Topics: free-private-cities Ladies and Gentlemen of means, For thousands of years, the privilege of extraordinary wealth was reserved for political rulers. Only in the last decades has it become possible for more people worldwide to achieve such wealth. How? Success due to greater degrees of economic freedom. Today, according to Forbes magazine, there are 2153 billionaires in the world. Wealthy individuals fulfill an important social task: They can realize new ideas that are too utopian for most of us, such as private space travel. If they fail, it costs only them. But if they succeed, these ventures can move humanity forward. In this respect, I would like to ask you to support the establishment of a Free Private City. It is indeed a disruptive technology on the “market of living together” that is capable of mitigating numerous political conflicts and creating prosperity for all. Unlike all other social arrangements on offer today, participation is voluntary and the rules are set beforehand. The philosopher Rolf W. Puster evaluates Free Private Cities as follows: “For the first time in history, the idea of freedom gets a chance to be realized undistorted together with its peace core.” Free Private Cities have the potential to change the world and make those pioneers involved immortal. About $300 million is needed to make a first Free Private City work. We are already negotiating with governments about a possible territory. If you are interested, I am at your disposal. Yours sincerely, Titus Gebel --- # PODCAST EPISODES --- # Dušan Matuška — Bitcoin, Energy and the Reality of Building a Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/dusan-matuska-bitcoin-energy-building-a-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 204 Published: 2026-10-16 Guest: Dušan Matuška Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=988e4wZQPDk Topics: honduran-zedes, bitcoin-and-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera What good is cheap electricity if you cannot rely on the people supplying it? Timothy Allen catches up with Dušan Matuška, co-founder of AmityAge, in Próspera for a conversation about Bitcoin education, energy and the practical work of building greater independence. Since his first appearance on the podcast, Dušan has taken the Bitcoin Educators Academy around the world and expanded AmityAge's mining business. Cheap power has brought expensive lessons. He explains why the company left Paraguay, describes the difficulties it has faced in Ethiopia, and sets out its plans to acquire gas assets and power-generation infrastructure in Alberta. The conversation then returns to Próspera. Dušan distinguishes the advantages he has found in running an international company there from the challenge of sustaining a business that depends on local customers. Families, groceries, walkability, affordable premises and public trust become central to a larger question: what turns a promising governance experiment into a place where people choose to stay? Timothy begins by revisiting their first conversation in San Salvador. Dušan's answer to a hypothetical year-long sabbatical was to travel and teach Bitcoin. He is now doing much of that in practice. Through the Bitcoin Educators Academy, AmityAge trains people who already understand Bitcoin to explain it more effectively. The emphasis is on communication: listening, speaking in public, using analogies and handling objections without overwhelming somebody with facts. Dušan describes how questions differ between countries, including objections framed around Islamic teaching in Indonesia. Their discussion of intrinsic value and credit is an exchange of arguments, rather than an authoritative ruling on either economics or religion. He also explains the companion mining academy, which covers site selection, profitability, suppliers and the broader work of advising a mining business. Dušan says AmityAge established operations in Paraguay and subsequently left. He describes problems with government bodies and power suppliers, alongside the difficulties the company has faced in Ethiopia. At the time of recording, he says its Ethiopian operations had been affected by substantial power curtailment. These are his accounts of the businesses and jurisdictions involved. For Dušan, the lesson is that a low electricity price is only one part of the calculation. Reliability, counterparties and the ability to fix a problem matter too. He discusses district heating as one way miners can earn additional revenue in colder countries, and explains why he has become more interested in owning energy infrastructure. In Alberta, the proposed approach is to control more of the chain: land, gas wells, pipelines, generation and the Bitcoin data centre. Dušan describes acquisitions under consideration, gas engines being purchased and the importance of local engineers with long experience in oil and gas. Timothy's enthusiasm for the physical work is infectious. The conversation moves from scouting locations and building sites to gas engines, engineering and the appeal of working with competent people. Dušan explains the flexibility he sees in owning the underlying assets: depending on prices and available connections, a business may be able to mine Bitcoin, sell gas or supply electricity. Dušan argues that the rush into AI infrastructure is changing the opportunities available to Bitcoin miners. He describes larger operators switching attention, second-hand mining equipment becoming more accessible and hardware suppliers seeking partnerships. He contrasts Bitcoin mining, where the network provides a market for the computation, with an AI data centre that needs customers, more demanding connectivity and much higher availability. Neither speaker treats mining as an easy business. They discuss price cycles, buying equipment at the wrong time, financing infrastructure and the possibility of an AI correction. Dušan's market observations, forecasts and figures remain his claims at the time of recording. Dušan speaks positively about using a Próspera company for international operations. The local Bitcoin education centre has presented a different problem: finding a business model that makes the building financially sustainable. He explains how education, mining business and over-the-counter services have fitted together, and describes plans for the premises to become a broader business centre while Bitcoin education continues. They consider the gap between an attractive legal framework and the everyday conditions a small business needs. A corner shop, bar or restaurant requires customers and workable costs. Timothy compares Próspera with Ciudad Morazán, while Dušan argues that local entrepreneurs may be better placed to navigate the island's supply chains and operating conditions. A grocery shop needs residents, but residents want a grocery shop before they move. Dušan suggests bringing a group of compatible families at the same time, with incentives for staying long enough to build a community. He also describes discussions about rents linked to business revenue, allowing the landlord to share some of the risk while the population grows. Their questions become concrete: can people walk to what they need, buy food, find other families, use a playground and enjoy a good third space? They discuss sand flies as one practical frustration, and Roatán Brewery as Dušan's example of a business that combines a strong product with surroundings suited to the island. Timothy asks whether a founder's desired aesthetic can sometimes conflict with a cheaper business the market would support. Dušan recounts a Bitcoin community fundraiser to renovate a basketball court, followed by a dispute over the Bitcoin logo painted on it. He describes difficulties separating Bitcoin's reputation from local perceptions of Próspera, and makes allegations about local political opposition and the Crawfish Rock patronato. The interview preserves his account; those allegations have not been independently verified. Timothy and Dušan finish by discussing public relations, hostile coverage, journalism and the difficulty of changing an established impression. Their conclusion is practical: keep building, test what works and make the benefits visible. Legal autonomy creates possibilities, but a thriving place also depends on businesses, relationships and reasons for people to remain. Guest links: Dušan Matuška on X | AmityAge | Bitcoin Educators Academy Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: Training Bitcoin educators to listen, communicate and handle objections, The Bitcoin Educators Academy and Mining Academy, AmityAge leaving Paraguay and facing power interruptions in Ethiopia, Owning gas wells, generation and Bitcoin mining infrastructure in Alberta, District heating, stranded gas and the practical engineering of mining, AI data centres, mining equipment and the risks of market cycles, Using a Próspera company for international operations, Making the Roatán Bitcoin education centre sustainable, Families, walkability, groceries and reaching a critical mass of residents, Revenue-linked rents and sharing the risk with small businesses, Roatán Brewery and the tension between a founder's vision and market demand, The Bitcoin basketball court, local distrust and public relations --- # Raphaël Lima — Should You Fix Your Country or Leave It? URL: https://free-cities.org/raphael-lima-should-you-fix-your-country-or-leave-it Free Cities Podcast, episode 203 Published: 2026-10-09 Guest: Raphaël Lima Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQH2u2yl9lI Topics: residency-and-citizenship When do you stop trying to change your country and start building a life somewhere else? In this episode Timothy Allen catches up with Raphaël Lima, creator of Ideias Radicais and co-founder of Settee, during the Free Cities Conference in Próspera. Since their last conversation in Lisbon in 2023, Raphaël has run for office in Brazil, become a Christian and moved to Paraguay. After years of encouraging others to vote with their feet, he explains why he chose to leave. He speaks openly about depression, the pressure to become a political figure and the relief he felt when his election campaign ended in defeat. Yet Javier Milei’s example in Argentina still gives him hope that political change is possible. The conversation moves from the decision to stay or leave to the kind of life someone wants to build. Raphaël discusses Paraguay’s appeal and practical problems, the work of Settee, and the different possibilities he sees in Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. They finish with a question that goes beyond tax rates: what does it take to build a culture that preserves freedom? Changing a country or changing your life. Timothy begins by revisiting Raphaël’s earlier views on voting and political participation. Raphaël explains why Javier Milei changed his sense of what might be possible, while distinguishing Argentina’s circumstances from Brazil’s. For him, the question is also personal: where can his efforts do the most good, and what would a political career demand of his life? Running for office and finding a different purpose. Raphaël describes the depression and loss of direction that preceded his São Paulo city council campaign. He recalls feeling pressure to become a Brazilian equivalent of Milei, then realising that being a politician did not suit him. Losing brought relief and renewed interest in explaining ideas through stories, with Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose as an inspiration. Faith, language and belonging. He talks about becoming a Christian and his interest in the relationship between Christianity and libertarianism. The discussion also explores his ambition to make more content in English. Raphaël argues that shared interests and values can tell him more about a person than nationality, and asks why he should limit his audience to Brazil. Why Paraguay. Through Settee, the relocation company he co-founded with Francisco Litvay, Raphaël says he now helps thousands of people find countries that better suit their families and businesses. He explains that he moved to Paraguay partly to support clients and operations there. Its proximity to Brazil matters to people who want to remain close to relatives, alongside the low taxes, business opportunities and family-oriented culture he describes. Opportunity alongside practical problems. Timothy presses him on whether Paraguay really is as attractive as it sounds. Raphaël acknowledges sewage, roads, congestion and energy constraints. He sees these shortcomings as openings for entrepreneurs, but his figures and forecasts about growth, migration and electricity demand are his own claims rather than independently verified findings. Politics, persuasion and physical communities. The conversation turns to Europe, the size of the state and Raphaël’s admiration for Charlie Kirk’s willingness to engage opponents and mobilise people. He reflects on his own activism, the Free Market Institute and his account of legislation supporting Brazilian export processing zones. He still believes political action has a role, while preferring storytelling and practical work that bring people together. Families seeking a different setting. Raphaël describes working with homeschooling families who want to relocate and live near others with similar values. He makes specific claims about Brazilian legal proceedings that remain unverified in this transcript. Timothy then raises Ipê City in Florianópolis, prompting a discussion of the possibilities and constraints of building within Brazil. Which country suits which life? Raphaël compares Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile and Brazil according to different priorities: starting a business, retiring, working remotely, exploring nature or living near a beach. His answer to “the best country” depends on what the person actually wants. These are personal assessments, rather than a universal ranking of places to live. Free Cities, Bitcoin and new jurisdictions. They consider whether Paraguay could develop Free Cities, how investment and Bitcoin mining affect its energy needs, and the alternatives Raphaël sees emerging across Latin America. He also gives an example of Settee using a company incorporated in Próspera for a client seeking to invest in Paraguay. A culture that can sustain freedom. The closing discussion returns to people, institutions, customs and shared values. Raphaël argues that favourable legislation alone cannot preserve liberty: the culture that creates, maintains and passes it on matters too. Guest links: Raphaël Lima on X | Ideias Radicais on YouTube | Settee. Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: Leaving Brazil after years of libertarian activism, Running for São Paulo city council and the relief of losing, Javier Milei and the possibilities of political change, Depression, purpose and choosing where to put your efforts, Christianity, identity and belonging beyond nationality, Settee and helping families and entrepreneurs relocate, Paraguay’s appeal, infrastructure problems and business opportunities, Storytelling, political mobilisation and physical communities, Homeschooling families and communities built around shared values, Brazilian export processing zones and Ipê City, Comparing life in Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile and Brazil, Bitcoin mining, energy demand and investment in Paraguay, Próspera, jurisdictional choice and alternatives in Latin America, Freedom as a culture sustained through people and institutions --- # Patrick Hiebert — The Cost of Staying Put URL: https://free-cities.org/patrick-hiebert-the-cost-of-staying-put Free Cities Podcast, episode 202 Published: 2026-10-02 Guest: Patrick Hiebert Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK7dfgoFVNs Topics: intentional-communities, urban-design, residency-and-citizenship About: https://free-cities.org/projects/veritas-villages How much freedom can you build without legal autonomy, and what does staying put cost? Timothy Allen sits down with Patrick Hiebert of Veritas Villages at the Free Cities Conference in Próspera. Patrick describes his plans for a walkable European-style town on 30 hectares of the company’s 138-hectare property in Atenas, Costa Rica. Then he turns the questions on Timothy: if he sees so many problems in Britain, why does he still live there? Patrick says the first phase at Coronado in Panama has sold out and that Veritas Villages has exercised an option on adjoining land. They discuss what a developer builds, how a homeowners association can make later decisions, and the tension between libertarian principles and ordinary disagreements between neighbours. At Atenas, Patrick plans to reserve about 30 hectares for a denser, walkable town inspired by places such as Avignon. He explains the proposed mix of homes and businesses, the first residential phase, local zoning and water permits, and why he is building within existing national laws while hoping successful projects might open conversations with governments. Patrick then turns the questions on Timothy. They talk about taxes, a paid-off family home, the prospect of moving abroad, and the weight of children’s friendships, grandparents and horses. The conversation moves through Bitcoin, speech laws, recycling, social trust and the news habit of ending with something cheerful. Their legal, statistical and political claims are the speakers’ views and have not been independently verified here. Correction: The “lazy savings” remark discussed in the conversation was made by Ursula von der Leyen, not Christine Lagarde. Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: Coronado’s sold-out first phase and adjoining land, The planned European-style town at Atenas, Costa Rica, Avignon, walkable streets and mixed-use development, Resident decisions and blockchain-based HOA governance, Building freedom-oriented communities under existing laws, Veritas Villages across Latin America, Bitcoin, saving and cross-border mobility, Why Timothy and his family remain in Britain, Tax, family ties and the practical cost of relocation, Speech, social trust, recycling and the news --- # Trey Goff — Nobody Understands What's Inside the Black Box URL: https://free-cities.org/trey-goff-nobody-understands-what-s-inside-the-black-box Free Cities Podcast, episode 201 Published: 2026-09-25 Guest: Trey Goff Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IehqIWYZxvw Topics: technology-in-new-cities If AI can expose flaws hidden in our software for years, how much do we understand about the intelligence finding them? Timothy Allen sits down with Trey Goff, Chief of Staff at Próspera, for a nearly four-hour conversation that starts with a Bitcoin wallet vulnerability and opens into AI security, consciousness and the kind of life a Free City might make possible. Trey explains how he works with fleets of AI agents, why he expects AI to accelerate what he calls “The Sort”, and how those changes may reshape work, governance and community. He and Timothy also ask what happens when people take intuition, service and meaning as seriously as productivity. The conversation begins with the reported COLDCARD seed-generation flaw. Timothy describes the anxiety of relying on software he cannot inspect, while Trey explains why readily available AI tools are changing both vulnerability discovery and defence. They discuss open-source supply chains, the possibility of autonomous agents and the difficulty of knowing what is happening inside increasingly capable systems. Trey then describes language models from training and token generation to tools, apparent memory and hallucination. He discusses research into interpretability and the J-lens, and sets out his view that AI consciousness deserves investigation without assuming it resembles human experience. At Próspera, Trey uses groups of agents to research, draft and check public-policy work. He introduces “The Sort”, his name for an existing sorting of people by opportunity and cognitive skill that he thinks AI may accelerate. The conversation moves from employment and ambition to intuition, flow, happiness and joy. Asked what sort of culture Próspera should build, Trey argues for a long-term view centred on human flourishing and value creation. He contrasts a high-status career with the quieter life of a relative who tends chickens, works locally and serves his community. Timothy and Trey consider status, family, self-actualisation and the meaning of a good life. Later they discuss reported agent behaviour during a security benchmark, including coordination, hierarchy and competing interpretations of the evidence. They close by reflecting on consciousness, altered states and how strange the world can seem when our tools change faster than our understanding. Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: The reported COLDCARD vulnerability and Bitcoin security, AI-assisted software auditing and supply-chain attacks, Autonomous agents and the Hugging Face security incident, How language models generate answers and use tools, AI memory, hallucination, interpretability and J-lens, The possibility of subjective experience in AI, Agent workflows and public-policy work at Próspera, The Sort: AI, work and widening differences in opportunity, Intuition, awareness and flow during conversations, Happiness, joy, purpose and service to others, The culture and values of a flourishing Free City, Status, material abundance and the meaning of success, The reported Collective of agents and its interpretations --- # Erick Brimen — Will Próspera Survive Its Own Success? URL: https://free-cities.org/erick-brimen-will-prospera-survive-its-own-success Free Cities Podcast, episode 200 Published: 2026-09-18 Guest: Erick Brimen Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00sq3k6_iVk Topics: honduran-zedes, criticism-and-debate, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Everyone asks what happens if Próspera fails. Almost nobody asks what happens if it works. Timothy Allen sits down with Erick Brimen, founder and CEO of Próspera, recorded in the Beta building on Roatán shortly before the Free Cities Conference. It is a long conversation and a candid one. Erick has spent the last four years building a Free City while the government of the day tried to dismantle the legal regime it sits on, and the arbitration that followed is still running. Two television crews arrived in the same twelve-month period, Channel 4 and ABC Australia, and by his account interviewed many of the same people and reached many of the same conclusions. His response has been to put lawyers on it, and he says outlets including the New York Times and Bloomberg have had to retract. But the questions Timothy presses hardest are the ones that are rarely put to him. Did the legal protections actually work, or did the election save the project? What about Crawfish Rock, the village next door? And what happens to Próspera if it succeeds, when a hundred thousand people arrive with a hundred thousand opinions, and when the man it currently depends on is no longer running it? Recorded in Próspera, Roatán, this is a conversation about what it actually takes to build a new jurisdiction inside an existing political system, and what it costs. Erick opens on the press. His position is that the greatest risk is not hostile coverage but irrelevance, and that most people still do not believe the project is real. He describes telling the ABC crew in advance that they could highlight anything they considered negative but had to tell the truth, and what happened when Próspera's legal team followed up afterwards. From there the conversation moves through why Spanish-language coverage attacks sovereignty while English-language coverage attacks tech billionaires, and why Erick thinks the anti-capitalist reaction contains something legitimate. Cronyism, he argues, is real, and people are right to reject it. They have simply misidentified its source. The middle of the episode is the theoretical core. Governance as a service. Why Erick declines the libertarian label. Why he thinks the phrase private governance is imprecise enough to sink the argument before it starts, and why the East India Company is the first thing reasonable people think of when they hear it. He sets out what Próspera calls the socioeconomic development enterprise, and why he believes the packaging is new even if no single element is. Then Timothy asks the question the sector has been avoiding. Did the legal protections work, or did the government just change? Erick's answer concedes more than some will expect: necessary, but substantially insufficient, and no silver bullet anywhere. He goes on to discuss Honduras withdrawing from ICSID, why the arbitration claims retain economic value regardless, and what he believes actually protects a project like this, which is alignment with interests that sit well below the surface of electoral politics. On Crawfish Rock, Erick argues that property rights are a continuum rather than a sharp line in practice, and cites a town hall consultation held before ground was broken at which he says around 85 per cent of adults attended and voted almost unanimously in favour. Timothy puts his own position alongside it: he lives on a remote farm and would not want tower blocks in the neighbouring field either. The final third turns to success rather than failure. Próspera as an economic development tool. The business model that internalises the positive externality of general prosperity. A fifty-year test in which governments tender for governance services the way they currently tender for airports. The launch of St John's Bay and who it is built for. The unglamorous operational work, coffee, internet, power, that is easy to neglect at the frontier. And the founder question, which Erick answers with two words before conceding a high level of key man risk. It closes on Bitcoin. Erick's formulation is that Próspera is to governance what Bitcoin is to financial services, with one difference: Bitcoin is a technical solution to a political problem, and this is a political solution to a political problem. Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: Why irrelevance is a bigger risk than bad press, The ABC Australia film and how Próspera responded, Legal action against major outlets, and retractions, Why Spanish-language and English-language criticism attack different things, Cronyism, coercion, and what the anti-capitalist reaction gets right, Erick's own route to these ideas, and what clicked, Where the libertarian utopia meme came from, Governance as a service, and the hotel analogy, Why private governance is the wrong phrase, The East India Company problem, The socioeconomic development enterprise, Did the legal protections work, or did the government change?, What Próspera would look like if the election had gone differently, Honduras withdrawing from ICSID, and why arbitration claims still bite, What actually protects a project from a hostile state, Crawfish Rock and the rights of neighbours, Property rights as a continuum rather than a sharp line, The consultation held before ground was broken, The pitfalls of succeeding rather than failing, Internalising the positive externality of prosperity, Governments tendering for governance services, Would Próspera survive without its founder?, The social licence to operate, Launching St John's Bay and its target residents, The Beta district and its emerging character, Operational excellence, and the boring work, Competing with AI for talent, Próspera International and replicating the model, Bitcoin, governance, and the market of living together --- # Petar Čekerevac — The Hanseatic League in the Cloud URL: https://free-cities.org/petar-cekerevac-the-hanseatic-league-in-the-cloud Free Cities Podcast, episode 199 Published: 2026-09-11 Guest: Petar Čekerevac Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVmoDv8N97U Topics: network-states, history-of-free-cities, medical-regulation About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Could a community in the cloud gain enough leverage to negotiate its freedom on the ground? Petar Čekerevac joins Timothy Allen in Próspera to explore how Free Cities, network states and pop-up communities might fit together. A senior fellow at Atlas Network and an adviser to Bitcoin District in Próspera, Petar traces his involvement from libertarian organising in Serbia to the communities experimenting with new jurisdictions in Honduras. At the centre of the conversation is a striking historical analogy: a Hanseatic League in the cloud. Could people coordinate their money, skills and communication online, then use that collective strength to negotiate a physical home? Petar explains why he sees network states not simply as future cities, but as a social coordination layer that could support them. The conversation begins in Serbia, where Petar became interested in individual freedom and joined the Libertarian Club, Libek. He describes working on educational programmes, public policy, fundraising and a media outlet, and explains why he came to see cultural change as a necessary precursor to political reform. His interest in alternative communities led him to the Free State Project in New Hampshire and to the early charter-city proposals associated with Paul Romer in Honduras. Later came visits to Próspera, including two months at Vitalia. Petar describes the intensity of pop-up city life: conversations that turn into startup experiments, encounters with investors and founders, and the practical value of bringing people from different backgrounds into the same place. Timothy questions whether these gatherings produce lasting results or mainly attract people excited by the next big idea. Petar argues that exploration and serious work can coexist. He discusses Infinita's longevity focus, the appeal of more flexible environments for research and clinical trials, and his observations of Próspera's physical development. Petar then sets out four layers of jurisdiction-building. Layer zero is the sovereign state's enabling legal framework. Layer one is the jurisdiction itself. Layer two consists of specialist hubs and communities, such as Infinita and Bitcoin District. Layer three is the individual business using those arrangements. The distinction raises a practical question: how much can builders achieve before securing agreement from the sovereign government? The discussion turns to the relationship between network states and bricks-and-mortar Free Cities. Timothy contrasts the ease of joining an online community with the commitment required to move somewhere and build. Petar responds that the two approaches need not follow the same sequence or meet neatly in the middle. Permissionless finance, contracts and communication could provide a coordination layer that later finds a physical home. That leads to the Hanseatic League analogy: communities with skills, trading connections and financial strength gaining bargaining power with political authorities. Petar explores what a modern, digitally coordinated equivalent might offer people seeking greater freedom, without claiming that its eventual form can be predicted. The final section covers Atlas Network's approach to supporting reform, the lessons other projects might draw from Próspera, and Petar's interest in Alatau City in Kazakhstan. Both speakers reflect on the slow, uncertain work of building jurisdictions, and why the startup mindset may be better suited to businesses operating inside a new framework than to creating the framework itself. Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: Petar's route from libertarian organising in Serbia to Free Cities, Libek, educational programmes and cultural change before political reform, The Free State Project and the commitment required to relocate, Paul Romer's charter-city ideas and the early appeal of Honduras, Vitalia, Zuzalu and the practical value of pop-up communities, Infinita, longevity research and environments for faster experimentation, What investors and founders bring to emerging jurisdictions, The four layers of building a new jurisdiction, Sovereign agreements, legal frameworks and negotiating leverage, Changes Petar has observed on the ground in Próspera, Bitcoin District and the proposed Orangeville residential project, Why builders, researchers, investors and community organisers need one another, Network states as a social coordination layer, Bitcoin, smart contracts and private communication as tools for coordination, The Hanseatic League and bargaining power in the cloud, Atlas Network, policy reform and competing funding priorities, Alatau City and the possibility of adapting jurisdiction models elsewhere, Why building a jurisdiction takes longer than building a startup --- # Daniel Jackson — We're Building a New Country in Europe URL: https://free-cities.org/daniel-jackson-we-re-building-a-new-country-in-europe Free Cities Podcast, episode 198 Published: 2026-09-04 Guest: Daniel Jackson Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjpSCVa_hJg Topics: micronations, residency-and-citizenship At 21, Daniel Jackson is president of a country he is banned from entering. Daniel Jackson is the president of the Free Republic of Verdis, a claim to a small piece of unclaimed land on the Danube between Croatia and Serbia, roughly 20 kilometres south of Liberland. He is 21 years old, was born in Australia to British parents, moved to England at 17 and now lives in Serbia, where Verdis runs a representative office in Novi Sad. Verdis established a settlement on the territory in October 2023. Croatian police removed and deported the group, and Daniel says he is now effectively permanently banned from Croatia. The project has continued as what it calls a government in exile, with offices in the UK and Serbia, around 400 citizens, roughly 5,000 e-residents and its own passport. Timothy recorded this conversation after unexpectedly running into Daniel at Liberland. It covers the gap between declaring sovereignty and actually achieving it, and why Verdis, unlike its neighbour, is not pitching itself as a libertarian project at all. If you follow Free Cities, micronations or alternative governance online, there is a good chance Verdis has appeared in your feed over the past year. Daniel says Verdis-related content has generated more than 200 million views across accounts, much of it following footage of him being chased by Croatian police boats. Verdis claims one of the last pockets of land in Europe left unclaimed by the unresolved Croatia-Serbia border dispute. Daniel argues that the doctrine of terra nullius, and Verdis's position as the oldest active claimant, gives the project a legal footing. Croatia maintains a blockade, and Daniel describes a police boat stationed on the water, contradictory public statements from Zagreb, and a colleague interrogated for two hours at the border after being identified from a British newspaper. What makes this different from Liberland is the politics. Daniel describes himself as a centrist, wants Verdis to be strictly neutral in foreign policy and a potential mediator, plans to use the euro rather than build around blockchain, and is openly cautious about becoming a tax haven in case it antagonises Croatia and Serbia. He talks about e-residency modelled loosely on Estonia and Palau, strict naturalisation checks including DBS background checks for UK applicants, a Build Verdis design competition won by Tholos Architects, and the funding mix of citizenship by investment, e-residency fees and donations, which he says generated around 170,000 euros from e-residency in the past year. There is also the diplomatic track: humanitarian projects and a memorandum of understanding in Côte d'Ivoire, a gala at the United Nations in New York, and plans for an office in the European Union. Daniel is candid that Croatia may try to block these relationships, and that Verdis cannot get far until the blockade lifts. Near the end, he says something unexpected. If Verdis succeeds, adopts a new constitution and holds elections, he will not run. He wants to step down and live there as an ordinary citizen. Claims made by the guest about legal status, recognition and third parties are his own and have not been independently verified. Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: Why Verdis suddenly appeared all over social media, Becoming president of a claimed state at 21, How Verdis differs from Liberland ideologically, Claiming one of the last pieces of unclaimed land in Europe, The Croatian blockade and the police boats on the Danube, The October 2023 settlement and the deportations that followed, Operating a government in exile from the UK and Novi Sad, The Croatia-Serbia border dispute and why neither side has an incentive to resolve it, EU accession as a possible forcing function, Terra nullius and the oldest active claimant argument, 400 citizens and 5,000 e-residents, How e-residency and naturalisation actually work, The Verdis passport and whether anyone accepts it, Why Daniel does not want a radically libertarian state, Taxes, neutrality and keeping the neighbours comfortable, The Build Verdis design competition and what the territory could look like, Diplomacy in Côte d'Ivoire and the United Nations gala, How Verdis funds itself, What Verdis could offer Croatia and eastern Slavonia, Why Daniel plans to give up the presidency, Whether new countries are having a moment --- # Dominic Frisby — They’ll Blame You When It Fails URL: https://free-cities.org/theyll-blame-you-when-it-fails-dominic-frisby Free Cities Podcast, episode 197 Published: 2026-08-28 Guest: Dominic Frisby Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgEN9ctyR3s Topics: micronations, bitcoin-and-free-cities, residency-and-citizenship Dominic Frisby has spent the best part of twenty years writing about gold for MoneyWeek. He co-wrote and narrated Four Horsemen, wrote Life After the State, Bitcoin: The Future of Money? and Daylight Robbery, and now writes The Flying Frisby. He is also a comedian, songwriter and the author of a new book, The Secret History of Gold, published by Penguin. Timothy Allen caught up with him at Liberpulco, at the Liberland Ark Village in Apatin, Serbia, for a conversation that begins with new countries and very quickly turns into an argument about money. Dominic does not believe the monetary system is heading inevitably towards the spectacular hyperinflationary collapse that many people in the hard-money world expect. His argument is more uncomfortable. Fiat currencies can deteriorate slowly for decades without ever reaching a dramatic end point. The pound, for example, has lost roughly forty per cent of its purchasing power since 2020. Rather than collapse, Dominic sees debasement as something closer to water on rock: gradual enough for people to tolerate, but relentless enough to transform the value of everything they own. He also challenges one of the most repeated claims in Bitcoin and gold circles: that every fiat currency in history has eventually collapsed. It sounds convincing. Dominic thinks the history is considerably messier. That leads into gold itself. How much does China really own? Why might governments deliberately understate their reserves? What happens to gold when money becomes a weapon of war? And why, when invading armies arrive, are gold reserves often among the first things they go looking for? Then comes Bitcoin. Dominic’s theory is that the supposed war between gold bugs and Bitcoiners is largely generational. People born before the 1960s tend towards gold. Those born after the 1980s tend towards Bitcoin. His solution to the argument is refreshingly uncomplicated: own both. Spending your life trying to establish which one is the superior form of hard money may be missing the point. The conversation travels through Triffin’s dilemma, unit of account versus medium of exchange, gold that predates the Earth itself, asteroid mining, Nazi and Japanese looted gold, alleged treasure tunnels in the Philippines, Nixon closing the gold window and William Pitt taking Britain off gold in 1797. And there is an awkward historical lesson running through all of it: every gold standard eventually fails too. The final part brings the history back to the present. Dominic and Timothy discuss wealth taxes, unrealised capital gains, Britain’s millionaire exodus and what a modern version of Executive Order 6102 might look like. If governments become desperate enough for revenue, do they simply tax accumulated wealth more aggressively? And when enough productive people respond by leaving, what happens next? The most disturbing possibility is not that governments build walls to stop people getting in. It is that one day they decide they need walls to stop people getting out. NOTE: The video version of this episode is shorter than the audio version. A camera malfunction during recording meant that the first part of the footage was lost. The audio contains the complete conversation. Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: Liberland, Liberpulco and why almost no genuinely new countries have appeared since 2011, The Shetland Islands and the Independent Republic of Dumnonia, Wanstonia and the campaign against the M11, Why 1971 remains one of the defining years in modern monetary history, The pound losing roughly forty per cent of its purchasing power since 2020, Why fiat currencies do not necessarily end in hyperinflation, Why stories of spectacular monetary collapse are more attractive than gradual debasement, “Every fiat currency eventually collapses”: how true is it?, How much gold China may really own, and why its official number matters, Gold reserves and the weaponisation of money during war, Triffin’s dilemma and the problem faced by the issuer of the global reserve currency, Why the divide between gold bugs and Bitcoiners may be largely generational, Gold versus Bitcoin as stores of value, Unit of account versus medium of exchange, Why some of the gold on Earth is older than the Sun, Asteroid mining and why Dominic thinks it is largely a red herring for the gold supply, Nazi seizures of gold during the invasion of Europe, Japanese looted gold and the stories of hidden treasure in the Philippines, Nixon closing the gold window in 1971, William Pitt suspending gold convertibility in Britain in 1797, Why every gold standard in history has eventually broken down, How governments respond when monetary systems fail, Why the people holding wealth may ultimately be blamed for the failure, The possibility of taxes on unrealised capital gains, What a twenty-first-century version of Executive Order 6102 might look like, The “white pill” case for the future, What the global margin call of 2008 revealed about the financial system, The millionaire exodus from Britain, Why Dominic expects wealth taxes to become increasingly difficult for governments to resist, Capital controls, exit taxes and the possibility of governments making it harder to leave, Dominic’s new book, The Secret History of Gold --- # Gareth Icke — The Panopticon Is Already Here URL: https://free-cities.org/gareth-icke-the-panopticon-is-already-here Free Cities Podcast, episode 196 Published: 2026-08-21 Guest: Gareth Icke Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhY1x7isMZ4 Topics: technology-in-new-cities The digital panopticon used to sound like science fiction. Gareth Icke thinks we are already living inside the early stages of it. Timothy Allen sits down with Gareth for a conversation that starts with AI and the strange incentives of the online world, then moves into power, surveillance, Brexit, COVID, immigration and the steady expansion of political control. But the most interesting question is not who is behind what. It is what an individual can actually do when they believe the system around them is moving in the wrong direction. At one point Timothy asks Gareth directly what he is doing for individual freedom. His answer is immediate: “I don’t comply for a start.” For Gareth, that means questioning things for himself, teaching his children to question them too, and refusing to spend his life simply waiting for somebody else to fix the problem. He is also critical of a freedom movement that can become consumed by anger and bad news. His response is surprisingly simple: find the good as well. Find joy. Treat people well. Act in the way you would like the world to be. He describes promoting joy itself as “almost an act of defiance”. The same argument runs into politics. Gareth sees the search for a political saviour as another form of outsourcing. Whether the chosen figure is Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, Rupert Lowe or somebody else, handing responsibility for your freedom to a politician still leaves somebody else responsible for it. And that is where the conversation begins to overlap directly with the Free Cities question. Saying no is one thing. What do you build instead? If millions of people eventually decide that they do not want to participate fully in an increasingly centralised and surveilled system, what does the alternative look like in ordinary life? Where do you live? How do you work, trade, educate your children and interact with the rest of society? Timothy admits that he can imagine rejecting the existing system more easily than he can visualise the parallel life that replaces it. Gareth does not pretend to have a finished blueprint either. His answer is straightforward: “You have to make it work one way or another.” That may be the most useful tension in the whole conversation. Criticism of existing institutions is abundant. Building alternatives that people can actually use is much harder. It is also the problem that Free Cities, parallel communities and new jurisdictions are increasingly trying to solve. Key topics: AI, algorithms and clickbait, Gareth’s relationship with the ideas of his father, David Icke, Conspiracy, power and psychopaths in positions of authority, The digital panopticon, Surveillance and privacy, Brexit, COVID and immigration, Political saviours, Personal responsibility, Peaceful non-compliance, Joy as an act of defiance, Parallel systems, What we build instead --- # Christian Betancourt — How to Survive a Hostile Government URL: https://free-cities.org/christian-betancourt-how-to-survive-a-hostile-government Free Cities Podcast, episode 195 Published: 2026-08-14 Guest: Christian Betancourt Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilXMFjS__TY Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance, bitcoin-and-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Four years ago, Timothy Allen came to Próspera to see whether there was anything actually there. An interview happened on a sofa in a guest house down the road, with a Honduran lawyer who had walked out of a comfortable job servicing banks in order to move to a half-finished district on an island. Few people were willing to say the place would survive. Christian Betancourt said it would, and sounded oddly relaxed about it. He turned out to be right. Four years on, and by his own account four fairly gruelling ones, he takes Timothy back through what actually happened, and it is not the version most people carry around. The story that circulated, which Timothy had been repeating himself, is that the government repealed the ZEDE law and that was that. What Christian lays out instead is four or five separate layers of protection, only two of which were ever successfully touched. The organic law did fall, which is why no new zones can be created. But the regime was also written into the Constitution, and that amendment was never completed. The zones are still in there today, and you can go and look them up. The rest is laid out. An investment treaty with Kuwait, of all places, which quietly triggered CAFTA-DR and dragged the United States into a dispute about a district in Honduras. A Supreme Court ruling he refuses to recognise on the grounds that you cannot declare something unconstitutional retroactively. A claim against Honduras starting somewhere near eleven billion dollars. A Socialist International delegation flown into a village of four hundred people, complete with an Indian Naxalite, to stage a protest that ended in a scuffle with locals who were rather in favour of the zone. And underneath all of it, a man who staked his career on the paperwork holding, and says plainly that if it had not held he would have given up practising law altogether. Key topics: Why he was so confident when almost nobody else was, Rough four years, and what kept the zone running, Who puts money into a place that has already been shut down, Coinbase, Tim Draper, sea turtles and Jack Sparrow, Leaving corporate law for a building site, Why Próspera draws foreigners and Morazán draws Hondurans, CBDCs, and the final boss of authoritarianism, Living on a Bitcoin standard, and the train ticket you cannot buy, San Pedro Sula, once the most violent city in the world, Whether Honduras needs its own Bukele, Crawfish Rock, and the story of the well, The five layers of legal protection, one by one, Why almost everyone believes the wrong thing about the repeal, The Kuwait treaty and the most favoured nation clause, Staking a career on the framework holding, Retroactive unconstitutionality, and why he refuses to recognise it, Whether the eleven billion dollar claim made any difference, The Saudis of Central America, An Indian Naxalite in Crawfish Rock, Spanish municipalism, and where the idea really comes from, Dune, the Fremen, and the very long view --- # Liam Martin & Nick Francis — Two Founders, Two Futures URL: https://free-cities.org/liam-martin-nick-francis-two-founders-two-futures Free Cities Podcast, episode 194 Published: 2026-08-07 Guest: Liam Martin & Nick Francis Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b4S1kZvzXo Topics: technology-in-new-cities “When you hear a lot of these AI evangelists talk publicly about AI, maybe there’s a 10% chance that it could be dangerous or a 5% chance. If you speak privately with those same people, they’re around 70, 80%” A year ago, in Morocco, Timothy Allen sat down with Liam Martin and asked him what an LLM was. Liam, co-founder of Time Doctor and Running Remote, has worked with AI for some time. Twelve months on, he says something difficult to hear from someone who knows it this well. He thinks tens of millions of jobs could be gone inside a year, that the p(doom) figures AI insiders quote privately are far higher than the ones they give on stage, and he has bought a chalet in the Canadian woods with its own water and power, just in case. Nick Francis could hardly disagree more. He spent over fifteen years building Help Scout as a fully remote company, and calls himself an incredible optimist about AI. His argument is that the media narrative and the observable reality have come apart, that companies are hiring rather than shedding, and that the last ten percent of any piece of work, the craft and the judgement, is exactly the part these tools cannot do. Both were recorded at Running Remote in Austin. Neither man heard the other. They argue across the middle of this episode, and it does not resolve. With Liam, the specifics land. A digital twin built from his own emails and calls, which answered a question about his tax filing and flagged three problems for the accountant while it was at it. An AI that read eight hours of his slide work, told him the premise of his talk was wrong, and built a better deck in seventy-eight seconds. He mourns skills that took ten thousand hours to acquire. He mentions the security lead at Anthropic who moved to Austria to write poetry. He notes that if all eight billion people on Earth subscribed to OpenAI it still would not cover its valuation, which leaves one conclusion about the business model. And he offers the horses: the population peaked in 1910, the Model T arrived in 1911, and we are now at one and a half per cent of that number. They did not get worse. They stopped being useful. Timothy queries the conclusion rather than the analysis. His position is that the scarce thing in an abundant world will be human experience itself, and he has already stopped using AI-written show notes because he can spot them and it could cost him trust. Drawing on years running expeditions to genuinely uncomfortable places for people who paid handsomely for the privilege, he argues humans will reinsert hardship once nothing requires it. Liam gives that a thirty per cent chance. With Nick the register changes, and the second half is a calmer education in where remote work stands. The first wave was the pandemic, which normalised something he was mocked for doing in 2011. The second wave is now, with remote optional again, a quarter of working days remote and stable for three years, and the bar raised because every company has the basics. He is precise on the trade-offs, and on the hub models Cloudflare and Stripe are making work. On AI he quotes Jensen Huang on the poverty of the cost-cutting lens, argues software as a service survives because building was never the hard part, and finishes on a thought worth sitting with: anybody can clone anything now, so the people who care about craft are about to find the bar has gone up tenfold in their favour. Key topics: A year on from Morocco, and the feeling that the floor has dropped out, Writing a website and a WordPress plugin with no real coding ability, Distributed people to distributed intelligence, The AI that rewrote a conference talk, then built the deck in seventy-eight seconds, Mourning ten thousand hours of hard-won skill, Peppermint, and a digital twin that answers your accountant, The Zapier study, and asking the CEO’s twin instead of the CEO, Sixty per cent of company work is just moving documents around, Is it creepy? PII layers, adult content filters and self-sovereign AI, Why Timothy wants his own hardware and a sandbox, Intelligence doubling every three months, Twenty acres in Canada with its own water and power, p(doom): ten per cent in public, seventy to eighty in private, The Anthropic security lead who moved to Austria to write poetry, Nuclear weapons in your pocket, and the case for oversight, Why Timothy will not listen to two AI twins in conversation, AI girls on Instagram, slop on TikTok, and rejecting AI-written show notes, The claim that AGI has already quietly happened, Waymo at seven dollars a ride, and how fast novelty dies, Where is the floor? Thirty, forty, fifty per cent unemployment, The OpenAI valuation maths that gives the game away, Typing pools, electricity, and what a general technology really does, The horses of 1910, Paying tens of thousands of dollars to be cold and uncomfortable, Why humans will choose to impose limits on themselves, A thirty per cent chance of utopia, Nick Francis, and what the second wave of remote work actually means, Being remote in 2011 and getting laughed at for it, Why talent, not cost, was always the reason, The trade-offs nobody mentions, and overcompensating for connection, Retreats in Rome, and crowning a Pope, What the data says about return to office, and what the media says, Hubs, Googles, Cloudflare, Stripe and the geographic perimeter problem, Running a company with no head office, The future of work, Why Nick is an incredible optimist, Jensen Huang and the poverty of the cost-cutting lens, Why software as a service survives being cloneable, Steel-manning your own ideas with a machine, The last ten per cent, and why craft is about to matter more than ever --- # Mark Frazier — Fifty Years of Watching It Go Wrong URL: https://free-cities.org/mark-frazier-fifty-years-of-watching-it-go-wrong Free Cities Podcast, episode 193 Published: 2026-07-31 Guest: Mark Frazier Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boqCcAAHGLY Topics: special-economic-zones, history-of-free-cities, technology-in-new-cities “Many free zone initiatives have been pushing on a string. They’ve fallen in love with a particular location and then push, push, push to try to make it happen… So the big takeaway for me was that these efforts to set up free areas by funnelling money into a predestined spot were exactly the wrong way to start.” Mark Frazier was made publisher of Reason magazine in 1970, at eighteen, when it had three hundred subscribers and was produced in the founder’s apartment while the founder drove a truck by day. What changed his life was not the job. It was a cardboard box in that apartment, full of newsletters documenting libertarian attempts to found new countries. Fifty-odd years, more than fifty countries and over a hundred free zone projects later, he is president of the nonprofit Openworld, chairs the advisory board of the Startup Societies Foundation, and is very probably the longest-serving participant in this movement still working in it. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen sits down with Mark in Próspera for an oral history of the Free Cities idea, told by one of the few people alive who was in the room for its strangest chapters. Werner Stiefel, who had seen Nazism firsthand, put pharmaceutical money into a boat and tried to found Operation Atlantis on a seamount off Haiti, until Papa Doc Duvalier’s regime took an interest and the boat sank before it arrived. Michael Oliver, who lost his parents in the Holocaust at thirteen and survived in the Polish woods with a partisan group, made a fortune in Nevada real estate, raised a flag on a Pacific reef as the Republic of Minerva, and watched Tonga sail out and destroy the structure. Then Oliver backed the Nagriamel movement on Espiritu Santo with money, radio equipment and a libertarian constitution, and on 27 December 1975 Jimmy Stevens declared independence. Mark, a young reporter in New Zealand at the time, wrote the lead article in the New Zealand Herald announcing it. Over the following months he watched it fall apart. As Timothy points out on tape, none of this has been mentioned in a hundred and eighty episodes of this podcast. The heart of it is what he did with that. Stopping at the site on his way home, Mark found the money backing the breakaway had gone on conspicuous consumption, and in a ragtag motel in Fiji waiting for a plane he arrived at the idea that became his life’s work. Most of these projects fail, he argues, because founders fall in love with a location and then push, and once the locals know they have been chosen the banana peels start to appear. The alternative is to reverse the direction of the pressure entirely: make the project a prize that countries compete to win, bidding against each other with land and policy reform. He tested it almost immediately with Earthport, an offer of the world’s first commercial spaceport to whichever equatorial nation would commit prime leasehold land and match Hong Kong or Singapore on transparency. On his account, an eight-hundred-dollar budget produced written interest from twelve countries, a Liberian resolution at the United Nations, and ministers flying to a low-rent office in Santa Barbara. The United States State Department killed it on technology export grounds, and Liberia’s cabinet was executed on a beach in Monrovia shortly afterwards. Then the conversation widens a very long way. Shenzhen sprouting skyscrapers from a fishing village in 1982, the Wall Street Journal article that turned Montego Bay into the first knowledge-industry free zone, the single paragraph of Uruguayan law that made a cow pasture into Zonamerica, and the argument he draws from all of it, which is that legal protection is not enough and the only durable defence is designing shared upside for the neighbours from day one. Thirty-dollar micro-vouchers that took a Sri Lankan village school from seven pupils under a tree to three university places and an offer from the head of Intel. Why he thinks AI is about to pull the rug out from under the entire free zone employment model inside eighteen months, and what should replace it. And in the last stretch it turns genuinely strange, in the best way: abundance, spirituality, whether a silicon chip under stress can be said to want something, and a mouse experiment called Universe 25 that neither host nor guest could quite let go of. Key topics: Publisher of Reason magazine at eighteen, when it had three hundred subscribers, A left-wing teenager who read Rand and changed course, The cardboard box of newsletters on libertarian new-country projects, Werner Stiefel, Operation Atlantis, and a boat that sank off Haiti, Michael Oliver, the Republic of Minerva, and Tonga’s response, Nagriamel, Espiritu Santo, and the breakaway nation that lasted months, Reporting the birth of a new country for the New Zealand Herald in 1975, The epiphany in Fiji, and why funnelling money into a chosen location is the wrong way to start, Pushing on a string, and the moment the banana peels appear, Making it a prize to be won, and Peter Diamandis’s massively transformative purpose, Earthport: twelve countries competing to host the first spaceport on Earth, How the State Department and a Liberian coup ended it, Shenzhen in 1982, sprouting skyscrapers from a fishing village, Montego Bay, telecom monopolies and the birth of offshore call centres, Uruguay, Zonamerica, and the single paragraph that changed everything, Anti-fragile design, and why what governments put on paper is not enough, Build-operate-transfer, and why leasing land beats selling it, Debt-for-equity swaps, Sri Lanka, and China’s actual model, Thirty-dollar micro-vouchers and the village school that reached university, Kyrgyzstan, where fifty villages bid for a scholarship endowment, The Phoenicians, gifts on a beach, and building trust from nothing, Forty million freelancers, and why eighty per cent never land a single job, Why AI pulls the rug out from under the free zone model, The future of zones as places of experience, safety and serendipity, A daughter, a horse, and learning natural horsemanship from an AI, The Alpha School, AI-delivered learning, and hiring on proof of work, The gentrification trap, and vesting the people who add the value, What Mark thinks Próspera got right and what it missed, Abundance, the unnecessariat, and why elite capture may not come, Spirituality as the last uniquely human premium, Universe 25 and the danger of a world without limits, A prediction for the next twenty years --- # Joey Flores — The First Country on the Internet URL: https://free-cities.org/joey-flores-the-first-country-on-the-internet Free Cities Podcast, episode 192 Published: 2026-07-27 Guest: Joey Flores Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr8YsUSiXYQ Joey Flores wants to help launch the first country on the internet, and he is not being metaphorical. The Head of Marketing at SafetyWing is a two-time startup founder who dropped out of high school at sixteen, went through Y Combinator, sold a company, and now lives in Oaxaca, Mexico, making art in his spare time. His CEO only recently discovered he never finished school, because nobody had bothered to read his résumé. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen sits down with Joey at the Running Remote conference in Austin, Texas, for a conversation about the future of digital nomadism. SafetyWing's pitch starts simple and turns audacious. Your healthcare, income protection and pension come from your country and stop following you the moment you live a borderless life, so the company is building a social safety net that travels with you instead. The endgame runs through Plumia, its nonprofit arm, run by Lauren Razavi, who appeared on this show in episode 122 and whom Gonçalo Hall credited in episode 189 as the reason he ended up in Próspera. A membership passport, a safety net that crosses borders, a plan mapped to 2050. The heart of it is the country question: What actually makes a country a country? Joey's honest answer is a passport recognised by other states, and he does not pretend that is close. In the near term the SafetyWing passport is the identification that makes a country want you, because you arrive carrying your own safety net rather than drawing on theirs. Their current product, Nomad Citizen, already bundles health insurance, income protection that pays four thousand dollars a month if you lose ninety percent of your income, life insurance and visa assistance, more, as Joey points out, than he gets from the state of California. Then the conversation widens. Joey argues you cannot conjure a second Silicon Valley by wishing for one, because the ingredient nobody can fake is early-stage capital, and that only appears once local exits mint local millionaires who become local angels. He is unusually candid about the cost of the nomad wave he is part of, the way an American salary prices locals out of their own neighbourhoods, the waiter who starts ignoring his countrymen for the foreigner who tips, and argues nomads owe the places they land more care than they tend to give. And the thread that runs through the back half is work itself: applicant-tracking software that filtered him out for lacking a degree, why he would hire the person who built something over the person with the tidy CV, and what he would tell a fourteen-year-old staring down a job market that is dissolving as fast as it is forming. Key topics: Launching the first country on the internet, and how it differs from a network state, SafetyWing and Plumia: the for-profit safety net and the nonprofit building toward a passport, What actually makes a country a country, and why a recognised passport is the benchmark, Nomad Citizen: health insurance, income protection, life insurance and visa assistance in one product, Income protection that pays four thousand dollars a month if you lose ninety percent of your income, Why a SafetyWing passport could make a country want you rather than fear you as a drain, Digital nomad visas, and connecting the back end so you can apply for them yourself, The 2050 timeline, and putting a flag in the ground on a twenty-five-year vision, The future of remote work, and why mobility matters more as the world grows less stable, A friend building a Mach 10 passenger plane: New York to Tokyo in two hours at business-class prices, Y Combinator, and why it remains the most prestigious early-stage funding programme, Living in Oaxaca on an American salary, and a very high quality of life on a budget, Why you cannot simply build a second Silicon Valley: talent is portable, early capital is not, How local exits mint local millionaires who become local angel investors, The honest cost of the nomad wave: housing, tipping culture and pricing locals out, Why long-term expats increasingly reject the "nomad" label, What nomad culture actually is: entrepreneurship, exploration and freedom, Hunting the next nomad hub, and the surprise appeal of Florianópolis in Brazil, SafetyWing's remote-first culture: Patagonia retreats, Build Week in Norway and a houseplant stipend, What AI is doing inside the company, and the shift toward solopreneurs, Applicant-tracking systems, the dropout who kept getting filtered out, and the death of the CV, Should your kids skip university and build something instead?, How to actually stand out and get hired when AI can do the entry-level job, Why founders struggle to work for anyone else, and where independent people thrive --- # Vance — Everyone Needs a Plan B URL: https://free-cities.org/vance-everyone-needs-a-plan-b Free Cities Podcast, episode 191 Published: 2026-07-17 Guest: Vance Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD8FRqKTw0c Topics: residency-and-citizenship Vance is not his real name, and that is rather the point. The founder of My Latin Life built a Latin American relocation service while keeping his own name out of it entirely, a Canadian-American software developer who read The 4-Hour Workweek, landed in Playa del Carmen in 2018 with a laptop and a WhatsApp invitation, and never really went home. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen sits down with Vance in Próspera for what amounts to a practical guide to internationalising your life. My Latin Life began as a side hustle and became, as far as Vance knows, the only immigration agency in the world covering every single country in Latin America: residency visas first, with offshore banking, company formation and asset protection growing out of them. Vance himself holds three passports, Canadian, American and Italian by descent, plus permanent residencies in Mexico, Panama, Paraguay and others, so the advice comes from someone running the playbook on his own life. The mechanics are the heart of the first half. There are five routes to a second passport, and ancestry is the cheapest and most overlooked, worth checking before anything else. Mexico tends to suit Americans, who cannot escape citizenship-based taxation anyway, while Paraguay suits Europeans fleeing 40 to 50 percent tax systems for a territorial one. Americans leaving high-tax states learn the Texas two-step. Britons learn about substantial ties, the explicit rules on houses, children and days in country that quietly pull leavers back into the UK tax net. And the region's quiet superpower gets its due: permanent residencies maintained with as little as one day on the ground every three years, the Plan B you keep in a drawer. Then the conversation widens into the argument the episode takes its title from. Vance reads history as a sequence of economic supercycles, Portugal in the 1500s, Spain in the 1600s, London in the 1800s, and believes the present one belongs to the Americas: El Salvador transformed, Argentina turning, diasporas itching to come home, Spaniards moving to Mexico City for higher salaries. Timothy highlights concerns with Dubai, the place to be two months ago and a cautionary tale today, proof that even a supercycle can turn on a single event. And the hardest question is Timothy's own situation: mobility is easy to preach and hard to practise with children who are happy, settled and surrounded by friends. Vance's answer, make the money where the money is and keep the family where the family is happy, is more humane than the usual exit-influencer script, and the exchange about what parents owe their children versus what they owe their own futures is the most honest stretch of the episode. Key topics: Living behind a pseudonym, and why the Bitcoin world made noms de guerre normal, Canada, the United States and discovering geo-arbitrage through cheap alcohol runs, How The 4-Hour Workweek turned travel from a savings-burning rite of passage into a way of life, Choosing destinations by the language spoken there: Spanish, Portuguese and French so far, Why technical skills still matter for location freedom in the age of AI, Arriving in Playa del Carmen in 2018 and finding the digital nomad world in one evening, How My Latin Life grew from a side hustle into a full immigration agency, The five routes to a second passport, and why ancestry should be investigated first, Mexico for Americans, Paraguay for Europeans, US citizenship-based taxation, worldwide income, and the Texas two-step, Paraguay in practice: two business days on the ground, then one day every three years, Panama, EU tax blacklists, and why the route out sometimes runs through a second country, UK substantial ties: the house, the kids and the day counts that pull you back in, Raising children in a stable home while positioning them for a changing world, European pessimism versus Latin American optimism, seen from both sides, Building a podcast as a network: what 300 plus episodes taught Vance about why famous guests do not move the needle, El Salvador's transformation, and the four-dollar Bukele hat, Dubai and the danger of mistaking a boom for permanence, Why Vance believes the present supercycle belongs to the Americas, Europe or the Americas: where should you place your future? --- # Joyce Brand — Building Prosperity in the Danger Zone URL: https://free-cities.org/joyce-brand-building-prosperity-in-the-danger-zone Free Cities Podcast, episode 190 Published: 2026-07-10 Guest: Joyce Brand Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY5qEQyG-Jk At 71, when most people are arranging their lives around comfort and familiarity, Joyce Brand moved to the outskirts of Choloma, Honduras, a city that within the last decade sat at the top of Latin America's danger rankings. She went to watch a city being built from nothing. She says she has never felt safer. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen talks to Joyce about a life that refuses to run in a straight line: a typewriter business in 1981, a decade in Hollywood cutting rooms editing Eric Roberts, and a 2010 meeting with Spencer MacCallum at Libertopia that changed everything. Joyce finished MacCallum's sixty-year book project at his bedside before he died in December 2020. Weeks earlier, at what turned out to be his last dinner party, Ciudad Morazán founder Massimo Mazzone spent four hours making her an offer: a house and a salary to live inside his new city and chronicle its building, the good and the bad, with no editorial leash. She said yes, and became one of Ciudad Morazán's first residents. Her book about it, Pioneering Prosperity: The Morazán Model for Free Cities, is the result. What Joyce moved into is the purest working example of the idea Spencer Heath and Spencer MacCallum spent their lives developing: the entrecom, a city run as a single enterprise. One entity holds all the land title, everything is rental, rent is paid in stablecoin, and governance arrives through the lease rather than the ballot box. There are no elections and no council, just a contract you can end. As Joyce puts it, residents are subscribing rather than submitting to governance. And the customers are not international founders or digital nomads but ordinary Honduran workers priced out of safety everywhere else in Choloma. It is a model that invites hard questions: If one owner holds every title, has the capture problem been solved or simply relocated to the landlord? Exit is the residents' recourse, but exit gets more expensive with every year of life you sink into a place. Can a city with a single proprietor scale past a few thousand people, or is Morazán's simplicity exactly the thing that stops it becoming Próspera? Joyce has lived inside the answers, chronicling the failures alongside the wins as her mandate required, and she does not pretend any of it is settled. Key topics: From a typewriter business in 1981 to a decade in Hollywood cutting rooms, including editing Eric Roberts, Meeting Spencer MacCallum at Libertopia in 2010, and inheriting the Heath intellectual lineage, Finishing MacCallum's sixty-year book project at his bedside before his death in December 2020, The four-hour offer at MacCallum's last dinner party: a house, a salary, and a mandate from Massimo Mazzone to chronicle everything, good and bad, Moving to Honduras at 71, and why country-level danger statistics dissolve at street level, Choloma's reputation as the most dangerous city in one of Latin America's most dangerous countries, and what that meant on the ground, The entrecom model: one owner, all rental, governance delivered through the lease, Subscribing rather than submitting to governance, and why exit beats voice, Paying rent in stablecoin, Who actually lives in Ciudad Morazán, and what safety buys for ordinary Honduran families, The Uber driver whose leg surgery became the whole neighbourhood's business, An escalator accident, being hospitalised as a COVID patient, and the treatments she refused, The stable corn joke, Why Joyce says life begins at 70, and the book she still wants to write, Joyce at the Free Cities Conference this September, and the Morazán excursion on 2 September: a site tour, the quarterly town hall with Massimo, and a community barbecue, the day before the conference opens in Próspera (details) --- # Gonçalo Hall — The Nomad Pioneer Betting on a Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/goncalo-hall-the-nomad-pioneer-betting-on-a-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 189 Published: 2026-07-03 Guest: Gonçalo Hall Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbCybLt2AtE Topics: residency-and-citizenship About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera That’s why I say you should build for nomads, but nomads should not be your end client.” Most people who fall in love with a place visit for a week and dream about staying. Gonçalo Hall does the opposite for a living: he decides where thousands of people will fall in love with next, and then he builds it. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen sits down in person with Gonçalo Hall in Próspera, on the Honduran island of Roatán. Gonçalo is a pioneer of the digital nomad movement: he built the world’s first Nomad Village in Madeira, founded NomadX, and has created nomad communities for governments from Rio de Janeiro to Nagasaki. A year ago, in episode 130, he told Timothy that almost nobody in the digital nomad world had heard of Próspera. Twelve months later he has moved there with his wife and young daughter and runs the Roatán Tourism Bureau, a Próspera company whose job is to put a little-known Caribbean island on the map. Gonçalo’s thesis is simple and, once you hear it, hard to unhear: build for nomads, but do not make them your end client. Build something good enough to attract a digital nomad, he argues, and you have built something good enough for almost everyone. It is the playbook that turned a Balinese backpacker village into Canggu, home to what he calls the best cafes, gyms and co-working spaces in the world, all built by nomads for nomads. Now he wants to run the same playbook on a Caribbean frontier, with one advantage Bali never had: in Próspera, both the physical layer and the community layer can be designed from scratch. Timothy has just spent almost a month living and working in Próspera himself, so this is not an outsider’s review. It is a candid conversation about what is genuinely working and what plainly is not yet: the missing third space, the cafe that opens too late, the beach that is not quite a beach, and the land that separates the two halves of the project. Gonçalo does not pretend any of it is solved. His argument is that the gaps are the opportunity, and that if you are a builder, the honest state of the frontier is precisely the reason to come now rather than in five years. Key topics: The full-circle story: meeting at an invite-only nomad gathering in Morocco, and how a three-month consulting trip became a family move to Roatán, Why you do not love Próspera automatically, and why Gonçalo says you grow to love it if you are a builder, The "come for a month" model: why a few days makes you a tourist, a month makes you a builder, and how Timothy accidentally proved it, Build for nomads, but nomads should not be your end client, The Bali and Canggu playbook: how one co-working space turned an island into the world's entrepreneur capital, Building for experience: the two layers of physical infrastructure and community, and why Próspera can control both from scratch, Pop-up months and thematic months, starting with a longevity month in October, The missing third space, and the beach club that could connect Duna Tower to Pristine Bay, Pristine Academy: the Montessori school with eight nationalities in one class, and the reason his family stayed, What the Roatán Tourism Bureau actually does, and the cruise ship problem: 2.1 million visitors, six hours ashore, sixty dollars a day, Longevity as the standout bet: the GARM Clinic, gene therapy, and the peptide boom, including the ones Gonçalo is testing on himself, The entrepreneur ranch on the Honduran mainland: rural tourism, free rent, and empowering locals to build, Why here and not the Bahamas or Lisbon: two hours from Miami, with regulatory autonomy, Crawfish Rock, the "same two ladies" in every interview, and why integrating the locals protects the whole project, The butterfly effect: how Lauren Razavi of Plumia is the reason this conversation happened at all --- # Polycarp Nakamoto — Plan For Decentralisation URL: https://free-cities.org/polycarp-nakamoto-plan-for-decentralisation Free Cities Podcast, episode 188 Published: 2026-06-26 Guest: Polycarp Nakamoto Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdKHpUS1cAs Most Bitcoiners worry about the price, the protocol, or the four-year cycle. Polycarp Nakamoto worries about something else entirely: what happens to all of it when the internet goes down. His answer is to build a second internet. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen travels to a quiet compound on the edge of Austin, Texas to sit down in person with Polycarp Nakamoto, the elusive, helmeted figure at the centre of Lab 484. Lab 484 is a research laboratory and cluster of twelve startups building what Poly calls Web 5: a second internet that runs peer-to-peer on Bitcoin nodes rather than the handful of centralised choke points the web rests on today. The conversation is a deep dive into the reality of the 21st century sovereign life, and whether a parallel system can actually be built, or whether most people even want one. Poly's starting point is stark. He believes the internet we all depend on has roughly five years left, taken down by cyber war, rogue AI, or simple infrastructure collapse, and that it will coincide with the arrival of central bank digital currencies. His answer is Archipelago, an open-source Bitcoin-node operating system that bundles mesh networking, a private AI, a private cloud and a private voice assistant, designed to spread from a USB stick so that a censorship-resistant network can come online the moment the old one fails. Owned by nobody, run by everybody, impossible to switch off. Timothy is an old Bitcoiner who runs his own node and lives on a remote farm, so in many ways Poly is preaching to the choir. But this is not an infomercial for the sovereign life. The conversation keeps returning to the hardest problem of all, which is people rather than technology. Poly frames the future as a fork in the road: on one side a CBDC dystopia of digital ID and face scans, on the other the "solarpunk" future he is betting on, where you own your hardware, your software, your money and your data. He is convinced both will end up existing side by side. The question the episode keeps circling is which one you are actually building toward. Key topics: Why Poly stays anonymous, and his argument that the message does not depend on any single person's identity, Lab 484: a decentralised governance board with no ownership, a private membership association, and twelve startups each building a piece of the new internet, Web 1 to Web 5 in plain terms, with Amazon Sidewalk as the proprietary mesh network and Jack Dorsey's Bitchat as the open-source one, Using Bitcoin nodes as a second internet: replacing the DNS, and hosting "sovereign" websites that cannot be switched off, Why Poly argues you need more nodes rather than mass adoption, and his claim that Bitcoin is already several times larger than Tor, Ubiquiti point-to-point antennas, five-mile links, and how even a remote farm might connect, The startups in detail: Bitcoin-node food trucks, shipping-container tiny homes, and a house with a private cloud, a private AI and a private voice assistant built in, Self-hosted, sovereign AI: the Framework Desktop with an AMD Ryzen AI Max chip, why open-source models are "cooking for yourself," and running it all on a node such as Umbrel or Start9, The Archipelago operating system: a Linux-based, open-source Bitcoin-node OS designed to spread from a USB stick, What happens if the internet goes down: radio, Meshtastic, dark fibre, cheap satellites, and reusing old architecture with Nostr relays, AI you cannot hold accountable, the "golden calf," AI-generated code rot, and the spiritual experience as the new human frontier, Digital ID as Timothy's line in the sand, the CBDC "triple threat" of identity, money and data, and the Tower of Babel as a parable for breaking centralisation, Off-grid Bitcoin with Fedimint and Cashu, the warehouse-receipt analogy for e-cash, and earning a passive income by relaying data, Network effects, low time preference, and why staying under the radar only works up to a point, Network states versus intentional communities, Próspera's legal survival, Liberland, and a spectrum of sovereignty that runs from hiding to recognition --- # Daniel Thompson — Free Cities Have a People Problem URL: https://free-cities.org/daniel-thompson-free-cities-have-a-people-problem Free Cities Podcast, episode 187 Published: 2026-06-19 Guest: Daniel Thompson Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXHkRh3QSIo “As we progress through this movement in general, I think this might be the key to unlock the critical mass. I really do think that. I think families are overlooked because the old family thought process, or the people who were families when we were younger, may not have been ready for this. But now everyone who’s in this movement is having families.” Everyone building a new city worries about law, land and governance. Daniel Thompson argues the real bottleneck is simpler and harder: people. Getting them to show up, and getting them to stay. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen sits down with Daniel Thompson, co-founder and CEO of Noma Collective, at Próspera, the charter city and ZEDE on the island of Roatán, Honduras. The conversation tackles a problem that sits underneath the entire Free Cities, charter cities and network state movement: not law, not land, not capital, but people. How do you get human beings to actually move to a new jurisdiction, and how do you get them to stay? Thompson argues that digital nomadism is a stage in a longer journey rather than a destination, and that the endpoint is “multi-local” living, a term he credits to Emi of Crecimiento, Argentina’s leading network state movement. His central claim is that families, not lone founders or nomads, are the key to reaching critical mass. He points to the 500 families who applied for a single month-long family hub at Pristine Bay in Próspera as evidence of demand the movement has overlooked. The episode traces Noma Collective’s accidental origin as a COVID-era pop-up in Belize, the case for connected and portable schooling, the threat AI poses to an education system built on memorisation, Thompson’s new Minimum Viable Society project, and a genuine disagreement between Thompson and Allen about whether you build a new community on empty land or take over one of the thousands of depopulated villages already standing across southern Europe. Key topics: The "people problem" of Free Cities, charter cities and network states: why population, not regulation or coastline, is the binding constraint, Digital nomadism as a stage, not a destination, and Thompson's "7 Stages of Remote Life" framework, "Multi-local" living, feeling at home in more than two places, a term credited to Emi of Crecimiento, How Noma Collective began as a COVID pop-up co-live in a Belize hotel and grew into a global community, Why families, not lone nomads, may be the key to critical mass in new cities, The Próspera family hub at Pristine Bay and Las Verandas on Roatán, Connected, portable schooling and the worldschooling model pioneered by Boundless Life, The AI threat to memorisation-based education, and newer schools such as Alpha School and Acton Academy, Return-to-office mandates, the "soft layoff" theory, and GitLab as a fully remote counterexample, The Minimum Viable Society project: assembling a society from health, housing, education and agriculture partners, Subscription-to-ownership as a fix for the broken property ladder, with echoes of the Homestead Act, Build versus buy: empty land and a chateau near Montpellier against Europe's depopulated villages, SafetyWing and Plumia, with the future-of-mobility work of Sondre Rasch and Lauren Razavi --- # Eric Kaufmann — You’re Not Allowed to Say This URL: https://free-cities.org/eric-kaufmann-youre-not-allowed-to-say-this Free Cities Podcast, episode 186 Published: 2026-06-12 Guest: Eric Kaufmann Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClK0ZAZ_NjQ Eric Kaufmann is a Canadian professor of politics at the University of Buckingham, where he directs the Centre for Heterodox Social Science. He is one of the most prominent academic voices on nationalism, national identity and political demography, and the author of Whiteshift: Immigration, Populism and the Future of White Majorities (Penguin, 2018) and Taboo: How Making Race Sacred Produced a Cultural Revolution (2024), published in the United States as The Third Awokening: A 12-Point Plan for Rolling Back Progressive Extremism. After two decades at Birkbeck, University of London, he moved in 2023 to Buckingham, Britain’s self-described free speech university, following what he describes as years of being “cancelled by a thousand cuts.” Timothy Allen sits down with Eric in the UK for a wide-ranging and often uncomfortable conversation about how Western culture arrived at this moment. Kaufmann’s central argument is that what we now call woke is not new, but the late-stage unfolding of the 1960s, and that it all traces back to a single sacred taboo around race that formed in the mid-1960s and was later stretched and weaponised. They move from his own cancellation story, through the quiet mutation of affirmative action from equal treatment into enforced equal outcomes, to the survey data on who actually holds these views, and into the hardest stretch of the conversation for Timothy: immigration, identity, and the contested idea of white culture, where the two men disagree. The result is a rare thing, two people discussing race and identity calmly, in good faith, and without rancour. Key topics: The “big bang” of the modern moral universe: how a good 1960s instinct, the norm against racism, hardened into an absolute taboo with no nuance, and became a piece of political kryptonite, Why Kaufmann argues woke is not new, but incubated in university gender studies and sociology departments for fifty years before social media and clickbait media pushed it everywhere in the 2010s, How a sacred taboo becomes a weapon: stretching the meaning of racism to shut down debate on immigration, multiculturalism and the grooming gangs, The shift from equal treatment to enforced equal outcomes: affirmative action as a 1965 executive order, disparate impact in 1971, and the Orwellian word games that justified the change, Whether the rise of woke is driven by women entering the professions, or by feminine ideas such as prioritising emotional safety over free speech, The survey data on who is actually woke, broken down by age and sex, including Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression findings on young women and campus speech, Why Kaufmann rejects the pendulum theory, and why the trans debate is the cultural left’s first real defeat in public opinion in sixty years, The psychological distinction between attachment to your own group and dislike of out-groups, and why he argues they are separate dispositions, The contested idea of white culture, where Timothy pushes back hard and argues that culture matters, not colour, The coming demographic shift, the projection that the United States, Canada and New Zealand become majority non-white after 2050, and why Kaufmann thinks identity will matter more, not less, The distinction between the membership level, which should stay open, and the system level, where caring about the pace of change is not racism, His forecast: an interregnum of polarisation and populism, and why he believes de-radicalisation has to come from the left --- # Niklas Anzinger — Medicine Without Permission URL: https://free-cities.org/niklas-anzinger-medicine-without-permission Free Cities Podcast, episode 185 Published: 2026-06-05 Guest: Niklas Anzinger Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkfN8o-GN7c Topics: honduran-zedes, medical-regulation About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Niklas Anzinger is a German entrepreneur who has probably done more than any single person to put Próspera on the longevity biotech map. He is the founder and General Partner of Infinita VC, the first venture capital fund based in the Free City of Próspera in Honduras, and the founder of Infinita City, a network of hubs for longevity biotech acceleration. He also hosts the Stranded Technologies podcast, which has featured guests including Naval Ravikant and Balaji Srinivasan. Niklas now splits his time between Próspera and the United States, where he is working to import a version of the Próspera regulatory model into Montana and New Hampshire through new Right to Try laws. He is a returning guest to the show. Timothy Allen sits down with Niklas in Austin, a few days after spending a month living alongside him in Próspera, for a conversation about why aging might be the most under-regulated disease nobody calls a disease, the FDA’s 1962 turning point, China’s rise to 30% of global pharma licensing deals in a decade, the insurance-based regulatory model that could replace the FDA monopoly, and the question at the heart of it all: why do you need permission to try to save your own life? Recorded in a borrowed penthouse between events, the result is one of the sharpest conversations of the year on medicine, liberty, and what comes next for the Free Cities movement. Key topics: Why Niklas is in Austin: building a supplementary regulatory pathway to the FDA, modelled on what CLEAR does for TSA airport security, Why aging isn’t technically a disease, and why that distinction is holding longevity biotech back from the most well-funded industry in the world, The FDA’s 1962 efficacy mandate: when drug costs exploded by 100 to 200 times, and why pharma fought it before being forced to comply, Sid Sijbrandij curing his own cancer, and the Australian who built a personalised cancer vaccine for his dog using AlphaFold and ChatGPT for $3,000, China going from near zero to 30% of global pharma licensing deals in ten years, and why Eli Lilly’s CEO says cost is forcing trials offshore, The three regulatory models: the FDA monopoly, the Dubai private-certifier model, and the Próspera insurance model based on Robin Hanson’s ideas, Right to Try in Montana and New Hampshire, how private certifiers work, and the cannabis Cole Memo as the precedent for how the whole thing could scale, Why Próspera should focus on phase one clinical trials rather than medical tourism, and why credibility has to come before commercialisation, Robin Hanson’s end game: fusing your doctor and your life insurance company into one organisation so they have an incentive to keep you alive, Massimo Mazzone’s profit-first model at Ciudad Morazán versus the venture capital model at Próspera, and why the three Honduran ZEDEs map onto the three sectors of the economy, The Free Cities Conference coming to Próspera in September, and why this is the phase where the whole ecosystem either scales or stalls --- # Matthew Mottola — What AI Can’t Replace URL: https://free-cities.org/matthew-mottola-what-ai-cant-replace Free Cities Podcast, episode 184 Published: 2026-05-29 Guest: Matthew Mottola Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWYMmrPegXY Topics: technology-in-new-cities Episode 184 Matthew Mottola is an American who fell in love with freelancing in his twenties and then spent the next decade trying to drag the rest of corporate America with him. He was early at Gigster, built the Microsoft 365 Freelance Toolkit, co-authored The Human Cloud with Matthew Coatney (HarperCollins), and now runs Human Cloud as an aggregator of flexible-talent platforms — the layer between Fiverr at the bottom end and Deloitte at the top, where companies go for projects in the $500K to $5 million range that need real specialists, not resumes from a staffing firm or markup from an agency. He’s spoken across more than 50 international stages, contributes to Forbes, and has been on the front line of the freelance economy since 2012. Timothy Allen sits down with Matthew at the Running Remote conference in Austin for a conversation about what AI is actually doing to the way we work, the 40% layoffs he expects at large enterprises, the 98% automated podcast workflow he’s built around Claude, why most agencies are quietly run by freelancers anyway, and the question that ties AI to Free Cities: who do you sue when the robot makes the mistake? Recorded between sessions at the conference, the result is one of the sharpest exchanges of the year on what gets automated, what gets protected, and what the future of work actually looks like. Key topics: Why Human Cloud sits between Fiverr and Deloitte, and why staffing firms are basically Fiverr replicated for the enterprise, Why most agencies are quietly hiring freelancers and not telling you, and why Google’s 60% contractors never make it into the ad campaign, The 40% layoffs Matthew expects at companies spending over a billion on talent, LinkedIn’s five-roles-into-one “builder” framing, and Block teams going from 14 to 6, The 98% automated Human Cloud podcast workflow: Riverside, Claude, Megaphone, and the “/human” command trained to make output not look like AI, Tim’s pushback on AI sloppiness, the underwear-vs-t-shirt analogy for what you automate and what you protect, and why trust is the irreplaceable core of a podcast, Why the freelance and remote work industries have no dominant media outlet despite the size of the industry, and the Salesforce-before-the-cloud parallel, The Microsoft $99 million misclassification lawsuit and the legal architecture that quietly shaped the whole flexible-talent industry, The future of work in three words: agentic, specialized, outcome-driven, and why ARR-per-employee is the highest it’s ever been, University advice for 14-year-old daughters, Babson vs Oxford and Cambridge, and why “you don’t need to go to university” usually comes from someone who went to Stanford, The Free Cities question — “who do I sue?” — and why Próspera’s legal architecture is part of the answer to AI-era liability --- # Tomek Kołodziejczuk — The Bitcoin Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/tomek-kolodziejczuk-the-bitcoin-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 183 Published: 2026-05-22 Guest: Tomek Kołodziejczuk Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiNf7WMAxKM Topics: honduran-zedes, bitcoin-and-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Tomek Kołodziejczuk is a Polish bitcoiner from Warsaw, where he founded the Bitcoin Film Festival, now four years old and the first of its kind in the world. A year ago he flew to Roatán to visit Próspera, the Honduran Free City he’d been hearing about for years. On his second day on the island he bought a motorbike from Facebook Marketplace to lock the decision in. He’s been on Roatán ever since. He now runs the Bitcoin District inside Próspera, where Orangeville (a wooden modular Bitcoin neighborhood climbing a jungle valley) is funded, the renovated Bitcoin Arena is open, and the wider Bitcoin Roatán coalition has onboarded around 60 merchants on the island. Timothy Allen sits down with Tomek for a conversation about what it actually takes to build a Bitcoin city from scratch on a Caribbean island, the new Hollywood sub-genre of Satoshi Nakamoto films, the quantum threat to Satoshi’s million coins, Iran and the Great Reset, why neither of them would take the job of king of the world, the gaps in Próspera that builders are quietly filling, and Tomek’s bet that this small island can become the most Bitcoin-dense place in the world. Recorded inside Próspera at the back end of a four-week trip, the result is the closest look you’ll find at what a working Free City actually feels like to live in. Key topics: The Bitcoin Film Festival in Warsaw, four years in, and the new sub-genre of Satoshi Nakamoto films coming out of Hollywood (Finding Satoshi, Killing Satoshi, Searching for Satoshi), Hal Finney, cryogenics, the quantum threat to Satoshi’s million coins, and the game theory of the honeypot, Aliens behind Saturn, time travelers, AI, and Tomek’s favourite theory of who really wrote the white paper, Michael Saylor’s bet, why a lower Bitcoin price might be better for Bitcoin, and what hyperbitcoinization looks like from Honduras, Iran, the Great Reset, global capital as the actor moving the world, and why neither Tomek nor Tim would accept the job of king of the world, The Bitcoin District inside Próspera: Orangeville (the wooden modular Bitcoin neighborhood up a jungle valley), BitChill (the quarterly Caribbean Bitcoin retreat), Bitcoin Games (with two BTC of prizes), and the Bitcoin Vibe Camp hackathon coming in August, The Bitcoin Roatán coalition: around 60 merchants accepting BTC across the island, the renovated Bitcoin Arena, and Tomek’s bet that this becomes the most Bitcoin-dense island in the world (Madeira, with around 170 merchants, currently leads), Running a business on a Bitcoin standard: 1% corporate tax in BTC, books denominated in sats, and the 15+ Bitcoin-only startups already registered in Próspera, Why Próspera’s gaps (the missing coffee shop, the missing scooter rental, the missing town hall) are the real opportunity, and Tomek’s challenge to listeners to come and fill them, The one-month stay strategy at the Duna Tower, Sovereign Engineering and Bitcoin++ coming to Roatán, and the Free Cities Conference in September --- # Lucy Connolly — Jailed for a Tweet URL: https://free-cities.org/lucy-connolly-jailed-for-a-tweet Free Cities Podcast, episode 182 Published: 2026-05-15 Guest: Lucy Connolly Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISqw2ySDFyU Topics: private-governance Lucy Connolly is a former childminder from Northampton and the wife of West Northamptonshire Conservative councillor Raymond Connolly. On 29 July 2024, the day three little girls were murdered at a Taylor Swift dance class in Southport, she posted an angry tweet about setting fire to hotels housing asylum seekers, deleted it three and a half hours later, and assumed that was the end of it. A week later the police knocked on her door. She was sentenced to 31 months at Birmingham Crown Court, served twelve and a half months at HMP Peterborough, and is now on licence until March 2027, meaning every word she says publicly can still send her back inside. Timothy Allen sits down with Lucy for a conversation about the deleted tweet that became a national scandal, the year she spent inside one of Britain’s largest women’s prisons, the women she met there, and what it feels like to live in a country where roughly 12,000 people a year are now arrested for things they’ve said online. The result is a story that has already been picked up worldwide as evidence that something has gone deeply wrong with free speech in Britain, told calmly, and at length, by one of the women at the centre of it. Key topics: The Southport murders, the angry tweet, and the three and a half hours it stayed online before she deleted it, Why she believes the case was a political takedown aimed at her husband, a Conservative councillor who’d taken a Labour seat, Section 19 of the Public Order Act, “either-way” charges, and why her case was pushed up to Crown Court for a longer sentence, Twelve and a half months inside HMP Peterborough, a private prison run by Sodexo, and why she rated it over the state-run alternative at HMP Drake Hall, What women’s prison is actually like: the lack of categorisation, the lifers, the young dealers, and the unwritten rule of “head down, do your time”, Peter Lynch, the 61-year-old grandfather who took his own life at HMP Moorland after being sentenced for shouting at police during the Southport riots, The Ricky Jones comparison, a Labour councillor filmed calling for throats to be slit who was acquitted by a jury, Why she thinks the police and judiciary have become politicised, and what serving officers are quietly saying about the College of Policing, Life on licence: no foreign travel, weekly probation calls about tweets, and being told what she is and isn’t allowed to say in public, Whether the tide is actually turning in Britain, or whether she should just leave --- # Paloma Lecheta — Brazil’s First Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/paloma-lecheta-brazils-first-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 181 Published: 2026-05-08 Guest: Paloma Lecheta Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA_UYNGvDxc Topics: free-private-cities, taxation-and-economics Paloma Lecheta is a Brazilian entrepreneur and co-founder of Founder Haus, a hub for what she calls healthy entrepreneurship in Jurerê Internacional, a private neighbourhood on the island of Florianópolis. After accelerating around 1,800 startups across Brazil, she is now part of a small group of founders trying to do for Brazil what Próspera is doing for Honduras — turn a quietly functioning private development into a formally recognised Free City. Timothy Allen sits down with Paloma at Próspera in Honduras for a conversation about the 45-year-old Brazilian neighbourhood that has been running its own water, sewage, security and urban planning since 1980, the visionary banker who built it from raw beach scrub, and the new generation of founders now trying to give it the legal autonomy to match. The result is a story of a Free City that already exists, mostly hiding in plain sight, and the people quietly trying to formalise it before the rest of the world notices. Key topics covered The story of Péricles de Freitas Druck, the Brazilian banker who built a private city in 1980 with no reference points, 45 years before the charter cities movement existed Why philanthropy often fails to solve the problems it claims to, and why business may be the better tool Healthy entrepreneurship: why founder burnout is a business problem, not just a personal one How Jurerê Internacional privatised water, sewage, security and urban planning while staying within Brazilian law The brain drain problem: 1,200 millionaires left Brazil last year, and why most of them didn’t want to Floripa 10, the proposed Digital Economic Zone that would give Jurerê formal regulatory autonomy Ipê City, Brazil’s first pop-up city, and how Founder Haus, Peerbase and Tools for the Commons are stacking experiments on top of each other Why the difference between crazy and visionary is execution Enjoy the conversation. Key topics: The story of Péricles de Freitas Druck, the Brazilian banker who built a private city in 1980 with no reference points, 45 years before the charter cities movement existed, Why philanthropy often fails to solve the problems it claims to, and why business may be the better tool, Healthy entrepreneurship: why founder burnout is a business problem, not just a personal one, How Jurerê Internacional privatised water, sewage, security and urban planning while staying within Brazilian law, The brain drain problem: 1,200 millionaires left Brazil last year, and why most of them didn’t want to, Floripa 10, the proposed Digital Economic Zone that would give Jurerê formal regulatory autonomy, Ipê City, Brazil’s first pop-up city, and how Founder Haus, Peerbase and Tools for the Commons are stacking experiments on top of each other, Why the difference between crazy and visionary is execution --- # Crémieux — Why Bad Ideas Persist URL: https://free-cities.org/cremieux-why-bad-ideas-persist Free Cities Podcast, episode 180 Published: 2026-05-02 Guest: Crémieux Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vHgSQVRcWM Crémieux is a pseudonymous statistician and writer with a large following on Substack and X. He takes widely cited studies, reopens the data, and argues the conclusions don’t always hold up. His readers include Elon Musk and JD Vance. In this episode, Timothy Allen sits down with Crémieux at Próspera in Roatán, Honduras, for a wide-ranging conversation on IQ, institutions, fertility, biotech, governance, and why every country on Earth, even Singapore, is run poorly. The result is part interview, part real-time error-correction service. Every casual claim Timothy makes gets gently audited against the data, and the answers are usually “harsher, less equal, and less comforting than people want them to be.” Key topics: IQ and group differences: Why most “special” immigrant groups are statistically unremarkable once you control for selection effects, Institutions over genetics: El Salvador’s transformation under Bukele. Same population, different outcomes, Honduras as case study: Severance taxes, FDI delays, and 80% informal employment as self-imposed poverty, Religion as social technology: The Catholic Church, cousin marriage, and the Hajnal line in European development, What predicts socialism?: Poor mental health, downward mobility, and resentment, with champagne socialists as a statistical deviation, Paul Ehrlich’s legacy: How neo-Malthusian advice influenced India’s mass sterilisation programme during The Emergency (1975-77), Voice vs exit: Why Switzerland and Dubai work, and why one-world government would be a “global Honduras”, Privacy vs biotech: Florida’s Sunshine Genetics Act, China’s biobank race, and the data tradeoff, The unsolved problem at the heart of every Free City or charter city: How do you generate the agglomeration effects of San Francisco? --- # Liam Bates — Make Sealand Great Again URL: https://free-cities.org/liam-bates-make-sealand-great-again Free Cities Podcast, episode 179 Published: 2026-04-25 Guest: Liam Bates Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh34hbK7Y1k Topics: micronations, history-of-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/principality-of-sealand Liam Bates is part of the Bates family behind the Principality of Sealand, the self-declared sovereign platform in the North Sea first occupied in 1967 by his grandfather Paddy Roy Bates. What began in the pirate radio era as a fight against the BBC broadcasting monopoly became one of the world’s longest-running experiments in independence, jurisdiction and building outside existing systems. Timothy Allen sits down with Prince Liam Bates in Próspera for a conversation about the real story of Sealand: life on a former wartime sea fort, the legal case that shaped its claim to being outside UK jurisdiction, the 1978 coup attempt, and why Liam and his brother James Bates are now trying to take Sealand into a new phase through eCitizenship, digital governance, a possible Sealand DAO, and long-term plans to expand the physical platform into a larger offshore community. Key topics: Why life on Sealand was difficult, cold and physically demanding, and how that hardship shaped its culture, How Paddy Roy Bates moved from pirate radio into a full sovereignty project in the North Sea, The legal argument around Sealand’s claim, UK territorial waters and the court case involving warning shots at a British vessel, Why Sealand still matters as an early example of opt-in governance and building freedom without permission, The role of Radio Essex, pirate radio and the BBC monopoly in Sealand’s origin story, What the 1978 coup attempt reveals about legitimacy, force, diplomacy and state-like behaviour, How Liam Bates sees Sealand’s future through eCitizenship, online community, noble titles and a Sealand DAO, The long-term vision for towers, reclaimed land, advanced manufacturing and a permanent offshore population --- # Patri Friedman — 8 Hard Truths from 25 Years of Investing in Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/patri-friedman-8-hard-truths-from-25-years-of-investing-in-free-cities Free Cities Podcast, episode 178 Published: 2026-04-17 Guest: Patri Friedman Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCbcsmuXUyE Topics: charter-cities Patri Friedman has been in this space longer than almost anyone. Twenty-five years – from co-founding The Seasteading Institute to running Pronomos Capital, the first venture capital fund dedicated to charter cities. He has invested in Próspera, Praxis, Alpha City, Itana, and others. He built one of the first AI poker bots at Stanford. He spent a decade as a software engineer at Google. And through all of it, his north star has remained the same – physical territory with significant legal autonomy. In this episode, Timothy Allen sits down with Patri at Próspera in Honduras for a grounded, no-nonsense conversation about what actually works in this space – and what doesn’t. The result is eight hard truths that challenge many of the assumptions the Free Cities ecosystem has been operating on. The Eight Lessons 1. Founders Tend to Be in Their 40s, Not 20s Free Cities are startups on hard mode. You need to sit down with heads of state, navigate international treaties, raise serious capital, and hold everything together across political cycles. That demands experience. Patri is clear – every exceptional person was in their 20s once, but they didn’t have the exceptional experience yet. The data backs this up too. Investment fund research shows founders in their 30s and 40s succeed more often across industries, and in a space this difficult, that edge matters even more. As Patri puts it – be hungry to achieve, but don’t be anxious to achieve. 2. Build for Locals, Not Nomads If you’re trying to attract digital nomads, you’re competing with Lisbon, Bali, San Francisco, and London. For a small new community with fewer restaurants, less infrastructure, and less of everything except better rules – that’s an almost impossible fight. But if you’re building for locals, you’re only competing with the rest of the country you’re in. That’s a winnable market. And locals who see their lives improving become your strongest political defenders when things get hostile. Nomads absolutely play a role – publicity, energy, ideas, hotel occupancy. But counting on them as your permanent population is a strategic mistake. 3. L1s and L2s Are Very Different An L1 is a platform that writes its own laws – Próspera, Alpha City. An L2 is a community that lives inside one – a Bitcoin village, a nomad community, a longevity hub. Both are essential. L2s are incredible customers for L1s because they aggregate demand. Instead of recruiting individuals one by one, an L1 can negotiate with community leaders and understand what their people need. The problem arises when L2 leaders think they should be starting charter cities. Very few people have the profile, resources, or skill set to sit down with a head of state and negotiate national legislation. That’s not a criticism – it’s a different job. The mistake is mixing them up. 4. You Need a Pipeline of Countries Birds fly, fish swim, and deals fall through. This is the physics of the space. The larger and more poorly governed the entity you’re negotiating with, the more likely deals are to stall or collapse. If you’re only talking to one government, one stalled meeting puts your entire project on hold. The solution is to talk to many countries simultaneously. Let them compete with each other. When one stalls, shift energy to the next. Keep multiple balls in the air because they all move very slowly. 5. Near Enemies – LARPing and the Cloud LARPing – live action role playing – is Patri’s reference to performing the idea of building a new society without doing the brutally hard work of actually building one. In his words – “There’s so much LARPing… It’s when you imitate the superficialities of something without actually doing it. The thing is that starting a new country is so fun and so romantic and so exciting and so unbelievably hard that even if you seriously try to do it, you’re going to naturally find that it’s so much easier to play with it.” Then there’s the Cloud – getting sucked into digital-first projects because online everything is easier, the barriers to entry are lower, and you can launch faster. But Patri’s focus is physical territory with legal autonomy, and that requires moving dirt, not shipping code. Both traps feel productive. Neither gets the thing built. 6. Pop-ups Select for the Rootless Pop-up cities and gatherings generate energy, buzz, and connections. They have real value. But they inherently select for people who can pick up their lives and go to a random place in the world for a month or more. That’s a very small, very unusual subset of people – and they’re generally not the ones who will settle permanently, raise families, and build the long-term fabric of a community. Great for activation. Not a foundation for permanent population growth. 7. Entrepreneurial Lift Early, Legal Arbitrage Later at Scale There is strong data showing that legal systems with more transparency, less corruption, and more economic freedom produce higher GDP growth over time. Compounded over 50 years, the difference between 7% and 4% growth is staggering. But nobody relocates their business to a new jurisdiction today because of a better 50-year GDP curve. Early on, you have to hand-build the economy. That means acting as a market analyst – figuring out what industries fit the location, what anchor tenants need, and solving the specific problems blocking them from setting up. The legal arbitrage becomes incredibly powerful at scale. But it doesn’t get you off the ground. Entrepreneurial lift does. 8. Too Much Theory – Stop Wonking The bottleneck in this space is not one more constitution, one more policy paper, or one more governance model. The space is drowning in those. The bottleneck is people going out and figuring out demand, finding customers, and putting together the pieces to actually move dirt. You absolutely need good policies and good legal frameworks – but you design those in response to real customers and real conditions, not in a vacuum years before anyone shows up. The Bigger Picture Beyond the eight lessons, the conversation covers significant ground on where the space sits right now and where it might be heading. On seasteading, Patri is candid. Twenty-five years in, progress has been limited. The ocean is a difficult and expensive operating environment, and without a compelling economic reason to be out there, cities on the water remain impractical compared to what can be done on land. The legal properties of the sea – a ship flying a country’s flag operates under that country’s laws – remain powerful for niche use cases like cutting-edge medical treatments or psychedelic therapy. But as a general path to building new societies, land-based Free Cities are simply more tractable. On AI, Patri sees enormous short and medium-term applications for better governance – AI-based regulators, smarter legal systems, digital identity. But long-term, the questions get harder. If more and more value moves into the digital world, the physical world becomes less important. And if an AI ends up controlling the physical world, what even is a Free City? He doesn’t have the answer. Nobody does. But he’s clear-eyed about the tension. On Próspera, Patri underscores what so many in the space have been saying – its survival under a hostile government in Honduras is the single most important proof point the movement has produced. The number one question he gets asked is whether governments will simply change their mind and take these projects over. Próspera answered that question definitively, and very early in its life. The legal stability protections worked. That changes the calculus for every future project. On the network state, Patri sees real value but draws a hard line. His focus is physical territory with significant legal autonomy. Online communities, digital governance, cloud-first projects – they’re all fine, but they don’t address the bottleneck he’s spent his career trying to fix. The civilizational operating system needs to be rewritten to be internet-first, but that doesn’t mean it lives only in the cloud. Key topics: Founders Tend to Be in Their 40s, Not 20s, Build for Locals, Not Nomads, L1s and L2s Are Very Different, You Need a Pipeline of Countries, Near Enemies – LARPing and the Cloud, Pop-ups Select for the Rootless, Entrepreneurial Lift Early, Legal Arbitrage Later at Scale, Too Much Theory – Stop Wonking --- # Gabriel Delgado — The Próspera Master Plan URL: https://free-cities.org/gabriel-delgado-the-prospera-master-plan Free Cities Podcast, episode 177 Published: 2026-04-10 Guest: Gabriel Delgado Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jd4mCvaUv6Y Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Gabriel Delgado-Ayau is co-founder and Chief Development Officer of Próspera, the semi-autonomous startup city on the Honduran island of Roatán operating under the ZEDE framework. In this episode, Timothy Allen sits down with Gabriel Delgado-Ayau at Próspera in Honduras for a conversation about what happens after a hostile government tries to destroy your jurisdiction and fails. They discuss the legal protections that kept Próspera alive, the 50-year legal stability agreement, the future relationship with the new Honduran government, and why Próspera’s survival may now be the strongest proof of concept the Free Cities movement has. The result is a clear look at Próspera moving from survival mode into growth mode, and why Honduras may now have one of the most powerful tools in the world for attracting investment, entrepreneurs, and new models of governance. This is Timothy’s second long-form conversation with Gabe – the first was recorded three years ago in Montenegro, when Próspera had only one new building and, by Gabe’s own estimate, a ten percent chance of reaching an agreement with a hostile government. Everything he was promising then now exists. The political situation has reversed entirely: a new, business-friendly administration has taken power in Honduras, and Próspera is not just surviving but expanding. Key topics: Próspera surviving the final boss: Why surviving a hostile socialist administration is such a major moment for the Free Cities movement, ZEDE legal protections: How the 50-year legal stability agreement and investor protections held up under pressure, The new Honduran government: Why Gabriel Delgado-Ayau believes Próspera is now one of Honduras’ strongest tools for attracting investment, Roatán and the mainland: The vision for a Hong Kong-style services hub connected to a Shenzhen-style industrial and nearshoring hub, Satoye: The proposed mainland port and industrial city, and why it could become a major economic engine for Honduras, Community as protection: Why local residents, Honduran entrepreneurs, and families are the long-term political defence of the project, Governance as a service: How the Próspera model could be licensed, replicated, or partnered with in other countries, The next phase: Why Próspera is now focused on entrepreneurs, infrastructure, villages, districts, and rapid growth --- # James Price — Why Everything Feels Broken URL: https://free-cities.org/james-price-why-everything-feels-broken Free Cities Podcast, episode 176 Published: 2026-04-06 Guest: James Price Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe-hkYbIpaY Topics: private-governance “When Starmer came in in 2024, how many people across the entire British state changed jobs? Two hundred… One hundred ministers… and one hundred special advisors… And that’s it. And everybody else in that deep state stayed exactly the same.” Timothy Allen speaks with James Price, former UK government adviser and political commentator, for a wide-ranging conversation on why modern government across the West increasingly feels ineffective, unresponsive, and detached from the people it is supposed to serve. James draws on his experience working across five Whitehall departments, including HM Treasury, the Cabinet Office, and the Department for Education, to describe what government actually looks like from the inside. His central claim is stark: elections change very little. When Keir Starmer entered office in 2024, roughly two hundred people changed roles across the entire British state, while tens of thousands remained in place. The system absorbs political change without fundamentally altering direction. The conversation traces how this situation emerged. James connects the rise of the modern administrative state to deeper intellectual and historical currents, referencing thinkers such as Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, Michael Oakeshott, and James Burnham. What began as an attempt to organise society more effectively has, over time, produced a permanent managerial class that increasingly governs in place of elected officials. From there, the discussion moves into the lived reality of this system. Ministers hold titles but limited power, civil servants operate with long time horizons and strong institutional incentives, and political promises often collide with layers of bureaucracy that are resistant to change. The result is a growing gap between what governments say they will do and what they are actually able to deliver. Timothy and James also explore the broader consequences of this shift. They discuss declining public trust in democratic institutions, the pressures created by immigration and cultural fragmentation, and the conditions required for democracy to function effectively. James argues that without a shared sense of national identity and purpose, democratic systems begin to fragment into competing group interests, making coherent governance increasingly difficult. The final part of the conversation turns to what, if anything, can be done. James outlines a pragmatic path forward focused on economic reform and state reduction: deregulation, restoring growth, reducing the size of government, and addressing welfare dependency. He suggests that meaningful change will likely require a period of political conflict, followed by a consolidation around more effective governance models. Throughout, the UK is framed as part of a wider pattern. The challenges discussed are not uniquely British, but reflect deeper structural shifts affecting governance across much of the developed world. TIMESTAMPS (Audio version only. Includes Timothy’s episode introduction): --- # Oswald Horowitz — The Last Free Place URL: https://free-cities.org/oswald-horowitz-the-last-free-place Free Cities Podcast, episode 175 Published: 2026-04-03 Guest: Oswald Horowitz Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nloco4HjWJs Topics: seasteading Timothy Allen sits down with filmmaker Oswald Horowitz, the man behind the upcoming documentary The Legend of Landi, to trace the strange true story of Samuele Landi, an Italian tech entrepreneur who set out to live beyond the reach of the normal system on a rusty barge in international waters between Dubai and Iran. What begins as Oswald’s quixotic quest to track Landi down, involving ignored Telegram messages, a ketchup-themed short film, a Croatian police ban, and a Dubai fisherman willing to sail forty miles offshore, opens out into something far bigger. Landi’s life turns out to be nothing like the press had painted it, and the story takes turns that nobody could have scripted. This is a conversation about myth, obsession, sovereignty, and the kind of rare individuals willing to push past every frontier to find out whether real freedom can actually be built at sea. --- # Patrik Schumacher — The Architecture of Spontaneous Order URL: https://free-cities.org/patrik-schumacher-the-architecture-of-spontaneous-order Free Cities Podcast, episode 174 Published: 2026-04-03 Guest: Patrik Schumacher Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UpPhhlGzaI Topics: technology-in-new-cities, urban-design Timothy Allen sits down with Patrik Schumacher, principal architect at Zaha Hadid Architects and the theorist behind “parametricism,” to talk about what happens when cities are allowed to evolve like markets: bottom up, adaptive, and shaped by real human purposes rather than planning committees. Starting with the 2008 crisis and Schumacher’s path into Austrian economics, the conversation moves into why he thinks the built environment is one of the most anti-market domains in the modern West, and how that shows up as paralysis, affordability problems, and “garbage spill” urbanization with no coherent identity. From there, Patrik makes the case that architecture should not impose a preconceived formal order, but should make an emerging network of relationships legible: tracing flows, affiliations, and co-location synergies the way a living ecosystem organizes itself. They close by bringing it back to Free Cities: whether a city with more freedom should look different, why frontier governance should pair with frontier design, and how computational tools and AI could accelerate a new era of high-performance, highly readable urbanism. --- # Mailyn Salabarria — The Hidden Path to Tyranny URL: https://free-cities.org/mailyn-salabarria-the-hidden-path-to-tyranny Free Cities Podcast, episode 173 Published: 2026-04-02 Guest: Mailyn Salabarria Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdNsVAIW4g Topics: residency-and-citizenship Timothy Allen sits down with Mailyn Salabarria, a Cuban refugee and liberty advocate, to talk about what “voting with your feet” looks like when it is not a lifestyle choice but a survival move. Mailyn describes leaving Cuba with two suitcases and $200, then having to learn how freedom actually works once she arrived in the US. From there, the conversation gets darker: why Cuba is not “quaint,” how the country is actively disintegrating (hospitals, power, crime, morality), and how the regime sustains itself through censorship, embedded informants, and a tourist-facing propaganda veneer. Mailyn also explains how remittances and “private” businesses still loop back into state control, and why she sees Venezuela as a key pressure point for Cuba’s future. They close on a guarded optimism: Florida as a lower-government bubble, a possible US fracturing scenario, and the surprising momentum for freer-market politics across Latin America, with the hope that the trend eventually reaches Cuba too. --- # Joe Quirk — The Ultimate Exit Strategy URL: https://free-cities.org/joe-quirk-the-ultimate-exit-strategy Free Cities Podcast, episode 172 Published: 2026-04-02 Guest: Joe Quirk Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l20e8xf4PFo Topics: seasteading It’s called the cruise ship industry.” Timothy Allen sits down with Joe Quirk, president of The Seasteading Institute, to make the strongest practical case for “exit” as a governance strategy, starting with Sealand and pirate-radio absurdity and ending with a serious blueprint for floating communities that can iterate on rules the way markets iterate on products. They use cruise ships as the key intuition pump: millions of people already live for weeks at sea under private rule-sets with security, dispute resolution, labor hierarchies, and tight logistics, which makes seasteading less sci-fi and more a question of engineering, law, and finance. From there, the conversation digs into what actually blocks seasteads from becoming mainstream: legal classification (not quite a ship, not quite a building), insurance, standards, and the need for designs that feel like livable cities rather than tiny pods for hobbyists. Joe argues seasteads are a “technology” for creating 100,000 competing governance experiments across most of the planet, while Timothy keeps pressing on the realism: what would make this legible, scalable, and resilient against political pushback. --- # Lotta Moberg — The Truth About Special Economic Zones URL: https://free-cities.org/lotta-moberg-the-truth-about-special-economic-zones Free Cities Podcast, episode 171 Published: 2026-04-02 Guest: Lotta Moberg Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeC83cxLddM Topics: special-economic-zones, taxation-and-economics Timothy Allen speaks with economist Lotta Moberg, author of The Political Economy of Special Economic Zones, about what zones really are once you look past the branding. Lotta wrote her doctoral dissertation on the political economy of SEZs at George Mason University after Paul Romer’s charter cities talk sent her looking for research that, it turned out, did not yet exist, so she wrote it herself. What follows is one of the most quietly myth-busting conversations we have had on the show. The story we all tell about China’s zones, the wise master plan, the cautious crossing of the river by feeling for the stones, turns out to be tidier than the truth. The real story starts with businessmen in Guangdong lobbying local officials to let them trade with Hong Kong, a process Lotta describes with the immortal line about brown envelopes above. Deng Xiaoping was against the zones until 1984. The experiment worked first and won official blessing afterwards, which Lotta argues is actually a better advertisement for decentralisation than the legend is. From there the conversation widens into why governments keep pouring money into failing zones, what separates the 6,000 zones of political theatre from the handful that change lives, and whether projects like Próspera and the Honduran ZEDEs are a cute experiment or the start of something much bigger. The second half turns personal: Lotta’s work in wealth management and how longevity breaks every retirement glide path, the investing mistake she made in Argentina by wanting to believe, her unusual sideline in cannabis credit, and a closing exchange on Bitcoin and property rights that ends with Timothy, not Lotta, declaring himself a total convert to governance by contract. --- # Tim Stern — Leaving Europe Is The Rational Choice URL: https://free-cities.org/tim-stern-leaving-europe-is-the-rational-choice Free Cities Podcast, episode 170 Published: 2026-04-02 Guest: Tim Stern Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a20a5CwAotU Topics: intentional-communities, residency-and-citizenship About: https://free-cities.org/projects/cryptocity Timothy Allen speaks with Tim Stern, founder of CryptoCity on Margarita Island, Venezuela. Tim explains why more Europeans are treating exit as a practical strategy, not a fantasy: rising tax friction, social instability, and the creeping merge of Digital ID with state money. We talk about why “CryptoCity” is a toxic name for Bitcoiners, what a DAO is actually useful for (crowdfunding businesses and managing shared infrastructure), and why he is building a high-trust community with a hard filter. We also get into the on-the-ground reality: moving earth, building terraces, planning a real port, and the longer-term bet that Latin America buys you time while Europe tightens control. --- # Mitchell Suchner — The First Operational Seasteading Resort URL: https://free-cities.org/mitchell-suchner-the-first-operational-seasteading-resort Free Cities Podcast, episode 169 Published: 2026-04-02 Guest: Mitchell Suchner Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBgDRZx4bAc Topics: seasteading About: https://free-cities.org/projects/arkpad Timothy Allen speaks with Mitchell Suchner, founder of ArkPad. Mitchell is building real, operational seasteading infrastructure, including Reef Resort in the Philippines. This episode is the economic case for how floating projects scale into ocean communities: not by ideology first, but by exports, revenue, and industry. We walk through the “seasteading stack” Mitchell sees emerging: aquaculture as early cashflow, tourism as a growth engine, and longer-term ocean industries like mineral extraction from seawater, offshore data infrastructure, and autonomous logistics. The conversation also covers platform stability, storm resilience, maritime flags and jurisdiction, and why distance from political risk can be a strategic advantage. --- # Vikram Bharati — At the Intersection of Free Cities & Network States URL: https://free-cities.org/vikram-bharati-at-the-intersection-of-free-cities-network-states Free Cities Podcast, episode 168 Published: 2026-04-02 Guest: Vikram Bharati Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzfUUAQiil8 Topics: network-states, technology-in-new-cities “The Free Cities community seems very much more buttoned up and more pragmatic – real estate, Free Cities, development, SEZs. You need lawyers, you need bankers. And then the network state community, there’s a lot more dreamers, young dreamers who want to do pop-up cities. But there’s a convergence in between where you have a group of people who are a bit of both. And I think that middle group of people are people that are going to do some very interesting things.” Timothy Allen speaks with Vikram Bharati. Vikram is the founder of Draper Nation, a governance venture lab focused on experimenting with new political and institutional models across both physical and digital realms. Vikram’s background spans venture capital, startup ecosystems, and long-running work with Tim Draper, with a particular focus on digital governance, networked communities, and cloud-based public services. The conversation moves from personal history, including Vikram’s roots in Nagaland and Timothy’s formative experiences across Northeast India, into a broader discussion of tribal governance, decentralization, and how small-scale systems resolve conflict and maintain cohesion. These lived examples become a lens for questioning democracy at scale and exploring why experimentation, rather than reform, is the primary driver of governance improvement. From there, the discussion connects Free Cities and Network States as complementary experiments: Free Cities operating on the ground through real estate, law, and host-state agreements, and Network States operating in the cloud through digital coordination and identity. Drawing on examples from China’s Special Economic Zones, private cities, Bitcoin, and Draper Nation’s digital nation experiments, the episode argues that the most meaningful governance innovation is emerging where physical jurisdictions and cloud-based systems intersect. --- # Mikkel Thorup — The Global Freedom Map Is Changing URL: https://free-cities.org/mikkel-thorup-the-global-freedom-map-is-changing Free Cities Podcast, episode 167 Published: 2026-04-02 Guest: Mikkel Thorup Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ-IYYOhUdo Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics Timothy Allen speaks with Mikkel Thorup. Mikkel is a long-time expat, offshore consultant, and founder of Expat Money. He has spent over 25 years living outside his country of birth, traveled to more than 120 countries, and works directly with families, entrepreneurs, and high earners looking to reduce friction with the systems they live under. What begins with travel stories from Central Asia and reflections on cultural psychology quickly expands into a deeper conversation about freedom, perspective, and trade-offs. Mikkel challenges Western assumptions about liberty, compares overt and hidden forms of control, and argues that many people do not actually want freedom once responsibility enters the picture. From China and the Middle East to Panama and Latin America, the discussion maps where real-world freedom is increasing, where it is quietly disappearing, and why jurisdictions with territorial tax systems and diversified revenue models are becoming magnets for mobile families. Along the way, Mikkel explains why Panama functions as a de facto city-state, how offshore structures really work in practice, and why physical communities matter more than online movements alone. The second half of the conversation moves into harder territory: public education, UBI, loss of purpose, and why meaning, struggle, and family remain central even in a world of optionality. Rather than offering slogans or hacks, the episode stays grounded in lived experience, trade-offs, and personal responsibility. --- # Christoph Heuermann — You Can Live Tax Free Almost Anywhere URL: https://free-cities.org/christoph-heuermann-you-can-live-tax-free-almost-anywhere Free Cities Podcast, episode 166 Published: 2026-02-06 Guest: Christoph Heuermann Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT1lWMvuVjE Topics: taxation-and-economics, residency-and-citizenship Timothy Allen speaks with Christoph Heuermann. Christoph is a perpetual traveler whose company Staatenlos sits at the intersection of global mobility, asset protection, and quiet preparation for uncertainty. What begins with stories of constant movement and remote places quickly turns into a deeper exploration of why some people choose not to anchor themselves to a single country, system, or plan. Without turning it into a how-to guide, the conversation moves through unclaimed territories, unusual experiments in sovereignty, and the lived reality behind concepts like exit, optionality, and Plan B thinking. Heuermann shares observations from years of travel and advising clients, offering glimpses into how families, entrepreneurs, and retirees are responding to tightening rules and rising friction worldwide. The discussion also challenges common assumptions about digital nomads, Free Cities, and what actually creates resilience, hinting at tensions between online freedom and physical reality. Throughout, the focus stays practical and grounded, more about mindset and trade-offs than hype. --- # Rahim Taghizadegan — Exit Is More Powerful Than Voice URL: https://free-cities.org/rahim-taghizadegan-exit-is-more-powerful-than-voice Free Cities Podcast, episode 165 Published: 2026-01-18 Guest: Rahim Taghizadegan Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soAsJKORVEU Topics: intentional-communities, residency-and-citizenship Timothy Allen speaks with Rahim Taghizadegan. Rahim is an Austrian economist and philosopher, founder of the Scholarium in Vienna, and a longtime figure in the Free Cities ecosystem. In this episode, he argues that exit is more powerful than voice: politics is mostly an attention game with a poor track record, while real freedom comes from optionality, mobility, and quiet preparation. The conversation introduces citadel.garden, a deliberately low-profile network of small, family-oriented refuges structured as a proprietary community and backed by Bitcoin, designed less as a utopia and more as practical insurance for those who expect institutional decline but prefer not to advertise their response. --- # Mason — The Last Piece in the Puzzle for the Sovereign Individual URL: https://free-cities.org/mason-the-last-piece-in-the-puzzle-for-the-sovereign-individual Free Cities Podcast, episode 164 Published: 2026-01-18 Guest: Mason Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfY87OwMmfo Topics: seasteading Timothy Allen speaks with Mason. Mason is a doctor and seasteader, and the founder of LiberArx, a floating, solar-powered catamaran home designed as a mobile apartment rather than a traditional sailing vessel. In this conversation, we explore how seasteading fits within the Free Cities movement, why cruise ships already function as real-world free private cities, and how projects like LiberArx can serve as a practical bridge between individual sovereignty and larger floating communities such as Atlas Island. Mason argues that true freedom is less about ideology and more about optionality. By rethinking housing as mobile, energy-independent, and jurisdictionally flexible, he sees seasteading as the final missing layer for the sovereign individual, enabling people to opt out of land-based constraints while still accessing global civilization on their own terms. --- # Yaron Brook — Why Atlas Shrugged Keeps Happening URL: https://free-cities.org/yaron-brook-why-atlas-shrugged-keeps-happening Free Cities Podcast, episode 163 Published: 2026-01-08 Guest: Yaron Brook Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZAE0NLniN8 Timothy Allen speaks with Yaron Brook. Yaron is an Israeli-American author and commentator, best known as the longtime chairman of the Ayn Rand Institute and a prominent advocate of Objectivism. In this conversation, we discuss why the core political divide is, in Yaron’s view, collectivism versus individualism rather than left versus right, and how growing statism erodes freedom, reason, and human flourishing. Brook argues that modern politics, technology, and even cultural movements increasingly resemble secular religions demanding sacrifice, while genuine liberty, entrepreneurship, and happiness rest on a clear philosophical defense of individual rights, free will, and rational self-interest, which he sees as essential foundations for projects like Free Cities and for resisting the long-term pull of control, conformity, and decline. --- # Vladimir Leshko — You Will Live Forever If You Choose To URL: https://free-cities.org/vladimir-leshko-you-will-live-forever-if-you-choose-to Free Cities Podcast, episode 162 Published: 2026-01-08 Guest: Vladimir Leshko Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDTjq3oTPJA Topics: honduran-zedes, medical-regulation About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Timothy Allen speaks with biomedical engineer Vladimir Leshko about gene therapy, longevity, and why Próspera’s regulatory environment makes human trials possible that are effectively blocked elsewhere. The conversation begins with the practical question at the heart of Próspera’s appeal to frontier medicine. Leshko explains how the city’s legal framework allows companies like Unlimited Bio to run regulated human trials through clinical partners such as GARM Clinic, using a system that is more flexible than the FDA model without being a lawless free-for-all. He pushes back on the common meme that Próspera lets people “do anything,” arguing instead that the system still relies on review boards, liability, insurance, and clear regulatory pathways. From there, the discussion moves into the science itself. Leshko explains gene therapy in simple terms: not as a Frankenstein-style rewriting of human nature, but as a way of delivering functioning genetic instructions where the body’s own version is missing or broken. He uses the example of his own son’s inherited deafness to illustrate both the promise and the current limits of the technology, and walks Timothy through embryo selection, embryo editing, viral delivery systems, and why early intervention matters so much. The episode then broadens into the larger longevity question. Leshko argues that aging should be treated not as an untouchable fact of existence, but as a biological process that can, in principle, be understood and altered. The conversation explores why some species appear to escape aging far better than humans, whether evolution “designed” us to deteriorate, and why current medicine still does almost nothing to slow aging in humans in any meaningful way. The final third turns philosophical. Timothy pushes the conversation beyond biotech and into the existential territory that longevity inevitably opens up: near-death experiences, lucid dreaming, psychedelics, heaven, suffering, meaning, and whether death is a natural part of life or simply another problem humans have learned to accept too easily. What emerges is less a sales pitch for immortality than a serious attempt to think through what radically extended life would actually mean. The conversation closes with a striking tension: if AI and technological abundance eventually make much of human struggle optional, what will still give life meaning? Leshko argues that the first moral priority is still obvious – give people the choice not to age into debility and death. Timothy remains more ambivalent, but by the end both men seem to agree on one thing: once the possibility of opting out of aging becomes real, the world will have to rethink far more than medicine. --- # Swen Lorenz — Demography is Destiny URL: https://free-cities.org/swen-lorenz-demography-is-destiny Free Cities Podcast, episode 161 Published: 2026-01-08 Guest: Swen Lorenz Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CSAdQw3QHc Topics: city-states-today, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/sark Timothy Allen speaks with Swen Lorenz. Swen is a Sark resident who was at the centre of a recent bid to rejuvenate the island by buying up the flailing Sark property portfolio of the Barclay family. This episode is an update on the current situation in Sark and the wider issue of confidence in government. In this conversation, Swen reflects on Sark as a microcosm of the wider structural pressures facing small jurisdictions and, increasingly, Europe itself. He offers a sober assessment of an island grappling with stagnation, demographic imbalance, and missed opportunities for renewal, including a high-profile investment effort that ultimately failed to materialise. From Sark, the discussion broadens to questions of capital, mobility, and confidence in the future: why people are beginning to move their money and themselves, how governments respond when that happens, and what it means to think seriously about where, and how, to build a life and a business in an era of growing constraint. --- # Mark Edge — The Freedom to Leave URL: https://free-cities.org/mark-edge-the-freedom-to-leave Free Cities Podcast, episode 160 Published: 2026-01-08 Guest: Mark Edge Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7mDyfyCZZk Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project, https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland Timothy Allen speaks with Mark Edge. Mark is an award-winning radio show host, most famously one half of Free Talk Live, the libertarian radio show he hosted out of New Hampshire with Ian Freeman. In this episode, we discuss libertarian projects like New Hampshire’s Free State Project, Liberland, and seasteading as ways to build freer societies, with Mark noting both the benefits and the limits of concentrating like-minded individuals. We explore privatized city-states, billionaire influence, and the flaws of democracy, advocating proprietarianism, where owners prioritize citizens’ well-being. Examples like Bill Gates’ farmland illustrate state and elite impact, while libertarian strategy emphasizes autonomy, freedom, and creating spaces where adults can act freely without harming others. --- # Massimo Mazzone — Liberty Without Libertarians URL: https://free-cities.org/massimo-mazzone-liberty-without-libertarians Free Cities Podcast, episode 159 Published: 2026-01-08 Guest: Massimo Mazzone Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjuZkI0oFgA Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Timothy Allen speaks with Massimo Mazzone Massimo Mazzone is the founder of Ciudad Morazán. We talk about the growing Free City movement and the idea that you don’t need libertarians to create a libertarian society. Massimo discusses how decentralized, intentional communities have been expanding since 2020, moving the Overton window and attracting people seeking autonomy and freedom. He explains the legal and political challenges facing ZEDEs in Honduras, the growth of Morazán despite pandemic setbacks, and the role of private governance in shaping cooperative, self-sustaining communities. The conversation also touches on network states, diaspora-driven community building, and the potential for entrepreneurial communities (“Entrecom”) to scale these Free City experiments globally. --- # Trey Goff — Próspera, Perception, and Post-Scarcity URL: https://free-cities.org/trey-goff-prospera-perception-and-post-scarcity Free Cities Podcast, episode 158 Published: 2026-01-08 Guest: Trey Goff Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noFicZW7D18 Topics: honduran-zedes, technology-in-new-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Timothy Allen speaks with Trey Goff. Trey is the chief of staff at Próspera and one of their longest serving employees. In this conversation he explains Prospera’s real model – partnering with host nations to create zones that encourage innovation through clear rules and fair governance. He pushes back on conspiracy theories about Prospera, arguing that media narratives often rely on inaccuracies and preconceived angles. We also discuss recent projects, rising interest from entrepreneurs and digital nomads, and new initiatives like a legal framework for AI agents. The conversation broadens into the philosophical implications of AI, the future of prosperity, and how humans create meaning in a world of increasing technological capability. --- # Vera Kichanova — Climbing a Ladder of Consent URL: https://free-cities.org/vera-kichanova-climbing-a-ladder-of-consent Free Cities Podcast, episode 157 Published: 2026-01-08 Guest: Vera Kichanova Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ukvpl1DFXio Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance Timothy Allen speaks with Vera Kichanova This is Vera’s third appearance on the show, and this time we’re discussing the rising interest in Free Cities since COVID-19 and addressing recent critiques framing them as projects for the wealthy/well connected. We explore the role of private initiatives versus state control, historical and modern examples of privately developed cities, and the nuances of freedom, choice, and consent in these projects. The conversation touches on topics ranging from free ports in the UK to seasteading, environmental considerations, and the potential for new models in places like Dubai, Europe, and Honduras. --- # Patrick Hiebert & Alex Voss — Building Bitcoin Citadels URL: https://free-cities.org/patrick-hiebert-alex-voss-building-bitcoin-citadels Free Cities Podcast, episode 156 Published: 2025-11-20 Guest: Patrick Hiebert & Alex Voss Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqQXjEd3380 Topics: intentional-communities, bitcoin-and-free-cities Timothy Allen speaks with Patrick Hiebert & Alex Voss. Patrick gives updates on Veritas Villages’ expansion into Nicaragua, Panama, and Costa Rica. He highlights their network model, allowing members to share amenities across locations. Alex discusses Autris’ acquisition of BitCorp to build a Bitcoin treasury company that pairs real business operations with Bitcoin holdings. They explain the concept of MNAV and emphasize that Autris focuses on tangible development, not just Bitcoin accumulation. The discussion covers integrating Bitcoin into Veritas Villages through payments, mining, and governance. Patrick and Alex also explore decentralized governance, including special economic zones and quadratic voting for fairer HOA decisions. The conversation concludes with plans for Autris to expand its communities and deepen Bitcoin integration. Enjoy. --- # Ioni Appelberg — The Medicine of Meaning URL: https://free-cities.org/ioni-appelberg-the-medicine-of-meaning Free Cities Podcast, episode 154 Published: 2025-11-20 Guest: Ioni Appelberg Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI_7KilX8VQ Topics: medical-regulation Timothy Allen speaks with Ioni Appelberg In part 1 of this episode, we explore the intersection of health, technology, and spirituality. Ioni discusses the evolution of medicine toward longevity science and biogerontology’s mission to treat aging as the root of modern disease. Drawing from Abundance Through Scarcity, he connects Bitcoin’s provable scarcity to building lasting abundance. The conversation expands into transhumanism, AI, and the search for meaning, before turning inward to Ioni’s transformative experiences with ayahuasca, peyote, and Bufo alvarius—journeys that revealed the depth of the body–mind–spirit connection and the importance of finding freedom and living fully in the present. In part 2, Ioni shares his holistic approach to healing, blending alternative therapies like cannabis and psilocybin with traditional medicine to treat conditions such as depression, PTSD, and chronic pain. He emphasizes the importance of mindset, environment, and lifestyle in healing, viewing the body as inherently self-restorative. The discussion expands into philosophical and societal themes, exploring consciousness, the illusion of reality, and civilization’s decline under fiat currency. Ioni links Bitcoin to a potential societal and spiritual renewal, envisioning it as a step toward a more connected, conscious, and future-oriented humanity. Ultimately, he advocates rediscovering our shared humanity and embracing existence as the foundation of meaning and growth. --- # Daniel Prince — The Grand Conspiracy 2 URL: https://free-cities.org/daniel-prince-the-grand-conspiracy-2 Free Cities Podcast, episode 153 Published: 2025-11-20 Guest: Daniel Prince Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTdTOYbI0w8 Timothy Allen speaks with Daniel Prince. The conversation opens with Daniel explaining his blue-light-blocking glasses and the work of neurosurgeon Dr. Jack Kruse, exploring how LED screens and artificial lighting disrupt our circadian rhythms. They discuss how Las Vegas casinos pioneered the use of flickering blue lights to keep gamblers in a trance-like state, and how that same trick has been carried into modern devices and social media platforms. Daniel recommends switching your phone to black and white mode to see the difference for yourself. From there they dive into geoengineering and chemtrails, referencing Peter Kirby’s book Chemtrails Exposed and tracing weather modification research back to Project Paperclip and HAARP. Daniel points to recent BBC reporting on UK government plans to dim the sun, Bill Gates’ investment in a company called Silver Linings, and the revelation that ARIA — Dominic Cummings’ DARPA-inspired research agency — is quietly funding geoengineering projects. The discussion moves through Cambridge Analytica, social engineering, and the financial incentives behind weather control, including the little-known world of weather derivatives. They close with the concept of allodial title and what true ownership really means, arguing that Bitcoin may be the only asset you genuinely own. Tim shares his family’s difficult experience with homeschooling in France and the heavy hand of the state. The takeaway: opt out of fiat money, take ownership of your children’s education, stay nimble, and stack sats. --- # Thomas D. Walls — Diplomacy By Example URL: https://free-cities.org/thomas-d-walls-diplomacy-by-example Free Cities Podcast, episode 152 Published: 2025-11-20 Guest: Thomas D. Walls Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcwbpqK70ds Topics: micronations, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland Timothy Allen speaks with Thomas D. Walls. Thomas is the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Free Republic of Liberland. In this episode, Thomas discusses Liberland’s evolving diplomacy and the nation’s efforts to foster peace and cooperation with its neighbours. The conversation explores ongoing dialogues with Croatia and Serbia, the delicate balance of seeking international recognition, and the challenges posed by territorial disputes and differing political realities. Thomas shares insights into “diplomacy by example,” explaining how Liberland aims to demonstrate its legitimacy through tangible regional benefits, including investment, innovation, and community development. He also discusses Croatia’s paradoxical stance, legal hurdles, and the gradual softening of attitudes from local authorities. Beyond borders, Thomas highlights Liberland’s ambition to build a global libertarian community, attract supporters worldwide, and create real-world alternatives such as The Ark, a pioneering community project on the Serbian side of the Danube. The episode also touches on broader themes of economic resilience, self-governance, and the role of free societies in an era of global uncertainty. --- # Susie Violet Ward — The Rise of Digital Authoritarianism URL: https://free-cities.org/susie-violet-ward-the-rise-of-digital-authoritarianism Free Cities Podcast, episode 151 Published: 2025-11-20 Guest: Susie Violet Ward Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXKirnKS7ww Topics: technology-in-new-cities Timothy Allen speaks with Susie Violet Ward. Susie is a financial analyst and journalist specializing in bitcoin content. She is also the CEO and co-founder of Bitcoin Policy UK. In this conversation we explore the bittersweet reality of living at a time when technological innovation and financial revolution coexist with growing surveillance and control. From the UK’s Online Safety Act to digital IDs and the normalization of data collection, we unpack how our modern conveniences may be costing us more than we realize. Yet amid the concerns, you can find hope, in Bitcoin, in community, and in the power of individual action. --- # Knut Svanholm — Democracy Leads to Totalitarianism URL: https://free-cities.org/knut-svanholm-democracy-leads-to-totalitarianism Free Cities Podcast, episode 150 Published: 2025-11-20 Guest: Knut Svanholm Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1z2nSd8tZY Topics: technology-in-new-cities, private-governance Timothy Allen speaks with Knut Svanholm. In this conversation we discuss the evolution of Bitcoin culture, security, and the balance between fear-based narratives and empowerment through self-sovereignty. Knut highlights natural law, property rights, and the non-aggression principle, connecting these ideas to Bitcoin’s role as a tool for peaceful trade and communication. The conversation also touches on AI’s limitations, personal responsibility within the Bitcoin community, and critiques of democracy versus trade-driven societies. We also explore geopolitics, the erosion of freedom, and how Bitcoin offers hope, resilience, and emancipation for the individual. --- # Vít Jedlička — Liberland’s Path to Prosperity URL: https://free-cities.org/vit-jedlicka-liberlands-path-to-prosperity Free Cities Podcast, episode 149 Published: 2025-10-10 Guest: Vít Jedlička Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Pg8RHqTTU4 Topics: micronations, private-governance, technology-in-new-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland On this week’s podcast, I sat down with the president of Liberland, Vít Jedlička. This discussion spans the current developments in Liberland, including the construction of houses, pontoon structures, and tourist infrastructure on Liberty Island, as well as the ongoing territorial disputes with Croatia. Key themes include efforts toward international recognition, the role of blockchain-based governance, the Liberland dollar, and the country’s constitution as a smart contract. Other topics explored include voluntary taxation, private property rights, flood-resistant construction, and the integration of e-residency with global financial systems. The conversation highlights the broader struggle to create an alternative model of governance and economic freedom, balancing individual liberty and innovative legal frameworks in the face of external pressures and challenges. Enjoy. --- # Patrick Henningsen — The Grand Conspiracy URL: https://free-cities.org/patrick-henningsen-the-grand-conspiracy Free Cities Podcast, episode 148 Published: 2025-10-10 Guest: Patrick Henningsen Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgpVqVGanLY On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Patrick Henningsen. Patrick is a writer, filmmaker, and global affairs analyst, best known as the founder of the alternative media site 21st Century Wire and as the host of Sunday Wire and The Patrick Henningsen Show. The discussion spans the Ukraine conflict, Western narratives, and geopolitical struggles between the Anglo-American empire and rising Eurasia, with emphasis on U.S. dominance, the role of Israel, and strategies of global control. Other key themes include migration as both a byproduct of wars and a tool of destabilization, the erosion of democracy and freedoms, and the risks of technology amplifying authoritarian power. The conversation underscores a broader struggle between centralized power and the pursuit of individual and collective autonomy in an increasingly controlled digital age. Enjoy. --- # Jeff G — Privacy and the Architecture of Freedom URL: https://free-cities.org/jeff-g-privacy-and-the-architecture-of-freedom Free Cities Podcast, episode 147 Published: 2025-09-12 Guest: Jeff G Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSv4Py6qABc Topics: technology-in-new-cities On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Jeff G. Jeff G is a Nostr developer working in the privacy tech space. This discussion ranges from AI tools and privacy concerns to the evolution of secure messaging, where Jeff introduces his project White Noise and its use of Message Layer Security (MLS) on Nostr. We examine the limits of platforms like WhatsApp and Signal, the challenges of metadata privacy, and practical defenses against sophisticated threats. The conversation then expands to Bitcoin, eCash, and mesh networks, before concluding with reflections on teaching digital responsibility, the trade-offs between privacy and convenience, and the promise of open-source, decentralized technologies to shape a freer internet. --- # Efrat Fenigson — Stop Bitching, Start Solving URL: https://free-cities.org/efrat-fenigson-stop-bitching-start-solving Free Cities Podcast, episode 146 Published: 2025-09-12 Guest: Efrat Fenigson Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBkI_70lcG4 Topics: technology-in-new-cities Efrat Fenigson has become hard to silence because she has stopped existing in one place. An independent journalist, marketing expert and host of You’re The Voice, she arrives already half-suppressed and fully prepared: if YouTube refuses an episode, it goes to Rumble; if Spotify censors, it goes to Substack, Nostr and everywhere else. The point is not metrics. The point is that the voice remains available. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen sits down with Efrat for a conversation about how to navigate an increasingly chaotic world. They explore censorship, shadow banning, freedom online, Bitcoin, privacy, encryption, CBDCs, propaganda, Israel, spirituality, psychedelics, microdosing and life as a digital nomad. They begin with the strange mechanics of suppression: clips that get struck, reinstated 24 hours later, then left with no reach; posts that vanish into the algorithmic void; and the possibility that a strong, engaged audience makes a person too noisy to deplatform, but not too dangerous to throttle. The centre of the episode is privacy. Efrat argues that privacy has become a forbidden concept, something ordinary people are being trained to treat as suspicious. But private life is not a criminal luxury. It is the door on the bathroom, the journal nobody else reads, the secret told in confidence. In the digital world, encryption, Signal, Bitcoin, Lightning and Cashu become the new doors, walls and curtains. They do not make you invisible. They make surveillance expensive again. That, for Efrat, is where sovereignty begins. Then the conversation goes somewhere stranger and more personal. Efrat talks about Bitcoin opening her horizons, her spiritual awakening, microdosing mushrooms, lucid dreams, ancestral trauma, fainting, despair, and the sense that human beings are being pushed into a decisive moment. The final stretch turns to Israel, propaganda, resistance, nomading and hope. She is blunt about the darkness, but not black-pilled. Her answer is the title of the episode: stop bitching, start solving. Yes, CBDCs are coming. Yes, control systems are advancing. Yes, the pressure is real. Now what? Build the rails for a freer society. Key topics: Efrat’s shadow banning, suppression and refusal to disappear, Why decentralisation matters for anyone speaking publicly online, How podcasts, Substack, Rumble, Nostr and live events create resilience, Personal branding as a defence mechanism in an age of censorship, Why Efrat thinks Bitcoin opened up every other subject in her life, Bringing life into Bitcoin, rather than bringing Bitcoin into people’s lives, Mental and spiritual preparation for turbulent years, Microdosing mushrooms, cognitive sharpness and emotional distance, Psychedelics, bad trips, despair and Timothy’s own formative experiences, Privacy as a forbidden concept, and why “what do you have to hide?” is the wrong question, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the right to private life, Bitcoin, permissionless transactions and the ability to spend money, Encryption as the return of doors, walls and curtains in the digital world, Signal, Lightning and Cashu as practical tools for sovereignty, Why control systems need visibility, compliance and the end of private organising, CBDCs, digital identity and the coming pressure on financial freedom, Stop bitching, start solving: choosing action over the black pill, Israel, propaganda, Gaza, and the difficulty of seeing clearly from inside the system, Leaving Israel, nomading, and the search for home, Hope, creativity and building parallel systems for a freer future, Veritas Villages, off-grid homes, Bitcoin and freedom-oriented living, Próspera and the wider Free Cities movement --- # Freddie New — The State is Failing URL: https://free-cities.org/freddie-new-the-state-is-failing Free Cities Podcast, episode 145 Published: 2025-09-12 Guest: Freddie New Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjK_qJdWwqo Topics: technology-in-new-cities On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Freddie New. Freddie, is a lawyer and Head of Policy at Bitcoin Policy UK. In this conversation we explore the battle for individual freedom in an age of surveillance, financial instability, and growing state power. We discuss the tools and principles that can safeguard personal sovereignty, from Bitcoin and privacy tech to the responsibility each of us carries in resisting economic debasement and government overreach. --- # Leon Wankum — The Real Estate Reckoning URL: https://free-cities.org/leon-wankum-the-real-estate-reckoning Free Cities Podcast, episode 144 Published: 2025-09-12 Guest: Leon Wankum Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JitsOfyguJI Topics: taxation-and-economics, technology-in-new-cities On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Leon Wankum. Leon, a veteran real estate developer speaks about his journey from property and construction into Austrian economics and Bitcoin. He challenges the idea that real estate is a safe store of value, arguing that its monetary premium is misplaced in a digital economy. In this conversation Leon contrasts the fragility of leveraged property markets with Bitcoin’s fixed supply, warning that utility-based pricing could upend the global financial system. From the demonetization of real estate to the rise of service-oriented housing and Bitcoin-based innovation, he envisions a future where property is valued for use, not speculation — and where Bitcoin strengthens resilience, reshapes development, and supports the growth of Free Cities. --- # Max Hillebrand — The Praxeology of Privacy URL: https://free-cities.org/max-hillebrand-the-praxeology-of-privacy Free Cities Podcast, episode 143 Published: 2025-09-12 Guest: Max Hillebrand Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4_1E2kJ5_w Topics: technology-in-new-cities On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Max Hillebrand. Max joins me to explore freedom, privacy, and property rights in the free market of ideas. We discuss Cypherpunk strategies, the appeal of Bitcoin, Free Cities, and digital nomadism as ways to resist creeping socialism and surveillance. Drawing on Lockean ownership theory, Austrian economics, and praxeology, Max makes the case for combining decentralization, community, and technology to defend liberty in both physical and digital realms. --- # Michael Mainelli — Solving Wicked Problems URL: https://free-cities.org/michael-mainelli-solving-wicked-problems Free Cities Podcast, episode 142 Published: 2025-09-12 Guest: Michael Mainelli Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxRkmyiely8 Topics: private-governance, history-of-free-cities On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Michael Mainelli. Michael is an American-born British scientist, economist, and accountant, known for being Chairman of Z/Yen, Sheriff of the City of London for 2019–21, and the 695th Lord Mayor of the City of London. In this conversation we discuss the City of London’s history and governance, plus various concepts related to free markets, regulation, democracy and wicked problems. --- # Jason Cozens — Why Gold Still Matters in the Digital Age URL: https://free-cities.org/jason-cozens-why-gold-still-matters-in-the-digital-age Free Cities Podcast, episode 141 Published: 2025-09-12 Guest: Jason Cozens Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAC_cx9cn-8 Topics: taxation-and-economics On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Jason Cozens. Jason, the CEO of Glint speaks about reintroducing gold as a viable form of money through Glint’s platform, which allows users to buy, store, and spend fractions of physical gold in real time. We explore gold’s enduring role as a store of value, its contrast with fiat currency and central bank policies, and how government control over money contributes to economic inequality. Jason explains how Glint offers a bottom-up solution that empowers individuals with sound money, likening it to Bitcoin but grounded in a tangible asset. We also discuss constitutional provisions for gold currency in the U.S., recent legislative efforts in several states, and the broader push to reclaim monetary freedom through trust, protection, and tax reform. --- # Nick Malster — Liberating Creators from the Attention Economy URL: https://free-cities.org/nick-malster-liberating-creators-from-the-attention-economy Free Cities Podcast, episode 140 Published: 2025-07-25 Guest: Nick Malster Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrPeJTDx9FQ Topics: technology-in-new-cities How much do you want that freedom?” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Nick Malster. Nick is the co-founder of Fountain, a value-for-value podcasting app that enables Bitcoin micropayments. In this conversation we discuss the changing nature of work, critique popular economic views, and trace Nick’s journey from advertising to launching Fountain. The discussion focuses on how the attention economy distorts content creation and how Fountain aims to realign incentives by letting listeners directly reward creators. We examine the challenges of moving away from traditional advertising, the promise of decentralized platforms like Nostr for content ownership, and the importance of community-driven models and subscriptions for long-term creator sustainability. --- # Niklas Anzinger — Inside Próspera – A Longtime Resident’s View URL: https://free-cities.org/niklas-anzinger-inside-prospera-a-longtime-residents-view Free Cities Podcast, episode 139 Published: 2025-07-25 Guest: Niklas Anzinger Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnPnMh51Hjc Topics: honduran-zedes, criticism-and-debate About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Niklas Anzinger. Niklas, a digital nomad turned entrepreneur and community builder in Próspera speaks about navigating public relations and skepticism of the Free City project, particularly in response to criticisms by nomad influencer Gonçalo Hall. Niklas shares his journey to Próspera through his ventures, Infinita City and Infinita VC and he addresses misconceptions about Próspera, concerns about its effect on the nearby Crawfish Rock community, and the political challenges related to Honduras’ reputation. He highlights efforts to build trust through community engagement, correcting misinformation, and attracting investment, while positioning Infinita as a “layer two” business helping Próspera scale. Despite backing from figures like Brian Armstrong and Balaji Srinivasan, Niklas emphasizes the long-term effort needed to build a sustainable and appealing community. --- # Mailyn Salabarria — Government Red Flags – Lessons From a Cuban Refugee URL: https://free-cities.org/mailyn-salabarria-government-red-flags-lessons-from-a-cuban-refugee Free Cities Podcast, episode 138 Published: 2025-07-25 Guest: Mailyn Salabarria Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpbHQRj39GM Topics: residency-and-citizenship On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Mailyn Salabarria. Mailyn shares her powerful story of growing up under communist rule in Cuba and how it shaped her deep awareness of government overreach and loss of individual freedoms. Drawing parallels between her past and current trends in the U.S., she discusses the rise of progressive ideologies in the education system, the erosion of parental rights, and the dangers of political indoctrination. She recounts her emotional journey to the U.S. as a refugee and offers a sobering warning about the slow creep of tyranny through bloated bureaucracy and unchecked power. She urges people to reclaim personal responsibility, educate the next generation on the value of freedom, and explore ways to reduce dependence on the state. --- # Ben Gunn — Three Rules For Life URL: https://free-cities.org/ben-gunn-three-rules-for-life Free Cities Podcast, episode 136 Published: 2025-07-25 Guest: Ben Gunn Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzd6N51NENY Topics: technology-in-new-cities On this week’s podcast, I sat down for a two part long form discussion with Ben Gunn. In part 1 of the conversation, pseudonymous Ben explores the evolving landscape of privacy, anonymity, and digital identity in a surveillance-driven world. He distinguishes privacy from secrecy, emphasizes the importance of reputation in small communities, and examines the challenges posed by increasingly pervasive monitoring technologies. Central to the conversation is NOSTR—and a decentralized identity and access control system designed to balance privacy, trust, and accountability. The discussion also touches on broader themes of governance, digital freedom, and the potential for tools like Bitcoin and NOSTR to foster a more open, responsible, and decentralized future. In the second part of the conversation we explore the evolving role of Bitcoin as both a store of value and a medium of exchange, analyzing its limitations due to taxation, regulation, and systemic incentives, while also diving into broader themes of economic decline, intergenerational tension, and political dysfunction. We also discuss the distortion of Bitcoin usage across class lines, drawing attention to the asymmetry in who can afford to use Bitcoin effectively. Ben critiques government overreach, anticipating societal collapse or reset. Emphasizing the importance of authenticity, personal mission, and proof of work, the conversation shifts to how individuals can navigate chaos by taking responsibility for their actions, embracing vulnerability & volatility, and aligning their values with meaningful action in both the physical and digital realms. --- # Jody Underwood — Homesteading, Microschooling & Living Off-Grid URL: https://free-cities.org/jody-underwood-homesteading-microschooling-living-off-grid Free Cities Podcast, episode 135 Published: 2025-07-02 Guest: Jody Underwood Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbREmtId21I Topics: intentional-communities, alternative-education About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project But they do know that they want the government out of their pockets and out of their bedrooms.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Jody Underwood. A former school board member and Free State Project board member, Jody discusses her off-grid lifestyle in New Hampshire, where she pursues self-sufficiency and runs an education non-profit. Drawn by the Free State Project, she moved with friends to embrace off-grid living, raising animals and growing food. Jody shares insights into local education reform, including a controversial vote to drastically cut the school budget—later overturned—that sparked backlash. She critiques the traditional education system and advocates for alternatives like micro schools and homeschool co-ops, reflecting a broader shift toward personalized, parent-driven education. --- # Melissa Creem — Live Free or Die URL: https://free-cities.org/melissa-creem-live-free-or-die Free Cities Podcast, episode 134 Published: 2025-06-16 Guest: Melissa Creem Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-vOo2UHpUI About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Melissa Creem. Melissa, a passionate advocate for liberty, is the chairperson of the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance (NHLA). In this episode, we explore the unique political landscape of New Hampshire. The conversation delves into the dynamics of the Free State Project, the challenges of local governance, and the importance of grassroots activism in promoting freedom. Melissa shares her insights on the role of the NHLA in monitoring legislation and advocating for pro-liberty bills, highlighting the significance of transparency and accountability in the statehouse. We also discuss the cultural differences between New Hampshire and other states, touching upon the impact of COVID-19, the complexities of gun rights, and the societal implications of individual liberty versus government control. --- # Liam Martin — Positioning Yourself for the AI Future URL: https://free-cities.org/liam-martin-positioning-yourself-for-the-ai-future Free Cities Podcast, episode 133 Published: 2025-06-06 Guest: Liam Martin Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yid5JB3y22M Topics: technology-in-new-cities “I think we are at a point in human history where we are at a huge crossroads. We could go down the dystopian route where everyone’s just being fed AI information and no one has a true connection with other human beings. Or we could double down on humanity and really interact with the human condition.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Liam Martin. Entrepreneur & best selling author Liam shares his insights on the evolving landscape of technology, remote work, and digital nomadism. The conversation delves into the concept of asynchronous management, emphasizing how effective communication and management can enhance productivity in remote settings. Liam also explores the implications of AI on the future workforce, discussing how automation may change the nature of jobs and the importance of creativity and innovation in a rapidly evolving environment. Navigating the complexities of commercial real estate and the potential for a future dominated by AI, the dialogue raises thought-provoking questions about human connection, the value of the human experience, and the future of work. --- # Bonnie Freeman — The War on Bitcoin is Not Over URL: https://free-cities.org/bonnie-freeman-the-war-on-bitcoin-is-not-over Free Cities Podcast, episode 132 Published: 2025-06-06 Guest: Bonnie Freeman Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t1Rlp-jrwA Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities “Trump gave a speech saying that he’s ending Elizabeth Warren & Biden’s ‘War on Crypto’. We’re trying to say to him, ‘Then release the prisoners of war if you ended the war on crypto’.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Bonnie Freeman. Bonnie is the wife of Ian Freeman, a prominent figure in the Bitcoin community who is currently serving an eight-year prison sentence. This episode delves deep into Ian’s story and the controversial circumstances surrounding his arrest and prosecution. Bonnie shares the harrowing details of the FBI raid on their home, which involved seemingly unwarranted extreme force. She discusses the media’s portrayal of Ian as a scammer and the complexities of the legal system that led to his conviction for charges related to unlicensed money transmission and conspiracy to commit money laundering. The conversation also touches on the broader implications of Ian’s case for the Bitcoin community and the perceived threat that BTC poses to government authority. Bonnie emphasizes the importance of activism and awareness in the face of such injustices, drawing parallels with other high-profile cases like that of Ross Ulbricht. --- # Izabela Patriota — Reclaiming Free Market Feminism URL: https://free-cities.org/izabela-patriota-reclaiming-free-market-feminism Free Cities Podcast, episode 131 Published: 2025-05-24 Guest: Izabela Patriota Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0cysP4RMAI On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Izabela Patriota Izabela is a member of the leadership team of Ladies Of Liberty Alliance Brazil and is the Director of Development for LOLA in the U.S. In this conversation, she shares her unique background as a Brazilian woman navigating the complexities of politics and economic freedom. The dialogue delves into the current political climate in Brazil, highlighting the influence of U.S. politics on Latin America. As a passionate advocate for women’s rights, Izabela discusses the importance of empowering women to make their own choices, emphasizing the need for a supportive community rather than relying on government intervention. We also touch on the evolving roles of men and women in society, the implications of technology on relationships, and the significance of personal responsibility in achieving happiness. --- # Gonçalo Hall — Why Most Digital Nomads Have Never Heard of Próspera URL: https://free-cities.org/goncalo-hall-why-most-digital-nomads-have-never-heard-of-prospera Free Cities Podcast, episode 130 Published: 2025-05-23 Guest: Gonçalo Hall Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPhy7cWr7J8 Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Nobody knows about it.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Gonçalo Hall. Gonçalo, a pioneer in the digital nomad movement, shares his journey from creating the first nomad village in Madeira to consulting with governments in Brazil, highlighting the transformative power of remote work and community building. We explore the challenges currently facing Próspera in Honduras, especially from a public relations standpoint, where Gonçalo sees a problem. He shares insights drawn from his own experience navigating similar hurdles while launching his projects in Madeira and beyond. The dialogue also delves into the current state of the digital nomad ecosystem, exploring the fragmentation within the movement and the need for a unified voice to advocate for nomadic rights and interests. --- # Ian Underwood — A New Governance Model for the 21st Century URL: https://free-cities.org/ian-underwood-a-new-governance-model-for-the-21st-century Free Cities Podcast, episode 129 Published: 2025-05-22 Guest: Ian Underwood Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWv8jvYcs-o Topics: private-governance Those are all answers, but the American answer, as I think of it, is: government operates from consent.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Ian Underwood. Ian has been a planetary scientist and artificial intelligence researcher for NASA; the director of the renowned Ask Dr. Math service; co-founder of Bardo Farm and Shaolin Rifleworks; and a popular speaker at liberty-related events. He’s also written 20 books on liberty related subjects. In this conversation we explore the multifaceted relationship between individual rights, government authority, and societal norms. We begin with a dive into the nuances of gun ownership across cultures, particularly contrasting American perspectives with European views on self-defense and governmental power. Ian shares his insights on the philosophical underpinnings of governance, emphasizing the importance of consent and individual rights. The dialogue evolves into a broader examination of how technology reshapes our understanding of governance, community interactions, and the potential for new models of societal organization. We navigate topics such as the role of education in shaping responsible citizens, the implications of social credit systems, and the evolving landscape of political discourse. --- # Scott Forte — Competitive Governance is Coming URL: https://free-cities.org/scott-forte-competitive-governance-is-coming Free Cities Podcast, episode 128 Published: 2025-05-21 Guest: Scott Forte Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUHzwzXoKXY Topics: private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Scott Forte. Scott, a former pilot turned entrepreneur, shares his insights into the importance of competitive governance and the impact of state rights on individual freedoms. We discuss the historical context of governance in the U.S. and reflect on the founders’ vision of states competing for citizens with diverse policies. The conversation explores the challenges faced by the Free State Project, including local opposition and the complexities of changing zoning laws to facilitate affordable housing. Scott also delves into the cultural dynamics of New Hampshire, highlighting the state’s unique blend of individualism and community spirit. He shares his personal journey of becoming involved in local politics and the importance of fostering a culture of responsibility and freedom among future generations. --- # Anders Ingemarson — Think Right or Wrong, Not Left or Right URL: https://free-cities.org/anders-ingemarson-think-right-or-wrong-not-left-or-right Free Cities Podcast, episode 127 Published: 2025-05-20 Guest: Anders Ingemarson Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n1aYHhiQFk On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Anders Ingemarson. Anders, a former Swede turned American citizen, shares his journey of embracing individualism through the teachings of Ayn Rand. In this episode, he reflects on his upbringing in Sweden, the allure of collectivism, and the contrast with American ideals of freedom and personal responsibility. The discussion delves into the philosophical underpinnings of individualism versus collectivism, exploring how cultural indoctrination shapes perceptions of rights and responsibilities. Anders articulates the challenges faced in promoting a philosophy that values the individual over the collective, especially in environments steeped in welfare state ideology. We discuss the moral spectrum of political thought, the implications of collectivism on society, and the importance of fostering a sense of personal responsibility. Anders emphasizes the necessity of understanding individual rights as the foundation for a thriving society, arguing that capitalism is the only system that consistently respects and protects these rights. --- # Mark Edge — The Arc of History Bends Towards Freedom URL: https://free-cities.org/mark-edge-the-arc-of-history-bends-towards-freedom Free Cities Podcast, episode 126 Published: 2025-05-18 Guest: Mark Edge Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zscyqAQHGaI Topics: private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Mark Edge. Mark is a passionate advocate for the Free Cities movement and a veteran voice in the libertarian community. In this episode, he shares his journey into the world of Free Cities and discusses his unique experiences that have shaped his understanding of governance and personal freedom. Mark reflects on his early encounters with the Free Cities concept, particularly through his connection with Próspera in Honduras, and the pivotal role it plays in offering a viable alternative to traditional governance models. The conversation delves into the complexities of modern governance, exploring the balance between individual rights and the role of state power. We also discuss topics such as the implications of technology on privacy, the evolution of political ideologies, and the ongoing struggle for freedom. Mark’s insights provide a hopeful outlook on the potential for Free Cities to foster a new era of autonomy and prosperity. --- # Travis Bockenstedt — Liberating the Free Market in Healthcare URL: https://free-cities.org/travis-bockenstedt-liberating-the-free-market-in-healthcare Free Cities Podcast, episode 125 Published: 2025-04-15 Guest: Travis Bockenstedt Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blavnrm2FDw Topics: medical-regulation On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Travis Bockenstedt. Travis is the president and CXO of Pinnacle Advanced Primary Care. In this episode, he shares his personal journey that led him to challenge the traditional U.S. healthcare system, which began with a shocking $26,000 medical bill for an anxiety attack. He discusses the complexities of medical billing, insurance loopholes, and the lack of transparency in healthcare costs. Travis dives into the concept of direct primary care, explaining how this model empowers patients by offering transparent pricing and direct access to physicians without the interference of insurance companies. He highlights the importance of preventive care and the need for a shift in how consumers approach healthcare decisions. Travis advocates for a free market approach to healthcare, emphasizing the potential for significant savings and improved patient outcomes. He also touches on the challenges of educating consumers about alternative healthcare models and the need for systemic reform in the U.S. healthcare landscape. --- # Jeremy Kauffman — Frontier Psychology & The Free State URL: https://free-cities.org/124-jeremy-kauffman-frontier-psychology-the-free-state Free Cities Podcast, episode 124 Published: 2025-04-14 Guest: Jeremy Kauffman Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqyUaMav9Ag Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project “The sweet spot is when the short term and the long term are aligned… …For most libertarian Americans, their life in New Hampshire will be better than wherever they are. So it works for them in the short term, and you’ve got that aspirational, transcendent thing in the distance that you’re still chasing after too.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Jeremy Kauffman. Jeremy is a tech entrepreneur and a well-known activist in the American Libertarian movement. He is deeply involved in the New Hampshire Free State Project and was the Libertarian nominee for the 2022 US Senate election. In this conversation, we explore the nuances of libertarianism and the unique dynamics of the Free State community. Jeremy shares his insights on the challenges and triumphs of building a free community, emphasizing the importance of individual rights and personal responsibility. The conversation navigates through the complexities of governance, the role of local authorities, and the impact of bureaucracy on individual freedoms. Jeremy discusses the balance between maintaining order and allowing for personal liberties, highlighting the ongoing evolution of the Free State Project and its potential to influence broader societal change. --- # Michael Williams — Capitalism, Exceptionalism and the American Founding URL: https://free-cities.org/michael-williams-capitalism-exceptionalism-and-the-american-founding Free Cities Podcast, episode 123 Published: 2025-04-11 Guest: Michael Williams Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inZDcTefBIk “It was more of a requirement to be self-reliant. You just had to, or else you didn’t make it. And so that self-reliance and independence—and that ‘I’m going to take care of myself and I don’t need you’ attitude—is, I think, in our DNA. That was part of what motivated the founders to say: We can take care of ourselves. We don’t need your onerous decision-making back there affecting our daily lives here. We’re better off without you.“ On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Michael Williams⁠. Michael is founder & president of ALTIUS Financial, Inc. He’s also the creator of the Defenders of Capitalism Project which is a crucial component of the ⁠Leadership Program of the Rockies⁠ curriculum. In this conversation, we explore governance and individual freedom. Recounting our personal journeys we discuss the historical context of democracy, the challenges of collective governance, and the philosophical underpinnings of individual rights. As we navigate through topics such as the role of government, the impact of culture on freedom, and the necessity of personal responsibility, we reflect on the complexities of modern society and the importance of self-examination in the pursuit of liberty. --- # Lauren Razavi — Digital Nomads, Global Mobility & Network States URL: https://free-cities.org/lauren-razavi-digital-nomads-global-mobility-network-states Free Cities Podcast, episode 122 Published: 2025-04-05 Guest: Lauren Razavi Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL-x1jzG8rQ Topics: network-states, residency-and-citizenship On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Lauren Razavi⁠. Lauren is a technologist, political scientist, and global citizen focused on the future of work, global mobility, and digital nomadism. As Executive Director of ⁠Plumia⁠, she leads efforts to build a global standard for nomad visas and reimagine the infrastructure that enables cross-border living. In this episode, Lauren, shares her insights on the evolving landscape of global mobility rights and the burgeoning digital nomad movement. As a digital nomad herself, she discusses her journey through the complexities of international travel and the implications of COVID-19 on mobility rights. The conversation delves into the concept of network states and the idea of building a country on the Internet, exploring how Plumia aims to unlock global mobility rights for individuals worldwide. We also discuss the rise of digital nomad visas, the importance of defining what it means to be a digital nomad, and the cultural dynamics of popular nomadic destinations like Bali and Malaysia, examining the impacts of tourism and nomadism on local communities. --- # Dennis Pratt — Liberty, Community & The Free State Project URL: https://free-cities.org/dennis-pratt-liberty-community-the-free-state-project Free Cities Podcast, episode 121 Published: 2025-03-21 Guest: Dennis Pratt Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaetfloGL2s Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project So, to actually have that amount of programming, for normal people it’s so hard to break out.” On this week’s podcast, I met with Dennis Pratt during our latest USA trip. Dennis was inspired to move to New Hampshire in 2018 and has been involved in the Free State Project ever since, establishing community groups, running the free state festival PorcFest and doing some fascinating research into the psychology of the local Libertarians. In this episode, Dennis shares his journey as a prominent figure in the Free State Project and discusses the challenges and triumphs of building a libertarian community, emphasizing the importance of personal characteristics in adopting libertarian ideals and the necessity of creating an environment that fosters freedom. The conversation delves into the practicalities of living in a free society, including the impact of zoning laws on young families and the potential for educational reform. Dennis highlights the unique dynamics of the libertarian community in New Hampshire, where diverse groups coexist and collaborate to enhance individual liberties. We also discuss the future of the Free State Project, the strategies being employed to attract more libertarians, and the vision for the future. --- # Daniel Hannan — Woke Politics, Reform & The Culture of Liberty URL: https://free-cities.org/daniel-hannan-woke-politics-reform-the-culture-of-liberty Free Cities Podcast, episode 120 Published: 2025-03-14 Guest: Daniel Hannan Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAiQGAsQ-38 “The desire for conformity & order is stronger in most people than the desire for freedom. But what you can do in an open society is teach people that freedom, although it may not come naturally to most people, produces better outcomes: It makes people richer, it makes people happier and constraining your natural tendency to tell people what to do is part of a trade-off that it worth making.” On this week’s podcast, I met with Daniel Hannan at The Leadership Program of the Rockies annual retreat. Daniel is a British writer, journalist and politician. If you’re a Brit, you may recognise him as one of the founders of ‘Vote Leave’ – one of the organisations that successfully campaigned during the UK’s Brexit referendum. Others of you will know him from his bestselling books and if you frequent popular social media channels then you may well have come across a clip of one of his scathing speeches in the European Parliament. In this episode, Daniel reflects on the historical context of individualism and the evolution of political thought, particularly in light of recent global events such as the pandemic. The conversation dives deep into the challenges of preserving freedom in a society that often prioritises safety over liberty. We discuss the psychological impacts of collectivism experienced during lockdowns, and the lasting effects on public consciousness as well as the complexities of political affiliations and the necessity for reform within the UK. The episode culminates in an exploration of the future of governance and the enduring struggle for personal freedoms in the face of increasing state control --- # Pavla Karon — Activism, Accountability & Abundance URL: https://free-cities.org/pavla-karon-activism-accountability-abundance Free Cities Podcast, episode 119 Published: 2025-03-02 Guest: Pavla Karon Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jek3hmBVIaM Trauma is real. But if you focus on it too much it can also mean giving up your power.“ On this week’s podcast, I sat down with returning guest Pavla Karon. We engage in a long discussion about activism, personal responsibility, and the inner work necessary for meaningful change, exploring the “shadow side” of wanting to save the world. Pavla shares insights on money as energy, highlighting the impact of shifting from a scarcity to abundance mindset whilst also delving into personal trauma’s influence on beliefs and behaviors. Finally, a discussion with Pavla would be nothing without a look at parenting skills and we go over the importance of grounding children in reality while fostering open dialogues, critical thinking, and diverse perspectives on societal issues. --- # Tim Stern — Building a Free City in Venezuela URL: https://free-cities.org/tim-stern-building-a-free-city-in-venezuela Free Cities Podcast, episode 118 Published: 2025-03-01 Guest: Tim Stern Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d060OLB8rw4 Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/cryptocity “Our city only consists of entrepreneurs who are from a certain type of mankind. You’re not exactly going to be seven times boostered and jabbed if you are in this community. You won’t exactly like the German government and what they do and what they stand for. We’re not talking about ultra right activists, we’re just talking about normal people from the nineties.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Tim Stern. Tim, a tech entrepreneur and visionary, shares his journey of establishing a unique community in Venezuela’s Margarita Island, dubbed “Cryptocity.” With a background in IT and a passion for liberty, Tim transitioned from traditional business to creating a haven for like-minded individuals seeking freedom from oppressive governance. We discuss the challenges and triumphs of constructing a community from the ground up, including the importance of selecting the right residents through Tim’s rigorous vetting process. He is keen to stress the strategic advantages of Margarita Island, along with the vision for future developments and how his project aims to create a safe and prosperous space for families and entrepreneurs alike. --- # Scott Schneider — Freedom in the Final Frontier URL: https://free-cities.org/scott-schneider-freedom-in-the-final-frontier Free Cities Podcast, episode 117 Published: 2025-02-15 Guest: Scott Schneider Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B_nG8YbLgs Topics: private-governance On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Scott Schneider. Scott is a space lawyer working at the intersection of international law, technological innovation, and individual liberty. What begins as a conversation about aerospace law quickly expands into a broader exploration of governance beyond our planet, and what space reveals about freedom back on Earth. Scott explains that space law remains a small and underdeveloped field, shaped largely by Cold War-era treaties like the Outer Space Treaty, which prioritise non-appropriation and state responsibility. But as access to space becomes cheaper and more decentralised, those frameworks are beginning to strain. Private actors are now building satellites, launching missions, and exploring resource extraction, raising fundamental questions about property rights, jurisdiction, and enforcement in a domain where sovereignty is unclear. A key insight from the conversation is how jurisdiction already works in practice. Spacecraft are governed by the laws of the country they are registered in, much like ships at sea, while liability is handled separately under international agreements. Even the International Space Station is divided into legal zones depending on which module you are in. These fragmented systems hint at the complexity of scaling governance beyond Earth. The discussion then turns to ownership. While international treaties prohibit states from claiming celestial bodies, some countries have moved to recognise private ownership of extracted resources. This creates a legal grey zone where enforcement depends less on law and more on practical capability and incentives. Timothy draws a parallel between space habitats and existing models like cruise ships and seasteading communities. These function as de facto private cities, where governance is contractual, participation is voluntary, and exit provides accountability. Scott agrees that such models may be highly applicable to space, particularly as traditional nation-state frameworks become harder to enforce at distance. One of the most striking takeaways is how dramatically the economics of space have changed. Small, standardised satellites can now be built cheaply and launched at relatively low cost, opening access to individuals, universities, and small organisations. This shift enables new forms of decentralised infrastructure, from communication to agriculture and finance, without reliance on governments. However, this expansion introduces new risks. Orbital congestion and potential cascading collisions, known as the Kessler effect, could render parts of space unusable. These challenges highlight the need for coordination, even in a domain that resists centralised control. Underlying the conversation is a deeper question: will space become a new frontier for freedom, or simply replicate the governance systems of Earth? Scott argues that unless new models are actively explored now, humanity risks carrying outdated legal frameworks into a radically new environment. The episode closes with a reflection on the broader freedom movement, including Scott’s involvement in the Live and Let Live Foundation, and the importance of communicating ideas like voluntarism in ways that resonate beyond ideological circles. As space becomes more accessible, the stakes are no longer theoretical. The foundations being laid today may determine whether humanity’s expansion into space leads to greater freedom, or simply extends the reach of existing systems. TIMESTAMPS (Video only): (00:00) Coming up…(00:42) Start of conversation(02:12) The international space law community(05:37) Law in the digital realm(07:22) Who owns space?(10:47) Whose laws do spacecraft follow?(14:00) The Artemis Accords(17:22) The Free Private City model in space(18:37) Cruise liners & space stations(34:22) Private satellites and space law(37:31) Small, affordable satellites in low orbit(43:47) The Live and Let Live Foundation(47:41) The life cycle of a frontier(52:23) What ‘radicalized’ you?(1:02:26) Teaching space entrepreneurship(1:03:39) What are the cutting-edge projects in the space world today?(1:06:37) Private individuals & communities now have access to space(1:16:57) The psychology of seasteading & living in outer space(1:24:02) Spreading the message of voluntarism --- # Manuel Barkhau — The Rise of Libertarianism in Germany URL: https://free-cities.org/manuel-barkhau-the-rise-of-libertarianism-in-germany Free Cities Podcast, episode 116 Published: 2025-02-08 Guest: Manuel Barkhau Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gsbNeHclPY “They say Germans are romantics in the sense that they follow an ideal to the bitter end, maybe to their own detriment. On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Manuel Barkhau. Manuel is a Software Developer based in Frankfurt, Germany. He’s been an Austro-Libertarian, Anarcho-Capitalist since the Ron Paul presidential campaign in 2008, and a Bitcoiner since 2011. His current focus is on growing the libertarian community and awareness of libertarianism in Germany through the German libertarian party Die Libertären. This episode dives deep into the evolution of political thought in Germany, particularly in the context of the recent COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on civil liberties. The conversation explores the current political landscape, the role of media in shaping public perceptions, and the potential for libertarian ideas to gain traction in a society increasingly wary of centralized power. The dialogue also touches on technological advancements, such as drones and their implications for warfare and civil liberties, and the possibility of a dystopian trajectory if current trends continue. --- # Vera Kichanova — Lessons From Odessa URL: https://free-cities.org/vera-kichanova-lessons-from-odessa Free Cities Podcast, episode 115 Published: 2025-02-01 Guest: Vera Kichanova Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVd3KVzE3nM Topics: special-economic-zones, history-of-free-cities On this week’s podcast, I sat down with the Free Cities Foundation’s senior economist Vera Kichanova. During our discussion we explore Odessa’s historical role as a model for Free Cities and Special Economic Zones, highlighting its rise in the late 18th century as a thriving economic hub due to unique governance and cultural freedoms. Vera discusses why such models are not more widely adopted today, considering competition from cities like Dubai and Singapore and the need for strong economic incentives and community engagement. The conversation also examines how Free Cities can address modern urban challenges, particularly in unstable regions, with Vera expressing optimism about the growing interest in alternative governance models. --- # Alex Voss — Strategies for Liberty, Free Cities & Bitcoin URL: https://free-cities.org/alex-voss-strategies-for-liberty-free-cities-bitcoin Free Cities Podcast, episode 114 Published: 2025-01-25 Guest: Alex Voss Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XxpGkAddBo Topics: free-private-cities, bitcoin-and-free-cities Próspera got a commitment from the government of Honduras to have this arrangement for the next 45 years. At this point, the government is reneging on its deal. We’re not fighting back. We’re standing our ground. This is what was given, and you are the one that is encroaching on it.“ On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Alex Voss. During our discussion we dive deep into the intersection of Bitcoin and Free Cities, exploring how these two concepts can work together to foster economic freedom and innovation. Alex is the long running CFO of Tipolis and a board member of the Free Cities Foundation, so his insights hail from an extensive history of experience in helping to develop autonomous regions. The conversation covers the challenges of creating Free Cities in the current geopolitical climate, discussing the importance of regulatory autonomy and the potential for these cities to thrive alongside Bitcoin as a currency of choice. Alex emphasises the necessity for building a strong community that supports and benefits from these innovative projects, while also addressing the complexities of negotiating with host governments. --- # Laurence Ion — Longevity Cities, Decentralised Science & The Cure for Aging URL: https://free-cities.org/laurence-ion-longevity-cities-decentralised-science-the-cure-for-aging Free Cities Podcast, episode 113 Published: 2025-01-19 Guest: Laurence Ion Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZJC7Y6EM2I Topics: medical-regulation “There are 110,000 people dying every day from aging: forty million per year. Alzheimer’s, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and so on are each bigger issues than COVID. Why are we not, as a society saying let’s remove red tape and do this faster? And I understand that society is not going to do that, but how about some of us live together and create an environment where that’s possible.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Laurence Ion. In our conversation we explore the intersection of longevity, science and Free Cities. Lawrence shares his journey within the ecosystem, focusing on creating environments that foster rapid medical innovation by circumnavigating traditional regulatory bottlenecks and empowering individuals to choose their health interventions. The discussion delves into the promising yet controversial realms of gene therapies, decentralised clinical trials, and the role of special jurisdictions in advancing aging research, highlighting the potential for Free Cities to become hubs for groundbreaking medical advancements. We also tackle existential questions about life extension, the ethics of transhumanism and the societal implications of increasing human lifespan. --- # Mark Lutter & Carl Peterson — Africa, Charter Cities & The Future of Urban Development URL: https://free-cities.org/mark-lutter-carl-peterson-africa-charter-cities-the-future-of-urban-development Free Cities Podcast, episode 112 Published: 2025-01-11 Guest: Mark Lutter & Carl Peterson Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NT0O6kFmmpw Topics: charter-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera “In Europe, twenty years ago there wasn’t really a Pan-European identity. Today there is which is in part a legacy of the European Union. I think similarly, with digital nomads you’re seeing what might be described as a decreased loyalty to their home country and an increased willingness to just say: ‘OK, I’m going to choose from objective criteria in terms of taxes, in terms of jobs, in terms of lifestyle, for the city I want to live in.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Mark Lutter and Carl Peterson from the Charter Cities Institute. In our discussion, we explore the evolving landscape of charter cities in Africa, focusing on ambitious projects in Zanzibar and the broader implications for urban development across the continent. Mark and Carl share insights into the NXT50 Cities Coalition, an initiative aimed at fostering new urban centers with potentially innovative governance models. They discuss the challenges and opportunities of building new cities from scratch, emphasizing the importance of special economic zones and decentralized authority to drive growth. The conversation delves into the complexities of partnering with governments, navigating bureaucracy, and the role of local engagement in ensuring the success of these projects. Mark and Carl provide a candid analysis of the lessons learned from projects like Próspera and Ciudad Morazán, offering a nuanced perspective on the potential of charter cities to contribute to economic development and governance innovation in a rapidly changing global landscape. --- # Alex Martynov — Mindfulness, Inner Freedom & Connecting With Your True Self URL: https://free-cities.org/alex-martynov-mindfulness-inner-freedom-connecting-with-your-true-self Free Cities Podcast, episode 111 Published: 2025-01-04 Guest: Alex Martynov Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49NiJicZ0RA Then I say ‘What would you want if anything was possible?’.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with leadership coach Alex Martynov. In the conversation, we delve into the intricate dance between inner freedom and external constraints, exploring how our internal dialogues can create either liberty or self-imposed limitations. Alex shares insights on how unwittingly, our internal processes can lead to more tension and restriction, emphasizing the significance of self-awareness and psychological understanding in achieving true freedom. The discussion navigates through topics such as the societal influences on personal values, the importance of acknowledging and negotiating with our inner needs, and the role of mindfulness in connecting with our true selves. We also touch on the concept of self-authoring, where individuals craft their own beliefs and values, moving beyond societal indoctrination. We explore the balance between logical and intuitive decision-making, highlighting the importance of both in personal and professional contexts. Alex offers practical advice on addressing internal conflicts and the yearning for change, sharing methods to uncover and embrace one’s true desires. We discuss the challenges of career transitions, the necessity of authentic living, and the potential of viewing life as a series of small, safe experiments to navigate complexity and uncertainty. --- # Francisco Litvay — Global Citizenship, 2nd Passports & Geo Arbitrage URL: https://free-cities.org/francisco-litvay-global-citizenship-2nd-passports-geo-arbitrage Free Cities Podcast, episode 110 Published: 2024-12-27 Guest: Francisco Litvay Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBvzpsIJk7k Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics “I am very excited about El Salvador. I think they are doing great things there. I think they’re going to grow a lot and there’s a lot of potential. That said. My experience so far is that it’s a bit similar to what’s happened with the Honduran ZEDEs: That a lot of people are cheering on the sidelines, wishing the best of luck and success, but they don’t really want to move there. At least, not at this point.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with Francisco Litvay. Francisco is a Brazilian digital nomad, flag theory expert and the co-founder of ⁠Settee⁠, the Portuguese franchise of ⁠Staatenlos⁠, companies that both help individuals with emigration, citizenship, offshore companies and tax optimisation etc. In this conversation Fran elaborates on the advantages of obtaining second citizenships in Latin America and in particular, the benefits of Brazilian, Argentine, and Chilean passports, emphasizing their strategic value in terms of visa-free travel and access to regional economic blocs. The discussion also covers the practical aspects of becoming a perpetual traveler, the importance of spending extended periods in potential new home countries, and the nuances of tax optimization across different jurisdictions. Fran also shares his thoughts on emerging opportunities in countries like Argentina and El Salvador, and the potential for change in countries under leftist governments. --- # Alex Ugorji — Life in a Honduran Free City Under Threat URL: https://free-cities.org/alex-ugorji-life-in-a-honduran-free-city-under-threat Free Cities Podcast, episode 109 Published: 2024-12-21 Guest: Alex Ugorji Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbL7zDhnllo Topics: honduran-zedes, criticism-and-debate About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Morazan can grow a lot faster than Próspera because it’s target market is the people of Honduras.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down for a candid chat with Alex Ugorji. Alex is one of the original residents of Ciudad Morazán, the so called ‘blue collar Free City’ and one of the lesser known Honduran ZEDEs. In fact, as far as I can tell, he is the third-longest-standing resident of a modern Free City in history, so his opinion carries weight. He shares his journey from the Northern Mariana Islands in the northwestern Pacific Ocean to Honduras, exploring the potential of crypto-friendly environments and the complexities of navigating financial regulations. Alex sheds light on the current legal uncertainties surrounding the ZEDE regime in Honduras, particularly in the wake of the Supreme Court’s controversial decision to retroactively repeal the ZEDE law, and discusses its implications for investors and residents. The conversation also delves into the broader political landscape of Central America, examining the rise of libertarian figures and the competitive dynamics shaping policy decisions in the region. Morazán often flies under the radar of journalists and commentators reporting on ZEDEs in Honduras. More often than not, this is because it doesn’t conform to the negative stereotypes frequently perpetuated by legacy media. If you’re interested in learning more, check out their ⁠website⁠ as well as my ⁠interview with Ciudad Morazán’s founder, Massimo Mazzone⁠. --- # Grant Romundt — Living on the Ocean in a Floating Home URL: https://free-cities.org/grant-romundt-living-on-the-ocean-in-a-floating-home Free Cities Podcast, episode 108 Published: 2024-12-13 Guest: Grant Romundt Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77ZI_JohD8M Topics: seasteading It’s kind of like designing Disneyland for the first time. What are all the elements that make this such an amazing place that you’ll never want to leave.“ On this week’s podcast, I sat down with a fascinating gentleman by the name of Grant Romundt. Grant shares his visionary journey along the way to the creation of his floating home that will no doubt go down as a pivotal moment in the history of seasteading. As a co-founder of ⁠Ocean Builders⁠, he dives into the challenges and triumphs of constructing SeaPods: Unique marine dwellings, designed for both luxury and sustainability. Discover how these floating homes offer a new frontier for living, with the potential to revolutionize life at sea whilst providing a sanctuary for marine life. We discuss technical innovations, from jet ski docks to rainwater purification systems, that make these homes viable and eco-friendly. Grant also shares insights into the lifestyle of living on the water, highlighting the freedom and tranquility it offers. With plans for expansion and the ambition to lower production costs, Grant envisions a future where floating cities become a reality, offering an alternative way of living that respects and enhances the ocean environment. --- # Patrick Hiebert — Building Off-grid Libertarian Villages in Latin America URL: https://free-cities.org/patrick-hiebert-building-off-grid-libertarian-villages-in-latin-america Free Cities Podcast, episode 107 Published: 2024-12-06 Guest: Patrick Hiebert Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsrFF4NqMBE Topics: intentional-communities, technology-in-new-cities “When the crap hits the fan in the world, people need places to go and we can’t create them fast enough, we can’t create them big enough. If ten percent of the world’s population says ‘I want to go there’ we’re never going to be big enough to handle that, but the people who are making that choice now to have that plan A or plan B will be able to go there. “ On this week’s podcast, I had the pleasure of sitting down with Patrick Hiebert. Patrick, a Canadian entrepreneur and the founder of ⁠⁠EcoVillages⁠, shared his inspiring journey from the software industry to creating freedom-focused communities in Latin America. He recounted his transition from living on a boat with his son to building self-sustaining luxury communities on land, all guided by his core philosophy: freedom, independence, resilience, sustainability, and transparency (FIRST). During our conversation, Patrick detailed the development of his communities, which are designed for like-minded libertarians seeking refuge from government overreach. We discussed the challenges and successes of establishing these communities in Central and South America, with a strong emphasis on achieving energy sovereignty. We also explored the integration of Bitcoin as the mandatory currency within these communities, underscoring Patrick’s dedication to financial independence and innovation. Additionally, he provided fascinating insights into the cultural dynamics of Latin America, highlighting the region’s growing embrace of capitalism and its live-and-let-live mindset, which aligns seamlessly with his vision. --- # Joe Quirk — One Hundred Thousand Free Societies at Sea URL: https://free-cities.org/joe-quirk-one-hundred-thousand-free-societies-at-sea Free Cities Podcast, episode 106 Published: 2024-12-02 Guest: Joe Quirk Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgrVP8_0yb8 Topics: seasteading, private-governance “On the ocean there is no way to get a monopoly on governance. You need static land on which you can win a war and climb to the top of that bloody heirarchy and control other people. On the ocean, if people can move around then governance becomes a product and the only way you can prosper is by serving customers.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with the president of the Seasteading Institute, Joe Quirk. Our conversation delves into the transformative potential of Seasteading as a frontier for innovation and freedom. Joe shares updates on the latest developments in the Seasteading movement, including new prototypes by Ocean Builders and the visionary efforts of Grant Romundt. This episode explores the concept of Seasteading as a catalyst for decentralized governance and a solution to the limitations of land-based state control. Joe discusses the challenges and opportunities of creating autonomous floating cities, drawing parallels with historical precedents like Venice and the American frontier. The conversation highlights the potential for Seasteading to revolutionize governance, promote sustainability, and provide a platform for human creativity and innovation. --- # Efrat Fenigson — Unmasking Agenda 2030 URL: https://free-cities.org/efrat-fenigson-unmasking-agenda-2030 Free Cities Podcast, episode 105 Published: 2024-11-25 Guest: Efrat Fenigson Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcl23qhlabU “Achieve gender equality, ensure the rule of law, promote justice, and promote non-discrimination. These are the fancy words that they’re using, but in reality, the deeper you go into this agenda, the more you realise that there’s a plan here that aspires to absolute control over humanity.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with independent journalist and podcaster Efrat Fenigson. Our conversation explores the rise of centralised control in the digital age, particularly regarding Agenda 2030. She sees this agenda as a plan to control many facets of human life, from finances and movement to information and even food choices. While it is presented as a path to sustainability, she argues it often relies on fear to promote compliance and brings up many concerns over how climate change narratives are being used to justify policies that could curtail personal freedoms. Efrat contends that awakening to these issues is a personal journey and stresses the importance of taking responsibility. She encourages listeners to educate themselves, build financial independence with tools like Bitcoin, and connect with like-minded communities. Additionally, she underscores the spiritual dimension of this challenge, advocating for inner growth and a deeper understanding of one’s purpose as a foundation for true freedom. --- # Per Bylund — Economics, Agorism & The Reality of Freedom URL: https://free-cities.org/per-bylund-economics-agorism-the-reality-of-freedom Free Cities Podcast, episode 104 Published: 2024-11-19 Guest: Per Bylund Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2d_l8Cm0Hs Topics: taxation-and-economics “I think that what is significant with the pandemic is not that there was a virus, but how they used people to enforce their ideas against other people. And that is pretty scary because we like to think that we are much more modern today than, say 1930s Germany. But it was pretty obvious I think that during the pandemic, most people would be there at those mass meetings with their hands up and their arms stretched out welcoming in Hitler.” On this week’s podcast, I sat down with author, economist, and Senior Fellow of the Mises Institute Professor Per Bylund. In our conversation, we explore the philosophical and practical dimensions of freedom, examining how the internet, as a modern frontier, continues to shape our socio-political landscape. As an economist renowned for his work on entrepreneurship and the market process, Per offers compelling insights into the evolution of the state and humanity’s natural inclination toward control and we question whether true freedom is achievable in a world increasingly dominated by centralized governance. Our discussion covers the challenges and opportunities of decentralization, the potential of Free Cities as hubs of innovation, and the roles of agorism and Bitcoin in circumventing state control. We also explore the nature of regulation, contrasting free-market principles with state intervention, and consider the broader implications of these ideas on societal progress. --- # Natalie Danelishen — Free Speech, Twitter & US Politics URL: https://free-cities.org/natalie-danelishen-free-speech-twitter-us-politics Free Cities Podcast, episode 103 Published: 2024-11-19 Guest: Natalie Danelishen Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7Zx5ANwD-A With election week in the US upon us, I thought it would be the perfect time to get some feedback from someone on the ground, so this week on the podcast I’m talking with my American colleague Natalie Danelishen. Natalie is deeply embedded in the political landscape, known as a prominent Twitter influencer who frequently tweets about liberty and freedom. She even managed to get Javier Milei to retweet a photo from this year’s conference—kudos to you, Nat! We recorded this conversation just a few days before the election, so at the time, we didn’t know the outcome. However, as you’ll hear, Natalie was quite confident in her prediction that Trump would come out on top. This is a casual and engaging chat that covers a range of topics, including money, politics, social media, and the broader concept of freedom. --- # Sam Roberts — Bitcoin, Pensions & The Financial Renaissance URL: https://free-cities.org/sam-roberts-bitcoin-pensions-the-financial-renaissance Free Cities Podcast, episode 102 Published: 2024-10-24 Guest: Sam Roberts Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics, bitcoin-and-free-cities Today on the podcast I’m talking to Sam Roberts. Sam is a qualified actuary and the director at Cartwright, a UK-based pensions and investment advisory firm that works with institutional clients, including corporate pension schemes, charities, and corporate treasuries. Under Sam’s leadership, Cartwright became the first UK firm to take the bold step of advising clients to allocate Bitcoin to their portfolios, marking a significant moment in what’s being called the “arrival of institutions” into this new financial frontier. In this episode, we explore Bitcoin’s emerging role in the institutional investment landscape, with a particular focus on pension funds. Sam recounts his journey from the 2008 financial crisis to embracing Bitcoin as a hedge against systemic risks. He also sheds light on the challenges of introducing Bitcoin into the traditionally conservative and slow-moving pensions industry. Our conversation also touches on Bitcoin’s potential as a tool for economic resilience, its environmental implications, and its role in shaping a future financial system—one that could ignite a new economic renaissance. --- # Ben Arc — Nostr, Anarchy & Algorithms URL: https://free-cities.org/ben-arc-nostr-anarchy-algorithms Free Cities Podcast, episode 101 Published: 2024-10-23 Guest: Ben Arc Host: Timothy Allen Topics: technology-in-new-cities You may have noticed recently that I’ve been talking a fair bit about Nostr on this podcast. In fact, we’re even reading out Nostr messages at the beginning of each episode. Well, it’s time to take a deeper dive. But before we do, let me give you my best 101 introduction to set the stage. This is important. As far as I can tell, Nostr isn’t just another fleeting social media platform destined to fade away due to a lack of adoption. Yes, it’s true that most people are currently using the protocol for social media, but focusing solely on that misses the true potential of this incredible new technology. Nostr—short for Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays—is a decentralized, censorship-resistant protocol for creating and sharing content. It operates without central servers or authorities. As an open protocol, anyone can use, implement, and build upon it without needing permission. Much like Bitcoin, Nostr identifies users with cryptographic public-private key pairs. Messages are sent through a network of relays, which users can freely choose to connect to. This makes censorship incredibly difficult because, if one relay censors content, you can simply switch to another that doesn’t. While social media applications are currently the most popular use case, they are just the beginning. As you’ll hear in this episode, a growing community is actively building a censorship-resistant version of the internet atop the Nostr protocol. One of Nostr’s game-changing features is that users own their own identity and data—commonly referred to as their “social graph”—and can take it to any app built on the protocol that they prefer. My guest today, Ben Arc, is the founder of LNbits and a developer who has been involved with Nostr since its early days. Together, we explore this groundbreaking technology and its implications for a more open and resilient digital future. Key topics: It operates without central servers or authorities., As an open protocol, anyone can use, implement, and build upon it without needing permission. --- # Peter Young — 100th Episode Free Cities Review URL: https://free-cities.org/peter-young-100th-episode-free-cities-review Free Cities Podcast, episode 100 Published: 2024-10-22 Guest: Peter Young Host: Timothy Allen Topics: private-governance Today we celebrate the 100th episode of the podcast and I sat down with the Free Cities Foundation’s CEO, Peter Young to reflect upon the last couple of years spent in the Free Cities movement. So, how can I sum up the last 100 episodes? Well, it’s been a phenomenal journey for me, one that’s taken me all over the world, meeting exceptional people who are really pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in the realm of living together. Of course, I feel incredibly fortunate to have had this opportunity to learn aloud about all of this, and I’m thankful that you’ve been able to come along with me for the ride. Before I started this podcast, governance wasn’t high on my list of interests, but as the months have gone by, I’ve realized it’s one of the most important aspects of the freedom we’re all searching for in the world. It’s also one of the key aspects that often lies at the heart of conflict and dispute. If only it were as simple as “live and let live”… but we all know that it’s not—and it never will be. So, we carry on discussing, building, and creating parallel systems into which people can voluntarily opt in. There are no utopias in the future; there’s no end to this road. But right now, what exists in our present is a world in which you can choose to work on a project you believe in—a project that you can offer to your fellow humans, to join in or not. And after that, as I’ve said many times before, it’s just a matter of turning up each day and putting in the work. Never forget: you’re working on what I believe are the most interesting projects on the planet, at this particular and incredible time in history. And I, for one, am extremely grateful for the opportunity. So here’s to another 100 episodes of this podcast and to all the future pioneers I’ll be talking to over the next two years. I salute you! I’ve loved hanging out with you all. What a time to be alive. --- # Dr. David Bovill — Future States, Regenerative Cities & Open Source Law URL: https://free-cities.org/dr-david-bovill-future-states-regenerative-cities-open-source-law Free Cities Podcast, episode 99 Published: 2024-10-21 Guest: Dr. David Bovill Host: Timothy Allen Topics: network-states, private-governance Today on the podcast I’m talking with Dr. David Bovill. David is a former medical scientist, hacker, programmer, and artist, currently known as—and I’ll quote his brief bio from the Future State Congress website here—“Liquid democracy OG, Ethereum early adopter, and commons platforms like WikiWiki contributor.” As you’ll hear, he’s been involved in quite a few projects, with the most interesting for us being his work at the Network State end of the Free Cities spectrum, which covers a lot of unfamiliar territory for me. In this conversation, we talk about privacy, identity, grassroots action, digital utopias, intentional communities, nomadic communities, regenerative cities, and open-source law, to name just a few. I also learned a new word: ‘Anarchive,’ derived from the word ‘anarchy,’ of course. I like that one. Although we share much in common, we also disagree on quite a few things, so hopefully, this will be an interesting discussion for you—as a fly on the wall. --- # Selfbankt — Decentralised Networks, Filter Events & Confronting Orthodoxy URL: https://free-cities.org/selfbankt-decentralised-networks-filter-events-confronting-orthodoxy Free Cities Podcast, episode 98 Published: 2024-10-20 Guest: Selfbankt Host: Timothy Allen Topics: technology-in-new-cities I’ve got another pseudonymous guest for you again this week on the podcast. He’s somebody I originally met through Twitter some years ago, subsequently forging a good friendship in real life. You may know him from Twitter yourself, in fact, he was a well-known character to Bitcoiners: SelfBankt, that was until he was banned from Twitter during the pandemic for ‘wrongthink’… that was pre-Elon, obviously. Anyway, rather than reappearing on the bird app under a new guise, he made a home on the decentralized messaging network known as Nostr, something that many other people appear to be doing of late, myself included… and that is something that we speak about a fair bit in this episode, along with his experience of nearly losing his job as an anesthetist over the COVID jab, the importance of what he calls ‘filter’ events in life, and his discovery of religion and how that fits in with all the Orwellian events he’s witnessed over the last few years. --- # Ben Gunn — Volatility, Stoicism & Anti-Fragile Networks URL: https://free-cities.org/ben-gunn-volatility-stoicism-anti-fragile-networks Free Cities Podcast, episode 97 Published: 2024-10-19 Guest: Ben Gunn Host: Timothy Allen Today, I had a rare opportunity on the podcast to talk with Ben Gunn. Pseudonymous Ben is somewhat of an elusive character (and I mean that in the best possible way.) He’s a grafter, a proof-of-worker, and he doesn’t sit down and do podcasts very often. I drove up the Welsh borders to visit him at his woodland estate last week to chat about a number of things. The idea was initially sparked by a conversation we had in Prague a few months prior when he told me he was starting a company in Próspera. We meander through a number of subjects during this chat, diving under the surface of Ben’s forestry project in Wales and the ethics that underpin its business model. We talk about his experiences living on Roatan in Honduras, about the pandemic, inflection points, and the broader implications of global economic shifts. Ben is a former broker and he uses the language of finance to frame many of the interesting concepts we speak about, including my request for him to explain “Long Vol” to me. If you don’t know what that means, I’m not about to explain it here but its something I’ve been grappling with for a while. Thankfully Ben sorted me out this time, so many thanks for that, and listen on for your own answers and much more. --- # Niko Jilch — Socialism, Gold & Bitcoin Geopolitics URL: https://free-cities.org/niko-jilch-socialism-gold-bitcoin-geopolitics Free Cities Podcast, episode 96 Published: 2024-10-18 Guest: Niko Jilch Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics, bitcoin-and-free-cities Today, on the podcast I have my final recording from Prague’s 2024 Bitcoin Conference. Niko Jilch is an Austrian financial journalist who has been covering financial markets, monetary history and policy, and macroeconomics for over 10 years. Interestingly, he has also been an advocate for gold for most of that time, and as many of you will know, I’ve been eager to have a gold bug on the show for quite some time now. Spoiler alert: Niko is also an evangelical Bitcoiner… I’m doing my best here! In this long conversation, we cover a number of key financial topics, beginning with the historical and contemporary implications of socialism and/or communism. Niko draws many parallels between the peaceful revolutions of 1989 in Eastern Europe and the situation we find ourselves in today in Western Europe, particularly with the emergence of Bitcoin as digital gold—a vehicle that can be used to peacefully exit the current fiat system. Keep listening for more of Niko’s insights on gold, stablecoins, governance models, the Federal Reserve, and central banking, plus his personal views on best practices to help you navigate the current wave of social and economic volatility we see in the world. --- # Pavla Karon — Gender Roles, Family Dynamics & Raising Liberated Children URL: https://free-cities.org/pavla-karon-gender-roles-family-dynamics-raising-liberated-children Free Cities Podcast, episode 95 Published: 2024-10-17 Guest: Pavla Karon Host: Timothy Allen Today’s guest on the podcast is Pavla Karon. Pavla is an entrepreneur and freedom maximalist who co-runs her family business. Outside of that, she is deeply focused on family and personal growth. Whenever our paths cross, I always have great conversations with her, and this one is no exception. Core topics discussed include raising children, particularly parenting methods, and how to bring up liberated kids. We also delve into 21st-century gender roles, feminism, socialism, stoicism, and the impact of technology on all of these areas. Pavla is an old-school voluntarist with a wealth of experience in the process of manifesting freedom and, more importantly, in staying free. --- # Shajay Bhooshan — Parametric Design, Digital Cities & The Future of Architecture URL: https://free-cities.org/shajay-bhooshan-parametric-design-digital-cities-the-future-of-architecture Free Cities Podcast, episode 94 Published: 2024-10-16 Guest: Shajay Bhooshan Host: Timothy Allen Topics: technology-in-new-cities, urban-design About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera, https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland Today’s guest on the podcast is Shajay Bhooshan. Shajay runs the Computation and Design Group at Zaha Hadid Architects and has worked on the designs for several well-known Free City projects, including Próspera, Praxis, and Liberland’s metaverse project. Zaha Hadid Architects is definitely at the cutting edge when it comes to using innovative technologies, and speaking with Shajay provided me with a glimpse into the future of architectural design and city planning, as well as the digital fabrication of virtual spaces. Spoiler alert: Shajay predicts that one day, Zaha Hadid will generate more revenue from the digital realm than from the physical one. I never would have predicted that. --- # Nathan Day — Overlanding, Self Sovereign Identity & Bitcoin Adoption URL: https://free-cities.org/nathan-day-overlanding-self-sovereign-identity-bitcoin-adoption Free Cities Podcast, episode 93 Published: 2024-10-15 Guest: Nathan Day Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Today’s guest on the podcast is Nathan Day. Nathan is a former global IT systems optimizer who gained a degree of financial freedom after selling his business a few years ago. Consequently, this led him and his wife to ask themselves the question: “If we were terminally ill and had two years to live, what would we do?” The answer came in the form of a custom-built, fully equipped overland and off-road truck, which their family has been using as a home away from home ever since. In this conversation, we discuss various topics related to Bitcoin, including the installation of miners in their truck, their experiences living self-sovereign lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the potential of decentralized networks like Nostr to revolutionize digital identity. We also explore the connections between time, entropy, and Bitcoin, and discuss the current state of Bitcoin adoption and infrastructure globally. If you’re a Bitcoiner, you’ll probably know Nathan better as the co-founder of BTC Map, the indispensable app for finding merchants who accept Bitcoin. Nathan shares some fascinating insights into merchant adoption around the globe—arguably one of the best metrics for measuring the success of decentralized money. --- # Tania Rak — Freedom, New Media & The Liberty Movement URL: https://free-cities.org/tania-rak-freedom-new-media-the-liberty-movement Free Cities Podcast, episode 92 Published: 2024-10-14 Guest: Tania Rak Host: Timothy Allen Today’s guest on the podcast is Ukrainian journalist and PR expert Tania Rak. Tania works within the liberty movement, spreading ideas of freedom at major outlets such as Fox News, CNN, and the BBC, to name a few. As you would expect, this conversation revolves around the ‘science’ of communication: media literacy, the impact of AI on journalism, fake news, social media, fact-checking, media bias, and the evolving media landscape. Tania also shares her experiences with the gender divide in the workplace and discusses whether this is an issue that needs to be addressed. --- # Ivan Ko — Planning a Free City in the UK URL: https://free-cities.org/ivan-ko-planning-a-free-city-in-the-uk Free Cities Podcast, episode 91 Published: 2024-10-13 Guest: Ivan Ko Host: Timothy Allen Topics: charter-cities On today’s podcast I’m talking with Ivan Ko, a real estate development and finance veteran from Hong Kong. In recent years, Ivan has turned his focus to the production of 21st-century charter cities in his role as CEO of Victoria Harbour Group. In this conversation, we discuss Ivan’s ambitious Free City project planned for the newly designated Thames Estuary Free Port area in the UK. --- # Lea Petrášová — Privacy, Autonomy & Decentralized Governance URL: https://free-cities.org/lea-petrasova-privacy-autonomy-decentralized-governance Free Cities Podcast, episode 90 Published: 2024-10-12 Guest: Lea Petrášová Host: Timothy Allen Topics: private-governance, technology-in-new-cities On today’s podcast I’m talking with Lea Petrášová, a cypherpunk and privacy advocate best known as the co-founder and CEO of Vexl, a peer-to-peer Bitcoin trading network. Our conversation revolves around the intersection of decentralized governance, privacy, security, and economic development. We discuss the importance of preserving privacy and security in decentralized markets while incentivizing proper behavior. We also explore the limitations of democracy as the sole form of governance and the potential emergence of autonomous cities. Additionally, we examine the economic situation in various countries, including Argentina, and the impact of inflation on the middle class. Finally, we touch on the creation of Free Cities and economic zones as a means of disruption. Lea is an old-school digital nomad with stories from all those places you’ve probably never been. Speaking with her is always a pleasure, and I hope you find inspiration in our discussion. --- # Allen Farrington — Venice, Sovereign Individuals & The Bitcoin Renaissance URL: https://free-cities.org/allen-farrington-venice-sovereign-individuals-the-bitcoin-renaissance Free Cities Podcast, episode 89 Published: 2024-10-11 Guest: Allen Farrington Host: Timothy Allen Topics: history-of-free-cities, bitcoin-and-free-cities On today’s podcast I’m talking with Allen Farrington. Bitcoin enthusiasts will likely know Allen well. He’s the co-author of the highly regarded book Bitcoin Is Venice, which explores modern economic theories—the good and the bad. The book’s title is inspired by one of Allen’s essays, where he draws parallels between the attributes that made Venice one of history’s most successful cities and the revolutionary properties of Bitcoin as a monetary technology. As you might expect, Allen believes Bitcoin could play a pivotal role in ushering in a new era of governance and global economic paradigms. In our conversation, we discuss Venice’s remarkable 1,000-year success story and eventual decline, as well as Allen’s perspective on the Sovereign Individual thesis—a concept we see increasingly manifesting in today’s world. Allen is someone who frequently uses “fiat” as an adjective, so naturally, we delve into the importance of moving away from the fiat monetary system in favor of a Bitcoin standard. Overall, this is a fascinating conversation at the crossroads of Free Cities and Bitcoin. A big thank you to Allen for taking the time to join me. --- # Luke Thibodeau — Próspera Update, Pioneer Residents & New Projects URL: https://free-cities.org/luke-thibodeau-prospera-update-pioneer-residents-new-projects Free Cities Podcast, episode 84 Published: 2024-10-10 Guest: Luke Thibodeau Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Today’s episode of the podcast is a Próspera update show. Próspera is, of course, one of the flagship projects in the Free Cities ecosystem and, as far as I’m concerned, one to watch closely. The groundbreaking work they’re doing in Honduras and the pioneering challenges they’re tackling are laying the foundation for many future projects in this space. Last week in Prague, I bumped into Próspera’s CFO, Luke Thibodeau, who gave me an in-depth update on the latest developments within the jurisdiction. This includes the exciting news that residents have started moving into the Duna Residence, their flagship new build. We also discuss their ongoing legal battle with the Honduran government, updates on new projects, and Luke’s perspective on how the initiative is likely to evolve in the short to medium term. This conversation is packed with valuable information and insights. I hope it inspires you to explore Próspera further—or, as Luke puts it: “It’s all theoretical until it happens.” --- # Efrat Fenigson — Preparing for Central Bank Digital Currencies URL: https://free-cities.org/efrat-fenigson-preparing-for-central-bank-digital-currencies Free Cities Podcast, episode 86 Published: 2024-10-09 Guest: Efrat Fenigson Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics, technology-in-new-cities CBDCs, as the name suggests, are programmable digital tokens issued directly by a country’s central bank. Think that’s not a problem? I disagree—but don’t just take my word for it. Here’s what Agustín Carstens, the General Manager of the Bank of International Settlements, said a couple of years ago while discussing physical cash: “A key difference with the CBDC… is that the central bank will have absolute control over the rules and regulations that will determine the use of that expression of central bank liability.” Yes, you heard that correctly: programmable money, issued and controlled exclusively by what I’d describe as creepy, psychopathic banking overlords. That’s my take, of course, but I’ve linked Carstens’ speech in the show notes below so you can decide for yourself whether you’d trust him to control your money. Thankfully, since 2008, we’ve had an antidote to this kind of centralized sociopathy: Bitcoin. So, while there’s no need to despair, it’s crucial to prepare for what is almost certainly coming alongside the rollout of CBDCs. In our conversation, Efrat and I explore a range of topics, including how CBDCs are being marketed to the public, the Covid crisis, social credit systems, Alipay and WeChat in China, the emergence of personal carbon allowances, and the looming possibility of a global financial collapse in our lifetimes. This discussion is both insightful and timely, so I hope it resonates with you. --- # Marc Friedrich — Preparing for an Economic Collapse URL: https://free-cities.org/marc-friedrich-preparing-for-an-economic-collapse Free Cities Podcast, episode 87 Published: 2024-10-08 Guest: Marc Friedrich Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics On today’s podcast, I’m having a conversation with Germany’s most successful non-fiction author. Marc Friedrich has written seven bestselling books, the latest of which is titled “The Greatest Revolution of All Time.” This book focuses on preserving your wealth in light of what Marc believes is the inevitable collapse of the current monetary system. This topic forms the core of our discussion, alongside a conversation about Marc’s views on gold. Has Bitcoin rendered gold obsolete? We also delve into his harrowing experiences with hyperinflation while living in Argentina, as well as practical advice on prepping and breaking free from the “matrix” of modern life. --- # Thomas D. Walls — Liberland’s Minister of Foreign Affairs URL: https://free-cities.org/thomas-d-walls-liberlands-minister-of-foreign-affairs Free Cities Podcast, episode 88 Published: 2024-10-07 Guest: Thomas D. Walls Host: Timothy Allen Topics: micronations, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland On today’s podcast I have another despatch for you from our trip to Liberland. Thomas D. Walls is Liberland’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, and I caught up with him at ARK—the so-called “Liberland village” located just across the border from Liberland’s territory in Serbia. If you’re new to the Liberland story, I recommend listening to this interview alongside the two other Liberland podcasts I’ve recorded recently: one with President Vít Jedlička in Episode 58 and the other with my Free Cities Foundation colleague Hynek Fencl in Episode 82. In this episode, I dive deeper into the Liberland project, seeking more insights into how its government functions and exploring updates on recent diplomatic and political developments shaping its future. Thomas also shares his predictions for the project’s timeline and discusses the strategies he believes are most likely to ensure a bright future for Liberland. --- # Tuur Demeester — Identifying Our Shackles URL: https://free-cities.org/tuur-demeester-identifying-our-shackles Free Cities Podcast, episode 85 Published: 2024-10-06 Guest: Tuur Demeester Host: Timothy Allen Today’s episode of the podcast is a conversation with Tuur Demeester. Tuur is an analyst and investor, probably best known for his work within the Bitcoin ecosystem. I’ve been a fan of his for quite some time, greatly appreciating his ability to bridge the gap between traditional finance on one hand and the more esoteric world of Bitcoin on the other. Before diving into this episode, I highly recommend checking out Tuur’s interview on the What Bitcoin Did podcast, episode #691, entitled “From Psychedelics to the Bitcoin Boom.” In that episode, Tuur shares his harrowing experience with the psychedelic Ibogaine, which he took in an attempt to uncover the root of some long-standing personal anxiety. In my conversation with Tuur, we jump straight into those experiences. Listening to the What Bitcoin Did episode first may provide helpful context for what we discuss. I’ll admit that my questions in this discussion may come across as a bit chaotic, and I hope you can forgive me for that. I had so much I wanted to explore with Tuur but only 1.5 hours to do so. In hindsight, I was trying to convey the idea that what Tuur experienced during his Ibogaine journey mirrors what many of us encounter in our daily lives. Tuur encapsulates this well in the episode when he says: “Let’s identify how we are shackled.” Many of us move through life unaware of the shackles that influence our actions. This applies not only to personal struggles—such as suppressed childhood experiences—but also to societal constructs, like fiat monetary systems. As Tuur and I discuss, the key to transformation lies in becoming aware of these shackles. From that position of awareness, we can begin to loosen them, or as Tuur puts it, allow them to become “unstuck.” This episode is about finding hope in dark places. It’s admittedly a bit of a strange one, but I hope you can distill some truth from our conversation and find ideas that might help you on your personal journey toward freedom in these chaotic times. --- # Swen Lorenz — Major Sark Announcement URL: https://free-cities.org/swen-lorenz-major-sark-announcement Free Cities Podcast, episode 83 Published: 2024-10-05 Guest: Swen Lorenz Host: Timothy Allen Topics: city-states-today About: https://free-cities.org/projects/sark On today’s episode of the podcast, I’m speaking with Swen Lorenz once again. Swen co-runs the Sark Property Company, and as the title of the episode suggests, they have some exciting news about their investment plans and the future of Sark. I caught up with Swen in London a couple of weeks ago but held back the episode until The Sunday Times published its major exclusive article on the same subject a few days ago. In this episode, we discuss the Sark Property Company’s upcoming cash bid for the Sark estate currently owned by the Barclay family. This should be of interest to you whether you’re a Sarkey, an incomer to Sark, or simply Sark-curious, as I know many of you are. --- # Hynek Fencl — Liberland Insights, Free City Proposals & The Limitations of Democracy URL: https://free-cities.org/hynek-fencl-liberland-insights-free-city-proposals-the-limitations-of-democracy Free Cities Podcast, episode 82 Published: 2024-10-04 Guest: Hynek Fencl Host: Timothy Allen Topics: micronations, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland Today’s guest on the podcast is Hynek Fencl. Hynek is the Head of Research at the Free Cities Foundation and the Chief Communications & Research Officer at Tipolis, Titus Gebel’s company focused on building Free Cities around the world. This conversation was recorded during our trip to Croatia and Serbia and begins with us reflecting on the Liberland project after spending a few days exploring the area. By this point, a lot had happened, including my being detained by the Croatian border police and instructed to leave the country, as well as Liberland becoming flooded, rendering the road into it impassable. Listen on for more, including our opinions on the future of the project. Skip to about the 1-hour mark for the second half of the discussion, which focuses on Hynek’s work at Tipolis. There are some great insights here into the process of identifying suitable locations for Free City projects, engaging with governments, and more. --- # Glenn Cameron — Bitcoin, Institutions & Mass Adoption URL: https://free-cities.org/glenn-cameron-bitcoin-institutions-mass-adoption Free Cities Podcast, episode 81 Published: 2024-10-02 Guest: Glenn Cameron Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics, bitcoin-and-free-cities “When inflation was 13%, how many people got a 13% pay rise? Hardly anyone. Right? So we all got poorer. Right? So wouldn’t it be great to have something in your life that’s counteracting that effect?“ Today’s guest on the podcast is Glenn Cameron. Glenn is a senior investment consultant who was recently appointed as Head of Digital Assets at Cartwright, the independent, privately-owned pension actuarial, consultancy and administration firm. If you’re a financial layman like myself, it’s easiest to think of him as the guy who deals with institutional investors regarding Bitcoin. Bitcoin’s institutional investors have been somewhat dramatically cast into the limelight recently with the SEC’s decision to allow the approval of spot Bitcoin ETF products for US citizens. Most people acknowledge that these developments are ushering in a new era of institutional adoption of BTC, with some saying that it also grants a new level of legitimacy to the decentralized money. So, I was extremely happy to sit down with Glenn and get his experienced opinion on what’s going on and what this means for the world of finance and individuals who want to be self-sovereign with their money. This was a great conversation full of excellent insights from the world of legacy finance and will be of great value to anyone who wants to understand Bitcoin’s path forward towards mass adoption. --- # Patrik Schumacher — Free City Architecture, Synergy Clusters & Próspera URL: https://free-cities.org/patrik-schumacher-free-city-architecture-synergy-clusters-prospera Free Cities Podcast, episode 80 Published: 2024-10-01 Guest: Patrik Schumacher Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes, urban-design About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera “It is sometimes hard to have a whole country reinvent itself. This process is too slow and too cumbersome with too much friction and no vested interest. We need more special economic zones and I think they play an enormous role in the whole progress of world civilization… exploring ways of doing business and ways of establishing contemporary life.“ Today’s guest requires little or no introduction. He is the renowned architectural theorist, educator, and author Patrik Schumacher, best known as the principal architect at Zaha Hadid Architects, renowned for their innovative and futuristic designs utilizing organic forms and cutting-edge technology. Those of you who follow the Free Cities space closely will also know that Zaha Hadid was commissioned to design customizable buildings in Honduras’s Free City Próspera, something we will discuss in the conversation. This interview was part of our SEZ film once again, so there is a somewhat slanted perspective in the Special Economic Zone direction. FYI, we jump right into the conversation discussing the City of London, just in case that isn’t immediately apparent. --- # Krysta Fox — Free Zones. Past, Present & Future URL: https://free-cities.org/krysta-fox-free-zones-past-present-future Free Cities Podcast, episode 79 Published: 2024-09-30 Guest: Krysta Fox Host: Timothy Allen Topics: special-economic-zones I think that’s a really important part of understanding the evolution of very successful zones across this region and something that leaders can really think about in terms of how they formulate their strategies.“ For this week’s podcast I’m back in the U.A.E. with another excellent conversation from our SEZ filming trip. Krysta Fox has a long and illustrious business career, but the part we were interested in was her six-year position as executive director of Dubai’s DMCC – (Dubai Multi Commodities Centre) a very well-known and hugely successful free zone. As a consequence, Krysta has a lot to say about free zones and what makes them tick. She’s also a wealth of information on the past and present of zones with many examples and predictions for the future especially with regard to their residential component… something that we here at the FCF are very excited about. --- # Olivier Roland — The Sovereign Individual, Infopreneurship & Nation-State Disruption URL: https://free-cities.org/olivier-roland-the-sovereign-individual-infopreneurship-nation-state-disruption Free Cities Podcast, episode 77 Published: 2024-09-29 Guest: Olivier Roland Host: Timothy Allen Topics: network-states, residency-and-citizenship On today’s podcast I’ve got another dispatch from Dubai for you. This week I’m talking to Olivier Roland. Olivier is a French author, entrepreneur, digital nomad, and influencer with over 800,000 followers across his social media channels. His latest book (not out yet) focuses on how the internet is disrupting nation-states and how to navigate these opportunistic times. Olivier has been testing out the sovereign individual thesis for his manuscript by analysing the data related to the predictions that were made in the original book. What he has discovered is incredibly fascinating along with the other topics discussed in this episode including China, Próspera, Dubai, charter cities, digital nomadism, network states and Olivier explains to me what an infopreneur is and why it is such an important concept for the 21st century. Public service announcement: At about the 1hr 10m mark a microphone blew up and I had to restart the recording. I didn’t try to splice them together this time so prepare for quite a jolt in the conversation. --- # Sebastian Weglarz — Libertarian Memes, Anarcho-capitalism and Polish History URL: https://free-cities.org/sebastian-weglarz-libertarian-memes-anarcho-capitalism-and-polish-history Free Cities Podcast, episode 78 Published: 2024-09-28 Guest: Sebastian Weglarz Host: Timothy Allen They have to come from your heart.” This week’s podcast is a bit of a trip into the past. If truth be told, I had an audio problem with the episode I was going to air and then I lost access to all my upcoming shows (it’s a long story that I won’t go into). Anyway, whilst rummaging around in my archive looking for backups, I discovered an unpublished episode that I thought we had lost many months ago. It was recorded at Weekend Kapitalizmu in Warsaw just over a year ago (obviously… bear this in mind whilst we’re talking about current affairs etc). Sebastian Weglarz is a Polish anarcho-capitalist who certainly wears many hats in life. He’s the head of outreach at Liberty International, which I’m told is the oldest organisation promoting Liberty worldwide. He’s also a marketeer, memer, rapper, and general advocate for self-sovereignty and the nomadic way of life. In our (rather chaotic) conversation you can expect to hear our raspy, conference-damaged voices talk about, amongst other things: Polish history, Communism, Libertarianism, art, culture, Bitcoin, and memes. --- # Stephan Livera — State Competitiveness, Bitcoin ETFs & The Demise of the West URL: https://free-cities.org/stephan-livera-state-competitiveness-bitcoin-etfs-the-demise-of-the-west Free Cities Podcast, episode 74 Published: 2024-05-21 Guest: Stephan Livera Host: Timothy Allen Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics “In 2019, if you had asked me ‘Will things change?’, I might have thought that certain things would change but there is an Overton window of what’s possible. Post 2020, so much has changed and I think the Overton window has just been blown wide open. Now is the time to be talking about these big ideas because now we could actually see some areas, some territory, some free state or some free zone, really outcompeting others.” On today’s podcast I’ve got another dispatch from Dubai for you this week and it’s also another returning guest, Stephan Livera. The last time we spoke was way back in episode 04, over a year ago when I ran into him in El Salvador. This week, we’re on his home territory, well adoptive home at least. He relocated to the UAE two years ago and in this conversation we discuss that move and why the Emirates have been so successful at attracting foreign talent over the last few years. Other topics discussed include the demise of the Western world, monarchies, multiculturalism, inflation, and Stephan gives us a roundup of the all latest developments in the world of Bitcoin. --- # Zuby — Responsibility, Discipline & Choosing Dubai URL: https://free-cities.org/zuby-responsibility-discipline-choosing-dubai Free Cities Podcast, episode 75 Published: 2024-05-20 Guest: Zuby Host: Timothy Allen Topics: city-states-today, residency-and-citizenship On today’s podcast I’m back in the UAE again, where I was lucky enough to sit down with a gentleman by the name of Nzube Udezue. Of course, you will probably know him by his stage name, Zuby. He’s a highly influential rapper, podcaster, and interestingly for me, a current resident of Dubai. What begins as a conversation about Saudi Arabia, Dubai, and the changing reputation of the Middle East develops into a broader discussion about governance, democracy, safety, taxation, and the meaning of freedom itself. Zuby argues that most people do not value liberty as highly as they claim, that every political system involves trade-offs, and that discipline, responsibility, and strong personal values matter at least as much as formal rights on paper. The episode also explores why Dubai is attracting talent from around the world, why the UK increasingly feels stagnant to many ambitious people, and why systems built around control, compliance, and digital scoring should be treated with caution. Rather than offering utopian answers, the conversation stays grounded in human nature, practical trade-offs, and the challenge of building a freer life within the constraints of the real world. --- # Andreas Baumgartner — Integrated Autonomous Cities & The Evolution of SEZs URL: https://free-cities.org/andreas-baumgartner-integrated-autonomous-cities-the-evolution-of-sezs Free Cities Podcast, episode 76 Published: 2024-05-19 Guest: Andreas Baumgartner Host: Timothy Allen Topics: special-economic-zones, private-governance “Autonomy is a tool to achieve something. We should never speak of autonomy just for autonomy’s sake. The objective is always to create an environment that attracts businesses, that attracts investment and that attracts people. That is what we’re talking about.“ On today’s podcast I have another returning guest for you. The last time I spoke with Andreas Baumgartner was back in episode 32 where we discussed the ins and outs of negotiating with governments, something that Andreas does on behalf of Free Cities projects and organisations such as the Metis Institute, Praxis and, relevant in this conversation: Tipolis, which is Titus Gebel’s organisation that creates privately run communities. Special Economic Zones began as ports, logistics hubs, and manufacturing enclaves. Andreas argues that their next evolutionary step is far more ambitious: integrated autonomous cities that combine governance innovation, economic opportunity, and livable urban environments in one place. In this conversation, Andreas explains why successful zones are not just tax breaks or legal carve-outs, but purposeful tools for achieving growth, employment, and long-term development. Using Dubai as a case study, he traces the historical evolution of SEZs from ports and warehousing to manufacturing and financial services, before making the case that the next frontier is integrated autonomous cities. The discussion also explores autonomy, governance, predictability, international competitiveness, and the role of cities as places people voluntarily choose to live and work. Andreas lays out why future zones must do more than attract business: they must create environments where residents, entrepreneurs, and families can thrive, and where governments can test new models without destabilising the wider state. This episode was recorded during one of our interviews for the Special Economic Zones film we are producing and afterwards I continued talking to Andreas about Tipolis and their ‘International Cities’ projects. I’ve spliced both interviews together but you may observe that the latter part of the podcast is a bit more question/answer than is normal on this podcast since I was fishing for soundbites for a film. Nevertheless, I thought there was some good info in there for all you Free Cities enthusiasts so I’ve left it in. I hope you enjoy the dialogue. Andreas is one of the OGs of the space and has more hands-on experience than most. --- # Peter Young — Special Economic Zones, Autonomy and the Future of Free Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/peter-young-special-economic-zones-autonomy-and-the-future-of-free-cities Free Cities Podcast, episode 73 Published: 2024-05-18 Guest: Peter Young Host: Timothy Allen Topics: special-economic-zones “Autonomous cities will develop naturally if they’re given the legal framework to do so. At the moment, most special economic zones have policies that apply to businesses and they’re targeted at creating space that is focused on a particular sector. I think if you allow that to be extended to residential components and had rules for living together as part of your framework, then you could see this naturally develop.“ On today’s podcast I have the Free Cities Foundation’s managing director Peter Young back for another episode. This time we’re talking about SEZs, free zones, and autonomous cities. We’re basically giving you the 101 on what we discovered during the making of our film ‘Zones of Progress’ in Dubai. There are lots of great insights here into the evolution of free zones and what their future might look like if the trend continues. Peter is super knowledgeable on the subject, so pay close attention and soak up all the insights. I personally think that understanding the history of SEZs is hugely important if you are interested in the establishment of new autonomous territories. --- # Fred Roeder — Dubai, Governance & The Evolution of Cities URL: https://free-cities.org/fred-roeder-dubai-governance-the-evolution-of-cities Free Cities Podcast, episode 72 Published: 2024-04-09 Guest: Fred Roeder Host: Timothy Allen Topics: city-states-today, private-governance Regulators should not pick the winners and losers. Consumers should do that, because that’s what consumers do in the marketplace.“ On today’s podcast I have another conversation for you that I recorded in Dubai. I am speaking with a gentleman by the name of Fred Roeder. Fred is the managing director of the Consumer Choice Center which is a consumer advocacy group focusing on pro-growth policies or, as Fred put it: promoting abundance for consumers. Fred is also a Dubai resident, having chosen to relocate there recently, so there’s a fair bit of chat in our conversation about the UAE and the benefits of living in the Middle East as well as subjects like the evolution of cities, governance incentives, innovative US cities, healthcare and we discuss the pros and cons of the democratic system. --- # Vera Kichanova — Private Cities, Russian Politics & The Middle East URL: https://free-cities.org/vera-kichanova-private-cities-russian-politics-the-middle-east Free Cities Podcast, episode 71 Published: 2024-04-08 Guest: Vera Kichanova Host: Timothy Allen Topics: free-private-cities “Last year our largest growth was in the Middle East. Our business has grown three times in the Middle East. And it’s not just us. All the big architecture firms are now working a lot here. Because as I said, it’s easier to build a city here than one small building somewhere in the European Union.“ Today’s podcast is a conversation I had with the Free Cities Foundation’s very own senior economist, Vera Kichanova. Obviously, in our discussion we take a deep pretty dive into the subject of private cities. Vera received the first ever Phd in the subject. What you may not know about her, however is that she was Russia’s first ever elected libertarian… so I had to ask about that too. There’s also a sprinkling of Argentinian politics, some observations on the successes of the UAE and we discuss the current buzz around Saudi Arabia and the country’s fascinating plans for future. --- # Danilo Silva — Geoarbitrage, Lifestyle Planning & Flag Theory URL: https://free-cities.org/danilo-silva-geoarbitrage-lifestyle-planning-flag-theory Free Cities Podcast, episode 70 Published: 2024-04-07 Guest: Danilo Silva Host: Timothy Allen Topics: residency-and-citizenship “Honestly, I’m actually not a big fan of traveling, which seems crazy when I have the lifestyle that I do. I just really hate taxes. I hate bureaucracy. I want to own my own destiny. That’s why I live the way I do.“ Today’s guest on the podcast is the digital nomad and perpetual traveler, Danilo Silva. Danilo is the C.O.O. of Settee, a Brazilian company that, in their own words “Helps Free People Become Citizens of the World”, advising on relocation, geoarbitrage, and flag theory in general. As you would imagine our conversation primarily revolves around these topics… Where are the hot countries to relocate to? Short & long-term strategies, golden visas, tax havens, or just havens of freedom. Listen on for more of the same. Just one caveat before we proceed… we recorded this interview just before Javier Milei won the presidency in Argentina. So, when we’re discussing Argentina, it’s the pre-Milei version. --- # Nicole Reese & Oscar Correa — Regenerative Neighbourhoods, Holacracy & Pioneer Communities URL: https://free-cities.org/nicole-reese-oscar-correa-regenerative-neighbourhoods-holacracy-pioneer-communities Free Cities Podcast, episode 69 Published: 2024-04-06 Guest: Nicole Reese & Oscar Correa Host: Timothy Allen Topics: intentional-communities “People are exiting society to build their own bubbles where they grow their own food, are self-sufficient, and have also learned how to consciously design human relationships. Many of the most successful of these projects refer to themselves as ‘research centers for peace’ because they’re exploring alternative governance systems with more socially inclusive circles and ways of relating to each other. I think this provides a really hopeful solution to the chaos that we see at the macro level of society.“ On today’s podcast we’re delving into one of my least visited sections of the Free Cities Spectrum. I’m talking with two members of Regen Tribe, a startup involved in the ‘Regenerative Neighbourhood’ ecosystem. Oscar Correa is the founder and CEO of Regen Tribe and Nicole Reese, the Director of Operations. Our conversation takes us on a journey through eco village design to futurism and pioneer communities as well as self-sovereignty, self-sufficiency and, of course the wider topic of the regenerative movement in general. --- # Tomer Kantor — El Salvador, Bitcoin & The IMF URL: https://free-cities.org/tomer-kantor-el-salvador-bitcoin-the-imf Free Cities Podcast, episode 68 Published: 2024-03-18 Guest: Tomer Kantor Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx-QWOHuug0 Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities “When I went to El Salvador, I went to try and find the catch. What’s really happening there? What is this Bukele dictator actually doing there? I went in there to to ask tough questions about Bukele. It took me about a week to change my mind, to realise that’s not really the story. That people love him. They honestly adore him.“ On today’s podcast I’ve got my final Bitcoin film festival despatch for you today. I’m talking with the director of the film “Bond to Unbind. Bitcoin & El Salvador’. Tomer Kantor’s film is a deep dive into the fascinating story of contemporary El Salvador. Spearheaded by its phenomenally popular president Nayib Bukele, El Salvador took the bold approach of not only passing the world’s first ever Bitcoin legal tender bill in 2021, but also of actively rallying against El Salvador’s traditional relationship with the IMF, including ignoring their pleas to rescind the Bitcoin law. In the words of Fortune magazine: “The International Monetary Fund’s board urged El Salvador to strip Bitcoin of its status as legal currency due to its large risks, highlighting a major obstacle for the nation’s efforts to get a loan from the institution.” Seemingly unperturbed by the IMF’s passive-aggressive threats, El Salvador’s so-called Volcano bonds, which are the government’s Bitcoin-backed bonds also got regulatory approval at the end of 2023. We discuss all this and more in the pod as well as talking about both of our personal experiences visiting the country since the law was passed. --- # Sondre Bjellås — Liberstad. The Norweigan Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/sondre-bjellas-liberstad-the-norweigan-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 67 Published: 2024-03-17 Guest: Sondre Bjellås Host: Timothy Allen Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberstad “Freedom is not going to come for free. You can’t ask anyone. You can’t go and ask a police officer to give you more freedom because he’s going to follow the law. That’s his job.“ Today’s podcast guest is developer/programmer Sondre Bjellås. Sondre is the co-creator of Liberstad, an innovative Norwegian community founded on the principals of non-aggression and voluntarism. In this episode you can expect an overview of the project along with plenty of updates on how things are progressing, as well as some of Sondre’s unique perspectives on life and technology. I always think of Liberstad as one of the lesser-known projects in the Free Cities ecosystem, nevertheless, it is most definitely one to watch in my opinion. Key topics: Liberstad, --- # Marc-Felix Otto — Geopolitics & Political Risk URL: https://free-cities.org/marc-felix-otto-geopolitics-political-risk Free Cities Podcast, episode 65 Published: 2024-02-23 Guest: Marc-Felix Otto Host: Timothy Allen Today’s podcast is a discussion based around risk management. Dr. Marc-Felix Otto is partner and chairman of The Advisory House AG, a renowned strategy and management consultancy serving the European energy industry. His expertise includes risk management for major energy trading organizations and, fortunately for us, he is also a council member of the Free Cities Foundation who has been advocating for Free Cities for more than 20 years. In this conversation, we talk about political risk management and the broader subject of geopolitics in the context of what is known as the Fourth Turning… listen on to find out what that is if you don’t already know. We also talk about Free City vulnerabilities, monetary reset and dive into a few of the more prominent conspiracy theories involving world governance. --- # Massimo Mazzone — Ciudad Morazán. The Blue-Collar Free City. URL: https://free-cities.org/massimo-mazzone-ciudad-morazan-the-blue-collar-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 64 Published: 2024-02-10 Guest: Massimo Mazzone Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan “This is the project of my life. I want to live and I want to die in that place, in a free place because as libertarians, we need a physical place to live. I mean, things like Network States are fine, but in the end we are people living in a three dimensional world. We need to have our feet on some soil and I want to find a place that is free… the Free Staters in New Hampshire, the Seasteaders, ZEDEs or something else. I want to die in a free place.“ On today’s podcast I’m talking with somebody who I consider to be one of the key individuals in the Free Cities movement. He is the incredibly successful entrepreneur who is both the brains and the finance behind Ciudad Morazán, Honduras’s so-called blue-collar Free City. Massimo is a lifelong Libertarian who saw an opportunity to create a unique passion project when the Honduran government passed its ZEDE legislation back in 2013. The ongoing result is Morazán, one of the world’s flagship Free City projects, but one that you probably know the least about since Massimo is not in the business of either self-promotion or promoting Morazán to potential investors. Massimo’s dreams for Ciudad Morazán are big as you will hear in the conversation and I hope that you will also pick up on the genuine enthusiasm he has for both Honduras and its people. I came away from the discussion feeling very optimistic, even after hearing about Morazán’s current legal battles which are somewhat stifling the project in the short term. --- # Rémi Forte — Bitcoin Origins, CBDCs & Social Credit Scoring URL: https://free-cities.org/remi-forte-bitcoin-origins-cbdcs-social-credit-scoring Free Cities Podcast, episode 63 Published: 2024-02-02 Guest: Rémi Forte Host: Timothy Allen Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46xMWab0VJg Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities “As far as the Cypherpunks go, I wanted the viewers to really understand WHY there is Bitcoin out there. You know, why? Why Bitcoin? And so it was really important for me to explain that a bunch of people were afraid that freedom could be jeopardised and so they built things.. and Bitcoin became the tool to fight for freedom in the electronic age.“ On today’s podcast, I have an interview for you recorded at the world’s first-ever Bitcoin Film Festival. Rémi Forte is a film director who created what I would call one of the most influential Bitcoin films ever created. ‘The Satoshi Mystery‘ has been viewed at least 8 million times across multiple platforms and media channels. It’s a six-part film series that explains the ‘why?’ of Bitcoin incredibly well using interviews and documentary footage plus a narrative revealed by an animated Satoshi Nakamoto character, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin. I spoke with Remi in Warsaw and he went into the importance of the cypherpunk origins of Bitcoin and why it is one of the most significant tools for freedom in these current times of burgeoning states, oppressive central bank digital currencies and social credit scores. --- # Tatiana Bugrova — Buying Land in Montelibero, Libertarianism & Montenegro URL: https://free-cities.org/tatiana-bugrova-buying-land-in-montelibero-libertarianism-montenegro Free Cities Podcast, episode 62 Published: 2024-01-29 Guest: Tatiana Bugrova Host: Timothy Allen Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/montelibero “If you have an idea, bring it up. Let’s put it on the table. Let’s discuss it. And yeah, we can potentially make it happen. Maybe it works because we are still a relatively small community. Probably as we grow, it’s going to change a little bit. But for now, it works quite well. Everybody’s quite welcoming to different ideas. So whatever you’re good at, you will find support.” On today’s podcast, I have another interview for you from Montenegro. Tatiana Bugrova is an active member of the Montelibero community who has bought a plot of land at ‘MTL City’, their community site. I caught up with her at the MTL clubhouse in Bar, Montenegro and we discussed her motivations for moving to Montenegro along with her hopes and expectations for the project. If living in a libertarian community in Montenegro strikes a chord with you then I will point you to two other episodes from our Montelibero series. Firstly, ⁠Episode 029⁠ with Jose Birkin is a two-hour deep dive into the community as a whole including an overview of their blockchain token system used for land ownership and community decision making. Secondly, there is ⁠Episode 042⁠ with Kosta & Albina, a digitally nomadic couple who have bought one of the newly built apartments in Montelibero. In a similar vein to this conversation with Tatiana, we discuss living nomadically and the draw to settle in a community of like-minded people. --- # Mark Littlewood — Libertarianism, Devolution & Decentralisation URL: https://free-cities.org/mark-littlewood-libertarianism-devolution-decentralisation Free Cities Podcast, episode 61 Published: 2024-01-27 Guest: Mark Littlewood Host: Timothy Allen On today’s podcast, I’m talking with Mark Littlewood. Mark will be well-known to many of you. He was, at the time of this interview, the director general of the Institute of Economic Affairs, the leading free-market think tank in the UK. Formerly he was the chief press spokesman for the Liberal Democrats and an advisor to the Conservative Party under Prime Minister David Cameron. Mark also sits on the Board of Big Brother Watch, a non-profit organisation fighting for the protection of privacy and civil liberties in the UK. In this conversation, we discuss libertarianism, the possibility of a Free City in London, State Competition, and Socialism and I get Mark’s opinion on the long-term viability of the Free Cities idea. --- # Ivan Ko — Made in Hong Kong URL: https://free-cities.org/ivan-ko-made-in-hong-kong Free Cities Podcast, episode 60 Published: 2024-01-13 Guest: Ivan Ko Host: Timothy Allen Topics: charter-cities “Previously, whenever people gathered with friends for dinner or lunch, the first question that would usually come up was ‘Will you leave Hong Kong?’. In the last two or three years, that question has changed to ‘When are you going to leave Hong Kong?“‘. On today’s podcast, I’m talking with Ivan Ko. Ivan is a real estate development and finance veteran from Hong Kong who has more recently turned his hand to the production of 21st century charter cities in his role as CEO of Victoria Harbour Group. In this conversation we discuss Ivan’s reasons for leaving his homeland of Hong Kong and the ensuing international journey that has culminated with him pitching a very ambitious Free City project to a council in the south east of England. --- # Filip Karađorđević — Monarchy, Low Time Preference & Bitcoin Adoption URL: https://free-cities.org/filip-karadordevic-monarchy-low-time-preference-bitcoin-adoption Free Cities Podcast, episode 59 Published: 2024-01-10 Guest: Filip Karađorđević Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities On today’s podcast, I’m talking with Filip Karađorđević. Also known as Prince Filip of Serbia, Filip is a former asset manager turned Bitcoiner currently traveling the world spreading the gospel of censorship-resistant money with Jan3, Samson Mow’s organization dedicated to promoting nation-state Bitcoin adoption. As you might expect, Prince Filip is also a monarchist, so in our conversation, you can expect his elevator pitch on why monarchy might be the best governance model going forward. Let’s see if Philip can convince you. --- # Vít Jedlička — Starting a New Country in Europe URL: https://free-cities.org/vit-jedlicka-starting-a-new-country-in-europe Free Cities Podcast, episode 58 Published: 2024-01-09 Guest: Vít Jedlička Host: Timothy Allen Topics: micronations About: https://free-cities.org/projects/liberland “There is this famous quote that you can never change things by fighting the existing reality and that you have to start something new. I think that’s pretty much valid. It might be much easier to start a new country than it is to fix an existing one.“ Today’s podcast is a discussion I had with Vít Jedlička in Prague during our ‘Liberty in Our Lifetime’ conference. Vit is the founder and president of the Free Republic of Liberland, a new micronation formed in 2015 that claimed an uninhabited parcel of disputed land on the western bank of the Danube, between Croatia and Serbia. This was my first time discussing the project on this podcast and, as a result, my questions are quite rudimentary. Liberland’s story is absolutely fascinating and if this is also your first exposure to it, you should definitely use this interview as a springboard to investigating the whole thing much, much further. I’ll be watching it very closely from now on. --- # Joe Quirk — Seasteading, Evolutionary Psychology & The Surveillance State URL: https://free-cities.org/joe-quirk-seasteading-evolutionary-psychology-the-surveillance-state Free Cities Podcast, episode 57 Published: 2023-12-22 Guest: Joe Quirk Host: Timothy Allen Topics: seasteading “People are completely persuaded by monopoly governance. They’re brainwashed with it. It’s coming for us. It’s coming for free people. It’s coming fast, it’s coming hard and it’s not hiding its agenda. So this is where I want to argue with all my colleagues. We don’t want one Próspera here. We don’t want a dozen Prósperas there. We don’t even want six thousand Special Economic Zones all over the world. It’s not enough. We need to radically proliferate the alternative examples, and completely out-compete the rise of the surveillance state.“ Today’s podcast was my favourite conversation of the year, recorded with Joe Quirk. I really enjoy chatting with Joe. The first time I met him was at our conference two years ago when I interviewed him for a film and it was instantly obvious that he is a great orator and overall extremely interesting guy. This is a light-hearted conversation about Seasteading. Joe is the president of The Seasteading Institute and is extremely knowledgeable on the subject. I mean, from whom else could I learn exciting new words such as flotel, coralcrete, aquapreneurs and seavilisation? If you listen to this podcast regularly, you’ll know how much I love new words. However, this conversation is also about the human condition and how best to use our innate ingenuity to stay as free as we can as individuals. I really enjoyed the discourse and in particular, Joe’s takes on the world. He makes fascinating observations about this particular moment in history and I sincerely hope that they can help you understand your own path forward. I wish you all a very wonderful Christmas. --- # Marthinus Grobler — Free City Design, Fiat Architecture & New Urbanism URL: https://free-cities.org/marthinus-grobler-free-city-design-fiat-architecture-new-urbanism Free Cities Podcast, episode 56 Published: 2023-12-15 Guest: Marthinus Grobler Host: Timothy Allen Topics: urban-design Todays’ podcast is an episode about Free City planning with Tipolis’s chief architect, Marthinus Grobler. I loved talking with Martinus. Not least because he let me rant about one of my personal bugbears, Modernist architecture. However, lovers of brutalism should not despair, since our discussion also touches upon subjects such as urban design, progressivism, central planning, new urbanism, and fiat architecture. I also get Martinus’s opinion on what he thinks of the way that the design of the modern Emirates has evolved as a possible case study for urban planning in the future, something that has left me wondering whether skyscrapers and high-rise buildings are even a good idea at all. --- # Marnix van Suylekom — Buying an Abandoned Village in Spain URL: https://free-cities.org/marnix-van-suylekom-buying-an-abandoned-village-in-spain Free Cities Podcast, episode 55 Published: 2023-12-09 Guest: Marnix van Suylekom Host: Timothy Allen Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-commune-of-penadexo I know that many of you, myself included, have secretly dreamt of buying an abandoned village and turning it into the utopia of your dreams. Well, today’s guest on the podcast has embarked on one such project and I sat down with him recently in Prague. Marnix Van Suylekom has a grand plan to apply Agorist principles to the rejuvenation of an abandoned hamlet in a picturesque valley in Galicia, Northern Spain. In this conversation, we discuss the lessons Marnix has learned so far on his journey to source, buy, and now begin renovating his abandoned village called Panadexo. There are lots of great insights and info here on his bottom-up approach to the project as well as some chat about life, raising kids, and generally finding freedom in your life. --- # Christopher Beaumont & Swen Lorenz — Sark. Past, Present & Future URL: https://free-cities.org/christopher-beaumont-swen-lorenz-sark-past-present-future Free Cities Podcast, episode 54 Published: 2023-12-02 Guest: Christopher Beaumont & Swen Lorenz Host: Timothy Allen Topics: city-states-today, history-of-free-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/sark On today’s podcast, I’m in discussion with two gentlemen involved in the self-governing island of Sark which is located just off the coast of Normandy. Christopher Beaumont, the 23rd Seigneur of Sark, and Swen Lorenz, a Sark immigrant who recently helped revitalize public interest in the island by creating the hugely successful ‘Move To Sark’ repopulation campaign, sat down with me in the Czech Republic and we talked everything Sark. This is a fascinating conversation with these two Sarkees who are deeply involved in creating a long-term masterplan for this little-known Crown dependency. We discuss the past, present, and future of Sark in a thoroughly informative conversation. Thanks to Christopher and Swen for taking the time to not only speak to me on the podcast but also for presenting the project to the Free Cities audience at our annual conference. --- # Aleks Svetski — Bushido of Bitcoin, Feudalism & Artificial Intelligence URL: https://free-cities.org/aleks-svetski-bushido-of-bitcoin-feudalism-artificial-intelligence Free Cities Podcast, episode 53 Published: 2023-11-25 Guest: Aleks Svetski Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Today’s guest on the podcast will be well-known to the Bitcoiners amongst you. Aleks Svetski is an entrepreneur and the co-author of the Uncommunist Manifesto with Mark Moss. He is also well known for his show Wake Up Podcast. I caught up with him at BTC Prague and we discussed his ideas about the Bushido of Bitcoin along with chivalry, warrior ethics, collectivism, A.I., transhumanism, and whether or not Bitcoin changes you. We also discuss the future of human culture. I’ll leave you to decide whether or not you agree with Aleks’s sentiment that “Feudalism was peak civilisation”. --- # Jeremy Kauffman — New Hampshire Free State Project URL: https://free-cities.org/jeremy-kauffman-new-hampshire-free-state-project Free Cities Podcast, episode 52 Published: 2023-11-17 Guest: Jeremy Kauffman Host: Timothy Allen About: https://free-cities.org/projects/free-state-project Today on the podcast, I’m speaking with Jeremy Kauffman Jeremy is a tech entrepreneur and a well-known activist in the American Libertarian movement. He is also deeply involved in the New Hampshire Free State Project, which is the focus of our conversation. In this episode, we discuss the Free State Project and the US political landscape in general, along with Jeremy’s perspectives on the Libertarian movement and the best strategies for carving out a pathway to freedom in the future. Additionally, we touch on topics such as A.I., frontier spaces, collapsatarianism (I love discovering new words), Jeremy’s opinion of the Free Cities movement, and I get the low down on why I should bring my family to visit PorcFest – New Hampshire’s epic Libertarian Freedom Festival. --- # Adam Bartha — Free Markets, The European Union & CBDCs URL: https://free-cities.org/adam-bartha-free-markets-the-european-union-cbdcs Free Cities Podcast, episode 51 Published: 2023-11-10 Guest: Adam Bartha Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics Today on the podcast, I’m releasing a conversation that I recorded just over 6 months ago. It’s worth noting that deciding which show to air each week is by no means an exact science. This episode has been near the top of my list for many weeks, but it just kept getting bumped aside by interviews that had content more time-sensitive. In reality, at any one time, I have a pool of episodes to choose from since we record all our podcasts in person in batches at different events and gatherings that I attend. As you are listening to this, bear in mind that the conversation was recorded in April. Nevertheless, there are still plenty of timeless insights and lots of up-to-date information, plus some interesting predictions about the economy that turned out to be quite prophetic. My guest is Adam Bartha, who is the director at Epicenter, The European Policy Information Center, which is part of the Institute of Economic Affairs. As a gentleman who roams the political hallways of Brussels, I had a lot of questions for Adam about the E.U. and international politics in general, which is something that both fascinates and infuriates me. Alongside that, we discuss topics such as freedom, social media, Brexit, open borders, city gentrification, inflation, the impending battle between Bitcoin and CBDCs, and of course, free markets. --- # Titus Gebel — Free Private Cities Book Update URL: https://free-cities.org/titus-gebel-free-private-cities-book-update Free Cities Podcast, episode 50 Published: 2023-11-03 Guest: Titus Gebel Host: Timothy Allen Topics: free-private-cities Today we have Titus Gebel back on the podcast and this time we’re talking about the update he has just published to his classic book Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You. What’s new in 2023? What has been deleted from previous manuscripts? And what lessons have we learned since the last edition was published just over five years ago? Of particular interest to me were questions that I had about the preferred architecture and design of Free Private Cities along with Free Cities culture, ethics, and a rundown of the main innovations that have emerged since the last book was released. We end the show by discussing the COVID pandemic and how Titus predicts that a Free Private City operator would respond to something similar were it to occur in the future. If you’re interested in the other two podcasts I’ve recorded with Titus, try ⁠episode 036⁠ for a deep dive into medieval city-states and ⁠episode 034⁠ for a broader discussion about the movement in general. --- # Natalie Danelishen — Twitter, Homeschooling & Ending the Fed URL: https://free-cities.org/natalie-danelishen-twitter-homeschooling-ending-the-fed Free Cities Podcast, episode 49 Published: 2023-10-27 Guest: Natalie Danelishen Host: Timothy Allen Topics: alternative-education “We need to be creating free societies across the world. What was it that Hans-Hermann Hoppe said? We need thousands of Liechtensteins'”. We do need more of this across the world. You want to be able to run into your president at the local grocery store. That’s my opinion on it. We need more smaller communities that are free across the world.” This week on the podcast I’ve got another episode for you from Liberty In Our Lifetime and it’s a light-hearted chat I had with one of the newest additions to the Free Cities Foundation’s team, Natalie Danelishen. I need to confess something before you listen. When we originally arranged to record this conversation a few weeks ago, the only free slot Natalie had in her busy conference schedule was the 2-hour window immediately after she arrived in Prague, so she ended up coming directly to my studio from the airport and from, what had turned out to be a rather long and sleepless 28-hour journey from the USA. Between the bouts of propping her eyes open with matchsticks, we did eventually manage to hone in on a number of topics in our chat. From Ron Paul, the Mises Institute and her mission to end the Fed, to homeschooling, inflation, and how to win on Elon’s new Twitter platform when, like her, you’re trying to spread ideas of freedom and liberty. It was lucky for me that Natalie’s such a good sport. If truth be told, most other people I know wouldn’t have been so polite on that little sleep, so thanks for coming on and I look forward to part two sometime in the not-to-distant future. Lastly, just to remind you all the Free Cities Foundation has published three new books in the last few weeks. There’s an updated version of Titus Gebel’s book Free Private Cities that has six new chapters including updates and lessons learnt from the movement so far. There is also Alex Voss’s new book Strategies for Liberty: Free Cities and Bitcoin and finally, Calvin Dukes’s Entrepreneurial Communitites – An alternative to the State. All of these books are a fantastic read and can be found on our website and Amazon.⁠ --- # Mason — Free Cities at Sea URL: https://free-cities.org/mason-free-cities-at-sea Free Cities Podcast, episode 48 Published: 2023-10-21 Guest: Mason Host: Timothy Allen Topics: seasteading About: https://free-cities.org/projects/atlas-island I’m not trying to reinvent anything here. I’m just trying to bring together existing ideas and use them in a reasonable a legal and a practical manner to achieve freedom as quickly as possible.” Today on the podcast I present to you the first episode recorded at Liberty in Our Lifetime 2024. I had a number of conversations on my bucket list for the conference and one of those was speaking to somebody about Seasteading, something that I was fortunate enough to do on two separate occasions. One of those was with Joe Quirk, the President of the Seasteading Institute and the other was with today’s guest Mason, the brains behind Atlas Island, a project planning to create sovereign cities at sea. Now, I feel that I should preface this show with a small plea to you all to forgive me for thinking out loud a fair bit in this episode. Those of you who follow the pod will know that my preferred style of investigation is very much to find out about things in real life from real people, something that I believe allows you the listener to join me as I work this stuff out in real-time. So, if you’re a hardened Seasteader then there may not be anything new for you here, but if, like me, you have a very specific set of beliefs about the viability of Free Cities in the ocean then I invite you to join me as I get me mind well and truly educated. Mason is a great ambassador for both Seasteading and the Free Cities movement as a whole and I can guarantee you that this is the first conversation of many as this project evolves in the coming months and years. --- # Nik Oraevsky — Bitcoin Predictions, CBDCs & Global Citizenship URL: https://free-cities.org/nik-oraevsky-bitcoin-predictions-cbdcs-global-citizenship Free Cities Podcast, episode 47 Published: 2023-10-13 Guest: Nik Oraevsky Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Today on the podcast I had a fascinating discussion about monetary and personal sovereignty with Bitcoin Reserve CEO, Nik Oraevsky. Nik wasn’t always a Bitcoin OG but his background in traditional finance has helped him to navigate the perilous regulatory environment surrounding the foundation and running of a Bitcoin company. As a result, he has excellent insights into the emerging world of cryptocurrency and freedom tech and indeed how to best protect yourself from the barriers to freedom that he sees coming. In this conversation, we discuss Bitcoin regulation, the war on cash, the impending bifurcated economy, carbon scores and CBDCs, universal basic income, A.I., prepping, digital nomadism, global citizenship, and emerging governance models. I also get to ask an expert in the field: ”Is Bitcoin necessary for a Free City to thrive?” Spoiler alert: Nik’s answer might not be what you expect. --- # Daniel Prince — Choosing a Parallel Life, Self-Directed Education & Bitcoin URL: https://free-cities.org/daniel-prince-choosing-a-parallel-life-self-directed-education-bitcoin Free Cities Podcast, episode 46 Published: 2023-10-07 Guest: Daniel Prince Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, alternative-education Today’s guest on the podcast is the long-time Bitcoiner and friend of the Free Cities Foundation, Daniel Prince. Daniel, is the host of the Once Bitten Podcast which is one of the biggest and best-known in the Bitcoin space. He is also (thankfully for us) going to be the MC at our Free Cities conference this year, so I thought it would be a good idea to drop an episode in which I got to pick his brains for a couple of hours before you all get to meet him in person next week in Prague. In this episode, we dive down a number of rabbit holes, but most notably we discuss the education system, vitamins, niacin, homeschooling, unschooling, nutrition and, since we are both family men, there’s also a fair bit of banter on the subject of bringing up well-adjusted kids and traveling with your family. Enjoy the episode. --- # Patrick Lamson-Hall & Nuria Forques — Designing a Free City from Scratch URL: https://free-cities.org/patrick-lamson-hall-nuria-forques-designing-a-free-city-from-scratch Free Cities Podcast, episode 45 Published: 2023-09-30 Guest: Patrick Lamson-Hall & Nuria Forques Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes, urban-design About: https://free-cities.org/projects/ciudad-morazan Today’s podcast is a discussion with two city planners who designed a Free City from scratch. Patrick Lamson-Hall and Nuria Forques are a husband-and-wife team whose firm, Fitted Projects was commissioned to design the Honduran ZEDE community of Ciudad Morazán, the second ZEDE established in Honduras after Próspera. While Próspera primarily focused on technological innovation and connecting Honduras with international business, Morazán was designed as more of a ‘blue-collar ZEDE,’ targeting working-class and middle-class residents primarily from Honduras. Patrick and Nuria have much to share about the design, implementation, and future of Free City projects. It was phenomenal to sit down with two individuals who possess such in-depth, hands-on experience in manifesting these innovative ideas in real life. This conversation was recorded during the ‘New Cities & Network States’ weekend at Zuzalu, the so-called pop-up city gathering in Montenegro. With many of the talks and presentations fresh in our minds, we ended up dissecting various projects within the Free Cities ecosystem and discussed how the movement as a whole might best progress in the coming years. --- # Josh & Zach Harvey — Homesteading, Low Time Preference & Moving to Portugal URL: https://free-cities.org/josh-zach-harvey-homesteading-low-time-preference-moving-to-portugal Free Cities Podcast, episode 44 Published: 2023-09-23 Guest: Josh & Zach Harvey Host: Timothy Allen “No one person knows how to make a pencil. No one person has the resources to make a pencil. You need the chainsaws and the fuel and the mining for the metals to make the chainsaws. It turns out that to actually feed yourself, you don’t need all those different people. All you need is a little bit of grass and a lamb. And the lamb makes more lambs. With the way we’re doing regenerative agriculture, we don’t use any external inputs. We don’t use herbicides, we don’t use fertiliser. We actually don’t need anything from the outside world.“ Today’s podcast is a conversation I had in Portugal with a couple of Bitcoin OGs by the names of Josh and Zack Harvey. The two brothers were responsible for creating the first ever prototype bitcoin ATM way back in 2013, an endeavour that has given rise to their market leading company ⁠Lamassu⁠, currently supplying Bitcoin ATMs all over the globe. More recently they have embarked on a inspiring regenerative agriculture project in their adoptive country of Portugal and this conversation helps to reveal some of their motivations and inspirations for not only moving across the world to a foreign country but also for immersing themselves in an experimental farming project. Something that is made all the more unusual by the fact that neither have any previous experience in that field at all. There’s plenty of advice here if you are thinking about embarking on a food sovereignty project of your own or moving to Portugal which, as you will hear has many benefits for those looking to move countries in search of a better life. --- # Pavol Lupták — Global Opportunists, Parallel Societies & Crypto Anarchy URL: https://free-cities.org/pavol-luptak-global-opportunists-parallel-societies-crypto-anarchy Free Cities Podcast, episode 43 Published: 2023-09-15 Guest: Pavol Lupták Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities This week on the podcast I’m speaking with Pavol Lupták. Pavol is someone who I’ve been trying to talk to for quite a while. So many people have mentioned his name to me but he had thus far proved to be a pretty elusive guy on account of the fact that he is (amongst other things) a perpetual traveler. Fortunately for me, I bumped into him at BTC Prague where his company Liberation Travel had a stand next to the Free Cities Foundation bureau, and I managed to sit down with him for a couple of hours to delve a bit deeper into his fascinating life. Pavol has been involved in the crypto anarchy scene in Prague for many years. As the founder of both an ethical hacking IT security company and Prague’s Paralelni Polis, arguably one of the world’s most infamous Bitcoin and crypto anarchy hubs, he has a unique perspective on the ins and outs of creating parallel systems and opting out of mainstream structures. In fact, Liberation Travel’s sole purpose is to help freedom-minded people to leave oppressive situations and relocate to a better jurisdiction or become what Pavol calls a ‘Global Opportunist’. Interestingly, something I didn’t know before this conversation was that Pavol has been visiting intentional communities and Free Cities projects for quite some time already, conducting personal research on different governance models. Look out for a couple of interesting projects mentioned in this conversation that I’d never heard of before and don’t forget that you can meet Pavol and all our other speakers in person in Prague in a few weeks time at our ‘Liberty in Our Lifetime’ conference. --- # Kosta Korenkov & Albina Tokarchuk — Digital Nomads Buying Property in Montelibero URL: https://free-cities.org/kosta-korenkov-albina-tokarchuk-digital-nomads-buying-property-in-montelibero Free Cities Podcast, episode 42 Published: 2023-09-09 Guest: Kosta Korenkov & Albina Tokarchuk Host: Timothy Allen Topics: intentional-communities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/montelibero This week on the podcast it’s another dispatch from my recent visit to Montenegro. I was visiting Montelibero which is a fascinating project that resides firmly within the ‘intentional community’ band of the Free Cities spectrum. For the most part, comprised of Russian libertarians, Montelibero has a tight-knit community with land and buildings in Montenegro as well as its own currency and decentralised governance system. If you want to take a deeper dive into the project you can check out our free communities directory at free-communities.org or pop on over to episode 29 of the Free Cities Podcast for a 3hr conversation with one of Montelibero’s longer standing members. In this week’s episode, I am speaking to a digitally nomadic couple who have taken the plunge and bought one of the newly constructed apartments in the so-called ‘MTL City’ which is Montelibero’s initial block of building land. Kosta Korenkov & Albina Tokarchuk have been digital nomads for over 10 years and this conversation is not only an interesting look into the motivations of people who choose to join an intentional community but also a fascinating peek into the lives of two traveling software developers. We discuss the process of buying property in Montelibero, as well as setting up visas, bank accounts, and the internet along with Kosta and Albina’s tips for setting yourself up as a digital nomad. What are the best jobs to get and where are the best countries to base yourself? All in all, this was an excellent conversation full of useful information and inspiration that might help you to vote with your feet and find the jurisdiction that will be best for you. --- # Niko Laamanen — Leaderless Organisations, Moving to Madeira & Bitcoin Adoption URL: https://free-cities.org/niko-laamanen-leaderless-organisations-moving-to-madeira-bitcoin-adoption Free Cities Podcast, episode 41 Published: 2023-09-01 Guest: Niko Laamanen Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities I haven’t seen that anywhere else.“ This week on the podcast it’s another dispatch from my recent visit to BTC Prague. My guest is Niko Laamanen, a Finnish gentleman who left an unfulfilling life as a construction engineer to start a publishing house specialising in the dissemination of content promoting ideas of freedom and liberty in all its myriad forms, or in Niko’s own words, “Stuff you don’t really learn at school but maybe you should.” Konsensus Network, as it is called, is a project that was born out of the emerging Bitcoin movement and has grown and evolved in a way characterised by the traits of what is known as a ‘starfish organization’: a leaderless, open-source network of collaborators. You can hear more on that fascinating concept from Niko in our conversation along with discussions about digital nomadism, ‘escaping the matrix,’ the importance of books and content curation, as well as Niko’s views on the progress of worldwide Bitcoin adoption and why he chose to move to the Portuguese island of Madeira, which has become somewhat of a Bitcoiner hotspot in recent times. --- # Casey Given — Guiding the Free Cities Narrative URL: https://free-cities.org/casey-given-guiding-the-free-cities-narrative Free Cities Podcast, episode 40 Published: 2023-08-26 Guest: Casey Given Host: Timothy Allen “Showing the bottom up potential of Free Cities is tremendous. I think of the brilliant Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto who talks about dead capital and how there’s knowledge distributed throughout the world. There are geniuses living in poor countries all over the world, but oftentimes they’re not able to really make much of their lives because of their dead capital, because their institutions don’t allow entrepreneurs to realise their potential. Not just for themselves, but for their communities and for the world. So many great inventions could be made that poor institutions are suppressing. So I think that really emphasising that kind of opportunistic, social mobility messaging is what can make Free Cities really thrive.“ This week on the podcast I had an excellent conersation with Casey Given. Casey is the president and executive director of Young Voices which is a nonprofit agency that aims to cultivate the next generation of libertarian thought leaders in policy, journalism, and academia, or as Casey himself describes it, “A talent agency for heterodox thinkers”. Casey has an interesting connection with the Free Cities movement through his undergrad student days and UC Berkley where he hosted a number of prominent seasteaders at the university’s libertarian club which he founded. In this conversation, we discuss Young Voices’s strategy for creating change in the media, both the legacy version and the new media landscape of soundbites and social influencers. I’m also lucky enough to get some excellent advice from Casey on the best way to get the Free Cities narrative out there and into the mainstream. All in all, this is a great conversation if, like me, you are sincerely interested in having a direct impact on hearts and minds. Many thanks to Casey for being so candid and accommodating with his time. --- # Rahim Taghizadegan — Bitcoin Citadels, Geopolitics & CBDCs URL: https://free-cities.org/rahim-taghizadegan-bitcoin-citadels-geopolitics-cbdcs Free Cities Podcast, episode 39 Published: 2023-08-18 Guest: Rahim Taghizadegan Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Rahim Taghizadegan is an Austrian economist who is actually from Austria, which somehow makes the phrase feel newly literal. He is also a philosopher, founder of Scholarium in Vienna, a long-time thinker in the Free Cities world, and one of those rare guests who can move from Bitcoin memes to medieval city-states, family life, capital mobility and the collapse of political reform without ever losing the thread. In this episode of the Free Cities Podcast, host Timothy Allen sits down with Rahim to talk about Citadel Garden, his deliberately quiet network of semi-private refuges for families who want more options before they need them. The conversation begins with the Bitcoin citadel meme: its origin as a warning about rich Bitcoiners withdrawing from society, and its later transformation into something more useful. For Rahim, the important point is not the fortress. It is exit. Bitcoin matters because it gives people mobile capital, and mobile capital gives people choices. The heart of the episode is the difference between voice and exit. Rahim argues that politics is overrated, reform is mostly a distraction, and the real hope for liberty lies in mobility of people, mobility of capital, and practical optionality. This is not a utopian vision. It is not a rendered dream city or a perfect jurisdiction waiting to be discovered. It is a sober response to a world where Western Europe is tightening, exit taxes are spreading, real estate is becoming a liability, and families are discovering that freedom is easy to talk about but hard to practise when children, homes, schools and memories are involved. Then the conversation turns to what Rahim is actually building. Citadel Garden is not a commune, not an ecovillage, and not a public-facing sales pitch. It is a network of small, family-oriented locations, beginning in Europe, designed as beautiful, useful, semi-private places where children can roam, parents can work, and members can quietly build a Plan B. The model draws on Spencer MacCallum’s idea of proprietary communities, Bitcoin-backed ownership, and the insight that the safest future may not be one grand escape, but a set of modest, well-chosen options. Exit is more powerful than voice because voice asks permission. Exit gives you somewhere else to go. Key topics: Rahim Taghizadegan, Austrian economics and the Scholarium in Vienna, Bitcoin citadels, the time-traveller meme and why the meaning changed, Exit versus voice, and why complaining is weaker than optionality, Bitcoin as mobile capital rather than a get-rich fantasy, Why the best hope for liberty is mobility of people and capital, The nation-state trap of house, mortgage, job, tax and dependency, Why Rahim thinks politics is overrated, Family as the real constraint on exit and location independence, Switzerland, Zug and the last fragments of old European jurisdictional competition, Why Western Europe is becoming a trap for entrepreneurs and capital, Exit taxes, non-dom changes and shrinking jurisdictional options, Timothy’s UK house, family roots and the emotional cost of leaving, Real estate as liability, especially when governments need new sources of tax, Why Rahim would not sell Bitcoin for real estate, Bitcoin reserves, Swiss custody, Lombard credit and shorting the euro, Citadel Garden as a network of small, semi-private family refuges, Istria, Croatia and the first Citadel Garden location, Why children need safe places to roam without helicopter parenting, Proprietary communities and Spencer MacCallum’s influence, Why communes and intentional communities usually fail, Bitcoin-backed shares, co-ownership and practical access to multiple locations, Privacy as a prerequisite for liberty, Being a tourist versus being a resident, Plan B thinking without utopian fantasy, Veritas Villages, off-grid living and Bitcoin-friendly homes, Próspera and the wider Free Cities movement --- # Raphaël Lima — Radical Ideas, Brazilian Free Cities & Digital Nomadism URL: https://free-cities.org/raphael-lima-radical-ideas-brazilian-free-cities-digital-nomadism Free Cities Podcast, episode 38 Published: 2023-08-11 Guest: Raphaël Lima Host: Timothy Allen Topics: residency-and-citizenship On the podcast this week we have a conversation with one of our Free Cities Foundation esteemed ambassadors by the name of Raphael Lima. Raphael is what I would call a Libertarian Influencer. In his home country of Brazil, his daily YouTube show Ideias Radicais has over 650k subscribers. He is also the founder of both the Free Market Institute in Brazil and ⁠settee.io⁠ which is a company that in their own words ‘helps our customers to live and do business without borders’… in other words, they help people move around the globe to jurisdictions that treat them better. In our discussion, we touch upon all aspects of Raphaël’s work in promoting the ideas of libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism, and Free Cities. From the importance of getting your ideas out there at a grassroots level by telling relatable stories to the common person, to having a robust plan to bring ideas of liberty into the political mainstream in Brazil, a country which, I have heard from a number of people recently, currently houses the biggest Libertarian movement in the world. This is one for the digital nomads amongst you as well since I get to dive into Raphaël’s list of top places to relocate to in 2023. --- # Andreas Hellmann — Big Government, Tax Policy & The Free Market URL: https://free-cities.org/andreas-hellmann-big-government-tax-policy-the-free-market Free Cities Podcast, episode 37 Published: 2023-08-04 Guest: Andreas Hellmann Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics On the podcast this week we’re back in Lisbon for a brief conversation I had with Andreas Hellman who I managed to intercept just before he went on stage at LibertyCon. Andreas is the director of outreach, tax, and regulatory policy at Tholos Foundation which is the international arm of Americans for Tax Reform. As a passionate advocate for the free market Andreas speaks critically of the workings of big government and its tax policies. We discuss questions such as: Why do governments keep getting larger? What would be the optimum size for a government? Where do government policies do the most harm? How much should we pay for governance? Andreas also reveals the implications of Free City models of large intergovernmental ‘tax harmonization’, a term straight out of the playbook of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth in my opinion. --- # Titus Gebel — Medieval City-States URL: https://free-cities.org/titus-gebel-medieval-city-states Free Cities Podcast, episode 36 Published: 2023-07-28 Guest: Titus Gebel Host: Timothy Allen Topics: history-of-free-cities On the podcast this week I’m back with Titus Gebel for another conversation and the subject of our discussion this time is medieval city-states. Titus is of course very knowledgeable about governance models from this time in history and we spend our time exploring the rise and fall of free imperial city models and what it might have been like to live within such a system. We also look for inspiration from the past to discover if there are any lessons that we may be able to learn from these historical Free Cities in order to apply them to their modern-day incarnations. --- # Pierre Corbin — The Great Reset URL: https://free-cities.org/pierre-corbin-the-great-reset Free Cities Podcast, episode 35 Published: 2023-07-19 Guest: Pierre Corbin Host: Timothy Allen Topics: technology-in-new-cities, taxation-and-economics Back in March, I visited Warsaw for the Weekend Kapitalizmu conference, and fortunately for me, at the same time, the world’s first-ever Bitcoin film festival was also happening just around the corner. So, of course, I took the opportunity to meet as many of the film directors in attendance as I could and managed to record a number of interesting interviews for the podcast, of which this will be the first. Pierre Corbin is a film director and co-founder of the festival who was also showing his latest film at the event. Titled ‘The Great Reset and the Rise of Bitcoin’, this conversation with Pierre is a deep dive into the film which reflects his ideas and observations of the current macroeconomic situation that we all find ourselves in. Some of the many subjects touched upon in this discussion include The gold standard, Venetian war bonds, Ming dynasty hyperinflation, debt cycles, social networks, Chat GPT, CBDCs, AI, UBI, and the IMF. Apparently, if you love acronyms, you’re going to love this episode. So stay tuned! I will also take this opportunity to remind you that we are also hosting our own festival this year. So jump on over to libertyinourlifetime.org to secure your tickets to the Free Cities Foundation’s conference taking place in Prague this October. In the meantime, enjoy the conversation. --- # Titus Gebel — Breaking the Political Cycle URL: https://free-cities.org/titus-gebel-breaking-the-political-cycle Free Cities Podcast, episode 34 Published: 2023-07-12 Guest: Titus Gebel Host: Timothy Allen Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance, history-of-free-cities So you have to change the system… And I have made a proposal on how to do that.” It’s another of my discussions from Montenegro again this week on the podcast and this time it’s part one of two conversations I had with none other than the Founder and President of the Free Cities Foundation himself, Titus Gebel. Now, since most of you will know who Titus is I will keep this intro brief. Obviously, he has done many interviews before so I tried my best to keep this conversation away from the usual Free Private Cities talking points and delve a little deeper into the history of different city-state models and their modern-day incarnations. I also got to probe a little into Titus’s own history and motivations as well as some of his predictions for the future of the idea that government should be a service. We recorded together on two separate occasions and part two of this conversation will be a deep dive into medieval city-states which is a discussion I’ve been pining to have for many months now, so look out for that one over the next few weeks. --- # David D. Friedman — Asteroid Colonies, Medieval Cooking & Romani Law URL: https://free-cities.org/david-d-friedman-asteroid-colonies-medieval-cooking-romany-law Free Cities Podcast, episode 33 Published: 2023-07-07 Guest: David D. Friedman Host: Timothy Allen Topics: private-governance “Developing the technologies that would let people live in space habitats.. it’s not trivial, but it’s a whole lot easier than colonising a planet when you’ve got to get down and up. If we could get to the planet for free. I mean, if we had cheap transportation, if you had teleportation or something, then colonising Mars becomes an interesting project.“ Today’s guest on the podcast needs no introduction. He is an esteemed economist, legal scholar, and libertarian thinker who has for many, redefined their understanding of individual liberty and the dynamics of human society. But did you know he was also a connoisseur of medieval cooking? Well, you’re about to find out as I sit down for an hour with David Friedman. As you would expect our conversation makes many twists and turns and we cover a fair bit of ground. From the intricacies of Romani legal codes and the judicial system in 10th century Iceland to the conversational faux pas one might encounter in a 21st-century Bardic circle and even, ‘What are the most feasible governance models that could be employed on an asteroid colony?’. Plus, as you will hear, David is quite candid when it comes to expressing his concerns with the Free Cities model. This podcast was recorded in a room full of people, so listen out for cameos by David’s daughter Rebecca and FCF’s Peter Young. --- # Andreas Baumgartner — Negotiating With Governments, Lifestyle Zones & Digital Nomadism URL: https://free-cities.org/andreas-baumgartner-negotiating-with-governments-lifestyle-zones-digital-nomadism Free Cities Podcast, episode 32 Published: 2023-06-30 Guest: Andreas Baumgartner Host: Timothy Allen Topics: special-economic-zones, private-governance The podcast is back in Montenegro again this week with a conversation I recorded at the pop-up city of Zuzalu. I’m talking with a gentleman who has very deep ties to the Free Cities movement, working as he does in the economic development space. His name is Andreas Baumgartner and he has spent the last 25 years working in the political and legal side of the space with the likes of The Metis Institute, Tipolis and Praxis to name but a few. Andreas has a wealth of practical knowledge on the nuts and bolts of actually negotiating with governments during the establishment and running of Special Economic Zones and semi-autonomous jurisdictions, which is somewhat of a rare occurrence in my experience due to the emergent nature of the whole Free Cities ecosystem. In our conversation he is keen to emphasise the importance of trying to work with host governments and highlights the strategies he has learnt to employ when approaching them. He also comments on the current limitations we are facing with particular reference to the process of incentivising different demographics to move to new jurisdictions. This is a fascinating and informative discussion. The first of many I hope as this movement continues to evolve. Andreas doesn’t just talk the talk, he very much walks the walk as well and I appreciate that about him very much. --- # Thomas Walker-Werth — Free City Planning, Frontier Governance & Colonising Outer Space URL: https://free-cities.org/thomas-walker-werth-free-city-planning-frontier-governance-colonising-outer-space Free Cities Podcast, episode 31 Published: 2023-06-23 Guest: Thomas Walker-Werth Host: Timothy Allen Topics: private-governance, urban-design “I wrote an article trying to apply John Locke’s principles of property to something like Mars. His basic principle is that if you mix your labour with a natural resource then you own the result. It’s the same moral principle that Ayn Rand identified that you have a right to the product of your productive effort. So if you go to Mars, and you start making a bit of Martian land valuable and turning that natural desert into something productive like a city or a mining operation, then you should own that. That doesn’t mean that reaching Mars means you own the entire planet, it just means you own the bit of it that you made useful.“ Today’s podcast was one of my favourite interviews from our recent trip to LibertyCon in Lisbon during which I was fortunate enough to get time to speak with Thomas Walker Werth. Thomas is an associate editor at The Objective Standard and a former town planner in the UK which means he has much to say about the designing and organising of Free Cities. During our conversation we take a deep dive into the reality of what it’s actually like planning a town as well as making some predictions about the prospect of designing places to live in outer space, particularly Mars. Thomas has uniquely informed opinions on the morality and practice of governance in these future frontiers which, prior to our conversation was not something I had ever thought about. Other topics covered include: New urbanism, 15 minute cities, post modernism, flying cars, environmentalism, collectivism and we discuss the role that Elon Musk might play in the future of alternative governance models. I loved this conversation. Full of facts and figures and intelligent observations. I feel as if I learnt alot and I hope that you too will get to take away as much as I did. --- # Knut Svanholm — Seafaring, Praxeology & Bitcoin Spirituality URL: https://free-cities.org/knut-svanholm-seafaring-praxeology-bitcoin-spirituality Free Cities Podcast, episode 30 Published: 2023-06-16 Guest: Knut Svanholm Host: Timothy Allen Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities This week the podcast is coming from Prague and I’m talking with one of our esteemed ambassadors here at the Free Cities Foundation who is also a very well known member of the Bitcoin community by the name of Knut Svanholm. Knut is a former sea captain turned Bitcoin author/philosopher. He’s written a number of well-known Bitcoin books including ‘Sovereignty & Independence’, ‘Everything Divided by 21 Million’, and his latest work, ‘Praxeology: The invisible hand that feeds you’. Now, this is a pretty long and meandering conversation and there’s a fair amount of thinking out loud going on, so I hope you can bear with us. A vast array of subjects are covered, including Bitcoin, praxeology, human action, governance models, life on the sea, monetary history, central planning, eduaction, universal basic income, military history, religion, spirituality and we get to answer the age-old question: ‘Is Bitcoin is a cult?’. Next week, amongst other things, I’ll be discussing city planning with Thomas Walker-Werth and trying to get to the bottom of the idiosyncracies of building Free Cities in the final frontier: outer space. --- # Jose Birkin — Montelibero, Libertarian Governance & Tokenomics URL: https://free-cities.org/jose-birkin-montelibero Free Cities Podcast, episode 29 Published: 2023-06-09 Guest: Jose Birkin Host: Timothy Allen Topics: intentional-communities, technology-in-new-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/montelibero “This is one of the things that we are proud of: We built a road under anarcho-capitalsm. Who’s going to build the roads? We are going to build the roads! This is the living proof that the system works. We, libertarians, are responsible for our own land.” This week the podcast is coming from Montenegro and I’m talking with with a pseudonymous gentleman by the name of Jose Birkin. This conversation was my first in Montenegro within the Montelibero community. Montelibero is an intentional community of mostly Russian-speaking libertarians that appears in our Free Communities Directory. Myself and Peter Young traveled there last month on a fact-finding mission to see what kind of progress is being made in their quest to become ‘A role model of liberty in practice in Montenegro’. Due to its decentralised nature, there are no spokespeople as such who can speak on behalf of the community as a whole but one individual who goes by the name of Jose Birkin (not his real name, of course) stepped up to answer my questions about the ins and outs of running a start-up intentional community such as this. A quick word of warning before you dive in. For an hour or so we ended up talking quite intensely about the blockchain tokenomics system that the community uses to transact internally, track ownership of land titles and make community decisions etc, and this part of the conversation may become a little tedious for some of you since I was not of the opinion that one needs to use a blockchain in this situation. As a result I did rather labour the point somewhat in order to get the whole thing straight in my head. Long and short of it is, whilst I still think that their solution is not necessarily a good long-term one, I now understand their reasons for choosing it. Other than that, we talk about the history of the community, the pros and cons of building in Montenegro and how the community functions without having any one person in charge. I also get to ask the question “Who will build the roads?” which is always a pleasure, so look out for that one and look out also in the future for more interviews that I conducted whilst I was there with further residents of Montelibero who have either bought land or property there. Montelibero is an exciting experiment and I thoroughly enjoyed my time there and I would like to offer another big thank you to the community who welcomed us with open arms during our time in the country. --- # Marek Tatała — Economic Freedom URL: https://free-cities.org/marek-tatala-economic-freedom Free Cities Podcast, episode 28 Published: 2023-06-02 Guest: Marek Tatała Host: Timothy Allen Topics: taxation-and-economics This week the podcast is back in Warsaw again and I’m talking with with a Polish gentleman by the name of Marek Tatała. Marek is the VP of the Economic Freedom Foundation which is a Polish grant giving organisation in a similar vein to Atlas Network. Alongside funding relevant projects, they also work on advocacy and political lobbying, believing in any way that bridges can be built to help integrate free market and classical liberal ideals into general society. Our discussion revolves around the work of the foundation and we touch upon many related subjects including the decentralisation of nation states, Polish political trends, global free market success stories and whether or not membership to the EU is a net benefit or not. --- # Federico Fernández — Liberating Innovation URL: https://free-cities.org/federico-fernandez-liberating-innovation Free Cities Podcast, episode 27 Published: 2023-05-26 Guest: Federico Fernández Host: Timothy Allen Topics: technology-in-new-cities This week the podcast is back in Lisbon again and I’m talking with with a gentleman by the name of Federico Fernández. Federico is the CEO of Somos Innovación also known as We Are Innovation, which is a network of more than 30 think tanks based in Latin America and Europe dedicated to promoting progress through innovation, the adoption of new technologies and human creativity. Unsurprisingly, the main focus of our discussion is innovation in all of its many incarnations. We examine the eternal struggle between regulation and innovation and dive into some of Federico’s opinions on inventive governance models, in particular Estonia and its innovative e-governance system. --- # Gabriel Delgado — Próspera Update URL: https://free-cities.org/gabriel-delgado-prospera-update Free Cities Podcast, episode 26 Published: 2023-05-19 Guest: Gabriel Delgado Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Timothy Allen speaks with Gabriel Delgado, co-founder and Chief Development Officer of Próspera, recorded at Zuzalu – Vitalik Buterin’s experimental two-month pop-up city in Montenegro — in May 2023. This was the first of two long-form conversations with Gabe on the show. The second, recorded three years later from inside Próspera itself, covers what happened next – and everything Gabe was promising in this conversation now exists. At the time of recording, Próspera had roughly a thousand residents and three hundred registered companies, but the political situation was bleak. The socialist government of Xiomara Castro had declared the destruction of the ZEDE framework its top political priority, using the project as what Gabe calls a “piñata” – a distraction device beaten publicly whenever the administration needed to redirect attention from domestic problems. Gabe put the odds of reaching an agreement with the government at ten percent. He explains why they chose to fight anyway. Gabe’s journey to Próspera involved four attempts at governance reform over more than a decade: one failed initiative in Guatemala, two in Honduras that collapsed before launch (including one where they had land, a master plan, money down, and a signed MOU with the government), and finally Próspera, which he and co-founder Erick Brimen launched in 2017 under the ZEDE organic law. He invokes Tolkien’s concept of “the long defeat” – the idea that you keep fighting even when you believe you’re losing, because it’s the right thing to do. That was the mood in 2023. On the ground, the conversation provides a detailed snapshot of early-stage city building: the Beta building fully operational and out of space, the 82-unit Duna tower nearing completion, the Circular Factory (a robotic cross-laminated timber workshop that cuts building components to be assembled on-site), plans for drone delivery to the tower rooftop via Ecuadorian startup Area Loop, and early traction in the biomedical and longevity space. Gabe also lays out the legal position as it stood in 2023. Honduras Próspera Inc., registered in Delaware, had activated the arbitration clauses in the US-Honduras bilateral treaty CAFTA, filing a case valued at over ten billion dollars – a figure derived from the 50-year legal stability agreement and the projected future value of the investment. He describes a government unwilling to meet, a diplomatic channel that had produced nothing in a year of attempts, and a team that had decided to lean into its legal protections rather than retreat. The most important passage is the core hypothesis behind the entire project: if Próspera can become the zero-to-one proof of concept – a functioning, prosperous special economic zone with private governance – then other countries in the region will have no choice but to respond through competition. Rather than reforming from within systems where incentives are hopelessly misaligned, you build the working example next door and let competitive pressure do the rest. --- # Jacek Spendel — Libertarian Advocacy URL: https://free-cities.org/jacek-spendel-libertarian-advocacy Free Cities Podcast, episode 25 Published: 2023-05-12 Guest: Jacek Spendel Host: Timothy Allen Topics: residency-and-citizenship Jacek is the President of Liberty International which I’m told is the oldest organisation promoting libertarianism worldwide. In this conversation we discuss the work of Liberty International as well as Jacek’s views on libertarianism, travel, Free Cities and the future of self-sovereignty. Jacek has an optimistic view of the world, something that we wholeheartedly endorse here at the Free Cities Foundation. It’s incredibly encouraging to hear from so many different people and organisations working towards the same goals of freedom and personal liberty. Don’t forget that tickets for our conference in Prague this October are on sale now at libertyinourlifetime.org And if you want to get a good sense of what it’s like to attend, check out the featured video at the top our YouTube channel @FreeCitiesFoundation which was shot during last year’s event. In the meantime, enjoy the conversation. --- # Matt & Terry Kibbe — Reaching Hearts & Minds URL: https://free-cities.org/matt-terry-kibbe-reaching-hearts-minds Free Cities Podcast, episode 24 Published: 2023-05-05 Guest: Matt & Terry Kibbe Host: Timothy Allen Matt and Terry Kibbe are the founders of Free the People which is an educational foundation charged with the mission of tuning in the next generation to the core values of personal liberty and peaceful cooperation. I met them both in Lisbon where they were speaking at LibertyCon and were it not for both of our incredibly strict schedules over that weekend, I would have happily spoken to them for much longer since they have such a wealth of experience in the worlds of both legacy and new media. In our conversation we mainly discuss the current media landscape and what might be the best tools and strategies for communicating our message to the hearts and minds of people in today’s highly volatile world. The marketplace of ideas has never been more universally accessible than it is at this time in history and Terry and Matt are most certainly amongst those at the sharp end of the wedge when it comes to communicating ideas of Liberty and freedom. --- # Kris Kaleta — Manifesting Community URL: https://free-cities.org/kris-kaleta-manifesting-community Free Cities Podcast, episode 23 Published: 2023-04-28 Guest: Kris Kaleta Host: Timothy Allen Topics: network-states Kris is a digital nomad and technologist who is, amongst other things, doing some absolutely fascinating post-graduate research on virtual libertarian communities. Our conversation touches on many aspects of his work from digital politics to emerging governance models and the contemporary phenomenon of online communities manifesting in real life. Kris has been a keen observer of the Free Cities movement since the start so he has a lot of great insights into the future of what many are calling the emerging free market of living together. Thanks for listening to us. It’s incredibly inspiring for me to watch our listener numbers growing steadily. Don’t forget to reach out if you have and ideas or suggestions for the podcast. I’d love to hear your opinions. If you would like to listen to us on YouTube, you can also find the podcast here. --- # Mikołaj Pisarski — Mises for the Masses URL: https://free-cities.org/mikolaj-pisarski-mises-for-the-masses Free Cities Podcast, episode 22 Published: 2023-04-21 Guest: Mikołaj Pisarski Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast I am talking with Mikołaj Pisarski in the third interview from our series recorded in Warsaw. Mikołaj is the former president of KoLiber Association and the current president of the Instytut Misesa, Poland’s Mises Institute. In this conversation we discover Mikołaj’s love for working with young people and his passion for teaching libertarian principles and the ideas of Austrian economics. We also talk about Polish history, personal responsibility, parenting strategies, and the problems of democracy, as well as a little anarcho-capitalism and technology thrown in for good measure. Don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast on your app of choice. If you would like to listen to us on YouTube, you can find the podcast here. --- # Nikos Sotirakopoulos — Life is Not Suffering URL: https://free-cities.org/nikos-sotirakopoulos-life-is-not-suffering Free Cities Podcast, episode 21 Published: 2023-04-14 Guest: Nikos Sotirakopoulos Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast I am talking with Nikos Sotirakopoulos in the second interview from our series recorded in Warsaw. Nikos is an author, senior lecturer in social sciences at York St John Universtity and director of the European Ayn Rand Institute. Now, i have a problem with this conversation… namely that it is way too short. Nikos is a busy man and I had a strict hour with him in Warsaw. We did, however manage to cover a fair bit of ground in that hour. Brutalist architecture, collectivism vs individualism, the culture wars, Ayn Rand’s philosophy, martial arts, what Jordan Peterson gets wrong, Joe Rogan and the medium of podcasting, political correctness and anti-capitalism, to name but a few of the subjects covered. Nikos is an excellent orator. This kind of conversation leaves me not only well informed but also rejuvenated and I hope that you get to have the same experience too. --- # Tom Palmer — Liberating Prosperity URL: https://free-cities.org/tom-palmer-liberating-prosperity Free Cities Podcast, episode 20 Published: 2023-04-07 Guest: Tom Palmer Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast I am talking with Tom Palmer in the first interview from our series recorded in Warsaw. Tom is an American libertarian author and theorist, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the executive vice president for international programs at Atlas Network. Just prior to recording this episode, Peter Young, The Free Cities Foundation’s Managing Director was chatting with myself and Tom in our makeshift studio in Warsaw and it turned out to be such an interesting discussion that I asked Peter to come onto the podcast with us to further the conversation. As a result, after briefly discussing Tom’s work at Atlas Network, he and Peter end up deconstructing some of the concepts underlying Free Cities and we get a very useful insight into Tom’s thoughts on the general validity of the Free Cities model itself. I would like to say Many thanks to Tom and Peter for making this a lively and interesting dialogue --- # Martin Leskovjan — Parallel Structures URL: https://free-cities.org/martin-leskovjan-parallel-structures Free Cities Podcast, episode 19 Published: 2023-03-31 Guest: Martin Leskovjan Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast I am talking with Martin Leskovjan in the last interview from our series recorded in Prague. Martin is a member of the subversive Czech art collective Ztohoven and co-founder of Paralelni Polis which is one of the collective’s better known projects, also the site of the world’s first bitcoin-only cafe. This is a conversation about art and the power to influence. Ztohoven are a band of merry pranksters with a desire to provoke emotion and open minds and I talk with Martin about many of their projects and whether it is possible to create parallel social structures that can liberate people. Martin is a fascinating and inspiring individual, one of many good people I had the pleasure and privilege to meet in Prague for this series and I sincerely hope you enjoyed the discussions as much as I did. Links for the videos mentioned in the podcast: Article: The official burning of the red boxer shorts. Video Series : He Will Not Divide Us. Enjoy today’s conversation.. --- # Pontus & Ulrika Lindblom — Vote With Your Feet URL: https://free-cities.org/pontus-ulrika-lindblom-buying-property-in-a-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 18 Published: 2023-03-24 Guest: Pontus & Ulrika Lindblom Host: Timothy Allen Topics: residency-and-citizenship This week on the Free Cities Podcast we continue our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my penultimate guests are Pontus and Ulrika Lindblom. Pontus and Ulrika are a family with a fascinating story: a journey around the world searching for liberty that has led them to the point of purchasing a property in Próspera on the island of Roatán in Honduras. I won’t give too much away here, but needless to say, they have an exceptionally 21st-century story that revolves around, amongst other things, digital nomadism, flag theory, and Bitcoin. If living in a Free City project is something you’ve thought about yourself, then today’s guests should be able to offer you a wealth of first-hand experiences of the trials and tribulations faced by a freedom-loving family looking for the best ways to navigate the idiosyncrasies of the times we are all living in. It was great to speak with them both. I very much appreciate people who are actually ‘walking the walk’ in this world. I sincerely hope they can offer some of you the inspiration to get out there and create the change you want to see in the world. I will be in Warsaw for the next seven days, recording interviews that you will be listening to over the next two months on the Free Cities Podcast. I can report that I am only three episodes in, and I have to say that my mind has been blown already on two different occasions, so I am really looking forward to sharing these conversations with you over the coming weeks. Enjoy today’s conversation. --- # Max Hillebrand — The Price of Privacy URL: https://free-cities.org/max-hillebrand-the-price-of-privacy Free Cities Podcast, episode 17 Published: 2023-03-17 Guest: Max Hillebrand Host: Timothy Allen Topics: technology-in-new-cities This week on the Free Cities Podcast we continue our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my next guest is Max Hillebrand. Max is a well-known privacy and Bitcoin activist and CEO of zkSNACKs, the company whose flagship product is the privacy-oriented Bitcoin wallet, Wasabi Wallet. Max spoke in depth about privacy and self-sovereignty at last year’s Liberty in our Lifetime conference and this conversation follows in a similar vein. We begin with a few stories from his time working at Deutsche Bank but the conversation quickly moves on to open source software, Bitcoin and of course privacy. We discuss many of the practical aspects of privacy tech, including how GitHub works, methods for anonymising Bitcoin transactions, blockchain surveillance and the privacy implications of Bitcoin’s lightning network. Max also makes some fascinating predictions about the far distant future of the Bitcoin network – certainly some things that I, for one, had never contemplated before. This conversation gets quite technical at times – apologies in advance if it’s too much for some listeners. I can’t help myself when I get the oportunity to spend 3 hours chatting alone with an expert like Max. He said it best: “You’ve got to scratch your own itch, you know!” I think I agree. Enjoy my scratch. --- # Caroline King — Homeschool Refugees URL: https://free-cities.org/caroline-king-homeschool-refugees Free Cities Podcast, episode 16 Published: 2023-03-10 Guest: Caroline King Host: Timothy Allen Topics: alternative-education This week on the Free Cities Podcast we continue our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my next guest is Caroline King. Today’s despatch is another refugee story of sorts, in a similar vein to my interview with Tom & Emily Lahdenranta, the family of 5 who left Canada due to their government’s pandemic policies. Caroline is a Swedish mother of four living with her husband and family in Prague. They had to leave Sweden in order to be able to homeschool their children on account of the Swedish government’s restrictive policies on self-directed education. This move has taken her on quite a journey including public vilification by the Swedish media who labelled her as “The leader of the anti-school movement”… a somewhat laughable claim as you will discover during the interview. As you would expect, much of this conversation revolves around education, in particular unschooling which can take on many forms as Caroline explains, but we also hear a lot about their experiences as a family of digital nomads which has taken them all over the globe. As a father of three myself, I love talking about different parenting strategies and this conversation with Caroline did not disappoint in any shape or form. If you want to follow up on anything we are discussing here, Caroline has told me that she’s happy for anyone to reach out to her. It’s also worth noting that I initially met Caroline at last year’s Liberty in Our Lifetime conference, which is the Free Cities Foundation’s annual flagship event. --- # Přemysl Bosák — Dispute Resolution URL: https://free-cities.org/premysl-bosak-dispute-resolution Free Cities Podcast, episode 15 Published: 2023-03-03 Guest: Přemysl Bosák Host: Timothy Allen Topics: private-governance This week on the Free Cities Podcast we continue our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my next guest is Přemysl Bosák. Přemysl is the founder of a new dispute resolution platform called Disputio which has an obvious attraction for someone like myself who would prefer to bear the responsibility of resolving my own disputes. In this conversation we discuss the platform and how it works as well as a little about the history and evolution of law including bottom up solutions to legal problems. Přemysl is an anarcho-capitalist so we discuss anarchy and voluntarism as well as transhumanism, epistemology and the resurgence of personal responsibility in contemporary culture. This is my 5th interview from Prague. Coming up will be 3 more touching on subjects from worldschooling to libertarian art and I talk to one family who, amongst other things, have just purchased a property in a Free City in Honduras. Thanks for listening to these conversations. It’s heartening to see the number of subscribers going up steadily each week which makes me happy that our movement is gaining momentum. Please don’t forget to subscribe and leave us a review and thanks in advance for both. --- # Jan Mošovský — Tales of Liberty URL: https://free-cities.org/jan-mosovsky-tales-of-liberty Free Cities Podcast, episode 14 Published: 2023-02-24 Guest: Jan Mošovský Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast we continue our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my fourth guest is Jan Mošovský. Jan is the Director of Research at the Liberální Institut (Liberal Institute), a Czech think tank championing the ideas of classical liberalism. He is also the European programs manager at Students for Liberty, the largest libertarian students organisation in the world. I begin this conversation by asking Jan about his observation that every good story is ultimately libertarian in nature. His answer leads us into an in-depth discussion on libertarianism, liberalism and governance models. Jan has reservations about the viability of the Free Cities model and we discuss where he sees vulnerabilities and potential alternatives. Listening back to our conversation I feel that I should add a small addendum to my side of the dialogue for the point at which we were discussing the possibility of the state coming into a Free City and shutting it down. Since our conversation, I have got further clarification from Próspera about the legal treaties in place to mitigate this. There are in fact two, the first being the Central American Dominican Republic Free Trade agreement in which the US is a signatory. Within this treaty is a key clause that guarantees that the property of foreign investors will not be expropriated by another country. This affects Próspera since it has several US investors. The second treaty is the Honduras-Kuwait Treaty in which there are similar clauses that would impact investments made by Kuwaiti nationals. --- # Pavla Karon — Freedom Starts Within URL: https://free-cities.org/pavla-karon-freedom-starts-within Free Cities Podcast, episode 13 Published: 2023-02-17 Guest: Pavla Karon Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast we continue our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my third guest is Pavla Karon. Pavla is what I would describe as an anarcho-capitalist entrepreneur and mother… Labels aside, she’s also a super interesting person to talk to who has much to say on the subjects of freedom and liberty, especially in the context of parenthood and relationships. Our conversation goes in many directions but in particular we discuss subjects such as what it was like growing up under socialism, bringing up free children, digital nomadism, tools for staying free and the importance of the path to inner freedom, particularly in relationships. On that subject, in her own marriage Pavla and her husband of 10 years practice something called ethical non-monogamy, a relationship strategy that she sees as a natural extension of her libertarian beliefs. This is a fascinating conversation that was constrained in time by my busy schedule but I will certainly be recording a part two in the future. Enjoy! --- # Josef Tětek — Enemies of the State, Friends of Liberty URL: https://free-cities.org/josef-tetek-enemies-of-the-state-friends-of-liberty Free Cities Podcast, episode 12 Published: 2023-02-10 Guest: Josef Tětek Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast we continue our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my second guest is Josef Tětek. Josef is an author, educator and founder of the Slovak Ludwig von Mises Institute. He also hosts the popular Czech podcast Stackuj which is a show about Bitcoin, money, and freedom. Josef’s background in Austrian economics and political philosophy informs the majority of our conversation and we start off by having an interesting discussion about the private provision of public goods including where the various incarnations of this model have existed around the world. Josef makes particular reference to BB Centrum which is a privately owned public neighbourhood not far from where we were recording the podcast in Prague. Other topics discussed include social engineering, the evolution and dissolution of the state, digital gulags and Josef reports on what he discovered about monetary colonialism during a recent trip to the African Bitcoin Conference in Ghana. This was another extremely fascinating conversation coming from the Czech Republic. Look out for more of them on the show over the next few weeks and if you are enjoying our content please leave us a review in your podcasting. Many thanks in advance. --- # Alena Vranova — Navigating the Future URL: https://free-cities.org/alena-vranova-navigating-the-future Free Cities Podcast, episode 11 Published: 2023-02-03 Guest: Alena Vranova Host: Timothy Allen This week on the Free Cities Podcast we begin our series of interviews recorded in Prague and my first guest is Alena Vranova. Alena’s extremely accomplished track record includes several successful startups in finance and technology but she is best known as the founder and former CEO of SatoshiLabs who produce one of the world’s best known cryptocurrency hardware brands TREZOR. SatoshiLabs also founded Slush Pool which was the world’s first Bitcoin Mining Pool established way back in 2010. In this conversation we talk about Alena’s experiences growing up in the Czech Republic under the communist regime and her thoughts and predictions for a future in which she sees technology emboldening many authoritarian regimes around the globe. In our discussion she highlights Paraguay as a relatively unknown destination for people considering a Plan B residency option, something that she has taken advantage of herself. She also speaks about an innovative project in the country that is using the profits from bitcoin mining to fund an education programme teaching 21st-century skills to Paraguayans. Other subjects covered include open source technology, central bank digital currencies, homesteading, self-sufficiency, transhumanism, and Alena offers up some suggestions on how to prepare for the future that she sees coming. As a renowned technologist, I find Alena’s unique perspective on the world absolutely fascinating and I sincerely hope I get to continue our conversation further at some point in the future. --- # John Dennehy — Building a Parallel Educational Structure URL: https://free-cities.org/john-dennehy-building-a-parallel-educational-structure Free Cities Podcast, episode 10 Published: 2023-01-27 Guest: John Dennehy Host: Timothy Allen Topics: technology-in-new-cities, alternative-education This week on the Free Cities Podcast I talk to John Dennehy. John is a former journalist who quit his life in the US to move to El Salvador with the intention of starting a Bitcoin education programme. The result was the creation of the non-profit organisation Mi Primer Bitcoin and the world’s first ever Bitcoin diploma. In this conversation we discuss the story behind My First Bitcoin as it is known in English, and the current state of the education programme as well as El Salvador’s Bitcoin adoption in general. As a firm believer in the notion that Bitcoin is a tool to empower people, John has some strong views on the subject of education as well as the state of the legacy journalism world from which he came. John is a passionate guy on a mission doing what he loves and it was great to meet him in San Salvador. Don’t forget to subscribe to our podcast feed and please leave us a review if you so desire. For more information on Mi Primer Bitcoin or to make a donation to the project check out their Linktree. --- # Zussel Ramos — Landing Your Dream Job in a Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/landing-your-dream-job-in-a-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 9 Published: 2023-01-20 Guest: Zussel Ramos Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes, technology-in-new-cities About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera This week on the Free Cities Podcast I talk to Zussel Ramos. Zussel is the C.O.O. of AmityAge, the Bitcoin education academy based in the Free City project of Próspera in Roatán, Honduras. This interview is the last one from my series of conversations recorded in Honduras and it is a very informal chat recorded inside Próspera’s newly inaugurated Bitcoin Center. Zussel is a wonderful young Honduran lady who ended up landing her dream job in Próspera thanks to her interactions with Students for Liberty whilst at college. In this conversation we discuss the work of the academy and some of the challenges she faces educating Hondurans about not only the technology of Bitcoin but also the fact that the academy is located in one of Honduras’ widely misunderstood ZEDEs, (Zones of Employment and Economic Development). Zussel is a wonderfully positive individual whose belief in both Bitcoin and Próspera is highly infectious, and I look forward to following the progress of the academy closely To support the work being done at Roatán’s Bitcoin Center you can donate to their Geyser Fund. --- # Sean Pawley — Banking on the Free City Model URL: https://free-cities.org/interview-with-sean-pawley Free Cities Podcast, episode 8 Published: 2023-01-13 Guest: Sean Pawley Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera This week on the Free Cities Podcast I talk to Sean Pawley Sean is the founder and CEO of Seshat Bank which is the first full-service commercial bank currently establishing itself in the Free City project of Próspera in Honduras. This interview was recorded before I spoke with Sean’s colleague Christian Betancourt published in Episode 003 so I entered into the conversation knowing absolutely nothing about the ins and outs of starting a bank. As a result, you may discover that my initial lines of questioning are rather basic! The conversation evolves, however, and we end up covering an extremely diverse set of topics, including: How to start a bank. The history of charter cities. Neo-medievalism. The pros & cons of decentralisation of power. Artificial Intelligence. Funding war in pre-revolutionary France. ZEDEs and alternative governance models around the world. What makes Próspera different from other special economic zones. Space habitation in a torus. The pros & cons of governance models in space. Please like & subscribe to the podcast and if you are enjoying the content please leave a review on your preferred podcasting app. New episodes come out every Friday. In the meantime, enjoy the conversation… Key topics: How to start a bank., The history of charter cities., Neo-medievalism., The pros & cons of decentralisation of power., Artificial Intelligence., Funding war in pre-revolutionary France., ZEDEs and alternative governance models around the world., What makes Próspera different from other special economic zones., Space habitation in a torus., The pros & cons of governance models in space. --- # Dusan Matuska — Bitcoin Education in a Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/interview-with-dusan-matuska Free Cities Podcast, episode 7 Published: 2023-01-06 Guest: Dusan Matuska Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes, bitcoin-and-free-cities, alternative-education About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera This week on the Free Cities Podcast I talk to Dusan Matuska. Dusan is an entrepreneur, consultant & Bitcoin educator. I initially met him in The Czech Republic during the Liberty In Our Lifetime conference but it wasn’t until our paths crossed again in San Salvador that I finally had the chance to sit down with him for an all too brief chat before he had to fly off to Roatán in Honduras where he has recently opened a Bitcoin education centre in the Free City project of Próspera. In this conversation we talk about Dusan’s decision to move to Próspera and how he sees the future of the project in the face of governmental opposition. Other topics we discuss include the socio-political concept of Parallel Polis, anarcho-capitalism, alternatives to democracy, personal carbon taxes and the importance of freedom of movement, in particular with regards to Free City projects and whether or not the freedom to move is even something that is guaranteed to exist in our future. Speaking to Dusan is always a pleasure… I only wish we could have spoken for longer. To support the work being done at Roatán’s Bitcoin Centre you can donate to their Geyser Fund. --- # Jorge Colindres — Mayor of a Free City URL: https://free-cities.org/jorge-colindres-mayor-of-a-free-city Free Cities Podcast, episode 6 Published: 2023-01-03 Guest: Jorge Colindres Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera This week’s episode is another foray into the world of Próspera, Honduras’ innovative Free Cities project. This time, I’m talking to Jorge Colindres, who is Próspera’s Technical Secretary, which is a role akin to the mayor of a traditional municipality. We spend time going into Jorge’s responsibilities at Próspera and his opinions on the idea of the ZEDEs, Honduras’ so-called Zones of Employment and Economic Development, which he considers to be the world’s most advanced form of these kinds of special zones. We also discuss tourism and the problems of political instability and the idea of the ZEDEs as a response to this instability as well as the notion of whether governments could ever shut down Próspera. We talk about the most compelling arguments against ZEDEs and how they manifest in Honduras and whether Europe is actually a good place for this kind of Free Cities model. Jorge finishes with some timeless advice for anyone wishing to replicate their model of governance and also how he sees the future of Próspera over the long term. I would like to say thank you to Jorge for taking the time out of his busy schedule to speak to me. --- # Tom & Emily Lahdenranta — COVID Refugees URL: https://free-cities.org/tom-emily-lahdenranta-covid-refugees Free Cities Podcast, episode 5 Published: 2023-01-02 Guest: Tom & Emily Lahdenranta Host: Timothy Allen Topics: residency-and-citizenship Tom and Emily Lahdenranta made the ultimate commitment to ‘voting with their feet’ when they sold their house and possessions in British Columbia and moved with their three young children to Central America. Their move to a better life was triggered by Canada’s strict COVID-19 restrictions, which meant that, amongst other things, Emily was fired from her nursing job on account of her choice not to take a mandatory vaccine. This situation, combined with what they considered to be the unacceptable and increasingly authoritarian trajectory of their own government, compelled them to leave their home country for Mexico, beginning a quest to find a place in which they felt they had the freedom to raise their family in the manner to which they aspired. Over a year later, that place turned out to be El Salvador, where they now live. We spend most of this conversation talking about the path that brought them to this point as well as the trials and tribulations of life as ‘COVID refugees’. Tom and Emily’s story is both shocking and hugely inspirational. They recount their experiences openly and give a fascinating insight into what it takes to make a bold move like this successful. --- # Stephan Livera — Free Cities & Bitcoin URL: https://free-cities.org/stephan-livera-free-cities-bitcoin Free Cities Podcast, episode 4 Published: 2023-01-02 Guest: Stephan Livera Host: Timothy Allen Topics: residency-and-citizenship, bitcoin-and-free-cities Stephan Livera is the host of one of the world’s leading Bitcoin podcasts and he is also the Managing Director at Swan Bitcoin International. He contributes to various outlets and publications including Bitcoin Magazine and Mises Institute as well as speaking at Bitcoin conferences internationally. After speaking at the Free Cities Foundation conference, Liberty in our Lifetime, Stephan wrote an excellent article for Bitcoin Magazine pointing out the striking parallelism between the Bitcoin movement and the Free Cities movement. Stephan is a natural advocate for Free Cities. He recently chose to leave his home country of Australia to move to Dubai and he discusses the rationale behind this decision in detail in this conversation. We also talk in depth about the pandemic and consequent lockdowns and the importance in this day and age of Flag Theory, the concept of insulating oneself against the actions of unfriendly governments by establishing homes in multiple jurisdictions around the world. Stephan’s case for Bitcoin is truly compelling and he sees it as humanity’s best shot at creating real and long-lasting liberty on Earth. --- # Christian Betancourt — Building a Free City Bank URL: https://free-cities.org/christian-betancourt-building-a-free-city-bank Free Cities Podcast, episode 3 Published: 2023-01-02 Guest: Christian Betancourt Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Christian Betancourt is an attorney with experience in banking and finance as well as fintech and legal tech. He is the co-founder and general council at Seshat Bank, a commercial bank that has been licensed in Próspera. Seshat was the first custom regulatory regime that was approved within Próspera leaving Christian with many intriguing anecdotes from his work during this time. Christian is always very thought-provoking in his conversation and we discuss many ideas including liberty and self determination as well as concepts around the notion of sovereignty. He also speaks about Honduran ZEDEs, about their history and that of many other autonomous zones around the world. We finish talking about the process of setting up the bank in Próspera and how he helped create the bank’s own unique regulatory framework as well as discussing a few of Christian’s ideas about the future of banking, especially the roles of cryptocurrencies and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). --- # Ricardo González — Working in Próspera & History of ZEDEs URL: https://free-cities.org/ricardo-gonzalez-working-in-prospera-history-of-zedes Free Cities Podcast, episode 2 Published: 2023-01-02 Guest: Ricardo González Host: Timothy Allen Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance About: https://free-cities.org/projects/prospera Ricardo González is an executive member at Honduras Próspera on the island of Roatán in Honduras. He is an experienced Honduran attorney with a background in business development, start-up incorporation, counselling to mid to small-sized organizations, operation management and mentorship. He got his Masters in Law (LLM) at Penn State University with a concentration in Corporate Law and Practice. This episode was recorded in Próspera in Honduras. Próspera is the innovative Free Cities project based on the Honduran ZEDE law (Zone for Employment and Economic Development) and it has its own civil law and regulatory structure, independent of that of Honduras. This conversation is a deep dive into everything Próspera, including its history and the history of the ZEDE laws. Ricardo is thorough in his descriptions of what it’s like to live and work in a ZEDE as well as speaking candidly about his experiences dealing with the Honduran government during his time working on ZEDEs. --- # Peter Young — Free Cities Overview URL: https://free-cities.org/the-free-cities-podcast Free Cities Podcast, episode 1 Published: 2023-01-01 Guest: Peter Young Host: Timothy Allen Topics: free-private-cities, private-governance Peter Young is the Managing Director of the Free Cities Foundation. He leads the operational management of the Foundation, with oversight over project delivery, communications and finance. In this, the inaugural episode of the podcast I talk with Peter about the Free Cities Foundation and its work. We also discuss Austrian economics, civilisation and the importance of contracts, education, the nature of protest, and parallel systems of finance including Bitcoin. Finally, Peter gives an overview of the hugely successful Liberty in Our Lifetime conference hosted by the Free Cities Foundation in Prague in October. --- # PEOPLE --- # Derek Khanna URL: https://free-cities.org/people/derek-khanna Role: Technology Policy Lawyer Topics: honduran-zedes, technology-in-new-cities Derek Khanna is an American attorney working on technology policy. He is acting ZEDE Manager of Próspera, the special jurisdiction on Roatán, and was previously deputy general counsel of Honduras Próspera Inc.; he describes the role as bridging the legal architecture of the zone with its day to day administration. He has advised technology startups and served on their boards. He took a degree in political science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and a Juris Doctor at Georgetown Law, worked on both of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaigns, and was executive director of the College Republicans for the Massachusetts Republican Party. He worked in the office of Senator Scott Brown from 2010 to 2012 on technology issues, including the protests against the Stop Online Piracy Act, then joined the staff of the House Republican Study Committee, where he handled technology, defense and government oversight policy. On 16 November 2012 the committee published his policy brief, Three Myths about Copyright Law and Where to Start to Fix it, which argued that copyright terms had grown too long, that penalties for infringement should be lighter and that fair use should be wider. The committee withdrew the paper within a day after objections from copyright industry groups, and Khanna lost his job weeks later. The memo went on circulating, and he set out his own account of the episode in the Cardozo Law Review’s arts and entertainment journal and in a chapter of Hacking Politics. In January 2013, after the Librarian of Congress ruled that unlocking a mobile phone for use on another carrier violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Khanna started a campaign to reverse it. With the entrepreneur Sina Khanifar he filed a White House petition that gathered 114,322 signatures within a month, the first to pass the 100,000 threshold. Congress then passed the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, signed into law on 1 August 2014, and Forbes placed him on its 30 Under 30 list for law and policy that year. He joined the Information Society Project at Yale Law School as a visiting fellow, practised at the law firm Fenwick and West, and has written for the Washington Post, the Guardian, the Atlantic, National Review, Slate, Reason and TechCrunch. --- # Nick Dranias URL: https://free-cities.org/people/nick-dranias Role: Constitutional Lawyer Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance Nick Dranias is general counsel to Honduras Próspera Inc. and its affiliates, where he describes himself as one of the principal architects of the Próspera platform, implementing policies meant to widen economic freedom inside a special economic zone. He has chaired the board of the Próspera Arbitration Center, the zone’s default arbitration body, since 2020. He has authored more than a hundred articles on law and public policy and comments on constitutional questions for Fox News and other outlets. He took a degree in economics and philosophy at Boston University in 1993, graduating cum laude, and his law degree at Loyola University Chicago School of Law in 1996, where he served on the law review. He practised at Dranias, Harrington and Wilson in Chicago until 2005, then spent three years as a staff attorney at the Institute for Justice. From 2008 to 2014 he was general counsel and constitutional policy director at the Goldwater Institute, where he held the Duncan Chair and directed its Moller Center, and where he helped secure a First Amendment victory at the Supreme Court against public financing of political campaigns. He later served as senior litigation counsel in the Arizona Attorney General’s office, and has taught ethical and legal issues in business at Grand Canyon University since 2018. As president of the Compact for America Educational Foundation from 2014 to 2018 he led a national effort for a federal balanced budget amendment built on an interstate compact, which five states joined. His recent work concerns the ethics of artificial intelligence. He is the architect of Excellence Ethics, a virtue based framework for AI safety and governance, and has testified before the Arizona House of Representatives on protecting individual rights in the age of artificial intelligence. The book setting the framework out, Why Excellence Matters: Building Better AI through Better Ethics, was published in 2025, runs to almost seven hundred pages, and credits as its co-author and lead drafter Claude, the AI assistant made by Anthropic. He is building JurisMaximus on the same foundation, an arbitration system meant to reason from legal principles rather than from statistical patterns. --- # Mitchell Suchner URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mitchell-suchner Role: Founder & CEO Topics: seasteading Mitchell Suchner is the founder and chief executive of ArkPad, a naval architecture company in the Philippines that designs and builds floating platforms, aquaculture systems and vessels. He is based in Davao City, across the water from the Reef Resort his company built and runs off Samal Island. He came across seasteading in January 2021 and began posting his own low-cost designs in the seasteading forums, where Ben Silone found him and brought him into the floating-platform venture Arktide, first as its website developer and then as its chief operating officer. He split ArkPad off as a company of its own, set up in the Philippines for the workers available there, its freeports and its tourism, and began by selling floating structures to hotels and resorts in shallow water. Joe Quirk credits The Seasteading Institute’s documentary about the manhunt for Chad Elwartowski and Nadia Summergirl with putting him on that road. The floating homes are built to be joined together, so that a single unit works on its own and several share water, electricity and internet between them. The prototype was launched at Nabas on the coast of Aklan in September 2024, shown then as the ArkPad-C and since renamed the ArkPad-D, and it came through two storms that overturned cars and wrecked homes on shore. Around the homes goes the Hexafarm, a hexagonal polyculture fish cage whose walkway carries a ring of glamping units, and the two together became the Samal Reef Resort, which opened off Samal Island in September 2025 and now takes guests and hosts events. His case for seasteading is economic rather than legal: aquaculture and tourism earn a floating structure its running costs, and that is the stack he set out on the Free Cities Podcast and at Foundation conferences from 2024 onwards. ArkPad launched a token in 2024 to crowdfund construction in place of a mortgage, and it runs research into self-driving boats, underwater drones and minerals taken from seawater. He received the Free Cities Conference Innovation Award in Prague in 2025, and gives interviews from a floating unit off the Philippine coast. --- # Titus Gebel URL: https://free-cities.org/people/titus-gebel Role: Chairman of the Board Topics: free-private-cities Dr. Titus Gebel is the inventor of the Free Private Cities concept and CEO of Tipolis. He is a serial entrepreneur with a doctorate in law who has founded a number of companies, including the multinational energy and resources group Deutsche Rohstoff AG. In 2014, Titus stepped down as CEO of Deutsche Rohstoff to devote himself entirely to his new project: Free Private Cities. Titus wants to create an entirely new product in the “market of living together” which aims to fast-track economic and societal progress. At Tipolis, a Singapore-based company, he is focused on creating and developing autonomous cities by partnering commercially with governments and special economic zones around the world. In February 2025 Tipolis signed an agreement with the Brunei Economic Development Board to explore an investment initiative there. The concept has a book behind it. Free Private Cities: Making Governments Compete for You, published in 2018 and now in a third revised edition, sets the proposition out in full: a private operator supplies law, security and infrastructure, residents pay a fixed contractual fee instead of taxes, disputes go to independent arbitration, and the terms cannot be altered against a resident without their agreement. It is the founding text of the movement in the German-speaking world and has been translated widely since. He came to it late and from business. He practised law briefly, moved through biotechnology and venture capital, and in 2006 co-founded Deutsche Rohstoff AG with a partner, building it into a Frankfurt-listed mining and energy group with production in Australia and the United States before stepping away to work on cities full time. He has not left the sector behind altogether: he is chairman of Argentina Metals Corp, a copper explorer in Mendoza listed in Toronto, Frankfurt and on the OTCQB since 2026. He founded the Free Cities Foundation as the non-profit half of the same project, on the reasoning that the idea needed a home that was not a company. In 2025 he received the Roland Baader Award. He read law at Heidelberg and holds a doctorate in international law. --- # Thomas Sevcik URL: https://free-cities.org/people/thomas-sevcik Role: City & Narrative Strategist Topics: city-states-today, urban-design, technology-in-new-cities Thomas Sevcik is a Swiss strategist who works on what a place is for before anyone draws it. He co-founded arthesia with Annette Schömmel in the mid-1990s and has run it since as a Zurich firm that develops strategic narratives for companies, cities, states and what it calls special situations. He studied architecture at the Technical University of Berlin, and he divides his time between Zurich, Panama and Los Angeles. His subject is urbanism approached as strategy rather than as design, and the results are easier to recognise than the label. Volkswagen’s Autostadt in Wolfsburg, the corporate theme world that opened in 2000, was built on a content concept from his firm. The Circle, the airport city at Zurich Airport, grew out of an idea and a strategy he led from 2006, modelled on the mixed grain of Zurich’s old town rather than on an office park. The development strategy that fourteen municipalities around the airport share under the name New Zurich is his as well. His reading of where cities are going is the part that overlaps with Free Cities. He argues in the Swiss press that the city as a model for integrating everyone has run its course, and that the successful ones are turning into special zones with their own economies and their own rules. He has put the same question to his own country in print: whether Switzerland is still a small state or already a city-state. For the Foundation he wrote the two Tales From Cities pieces. The first asks how a city in the metaverse would be masterplanned once time, space and gravity are optional, and sorts the answers into two spacetime models and three design strategies. The second is about sixteenth-century Antwerp, a de facto city-state with the world’s first modern stock exchange, free enough that a ship could be insured against a Dürer, and about the envy that ended it. He also teaches narrative environments at Central Saint Martins in London, lectures in Hong Kong, and writes regularly for the NZZ and the Schweizer Monat. --- # Marc J. Victor URL: https://free-cities.org/people/marc-j-victor Role: Libertarian Defense Attorney Topics: private-governance Marc J. Victor is a criminal defense attorney and the founder and managing partner of The Attorneys For Freedom Law Firm, which represents individuals in state and federal criminal matters in the United States, including major felony and civil rights cases. In 2021 he co-founded the Live and Let Live Movement, an ambassador network run through a 501(c)(3) public charity, to argue that the law should leave everyone free to live as they peacefully choose. He is the author of The Live and Let Live Philosophy: Two Principles for Freedom, Peace, and Prosperity, which names a legal principle against aggression and a moral principle obliging people to be good to each other, and applies the first of them to twenty five contested public questions. He served in the United States Marine Corps from 1985 to 1992 as a sergeant and squad leader, and deployed to Saudi Arabia near the Kuwaiti border during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. He took a bachelor’s degree at Arizona State University in 1992 and a Juris Doctor at Southwestern University School of Law in 1994, and was admitted in Arizona that year and in Hawaii in 2019. He founded his practice in 1997; it took the name The Attorneys For Freedom in 2004 as other attorneys joined it, and it limits its privately retained work to self defense cases. The Arizona Board of Legal Specialization certifies him as a criminal law specialist. Victor has twice stood for the United States Senate in Arizona as the Libertarian candidate, taking 4.55 per cent of the vote in 2012 and running again in 2022, when he took part in the televised debate in October before withdrawing on 1 November and endorsing the Republican candidate. His firm says he has handled more than a thousand major felony matters, and his courtroom work has included the defense of Elizabeth Johnson in the case reported nationally as the Baby Gabriel case. He co-hosted the movement’s podcast The Peace Radicals with his firm partner Andrew Marcantel through a hundred and one episodes. --- # Lou Perez URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lou-perez Role: Comedian Lou Perez is an American comedian, producer and writer, and the author of That Joke Isn’t Funny Anymore. He is best known as the former head writer and executive producer of We the Internet TV, the comedy channel that satirised politics and media and won a Webby Award in 2017 in the variety and reality category, where he wrote and produced sketches watched by tens of millions. He is a regular commentator on comedy, culture and free speech, has worked with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, Free the People, Fox and TruTV, and has appeared on Gutfeld!. He studied at New York University, where he performed with the sketch group the Wicked Wicked Hammerkatz, and went on to sketch and improv at the Upright Citizens Brigade theatres in New York and Los Angeles. He is half of the comedy duo Greg and Lou, with Greg Burke, whose sketch Wolverine’s Claws Suck has been watched more than twenty million times. As a stand-up he has opened for Rob Schneider, Rich Vos, Jimmy Dore and Dave Smith, and toured North America with Scott Thompson of The Kids in the Hall. He produced The Attendants with Lorne Michaels’s Broadway Video, worked as a comedy producer on TruTV’s Impractical Jokers, and has taught creative writing at the City College of New York. That Joke Isn’t Funny Anymore: On the Death and Rebirth of Comedy was published in September 2022 by Bombardier Books. It works through the subjects audiences have come to treat as off limits and argues that the reflex to withdraw a joke damages comedy itself. He has hosted The Lou Perez Podcast since 2020, co-hosts Happy Hour Econ with the economist Phillip Magness, co-created the podcast Unsafe Space, and sits on the advisory board of Heresy Press. He makes the sketch series Comedy Is Murder with Free the People, whose video James Bond has a license to kill hate speech has passed forty million views. He closed the 2026 conference dinner in Próspera with a stand-up set. --- # Stephan Kinsella URL: https://free-cities.org/people/stephan-kinsella Role: Libertarian Legal Theorist Topics: private-governance Stephan Kinsella is a libertarian legal theorist, author and retired patent attorney in Houston, Texas, best known for the argument that intellectual property is not property at all. Against Intellectual Property appeared in the Journal of Libertarian Studies in 2001 and was reissued as a monograph by the Mises Institute in 2008. It is the standard statement of the anti-IP position in libertarian legal theory, and the reason the question is still argued rather than assumed. His collected legal theory was published in 2023 as Legal Foundations of a Free Society, some eight hundred pages gathering essays written across nearly three decades, with a foreword by Hans-Hermann Hoppe and released into the public domain, which is the only consistent way to publish that particular book. In 2025 he published The Universal Principles of Liberty with Alessandro Fusillo, David Dürr and Patrick Tinsley, and his legal writing includes International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution, now in a second edition from Oxford University Press. He took engineering degrees at Louisiana State University before his law degree there, and an LL.M. in international business law at King’s College London. He practised at Jackson Walker, at Schnader Harrison and as a partner at Duane Morris, taught as an adjunct law professor at South Texas College of Law, and was general counsel of Applied Optoelectronics from 2000 to 2012. He founded and edited the journal Libertarian Papers from 2009 to 2018, has directed the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom since 2010, and has hosted the Kinsella on Liberty podcast since 2013. Why the argument matters to a Free City is practical rather than doctrinal: a new jurisdiction has to decide what its law will recognise as property before it can enforce anything, and patents and copyrights are the case where that choice is least settled. --- # Erick Brimen URL: https://free-cities.org/people/erick-brimen Role: CEO Topics: honduran-zedes Erick Brimen is the founder and CEO of Próspera, the privately governed special economic zone (ZEDE) on the island of Roatán, Honduras, run through Próspera International. He founded NeWay Capital in 2013, and it is the firm the project grew out of. A Venezuelan-born former investment banker, he has led Próspera’s development as a charter-city project with its own legal, regulatory and tax framework. He grew up in Venezuela and left at fourteen for school in the United States, and traces the project to what he watched happen at home: not a shortage of resources or talent, but the steady destruction of the rules that let people build anything. He studied at Babson College, then worked in private banking at Brown Brothers Harriman, in mergers and acquisitions at AG Edwards and in the London practice of Ernst and Young, developed real estate across Latin America, and co-founded ComparaMejor.com, an online insurance brokerage in Colombia, before founding NeWay Capital. He is a member of the Society for International Development in Washington. He has led Próspera’s development since 2017, and the zone began operating in 2020 under the Honduran ZEDE framework with its own regulatory system, courts and taxes, and the claim that a business can be established there faster and more cheaply than anywhere else in the hemisphere. Brimen has spent as much time defending it as building it, first against opposition on Roatán and later against the Honduran government. Congress repealed the organic law in 2022 and the Supreme Court declared the ZEDEs unconstitutional in 2024, with retroactive effect; the zones have gone on operating. The dispute went to arbitration at ICSID and reached the merits stage in late 2025, and in July 2026 he testified about it before a subcommittee of the United States House Foreign Affairs Committee. --- # Patri Friedman URL: https://free-cities.org/people/patri-friedman Role: Charter Cities Investor Topics: seasteading Patri Friedman is the founder and general partner of Pronomos Capital, a venture firm that invests in charter cities and new jurisdictions. In 2008 he co-founded The Seasteading Institute, which promotes autonomous ocean communities; a former Google engineer, he is the grandson of economist Milton Friedman. He co-founded The Seasteading Institute in 2008 with Wayne Gramlich and with early backing from Peter Thiel, having left a job as a Google engineer, and argued for the next few years that new jurisdictions would have to be built at sea because the land was all claimed. The institute produced designs, legal research and a movement rather than a permanent settlement. He also launched Ephemerisle in 2009, an annual gathering of lashed-together boats that was the first attempt to live the argument rather than publish it, and which the community has run itself since 2010. He stepped down as the institute’s executive director in 2011 and co-founded Future Cities Development that year to pursue a charter city in Honduras, which is where the pivot from sea to land actually happened; that company wound up in 2012 and he returned to Google until 2019. Pronomos Capital, founded that year, follows from what he took away from the whole sequence: building on land, with a host government’s agreement, is cheaper and faster than building against the ocean and against international law at the same time. The fund invests in charter cities and new jurisdictions, its backers and advisers include Thiel, Marc Andreessen, Naval Ravikant and Balaji Srinivasan, and Próspera in Honduras is its best-known holding. He is the grandson of Milton Friedman and the son of David Friedman, which makes him the third generation of a family arguing about how far markets can replace the state, and the first to try building the answer. --- # Nadia Elwartowski URL: https://free-cities.org/people/nadia-elwartowski Role: Seasteading Pioneer Topics: seasteading Nadia Elwartowski is a Thai entrepreneur and a co-founder of Ocean Builders. She and her husband Chad Elwartowski were among the first people to live permanently on a seastead, aboard a floating home in international waters, and she has since helped develop the company’s floating home projects in Panama. Ocean Builders lists her as its chief sustainability officer and describes the remit as the sustainability of the homes and the aim of living at sea in step with the surrounding ecosystem. She was born Supranee Thepdet and also uses the name Nadia Summergirl. She ran the site Bitcoin Girl Thailand from 2017, posting cryptocurrency news under that handle, and in May 2018 published her own interview with Elwartowski about seasteading and blockchain. On 2 February 2019 the company raised its first seastead in the Andaman Sea, a six metre octagonal cabin on a twenty metre steel spar, at what Ocean Builders gives as twelve nautical miles off Phuket, and the two of them moved aboard as its first occupants. On 12 April 2019 the Royal Thai Navy filed a police complaint accusing them of undermining Thai sovereignty under a provision of the criminal code that carries death or life imprisonment. Thailand did not claim the seastead sat inside its territorial waters; it asserted jurisdiction over the contiguous zone beyond them. The couple left the country within about a day and reached Panama by way of Singapore, and they married in exile that June. On 22 April the navy cut the cabin from its spar and took both parts to Phuket, where they were held as evidence. Ocean Builders now works from Linton Bay Marina on the Caribbean coast of Panama, where it builds the SeaPod, a home raised above the water on a support column. --- # Joyce Brand URL: https://free-cities.org/people/joyce-brand Role: Writer Joyce Brand is a governance architect and writer who studies the structural design of voluntary, contractual governance, drawing on forty five years of reading economics and political philosophy, and who is dedicated to promoting special jurisdictions for peace, prosperity, and better governance. She is co-author of the book Economics and the Spiritual Life of Free Men, and the intellectual heir of philosophers Spencer Heath and Spencer Heath MacCallum. She lived for years in the ZEDE Ciudad Morazán in Honduras, a prototype Free City based on the ideas of the two Spencers, and still chronicles it month by month. The book she co-authored is Spencer Heath’s, published decades after his death. She came to it through Spencer Heath MacCallum, Heath’s grandson and intellectual executor, and did enough of the work of turning an unfinished manuscript into a readable book to be credited as co-author rather than as editor. She published Pioneering Prosperity: The Morazán Model for Free Cities in 2024, an account of the city she lived in and of what happens when Heath’s proposition, that a community can be owned and run by a proprietor who leases rather than taxes, is actually built and then occupied by several thousand people who have never read the theory. She has since built the Consent Architecture Framework, a way of reading a jurisdiction’s structure for how it handles consent, how far it is insulated from reversal, and whether it can last, and has applied it to the question of how the Honduran ZEDEs kept operating after the state moved against them. A second book, The Sovereign Network: How Network Autonomy Builds Durable Prosperity, is in preparation. Her vantage point is a rare one in this movement: she lived in the thing for years rather than visiting it. --- # Joe Quirk URL: https://free-cities.org/people/joe-quirk Role: Seasteading Author & Advocate Topics: seasteading Joe Quirk is President of The Seasteading Institute and co-founder of Blue Frontiers. He is a science writer, novelist and memoir ghostwriter with national bestsellers in each category, and the co-author of Seasteading, published in 2017, which argues that floating settlements let people test new forms of government without displacing anybody. His earlier books run from the novel The Ultimate Rush to It’s Not You, It’s Biology. He joined the Institute in March 2014 as its author and, in his own word, its seavangelist. The Institute was founded in 2008 by Patri Friedman and Wayne Gramlich with seed money from Peter Thiel, to enable floating societies where, in its own words, the next generation of pioneers can test new ideas for government. Its work now is legal rather than structural. It is raising money for a maritime flag, which it calls a glorious legal hack offering government protection without government control, and it has a five-year plan to create a classification society so that seasteads count as safe and are recognised by the family of nations. Blue Frontiers was the attempt to build the first floating community. On 13 January 2017 the Institute signed a memorandum of understanding with French Polynesia to create a semi-autonomous seazone for a prototype in its waters. Political change after the territory’s presidential election ended it, and French Polynesia cut ties in March 2018. In 2019 he directed The First Seasteaders, about the prototype seastead deployed off the coast of Thailand, and he credits that film with inspiring Mitchell Suchner to build ArkPad. The Institute’s volunteers now work with the ArkPad team on securing legal seasteads in all seas. He received the Free Cities Best Storyteller Award in November 2025, and is a Free Cities Ambassador in Panama City. --- # Oliver W. Porter URL: https://free-cities.org/people/oliver-porter Role: Contract City Pioneer Topics: private-governance Oliver W. Porter is the architect of the public-private partnership that created Sandy Springs, Georgia, the first American city designed from the outset to buy in nearly all of its municipal services rather than staff them. Residents voted about 94 per cent in favour of incorporation in June 2005 and the city came into being that December, the first new city in Georgia in half a century. Porter chaired the charter commission and served as volunteer interim city manager, organising twelve task forces of some 120 volunteers to define what the city would need and then putting the work out to tender. Sandy Springs opened with only a handful of direct employees: police, fire and the courts were kept in house, and everything else, from finance and human resources to parks, transport and community development, was delivered under contract. The model was copied across Georgia and studied abroad, and it was also partly unwound. In 2019 the city brought 183 contract workers onto its own payroll, keeping a smaller number of functions outsourced. Porter has written about the experiment in Creating the New City of Sandy Springs (2006), Public/Private Partnerships for Local Governments (2008) and The Contract City, and has advised four further Georgian cities, communities in other American states, and municipalities in Japan considering the model. He is a retired AT&T vice president, a registered professional engineer with a degree in civil engineering and an MBA, and has served as national chairman of both the National Kidney Foundation and the Combined Health Appeal of America. His work is the nearest thing the Free Cities argument has to a completed municipal experiment in the United States, including the part where a city changes its mind about it. --- # Li Schoolland URL: https://free-cities.org/people/li-schoolland Role: Human Rights Advocate Topics: history-of-free-cities Li Schoolland was born in the People’s Republic of China and lived through the Great Leap Forward, the famine that followed it and the Cultural Revolution, before watching the country’s economic transformation in the decades after. Having seen both authoritarian rule and economic liberalisation at first hand, she speaks on the relationship between liberty, prosperity and human flourishing. She has worked in education, in the arts and in event organisation, and argues for freedom oriented ideas and institutions. She also publishes as Li Zhao Schoolland, and her own account of the Mao years appears as the chapter A Survivor’s Story in Libertarian Autobiographies, published in 2023. She has taught in high schools and universities in China, Minnesota and Hawaii, served as youth director of the Chinese Lutheran Church of Honolulu, and holds master’s degrees in Japanese business studies from Chaminade University of Honolulu and in Japanese literature from the University of Minnesota. She speaks Mandarin, Japanese and English. She founded TFT Events, which has run conferences and summer camps on Austrian economics since 2010 in China, Slovakia, Romania, Indonesia and Morocco, and through it she has arranged the Chinese translation and publication of work by Jesús Huerta de Soto, Doug Casey, Ken Schoolland, Jeffrey Tucker and the Acton Institute. Liberty International describes her as a longtime member and its primary organiser for conferences in China, Slovakia and Bali; the Shenyang summer programme was her idea and started in 2009. She chairs the World Anti Extremism Network, was formerly on the Acton Institute’s staff for external relations in Asia and the Pacific, and is married to Ken Schoolland, an economist at Hawai’i Pacific University and vice president for international relations at Liberty International. --- # Max Medina URL: https://free-cities.org/people/max-medina Role: Space & City Architect Topics: honduran-zedes, urban-design, technology-in-new-cities Max Medina is a Honduran architect and a director at LAVA, the Laboratory for Visionary Architecture, an international studio whose work runs from urban masterplans to experimental habitats. His own projects span the same range, from city-scale development to designs for living on the Moon, and the phrase he uses for the discipline is that architecture is a vessel through time and space. He is from San Pedro Sula and studied architecture at the Universidad de San Pedro Sula, where he was student president for four years and later led the national architecture students’ body. He joined LAVA as a junior partner before becoming a director, and between 2020 and 2024 lectured and ran workshops across Latin America, the United States and Germany on future cities, modular architecture, urban design and startup city development. He spoke at TEDxRoatán on how architecture can change a life, and in 2025 was announced as an astronaut candidate with Titans Space Industries. His work has been recognised with several awards in architecture and in space innovation. In July 2025 he published his first book, Architecture: A Vessel Through Time and Space, presented at the Universidad de San Pedro Sula, which argues for architecture as an instrument of human evolution rather than only of shelter. His connection to the Free Cities movement runs through Próspera, the special jurisdiction on Roatán, where he has worked on architectural projects. That puts a designer inside a jurisdiction being built from nothing, which is a rarer vantage point than it sounds: most of the argument about new cities is conducted by lawyers and economists, and comparatively little of it is about what the place will look like to stand in. --- # Per Bylund URL: https://free-cities.org/people/per-bylund Role: Economist & Author Topics: taxation-and-economics Per L. Bylund, PhD, is the Johnny D. Pope Chair and an associate professor in the School of Entrepreneurship at Oklahoma State University’s Spears School of Business. He is also a senior fellow at the Mises Institute and an associated researcher at the Ratio Institute in Stockholm, and he held faculty positions at the University of Missouri and at Baylor University before Oklahoma State. He is the author of several books and has published widely on entrepreneurship, management, economics and the history of economic thought. His book The Seen, the Unseen, and the Unrealized takes Bastiat’s argument a step further. The cost of a regulation is not only the visible burden and the transaction it prevents, but the businesses that were never started and the industries that never formed, which no impact assessment can measure because they leave no trace. That question is why his work matters to this movement: a new jurisdiction is the one place where the unrealised can actually be observed, by permitting things that are prohibited elsewhere and seeing what appears. He has also edited A Modern Guide to Austrian Economics and the Research Handbook on Austrian Economics in Management and Entrepreneurship, and writes for a general audience on entrepreneurship as the driving force of an economy rather than as a career choice. His later books include How to Think about the Economy: A Primer and Entrepreneurship and Evolutionary Economics for Cambridge University Press. He is field editor for the Journal of Business Venturing, an associate editor of the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, and sits on the editorial boards of the Academy of Management Review, the Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal and the Journal of Management Studies. --- # Juan D. Hanke-Estevez URL: https://free-cities.org/people/juan-hanke-estevez Role: Free Cities Ambassador Topics: free-private-cities Juan D. Hanke-Estevez is an ambassador for the Free Cities Foundation and a German-language writer and translator on free private cities. He makes the case for special economic zones as institutional laboratories, including a proposal for an experimental zone in Switzerland’s Jura region, and has translated work on competitive governance between German, English and Spanish. He worked for the Free Cities Foundation as an operations assistant in its early years and has stayed with the movement since as an ambassador and a writer, and he sits on the board of the Hayek Club in Frankfurt. His paper in the Journal of Special Jurisdictions, the peer-reviewed journal for research on zones and new jurisdictions, examines the future of citizenship and what democracy and participation can mean inside a Honduran ZEDE. It takes on the objection critics raise most often: a jurisdiction governed by contract still has residents, and residents want a say, so the design question is which decisions belong to the operator, which belong to the people who live there, and how the second group can enforce anything against the first. He writes in German at Der Freydenker on private cities and democracy, and on the older question of how liberalism, the social market economy and Catholic social teaching relate to one another. The Jura proposal applies the same reasoning in a European setting, where a special zone would give a region room to try solutions of its own instead of waiting for a national reform that may never come. He holds a master’s degree in political theory, is an alumnus of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom and a former Frédéric Bastiat Fellow at the Mercatus Center. --- # Chad Elwartowski URL: https://free-cities.org/people/chad-elwartowski Role: Seasteading Pioneer Topics: seasteading Chad Elwartowski co-founded Ocean Builders, which develops floating SeaPod homes in Panama. An early seasteading pioneer, in 2019 he lived aboard one of the first seasteads placed in international waters off Thailand before relocating to continue building floating communities. An early bitcoiner and software engineer, he co-founded Ocean Builders with Grant Romundt and the engineer Rüdiger Koch, and served as its chief operating officer. He has since stepped back from running it day to day, and works on decentralised systems and AI businesses alongside seasteading, Bitcoin and Free Private Cities. On 2 February 2019 he and Nadia Elwartowski moved aboard a six metre octagonal cabin on a twenty metre steel spar in the Andaman Sea, at what Ocean Builders gives as twelve nautical miles off Phuket, intended as a proof of concept for living beyond the reach of any municipality. Thailand read it as a claim against its sovereignty. It did not say the seastead sat inside its territorial waters; it asserted jurisdiction over the contiguous zone beyond them. On 12 April the navy filed a police complaint under a provision of the criminal code that carries death or life imprisonment, the couple left the country within about a day, and ten days later the navy cut the cabin from its spar and took both parts to Phuket, where they were held as evidence. The episode settled in practice what the seasteading movement had argued in the abstract, which is that the binding constraint on floating communities is jurisdictional rather than technical. Ocean Builders moved its work to Panama, where the SeaPods are built with the host country’s agreement rather than at the edge of its patience. --- # O. Shane Balloun URL: https://free-cities.org/people/o-shane-balloun Role: Maritime Lawyer Topics: seasteading, private-governance O. Shane Balloun is a maritime and admiralty lawyer and a member of the board of directors of The Seasteading Institute. In 2012 he published The True Obstacle to the Autonomy of Seasteads: American Law Enforcement Jurisdiction over Homesteads on the High Seas in the University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal, the first law review article devoted to the subject. That paper is the reason the legal side of seasteading has a starting point at all, and its answer was not the one enthusiasts expected. The binding constraint on an autonomous seastead is not the law of the sea as such but the reach of American law enforcement jurisdiction over vessels and structures with any tie to the United States, which is wide enough that flagging and distance do not settle the question on their own. He practises in western Washington, where he is the shareholder of Balloun Law Professional Corporation at the Bellingham Cruise Terminal and of counsel to Johns Law Group, working on admiralty and maritime matters, complex corporate structures, trusts and estates, and civil litigation and appeals. He is admitted in five states and before federal courts including the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court of the United States. He came to law from technology. He read mathematics at Cornell, worked in the hard disk drive industry and then at Google, where he was on the teams that launched Gmail and Google Product Search, and took his law degree with honour at the University of Wyoming, where he was inducted into the Order of the Coif. His LL.M. in Admiralty, taken with distinction at Tulane, was held as a Maritime Law Fellow. --- # Vera Kichanova URL: https://free-cities.org/people/vera-kichanova Role: Ambassador Topics: free-private-cities, urban-design Dr Vera Kichanova is an urban economist exploring the future of private governance. Besides the Free Cities Foundation, she works at Zaha Hadid Architects as urban policy advisor. Vera’s career has spanned roles including elected Municipal Councillor in Moscow, Editor-in-Chief with Atlas Network in Kyiv, and President of the Oxford Hayek Society. That council seat came at twenty, which made her one of the youngest elected officials in Russia and the first elected libertarian in the country. The Washington Post called her the new face of Russia’s opposition, her story appears in the book Generation Putin, and she received the National Endowment for Democracy’s Democracy Award in 2013. She had arrived there from journalism, writing for her local paper at fourteen and later for Novaya Gazeta and Slon, and she left Russia as the room for both occupations closed. She spent more than seven years at Zaha Hadid Architects advising city planners on municipal governance, which is where the two halves of her work meet. Her doctoral research is on private urban development: charter cities in emerging economies and startup jurisdictions in neutral waters, examined as an economist rather than as an advocate. She is a Research Fellow at King’s College London and writes for The Telegraph, Forbes, the Wall Street Journal, Spiegel and CapX. She is a Frédéric Bastiat Fellow at the Mercatus Center (US), a contributor to the Adam Smith Institute (UK) and a Mont Pèlerin Society member. Vera holds a PhD in Political Economy from King’s College London, a Master of Public Policy from the University of Oxford, and a BA in Journalism from Moscow State University. --- # Patrick Hiebert URL: https://free-cities.org/people/patrick-hiebert Role: CEO & Chairman Topics: intentional-communities, technology-in-new-cities Patrick Hiebert is the chief executive and chairman of Autris Group, the Panama City holding company quoted over the counter as AUTR, and co-founder and chief executive of its Veritas Villages arm, companies focused on freedom and self-sustainability in community development, and has been designing eco-friendly, self-sustainable communities for two decades. After founding and selling several high-tech software companies, he and his son Spencer lived aboard a boat and sailed the ocean, honing their skills in self-reliant living (generating their own power and fresh water) before applying what they learned to building new communities on land. The practice came before the theory. After founding and selling several software companies he and his son Spencer lived aboard a boat, generating their own power and desalinating their own water, and he took what he learned there ashore to Central America, wanting a warmer climate, a lighter tax burden than Canada’s and neighbours who thought as he did. He set out the standard his projects are built to as an acronym, F.I.R.S.T.: freedom, independence, resilience, sustainability and transparency. In practice that means a community generating its own power and water, holding clear title, and publishing what it is doing rather than asking residents to trust a brochure. Veritas Villages now has communities designed or under way across Central America, among them Playa Pacifica in Nicaragua, Coronado and Chiriquí in Panama, and Atenas in Costa Rica. More than a decade ago Hiebert, who is Canadian, founded Help Them Help Themselves, a charitable foundation built on the principle of a hand up rather than a handout, which has funded schools, clinics and sea turtle sanctuaries. --- # Jorge Colindres URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jorge-colindres Role: Technical Secretary Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance Jorge Colindres is the Technical Secretary of Próspera, the ZEDE on the Honduran island of Roatán, a role comparable to the mayor of a traditional municipality. A Honduran lawyer, he oversees the zone’s administration and advocates for Honduras’ Zones of Employment and Economic Development (ZEDEs) as a response to political instability and an advanced model of decentralized governance. As the jurisdiction’s highest-ranking public official he presides over the Próspera Council, its rulemaking body, and chairs the oversight committee of the Roatán Financial Services Authority. He was appointed by the State of Honduras in January 2022, and the detail is worth stating precisely: Technical Secretary is a public office created by Honduran law, not a company position, and the zone’s authority derives from the statute rather than from its developer. A Honduran attorney with a background in constitutional law and economic reform, he has spent his tenure administering the zone and defending its legal position after the ZEDE statute was repealed. Próspera has grown from 58 acres to more than a thousand under him, and he led the development of the Roatán International Financial Centre, now a regional hub for fiduciary services, wealth management, digital payments and financial technology. His argument is that the framework binds Honduras through international agreements, including its trade treaty with the United States, and that the guarantees therefore survive a change in domestic legislation. His broader case is constitutional rather than commercial: that sovereignty rests with the people and is distributed across institutions, and that a ZEDE is one more level of that distribution alongside the municipalities rather than an exception to it. --- # Tomek K URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tomek-k Role: Bitcoin Festival & District Builder Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Tomek K is a Polish libertarian activist who has launched and led a series of freedom oriented projects. As founder of Centrum Kapitalizmu he has worked on Poland’s libertarian movement through the Weekend of Capitalism conference, the Freedom Lounge in Warsaw, the Laissez Fest summer festivals, the Laissez Faire United football team and Bitcoin FilmFest. He names Bitcoin, Ayn Rand’s Objectivism and microstates as the most important routes to liberty, and lists travel, electronic music and chess among his interests. His full name is Tomek Kołodziejczuk. He founded Centrum Kapitalizmu in Warsaw in 2017, through the foundation Fundacja Instytut Nieagresji, to make the moral case for capitalism to business, media, universities and non-governmental organisations. He was chief organiser of the first Weekend Kapitalizmu, held in Warsaw in November 2017 with about four hundred attendees, and Students for Liberty, whose alumnus he is, calls him the founder of its Polish team. He co-founded Bitcoin FilmFest, which staged its first large festival in Warsaw in March 2023 and now runs at the Kinoteka cinema in the Palace of Culture and Science; the organisers put the 2026 edition at more than four hundred people from fifteen countries, and it stages smaller events in Lisbon, Lugano, San Salvador, Cape Town, Funchal and Maribor. He now works on the Bitcoin District in Próspera, which describes itself as a startup society inside the jurisdiction and lists him among its district guides. Its work runs from weekly meetups and onboarding merchants to help with residency and company registration, a modular timber housing scheme, and the naming rights to the largest sports venue on Roatán. --- # Mikkel Thorup URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mikkel-thorup Role: World-leading Expat Consultant Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics Mikkel Thorup is an expat consultant specialising in tax mitigation, second residencies and foreign investment. He is the founder and CEO of Expat Money, hosts The Expat Money Show podcast, and is a bestselling author. He founded Expat Money in 2017 and directs it, and with over two decades of experience he has helped hundreds of clients build new lives abroad. He also co-founded the Expat International School of Freedom & Entrepreneurship, an online programme launched in 2021. He left Canada as a teenager and has been travelling ever since, visiting more than 110 countries and making a home in nine of them. He works from Panama City, where he is a Free Cities Ambassador. His consulting covers the practical end of internationalisation: legally reducing tax exposure, obtaining a second residency or citizenship, and moving assets into things that sit outside the banking system, from foreign property to timber and farmland. His books set the approach out for a general reader, Expat Secrets: How To Pay Zero Taxes, Live Overseas, And Make Giant Piles Of Money first and later an expats’ guide to moving to Mexico and a volume on digital nomad visas, and the Expat Money Show, running since 2017, is among the longest-standing podcasts in the field, with several hundred episodes of interviews with lawyers, bankers and people who have already moved. He also runs the Expat Money Summit, an annual online event that gathers the specialists in one place. That is how much of this field actually works: the information exists, but it is scattered across jurisdictions and rarely written down anywhere complete. --- # Max Borders URL: https://free-cities.org/people/max-borders Role: Decentralist Author & Futurist Topics: network-states, private-governance Max Borders is a writer and editor whose subject is decentralisation: how people might cooperate, govern themselves and solve social problems without routing everything through a central authority. He is the author of The Social Singularity (2018), After Collapse and The Decentralist (2021), and writes and hosts Underthrow, a Substack publication and interview show that shares its name with his most recent book. He directs Human Respect Labs, an incubator launched in 2025 as a project of the Foundation for Harmony and Prosperity, which makes small grants to teams working on what it calls liberatory projects, from content creators and community builders to entrepreneurs. He is also founder and executive director of Social Evolution, a non-profit devoted to solving social problems through innovation rather than legislation, and he co-founded the Voice & Exit event and the Future Frontiers conference. He read philosophy at Appalachian State University and University College London, and came to this work through the institutes: programme director at the Institute for Humane Studies, media director at TCS Daily, policy analyst at the John William Pope Civitas Institute, and then editor and director of content at the Foundation for Economic Education, where he edited The Freeman. The thread running through the books is the one that connects him to Free Cities: that jurisdictional competition, startup societies and network states are a practical exit from centralised governance rather than another attempt to reform it from the inside. He has written on subscription government, and on what it would take to move from a shadow constitution to a network state. --- # Telamon Ardavanis URL: https://free-cities.org/people/telamon-ardavanis Role: Pop-Up City Organiser Topics: network-states, technology-in-new-cities Telamon Ardavanis is head of partnerships and scouting at Edge City, a society incubator founded by Janine Leger and Timour Kosters that gathers people working at the frontiers of technology, science and culture into month-long popup villages around the world. He joined in 2024 and has co-hosted several editions, among them Edge City Lanna in Chiang Mai in the autumn of that year, and was one of the residency leads for Edge City Patagonia in San Martín de los Andes, Argentina, in late 2025. The programme has run in Healdsburg in northern California, in Buenos Aires alongside the Crecimiento movement, and in Denver, Austin, South Africa, Bhutan and Goa. Its residencies and hackathons deal directly with the Free Cities subject matter, covering special economic zones, urban planning, new cities and governance, and the organisation works on new city development partnerships of its own. A popup village is a partial answer to a problem the movement usually approaches by building. Instead of founding a jurisdiction and waiting for people to arrive, it assembles the people first, for a month, and finds out what they actually want from a place; several permanent projects have come out of that sequence rather than the other way round. He grew up in South Africa, was educated in Germany and Finland, moved to the United Arab Emirates and then applied for visas to reach the American innovation economy, and he gives that history as his reason for the work. Innovation hubs have historically been geo-fenced, and a village that travels is one way around the fence. --- # Billy Tetrud URL: https://free-cities.org/people/billy-tetrud Role: Bitcoin Developer & Town Builder Topics: intentional-communities, private-governance, bitcoin-and-free-cities Billy Tetrud is co-founder and chief executive of Meridia, a planned town near Austin, Texas, which its founders describe as a federated settlement built around human flourishing. The published design proposes a largely car-free layout with a dense mixed-use centre, nontoxic construction, zoning by externality rather than by use, arbitration in place of litigation, a Georgist land rent, supermajority decision rules and borough-level sub-governments, with separate neighbourhoods built by collaborating communities. He founded it with Stacia Wilson, who is its chief community officer. He spent roughly fifteen years as a software engineer and entrepreneur before that, including time at Google and later work on Bitcoin self-custody at the Austin firm Unchained, and he founded Tixit, which built an extensible project management system. In Bitcoin he is known for technical writing rather than for a company. He has published an analysis of the network’s transaction throughput bottlenecks, documented methods for backing up and storing bitcoin, and circulated a proposal for efficient Bitcoin vaults introducing new script opcodes, which he took to the Bitcoin development mailing list in 2023. He publishes code under the handle fresheneesz. He has written about governance and economics for about a decade at his Governology Substack, whose subtitle is the science of government, and he co-founded an Austin meetup on eco-development, sustainable real estate and land projects. What distinguishes the position is where he wants it tested: at the scale of one town that people choose to move to, rather than in an argument about how a country ought to be run. --- # Niklas Anzinger URL: https://free-cities.org/people/niklas-anzinger Role: Building Biotech Acceleration Zones Topics: honduran-zedes, medical-regulation Niklas Anzinger is the founder and general partner of Infinita VC, which backs founders building startup cities, network states and longevity biotech, ventures that route around the regulatory bottlenecks holding back progress. A German entrepreneur who moved to the Próspera ZEDE on the Honduran island of Roatán, he also founded Infinita City, a network city for accelerating longevity biotech, and hosts the Stranded Technologies Podcast. Before Infinita he worked as an early-stage startup operator, taking one company from nothing to a Series B and another from seed to a Series B, with one failure in between, and worked as a management consultant and a political analyst. The thesis behind Infinita VC is in the name of his podcast. Some technologies are not missing but stranded: they exist, they work, and no jurisdiction will let them be deployed, which makes regulatory access a form of capital in its own right. He moved to Próspera to test that rather than write about it. Infinita City grew out of Vitalia, which he co-founded with Laurence Ion in late 2023 and which ran as a two-month gathering on Roatán in early 2024, bringing longevity researchers and founders to the island. The two founders went separate ways in January 2025, Ion to start Viva City and Anzinger to rename the Roatán community Infinita City, which now runs from its own buildings in Próspera and has settled into recurring seasons. His argument is that a zone earns its existence through the experiments it permits, not through its tax rate. --- # Jeremy Kauffman URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jeremy-kauffman Role: Libertarian Technologist & Activist Topics: intentional-communities, private-governance Jeremy Kauffman sat on the board of the Free State Project, the New Hampshire-based libertarian migration initiative, from 2018 until 2023. He founded the blockchain file-sharing project LBRY and co-founded the video platform Odysee. An American entrepreneur and activist, he is based in New Hampshire, where LBRY was built, and has become one of the Free State Project’s most visible public figures. LBRY set out to publish and share files over a blockchain rather than through a company’s servers, and Odysee grew out of it as a video platform on the same protocol, both built on the premise that infrastructure nobody controls is harder to censor than infrastructure somebody does. LBRY Inc. wound down in 2023 after a long fight with the Securities and Exchange Commission over whether its token was a security, and Odysee continues under new ownership. His case for the Free State Project is the movement’s argument in miniature. Concentrating liberty-minded people in one small jurisdiction changes what is politically possible there far faster than persuading an entire country, and New Hampshire is small enough for a few thousand deliberate arrivals to matter. He stood as the Libertarian candidate in the 2022 United States Senate election in New Hampshire, and in 2026 was elected chair of the state’s Libertarian Party and launched the Free State Party, which despite the name is a private membership network for people who have moved to New Hampshire rather than an electoral party. He writes on technology, censorship and political strategy on his Substack. --- # Mark Edge URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mark-edge Role: Free Cities Ambassador Topics: intentional-communities Mark Edge co-founded Free Talk Live two decades ago with the aim of spreading peace, love and liberty around the world. The show airs on more than 200 stations, has won numerous awards and has been ranked among the most influential political radio shows in the United States. Mark is leading the development of Coral Beach Village, a purpose-driven community for people who value freedom, crypto and private property rights. Free Talk Live is an open-phones show with no call screening, unusual in American talk radio and the point of the format: anyone gets on, including the people who disagree. Since the show became a network of programmes he has presented his own strand within it, from New Hampshire, where he moved as a Free State Project participant. Coral Beach Village is the other half of his work, a community on Utila in the Bay Islands of Honduras built around freedom, cryptocurrency and clear private title, on an island that sits outside the hurricane belt. He is a Free Cities Ambassador there. He has been the MC of the Free Cities Conference for several years and introduces the speakers on the main stage. He also hosts the fundraising auction at the VIP dinner, one of the highlights of every edition. In 2026 he was MC of the VIP dinner at the Pristine Bay Beach Club in Próspera. He has spoken at the conference himself since 2021, most recently on why the Free Cities movement deserves support and where it goes next. --- # Ivan Syrtsov URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ivan-syrtsov Role: Free City Real Estate Developer Topics: honduran-zedes Ivan Syrtsov is the co-founder and CEO of Darien Village, a build-to-rent residential development inside the Próspera special economic zone on Roatán, Honduras. He develops property in charter cities and emerging Free City jurisdictions. He founded Vilnyy, the largest coliving chain in Ukraine, before this, and says it was watching governance fail at home, through instability and inefficiency alike, that set him reading about how other systems are built. He began the Próspera project in 2024. Its first phase covers 55 apartments in five buildings in Próspera’s Beta district, with ten more buildings planned in a second phase and ground-floor space set aside for a café and coworking. He describes it as a European-style short-term rental neighbourhood for remote workers and entrepreneurs who want to try Próspera before committing to it. The units are built to be rented rather than sold off one by one, which makes the development a bet on the zone attracting residents who stay, not only investors who buy. That is the harder half of the Free Cities problem. A zone can pass good rules quickly, but somebody still has to build the housing, and the housing has to be financed before the residents are there to fill it. Syrtsov is one of the few developers who can compare a special jurisdiction with an ordinary one from experience. Asked in 2026 what Próspera’s regulatory model changes in practice, he said a building permit that would have taken him roughly four years elsewhere took two weeks there. --- # Danel Armendáriz URL: https://free-cities.org/people/danel-armendariz Role: Financial Services Regulator Topics: honduran-zedes, taxation-and-economics Danel Calvillo Armendáriz is a Spanish financial services executive from the Basque Country. Since 2024 he has been director of financial supervision at the Roatán Financial Services Authority, the regulator for financial services inside Próspera, where he says he has played a central role in building its prudential and supervisory framework. He teaches stablecoins and monetary infrastructure at the University of Navarra, where he took his master’s degree in banking and financial regulation after business administration degrees from Southern Illinois University and the University of Deusto. He worked in the blockchain and digital assets team at BBVA in Switzerland, which launched Bitcoin and Ethereum trading and custody for private banking clients. He has taken virtual asset service provider licences through the Bank of Spain for institutional clients, including oversight of stablecoin remittance operations, and led the launch of a crypto index fund regulated under MiFID II and listed on the Frankfurt exchange. He is managing partner of the advisory firm Inertia Advisory and auditor of Próspera Insurance Company, and he writes on Web3 and digital asset markets. In August 2025 he joined the board of CSLM Digital Asset Acquisition Corp III as an independent director and audit committee member. The company is a special purpose acquisition vehicle listed on Nasdaq under the ticker KOYN, raising 230 million US dollars against digital financial infrastructure. Spanish press reports describe research he is developing under the title The Modern Goldsmiths, on dollar stablecoins as a programmable continuation of the eurodollar system. --- # Peter Young URL: https://free-cities.org/people/peter-young Role: Managing Director Peter is the Managing Director of the Free Cities Foundation, where he oversees project delivery, communications, and the Foundation’s flagship Free Cities Conference. His interest in alternative governance models began during a decade spent living in China, where he studied how Special Economic Zones were used in the 1980s to shift the country toward a market-oriented economy. During that time, he held roles at the British Embassy in Beijing, the British Consulate-General in Wuhan, and the UK’s Catapult Network, focusing on trade, innovation, and international collaboration. He is one of the Foundation’s most frequent public voices, appearing as the guest on the very first episode of its own podcast and since on programmes from Adopting Bitcoin to the New Cities Summit. The case he makes there has two halves: that special economic zones already changed one of the poorest countries on earth beyond recognition within a single working lifetime, and that the next round of them can be built to a far higher standard than the ones China used. He has also argued that the missing piece is financial rather than legal. A new jurisdiction that runs its treasury and its payments through the banking system of the country it is trying to differ from is not meaningfully separate from it, which is why he takes an interest in Bitcoin as infrastructure rather than as an investment. Peter now travels widely to emerging zones around the world, building partnerships and sharing insights from the Free Cities movement. --- # Marc-Felix Otto URL: https://free-cities.org/people/marc-felix-otto Role: Member of the Board Marc-Felix Otto is a Foundation Council Member of the Free Cities Foundation, having supported the idea of contract-based government for over 20 years and authored scientific articles on the topic of coercion together with Rahim Taghizadegan. He is a Partner at The Advisory House, a leading management consultancy to the energy industry. The papers with Taghizadegan, published in the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, try to give coercion the treatment Austrian economics gives exchange: a praxeology of force alongside the praxeology of trade, and an account of why cycles of violence recur. It is an unusual thing for a working consultant to spend his evenings on. His day job is closer to the same question than it looks. He advises European energy companies, an industry whose returns depend less on engineering than on what governments decide, and in 2023 he published a book with Springer on managing political risk: how a firm works out what political exposure it is already carrying, and what it can do about it before the decision lands. That is the practical form of the argument for Free Cities. A business can hedge a currency and insure a factory, but the rules it operates under are the one input it usually cannot price, and a jurisdiction that binds itself by contract is a way of pricing it. He holds a doctorate in physics from the Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, and lives with his wife and two sons in Switzerland. --- # Brian O’Beirne URL: https://free-cities.org/people/brian-obeirne Role: Digital Asset Lawyer Topics: honduran-zedes, private-governance, technology-in-new-cities Brian O’Beirne is an intellectual property lawyer and a co-founder and the chief operating officer of Reality Network, a decentralised computing project whose client software lets people contribute spare capacity from their own laptops, desktops and phones, so that applications run on user devices rather than on central servers. He studied law in Ireland, took the BCL at the University of Oxford, covering legal and political philosophy, criminology and constitutional theory, and an LLM in law and technology at the University of California, Berkeley. He began a doctorate in legal and political philosophy at Trinity College Dublin, left it in 2014, moved to California and was admitted to the California bar in 2016. He practised at Gunderson Dettmer in Silicon Valley, advising startups and investors on intellectual property and asset protection, and later served as director of research for Kasei Holdings in London. His link to the Free Cities movement runs through Próspera, the private jurisdiction on the Honduran island of Roatán, where he is working on a digital asset regulatory framework on the network’s behalf and where it intends to hold its token generation event. He is based on the island. The subject he argues about in public sits where his two careers meet. He has written on blockchain governance as a form of social architecture, treating a protocol’s rules as a question of institutional design rather than of engineering, which is the same question a new jurisdiction has to answer about its own law. --- # Dušan Matuška URL: https://free-cities.org/people/dusan-matuska Role: Bitcoin Educator Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, alternative-education Dušan Matuška is a Bitcoin teacher and miner, and one of Slovakia’s leading educators in the field. A former maths tutor, he helps people understand Bitcoin so they can protect their wealth from inflation. Inside the Próspera jurisdiction on the Honduran island of Roatán he runs the Bitcoin Center Roatán, which opened in November 2022 as the first Bitcoin education centre in the country and is financed by his mining business. AmityAge, which he founded with two partners, mines bitcoin in Paraguay and Ethiopia on hydroelectric power, including a site near the Itaipú dam, and has since added an Alberta operation running on stranded and flared gas at the wellhead. The mining pays for the education work rather than the other way round. That education work is the point. He built the AmityAge Bitcoin Educators Academy to train other teachers, which first ran in Bratislava in January 2024 and has since held academies in more than a dozen countries, and he translated a Bitcoin primer into Slovak, crowdfunding enough to put over two thousand copies into Slovak schools. His stated aim of reaching a hundred million people by 2030 is less a target than a way of saying that the constraint is teachers rather than interest. He chose the Próspera jurisdiction for the education centre, which is the sort of exchange these zones exist for: a jurisdiction that wants a particular kind of resident, and a project that needs somewhere it can simply operate. --- # Mailyn Salabarria URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mailyn-salabarria Role: Strategic Partnerships Topics: private-governance, residency-and-citizenship Mailyn Salabarria is the Free Cities Foundation’s Senior Advisor on U.S. Development and Strategic Partnerships. A bilingual communications strategist, speaker, and international advisor, she has more than 15 years of experience leading outreach, media, and engagement initiatives across the United States and Latin America. Born and raised in communist Cuba, Mailyn experienced firsthand the consequences of a system that suppresses individual liberty, free enterprise, and personal responsibility. In pursuit of greater freedom and opportunity, she left Cuba at the age of 27. She left first for Europe and then for the United States, and has spent the two decades since making the argument from experience rather than from theory. She has spoken for the Dissident Project, which sends people who grew up under authoritarian governments into American classrooms, and runs CRCRFS, her own consultancy on public speaking, communications, public relations and international engagement strategy. She hosts the Cafecito Libre Podcast on the 4LibertyNetwork, and writes Libertad and Clarity Memos on Substack. At the Foundation her work is the American side of the movement: the funders, partners and institutions in the United States who have heard of charter cities but have never met anyone living in one. Her own case is personal rather than theoretical. She has already made the choice between staying somewhere unfree and leaving everything behind, and thinks fewer people should have to. She holds a Juris Doctor from the University of Havana and a master’s degree from Florida International University. --- # Timothy Allen URL: https://free-cities.org/people/timothy-allen Role: Creative Director Timothy hosts the Free Cities Podcast, the Foundation’s long-running interview series on the people who build, live in, and advocate for Free Cities. Across more than 180 episodes he has sat down with city operators, economists, legal scholars, residents and sceptics, turning a niche policy debate into an accessible, human conversation that reaches listeners on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music and Pocket Casts. He brings a 25-year media career to the microphone, starting in London’s Fleet Street as a multi-award-winning photographer and later producing films for the likes of BBC Earth and the Discovery Channel. As the Foundation’s Creative Director he also directed Zones of Progress, the documentary on the past, present and future of Special Economic Zones. The BBC commissioned him in 2008 as the dedicated stills photographer on Human Planet, the first time the corporation had attached one to a landmark series. He spent eighteen months moving between four film crews across more than forty countries; the series went on to win two BAFTAs and an Emmy. His own photography has been commended seventeen times at the Travel Photographer of the Year awards, and he took the overall title in 2013. The subject he keeps returning to is people living in places and in ways that are disappearing, which is an unusual grounding for a movement otherwise staffed by economists and lawyers, and it shows in how the Foundation’s films look and in the questions he asks on the podcast. --- # Massimo Mazzone URL: https://free-cities.org/people/massimo-mazzone Role: Founder Topics: honduran-zedes Massimo Mazzone is the founder of Ciudad Morazán, a ZEDE on the outskirts of Choloma focused on providing a safe and pleasant living environment for Honduran blue-collar workers. He is also president of 3C, a Latin American conglomerate active in pharmaceutical retail and wholesaling. Before founding Ciudad Morazán he spent his career in the telecoms industry and in management consulting. Ciudad Morazán covers about twenty-four hectares outside Choloma, in the industrial belt where much of Honduras’s garment manufacturing is done, and it rents rather than sells: flats, workshops and industrial space, with private security, reliable water and power and a walkable layout, for workers who would otherwise commute from unsafe neighbourhoods. It is designed to house up to ten thousand residents once complete. That makes it the odd one out among the ZEDEs. It was not built for foreign entrepreneurs or for tax residency, and its residents are Honduran factory workers rather than expatriates, which is why it has been described as a libertarian city with no libertarians in it. An Italian businessman long resident in Honduras, he also runs Centro American Consulting & Capital, the group known as 3C, which employs some four thousand people across pharmacy retail, education and property. After Honduras repealed the ZEDE statute in 2022, the company behind Ciudad Morazán brought a claim against the state at ICSID under the DR-CAFTA treaty, which Mazzone has valued at no less than a hundred million dollars. --- # Lotta Moberg URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lotta-moberg Role: Special Economic Zones Economist Topics: special-economic-zones, taxation-and-economics Lotta Moberg is the author of The Political Economy of Special Economic Zones and co-founder of the investment firm ViviFi Ventures and of Wealth Horizons, where she is head of investment research and strategy, applying Austrian economics and political economy to questions of development, tax policy and global markets. The Political Economy of Special Economic Zones, published by Routledge, is one of the few academic treatments of why zones succeed or fail, and its argument is uncomfortable for enthusiasts. Zones work when they are a way of testing reforms that can later be generalised, and fail when they become a way of granting privileges to well-connected firms while the rest of the economy is left alone. The difference is political rather than technical. She spent some seven years as a global macro analyst at William Blair in Chicago before co-founding firms of her own, where she invests using the framework she uses in her research: that institutions, politics and policy shape long-horizon returns more reliably than growth forecasts do. She serves on the board of trustees of the CFA Institute Research Foundation, where she works on research and marketing. She writes and speaks widely on the subject, and holds a doctorate in economics from George Mason University and the CFA charter. She joined the board of trustees of the CFA Institute Research Foundation in 2019, hosts its Financial Thought Exchange podcast, and sits on the Tipolis advisory council. --- # Mark Lutter URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mark-lutter Role: Founder & Executive Director Topics: charter-cities Dr Mark Lutter is the founder and CEO of Braavos Cities, which advises governments and developers on special economic zones and new cities, and the founder and executive director of the Charter Cities Institute, a non-profit building the ecosystem for charter cities. He holds a PhD in economics from George Mason University, where his research focused on charter cities. Previously he was lead economist for NeWAY Capital, an asset-management firm making early-stage investments in charter cities. He hosts the Charter Cities Podcast, which has run to more than eighty episodes of interviews with developers, financiers and officials, and writes Building Grand Bahama, a newsletter on developing the island. His writing has appeared in outlets including the Financial Times, the Chicago Tribune, City Journal, the New Yorker and Cato Unbound. The Charter Cities Institute is the field’s main research and convening body, publishing the governance handbooks and legal analyses that new projects work from, and running the New Cities Summit, which has gathered developers, financiers and government officials in Kigali, Nairobi and Johannesburg. Braavos Cities is the other half of the answer, a firm advising governments and developers on special economic zones and new cities, with work in Latin America, Africa and Asia. His reason for the split is that a think tank can make the case while a developer has to make the numbers work, and the field needs both before anyone takes it seriously. --- # Ricardo Gonzalez URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ricardo-gonzalez Role: Free Cities Ambassador Ricardo A. González is a Honduran attorney and entrepreneur, and the founder and managing attorney of GALCO Legal, with close to a decade of experience in corporate law, investment and business development. He holds a Master of Laws in corporate law from Penn State Law, and has held senior legal and governmental roles within Próspera, overseeing legal compliance, incorporations and business development. He advises local and international companies, entrepreneurs and investors operating in Honduras, and describes his focus as the legal frameworks that let new ideas and businesses grow. Before Penn State he led operations at a law firm working with technology startups and mentored in incubation programmes such as Honduras Digital Challenge; he also worked at the Eleutera Foundation on research and advocacy for economic freedom in Honduras, and held student leadership roles at the University of San Pedro Sula, including president of the law students association. His work in Próspera is the everyday machinery of a jurisdiction with its own company law: incorporations, compliance, and the questions that arise when a business registered under a zone framework has to deal with counterparties and banks outside it. Before that he worked at the Eleutera Foundation, the Honduran think tank that has argued for economic freedom in the country for years and did much of the groundwork of persuasion that made the ZEDE framework politically possible at all. Based in Próspera, Roatán, Honduras. --- # Emile Phaneuf URL: https://free-cities.org/people/emile-phaneuf Role: Free Cities Ambassador Topics: residency-and-citizenship Emile Phaneuf III is a Research Associate for the Center for Market Education, an ambassador of the Free Cities Foundation and a member of the Mont Pelerin Society. His articles and essays have been published in several languages by Zero Hedge, Bitcoin Magazine, Nasdaq, the Independent Institute, Procesos de Mercado and Instituto Mises Brasil, and have been featured in The New York Times, The Japan Times and The Economic Times. He writes on money, governance and flag theory for economic outlets rather than for a specialist audience. He came to it late. He spent over a decade in international business development, first at the World Trade Center Arkansas and then in senior export management roles in the United States and New Zealand for manufacturers in mining and in food and drink, and as a younger man served in the Security Forces of the United States Air Force, stationed at home and in Japan. His interest is in the overlap between Austrian economics and Bitcoin: two bodies of thought that reached the same conclusion about money from opposite directions, one philosophical and one an engineering result, and that the Free Cities movement now draws on together. He holds a double-degree Master's in Economics from OMMA Business School Madrid and Universidad Francisco Marroquín, and an MA in political science and a BA in international relations from the University of Arkansas. Based in Asunción, Paraguay. --- # Jorge Schmidt URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jorge-schmidt Role: Maritime Lawyer Topics: seasteading Jorge Schmidt is a Miami attorney who has advised The Seasteading Institute’s board of directors on legal questions since 2009. He presented research at the institute’s second conference in San Francisco that September, and the talk it produced, Legal Aspects of Seasteading, was published by the institute in January 2010. He practises through Legal Schmidt PLLC on complex commercial and cross-border litigation and arbitration: contract disputes, antitrust, securities fraud and intellectual property claims, together with business formation, capital raising and transactional analysis. He also takes claims under USERRA, the statute protecting the reemployment rights of members of the Guard and Reserves, and has advised chief executives, chief financial officers and general counsel at businesses exposed to scrutiny by the Office of Foreign Assets Control and the Securities and Exchange Commission. He was admitted to the Florida Bar in 2004, holds a Juris Doctor magna cum laude from the University of Miami School of Law and a master’s degree in finance from Johns Hopkins, works natively in Spanish and has long experience of civil law systems. He is a special operations veteran and serves as judge advocate for his VFW post. He has founded and run two startups in Latin America, and the industries he says interest him are aquaculture, logistics and robotics: between them, most of what a settlement on the water would have to solve before anyone could live on it. --- # Tatiana Butanka URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tatiana-butanka Tatiana Butanka is an activist and one of the visible representatives of Montelibero, a libertarian intentional community and crypto-oriented free-society movement in Montenegro. With a background in IT, sales and marketing, she helps organise the community’s events and projects. Montelibero began in December 2020, when a libertarian couple left Kyiv for Montenegro and were joined within months by others from across the Russian-speaking world. It asks members to hold to the non-aggression principle rather than to any party or programme, and it runs its common purse through the MTL token, which works as a share in the fund that buys the land and pays for what gets built on it. Butanka bought a plot at MTL City herself, which is the part of the project that separates it from an online community. The land is real, the money is pooled, and the decisions about both are taken by the people who put it in. She presented the project at the Liberty in Our Lifetime conference in Prague in 2023 and has talked through the practicalities on the Free Cities Podcast, including what it actually takes for a foreigner to buy land in Montenegro. Her reason for choosing the country is not ideological: she describes it as unusually open to newcomers and willing to try things, which for a settlement of this size counts for more than any constitutional argument. --- # Trey Goff URL: https://free-cities.org/people/trey-goff Role: Chief of Staff & Director of Public Affairs Topics: honduran-zedes Trey Goff is Chief of Staff and Director of Public Affairs at Próspera, the charter-city project on the Honduran island of Roatán, where he leads public policy and institutional design, and increasingly the software and AI tooling the zone runs on. He writes and speaks widely on special jurisdictions and governance innovation, and authored a peer-reviewed study of the governance structure of Honduras’s first ZEDE. He was Próspera’s first full-time employee and has been with the project since before there was anything to show a visitor, which makes him one of the few people who can describe a charter city’s institutional design from the inside rather than from a paper. He read economics and political science at Mississippi State University. His work covers public affairs as well as policy: drafting and refining the zone’s regulations, and defending them since Honduras repealed the ZEDE statute. He has written on whether it is possible to design a constitution that genuinely binds the government it creates, which is the practical question a new jurisdiction faces on its first day and the one most existing constitutions have answered badly. He also founded Learn Arena, an education platform built around market-driven learning. He speaks widely on special jurisdictions, and argues that the movement’s bottleneck is not ideas but execution: somebody has to secure the legal framework, and then somebody has to build. --- # Patrick Lamson-Hall URL: https://free-cities.org/people/patrick-lamson-hall Role: Urban Planning Researcher Topics: honduran-zedes, urban-design Patrick Lamson-Hall is an urban planner and a Fellow in the Urban Expansion programme at NYU’s Marron Institute of Urban Management, where he contributed to the Atlas of Urban Expansion. Through Fitted Projects, the planning firm he co-founded in 2020 with the urban designer Nuria Puigcerver, he prepares plans for charter cities and special economic zones, including the urban plan for Ciudad Morazán in Honduras. He coordinated the Ethiopia Urban Expansion Initiative, a programme run with the Ethiopian government that applied a deliberately simple method in sixteen cities: extend the municipal boundary well ahead of growth, lay out and protect a grid of arterial roads roughly a kilometre apart, and reserve the open space, all before the land is built on. The premise is that a city government in a poor country cannot control how its edges develop, but it can decide where the roads will run, and doing that early costs almost nothing while doing it late is close to impossible. His research at NYU forecasts urban growth worldwide, including downscaled maps of where two hundred cities are likely to expand by 2050, and he manages the India Urban Expansion Observatory, a thirty-person research facility in Mumbai. Through Fitted Projects he applies the same discipline to charter cities and special economic zones, among them Ciudad Morazán in Honduras and Green Heart Kilifi in Kenya. --- # Stacia Wilson URL: https://free-cities.org/people/stacia-wilson Role: Network Society Community Builder Topics: intentional-communities, private-governance Stacia Wilson is co-founder and chief community officer of Meridia, a planned town near Austin, Texas, organised as a set of boroughs, each with its own character and its own governance experiment. Its published design goals include car-free walkable neighbourhoods with mixed-use centres, nontoxic construction, permaculture and regenerative agriculture, a vetted high-trust culture, and economic instruments such as externality zoning and a Georgist land rent. Her co-founder is Billy Tetrud, the project’s chief executive. Her training is in anthropology, and the decade before Meridia was spent building communities rather than companies: lifestyle brands, dance communities, church planting, and international pop-up co-living houses where dancers could live and work remotely in Cancún, Rome and Tokyo, each one run with local organisers. That is an unusual preparation for this field, and it shows in which half of the problem she works on. A new settlement is normally designed as a legal and a physical object, a charter and a street plan. The part that decides whether anyone stays is whether the people in it can live together, which is a question about culture, membership and trust rather than about rules. She writes about sensemaking, liberty, technology and culture on her Substack, How to Change Your Mind, was a Young Voices contributor published by Free the People, and has spoken on panels at FreedomFest. --- # Lonis Hamaili URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lonis-hamaili Role: VP of Growth Topics: honduran-zedes Lonis Hamaili is Head of Governance and VP of Growth at Próspera, the ZEDE on the Honduran island of Roatán, where he works to attract entrepreneurs and businesses to the zone and has lived for more than two years. A Swedish national, he left a Silicon Valley startup career, having founded Godmode and co-founded Dework and the Y Combinator-backed Depict.ai, to join the project. What those ventures were explains the move: Godmode was one of the first autonomous AI agents to reach a large user base, Dework a project-management tool built for organisations that pay in tokens, and Depict.ai a machine-learning product that went through Y Combinator in 2020. At Próspera his job is demand. A zone with good rules and no companies in it proves nothing, so the work is recruiting founders, easing their arrival and shortening the distance between someone’s interest and their incorporation. The zone passed five hundred incorporated companies during his time there. He makes the case in the terms a founder actually weighs, which are the cost of starting, the time to a licence and whether the rules will still be there in ten years, rather than in the language of political theory. He reads history for the same reason, looking for what earlier governance practice can tell a new jurisdiction. He studied in Stockholm. --- # Liam Bates URL: https://free-cities.org/people/liam-bates Topics: micronations, history-of-free-cities, private-governance Liam Bates is part of the third generation of the family running the Principality of Sealand, the self-declared micronation on a former Second World War sea fort in the North Sea. Grandson of founder Roy Bates and son of Michael Bates, he works on Sealand’s governance and community and is a director of the family shellfish company, Fruits of the Sea. Sealand was founded in 1967 by his grandfather Roy Bates, a wartime army officer turned pirate radio broadcaster, who occupied an abandoned anti-aircraft fort several miles off the Essex coast and declared it a principality. It has since survived a court case, an attempted armed takeover and several changes in the law of the sea, and it remains the most persistent micronation in existence. The third generation runs it as a working concern rather than a stunt. The fort has to be maintained, staffed and paid for, and the family funds it partly through a shellfish business, Fruits of the Sea, which harvests cockles largely for the Spanish market, and partly through the sale of titles, passports and merchandise. Liam works on Sealand’s governance and community and is the family member most engaged with the wider movement, where Sealand is less a model to copy than the longest-running demonstration of what a micro-jurisdiction actually costs to keep going. --- # Joseph McKinney URL: https://free-cities.org/people/joseph-mckinney Role: Startup Societies Pioneer Topics: charter-cities Joseph McKinney is the founder and president of the Startup Societies Foundation, a think tank that studies and connects special economic zones, charter cities and network states. He works in particular on tribal special economic zones, founded the Catawba Digital Economic Zone, publishes the Journal of Special Jurisdictions, and co-authored Founding Startup Societies: A Step-by-Step Guide. He founded the Startup Societies Foundation in 2015 and built it into a network of researchers, entrepreneurs and policymakers, running conferences that put zone operators and academics in the same room at a point when the field had no common venue. He co-authored Founding Startup Societies: A Step-by-Step Guide and published the Journal of Special Jurisdictions, the first peer-reviewed journal devoted to the subject. The Catawba Digital Economic Zone took the theory into practice. Created with the Catawba Indian Nation in South Carolina, it uses tribal sovereignty to establish a jurisdiction inside the United States with its own commercial code, aimed at digital assets and financial technology, and McKinney has served as its chief executive. He has since worked with other federally recognised tribes on the same model. It is one of the few zones in a developed country that needed neither a new treaty nor a constitutional amendment, only a sovereign that already existed and had never used its authority this way. --- # Christoph Heuermann URL: https://free-cities.org/people/christoph-heuermann Role: Emigration & Flag-Theory Expert Topics: taxation-and-economics, residency-and-citizenship Christoph Heuermann helps people worldwide to lead a freer life. As an expert in emigration, tax optimisation, and travel hacking, his own mission is to travel to every country in the world. Christoph is also active as an investor in agriculture, real estate, and other areas such as free private cities. He can be reached on his travel blog christoph.today. He gave up his German residence at twenty-four, soon after a degree in administrative sciences, to travel and to arrange his own affairs by flag theory, the practice of splitting citizenship, residence, business, banking and assets across several countries so that no single government holds all of them. He has since visited every country in the world and built a consulting business, publishing in German at Staatenlos and in English at denationalize.me, with Spanish, French and Portuguese arms. He also runs a catamaran that doubles as a meeting place for his community, used through the year for seminars and working retreats, which is a fairly literal expression of the argument: a base that is not attached to any jurisdiction. His interest in Free Cities follows from the same logic. Perpetual travel solves the problem for someone willing to keep moving; a Free City would solve it for people who would rather stay somewhere. Based in Panama City, Panama. --- # Max Hillebrand URL: https://free-cities.org/people/max-hillebrand Role: Free Software Entrepreneur Topics: technology-in-new-cities, taxation-and-economics Max Hillebrand is a free-software entrepreneur focused on building tools to define and protect property rights in cyberspace. Drawing on praxeology and cypherpunk strategy, he works to create a “second realm” with a sound monetary economy in which sovereign individuals can act freely. He contributes to numerous free-software projects, most notably the privacy-focused Bitcoin wallet Wasabi Wallet. He was chief executive of zkSNACKs, the company behind Wasabi Wallet, and has worked on the coinjoin techniques that let bitcoin users break the link between their transactions without handing custody of their coins to anyone. His view is that privacy has to be cheap and switched on by default, because a privacy tool used by only a few people identifies them rather than protecting them. He runs his own affairs on the same principle, paying suppliers in bitcoin and working only for clients who pay in it, and because the software he writes is not scarce he gives it away. The second realm he describes is not a place on a map. It is the set of relationships, tools and money that already work without permission, and his argument to the Free Cities movement is that a jurisdiction built on paper alone stays fragile unless the people inside it can also transact, communicate and hold property without asking. --- # Michael Mainelli URL: https://free-cities.org/people/michael-mainelli Role: Economist & Former Lord Mayor of London Topics: taxation-and-economics Michael Mainelli is executive chairman and co-founder of Z/Yen, the City of London commercial think tank behind indices such as the Global Financial Centres Index. A scientist and accountant by background, he served as the 695th Lord Mayor of the City of London in 2023–24 and is Emeritus Professor of Commerce at Gresham College. He founded Z/Yen in 1994 and built it into a commercial think tank whose indices are its most visible output. The Global Financial Centres Index has ranked the world’s financial centres twice a year since 2007, and the same method has since been applied to green finance and to smart centres. The ranking works by asking practitioners where they would locate and why, which turns competition between jurisdictions into something published and comparable. That is why the work is relevant here. His indices measure, in public and twice a year, the thing the Free Cities movement argues for: that places compete for capital and talent on the quality of their institutions, and that the results move. A research scientist and accountant by training, he was Sheriff of the City of London before serving as Lord Mayor, and took his mayoral theme, Connect to Prosper, from the same view of the City as a place that trades knowledge as much as money. --- # Thomas D. Walls URL: https://free-cities.org/people/thomas-d-walls Role: Minister of Foreign Affairs Topics: micronations, private-governance Thomas D. Walls is the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Free Republic of Liberland, a self-declared micronation on the Danube between Croatia and Serbia. He leads the project’s diplomatic efforts, pursuing international recognition and cooperation with its neighbours through what he calls “diplomacy by example”: demonstrating legitimacy through investment, innovation, and community development. An American with a diplomatic background, he worked in Hamburg, Bonn and Berlin, including in the office of Richard Holbrooke during his time as United States Ambassador to Germany, and he brings that experience to a state that has to be argued into existence rather than inherited. Liberland claims a few square kilometres on the Danube that neither Croatia nor Serbia counts inside its own borders, because each draws the river line differently. That leaves the project with the hardest version of the recognition problem, and Walls has spent his tenure on the slow parts of it: contacts with neighbouring governments, cooperation agreements, and turning a body of supporters into something other states can deal with. In 2023 a formal crossing to the site was arranged with Croatia for the first time, letting citizens set foot on the territory. His case to the neighbours is regional rather than ideological: investment, jobs and stability on a stretch of river nobody wanted. --- # Thibault Serlet URL: https://free-cities.org/people/thibault-serlet Role: Special Economic Zones Researcher Topics: special-economic-zones Thibault Serlet is Co-Founder and Chief Researcher at Adrianople Group, a research and advisory firm focused on Special Economic Zones. He previously founded and led the Startup Societies Foundation, a think tank studying SEZs. He founded that organisation in 2015 as a non-profit studying and promoting Special Economic Zones and new city projects, and he sits on the board of advisers of the Center for Innovative Governance Research. He is the architect of Open Zone Map, published in 2021 as the first attempt to catalogue every Special Economic Zone on earth in a single dataset, and still the largest such collection. Before it there was no common reference for how many zones exist, where they are or what rules they run on, which made the field easy to argue about and hard to measure. Consultancies, development organisations and researchers now use the data. His own research covers the unglamorous mechanics: how tax incentives are structured, what happens to wages and worker training inside zones, how construction is tendered in new city projects, and why master-planned communities so often fail to turn into cities. He has published case studies on zones from Indonesia to South Africa, advises Pronomos Capital, the venture fund that invests in new city projects, and hosts a podcast on geoeconomics. --- # Mason URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mason Role: Chair Topics: seasteading Mason is the Chair of Atlas Island, an organization dedicated to supporting individual sovereignty by applying the principles of Free Cities to the world of seasteading. Atlas Island aims to become an archipelago of independent seasteading platforms that adhere to a common set of rules that protect natural rights. The project has a five-stage plan for developing an online community of seasteaders into a full offshore community. He founded Atlas Island in 2021, taking the name from Atlas Shrugged, on the reasoning that arguing with people who do not want liberty is less useful than building somewhere for the people who do. An engineer by background, he has since concentrated on the intermediate step the movement kept skipping. LiberArx began as an open-source solar catamaran designed as a permanent home rather than as a boat, comfortable enough for a family and cheap enough to reproduce, on the argument that an archipelago has to begin with a single unit somebody will actually live on. He now builds them through Atlas Yachts, which he founded to design solar-electric house yachts in five models from the twelve-metre Atlas 39 to the twenty-two-and-a-half-metre Atlas 74, each generating its own power and water and free to move between jurisdictions under admiralty law. Based in the Caribbean Sea. --- # Grant Romundt URL: https://free-cities.org/people/grant-romundt Role: Seasteading Entrepreneur Topics: seasteading Grant Romundt is CEO of Ocean Builders, a company developing innovative, eco-friendly floating homes and structures (“SeaPods”) designed for sustainable living on the water. He has spent years living aboard the first oceanic floating homes as the company works toward deploying them globally. He founded Ocean Builders with Chad Elwartowski and the engineer Rüdiger Koch, and the company moved its work to Panama after an earlier attempt off Thailand ended with the seastead dismantled by the navy. The SeaPod is raised above the water on a single column so that it shades and disturbs less of the reef beneath it, and the company presents the design as restorative rather than merely low-impact. Romundt has lived aboard the prototypes himself, which is the point of them: the case for floating homes is not made by renderings but by people staying in one through weather, maintenance and the ordinary boredom of daily life. The first pod has since been moved to its permanent Caribbean position and is occupied as a private residence rather than a demonstration. He spends much of his time in discussions with governments, developers and island states about floating development, where the argument for building on water is practical rather than ideological: some places have far more coastline than buildable land. --- # Ben Silone URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ben-silone Role: Seasteading Entrepreneur Topics: seasteading Ben Silone is the CEO and co-founder of Arktide, a seasteading venture building affordable, concrete-hulled modular floating homes designed to be joined into larger floating communities. He previously worked on international-development and communications projects, including disaster relief abroad. Arktide was founded in 2021 and launched its first prototype, the Coquina, in Florida in 2023: a floating home of about a hundred square metres on a platform roughly ten metres square, engineered for waves of up to five metres so that it can sit in coastal water or further out. The hull uses high-strength concrete and geopolymers rather than steel or fibreglass, chosen for a projected life of over a century and for resistance to salt water, and the homes run off-grid on solar power with rainwater capture and wastewater recycling. Aquaculture infrastructure sits under the base, so a platform can raise fish and shellfish while people live on it. The company also works on ocean thermal energy and has entered the Carbon Removal XPRIZE. The point of the design is reproducibility. A seastead only becomes a community if the units are cheap enough to build in numbers and standard enough to join together, which is the question Silone brought to the seasteading panel at the Free Cities Summit in 2025. --- # Alex Tourski URL: https://free-cities.org/people/alex-tourski Role: Data Sovereignty Entrepreneur Topics: technology-in-new-cities Alex Tourski is the founder of the Post-Platforms Foundation, which he started in 2020 to decouple user data from dominant digital platforms and build a decentralised data space. Originally from Ukraine and based in the Netherlands, he has worked across internet security and cryptography, and in 2025 launched the MetaState Foundation. His argument is that the internet’s central flaw is architectural rather than legal. Data lives inside platforms, so leaving a platform means leaving your contacts, your records and your reputation behind, and that is what makes incumbents hard to displace. The Web 3.0 Data Space he has been developing since 2020 separates the data from the application, so that identity, reputation and records stay with the person and any service can be granted access to them. The MetaState Foundation, launched in 2025 with private sponsors and European grants, is the vehicle for putting that to use: identity, voting, charters and reputation as shared infrastructure rather than as features of one company’s product, starting with communities in Amsterdam. The link to the Free Cities argument is direct. A new jurisdiction needs a record of who its residents are and what they have agreed to, and building that inside somebody else’s platform reproduces the dependency it was meant to escape. --- # Sean Pawley URL: https://free-cities.org/people/sean-pawley Role: Banking Entrepreneur Topics: honduran-zedes, taxation-and-economics Sean Pawley is the founder and CEO of Seshat Bank, the premier bank for the ZEDE ecosystem in Honduras, and an expert on banking, finance and agriculture. The bank departs from traditional Central American banking by letting customers manage everything from their phone or laptop with full API access, operating under a regulatory regime designed to reduce risk for depositors. He began the project after dealing with banks in East Africa and concluding that the problem was regulatory rather than technical: the compliance burden on a small bank makes it impossible to serve the customers a large one will not bother with. The plan was originally for Rwanda and Uganda before he moved it to Próspera, where the rules for chartering a bank are written by the zone itself. Seshat takes deposits on fixed terms of several years, which lets it lend on longer horizons than a bank funded by instant-access accounts can, and it runs from a phone or a browser with full programmatic access rather than through branches. It is named after the Egyptian goddess of writing and accounting, and it is one of the clearer tests of whether a new jurisdiction can produce something a regulator elsewhere would not permit and a customer would still trust. --- # Knut Svanholm URL: https://free-cities.org/people/knut-svanholm Role: Bitcoin Author & Educator Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Knut Svanholm is a Bitcoin author, educator and self-described armchair philosopher. His first book, Bitcoin: Sovereignty Through Mathematics, is regarded as a classic of the genre, and he coined the meme (and wrote the book) “Everything Divided by 21 Million”. A committed voluntaryist, he sees Free Cities as a practical way to implement Austrian principles in real-world societies. Sovereignty Through Mathematics appeared in 2019 and is deliberately not an introduction to how Bitcoin works. It is an argument about what follows once money is separated from the state, and it has been recommended widely enough to have become the standard gift to newcomers who are already past the technical explanations. He has written several further books in the series, some with co-authors, and the phrase he coined, Everything Divided by 21 Million, has become the shorthand for pricing the world in a fixed supply rather than in a currency that keeps expanding. He lives on Madeira, where the island’s Bitcoin community and the Free Cities movement overlap, and serves as a Free Cities Ambassador there. His case for these projects is Austrian rather than technological: a society is a set of voluntary agreements, and those agreements only hold over time if the money underneath them cannot be quietly diluted. --- # Vít Jedlička URL: https://free-cities.org/people/vit-jedlicka Topics: micronations, private-governance Vít Jedlička’s mission is to build Liberland, a country where honest people can prosper without being oppressed by unnecessary regulation and taxation. Liberland is undergoing a transformation from a centralised libertarian state toward a Decentralised Autonomous Government, combining blockchain governance technology with the ideas of limited government. Liberland claims seven square kilometres of Gornja Siga, a pocket of the Danube floodplain that Croatia and Serbia each exclude from their own territory because of a boundary dispute neither wants to concede. Jedlička declared it in 2015, and Croatian police have repeatedly turned back or detained people trying to reach it, himself included. The project has worked around that from the Serbian bank, where it acquired a riverside site now developed as a settlement and event venue, and it holds an annual gathering there. Its residency and voting run on blockchain, which is less a gimmick than a necessity for a state whose citizens are almost all somewhere else. He has given hundreds of interviews to mainstream outlets such as The New York Times Magazine and Fox Business Network, and spoken at dozens of conferences including the Horasis Global Meeting, TEDx and the St. Gallen Symposium. He holds degrees from the University of Economics in Prague and the CEVRO Institute. --- # Scott Forte URL: https://free-cities.org/people/scott-forte Role: Free Cities Ambassador Scott Forte is a Pilot, Real Estate Developer, Entrepreneur, and Freedom Enthusiast. Scott graduated from the "Harvard of the Sky" Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University where he earned an undergraduate in Aeronautical Science, with minors in both Business and Law. He went on to earn an MBA with a specialization in Finance. After flying Private Jets and selling charter on a fleet of Falcon 900’s & BBJs, Scott transitioned into Real-Estate Sales & Real-Estate Development. He has used his array of skills to help start multiple tech companies. Freedom, Competition, and Meritocracy are political ideals Scott stands for and plans to incorporate into the many Free Private Cities he is working diligently to build. A Portsmouth native, he has also stood for public office in New Hampshire, which is the ordinary route in a state where the Free State Project has put several hundred of its participants into local and state politics. His two careers meet in the same practical question. Aviation taught him how a heavily regulated industry actually gets things certified and moved; property development taught him what it costs to put a building on a piece of land. Both are the unglamorous parts of a Free City, and they decide whether one exists. Based in Portsmouth, USA. --- # Tim Stern URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tim-stern Role: Founder of CryptoCity Topics: intentional-communities, bitcoin-and-free-cities Tim Stern is the founder of CryptoCity, a community development on Isla de Margarita, Venezuela, that combines technology, entrepreneurship and a shared set of values. First planned as a 12.8-hectare site of 100 plots, the project has grown to around 40 hectares with some 300 plots, and selects its residents for their fit with an ethos of innovation and collaboration. He argues that leaving an increasingly constrained Europe is a rational choice rather than a fantasy, and is building CryptoCity as a high-trust community funded through DAO-based shared investment. He has appeared on the Free Cities Podcast and writes about the future of community living. The project is organised as a DAO, with each plot carrying a token that functions as a vote, so decisions about the site are taken by the people who own part of it rather than by the developer alone. Stern has lived in Venezuela since 2021, and Isla Margarita is a deliberate choice: an island with duty-free status, cheap land and enough distance from Caracas to be left alone. The removal of Nicolás Maduro in January 2026 reopened the country to foreign investment, and the project now builds in conditions nobody planned for. Construction has run in phases, with infrastructure before houses. --- # Vince Graham URL: https://free-cities.org/people/vince-graham Role: Real Estate Developer Topics: intentional-communities, taxation-and-economics, urban-design Vince Graham is a US-based real-estate developer and self-described contrarian who works to combine time-tested lessons with modern advances, creating places of enduring aesthetic, economic and social value. Across more than four decades his career has involved adaptive reuse, historic renovation and the building of human-scale neighbourhoods. He began in 1991 with Newpoint, a traditional neighbourhood on Lady Island near Beaufort, and followed it with I’On in Mount Pleasant, one of the earliest full-scale New Urbanist communities in the United States. Both were modelled on the older neighbourhoods a mile away rather than on a style guide: narrow streets, shallow setbacks, houses close enough together that a street reads as a room. Getting them approved was the hard part. I’On took years of negotiation with a town whose zoning code effectively forbade the kind of place that town already contained, which is the paradox his work keeps running into: many of the most admired neighbourhoods in America would be illegal to build today. His firm Loci has since developed further projects around Charleston, and that obstacle, regulatory rather than architectural, is what draws him to the Free Cities idea. He hopes the Free City concept can create greater opportunities for a more humane and fulfilling built environment. --- # Katie Ananina URL: https://free-cities.org/people/katie-ananina Role: Second-Citizenship Entrepreneur Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics Katie Ananina (known online as “Katie the Russian”) is the founder of Plan B Passport and host of The Bittersweet Podcast. A former professional athlete, she emigrated to the United States and traded her sporting career for entrepreneurship. Driven by a passion for sovereignty and Bitcoin, she founded Plan B Passport to help bitcoiners obtain second citizenships through jurisdictional arbitrage. She grew up in Russia, competed as a professional athlete and emigrated to the United States, where she started Plan B Passport after friends online kept asking the same questions about how she had arranged her own citizenship. The firm works with the Caribbean and Pacific programmes that grant citizenship for an investment or a donation, and it took payment in bitcoin from the beginning, which at the time almost nobody in the industry did. In 2025 Plan B Passport was acquired by CitizenX, a Swiss citizenship-by-investment company, and she became its chief marketing officer. Her argument is that a second citizenship is not a tax trick but a redundancy. The single document that decides where you may live and work is issued by one government, and holding only one of them is a concentration of risk nobody would accept in any other part of their affairs. --- # Johann Thusbass URL: https://free-cities.org/people/johann-thusbass Role: Liberty Community Builder Topics: special-economic-zones Johann Thusbass is a co-founder of Guanaja Hills, a resort, community and business development on the Honduran island of Guanaja. A Swiss ICT manager and co-founder of Club Hayek Zurich, he was an early participant in the Crypto Valley. The project is run by an association registered in Lucerne and takes its motto from the movement it grew out of, Liberty in Our Lifetime. It is planned as a place to live and work rather than as a holiday development, on an island whose economy has run on fishing, diving and tourism. Thusbass has spent his working life in Swiss industry, running IT for a mid-sized manufacturer, and has spent three decades reading and writing on the private provision of services that states usually reserve for themselves, security and defence among them. That is also what he brings to Club Hayek Zurich, which he helped found as a forum for Austrian economics in the city. He first backed a Honduran venture in 2018 and has since discussed the project publicly in the Free Cities and liberty podcast circuit, where the recurring theme is what building on a small Caribbean island actually takes: legal certainty, patient capital and infrastructure that has to exist before the first resident arrives. --- # David Friedman URL: https://free-cities.org/people/david-friedman Role: Economist & author Topics: taxation-and-economics, private-governance David D. Friedman is an American economist, legal scholar, and author best known for The Machinery of Freedom, a foundational text of anarcho-capitalism that argues for a society ordered by private, competing institutions rather than a state. Trained as a physicist, he has taught economics and law at several US universities, and is the son of economist Milton Friedman. The Machinery of Freedom appeared in 1973 and has been revised twice since. Its distinctive move is to argue for a stateless order on consequentialist rather than moral grounds: not that the state is unjust, but that private, competing institutions would in most cases do the job better, and where he thinks they would not, he says so. Trained as a physicist at Chicago before turning to economics and law, he taught for years at Santa Clara University without holding a degree in either subject. His later book Legal Systems Very Different From Ours examines historical and contemporary legal orders, from the Icelandic sagas to Romani custom, as evidence of what law looks like when it is not produced by a modern state. That is the work the Free Cities movement draws on most heavily, because it turns private law from speculation into a matter of comparative evidence. --- # Johann Gevers URL: https://free-cities.org/people/johann-gevers Role: Bitcoin Pioneer Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Johann Gevers is an entrepreneur building infrastructure for a free and prosperous society. He founded Crypto Valley, the world’s leading cryptofinance ecosystem, along with Monetas, the Tezos Foundation and the Crypto Valley Association. Born in South Africa and based in Switzerland, he set up Monetas in Zug in 2012 to bring cheap financial and legal transactions to people without bank accounts, aiming the product at the parts of the world where the nearest bank branch is a day’s travel away. From 2013 he built out Crypto Valley around it, coining the name and organising the cluster of companies, lawyers and regulators that turned one canton into a place where work on decentralised systems could be done in the open. More than a thousand firms now operate there. He also co-founded the Bitcoin Association Switzerland and the Digital Finance Compliance Association, and served as president of the Tezos Foundation. The thread running through the work is jurisdictional. Crypto Valley grew because a small canton chose clear rules earlier than its neighbours, which is the mechanism the Free Cities movement is interested in: places compete for people and capital through the quality of their institutions, and good rules spread by being copied rather than imposed. --- # Hugo Mathecowitsch URL: https://free-cities.org/people/hugo-mathecowitsch Hugo Mathecowitsch is the founder of Tools for the Commons, a technology organisation building interoperable infrastructure for economic zones that blend state, market and non-profit functions. Its Digital Access Zone lets users register an entity, bill revenue and reinvest the proceeds. He previously worked at Endeavor. Tools for the Commons builds what it calls digital special economic zones: cloud-first jurisdictions with their own rules, anchored to a host country without being identical to it, aimed at businesses whose operations are already online. The pitch is that a company should be able to register, bank, invoice and pay tax inside one legible framework instead of assembling one out of four countries. The company has raised early funding for the model and works with public partners, including a digital zone in Zanzibar with the telecommunications and investment authorities, and a project in the Brazilian state of Amapá with the cities of Santana and Macapá. The approach is a useful counterweight inside a movement that tends to picture new jurisdictions as land. Mathecowitsch’s premise is that most of what a zone actually does is administrative, that administration is software, and that the software can arrive long before the buildings do. He previously worked at Endeavor. --- # Alex Ugorji URL: https://free-cities.org/people/alex-ugorji Role: Free Cities Entrepreneur Alex Ugorji is an educator and entrepreneur interested in prosperity zones, breakaway civilisations and disruptive technologies. He studied International Politics and Economics at Middlebury College before earning a master’s in education policy from Stanford University. He went on to start Crypto Frontier, an intentional crypto community in Saipan, and to co-found the blockchain software company RaiPay and the financial-technology company Nakamoto Financial. He later moved to Ciudad Morazán, Honduras, to become one of the first residents of a free private city, where he works as a consultant, community manager and Free Cities ambassador. Crypto Frontier was an attempt to bring cryptocurrency businesses to the Northern Mariana Islands, and it was shelved as United States regulators took a closer interest, which is what sent him looking for a jurisdiction outside the American perimeter. In Ciudad Morazán he helped build the payment layer that lets a resident live entirely on crypto, which in a city built for Honduran factory workers is a more demanding test than it sounds: the point is not the technology but whether the corner shop takes it. He received the 2024 Free Cities Foundation Storyteller Award for his Morazán Monday series on X and for the outreach around it. --- # Balaji Srinivasan URL: https://free-cities.org/people/balaji-srinivasan Role: Author of The Network State Topics: network-states Balaji S. Srinivasan is an angel investor and tech founder. Formerly the CTO of Coinbase and General Partner at Andreessen Horowitz, he is an early investor in many successful tech companies and crypto protocols, including Akasa, Alchemy, Benchling, Cameo, CoinTracker, Culdesac, Dapper Labs, Deel, Digital Ocean, Eight Sleep, EPNS, Farcaster, Gitcoin, Golden, Instadapp, Lambda School, Levels Health, Locals, Messari, Mirror, OnDeck, OpenSea, Orchid Health, Prospera, Replit, Republic, Roam Research, Skiff, Soylent, Stability AI, Starkware, Stedi, Superhuman, Synthesis, and Zora Labs, to name a few. Balaji was also an early investor in many important crypto protocols including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche, NEAR, Polygon, Chainlink, XMTP, ZCash and more. Dr. Srinivasan was the cofounder of Earn.com (acquired by Coinbase), Counsyl (acquired by Myriad), Teleport (acquired by Topia), and Coin Center. He holds a BS/MS/PhD in Electrical Engineering and an MS in Chemical Engineering from Stanford University. His book The Network State, published in 2022, gives the movement its most cited definition: a highly aligned online community with a capacity for collective action, which crowdfunds territory around the world and eventually seeks diplomatic recognition. The sequence he describes runs from startup society to network union to network archipelago before anything resembling a state appears. --- # Pavol Lupták URL: https://free-cities.org/people/pavol-luptak Role: Freedom-Travel & Residency Consultant Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, residency-and-citizenship Pavol Lupták is a Slovak entrepreneur and self-described cryptoanarchist. He founded the freedom-focused residency and relocation service Liberation Travel, which helps people obtain second residencies and citizenships in jurisdictions such as Paraguay, Panama and Georgia, and earlier built the penetration-testing firm Nethemba and co-founded the Paralelná Polis hackerspaces. He founded Nethemba in 2007 and built it into a well-known penetration-testing firm, later co-founded the bug-bounty platform Hacktrophy, and was among the founders of the Institute of Cryptoanarchy and of Paralelná Polis in Bratislava, sister project to the Prague hackerspace where the same idea took physical form: a building where people work, teach and trade using only cryptocurrency. Liberation Travel applies the argument to individuals rather than to institutions. It advises people on where to relocate, which jurisdiction to be taxed in, and how to handle the paperwork that follows, with Paraguay, Panama and Georgia among the destinations it works with most. His position, which he states without much hedging, is that a person can be substantially free today by distributing their life across several jurisdictions rather than one, and by using technology that asks nobody for permission. He writes and speaks on cryptoanarchy, parallel societies and what he calls global opportunism. --- # Danny Hertle URL: https://free-cities.org/people/danny-hertle Role: Perpetual-Travel Communicator Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics Danny Hertle handles social media, digital communication and content production for Staatenlos, the German-language emigration and perpetual-travel consultancy founded by Christoph Heuermann. He looks after the organisation’s online presence, works on how its material is presented across its channels, and is one of the points of contact between the team and the Staatenlos community. Staatenlos publishes in German at staatenlos.ch and in English at denationalize.me, with Spanish, French and Portuguese arms, and its subject is flag theory: the practice of splitting citizenship, residence, business, banking and assets across several countries so that no single government holds all of them. Most of what it produces is practical rather than ideological, covering residence permits, tax residency, company structures and the ordinary friction of living outside the country you were born in. That places his work next to the Free Cities question rather than inside it. The movement argues about what a better jurisdiction would look like; Staatenlos deals with the people who have already decided to leave the one they have, and with what they find when they arrive. His own part of it is the communication: taking a subject that is mostly paperwork and making it legible to a large German-speaking audience. --- # Henrique Albuquerque URL: https://free-cities.org/people/henrique-albuquerque Role: Bitcoin Educator Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Henrique Albuquerque is a developer and educator working at the intersection of technology, economics and individual liberty. As head of education at FREE Madeira he teaches people to use Bitcoin for savings and everyday payments through workshops and multi-week courses, contributing to the financial literacy and self-sovereignty of Madeira’s population. He also works on open-source projects and Monstera Media. FREE Madeira runs Bitcoin education in Portuguese for the island’s own residents rather than for visiting enthusiasts, from a monthly meetup to multi-week courses, and it publishes its teaching materials openly so that other communities can reuse them. Albuquerque builds and runs that programme. The setting is unusual. Madeira is an autonomous region of Portugal inside the European Union, so it cannot make bitcoin legal tender, and the strategy is instead adoption: merchants who accept it, residents who understand it, and an island known for it. The regional government has backed the effort in public. His starting point as a developer is that adoption is a usability problem before it is a policy one. People do not fail to use bitcoin because they oppose it, but because nobody has shown them how to receive a payment or keep a key safe. --- # Marnix van Suylekom URL: https://free-cities.org/people/marnix-van-suylekom Topics: intentional-communities Marnix van Suylekom has more than ten years of experience in design, construction and engineering, from draining swamps in the Caribbean to building homes in the rainforest. During the early Covid period he started the Free Commune as a plan B for a free and respectful place to live, and moved to Galicia, Spain with his family to lead it. Free Commune is a community development in an abandoned village in Galicia (one of the most overlooked regions of Europe) offering freedom, independence and real community close to home. The village he took on had been empty for decades, in one of the least populated parts of Spain, and the work has been literal: water, electricity, internet and road access first, then bringing houses up to a standard people will live in year-round. A small number of permanent residents live there now. The longer plan is an economy rather than a settlement, with an apple orchard and a chestnut grove planted for commercial use, and the village has kept its old patron saint festival going. His argument for Galicia is unglamorous: land is cheap, the bureaucracy is distant, and Europe has thousands of abandoned villages somebody could do this with. --- # Přemysl Bosák URL: https://free-cities.org/people/premysl-bosak Role: Dispute-Resolution Entrepreneur Topics: private-governance, technology-in-new-cities Přemysl Bosák is a voluntaryist with a strong interest in moral philosophy and the creation of free societies. After a career in finance he founded Disputio, a free, anonymous peer-to-peer dispute-resolution and negotiation platform that lets people resolve disputes without relying on an external authority. Disputio pairs the two sides of a disagreement with an impartial guide who leads them through a structured conversation. Everyone is anonymous, including the guide, the exchange is visible to nobody else, and nobody decides anything: the guide does not judge, assign fault or impose an outcome, and any agreement reached is carried out voluntarily. The design follows from the philosophy. If a society is to function without an authority that can compel people, the ordinary business of settling disputes has to work on consent alone, and Bosák built the platform as a working test of whether it can. He came to it after a career in finance. He speaks on private dispute resolution in the Free Cities context, where the question is not abstract. A new jurisdiction has to offer its residents some way of resolving disagreements from the first day, long before it has courts, precedent or a police force of its own. --- # Gabriel Scheare URL: https://free-cities.org/people/gabriel-scheare Role: Liberty Community Builder Gabriel Scheare is the founder of Frenly Park, a liberty-minded community project in Saskatchewan, Canada. He grew up on the Saskatchewan prairie in a district that largely looked after itself, where fire cover, road work and most disputes were handled locally rather than by a distant authority, and he traces his interest in self-governing communities to that experience. In 2013 he moved to Chile, drawn there by the Galt’s Gulch Chile land project, which collapsed soon afterwards. Rather than go home he founded Fort Galt, an entrepreneurial start-up village on a hundred-acre site outside Valdivia, and spent several years building it out for the people who had bought in. The project closed at the end of the decade, after Chile’s political turn made its position untenable. Back in Saskatchewan he bought land and started Frenly Park, run first as a private residential country club so that membership and rules rest on contract rather than on municipal politics, with the stated aim of growing it into an incorporated village of around three hundred residents. It is the small-scale end of the Free Cities idea: not a new country, but a settlement whose residents agree in advance on how it is run. --- # Patrik Schumacher URL: https://free-cities.org/people/patrik-schumacher Role: Zaha Hadid Architects Topics: free-private-cities, urban-design Dr Patrik Schumacher is the principal of London-based Zaha Hadid Architects, with a track record of award-winning projects worldwide. He teaches at architectural schools across Europe and the US, including Harvard, and has worked on master plans such as Singapore’s one-north. He joined Zaha Hadid in 1988 and has led the practice since her death in 2016. In 2008 he launched parametricism at the Venice Biennale, arguing that computational design had produced a genuine successor to modernism rather than another style. In 2016 he set out an eight-point urban policy manifesto at the World Architecture Festival: scrap social housing, abolish land use planning, privatise streets, squares and parks. His argument was that there is no real market in housing and so no market has yet been allowed to solve the shortage. It was widely reported and heavily criticised, and it is also why a Free City interests him, since a project that starts without an inherited planning code is the only setting in which the proposition could be tried rather than argued about. His contribution to contemporary architectural discourse includes the concept of a market-based urban order, which he advocates applying to the planning and design of Free Cities. --- # Nathalie Schönwetter URL: https://free-cities.org/people/nathalie-schonwetter Role: IT Expert Nathalie Schönwetter is a software developer, privacy advocate, entrepreneur, and author, as well as a self-described 3D-printing nerd. She runs the popular YouTube channel Make-o-Rama 3D Druck, where she tests and reviews 3D printers for an audience of over 16,000 subscribers. She is also the author of Bitcoin Einfach, a practical guide that helps readers understand and use Bitcoin with ease. Make-o-Rama is both the channel and a business: she sells filament, parts and accessories for people building or upgrading their own printers, and has accepted cryptocurrency for years, with a discount for customers who pay that way. Her book Bitcoin Einfach came out of the same instinct as the channel, which is that most explanations start too far in. It covers what Bitcoin is, how it works and how to buy and keep it, in German, for readers who are not technical and are not looking to trade. The combination is more coherent than it first looks. Both halves of her work are about giving people the means to make something themselves rather than buying a finished product from a company that can withdraw it, which is close to the argument the Free Cities movement makes about jurisdictions. --- # Raphaël Lima URL: https://free-cities.org/people/raphael-lima Role: Free Cities Ambassador Libertarian activist and entrepreneur. He is the founder of Ideias Radicais and an enthusiast of cryptocurrencies. He started Ideias Radicais in 2014 as a YouTube channel and built it into the largest freedom-focused media operation in Portuguese, with a daily programme and more than eight hundred thousand YouTube subscribers, which made him one of the most widely followed libertarian commentators in Brazil. Out of that audience grew the Instituto Livre Mercado, the free-market policy institute he founded and still advises, which he describes as the leading advocacy body for freedom in the Brazilian congress and among the five most influential in Brasília. In 2020 he co-founded Settee with Francisco Litvay and Christoph Heuermann, the Portuguese-language arm of a network that advises people on emigration, residency, banking, company formation and second citizenships. The work rests on the same premise as much of the Free Cities movement: that the jurisdiction you live under is a choice rather than an accident of birth, and that competition between jurisdictions improves all of them. He stood for the São Paulo city council in 2024 for the Partido Novo, and speaks and writes on Free Cities, digital nomadism and Bitcoin. Based in Curitiba, Brazil. --- # Vladimir Leshko URL: https://free-cities.org/people/vladimir-leshko Role: Longevity Biotech Entrepreneur Topics: honduran-zedes, medical-regulation Vladimir Leshko is the chief operating officer of Unlimited Bio, a longevity-focused gene-therapy company operating from Próspera, the special economic zone in Honduras. A biomedical engineer, he works on running clinical trials of preventive and anti-ageing therapies under Próspera’s regulatory framework. Unlimited Bio was founded in 2024 and states the aim of running a hundred clinical trials of preventive genetic therapies within ten years, using Próspera’s regulatory framework to compress approval times that would run for years elsewhere. Its first trial combines plasmid gene therapies aimed at two proteins, one involved in the growth of blood vessels and one that limits muscle growth, given to healthy people rather than to patients. Leshko runs operations for that programme: trial logistics, laboratory and clinic capacity, and the paperwork a zone with its own medical regulator still requires. He came to biomedical engineering by an unusual route, having worked as an electrical engineer and as a professional poker player before retraining. The company is one of the clearest tests of what a special jurisdiction is for. A zone that can responsibly approve research no ordinary regulator will allow has produced a difference visible in outcomes rather than in tax rates. --- # Gabriel Delgado-Ayau URL: https://free-cities.org/people/gabriel-delgado-ayau Role: Co-Founder Gabriel Delgado-Ayau is a co-founder of Próspera, the ZEDE on Roatán, Honduras, where he has served as Chief Development Officer and a board member. A Guatemalan entrepreneur and a trustee of Universidad Francisco Marroquín, he speaks frequently on charter cities and economic development in Latin America. A serial entrepreneur, he founded a long series of companies in Guatemala before Próspera, and came to the project through the intellectual tradition around Universidad Francisco Marroquín, where he is a trustee. He is also an Aspen Institute fellow and a member of the Central America Leadership Initiative. As chief development officer he has handled much of what turns a legal framework into an actual place: bringing in the businesses and residents who make a zone worth living in, and running gatherings such as the zone’s legal-engineering summits, where the rules themselves are treated as something to be designed and tested rather than inherited. He describes the point of the zone as raising human flourishing through entrepreneurship and technology rather than as an exercise in tax competition, an argument he makes in Spanish as often as in English, to a Latin American audience with its own long history of foreign-run enclaves. --- # José Cordeiro URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jose-cordeiro Role: Longevity Enthusiast & Author Topics: medical-regulation José Cordeiro is a Venezuelan-Spanish engineer, economist and futurist, and a founding faculty member of Singularity University. He is co-author of The Death of Death, which argues that human longevity can be radically extended, and a long-standing advocate of life-extension research. He directs The Millennium Project, is an international fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science, and has held roles with the Club of Rome in Venezuela and with transhumanist organisations in the United States and Europe. The Death of Death, written with David Wood, argues that ageing is a technical problem rather than a fixed fate and that the research needed to treat it is already under way. It appeared first in Spanish and has since been published in English and other languages, making him the most widely heard transhumanist voice in the Spanish-speaking world. His interest in new jurisdictions follows from that. Research aimed at a condition no regulator classifies as a disease needs somewhere it can lawfully be done. He came to futures research by way of engineering and finance, having studied engineering at MIT and economics at Georgetown, taken an MBA at INSEAD, and worked at Schlumberger and Booz Allen. --- # Marthinus Grobler URL: https://free-cities.org/people/marthinus-grobler Role: Free Cities Ambassador Topics: urban-design Marthinus Grobler is a South African architect with a particular interest in economics. Throughout his career, he has worked on and investigated many disciplines of the design scale and is mostly concerned with the networks of the city and its manifestations in urban form and culture. Together with various groups, he is developing mechanisms allowing neighbourhoods and cities to evolve as a result of voluntary human actions. This is based on studies into the processes of emergent order found in nature’s distributed systems and the principles of Austrian Economics. He is also campaigning for multiculturalism through political decentralization. At Tipolis, the developer of new jurisdictions, he is chief architect, which means designing settlements that have to work as places long before they are full. He has practised for nearly two decades and holds a master’s degree from the University of Pretoria. His subject is emergent urbanism: the observation that the cities people find most liveable were not designed all at once but grew plot by plot under simple rules, and that a new city therefore has to be laid out to permit growth rather than to specify it in advance. Based in Cape Town, South Africa. --- # Vikram Bharati URL: https://free-cities.org/people/vikram-bharati Role: Network State Entrepreneur Topics: network-states Vikram Bharati is the founder of Draper Startup House, a global network of hubs supporting early-stage entrepreneurs, and a co-founder of Draper Nation. He previously led venture investments at REAPRA and began his career at J.P. Morgan. Draper Startup House grew out of Tribe Theory, a chain of hostels he built for founders and digital nomads after noticing how much of a startup ecosystem is really just the right people staying in the same building. It now runs hubs in around a dozen countries, many of them in emerging markets where the local founder community was thin when it arrived. Draper Nation extends the idea into governance. It is a venture lab experimenting with digital nations whose members subscribe to services, company formation, dispute resolution, insurance, legal jurisdiction and physical residency among them, and take only the ones they want instead of receiving a fixed bundle by accident of birth. Based in Singapore, he came to this from finance. His argument is that people who already live and work across several countries have outgrown the assumption that one passport supplies everything, and that competing digital nations offering government as a service are the logical response. --- # Aleks Svetski URL: https://free-cities.org/people/aleks-svetski Role: Bitcoin Author & Entrepreneur Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Aleks Svetski is a writer and builder. He is the author of the best-selling UnCommunist Manifesto, the Bushido of Bitcoin and The Bitcoin Times. He is currently building Satlantis, the Bitcoin and Nomad Super App. He launched Amber in 2018, one of the first Bitcoin-only savings apps, built for people who wanted to accumulate steadily rather than trade, and later open-sourced Spirit of Satoshi, a language model trained on Bitcoin literature. The Bushido of Bitcoin, a book of some five hundred pages, sets out the culture and moral code he believes a sound-money society would need. It draws on warrior traditions, the Austrian School, Nietzsche and Christian thought, and argues that money is downstream of character: a civilisation gets the currency its people deserve, and repairing the currency without repairing the culture achieves little. A companion volume, The Metaphysics of War and Beauty, is in progress. Satlantis follows from the same premise. People who opt out of the monetary system still need somewhere to find each other, so it is built as a Bitcoin-native app for events, places and communities, aimed at the growing number of people who live and work outside any single jurisdiction. --- # Greg Foss URL: https://free-cities.org/people/greg-foss Role: Credit Analyst & Bitcoin Advocate Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Greg Foss is a self-described Bitcoin enthusiast and realist with more than thirty years of experience in high-yield credit trading and analysis as a portfolio manager and trader. He is widely known for framing Bitcoin as a form of insurance against a failing fiat system. He began at the Royal Bank of Canada in 1988, later traded high-yield credit at TD Securities and ran credit strategies at a hedge fund through the 2008 crisis, which is where the argument comes from: he has spent a career pricing the probability that a borrower does not pay. Applying that to governments, he co-created the fulcrum index, which values Bitcoin by taking credit default swap spreads on a basket of G20 sovereigns and multiplying them by those countries’ funded and unfunded obligations. The conclusion he draws is that Bitcoin is not a technology bet but insurance on the credit quality of the fiat system, and should be sized in a portfolio the way insurance is sized rather than the way a growth position is. He was a founding shareholder of one of Canada’s largest digital-asset managers and speaks at Bitcoin conferences on bonds, sovereign debt and portfolio construction. --- # André Loja URL: https://free-cities.org/people/andre-loja Role: Bitcoin Community Builder Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics André Loja is a native Madeiran, father of four and serial entrepreneur who founded the FREE Madeira initiative. On the island he runs companies spanning real estate and a coworking space. With support from the local government, FREE Madeira guides the archipelago’s Bitcoin strategy as part of an effort to diversify the island’s economy into a technology and digital hub. He founded it with Bitcoin authors and podcasters who had moved to the island, among them Knut Svanholm and Daniel Prince, and it works as an advisory body to the regional government as well as a community: merchant onboarding, education in Portuguese, and a permanent Bitcoin space on the island. Madeira cannot make bitcoin legal tender, being an autonomous region inside the European Union, so the strategy is the softer one: shops that accept it, residents who understand it, and a reputation that draws people who work in it. The regional president has appeared at Bitcoin conferences abroad to make that case in person. Loja also brought Bitcoin Atlantis to the island, a conference that filled the capital and put Madeira on the itinerary of a movement that otherwise meets in Prague, Miami and Riga. --- # Matthias Gertz URL: https://free-cities.org/people/matthias-gertz Role: Bürgergenossenschaft Mittelsachsen Topics: intentional-communities Matthias Gertz is a co-founder of the Bürgergenossenschaft Mittelsachsen, a citizens’ cooperative registered in Döbeln that pools local capital to hold and run assets for its members. It is a modest, legal and thoroughly German version of the Free Cities idea: not a new jurisdiction, but ownership of the things a community depends on moved from the municipality to the people who use them. His day job is the family tax consultancy. Together with his brother Hendrik he runs the firm founded in 1949 in Wilster, a small town near the mouth of the Elbe in Schleswig-Holstein, now in the third generation, and in 2018 he took over the Döbeln office as successor to his father Horst Gertz, after sixteen years working outside the family business. His extensive experience in the financial industry, including the financial crisis of 2008, its precursors and aftermath, he processed into an overarching advisory approach for medium-sized entrepreneurs, which encompasses the entire assets of the client and integrates financial, legal and tax aspects into a financial architecture that is stable over the generations. He is a business graduate and passed his tax adviser examination in 1998. Based in Döbeln, Germany. --- # Robert Aro URL: https://free-cities.org/people/robert-aro Role: Freedom Columnist Robert Aro is a chartered professional accountant (CPA, CA) from Toronto who writes for the Mises Power and Market blog on issues surrounding the Federal Reserve and central banking. He is currently enrolled in the Mises Institute’s graduate school, working toward his master of arts in Austrian economics. In 2021, Robert placed third in the Free Private Cities short story contest with "Express to City Center ONE," which explores the endless possibilities a stateless society can offer the world. Passionate about writing and economics, he intends to publish in the future. You can follow Robert under the name Econ Circus on Twitter. His writing at Power and Market takes one Federal Reserve action at a time, a facility, a balance-sheet line, a speech, and works out what it means in plain terms, which is a different exercise from commentary on interest rates and closer to the accountancy he trained in. That is also the connection to this movement. Central banking is the one part of an economy nobody can opt out of by moving house, so the case for competing currencies and competing jurisdictions depends on making its mechanics visible first. Based in Toronto, Canada. --- # Carl Peterson URL: https://free-cities.org/people/carl-peterson Role: Charter Cities Researcher Topics: charter-cities Carl Peterson is the Senior Manager for Special Projects at the Charter Cities Institute, where he leads the Africa’s NXT50 Cities Coalition and partnerships, and helps new-city projects secure investment and tenants. An attorney, he has published academic articles on special jurisdictions and private military corporations, and is a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer. He came to the institute as a legal researcher, co-authoring a study of the Honduran ZEDE law for the Journal of Special Jurisdictions and contributing chapters to the institute’s governance handbook, the reference manual for people who have to write the rules of a new city rather than argue for one. The NXT50 Cities Coalition, which he leads, rests on a demographic fact rather than an ideology. Africa will add hundreds of millions of urban residents over the coming decades, and most of the cities that will house them are small today and unplanned. The coalition convenes governments, developers and non-governmental organisations around that, and he has recruited the bulk of its membership personally, converting dozens of organisations out of hundreds approached. He served in the Peace Corps before this work, and holds a law degree from the University of Washington. --- # Francisco Litvay URL: https://free-cities.org/people/francisco-litvay Role: Flag Theory & Economic Zone Expert Topics: special-economic-zones, residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics Francisco Litvay is a Brazilian digital nomad and online entrepreneur who left Brazil at seventeen and opened his first company at twenty. He specialises in Flag Theory and in how free and special economic zones can support offshoring and internationalisation. He is Head of Internationalisation at the Adrianople Group and co-founder of Settee, an internationalisation company for the Lusophone market. He has visited more than twenty countries on four continents and built his working life around the arrangement he advises on: separating the country you live in from the ones where you bank, incorporate and pay tax. He is a Brazilian-Austrian dual citizen with a degree in business informatics. At the Adrianople Group he treats zones as a business proposition rather than as a political idea, and that is where his two roles meet. A special economic zone is only useful to a company or a person if the residency, the banking and the tax treatment line up, and most of a zone’s value is lost if any one of the three does not. He is a Free Cities Ambassador in Medellín and speaks widely on second passports, territorial tax systems and geographic arbitrage. --- # Mark Valek URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mark-valek Role: Sound Money Fund Manager Topics: taxation-and-economics Mark Valek is a partner at the wealth-management firm Incrementum AG, where he is responsible for portfolio management and research. He applies interdisciplinary thinking to investment and is particularly drawn to the Austrian School of economics, monetary history, gold and the coming paradigm shift in the monetary system. He co-authors Incrementum’s widely read In Gold We Trust report. Incrementum is based in Liechtenstein, and the report he co-authors with Ronald-Peter Stöferle has appeared annually since 2013, running to several hundred pages and published in Spanish, Chinese and Japanese as well as German and English; the Wall Street Journal once called it the gold standard of gold studies. It is not really a price forecast. It is an annual audit of the monetary system: real interest rates, debt levels, central bank behaviour and the opportunity cost of holding an asset that yields nothing but cannot be printed. Valek runs portfolio management and research at the firm and has argued for years that the system is heading for a change of monetary regime rather than through an ordinary cycle, which is why gold and bitcoin turn up in the same analysis rather than as rival trades. --- # Swen Lorenz URL: https://free-cities.org/people/swen-lorenz Role: Investor & author Swen Lorenz is an investor and author who has founded or led ventures including a $300m property fund and a UNESCO-affiliated scientific organisation. He lives on Sark, a semi-autonomous island of around 600 residents in the Channel Islands, and writes at undervalued-shares.com. Born in Germany, he started investing at fifteen, moved to London in 1998 and has since worked from New York, Hong Kong, Macau, the Galapagos Islands and Switzerland, looking for undervalued companies in places most funds do not cover. He was a director of the first London-listed residential property fund for Macau, and spent four years outside finance as chief executive of a scientific conservation organisation in the Galapagos. He has lived on Sark since 2017. The island has no cars, its own parliament in the Chief Pleas and a tax system of its own, which makes it one of the few places in Europe where a very small jurisdiction can be watched at work rather than theorised about. He writes about it publicly alongside his investment research, including on what it would take for Sark to fund its infrastructure and attract new residents without losing what makes it worth moving to. --- # Russell Lamberti URL: https://free-cities.org/people/russell-lamberti Role: Economist & Author Topics: taxation-and-economics, private-governance Russell Lamberti is head of research and strategy at Sakeliga, a South African business club whose members take up their constitutional duty to resist excessive state power and build a just commercial order. He is the co-author of When Money Destroys Nations, a study of Zimbabwe’s hyperinflation. Written with Philip Haslam, When Money Destroys Nations traces Zimbabwe’s hyperinflation from the first rounds of unrestrained printing to the collapse of the currency in 2008, largely through the accounts of people who lived through it: how they were paid, what they used as money once the notes failed, and which parts of ordinary commercial life kept working. The parallels the authors draw to developed economies are deliberate. He founded the macro research firm ETM Macro Advisors, was chief strategist at ETM Analytics and co-founded the Ludwig von Mises Institute of South Africa. At Sakeliga he directs research for an organisation whose purpose is a commercial order that works despite the state rather than through it, which in a country with unreliable public services means practical work on procurement, infrastructure and municipal failure rather than commentary alone. He read economics at the University of Cape Town. --- # Sam Roberts URL: https://free-cities.org/people/sam-roberts Role: Bitcoin Pensions Advocate Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Sam Roberts is a qualified actuary and Director of Investment Consulting at Cartwright, a UK pensions and investment advisory firm. In 2024 he led the first UK pension scheme to allocate to Bitcoin, and he advocates for Bitcoin as an institutional hedge against systemic financial risk. The allocation was small and deliberately so: about three per cent of a scheme of roughly fifty million pounds, made after months of training and due diligence with the trustee board rather than as a quick reallocation. The case he put to them was not that Bitcoin would outperform, but that a fund which has to be solvent in thirty years carries risks a position of that size can hedge, and that leaving the asset out is itself a decision with consequences. It drew attention across the British pensions industry, where Bitcoin had until then been treated as outside the range of instruments a fiduciary could responsibly consider, and he has defended the reasoning since on industry panels and against sceptical colleagues. His argument is structural rather than speculative: the sterling-denominated assumptions behind a thirty-year promise are worth insuring, and the cost of that insurance is small. --- # Zuby URL: https://free-cities.org/people/zuby Role: Rapper & podcaster Zuby (Nzube Udezue) is a British independent rapper, author, and podcaster known for his commentary on culture, discipline, and personal responsibility. A Dubai resident, he speaks on freedom, governance, and the trade-offs between political systems, arguing that most people value liberty less than they claim and that strong personal values matter more than any system. He has released his music independently throughout, selling tens of thousands of albums without a label and performing in more than twenty countries. Born in Britain to Nigerian parents and raised in Saudi Arabia, he began rapping while reading computer science at Oxford. He has written a fitness guide and a children’s book, and hosts Real Talk with Zuby, where the recurring themes are self-reliance, free speech, and the gap between what people say they want and what they will actually tolerate. That is also his angle on Free Cities. Having lived under several very different systems, he is sympathetic to the argument for choosing your jurisdiction but sceptical that most people would use the choice, and he tends to say that the character of the people in a place decides more than the rules written for it. --- # Michael Bates URL: https://free-cities.org/people/michael-bates Topics: micronations, history-of-free-cities Michael Bates leads the Principality of Sealand, a self-declared micronation on a former Second World War sea fort in the North Sea off the English coast. The son of founder Roy Bates, he occupied the platform from the 1960s, held the title of Prince Regent and became head of state on his father’s death in 2012. He also runs the family’s shellfish business, Fruits of the Sea. His memoir Holding the Fort recounts the parts of that history that are hard to believe and nonetheless documented, among them August 1978, when a group led by a German businessman arrived by helicopter under cover of a business meeting and held him prisoner on the platform for several days before releasing him in the Netherlands. His father then chartered a helicopter, recruited a stunt pilot who had flown for the Bond films and retook the fort at dawn, holding one of the raiders until a German diplomat came to negotiate for him. Sealand still cites that visit as evidence of de facto recognition. Bates has run the place since, and his account of it is unromantic: a micronation is mostly maintenance, weather and paperwork. --- # Art Finch URL: https://free-cities.org/people/art-finch Role: Free City Developer Art Finch is the founder of the League of Free Cities, a venture studio that coordinates investment, incubation and legal protection for special economic zones, aiming to fund dozens of new Free City projects worldwide. He has worked on projects across Asia, including originating the concept behind Bhutan’s Gelephu Mindfulness City. Between 2020 and 2023 he developed the concept for a charter city at Gelephu in southern Bhutan, pitching officials on turning the town on the Indian border into an experimental economic zone. Bhutan took up the idea and is building Gelephu Mindfulness City without the original venture: a special administrative region with its own legal framework, an airport and a masterplan by the architects BIG. That outcome is instructive about how these projects actually happen. The concept was adopted, the promoters were not, and the state kept control of the thing it had been persuaded to want. The League of Free Cities is his response. It is meant to supply the pieces an individual project cannot assemble alone, coordinating investment, incubation and legal protection so that founders are not each negotiating from scratch with a government that can change its mind. --- # Tom W. Bell URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tom-w-bell Role: Special Jurisdictions Legal Scholar Topics: private-governance, special-economic-zones Tom W. Bell is a leading authority on special jurisdictions and innovative governance models. A professor at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law, he specialises in intellectual property, internet law, and legal frameworks for private and semi-autonomous cities. Tom has played a pivotal role in shaping governance for special jurisdictions, serving as the lead drafter of constitutions and civil codes for projects such as the Free Society and providing legal-system design consultancy through Archimediates LLC. He is the author of the influential book Your Next Government? From Nation States to Stateless Nations (2017), which explores how emerging political models, such as Free Private Cities and seasteads, are redefining governance in the 21st century. His most portable contribution is Ulex, an open-source legal system assembled from restatements and model codes rather than from any one country’s law, so that a new community can adopt a working body of rules on its first day instead of drafting one or borrowing a national code wholesale. He also helped found the peer-reviewed journal for research on special jurisdictions, and his university has recognised the subject as a field of its own rather than a curiosity. --- # Robert P. Murphy URL: https://free-cities.org/people/robert-p-murphy Role: Austrian Economist & Author Topics: taxation-and-economics Robert P. Murphy is an economist of the Austrian School with a PhD from New York University and a senior fellow of the Mises Institute. He is the author of Contra Krugman and other books, hosts the Bob Murphy Show and co-hosts the Contra Krugman podcast. He has held positions at the Free Market Institute at Texas Tech, the Institute for Energy Research and the Fraser Institute, where he is a senior fellow, alongside his work for the Mises Institute. His writing runs from textbooks to polemic. Lessons for the Young Economist and Choice: Cooperation, Enterprise, and Human Action are attempts to make Ludwig von Mises’s economics teachable, while Chaos Theory sets out how courts and defence might be supplied on a market rather than by a state, which is the question every Free City project eventually has to answer in practice. He also co-wrote a book explaining Bitcoin. He hosts The Bob Murphy Show and The Human Action Podcast, and has spent years debating Keynesian economists in public rather than only writing about them. He read economics at Hillsdale College and took his doctorate at New York University in 2003. --- # Alena Vranova URL: https://free-cities.org/people/alena-vranova Role: Entrepreneur & Bitcoin Pioneer Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, technology-in-new-cities Alena Vranova is an entrepreneur, advisor and educator who has spent more than a decade building user-friendly tools for bitcoiners, including Trezor (the first Bitcoin hardware wallet) and Casa Node. She co-authored The Little Bitcoin Book and advises the Penguin Technology Campus in Paraguay, a project converting hydropower into education and software talent. She was chief executive of SatoshiLabs for four years, the period in which Trezor went from a prototype to the product that established the hardware wallet as a category, and she later joined Casa as head of strategy, where she worked on the Casa Node and on ways of holding keys that do not depend on one person remembering one secret. The Little Bitcoin Book, which she wrote with five co-authors, has been translated into more than twenty languages and is deliberately short: an explanation of why money is broken and what Bitcoin does about it, written for people with no interest in the technology. She now advises projects that turn the argument into infrastructure, including the Penguin Technology Campus in Paraguay, and speaks on privacy, self-custody and what the next generation of tools has to get right. --- # Seb Bunney URL: https://free-cities.org/people/seb-bunney Role: Sound Money Educator Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Seb Bunney began his career as a backcountry mountain-bike guide while teaching himself about real estate, financial markets and the monetary system. He now writes about the macroeconomic landscape with a focus on Bitcoin and is a co-founder of Looking Glass Education, a platform creating jargon-free, concise sound-money education aimed at wage earners. His book The Hidden Cost of Money argues that monetary policy is not a technical matter confined to markets but something that reaches into health, community and the choices people make about time. When saving does not work, the rational response is to borrow, spend and optimise for the short term, and a society doing that at scale changes in ways rarely attributed to money at all. Looking Glass Education grew from the same premise, that most financial education either assumes prior knowledge or is selling something. It teaches through articles, courses, audio and video, and aims at people who work for wages rather than at investors, on the grounds that they are the ones inflation takes most from. He also co-wrote a children’s book on Bitcoin, and now works on bringing Bitcoin into payroll and employee benefits. --- # David Parkinson URL: https://free-cities.org/people/david-parkinson Role: Bitcoin Payments Builder Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities David Parkinson is the founder of Musqet, a UK fintech building payment infrastructure that combines card networks with Bitcoin and Lightning payments in a single merchant device. A former consulting and transformation executive, he works to accelerate everyday Bitcoin adoption by merchants. Musqet puts card networks and Bitcoin through one terminal, so a shop can take Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Apple Pay and Google Pay alongside bitcoin and Lightning, with point of sale, stock, staff and accounting in the same system. The design choice is deliberate: merchants do not adopt a new payment rail on principle, they add one when it costs them nothing and sits inside the till they already use. Its chairman came from the Bank of England’s Faster Payments scheme, an unusual pedigree for a Bitcoin company and a deliberate one. Parkinson came to this from consulting and business transformation rather than from crypto, and argues that adoption stalls at the checkout rather than at the wallet. He speaks on merchant adoption at Bitcoin events in Britain and Europe, and the company has focused on hospitality and food businesses, the sector where card fees bite hardest on thin margins. --- # Fred Roeder URL: https://free-cities.org/people/fred-roeder Role: Free Cities Ambassador Topics: taxation-and-economics, medical-regulation Fred Roeder is a health economist and the Managing Director of the Consumer Choice Center, a consumer-advocacy group promoting pro-growth, pro-innovation policy, or, as he puts it, abundance for consumers. A Dubai resident and Free Cities Foundation ambassador, he argues for light-touch regulation that leaves room for businesses to innovate and consumers to choose. A health economist trained in Germany, he has worked on healthcare reform in Europe and North America, and started the Consumer Choice Center in 2014 after organising a small protest in Berlin about consumer choice with two friends. It now campaigns on trade, technology, transport, nicotine policy and lifestyle regulation across several continents. His argument is that regulation written to protect consumers usually ends up protecting incumbents, because the compliance cost is trivial for a large company and prohibitive for a new one, and that consumers are better served by more options than by fewer approved ones. He has travelled to around a hundred countries and is a Free Cities Ambassador in Dubai, where the same question appears in its sharpest form: what a jurisdiction has to offer in order to attract people who could live anywhere. --- # Marcell Heinrich URL: https://free-cities.org/people/marcell-heinrich Role: Educating & Mentoring Kids Topics: alternative-education Marcell Heinrich is a talent expert and education pioneer. He develops innovative educational concepts for the Ministry of Education in Luxembourg as well as for Germany and Switzerland. As the founder of Hero Society, he and his team help young people discover their unique strengths and build meaningful life and career paths. Hero Society collaborates with schools, businesses, and families to foster potential and create sustainable opportunities. With his focus on autonomy and talent development within communities, Marcell Heinrich brings an inspiring perspective to the Free Cities movement. Hero Society has been running since 2006 and now visits around a hundred and forty schools a year, reaching several thousand young people, with a method built on finding what a person is actually good at rather than sorting them by grades. He has written books with education researchers including Gerald Hüther and gave the keynote at the German federal education ministry marking twenty years of careers guidance. His interest in Free Cities is the same interest in another form: a new community has to decide how it educates people before it can claim to be a place to raise a family. --- # Lea Petrášová URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lea-petrasova Role: Bitcoin Entrepreneur Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, technology-in-new-cities Lea Petrášová is the co-founder and CEO of Vexl, a mobile app for peer-to-peer Bitcoin trading without KYC. An active member of the cypherpunk community, she is passionate about privacy and security in the digital world and about making Bitcoin accessible and peer-to-peer as it was originally intended. Vexl was built with people from SatoshiLabs, the company behind the Trezor hardware wallet, and works from the phone book rather than from an exchange: it shows offers from your own contacts and from theirs, so a trade happens between people with some social distance rather than none, and without an account, an identity check or a fee. The project runs as a non-profit. The design is an argument. If bitcoin can only be obtained through registered exchanges then every holder is on a list, and the peer-to-peer property in the original design becomes theoretical. Vexl tries to make the original way of getting bitcoin, from another person, convenient enough that ordinary users choose it. She spent more than a decade in software development before this, and speaks at Bitcoin conferences in Europe, among them BTC Prague, on privacy and peer-to-peer trade. --- # Hartmut Sieper URL: https://free-cities.org/people/hartmut-sieper Role: Mauritius Investment Consultant Topics: residency-and-citizenship Hartmut Sieper is a German citizen living in Mauritius as an entrepreneur and business consultant on corporate development in Africa. His vision and mission is to create new businesses in Africa based on technology, to assist global companies in getting access to African markets via Mauritius, and to introduce investors to profitable and sustainable direct investment opportunities. He worked with several private banks as an investment advisor, financial analyst, asset manager, and investment strategist. Hartmut is the author of several books about investments and capital markets. He spent nearly three decades in capital markets, worked as a banker at a Frankfurt private bank where he ran funds and asset-management mandates, and from 2009 managed an Africa equities fund out of Luxembourg before moving to Mauritius in 2015. His case for Mauritius is a jurisdictional one. It is politically stable, has treaties with much of the continent and a financial sector built for holding structures, which makes it the practical door into African markets for European investors who would otherwise not go at all. He has written several books on capital markets and on investing in Africa. Based in Vacoas-Phoenix, Mauritius. --- # Christoph Kröppl URL: https://free-cities.org/people/christoph-kroppl Role: Free Cities Ambassador Christoph Kröppl is an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) development professional and a passionate advocate for libertarian principles, Free Private Cities, and Bitcoin. His journey into the world of Free Private Cities began during the lockdown in Tanzania, where he delved deeply into libertarian ideas, sparking a lasting commitment to individual freedom and private governance. In the fall of 2022, Christoph became an active participant in the German-speaking libertarian conference circuit, beginning with his attendance at Liberty in Our Lifetime, the Free Cities Conference. Later that year, he relocated to Tbilisi, Georgia, where he established an ERP development branch for Hucke-Media, a leading German implementation partner. Christoph is an active member of Tbilisi’s libertarian community and is dedicated to promoting private property rights, the non-aggression principle, and decentralized innovation through Free Cities and Bitcoin. Georgia is a fitting base for the combination. It taxes foreign income lightly, registers a company in a day, and has drawn a large community of remote workers and Bitcoin users to Tbilisi, which makes it one of the easier places in the region to live the argument rather than only make it. Based in Vienna, Austria. --- # Isabela Christo URL: https://free-cities.org/people/isabela-christo Role: Free Cities Ambassador Isabela Christo is the Chief of Staff of the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE). Previously, she was a strategic advisor at Minas Gerais State Government (Brazil), where she was in charge of putting into practice her master’s thesis research on how to create a Special Economic Zone in the state of Minas Gerais that would attract international investment. She has also worked with the Brazilian Government at its Mission to the United Nations in New York and with different renowned non-profits in the United States. Isabela is a Schwarzman Scholar Alumna at Tsinghua University and a Georgetown University Alumna of the Latin America Leadership Program. The Foundation for Economic Education is the oldest free-market think tank in the United States, founded in 1946, and best known for publishing Leonard Read’s essay I, Pencil. Running it day to day is the work of a chief of staff. Her own research was on the practical question rather than the philosophical one: what a Brazilian state would actually have to legislate, and what it would have to give up, to make a special economic zone attractive to foreign capital. Based in Atlanta, USA. --- # Joey Langenbrunner URL: https://free-cities.org/people/joey-langenbrunner Role: Tax Residency Entrepreneur Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics Joey Langenbrunner is the founder and chief executive of Nomad Layer, the official distributor for Próspera’s lump sum tax regime. He says he co-drafted the legislation behind the regime, which he describes as the first remote tax residency programme, and that his aim is to bring it to every digital nomad and remote worker in the world. The programme opened on 11 March 2026. It charges a flat 5,000 US dollars a year in place of income tax, can be settled in Bitcoin or other approved cryptocurrencies, and requires a participant to spend at least seven consecutive days a year inside Próspera while declaring no other tax residence. Before Nomad Layer he worked in cryptocurrency and in the citizenship and residency by investment industry, and he co-founded a service helping people relocate to El Salvador. He holds a diplomatic role with the Free Republic of Liberland, the micronation claimed on disputed land between Croatia and Serbia, where he has represented the project in the United States and served as acting chairman of the Liberland Aid Foundation. He speaks and writes on digital sovereignty and on governance built from blockchain records. --- # Scott Schneider URL: https://free-cities.org/people/scott-schneider Role: Space Lawyer Scott Schneider is a space lawyer working at the intersection of international law, technological innovation and individual liberty. He is general counsel of the Space Generation Advisory Council and strategy director at the Live and Let Live Foundation, and speaks on new legal and governance models for the space frontier. He became general counsel of the Space Generation Advisory Council in 2024 and was named one of its Pioneer Award recipients in 2025. He is also special counsel at the International Aerospace Law and Policy Group, where his work covers public international law, licensing for space activities and law reform. Space is the one frontier where the questions this movement asks are already live in treaty law. The Outer Space Treaty forbids national appropriation but says little about what private actors may own or how disputes between them are settled, which leaves the rules for permanent settlement genuinely unwritten rather than merely unreformed. He serves on the council of the Live and Let Live Foundation, which argues that the law should protect anyone living peacefully in whatever way they choose, and speaks on governance models for settlements beyond Earth. --- # Doug Casey URL: https://free-cities.org/people/doug-casey Role: Author & Investor Topics: taxation-and-economics, private-governance Doug Casey is a world-renowned author and libertarian thinker. He wrote Crisis Investing (a #1 New York Times bestseller on investing during economic turmoil) as well as Totally Incorrect and Right on the Money. He has appeared on hundreds of radio and TV shows, from David Letterman to Charlie Rose, and been featured in Time, Forbes, People and the Washington Post. He is the founder of Casey Research and a regular keynote speaker at FreedomFest, the world’s largest gathering of libertarians and like-minded thinkers. He describes himself as an anarcho-capitalist, has lived in ten countries and visited more than a hundred and seventy-five, which is the practical form his argument takes: that a person should treat the world as a menu rather than a fate, and diversify citizenship, assets and residence the way an investor diversifies a portfolio. He spends much of the year at La Estancia de Cafayate, a development he helped start in the wine country of northern Argentina, one of the older attempts at building a place for people who wanted out, and a direct ancestor of much of what the Free Cities movement now does. --- # Olivier Roland URL: https://free-cities.org/people/olivier-roland Role: Entrepreneur & Author Topics: residency-and-citizenship Olivier Roland has been an entrepreneur since the age of nineteen, and, among his many hats, a blogger, YouTuber, amateur archaeologist, diver, aeroplane pilot, globetrotter and international speaker. Across all his networks combined he is followed by close to 500,000 fans won over by his method, and has helped thousands of people create and grow a successful online business. He started his first business, a computer repair company, at nineteen after leaving formal education behind, and later built the blog and publishing operation that made his name in the French-speaking world. His book Tout le monde n’a pas eu la chance de rater ses études, prefaced by the Free founder Xavier Niel, argues across several hundred references that formal education is one route to a working life rather than the route, and it has been a long-running bestseller in France. He writes Disruptive Horizons in English on technology, longevity and the places that let people build, and he is a Free Cities Ambassador in Dubai, which is also where he lives: a jurisdiction he chose rather than inherited, and the practical version of the argument his books make. --- # Calvin Duke URL: https://free-cities.org/people/calvin-duke Role: Author Calvin Duke is the author of Entrepreneurial Communities, which asks whether society can be organised without taxation or self-serving political parties. The book introduces the little-known social thinkers Spencer Heath and Spencer MacCallum and examines real-world examples of their ideas: the entrepreneurial community is the governance model chosen for the Honduran Free City of Ciudad Morazán. The full title names its subject, the theories of Spencer Heath and Spencer MacCallum, and the term the book uses for them is entrecomm: a community owned by a single proprietor who leases rather than sells, and therefore has a direct financial interest in the place being well run. Heath noticed that hotels, marinas and shopping centres already work this way, supplying streets, security and utilities without a tax or a vote, and MacCallum extended the argument to settlements. The book was written under a pseudonym and found its way to the people building. Massimo Mazzone read it before founding Ciudad Morazán and built the zone on the model, which makes this one of the few cases in the movement where a specific book can be traced to a specific city. --- # Andries Kerpestein URL: https://free-cities.org/people/andries-kerpestein Role: Author Andries Kerpestein is an economist, entrepreneur and author who describes himself as a principled capitalist. His work is rooted in institutional economics and the case for extending market mechanisms into sectors that have historically sat outside them, governance itself among them. In The Proprietary State, he asks what happens when a government takes the form of a for-profit corporation, a system in which it answers to shareholders instead of voters. Drawing on contract theory, entrepreneurship and consumer sovereignty, he sets out how proprietary governance could outperform traditional democracies. Alongside the book he writes the Revolutionary Capitalism Substack, with essays on proprietary jurisdictions, network states, the future of higher education and the effect of AI on labour. His current venture is Cloud College, a for-profit higher-education model designed to lower costs while raising the quality of teaching. The essays extend the same argument outward, including a proposal for privatising jurisdictions as a foreign development policy, on the view that poor countries are held back by their institutions rather than by a shortage of aid, and that a proprietor with capital at risk has a reason to fix them. --- # Lawrence Lepard URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lawrence-lepard Role: Investment Manager Topics: taxation-and-economics Lawrence Lepard is an investment manager and Austrian-School economist. In 2006 he founded Equity Management Associates, an investment firm backing growing private and public companies around the world. He is a well-known advocate for sound money and Bitcoin. He spent twenty-five years in venture capital before that, at Summit Partners and Geocapital Partners, and turned to monetary questions after concluding that the returns he was chasing owed more to money printing than to productivity. Equity Management Associates now concentrates on gold and silver miners and on Bitcoin, which he treats as insurance against monetary debasement rather than as a speculation. In 2025 he published The Big Print: What Happened to America and How Sound Money Will Fix It, which sets out how he thinks the dollar system reached its present state and what a return to sound money would require. He is a frequent guest on finance and Bitcoin podcasts, where his argument is that the debt cannot be repaid in real terms and that inflating it away is the only politically available option, which is why he holds assets that cannot be created by decree. --- # Lawrence Bahr URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lawrence-bahr Role: Bitcoin Commerce Entrepreneur Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Lawrence Bahr (who speaks under the name Lando Rothbardian) is the CEO of ShopinBit, one of Europe’s largest Bitcoin stores, with hundreds of thousands of products that can be bought with bitcoin, from everyday items to electronics. He started the shop in 2018 from Poland on the premise that sound money is only useful if you can spend it. ShopinBit is built around privacy as much as payment: customer accounts are optional, order data is deleted after thirty days, and the site runs without tracking scripts. Alongside bitcoin it accepts Monero and stablecoins, and swaps other coins through an exchange partner. A concierge service sources goods the catalogue does not carry, and in 2025 it was extended into an app for ordering almost anything worldwide against crypto. He speaks at Bitcoin conferences on merchant adoption, where his argument is a practical one for anyone building a new jurisdiction. A currency only becomes a currency once there is a circular economy around it, somewhere to earn it and somewhere to spend it. Until then it stays an asset that people hold rather than money that people use. --- # Daniel Model URL: https://free-cities.org/people/daniel-model Role: Entrepreneur & Micronation Founder Daniel Model is a Swiss entrepreneur who runs the Model Group, a fourth-generation packaging and display company. He is the owner of Modelhof, the cultural and training centre in the Canton of Thurgau that hosted the conference. The family firm was founded in 1882 in Weinfelden and now employs several thousand people across central Europe, making packaging and displays for industrial customers. Model took it over as the fourth generation and has run it alongside a second, stranger project. In 2006, invited to address Thurgau municipal leaders on the relationship between the state and business, he used the occasion to proclaim a state of his own, later named Avalon. In 2012 he opened the Modelhof in Müllheim as its seat, and runs it as a venue for lectures, apprenticeship training and cultural events, with a programme built around the idea of a society organised by voluntary contract rather than by compulsion. That places him among the small number of European industrialists who have taken the micronation question seriously in public, and makes the Modelhof a recurring venue for the German-speaking part of the Free Cities debate. --- # David Sloan Wilson URL: https://free-cities.org/people/david-sloan-wilson Role: Evolutionary Biologist Topics: private-governance David Sloan Wilson is a SUNY Distinguished Professor of biology and anthropology at Binghamton University. He is also President of the Evolution Institute and Editor-in-Chief of Evolution: This View of Life, an online general-interest magazine. He is the author of multiple books including Evolution for Everyone: How Darwin’s Theory Can Change the Way We Think About Our Lives and This View of Life: Completing the Darwinian Revolution. His scientific reputation rests on multilevel selection, the argument that natural selection acts on groups as well as on individuals, which was heterodox for decades and is the reason cooperation and altruism can be explained in Darwinian terms rather than explained away. He has since taken the theory out of the laboratory. ProSocial World, which he leads, applies Elinor Ostrom’s design principles for managing shared resources to ordinary groups, from schools to businesses, and he ran a long study of prosocial behaviour in his own city of Binghamton. He also wrote Atlas Hugged, a novel answering Ayn Rand from the opposite direction. Wilson holds a PhD from Michigan State University and a BA from the University of Rochester. --- # Jacek Spendel URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jacek-spendel Role: Libertarian educator Topics: residency-and-citizenship Jacek Spendel is the President of Liberty International, described as the oldest organisation promoting libertarianism worldwide. A Polish libertarian advocate, he runs educational programmes for freedom-minded students and activists around the world and argues that the ability to relocate freely between jurisdictions, to “vote with your feet”, is a truer form of democracy. He came into the movement in 2006 as a twenty-one-year-old student attending a Liberty International conference in Prague on a scholarship, ran his first liberty camp two years later, and has since organised more than a dozen of them in several countries. He became president of the organisation in 2019. In 2012 he founded the Freedom and Entrepreneurship Foundation in Poland, where he is chief executive. Its best-known programme, Project Arizona, sends young people from central and eastern Europe to the United States for an intensive fellowship in classical liberal ideas and practical advocacy. His own argument joins the two halves of the work. Teaching the ideas matters, but so does keeping the exits open, because a person who can leave has leverage that a voter inside a single jurisdiction does not. --- # Jan Mošovský URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jan-mosovsky Jan Mošovský is the Programs Manager at European Students for Liberty, Director for Research at Liberální institut (the oldest Czech liberal think tank) and an economic regulation analyst. He has been part of Students for Liberty since 2017, having previously led its Czech and Central European team. He is also a PhD candidate at the Institute of Economic Studies at Charles University in Prague, where his research focuses on inequality and on monetary policy and its unintended consequences. He teaches econometrics, ethics and economics, and the history of economic thought. He joined Students for Liberty after its 2017 conference in the Czech capital, ran its national and then its central European operation, and was named its leader of the year in 2021. The Liberální institut, where he directs research, is the oldest Czech liberal think tank, founded as the country was leaving communism, which gives his work on monetary policy and inequality a particular local weight: what happens when a currency and a state are rebuilt at the same time is not a theoretical question there. He studied economics at Edinburgh before Prague. --- # Christopher Beaumont URL: https://free-cities.org/people/christopher-beaumont Role: Seigneur of Sark Topics: private-governance, history-of-free-cities Christopher Beaumont is the 23rd and current Seigneur of Sark, the hereditary head of the self-governing Channel Island of Sark. A former British Army officer in the Royal Engineers, he succeeded his father, Michael Beaumont, in 2016 and works on the island’s long-term development. He served as a regular officer in the Royal Engineers before returning to Sark, and moved into the Seigneurie in 2017, where he has worked with his family on restoring the house and gardens, which are open to visitors. The office he inherited is a genuine constitutional curiosity. Sark has been governed under a charter granted in 1565, and until reforms in 2008 its parliament, the Chief Pleas, was composed largely of the holders of the island’s forty tenements. Those reforms, which his father supported, moved most of the Seigneur’s remaining authority to an elected chamber, leaving the Seigneur as the island’s head rather than its ruler. Beaumont, who was educated at Clifton College and Sandhurst, has defended the arrangement publicly, arguing that a working legislature for a few hundred people needs far less machinery than outside critics assume. --- # Hynek Fencl URL: https://free-cities.org/people/hynek-fencl Role: Head of Research Hynek leads the Foundation’s research into free communities around the world and curates its news and blog section. He is also Chief Communications and Research Officer at Tipolis, the developer of new jurisdictions founded by Titus Gebel. His written work for the Foundation includes the two-part case for why the world needs more Free Cities, argued once politically and once socially: that a jurisdiction nobody can leave has little reason to improve, and that people who choose a place together behave differently from people assigned to one. He has also written on Liberland and on what separates a Free City proposal that could be built from one that merely reads well. His interests run to urbanism as much as to political economy, which is a rarer combination in this field than it should be. Most arguments about new jurisdictions are arguments about rules; comparatively few are about whether the resulting place is somewhere anyone would want to live. He has a degree in Politics and International Relations from the University of Cambridge and a background in media and journalism as a writer. --- # Zuzana Martakova URL: https://free-cities.org/people/zuzana-martakova Role: Liberty Advocate Zuzana Martakova leads business development in Europe for Freeth'm, a venture building decentralised, self-sufficient towns for freedom-seekers. A long-time advocate of individual liberty and laissez-faire economics, she represents the project within the Free Cities community. Freeth’m plans privately operated settlements built around a voluntary contract: residents agree in advance to the conditions, the duration and the cost of living there, keep their privacy and property rights under that agreement, and remain free to leave. The towns are designed to run off-grid, with renewable power, water recycling and food production from aquaponics and agrovoltaics, and with everything inside walking distance. The venture works out of Portugal and Spain and states a goal of a hundred such communities by 2036. Martakova’s part is the demand side: finding the partners, investors and residents who turn a plan into a town, and explaining a contractual community to people who have only ever lived in a municipal one. She introduced the project to the movement at the Liberty in Our Lifetime conference in 2024, and has followed libertarian philosophy and laissez-faire economics for more than a decade. --- # Tom Woods URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tom-woods Role: Libertarian Historian & Podcaster Topics: taxation-and-economics Tom Woods is a senior fellow at the Mises Institute and host of The Tom Woods Show. He holds a history degree from Harvard and a PhD from Columbia University. Woods is the author of thirteen books, including the New York Times bestseller Meltdown, and his work focuses on history, economics, and libertarianism. He has appeared on CNBC, FOX News, and Bloomberg TV and has received numerous awards, including the Hayek Lifetime Achievement Award and the Templeton Enterprise Award. Woods has also created educational content for the Ron Paul Curriculum. The Tom Woods Show has run on weekdays for over a decade and is one of the largest libertarian podcasts, and he founded Liberty Classroom, which sells recorded university-level courses in history and economics to people who did not want the version they were given at school. His books run from popular history to monetary policy, and Nullification, which argues that states may refuse to enforce federal laws they judge unconstitutional, put him at the centre of an American constitutional argument that has since been taken up well beyond libertarian circles. --- # Michael Strong URL: https://free-cities.org/people/michael-strong Role: Education Entrepreneur & Startup Cities Pioneer Topics: charter-cities, alternative-education Michael Strong is a serial education entrepreneur, most recently founding The Academy of Thought and Industry (ATI), a network of Montessori-aligned high schools with campuses in Austin, San Francisco, New York City, and St. Louis. Earlier he created Moreno Valley High School, ranked the 36th best public high school in the U.S. He is the author of The Habit of Thought: From Socratic Seminars to Socratic Practice and lead author of Be the Solution: How Entrepreneurs and Conscious Capitalists Can Solve All the World’s Problems. He introduced the expression “Startup Cities” in a 2013 Voice & Exit talk, which has led to a vibrant “Startup Societies” movement around the world. He is also a co-founder of FLOW, Peace through Commerce, Conscious Capitalism, and Radical Social Entrepreneurs, and serves on the boards of Radical Social Entrepreneurs and Social Evolution. The phrase was a deliberate borrowing from Albert Hirschman, whose distinction between voice and exit underlies the whole argument: reforming a place means persuading everyone in it, while starting one means persuading only the people who choose to come. Based in Austin, USA. --- # Alex Voss URL: https://free-cities.org/people/alex-voss Role: Member of the Board Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Alex is a Foundation Council Member of the Free Cities Foundation. He has a background in investment banking and joined Titus Gebel as the CFO of Tipolis from its beginning. Alex lives in Chicago and is working to expand the ideas of the Foundation to the Americas. Before Tipolis he worked on corporate restructurings and mergers and acquisitions in healthcare, and in asset management at Ariel Investments, buying deep-value equities. That is the discipline he brings to a field with a shortage of it: a new city is a capital project with a thirty-year horizon and no comparable transactions to price it against, and somebody has to model it anyway. Alongside Tipolis he advises fintech, Bitcoin, intentional-community and real-estate ventures, and argues that a Free City needs a financial system that does not depend on the goodwill of the country it sits in. He studied economics and finance at the University of Chicago and Notre Dame, holds the CFA charter along with several other professional designations, and has more recently formalised his study of Austrian economics through the Mises Institute. --- # Rahim Taghizadegan URL: https://free-cities.org/people/rahim-taghizadegan Role: Austrian School Economist Topics: intentional-communities, residency-and-citizenship, bitcoin-and-free-cities Rahim Taghizadegan is the last Austrian economist of the Austrian School in the direct tradition and has been teaching at universities in Austria, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, and Germany. As one of the last Viennese polymaths, he is also a physicist (specialization in nuclear physics and complex systems), philosopher, investor and entrepreneur. He has written more than a dozen books, some of them best-sellers, and is the founder of the private university Scholarium in Vienna, where the Austrian School is kept alive in its original interdisciplinary form of the Hayek- and Mises-Circles. He is originally from Iran, but has grown up in Austria and studied in Switzerland and the US. He moved the Scholarium to Zug in Switzerland in 2024, and has held lectureships in Austria, Liechtenstein and Germany. He studied physics, economics and sociology in Vienna and Lausanne. He was among the first Austrian economists to take Bitcoin seriously, teaching and publishing on it since 2011, and he now builds what he calls citadels: small, defensible communities in Europe founded on sound money and self-reliance, of which Citadel.Garden is his own. --- # Nuria Puigcerver URL: https://free-cities.org/people/nuria-puigcerver Role: Urban Designer Topics: honduran-zedes Nuria Forqués Puigcerver is an urban designer and co-founder of Fitted Projects, an urban-planning practice. She co-developed the master plan for Ciudad Morazán, a ZEDE under construction in Honduras, covering its housing, street network and zoning, and lectures on urban planning at the Africa Urban Lab in Zanzibar. The Ciudad Morazán plan is unusual in this movement for what it aims at: not a hub for foreign entrepreneurs but affordable rented housing for Honduran factory workers, laid out so that people can walk to work, with narrow streets, small blocks and a plot pattern meant to be built out incrementally rather than all at once. Her work as an urban designer runs from small renovations to new-city plans of several thousand hectares, across Latin America, the Caribbean, the Middle East, Europe and the United States. She teaches at the Africa Urban Lab in Zanzibar, the programme training African planners and economists for the urban growth the continent is already in, where the practical question is whether a city’s expansion is laid out in advance or absorbed as informal settlement afterwards. --- # Paul Dragos Aligica URL: https://free-cities.org/people/paul-dragos-aligica Role: Polycentric Governance Scholar Topics: private-governance Paul Dragos Aligica is KPMG Professor of Governance at the University of Bucharest, a Senior Research Fellow in the F. A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and a Senior Nonresident Scholar with the Center for Governance and Markets at the University of Pittsburgh. In 2023 he was elected a Member of the Academy of Europe, the Academia Europaea. Working in the Ostromian tradition of institutional analysis, he is the author of Institutional Diversity and Political Economy: The Ostroms and Beyond. His work is the main line continuing the Ostroms’: polycentricity, the idea that a society can be governed by many overlapping centres of decision with limited authority rather than by one, which is the closest thing political science has to a theory of what this movement proposes. He took his doctorate at Indiana University, where they taught. His recent books include Public Governance and the Classical Liberal Perspective and Governing Differences, written with Jennifer Brick Murtazashvili, on how a polycentric order copes with deep disagreement about values. --- # Jeff Deist URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jeff-deist Role: Austrian-School Attorney & Writer Topics: taxation-and-economics Jeff Deist is an attorney and writer who serves as general counsel at Monetary Metals. He previously spent roughly a decade as president of the Mises Institute and earlier served as chief of staff to Congressman Ron Paul. He trained in tax law and worked in private equity and mergers and acquisitions before moving into policy, and he ran Ron Paul’s congressional office during the years when the campaign to audit the Federal Reserve turned monetary policy from a specialist subject into a popular one. He led the Mises Institute from 2013 to 2023, running its conferences, publishing and student programmes, and became one of the more visible voices of the Austrian School in the United States through its lectures and podcasts. His writing concentrates on central banking, the political economy of money and the case for decentralisation, including secession and jurisdictional competition, which is where his work meets the Free Cities argument. He joined Monetary Metals in 2023, a business that pays interest on gold and treats it as productive capital rather than as an inert store of value. --- # Jon Vandenheuvel URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jon-vandenheuvel Role: Charter Cities Entrepreneur Topics: charter-cities Jon Vandenheuvel is the founder of Small Farm Cities Africa, which develops agribusiness enterprises, municipal infrastructure and applied technology systems, and a senior advisor for Africa at the Charter Cities Institute. He was previously executive director of e-commerce Africa at DP World and has organised initiatives across Ghana, Nigeria, Somalia, Rwanda, Ethiopia and Malawi. He co-authored Africa Risk Dashboard with the multimodal-transport pioneer Issa Baluch and has been a visiting scholar in African urbanism at MIT. Small Farm Cities builds settlements around agriculture rather than around industry: horticulture and aquaculture, the infrastructure to support them, and housing owned by the people doing the farming, so that a village produces an income and an asset rather than only a place to sleep. Its first community was built in Malawi, with a second planned there. The project belongs to the Charter Cities Institute’s NXT50 Cities Coalition and has worked with the Rwanda Development Board. His premise is that most of Africa’s urban growth will happen in small towns rather than megacities, and that those towns are where the model has to work. --- # Andreas Baumgartner URL: https://free-cities.org/people/andreas-baumgartner Role: Special Economic Zones Advisor Topics: special-economic-zones Andreas Baumgartner is co-founder and CEO of The Metis Institute, an advisory focused on courts, regulation and governance design for special economic zones and autonomous cities. He holds doctorates from the University of Vienna, spent around nine years at McKinsey & Company, led government advisory work at the Office of Tony Blair, and was Executive Director of the Dispute Resolution Authority at the Dubai International Financial Centre. The Metis Institute advises governments, zones and industries on the machinery most new jurisdictions discover late: courts that people trust, regulators competent enough to be worth having, and dispute resolution that works when the parties come from different legal traditions. It was set up by judges, court administrators and academics rather than by consultants. That work follows directly from his time in Dubai. The DIFC built a common-law court and arbitration system inside a civil-law country, and it remains the closest thing the field has to a proven template for a zone that needs a legal order of its own. He is also deputy chief executive of Tipolis, the developer of new jurisdictions. --- # Tudor Iliescu URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tudor-iliescu Role: Free Cities Ambassador Topics: private-governance Tudor is a tech entrepreneur who built and grew dozens of mobility and social apps, enabling more individual liberty. Having lived on several continents, he sees a great need for alternative development models. Tudor believes intentional communities and Bitcoin will shape the 21st century. He spent about a decade in smart mobility, co-founding the ride-hailing app EasyRide in Mongolia and the app studio Concept Apps in Romania, and has since worked as a consultant and adviser to technology ventures, including in artificial intelligence. In the movement he is the point of contact for Romania and Moldova, running events and making the Free Cities case to an audience whose recent experience of centrally planned settlement is not abstract. He also maintains Free Citadels, a directory of intentional and freedom-oriented communities, and has volunteered with Bitcoin outreach in Romania. His interest is practical rather than doctrinal. He treats new communities as products that either attract residents or do not, and expects the ones that work to combine a real place, a clear contract and money nobody can inflate. Based in Bucharest, Romania. --- # Cesare Martins URL: https://free-cities.org/people/cesare-martins Role: Free Cities Ambassador Cesare is dedicated to promoting innovative governance models that create greater economic freedom in Nigeria. In 2021, he founded Abelar: an organization that provides research and consulting services that focus on advancing special jurisdictions. Cesare studied Banking and Finance at the University of Benin, Nigeria and has undertaken national service at the Lagos State Ministry of Economic Planning and Budget. Abelar researches and advocates for special jurisdictions in Nigeria, and its work has included an institutional blueprint for an international financial centre in the country. He has also supported the Charter Cities Institute’s NXT50 Cities project and several new-city developments, and writes for Nigerian outlets on urbanisation, governance and what economic zones can and cannot do. The case he makes is demographic before it is ideological. Lagos already holds more than twenty million people and the projections for this century are far larger, so the cities that will house them are being built now, either with usable rules or without them. The question is whether Nigeria writes better ones deliberately or inherits worse ones by default. Based in Lagos, Nigeria. --- # Stefan Kraus URL: https://free-cities.org/people/stefan-kraus Role: Investment Migration Executive Topics: residency-and-citizenship Stefan Kraus is Chief Operating Officer and an Executive Committee member at Henley & Partners, the residence- and citizenship-by-investment advisory firm, based in Vienna. He previously worked in consulting and private equity, including at McKinsey & Company, and holds an MBA from London Business School. He oversees group IT and human resources and is responsible for the firm’s delivery offices, the back end of a business whose product is paperwork done correctly in jurisdictions that do not forgive mistakes. He joined as chief of staff before taking the operating role, and advises clients on Austrian residence and citizenship from the Vienna office. Henley & Partners has done more than any other firm to turn residence and citizenship by investment into an industry, advising both applicants and the governments that design the programmes, and publishing the index that ranks passports by the access they give. That places Kraus close to a question the Free Cities movement approaches from the other direction: once citizenship can be applied for, priced and compared across countries, it behaves like a service, and services compete. --- # Alex Martynov URL: https://free-cities.org/people/alex-martynov Role: Leadership Coach Alex Martynov is a leadership coach based in Prague with ten years of experience in leadership development. After almost two decades in tech he runs his own freelance coaching practice and, together with his wife, operates a small family bistro. In 2010 he founded the first website in Ukraine dedicated to Austrian economics and libertarianism. His interests span the connections between humanistic psychology, spontaneous order, group dynamics and self-organisation. He is inspired by the vision of a world with more peace, liberty, prosperity and fulfilment. He trained as an engineer, worked as a software developer and led teams before moving into coaching, and his practice draws on humanistic psychology rather than on management technique: the premise is that people lead better once they know what they actually value. The Borsch, the bistro he runs with his wife, is the other half of a life deliberately built at small scale in Prague. He is one of the few people in this movement who arrived through Ukrainian libertarian circles, having built the first Ukrainian-language site on Austrian economics in 2010. --- # Mark Beer URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mark-beer Role: Dispute-Resolution Expert Topics: special-economic-zones, private-governance Prof Mark Beer OBE is Chairman of The Metis Institute and a visiting fellow and co-founder of the Deep Tech Dispute Resolution Lab at the University of Oxford. He served as Chief Executive Officer of the DIFC’s Dispute Resolution Authority, Registrar General of the DIFC Courts and Registrar to the Dubai World Tribunal, and is a past President of the International Association for Court Administration and a member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Expert Network. He was behind the creation of the DIFC’s Dispute Resolution Authority and is widely credited with the DIFC Courts’ success: a common-law commercial court inside a civil-law country, working in English, with judgments enforceable abroad, which is the single piece of institutional design most new zones now try to copy. At the Metis Institute he advises governments and zones on doing it deliberately, and his measure is public trust rather than throughput. A court is only useful to a new jurisdiction if the people expected to invest under it believe it will rule against its own government when the law requires that. --- # Ott Vatter URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ott-vatter Role: E-Governance Expert Topics: network-states, technology-in-new-cities Ott Vatter was an Estonian digital-government specialist who served as Managing Director of Estonia’s e-Residency programme from 2019 to 2020. He later worked for Próspera, the ZEDE in Honduras, as managing director of its e-governance arm, ePróspera. He joined e-Residency in its early years and led it from March 2019, having first run it in an acting capacity. By the time he left, more than seventy thousand people worldwide held Estonian e-residency and had registered roughly fourteen thousand companies through it, enough that around one in six new Estonian companies was being founded by someone who had never lived in the country. That programme remains the clearest working proof of a Free Cities premise: a government can unbundle its services and offer them to people who are not its residents, and a small state can compete for a global population simply by being easier to deal with than larger ones. Vatter took the idea to Honduras, where ePróspera was built to give a new jurisdiction the digital administration Estonia had spent two decades assembling. He died in 2024. --- # Sondre Bjellås URL: https://free-cities.org/people/sondre-bjellas Topics: intentional-communities, technology-in-new-cities In 2017 Sondre Bjellås co-founded Liberstad with John Holmesland. Liberstad is a private-city project in Norway based on voluntaryism, private property rights and Austrian economics. He has an extensive background as a software developer, working on open-source blockchain and decentralised projects. The software he has built is used by the residents of Liberstad and is available to other Free City projects. A Norwegian anarchist who has been writing about the ideas since 2011, he came to the project from software rather than from politics, and Liberstad reflects that: the settlement runs on tools he built, including its own registry and a local currency, so that ownership, membership and payment work without the municipal apparatus the residents have opted out of. Liberstad sits on private land in southern Norway. It is not exempt from Norwegian law and the founders have never claimed that it is; it is a private city inside an existing state, where whatever can be arranged privately is arranged that way and the rest is lived with. He is a Free Cities Ambassador in Liberstad. --- # Sebastian Brunemeier URL: https://free-cities.org/people/sebastian-brunemeier Role: Longevity Biotech Investor Topics: medical-regulation Sebastian Brunemeier is a longevity-biotech investor and entrepreneur, co-founder and general partner of Healthspan Capital and co-founder and CEO of ImmuneAGE Pharma. He previously co-founded Cambrian Biopharma and studied the biology of ageing at the University of Oxford. Before Healthspan Capital he was a principal at Apollo Health Ventures and co-founded Cambrian Biopharma and Samsara Therapeutics, having helped start four longevity companies in five years. His interest in special jurisdictions is professional rather than ideological. Longevity medicine runs into a regulatory problem ordinary drug development does not have, because ageing is not classified as a disease, which leaves almost no approved route for trialling a therapy meant to prevent illness rather than treat it. Próspera is one of the few places where such trials are possible, and Brunemeier has taken part in the longevity biotech gatherings held there, including the Vitalia programme on Roatán. He was a Clarendon Scholar at the University of Oxford, a Fulbright Fellow and a Skaggs-Oxford Scholar at Scripps Research, and holds a dual master’s degree in molecular neuroscience and biotech business management. --- # Olivier Kessler URL: https://free-cities.org/people/olivier-kessler Role: Free-Market Economist & Publicist Olivier Kessler is an economist, publicist and director of the Liberal Institute in Zurich. Previously, he worked for several public affairs, media and finance companies. Olivier studied International Affairs & Governance at the University of St. Gallen. In 2017-18 he led the campaign for the liberal “No Billag” initiative in Switzerland as the president of the association for the abolition of compulsory media tax. He is a member of the Friedrich A. von Hayek Society and the jury for the Roland Baader Award. The Liberales Institut is Switzerland’s classical liberal think tank, and he has directed it since 2020 after several years as deputy director, publishing on federalism, tax competition and the size of the federal administration. The No Billag campaign made him nationally known. The initiative to abolish the compulsory broadcasting fee was rejected decisively in March 2018, but it forced an argument about state media into a national vote, which is the Swiss version of the point this movement keeps making: a decision only counts as consent when refusing it is on the ballot. --- # Jidy Chitta URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jidy-chitta Role: Charter Cities Expert Topics: charter-cities Jidy Chitta joined the Charter Cities Institute in 2023 as an Associate in the Special Projects division. His primary role at CCI is developing new city projects in Zanzibar, where he currently lives. Previously, Jidy served as Chief of Staff to the CEO at Braavos Cities, a charter-city search fund that explored projects in Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean. Before entering the charter-city space, he worked as a venture-capital and private-equity analyst at SageLink Capital and Kickstart Seed Fund. He studied economics, business, and international development at Brigham Young University. Zanzibar has become one of the more active testing grounds in the field, with Fumba Town as the anchor and a series of pop-up gatherings that bring founders and researchers to the island for weeks at a time. Chitta works on the projects that come out of that. His route in was through finance rather than urbanism, from venture and private-equity analysis to a charter-city search fund, which is a useful background in a field where the binding constraint is usually capital rather than design. --- # Magatte Wade URL: https://free-cities.org/people/magatte-wade Role: African Business Advocate Topics: taxation-and-economics, special-economic-zones Magatte Wade is a US-based entrepreneur who manufactures products in Senegal that are sold at Whole Foods Markets, and director of the Center for African Prosperity at the Atlas Network. A leading advocate for entrepreneurship and economic freedom in Africa, she has spoken at the UN, the Aspen Institute, the Clinton Global Initiative and universities including MIT, Harvard and Yale. Forbes named her one of its “Twenty Young Power Women of Africa”. Her book The Heart of a Cheetah argues that African poverty is not a shortage of resources or of talent but a consequence of the regulatory burden a young African meets trying to start anything, and that the fix is the boring one: make it possible to open and run a business. She takes the cheetah generation from the Ghanaian economist George Ayittey, and her own companies, which manufacture in Senegal for export, are the working demonstration of the argument rather than an illustration of it. She makes the moral case for special economic zones as a way to accelerate prosperity across the continent. --- # Lise Amber URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lise-amber Role: Longevity Project Lead Topics: medical-regulation Lise Amber is an entrepreneur and legal strategist and the chief executive of the Nexus Foundation and the ARSR Foundation. She works in international business law, corporate structuring and strategic development, and leads initiatives that combine sovereign high technology infrastructure with life extension research. She is directing the development of the Panama Autonomous Scientific Resort and Longevity Hub, a 42 acre titled property in the Chiriquí Province of Panama. The master plan is presented as a Latin American extension of the Próspera ecosystem and combines an autonomous data centre, a scientific resort and a longevity sanctuary, intended as a physical node for people working on artificial intelligence, biotechnology and charter city governance. The ARSR Foundation describes itself as a Canadian not-for-profit corporation with an interest in longevity, artificial intelligence, cultural learning, and legal and civic innovation, and presents the Nexus Umbrella as its project ecosystem, operated under its own governance. The International Longevity Alliance directory lists her as the foundation’s contact. She co-hosted the Infinita investor demo day that closed the 2026 conference week in Próspera. --- # Yaron Brook URL: https://free-cities.org/people/yaron-brook Role: Objectivist Intellectual Topics: private-governance Yaron Brook is chairman of the board of the Ayn Rand Institute, having previously served as its executive director from 2000 to 2017. An Israeli-American writer and Objectivist, he hosts The Yaron Brook Show, a podcast on philosophy, politics and economics. With Don Watkins he wrote Free Market Revolution: How Ayn Rand’s Ideas Can End Big Government, Equal Is Unfair and In Pursuit of Wealth, and he has spent two decades making the moral rather than the merely economic case for capitalism, on the argument that markets need defending as a matter of justice and not only of efficiency. The Yaron Brook Show carries the same case into daily commentary on politics, philosophy and economics. He taught finance at Santa Clara University for seven years, where he was an award-winning professor, and co-founded the advisory firm BH Equity Research before leaving academia in 2000 to lead the institute. Born in Jerusalem in 1961, he had moved to the United States for an MBA and a doctorate in finance at the University of Texas at Austin. --- # Felipe Munizaga URL: https://free-cities.org/people/felipe-munizaga Felipe Munizaga is a public-policy researcher who leads the work behind Liberty International’s Digital Nomad Tax Freedom Index, a cross-country ranking of tax freedom and regulatory flexibility for remote workers. The index assesses how remote income is taxed, tax-residency rules and digital-nomad visa frameworks. He leads the research team at Liberty International and rebuilt the index’s methodology, which scores countries on how remote income is taxed, when tax residency is triggered, and whether a digital-nomad visa actually removes the exposure it appears to remove. The 2025 edition put Ecuador at the top. The scores are published with the reasoning behind them, so that a government can see precisely which rule cost it places. He presented the index at the Free Cities Conference in Prague in 2025, on a panel unpacking what the year’s rankings say about where remote workers are actually going. The work matters to the movement because it measures the thing Free Cities projects promise in the abstract: how much practical difference a jurisdiction makes to someone who is free to choose one. --- # Neil Woodfine URL: https://free-cities.org/people/neil-woodfine Role: Bitcoin Industry Executive Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Neil Woodfine has almost a decade of experience in the Bitcoin industry, having worked at startups across exchange (OKCoin), cross-border payments (Remitsy and Wyre), infrastructure and mining (Blockstream) and custody (Unchained). He led marketing at Unchained, a Texas-based Bitcoin financial-services company, and has featured in Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, the Financial Times and the BBC. That path runs through most of the industry’s layers in turn: an exchange, a cross-border payments startup moving money into China over bitcoin, the infrastructure and mining side at Blockstream, and finally custody, where the product is not speed but the assurance that coins held for years are still there. He has since moved to Second as chief marketing officer, working on the Ark protocol, a second-layer system for fast, low-cost bitcoin payments. His public writing is mostly about the difference between marketing a technology and marketing a monetary standard. The first can promise features; the second has to persuade people to change what they treat as savings, which is slower and cannot be done with a campaign. --- # Nicole Reese URL: https://free-cities.org/people/nicole-reese Role: Regenerative Community Builder Topics: intentional-communities Nicole Reese is co-founder and COO of Regen Tribe, a startup accelerating regenerative-community land projects. Trained as an anthropologist, she founded the educational initiative Terrenity and has lived in and studied ecovillages in Costa Rica and Mexico. She is a certified ecovillage designer through the Global Ecovillage Network and started Terrenity in 2021 to give people trying to join or start such a settlement the practical knowledge the field lacked: how to assess a piece of land, how to structure ownership, and how to hold a group of people together long enough to finish anything. Terrenity became an official collaborator of the network and has since turned into a non-profit supporting emerging ecovillages in Guyana and Uganda, while its venture side merged into Regen Tribe. At Regen Tribe she runs operations for an accelerator whose product is other people’s communities: the templates, the education and the design work that a group of would-be neighbours cannot easily produce on their own. She came to the work from graphic design, marketing and event production, including for TEDx. --- # Khushboo Khullar URL: https://free-cities.org/people/khushboo-khullar Role: Bitcoin Investor Topics: honduran-zedes, bitcoin-and-free-cities Khushboo Khullar is a Bitcoin-focused investor and venture partner at Lightning Ventures, an investment network for Bitcoin startups. She previously worked in mergers and acquisitions and macroeconomics at Mizuho Bank, focusing on financing for Bitcoin-native companies and the Lightning Network. At Lightning Ventures she leads portfolio support for a fund that has backed more than forty Bitcoin and open-source companies, most of them at the earliest stage, where the binding constraint is rarely the technology and usually the banking, the legal wrapper and the jurisdiction. That is where her work meets the Free Cities argument. A company built on an open monetary network still has to be incorporated somewhere, bank somewhere and pay tax somewhere, and for a founder who can work from anywhere that choice has become a design decision rather than an accident of birth. She speaks at Bitcoin conferences on adoption and start-up financing, including Adopting Bitcoin in El Salvador, and is based in Singapore, where she took her master’s degree; her doctorate in economics was on macroeconomics and energy security. --- # Zach Weissmueller URL: https://free-cities.org/people/zach-weissmueller Role: Libertarian Journalist & Filmmaker Zach Weissmueller is a senior producer at Reason. He has produced documentary shorts, video interviews, and feature articles for the platform since 2010, covering permissionless technology, free speech, mental health and homelessness, experimental governance, COVID-19 policy, criminal-justice reform, and drug legalisation. Judges honoured Zach’s video series Anarchy in Detroit with an L.A. Press Club award, calling it “an awesome piece of journalism”, and recognised him again in 2019 and 2021 for his documentaries on the mental-health system and the homelessness crisis in Los Angeles. His work covering Hong Kong’s mass movement against creeping authoritarianism was cited in national media, and at least one of his video essays exploring libertarian philosophy has been viewed more than a million times on Reason’s YouTube channel. He documented his 2021 move from Los Angeles, California, to Florida, where he now lives and works. He co-hosted Just Asking Questions, Reason’s weekly interview podcast, with Liz Wolfe, and has argued the case for drug legalisation in public debate, including at the Soho Forum. His documentary work for Reason TV continues. --- # János Zolcer URL: https://free-cities.org/people/janos-zolcer Role: Journalist & TV Producer János Zolcer is a journalist, television producer and content developer with decades of experience at global networks including CNN, BBC and ZDF. A German citizen born in Czechoslovakia, he now lives in Hungary. He is known for his work on Mikhail Gorbachev, having produced a documentary series featuring the former Soviet leader and brought together world leaders such as Helmut Kohl and Shimon Peres for dialogue. He chronicles these experiences in his book Secrets of Gorbachev. The Gorbachev work began with a meeting in Vienna in 2000 and became a documentary series in which the former Soviet president interviewed the people he had negotiated the end of the Cold War with, among them George H. W. Bush, Helmut Kohl, Hans-Dietrich Genscher and Shimon Peres. The friendship lasted more than two decades, and Gorbachev’s Secrets, published on his ninetieth birthday, is Zolcer’s account of the private conversations behind it. He came to it from three decades of broadcast production, which is a rare vantage point on how a state comes apart without a war. --- # Archibald Astley-Corbett URL: https://free-cities.org/people/archibald-astley-corbett Role: FDI Advisor Topics: special-economic-zones Archibald Astley-Corbett is a foreign-direct-investment advisor who runs Vessel Global, advising expanding businesses on market access across Europe since 2011. He studied international law at the University of Paris X and works between Brussels, London, Berlin and Prague. Vessel Global works on market entry, trade and investment attraction, with economic development agencies, regions and cities on one side of the table and corporate investors and funds on the other. That makes his day job the everyday version of what special jurisdictions attempt deliberately: places competing for capital through what they can credibly offer, and investors choosing between them. He has spent some sixteen years in international business development across Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and is based in Berlin, where he is a director of the firm. He speaks at Free Cities events on foreign direct investment and on how a new zone can present itself credibly to the people who would have to underwrite it, which is a narrower audience than the movement usually addresses and a harder one to convince. --- # Mark Littlewood URL: https://free-cities.org/people/mark-littlewood Role: Free-Market Campaigner Topics: taxation-and-economics, private-governance Mark Littlewood is a British free-market campaigner who served as director general of the Institute of Economic Affairs from 2009 to 2023. Earlier in his career he was campaigns director at Liberty and head of media for the Liberal Democrats. He ran the Institute of Economic Affairs for fourteen years and is credited with raising both its media profile and its influence in Westminster, over a period in which free-market arguments moved from the fringe of British politics into a governing party and back out again. Since leaving he has directed Popular Conservatism, a campaign group on the right of British politics. His background is unusual for a free-market campaigner. Before the IEA he was campaigns director at Liberty, the civil-liberties organisation, and head of media for the Liberal Democrats, which left him making the case for economic and civil liberty from the same premise rather than treating them as separate causes. He is a frequent broadcaster on British television and radio and a regular speaker at liberty conferences in Britain and Europe. --- # Jordi Llonch Esteve URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jordi-llonch-esteve Role: Bitcoin Community Builder Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Jordi Llonch is a digital nomad, entrepreneur, and advocate for digital sovereignty. He is a co-organiser of Barcelona Bitcoin Only, Spain’s most active Bitcoin meetup, and the global organiser of Nostr Day events, which have introduced hundreds of people to decentralised communication. Jordi leads growth at Satlantis, a social network for sovereign individuals built using Nostr, and travels the world tapping into grassroots communities to learn how people are using freedom tech like Bitcoin and Nostr to reclaim their digital lives. A former airline pilot, he now dedicates his work to promoting tools that enable self-sovereign communication and financial independence. Satlantis ties people, places and events together on Nostr, an open protocol where an account is a key rather than an entry in a company’s database, so a user who falls out with a service can take their identity and their following elsewhere. He organises the Barcelona meetup and the international Nostr Day events, and came to this after a career flying commercial aircraft, which is a longer way round than most. --- # Thomas Walker-Werth URL: https://free-cities.org/people/thomas-walker-werth Role: Objectivist Writer & Editor Thomas Walker-Werth is associate editor at The Objective Standard and a fellow of both the Objective Standard Institute and the Foundation for Economic Education. He writes and speaks on Objectivist philosophy and individual flourishing. His essays have appeared in The Objective Standard, Capitalism Magazine, RealClear Policy and the Foundation for Economic Education’s publications, and he has spoken at the Battle of Ideas festival in London and on podcasts across the liberty movement. His book, Reason for Living: A Rational, Fact-Based Approach to Living Your Best Life, applies Ayn Rand’s ethics to the ordinary business of deciding what to do with a life: identifying values instead of inheriting them, setting goals that follow from those values, and treating happiness as an achievement rather than a mood. He argues that most of the self-help industry sells the opposite, techniques without any standard of what is worth wanting, and he continues the argument in a project and newsletter of the same name. He also teaches and speaks on this material for the Objective Standard Institute. --- # Annette Heinisch URL: https://free-cities.org/people/annette-heinisch Role: Lawyer & political commentator Topics: taxation-and-economics, private-governance Annette Heinisch is a German lawyer and advisor. She studied law in Hamburg, specialising in international banking and monetary law and financial constitutional law, and has practised as an attorney since 1991, advising decision-makers and small and medium-sized enterprises. She is a regular commentator for the German opinion site Achgut.com (Die Achse des Guten), writing on politics, economics and governance. She also hosts Macht&Markt, a German-language podcast of in-depth conversations on economics and politics with expert guests. Her training in monetary law and financial constitutional law is unusual in German commentary, and it shapes what she writes: less about the politics of a measure than about whether the state was entitled to take it, and what happens to a legal order once the rules constraining it are treated as negotiable. She has been a guest on Achgut’s Indubio podcast and writes on the constitutional side of monetary policy, which is where her work meets the Free Cities question: a jurisdiction is only as good as the limits it actually observes on itself. --- # Jan Bertram URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jan-bertram Role: Director of Operations Jan is the Director of Operations of the Free Cities Foundation. He runs the organisation day to day and leads its projects, among them the Foundation’s digital platforms: the public website, the member portal and the systems behind the Free Cities Conference. He has been with the Foundation and its predecessor organisations since 2018, longer than anyone else on the team. Jan is from Germany and has been part of the libertarian movement for nearly twenty years. He has since left the country and lives as a digital nomad. He sees new jurisdictions as the fastest way to advance liberty within his own lifetime. Reforming an existing state means persuading everyone at once. A new zone only has to persuade the people who choose to move in. Jan is also Chief of Staff at Tipolis, a developer of new jurisdictions, and IT administrator for several organisations in the Free Cities movement. He still organises the Free Cities meetup in Berlin, speaks at conferences and events, and represents the Foundation at them. --- # Prince Philip of Serbia and Yugoslavia URL: https://free-cities.org/people/prince-philip-of-serbia-and-yugoslavia Role: Member of the Serbian Royal Family Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Prince Philip of Serbia and Yugoslavia is a member of the Karađorđević royal family and a prominent advocate for Bitcoin and free-market ideas. He spent some thirteen years in traditional finance before joining JAN3, a Bitcoin technology company, as Chief Strategy Officer. There he works on adoption by companies and states, dealing with the governments and institutions that are weighing what it would mean to hold a monetary asset nobody can issue more of. His public argument is that Bitcoin restores a form of property no government can dilute, and that a currency which cannot be debased encourages the long horizons on which families, firms and countries actually build. He connects this to the low time preference he associates with hereditary institutions, a theme he has developed in lectures and interviews. Through his foundation in Serbia he promotes financial literacy and property rights, and he speaks regularly at Bitcoin conferences in Europe and the Middle East, among them BTC Prague and Bitcoin MENA. He read modern languages at University College London. --- # Tania Rak URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tania-rak Role: Libertarian Journalist & Communicator Topics: private-governance Tania (Tetiana) Rak is a Ukrainian journalist and communications manager active in the liberty movement, with around eight years of experience across TV, radio, podcasts and print. She co-leads the Ladies of Liberty Alliance chapter in Poland, coordinates Students for Liberty in Ukraine, and edits at SpeakFreely. She has worked with or contributed to outlets including the BBC, CNN, Radio Free Europe and TechCrunch, is a senior editor at Speak Freely, the European Students for Liberty journal, and launched Ukrainian Superwomen, a media project telling the stories of women in Ukraine. Her work since 2022 has been shaped by the war. Communications for a liberty organisation in a country under invasion is a different job from the same role elsewhere: the audience is scattered, many volunteers are displaced, and the case for open markets and limited government has to be made alongside the case for national survival. She is chief operating officer at We Are Innovation, a network arguing for permissionless problem-solving and innovation, and speaks at liberty conferences across Europe. --- # Iván Dubois URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ivan-dubois Role: Mercosur Parliamentarian Iván Dubois is an Argentine libertarian politician and entrepreneur. Elected in 2023, he represents Argentina in the Mercosur Parliament (Parlasur) for La Libertad Avanza, and since 2024 has served as president of the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties. Born in 1987 into a middle-class family in Villa Gobernador Gálvez in Santa Fe province, he spent eleven years in the family’s franchise business, ending as its operations director, before politics became his work. In 2021 he co-founded Urgente Milei, a YouTube channel that followed Javier Milei’s early public appearances, and he belongs to the young cohort that carried the Argentine libertarian movement from the internet into office. In Parlasur he has pressed for the body’s own costs to be cut, including an end to parliamentarians’ travel allowances, and has argued against readmitting Venezuela to Mercosur. Through the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties he works to connect liberty-minded parties across Latin America and Europe, and he has taken the case for special jurisdictions and Free Cities to the Free Cities Conference. --- # Frank Karsten URL: https://free-cities.org/people/frank-karsten Role: Libertarian Author & Activist Topics: private-governance Frank Karsten is a Dutch libertarian author and activist who founded the More Freedom Foundation (Stichting MeerVrijheid) and co-founded the Mises Institute Netherlands. He is co-author of Beyond Democracy, which has been translated into more than twenty languages. Written with Karel Beckman, the book takes on what its authors call the last political taboo: the assumption that majority rule and freedom are the same thing. Their argument is that decisions taken collectively for everyone manufacture conflict, because every question has to produce a single answer for all, while decentralisation and the right to leave allow people who disagree to live differently instead. That is why the book keeps turning up in Free Cities and seasteading debates, where exit rather than outvoting is the starting point, and why Karsten has been a regular guest at conferences in both movements. In the Netherlands the More Freedom Foundation campaigns against taxes and state intervention. He has since written on complexity in software, and he serves as a Free Cities Ambassador in Amsterdam. --- # William Markus URL: https://free-cities.org/people/william-markus Role: Free Cities Ambassador Topics: free-private-cities, taxation-and-economics William Markus is a co-founder and partner at the Pacioli Network, an international consulting network focused on Corporate Performance Management. The Pacioli Network is a network of consultants specialising in corporate performance management, the systems large companies use for planning, consolidation and financial reporting. It advises on the accounting as well as the implementation: group and management reporting, internal controls, and conversions to international standards. That is an unusual vantage point on the Free Cities argument. Markus spends his working life inside the reporting obligations a jurisdiction imposes on companies, which is where the real cost of a legal system is felt by a business, rather than in the headline tax rate. Because the network operates across borders, his clients are typically firms answering to several regimes at once, and the differences between them are measurable in the work. William is also a staunch supporter of the Free Cities movement. He believes that more decentralisation and competitiveness in governance improves the lives of people from all walks of life. --- # Rafael Badziag URL: https://free-cities.org/people/rafael-badziag Role: Free Cities Ambassador Rafael Badziag is an entrepreneur, best-selling author and angel investor. He is an expert in the psychology of entrepreneurship, specializing in self-made billionaires. His #1 Amazon Best Seller The Billion Dollar Secret has been published in 15 languages. Rafael is also the founder of the 10 Digit Impact Group, a global organization of 10-digit entrepreneurs (billionaires) with a vision to have a positive impact on the lives of billions of people. The book came out of face-to-face interviews with more than twenty self-made billionaires across several continents, conducted over years, and it is unusual in having been endorsed by many of its own subjects. He built his first business in the nineties, pioneering e-commerce in Europe. His interest in Free Cities follows the same line as his research. The people he studied built value wherever the rules allowed it, and he treats the choice of jurisdiction as one of the decisions that separates the entrepreneurs who compound from those who do not. Based in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. --- # Natalie Danelishen URL: https://free-cities.org/people/natalie-danelishen Role: Free Cities Influencer Natalie Danelishen is a well-known proponent of liberty who previously served as an administrative assistant at the Free Cities Foundation. Earlier in her career she worked for liberty-focused non-profit think tanks. A mother of three, she sees Free Cities as a way of securing freedom for the next generation. A self-taught graphic designer and writer, she worked for the Mises Institute and the National Constitutional Law Union before joining the Foundation, where she helped organise its international conferences and produce its published material. She is better known to a wider audience under the handle Chesschick01, where her graphics and commentary on liberty, money and family have built one of the more engaged followings in the movement, and she holds one of the Principality of Sealand’s noble titles. She home-schools her three children, and treats that as the same project by other means. The reason to want a freer jurisdiction is that somebody has to live in it afterwards, and they will have been taught by someone. --- # Michael Cobb URL: https://free-cities.org/people/michael-cobb Role: Real Estate Developer Topics: residency-and-citizenship At the height of a successful career in the computer industry, Michael Cobb left to pursue opportunities in the emerging real-estate markets of Central America. In 1996 he and a business partner formed Exotic Caye International, providing loans to North Americans buying across the region; as demand for capital grew, the mortgage company was converted into an international bank under the jurisdiction of Belize. He has since continued in development, creating opportunities for adventurous expatriates. The company he founded became ECI Development, which has assembled thousands of acres of coastline across Belize, Nicaragua, Panama and Costa Rica and built resorts, villages and retirement communities on them, and is now extending into South America. His customers are mostly North Americans relocating or retiring abroad, which has made him a practical observer of the thing this movement theorises: what makes a person actually move to another jurisdiction, and what makes them stay. His answer tends to be mundane, being title, water, electricity and neighbours you can talk to. --- # Baixu URL: https://free-cities.org/people/baixu Role: Architect Topics: urban-design Baixu is an architect whose work moves between practice and public explanation. She previously supported the Free Cities Foundation by making videos that set out its core ideas for people meeting them for the first time. She also runs a successful YouTube channel about interior design with over 300,000 subscribers. The channel is not decoration on the day job. She takes real floor plans apart on camera and shows why a room does not work, which is architectural criticism aimed at people who will never commission a building but do have to live in one, and it reaches an audience far larger than any practice’s client list. She is licensed in both the United Kingdom and Germany and trained at Cambridge, Bath and University College London, a conventional route into a profession she mostly discusses in unconventional venues. She sees Free Cities as a way to unleash the creative power of architects, letting them build more mixed-use, human-scale urban spaces where thriving communities can develop. --- # Jack Zama URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jack-zama Role: Agorist Community Builder Jack Zama is the founder of Los Propietarios, an anarcho-capitalist and agorist community project in Argentina that aims to build a town of libertarian settlers on homesteaded land. The model is homesteading in the literal sense. Any member may claim a thousand square metres, but the claim only holds if the land is put to use within a few months, by the member or by a representative acting for them, which lets people who cannot yet move to South America still take a plot. Ownership is reserved to libertarians; the community itself is open to anyone who wants to trade there. An agora marketplace runs alongside it, so members can supply each other rather than depend on the surrounding economy. The bet is a plain one: land in rural Argentina is cheap enough that a settlement can be started without permission, capital or a negotiation with a government, and the hard part is not acquiring the ground but getting enough people to arrive and stay. --- # Ekhard Seeßelberg URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ekhard-seesselberg Role: Free Cities Ambassador Ekhard Seeßelberg is an IT Professional with a longtime interest in Liberty, Austrian Economics, and Bitcoin. He is currently studying Austrian Economics at the Scholarium in Vienna and is a co-founder of B2029.org. Ekhard works as Chief Information Officer at TIPOLIS. He co-founded B2029, a Bitcoin space in Berlin that has run since 2019 as a permanent meeting place for developers, entrepreneurs and newcomers, at a time when most cities had only irregular meetups. It has hosted workshops, talks and regulars for years, which is a different sort of contribution from writing code or trading: somewhere for a scene to exist in person. At Tipolis, the developer of new jurisdictions, he is a director and Chief Information Officer, responsible for the systems a company needs when its product is a place rather than a piece of software. His study of Austrian economics at the Scholarium in Vienna sits behind both roles, and he serves as a Free Cities Ambassador in Berlin. Based in Berlin, Germany. --- # Veronika Kütt URL: https://free-cities.org/people/veronika-kutt Role: Bitcoin Expert Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities Veronika Kütt is a mathematician and strategist, and a recognised voice in the Bitcoin community. She lectures on Bitcoin and crypto-assets at universities including the Frankfurt School of Finance. She joined the Frankfurt School Blockchain Center in 2018 as a research assistant, where her work focused on open, permissionless systems, chiefly Bitcoin and the Lightning Network. She has also taught at the Bundeswehr University in Munich and runs workshops for practitioners, taking apart how the technology works underneath the price. Her audience is mostly people who are not already convinced: bankers, public administrators and executives who need to understand what a bearer asset with no issuer means for the institutions they run. She writes for German banking publications and has spoken at industry conferences since the first wave of European blockchain events, and she is one of the few German-speaking Bitcoin educators who came to the subject from mathematics, which she read at Goethe University in Frankfurt, rather than from finance or activism. --- # Ivan Ko URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ivan-ko Role: Charter City Developer Topics: charter-cities Ivan Ko is the CEO of the Victoria Harbour Group, chairman of the RECAS Group and a director of the At Home Foundation. Born in Hong Kong, he has more than 27 years of real-estate development and finance experience across Hong Kong, China, Macau, the US and the UK. His proposal, Nextpolis, was for a new city of around fifty square kilometres for Hong Kongers leaving after the national security law, with schools teaching in Cantonese and a charter setting out its principles, though governed under the host country’s law rather than outside it. Ireland was the first candidate, with a site sought between Dublin and Belfast, and the plan drew international coverage before running into the obvious political difficulty: a host government has to want fifty thousand new arrivals in one place. He has since looked at other jurisdictions. He is working to build new cities that could offer Hong Kongers an alternative place to live under the rule of law. --- # Stephan Livera URL: https://free-cities.org/people/stephan-livera Role: Bitcoin Podcaster Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Stephan Livera hosts one of Bitcoin’s leading podcasts, the Stephan Livera Podcast, focused on the economics and technology of Bitcoin. He contributes to outlets including Swan Bitcoin, Bitcoin Magazine and the Mises Institute, and speaks at Bitcoin and liberty conferences internationally. Previously a chartered accountant, he worked at Deloitte, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia and Macquarie Group. He grew up in Sydney and studied commerce at the University of New South Wales. The podcast has run since 2018 and is among the most listened to in the field, built on long technical interviews with developers, economists and operators rather than on price commentary. He also co-founded Ministry of Nodes, which teaches people to run their own node and hold their own keys. He is head of education at Swan Bitcoin, managing director of its international arm and a partner at Bitcoiner Ventures. He lives in Dubai, where he is a Free Cities Ambassador and a regular presence at the region’s Bitcoin conferences. --- # Oscar Correa URL: https://free-cities.org/people/oscar-correa Role: Regenerative Community Builder Oscar Correa is the founder and CEO of Regen Tribe, a startup that develops and accelerates regenerative-community and “regenerative neighbourhood” land projects. Regen Tribe works on three fronts at once: growing a global network of people and neighbourhoods, building the tools and templates such projects need in order to plan, finance and govern themselves, and partnering with existing communities that have already broken ground. Its own model settlements are designed for about 150 residents each, small enough that decisions can still be taken face to face and services shared without a bureaucracy. Correa came to the work through permaculture, including projects at Mother Tree, a regenerative community outside Tulum in Mexico, and through years of studying the problems that recur whenever people try to build an intentional community from scratch. He writes about “polyorganisation”, his term for co-ordinating a settlement through overlapping voluntary groups rather than a single hierarchy, and about the lessons the regenerative neighbourhood movement has learned the expensive way. --- # Jeff Booth URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jeff-booth Role: Entrepreneur & Author Topics: taxation-and-economics, technology-in-new-cities Jeff Booth is a technology entrepreneur who has lived at the forefront of technological change for two decades. He led the building-materials marketplace BuildDirect for nearly twenty years, through the dot-com crash, the 2008 financial crisis and many waves of disruption. He is the author of The Price of Tomorrow: Why Deflation is the Key to an Abundant Future, which argues that accelerating technology is inherently deflationary and at odds with a debt-based monetary system. The argument in the book is a collision. Technology makes almost everything cheaper every year, while a monetary system built on expanding debt requires prices to rise, so the two can only be reconciled by printing enough money to hide the deflation, which transfers wealth to whoever stands nearest the new money. He has since co-founded Ego Death Capital, a venture firm that invests only in businesses built on Bitcoin, on the view that the alternative to hiding deflation is money nobody is able to print. --- # Nikos Sotirakopoulos URL: https://free-cities.org/people/nikos-sotirakopoulos Topics: private-governance Dr Nikos Sotirakopoulos is the director of the Ayn Rand Institute Europe and a visiting fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. He holds a PhD in political sociology from the University of Kent and taught in UK universities for a decade. A frequent commentator in the British media, he is the author of two books, The Rise of Lifestyle Activism: From New Left to Occupy and Identity Politics and Tribalism: The New Culture Wars. His work on identity politics has a different character from most commentary on the subject: he studied activist movements as a sociologist before he began arguing with them, having spent more than a decade in British universities, at Kent, Loughborough and York St John. His case is that the individual gets squeezed from both directions, by a left that sorts people into groups and a right that sorts them into nations, and that the Enlightenment premises underneath a free society are precisely what both are discarding. --- # Alexandra Kons URL: https://free-cities.org/people/alexandra-kons Role: Crypto Journalist Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Alexandra Kons has worked as a crypto journalist since 2017, writing for outlets including BeInCrypto. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Oriental and Asian studies from the University of Bonn and a master’s in Arabic studies from the Free University of Berlin. She has written for BeInCrypto and BTC-ECHO in German and English, covering Bitcoin, the wider market and the policy around it, and has interviewed people who organise their whole lives around the technology rather than only trading it. She also hosts a podcast on unschooling and self-directed education. Those two threads meet in her work with Freeth’m, the venture building self-sufficient contractual towns in Iberia, where she leads Kids World, the part of the project concerned with how children are taught in a settlement with no municipal school system. It is a question most Free City projects postpone: a town can be designed and financed by adults, but families only move somewhere that has thought about education first. --- # Lauren Razavi URL: https://free-cities.org/people/lauren-razavi Role: Network State Strategist Topics: network-states, residency-and-citizenship Lauren Razavi is a technologist, political scientist and lifelong global citizen who has lived as a digital nomad since 2013. She is executive director of Plumia, an innovation lab (part of the all-remote company SafetyWing) that aims to build “a country on the internet” for borderless workers. She is the author of Global Natives, a book on the past, present and future of borderless work, and writes an award-winning newsletter of the same name. Plumia sits inside SafetyWing, a company selling insurance and benefits to people who work outside any one country’s system, which gives the project something most network-state proposals lack: a business already serving the population it wants to organise. Her argument is that the digital nomad is a preview rather than a curiosity. Once work is portable, the bundle a state offers, residence, healthcare, pension and taxation, comes apart, and somebody has to reassemble the parts for people whose lives no longer fit inside one border. --- # Efrat Fenigson URL: https://free-cities.org/people/efrat-fenigson Role: Journalist & Podcaster Topics: taxation-and-economics, technology-in-new-cities Efrat Fenigson is an independent journalist, podcaster and public speaker, and a former chief marketing officer at global tech companies. Through her podcast You’re The Voice and her Substack she covers freedom and sovereignty, the growing global control regime, monetary change, CBDCs and Bitcoin. She was featured by The Wall Street Journal as one of Israel’s top tech leaders of 2022, and her channels reach more than 165,000 followers. She spent two decades in technology, latterly as a marketing executive at global companies, and turned to journalism during the pandemic. Her subject since has been the machinery of financial control: central bank digital currencies, digital identity, payment surveillance, and the argument that a currency which can be programmed can also be made conditional on behaviour. She holds a degree in computer science and reports in both English and Hebrew, which puts her in the unusual position of covering Israel’s digital-currency plans for an international audience while living there. --- # Joel Bomgar URL: https://free-cities.org/people/joel-bomgar Role: President Topics: honduran-zedes Joel Bomgar is a technology entrepreneur and statesman who founded Bomgar Corporation (now BeyondTrust) and served in the Mississippi House of Representatives. An early investor in Próspera, he later became President of the Honduran ZEDE. He started Bomgar in 2003 to give IT teams a secure way to support machines they could not physically reach, and built it into a business serving customers in some sixty-five countries before it was sold and later renamed BeyondTrust. He then spent eight years in state politics, elected for Mississippi’s 58th district in 2016 and serving until 2024. He backed Próspera early, as an investor rather than an operator, and has been its President since 2021. The role covers the running of the zone and its relationships with residents and businesses, as well as much of its public case, which has become more demanding since Honduras repealed the legal framework the project was built under and the dispute moved into international arbitration. --- # Daniel Prince URL: https://free-cities.org/people/daniel-prince Role: Author & Podcaster Topics: residency-and-citizenship, alternative-education Daniel Prince is the author of Choose Life, host of the Once BITten! podcast and a father of four. His book offers practical advice for adventurous families who want to combine long-term world travel with a first-rate education for their children. For six years he has taken his children on an educational journey across more than twenty countries, making the case that online learning services and tutoring networks are an attractive alternative to state-run schooling. He and his wife left Singapore after fifteen years, sold nearly everything, took their four children out of school and travelled continuously, using home swaps rather than hotels: more than sixty of them, across sixteen countries and four continents. Once BITten! grew out of that. Rather than technical explanations, the interviews are with people describing what actually changed for them, which is the format’s premise: most people are moved by another person’s circumstances rather than by an argument about monetary policy. --- # Niko Laamanen URL: https://free-cities.org/people/niko-laamanen Role: Bitcoin Publisher Topics: bitcoin-and-free-cities, taxation-and-economics Niko Laamanen is an educator and the founder of Konsensus Network, the first Bitcoin-only publishing house. Working through a distributed network of more than fifty volunteers across some twenty languages, Konsensus translates and publishes the best books on liberty, economics and Bitcoin, describing itself as a censorship-resistant “starfish enterprise”. He is the author of Wielding Bitcoin and is based in Madeira, where he supports the island’s autonomy through economics and Bitcoin education. Konsensus works the way its name suggests: no central office, a network of translators and editors spread across countries, each title localised by people who speak the language rather than by a service. It has published dozens of titles on Bitcoin, Austrian economics and sovereignty in languages no commercial publisher considers worth a print run. The starfish comparison is deliberate. An organisation with no head cannot be decapitated, which for a publisher of politically inconvenient books is a design requirement rather than a metaphor. --- # Carlos Pineda URL: https://free-cities.org/people/carlos-pineda Role: ZEDE Legal Expert Carlos A. Pineda Pinel is a Honduran lawyer and reform strategist best known for co-designing the legal and governance framework of the ZEDEs (Zones for Economic Development and Employment), a bold model of autonomous special jurisdictions. He served on their national oversight body (CAMP), helping adapt global best practices in law, arbitration, and institutional design. He also co-authored Honduras’s Investment Promotion Law, launched the first online company registry in Central America, and led the creation of the country’s e-government platform. Carlos advises governments, developers, and investors on Special Economic Zones (SEZs), incentive structures, and legal innovation. He has represented clients in national courts and before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. He holds an MBA from IE Business School, a master’s in law from UNITEC, and has trained at Oxford and Harvard in negotiation and public-sector innovation. Through his firm, Developing Concept Consulting, he offers advisory services on legal frameworks, institutional design, and SEZ development. --- # Pavla Karon URL: https://free-cities.org/people/pavla-karon Role: Entrepreneur & writer Pavla Karon is a Czech entrepreneur and writer who co-runs her family business. An anarcho-capitalist and voluntarist who grew up under socialism, she writes and speaks on personal freedom in everyday life, with a particular focus on conscious parenting, relationships, and the path to inner freedom. She is a recurring guest on the Free Cities Podcast. She grew up under socialism in Czechoslovakia, which is where her argument starts: that a person raised to defer does not become free when the regime changes, and that the habits of freedom are formed at home long before they are exercised anywhere else. Her subjects are accordingly domestic rather than political. She writes and speaks on raising children who can think for themselves, on gender roles and family dynamics, and on the inner work that has to come first, and she has written on freedom-based parenting for the Foundation as well as appearing on its podcast. --- # Rodrigo Quercia URL: https://free-cities.org/people/rodrigo-quercia Role: Free Cities Ambassador Born and raised in São Paulo, Brazil, Rodrigo joins the Free Private Cities movement after having experienced how devastating poverty can be to many communities. His fascination with political philosophy and economics has led to the realization that the optimization of jurisdictional systems is crucial in order to unleash accelerated and sustainable prosperity, and competition is the best way to achieve that end. He has previously worked in the financial services industry in Hong Kong and Brazil. He later joined Grupo SolPanamby as the managing director of its Family Office as well as a board member with executive roles in the Group’s real estate, media, and agriculture operations, leading the creation of multiple business units and shifting the group’s strategic plan to large scale real estate projects. He later implemented his Financial expertise as CFO of NeWAY Capital, a company in the field of competitive governance. Based in São Paulo, Brazil. --- # Aleksa Burmazovic URL: https://free-cities.org/people/aleksa-burmazovic Role: Tax and Banking Specialist Topics: taxation-and-economics, special-economic-zones Aleksa Burmazovic has worked on offshore banking, special economic zones and tax optimisation for eight years, and speaks and writes on the subject. He is active with Nomad Layer, the official tax residency partner of the Próspera ZEDE. He is Serbian, and also writes his name Aleksa Burmazović. A profile published by the Trade Law Centre describes him as project manager at Adrianople Group, a business intelligence and consulting firm working on special economic zones, and says he works regularly in sub-Saharan Africa and concentrates on the investment attraction policies of Central African states. The same profile credits him as host of the firm’s Geoeconomics Podcast, and in 2021 he appeared with the Adrianople co-founder Preston Martin on the Curious Worldview podcast to explain what special economic zones are and why states build them. --- # Sebastian Grell URL: https://free-cities.org/people/sebastian-grell Role: Free Cities Ambassador Sebastian is a young entrepreneur who is driven by a vision to innovatively shape our ways of life and living together in a freedom-embracing way. He acquired academic degrees from various top universities in the areas of physics, business management, economics, and philosophy. This gave him inter alia the opportunity to study Ludwig von Mises within the Hamburgian Praxeological School and to thoroughly and philosophically reflect on a range of freedom-related topics. As a friend of freedom, he is a crypto enthusiast since the early days who seeks opportunities to make the world a better place. He believes that the world becomes a better place if made a place of freedom governed by voluntary (inter-)action. Based in Hamburg, Germany. --- # Tobias Zepf URL: https://free-cities.org/people/tobias-zepf Role: Free Cities Ambassador Tobias Zepf is a digital nomad, investor, and passionate advocate of freedom. His libertarian beliefs have driven him to explore opportunities to advance freedom and free market principles in various fields. He studied Management, Philosophy, and Economics at the Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, where he had the opportunity to study under libertarian professors and graduated with his Bachelor’s Thesis on the societal implications of blockchain technology. Since 2018, Tobias has been traveling the world, immersing himself in different cultures while encouraging Bitcoin adoption and spreading the concept of flag theory and internationalization strategies. Based in Mexico City, Mexico. --- # Eduard Bucher URL: https://free-cities.org/people/eduard-bucher Role: Free Cities Ambassador Eddie is a project manager whose expertise lies in creating flexible solutions to dynamic problems. He is pursuing a master’s degree in Austrian Economics from the Mises Institute and is writing a thesis on integrating market mechanisms into firms’ operating procedures. He is convinced that independent, autonomous communities are the solution to the problem(s) of transfer societies and recently took some time off to lead a related project in an undisclosed location. Based in Valencia, Spain. --- # Ben Gunn URL: https://free-cities.org/people/ben-gunn Role: Forester & entrepreneur Ben Gunn (a pseudonym) is an entrepreneur who runs a forestry project on his woodland estate in the Welsh borders and is building a company in Próspera, Honduras. A privacy advocate, he works on decentralized identity and Bitcoin-based tools, and speaks on privacy versus secrecy, self-reliance, and the ethics of building anti-fragile businesses. --- # Dirk Wagner URL: https://free-cities.org/people/dirk-wagner Role: Free Cities Ambassador Having been born in socialist East-Germany, Dirk is uniquely aware of the dangers of postmodern ideologies as well as governmental intervention into the economy and private lives. Due to this, he has been an active participant of the seasteading and Liberland projects before joining Free Private Cities. Based in Mykolaiv, Ukraine. --- # Jessica Hodlr URL: https://free-cities.org/people/jessica-hodlr Role: Second-Citizenship Advisor Topics: residency-and-citizenship, taxation-and-economics After earning her degree in industrial engineering and technology at Purdue University, Jessica Hodlr decided the nine-to-five was not for her and took the entrepreneurial route. She is COO of Plan B Passport, where she helps people obtain second citizenships and greater freedom through jurisdictional arbitrage. --- # Igal Gofman URL: https://free-cities.org/people/igal-gofman Role: Documentary photographer & community builder Igal Gofman is a documentary photographer and community builder who turned to the Free Cities movement in 2021. Born in Russia and raised in Israel, he is involved with the Montelibero project and lives in Montenegro. --- # Danilo Silva URL: https://free-cities.org/people/danilo-silva Role: Relocation & Internationalisation Consultant Topics: residency-and-citizenship Danilo Silva is Chief Operating Officer of Settee, the Portuguese-language arm of the Staatenlos internationalisation network, where he supports clients on relocation and internationalisation for the Brazilian and wider Lusophone market. --- # Michael Cruz URL: https://free-cities.org/people/michael-cruz Role: Commercial Real Estate Advisor Michael Cruz is a commercial real-estate advisor focused on property in new-city and Free City projects. --- # MEDIA ARCHIVE: COVERAGE PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE --- # Inside Próspera, the libertarian utopia on a Caribbean island off the coast of Honduras URL: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-22/honduras-prospera-libertarian-utopia-caribbean-roatan/107045960 Source: ABC News (Australia) Author: Lauren Day and Matt Henry Date: 2026-08-22 ABC News (Australia) · Lauren Day and Matt Henry · 2026-08-22 --- # 'The center of NH political thought': Free Staters celebrate successes at Liberty Forum URL: https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2026-03-09/free-staters-freestateproject-nh-newhampshire-jason-osbrne-libertarians-free-state-liberty-forum Source: New Hampshire Public Radio Author: Josh Rogers Date: 2026-03-09 New Hampshire Public Radio · Josh Rogers · 2026-03-09 --- # One month in, can Honduras' new president put the country on the path to lasting economic gains? URL: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/one-month-in-can-hondurass-new-president-put-the-country-on-the-path-to-lasting-economic-gains/ Source: Atlantic Council Author: María Fernanda Bozmoski and Isabella Palacios Date: 2026-02-27 Atlantic Council · María Fernanda Bozmoski and Isabella Palacios · 2026-02-27 --- # Jurisdiction Shopping: The Forgotten Logic Behind Flag Theory URL: https://thedailyeconomy.org/article/jurisdiction-shopping-the-forgotten-logic-behind-flag-theory/ Source: The Daily Economy Author: Emile Phaneuf III and Rahim Taghizadegan Date: 2026-02-02 The Daily Economy · Emile Phaneuf III and Rahim Taghizadegan · 2026-02-02 --- # Sark – what's next for the little island? URL: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/sark-whats-next-for-the-little-island/ Source: Undervalued Shares Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2025-12-12 Undervalued Shares · Swen Lorenz · 2025-12-12 --- # Tech elites are starting their own for-profit cities URL: https://www.ft.com/content/b127ee7a-5ac4-4730-a395-c9f9619615c7 Source: Financial Times Date: 2025-12-08 Financial Times · 2025-12-08 --- # Inside Bhutan's US$100 billion plan to build 'happy' Singapore-inspired economic hub URL: https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/economics/article/3332904/inside-bhutans-us100-billion-plan-build-happy-singapore-inspired-economic-hub Source: South China Morning Post Author: Jean Iau Date: 2025-11-16 South China Morning Post · Jean Iau · 2025-11-16 --- # How Do You Build a New Singapore? Inside Próspera's Bet on Private Governance URL: https://www.generalist.com/p/the-170m-experiment-to-build-a-private-city Source: The Generalist Author: Mario Gabriele Date: 2025-11-11 The Generalist · Mario Gabriele · 2025-11-11 --- # Inside Itana, Nigeria's first digital free zone URL: https://techcabal.com/2025/06/10/inside-itana-nigerias-first-digital-free-zone/ Source: TechCabal Author: Frank Eleanya Date: 2025-06-10 TechCabal · Frank Eleanya · 2025-06-10 --- # Inside the libertarian charter city of Próspera URL: https://spearswms.com/wealth/inside-the-libertarian-micronation-of-prospera/ Source: Spear's Author: Robert Jackman Date: 2025-04-17 Spear's · Robert Jackman · 2025-04-17 --- # Próspera, Honduras' Libertarian Island Dream, Becomes $11 Billion Nightmare URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-02-13/a-honduras-dream-city-now-faces-11-billion-political-dispute Source: Bloomberg Author: Umar Farooq and Michael D. McDonald Date: 2025-02-13 Bloomberg · Umar Farooq and Michael D. McDonald · 2025-02-13 --- # Build the Presidio Freedom City URL: https://www.palladiummag.com/2025/01/17/build-the-presidio-freedom-city/ Source: Palladium Author: Mark Lutter and Jeffrey Mason Date: 2025-01-17 Palladium · Mark Lutter and Jeffrey Mason · 2025-01-17 --- # Inside Bhutan's Plan to Boost Its Economy With 'Mindful Capitalism' URL: https://time.com/7204652/gelephu-mindfulness-city-bhutan-economy/ Source: TIME Author: Charlie Campbell Date: 2025-01-16 TIME · Charlie Campbell · 2025-01-16 --- # Building Freedom Cities URL: https://www.city-journal.org/article/building-freedom-cities Source: City Journal Author: Mark Lutter and Nick Allen Date: 2024-12-06 City Journal · Mark Lutter and Nick Allen · 2024-12-06 --- # Sark – it's not a big deal URL: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/sark-its-not-a-big-deal/ Source: Undervalued Shares Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2024-11-29 Undervalued Shares · Swen Lorenz · 2024-11-29 --- # A tiny, tranquil but crumbling island populated by 500 people – how does a £30m investment in Sark make any sense? URL: https://www.bailiwickexpress.com/news-ge/focus-tiny-tranquil-crumbling-island-populated-500-people-how-does-30m-investment-sark-make-any-sense/ Source: Bailiwick Express Date: 2024-10-14 Bailiwick Express · 2024-10-14 --- # No More Special Little Freedom Zones URL: https://reason.com/2024/09/25/no-more-special-little-freedom-zones/ Source: Reason Author: Liz Wolfe Date: 2024-09-25 Reason · Liz Wolfe · 2024-09-25 --- # The For-Profit City That Might Come Crashing Down URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/28/magazine/prospera-honduras-crypto.html Source: The New York Times Magazine Author: Rachel Corbett Date: 2024-08-28 The New York Times Magazine · Rachel Corbett · 2024-08-28 --- # Putting the Spark Back in Sark – Swen Lorenz's Big Plans for Europe's Tiniest Tax Haven URL: https://www.imidaily.com/podcast/podcast-putting-the-spark-back-in-sark-swen-lorenzs-big-plans-for-europes-tiniest-tax-haven/ Source: IMI Daily Author: Christian Henrik Nesheim Date: 2024-07-12 IMI Daily · Christian Henrik Nesheim · 2024-07-12 --- # Sark bid – decision time URL: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/sark-bid-decision-time/ Source: Undervalued Shares Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2024-06-28 Undervalued Shares · Swen Lorenz · 2024-06-28 --- # Creating 'Free Cities' as Plan B for global societies URL: https://www.pacificresearch.org/creating-free-cities-as-plan-b-for-global-societies/ Source: Pacific Research Institute Author: Alex Voss Date: 2024-04-11 Pacific Research Institute · Alex Voss · 2024-04-11 --- # Meet Me in the Eternal City URL: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/03/silicon-valley-billionaires-building-cities/677173/ Source: The Atlantic Date: 2024-03-01 The Atlantic · 2024-03-01 --- # Sark – bidding for the Barclay estate and going public URL: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/sark-bidding-for-the-barclay-estate-and-going-public/ Source: Undervalued Shares Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2023-11-24 Undervalued Shares · Swen Lorenz · 2023-11-24 --- # Sark – a small island with huge potential URL: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/sark-a-small-island-with-huge-potential/ Source: Undervalued Shares Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2023-09-01 Undervalued Shares · Swen Lorenz · 2023-09-01 --- # A Private Libertarian City in Honduras URL: https://reason.com/video/2023/07/06/a-private-libertarian-city-in-honduras/ Source: Reason Author: Zach Weissmueller Date: 2023-07-06 Reason · Zach Weissmueller · 2023-07-06 --- # £100m dream for a Sark "utopia" URL: https://www.bailiwickexpress.com/news/focus-100m-dream-sark-utopia/ Source: Bailiwick Express Date: 2023-06-09 Bailiwick Express · 2023-06-09 --- # Liberty in Our Lifetime – Lessons from Prague URL: https://mises.org/power-market/liberty-our-lifetime-lessons-prague Source: Mises Institute Author: Robert Aro Date: 2022-11-29 Mises Institute · Robert Aro · 2022-11-29 --- # Finding Liberty in Parallel – Bitcoin and the Free Cities Movement URL: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/bitcoin-enables-the-free-cities-movement Source: Bitcoin Magazine Author: Stephan Livera Date: 2022-11-27 Bitcoin Magazine · Stephan Livera · 2022-11-27 --- # Crypto-libertarian paradise, Próspera, just lost its battle with Honduras URL: https://restofworld.org/2022/crypto-libertarian-prospera-lost-legal-battle-honduras/ Source: Rest of World Author: Laurie Clarke Date: 2022-05-11 Rest of World · Laurie Clarke · 2022-05-11 --- # Honduras Ends Its Experiment With Charter Cities URL: https://reason.com/2022/04/27/honduras-ends-its-experiment-with-charter-cities/ Source: Reason Author: Brian Doherty Date: 2022-04-27 Reason · Brian Doherty · 2022-04-27 --- # Crypto millionaires plan tax-free cities in Central America URL: https://fortune.com/2022/04/22/crypto-millionaires-building-tax-free-cities-central-america/ Source: Fortune Author: Amiah Taylor Date: 2022-04-22 Fortune · Amiah Taylor · 2022-04-22 --- # Crypto millionaires building their own cities in Central America URL: https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/20/1049384/crypto-cities-central-america/ Source: MIT Technology Review Author: Laurie Clarke Date: 2022-04-20 MIT Technology Review · Laurie Clarke · 2022-04-20 --- # Bitcoin City and The Future of Economic Liberty with Peter Young URL: https://rumble.com/vwba4v-bitcoin-city-and-the-future-of-economic-liberty-with-peter-young.html Source: The Sean Morgan Report Date: 2022-03-03 The Sean Morgan Report · 2022-03-03 --- # Free Private Cities & Bitcoin with Peter Young URL: https://open.spotify.com/episode/31PfYSA4vMnndqgfGgsJVK Source: The Bitcoin Reserve Show Date: 2022-02-25 The Bitcoin Reserve Show · 2022-02-25 --- # Bitcoin Adoption in El Salvador, Free Private Cities and the Honduran ZEDEs URL: https://stephanlivera.com/episode/340/ Source: Stephan Livera Podcast Date: 2022-01-20 Stephan Livera Podcast · 2022-01-20 --- # How Erick Brimen Helped Launch a Honduran Charter City URL: https://reason.com/2021/12/28/how-erick-brimen-helped-launch-a-honduran-charter-city/ Source: Reason Author: Brian Doherty Date: 2021-12-28 Reason · Brian Doherty · 2021-12-28 --- # Peter Young and Veronika Kuett Twitter Spaces discussion on El Salvador's Bitcoin City URL: https://twitter.com/AdoptingBTC/status/1463175122731380741 Source: Adopting Bitcoin Date: 2021-11-23 Adopting Bitcoin · 2021-11-23 --- # Are American Cities Ready for Special Economic Zones? URL: https://catalyst.independent.org/2021/11/19/cities-special-economic-zones/ Source: Catalyst (Independent Institute) Author: Scott Beyer Date: 2021-11-19 Catalyst (Independent Institute) · Scott Beyer · 2021-11-19 --- # Veronika Kuett & Peter Young talk about Bitcoin and Free Private Cities at the Adopting Bitcoin Conference URL: https://youtu.be/OP5HHoBsV7Q Source: Adopting Bitcoin Conference Date: 2021-11-16 Adopting Bitcoin Conference · 2021-11-16 --- # Peter Young talks to John Vallis about Bitcoin Citadels and Free Private Cities URL: https://youtu.be/qs2UWUMGYbY Date: 2021-10-26 2021-10-26 --- # Bitcoin, Bitcoiners and Citadels URL: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/how-toxic-bitcoiners-are-protecting-ideals Source: Bitcoin Magazine Author: Aleksandar Svetski Date: 2021-10-15 Bitcoin Magazine · Aleksandar Svetski · 2021-10-15 --- # Free Private Cities – Why Governments Are Obsolete Relics URL: https://kite.link/freeprivatecities-018 Source: Kite Date: 2021-09-26 Kite · 2021-09-26 --- # Satoshi's Sidewalk #25: Free Private Cities URL: https://bitcoinurbanism.substack.com/p/satoshis-sidewalk-25-free-private Source: Bitcoin Urbanism Author: Kelly Lannan Date: 2021-09-16 Bitcoin Urbanism · Kelly Lannan · 2021-09-16 --- # Prospectus On Próspera URL: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/prospectus-on-prospera Source: Astral Codex Ten Author: Scott Alexander Date: 2021-09-14 Astral Codex Ten · Scott Alexander · 2021-09-14 --- # Free private cities, economic zones, and gradual progress with Rahim Taghizadegan URL: https://anchor.fm/tales-from-the-crypt/episodes/267-Free-private-cities--economic-zones--and-gradual-progress-with-Rahim-Taghizadegan-e16m214 Source: Tales from the Crypt Date: 2021-08-30 Tales from the Crypt · 2021-08-30 --- # The Man Who Grew Sark's Population 20% by Wooing Digital Business-Owners With Political Freedom URL: https://www.imidaily.com/editors-picks/the-man-who-grew-sarks-population-20-by-wooing-digital-business-owners-with-political-freedom/ Source: IMI Daily Author: Christian Henrik Nesheim Date: 2021-07-17 IMI Daily · Christian Henrik Nesheim · 2021-07-17 --- # The Urban Environment and Society – ft Marthinus Grobler and Rahim Taghizadegan URL: https://youtu.be/PhkhxoyFdnQ Date: 2021-07-07 2021-07-07 --- # What a Free Private City of the (not so distant) Future Will Look Like URL: https://youtu.be/aIlqbg8whss Author: Joe Jarvis Date: 2021-06-30 Joe Jarvis · 2021-06-30 --- # Unsustainable Cities: Is Bitcoin the Answer? ft Kelly Lannan & Rahim Taghizadegan URL: https://youtu.be/v1IS3CGckoI Date: 2021-06-28 2021-06-28 --- # Sark population grows by 100 due to one man URL: https://guernseypress.com/news/2021/06/11/sark-population-grows-by-100-due-to-one-man Source: Guernsey Press Date: 2021-06-11 Guernsey Press · 2021-06-11 --- # Free Private Cities and Bitcoin with Rahim Taghizadegan URL: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/56-free-private-cities-and-bitcoin-with-rahim-taghizadegan/id1403202032 Source: The Bitcoin Standard Podcast Date: 2021-05-17 The Bitcoin Standard Podcast · 2021-05-17 --- # Free Private Cities in Practice: Interview with Titus Gebel URL: https://youtu.be/u0r-mSkyZU0 Date: 2021-04-21 2021-04-21 --- # Prospera in Honduras: A Private Tech City Now Open for Business URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-27/prospera-in-honduras-a-private-tech-city-now-open-for-business Source: Bloomberg CityLab Date: 2021-03-27 Bloomberg CityLab · 2021-03-27 --- # A New Golden Age of Governance URL: https://www.palladiummag.com/2021/03/10/a-new-golden-age-of-governance/ Source: Palladium Author: Wolf Tivy Date: 2021-03-10 Palladium · Wolf Tivy · 2021-03-10 --- # Free Private Cities – there is an alternative URL: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/business-reporter/free-private-cities/ Source: The Daily Telegraph Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2021-02-22 The Daily Telegraph · Titus Gebel · 2021-02-22 --- # Sark – a small island goes viral (and a new 51-minute video) URL: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/sark-a-small-island-goes-viral-and-a-new-51-minute-video/ Source: Undervalued Shares Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2020-08-28 Undervalued Shares · Swen Lorenz · 2020-08-28 --- # 0% income tax in Europe – Should you consider a Sark residency? URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el49R201DXQ Source: The Wandering Investor Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2020-08-25 The Wandering Investor · Swen Lorenz · 2020-08-25 --- # Sark: investment opportunity of a decade URL: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/sark-investment-opportunity-of-a-decade/ Source: Undervalued Shares Author: Swen Lorenz Date: 2020-08-09 Undervalued Shares · Swen Lorenz · 2020-08-09 --- # Build state capacity by building charter cities URL: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/build-state-capacity-by-building-charter-cities/ Source: Works in Progress Author: Mark Lutter and Jeffrey Mason Date: 2020-08-28 Works in Progress · Mark Lutter and Jeffrey Mason · 2020-08-28 --- # Private Cities Are a Needed Experiment URL: https://catalyst.independent.org/2020/05/20/private-cities-experiment/ Source: Catalyst (Independent Institute) Author: Scott Beyer Date: 2020-05-20 Catalyst (Independent Institute) · Scott Beyer · 2020-05-20 --- # Free Private Cities: the future of liberalism URL: https://capx.co/free-private-cities-the-future-of-liberalism Source: CapX Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2019-10-11 CapX · Titus Gebel · 2019-10-11 --- # Give Charter Cities a Second Look URL: https://www.city-journal.org/article/give-charter-cities-a-second-look Source: City Journal Author: Mark Lutter Date: 2019-09-05 City Journal · Mark Lutter · 2019-09-05 --- # What We Can Learn from Liechtenstein URL: https://mises.org/wire/what-we-can-learn-liechtenstein Source: Mises Institute Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2019-09-03 Mises Institute · Titus Gebel · 2019-09-03 --- # Can Private Cities Help Solve the Refugee Crisis? URL: https://fee.org/articles/can-private-cities-help-solve-the-refugee-crisis/ Source: Foundation for Economic Education Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2019-08-31 Foundation for Economic Education · Titus Gebel · 2019-08-31 --- # A Rethink in Governance is Necessary URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20240304013237/https://austriancenter.com/rethink-governance-necessary/ Source: Austrian Economics Center Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2019-08-23 Austrian Economics Center · Titus Gebel · 2019-08-23 --- # Free Private Cities | Titus Gebel Interview URL: https://anarchitecturepodcast.com/ana025/ Source: Anarchitecture Podcast Author: Joe Brochu Date: 2019-07-18 Anarchitecture Podcast · Joe Brochu · 2019-07-18 --- # Titus Gebel (Free Private Cities) URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20191115132939/https://www.startupgrind.com/events/details/startup-grind-geneva-presents-titus-gebel-free-private-cities/ Source: Startup Grind Geneva Date: 2019-05-22 Startup Grind Geneva · 2019-05-22 --- # Free private cities can revolutionise the way we live together URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190818085511/https://ftn.media/free-private-cities-can-revolutionise-way-we-live-together Source: Freedom Today Network Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2019-05-17 Freedom Today Network · Titus Gebel · 2019-05-17 --- # Free Private Cities – There is an Alternative URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190721232130/https://ftn.media/free-private-cities-there-alternative Source: Freedom Today Network Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2019-05-13 Freedom Today Network · Titus Gebel · 2019-05-13 --- # Can Free Private Cities Replace the State? URL: https://mises.org/wire/can-free-private-cities-replace-state Source: Mises Institute Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2019-03-29 Mises Institute · Titus Gebel · 2019-03-29 --- # Free Private Cities URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20191122163517/https://lockechain.liberty.me/free-private-cities/ Source: Lockechain Date: 2019-03-24 Lockechain · 2019-03-24 --- # If you don't like the way your country is run, build your own Utopia URL: https://www.afr.com/life-and-luxury/arts-and-culture/if-you-dont-like-the-way-your-country-is-run-just-found-a-new-one-20181203-h18nb6 Source: Australian Financial Review Date: 2018-12-07 Australian Financial Review · 2018-12-07 --- # Building a Tech Smart City URL: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/building-tech-smart-city-my-lecture-kings-college-london-alejandro/ Source: LinkedIn Pulse Author: Julio Alejandro Date: 2018-10-29 LinkedIn Pulse · Julio Alejandro · 2018-10-29 --- # Zero to 1: Private Governance as a Service URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190923151620/https://yosee.in/2018/10/25/zero-to-1-private-governance-as-a-service/ Source: Yosee Date: 2018-10-25 Yosee · 2018-10-25 --- # Ulex And The Concept Of Free Private Cities URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20201109014658/https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/ulex-and-the-concept-of-free-private-cities-open-source-decentralization/ Source: Bitcoin Exchange Guide Date: 2018-08-30 Bitcoin Exchange Guide · 2018-08-30 --- # Landsteading? Read "Free Private Cities" by Titus Gebel URL: https://www.seasteading.org/landsteading-read-free-private-cities-by-titus-gebel/ Source: The Seasteading Institute Author: Joe Quirk Date: 2018-08-21 The Seasteading Institute · Joe Quirk · 2018-08-21 --- # Private Cities: A Model for a Truly Free Society? URL: https://mises.org/wire/private-cities-model-truly-free-society Source: Mises Institute Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2018-07-09 Mises Institute · Titus Gebel · 2018-07-09 --- # The Floating City, Long a Libertarian Dream, Faces Rough Seas URL: https://www.citylab.com/design/2018/04/the-unsinkable-dream-of-the-floating-city/559058/ Source: CityLab Author: Andrew Zaleski Date: 2018-04-27 CityLab · Andrew Zaleski · 2018-04-27 --- # Private Cities: Another Path to a Free Society? URL: https://tomwoods.com/ep-1126-private-cities-another-path-to-a-free-society Source: The Tom Woods Show Date: 2018-04-03 The Tom Woods Show · 2018-04-03 --- # Free Private Cities will have no parliament or prince who can change the rules URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190522044043/https://www.svobospol.cz/2018/03/30/titus-gebel-free-private-cities-will-have-no-parliament-or-prince-who-can-change-the-rules/ Source: Svobospol Date: 2018-03-30 Svobospol · 2018-03-30 --- # Free Private Cities Coming To A Town Near You with Titus Gebel URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7pAAupLEN8 Source: Anarchast Date: 2018-01-19 Anarchast · 2018-01-19 --- # The Hanseatic League: An "Empire" of Commerce URL: https://mises.org/mises-wire/hanseatic-league-empire-commerce Source: Mises Institute Author: Marcia Christoff-Kurapovna Date: 2018-01-05 Mises Institute · Marcia Christoff-Kurapovna · 2018-01-05 --- # Start-up nations: Are 'floating cities' a frontier for freedom? URL: https://blog.acton.org/archives/99027-start-up-nations-are-floating-cities-a-frontier-for-freedom.html Source: Acton Institute Date: 2017-11-20 Acton Institute · 2017-11-20 --- # Why Liechtenstein Works URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20170804234423/https://jacobitemag.com/2017/08/04/why-liechtenstein-works-self-determination-and-market-governance/ Source: Jacobite Magazine Author: Andreas Kohl Martinez Date: 2017-08-04 Jacobite Magazine · Andreas Kohl Martinez · 2017-08-04 --- # 5 Private City Projects That You Should Know About URL: https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/5-private-city-projects-that-you-should-know-about/ Source: The Daily Bell Author: Joe Jarvis Date: 2017-07-14 The Daily Bell · Joe Jarvis · 2017-07-14 --- # Paseo Cayala – private city built to escape crime URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20210102155414/https://adventuresguatemala.com/paseo-cayala-private-city-built-escape-crime/ Source: Adventures Guatemala Date: 2017-06-05 Adventures Guatemala · 2017-06-05 --- # Seasteading in Paradise URL: https://reason.com/2017/05/21/seasteading-in-paradise/ Source: Reason Author: Brian Doherty Date: 2017-05-21 Reason · Brian Doherty · 2017-05-21 --- # Mu Aye Pu: Live Stateless in Southeast Asia? URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20170521175146/https://lfb.org/mu-aye-pu-live-stateless-in-southeast-asia/ Source: Laissez Faire Books Date: 2017-05-10 Laissez Faire Books · 2017-05-10 --- # Titus Gebel: Free Private Cities URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190831155552/https://www.startupsocieties.org/blog/titus-gebel-free-private-cities Source: Startup Societies Foundation Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2017-02-13 Startup Societies Foundation · Titus Gebel · 2017-02-13 --- # Competitive Governance, Seasteading and Free Private Cities For Dummies URL: https://athousandnations.com/2016/10/19/competitive-governance-seasteading-and-free-private-cities-for-dummies/ Source: A Thousand Nations Date: 2016-10-19 A Thousand Nations · 2016-10-19 --- # Free Private Cities URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20161201121015/https://liberty.me/audio-video/free-cities-podcast-free-private-cities/ Source: Free Cities Podcast Date: 2016-10-12 Free Cities Podcast · 2016-10-12 --- # A weeklong camping festival in New Hampshire is paradise for libertarians URL: https://www.boston.com/travel/travel/2016/06/24/weeklong-camping-festival-new-hampshire-paradise-libertarians/ Source: Boston.com Author: Kathleen Ronayne, Associated Press Date: 2016-06-24 Boston.com · Kathleen Ronayne, Associated Press · 2016-06-24 --- # Private Cities: A Path to Liberty URL: https://fee.org/articles/private-cities-a-path-to-liberty Source: Foundation for Economic Education Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2016-04-22 Foundation for Economic Education · Titus Gebel · 2016-04-22 --- # Private Cities – a disruptive technology for the state market URL: https://capx.co/private-cities-a-disruptive-technology-for-the-state-market/ Source: CapX Author: Titus Gebel Date: 2016-04-06 CapX · Titus Gebel · 2016-04-06 --- # Live Free In Private Cities URL: https://medium.com/philosophie-workout/live-free-in-private-cities-dr-titus-gebel-1954526f7a5 Source: Philosophy Workout (Medium) Date: 2016-03-25 Philosophy Workout (Medium) · 2016-03-25 --- # 20,000 liberty-minded people pledge to move to New Hampshire URL: https://www.foxnews.com/us/20000-liberty-minded-people-pledge-to-move-to-new-hampshire Source: Fox News Author: Associated Press Date: 2016-02-18 Fox News · Associated Press · 2016-02-18 --- # In N.H., Free State Project pushing to top 20,000 members URL: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/01/17/libertarian-group-nearing-signers-move/UFoab2JzRgqBvwtAEfrEwI/story.html Source: The Boston Globe Author: Associated Press Date: 2016-01-17 The Boston Globe · Associated Press · 2016-01-17 --- # The Free State Project: A Libertarian Testing Ground For Bitcoin, 3D Printers, and Drones URL: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/12/the-free-state-project-a-libertarian-testing-ground-for-bitcoin-3d-printers-and-drones/ Source: Forbes Author: Kashmir Hill Date: 2014-06-12 Forbes · Kashmir Hill · 2014-06-12 --- # Want to Own a City? URL: https://fee.org/articles/want-to-own-a-city/ Source: Foundation for Economic Education Author: Tom W. Bell Date: 2013-08-14 Foundation for Economic Education · Tom W. Bell · 2013-08-14 --- # The Man Who Outsourced the Government URL: https://fee.org/articles/the-man-who-outsourced-the-government/ Source: Foundation for Economic Education Date: 2013-05-28 Foundation for Economic Education · 2013-05-28 --- # The Free State Project Grows Up URL: https://reason.com/2013/05/15/the-free-state-project-grows-up/ Source: Reason Author: Garrett Quinn Date: 2013-05-15 Reason · Garrett Quinn · 2013-05-15 --- # Can 'charter cities' help abolish global poverty? URL: https://www.zdnet.com/article/can-charter-cities-help-abolish-global-poverty/ Source: ZDNet Author: Jason Dearen Date: 2013-02-26 ZDNet · Jason Dearen · 2013-02-26 --- # The TED Talk That Could Spawn a City URL: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/05/09/152335829/the-ted-talk-that-could-spawn-a-city Source: NPR Planet Money Date: 2012-05-09 NPR Planet Money · 2012-05-09 --- # Cities from Scratch URL: https://www.city-journal.org/article/cities-from-scratch Source: City Journal Author: Paul Romer and Brandon Fuller Date: 2010-12-21 City Journal · Paul Romer and Brandon Fuller · 2010-12-21 ---