4 ms·
It may be economically feasible if land in the Sahara were sold, under some reasonable terms like not polluting it beyond some reasonable level, on a 500 year l
by epicureanideal 6y ago
It may be economically feasible if land in the Sahara were sold, under some reasonable terms like not polluting it beyond some reasonable level, on a 500 year lease to wealthy individuals who want some "effectively sovereign" land to try experimental forms of government.
- MereInterest 6y agoI'm having a hard time interpreting your comment as anything other than "Let's sell kingships to the wealthy," and am not seeing how that would solve any problems at all.
- epicureanideal 6y agoIt's not a kingship because it's only a 500 year lease. It could probably be shortened to 200-250. Enough time for very long term returns on investment.
- microtherion 6y ago500 years is longer than most royal dynasties lasted. In China, none of the CE dynasties lasted that long, in Ancient Egypt, no dynasty lasted longer than 300 years, and in Western Europe, off the top of my head, I can think of only the Capets and the Habsburgs who lasted longer.
- MereInterest 6y agoThe duration is not the issue that I have with the idea. Jonestown only lasted for 3 years, but caused some rather big waves with its experimental forms of government.
- RobRivera 6y agoEffective sovereignty requires an army when useless land becomes valuable
- Aperocky 6y agoEffectively sovereign is pretty much already the deal in some countries if you're rich enough.. The only problem with Sahara is that no one will bother - there's also not much to govern except sand. If people wanted to spend billions to seed the place I don't think any of the government in Africa is going to say no, it's just that nobody is doing it.