5 ms·

Well, this is why Burma did the exact same thing (anybody who casts their memories back a few years might see how this relates to Egypt): >Naypyitaw, then, is

Well, this is why Burma did the exact same thing (anybody who casts their memories back a few years might see how this relates to Egypt): >Naypyitaw, then, is the ultimate insurance against regime change, a masterpiece of urban planning designed to defeat any putative ‘colour revolution’ – not by tanks and water cannons, but by geometry and cartography. 320 kilometres to the south, Rangoon, with five million people, is home to one-tenth the country’s population. But even if that city were brought to a standstill by public protests and demonstrations, Burma’s military government – situated happily in the middle of paddy fields in the middle of nowhere – would remain unaffected. > >Of all the possible reasons why the junta chose to relocate their capital to this isolated, dusty place, this is perhaps the most plausible. And judging by the pace and scale of construction underway here, the transfer of capital is intended to be as final and irrevocable as the grip on political power of the Tatmadaw, the Burmese military. http://svaradarajan.blogspot.sg/2007/02/dictatorship-by-cartography-geometry.html http://svaradarajan.blogspot.sg/2007/02/dictatorship-by-cart... More bad news: http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/05/how-geography-influences-political-corruption/5642/ http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/05/how-geography-influe...

rmckayfleming 12y ago
Louis XIV moved the palace from Paris to Versailles for the very same reason.
- throwaway344 12y ago
  And that just worked out brilliantly, and the Ancien Régime ruled peacefully for the next hundred years. Oh wait...
  - achamayou 12y ago
    107 years, the court moved there in 1682, and the revolution only happened in 1789.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
higherpurpose 12y ago
I think it's for the same reason why the US hasn't seen a revolution in a very long time, despite the obvious corruption in Washington. Most people are too far away from Washington.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 12y ago
  Have you been to the mid-Atlantic region recently.
cthalupa 12y ago
While skepticism is healthy, I'm not sure this is a fair comparison. > Mr Alabbar told the BBC, saying that the new development would sit on the edge of the existing city. They're talking about building something on the edge of the current capital. It's not like they're relocating to the middle of nowhere - the distance sounds more like Dallas/Ft. Worth or Minneapolis/St. Paul
- pgeorgi 12y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges-Eug%C3%A8ne_Haussmann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges-Eug%C3%A8ne_Haussmann rebuilt Paris. That was partly for artistic reasons, but the wide boulevards had the nice benefit of being riot-safe. Looking at a map of Kairo, this may be a similar approach, just that they build it next to the city (since they expect massive expansion in any case) instead of remodelling existing parts: whatever they will build will be more structured, and thus easier to lock down than the maze of the current city.
Apocryphon 12y ago
If a government wanted to relocate during unrest, couldn't they simply retreat to a loyalist military base? Would be cheaper than building another city.
- unchocked 12y ago
  Very bad optics. Surviving revolutions requires a show of strengths, and retreating to a military base is very much a sign of weakness.
  - speeder 12y ago
    Also as in Brazil case, the government consider that the biggest threat is the military itself (to the point it created recently another quasi-military organization completely separated from the military, it left the main military bases VERY FAR from the capital, and built those new "quasi-military" bases near the capital).
    - philwelch 12y ago
      But what stops the quasi-military from staging a coup? The military?
speeder 12y ago
In Egypt case, the new capital looks to be too close to Cairo to give this sort of protection. Brazil changed the capital for that purpose too, and made it masterfully: Brazil had two previous capitals, the first is in Salvador, the capital was there for foreign military reasons: The city is a natural fortress, to attack Salvador by sea you need to navigate inside a bay that has cannons on both sides of the entrance, and the coast is VERY high (Salvador major landmark is a elevator, that take people from the coast to the city proper... obviously a invader army cannot use said elevator, it was deliberately designed to not support an army). Later it was moved to Rio de Janeiro, because Rio de Janeiro was the new focus of economic activity, mostly for agricultural reasons (Brazil southeast is much more fertile than northeast, also in southeast countryside you could mine gold). Currently, São Paulo-Rio Megalopolis has 40 million people (out of 200 million on the whole country), crammed in 0.5% of the country territory. And precisely to avoid this, the capital now is Brasília, Brasília is in the middle of nowhere, to get there by road you cross hundreds and hundreds of kilometers of roads bordered by forests, tiny villages and farms, the only actual "reasonable" way to get in or out of Brasília is by plane, in fact when Brasília was first built, all construction materials that could not be gathered on-site had to be shipped by plane. And the city itself was designed in a way that the population cannot take over, the government buildings are wide apart, there are lots of sniper spots on said buildings (ie: defenders can snipe attackers easily), and it also allows tanks to roll around as necessary. We have unrest here in Brazil, tomorrow, I expect many thousands to take the streets to try to topple the government (most of the protesters want impeachment, but many want outright army coup, even civil war is necessary), but all of those people will be in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro... The government will be sitting safely in the capital, the president even called all ministers to the capital to wait, and the federal government has a separate defense militia (we have federal police, armed forces, and the "National Guard", the "National Guard" does not obey the defense minister, neither the police hieararchy, and is directly under the president, also the "National Guard" people can easily rally and wait in the capital, their numbers are only enough to defende the capital, many of their members are government supporters, and the army suspect that the National Guard was created precisely to counter the army itself.
- eitally 12y ago
  Regarding Brazil... but on the other hand, Niemeyer's Brasilia ended up being a place completely pedestrian-unfriendly, full of red dust, and generally speaking, not a desirable place to live. Sure, lots of federal employees live there, and take those jobs because they pay well and offer incredible security, but the wealthy who work in Brasilia typically reside in SP or Rio and just fly in to Brasilia Mon-Thurs or similar... including the politicians. They may have succeeded in designing a city that was strategically defensible, but if everyone who matters is mostly in Rio or SP anyway, ....
frik 12y ago
Top Gear Burma special: Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uwTnP8ioiU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uwTnP8ioiU Empty 20 lane highway in the [Burma] nation's brand new capital. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-reviews/10678667/Top-Gear-episode-6-review.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-r..., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(series_21) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(series_21) @downvoters: what's wrong? watch the video it's rather on-topic and interesting!
- forgotX2 12y ago
  Man I wonder why automotive tourism isnt more popular. I'd love to rent a sportscar and go driving through that city
civilian 12y ago
Another historical example is Ravenna! The capital of Western Roman Empire in Milan was not secure from barbarians, so they moved it to Ravenna, a little city hidden among the swamps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenna#Ancient_era http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenna#Ancient_era

rmckayfleming 12y ago

Louis XIV moved the palace from Paris to Versailles for the very same reason.

throwaway344 12y ago
And that just worked out brilliantly, and the Ancien Régime ruled peacefully for the next hundred years. Oh wait...
- achamayou 12y ago
  107 years, the court moved there in 1682, and the revolution only happened in 1789.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

higherpurpose 12y ago

I think it's for the same reason why the US hasn't seen a revolution in a very long time, despite the obvious corruption in Washington. Most people are too far away from Washington.

GFK_of_xmaspast 12y ago
Have you been to the mid-Atlantic region recently.

cthalupa 12y ago

While skepticism is healthy, I'm not sure this is a fair comparison. > Mr Alabbar told the BBC, saying that the new development would sit on the edge of the existing city. They're talking about building something on the edge of the current capital. It's not like they're relocating to the middle of nowhere - the distance sounds more like Dallas/Ft. Worth or Minneapolis/St. Paul

pgeorgi 12y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges-Eug%C3%A8ne_Haussmann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges-Eug%C3%A8ne_Haussmann rebuilt Paris. That was partly for artistic reasons, but the wide boulevards had the nice benefit of being riot-safe. Looking at a map of Kairo, this may be a similar approach, just that they build it next to the city (since they expect massive expansion in any case) instead of remodelling existing parts: whatever they will build will be more structured, and thus easier to lock down than the maze of the current city.

Apocryphon 12y ago

If a government wanted to relocate during unrest, couldn't they simply retreat to a loyalist military base? Would be cheaper than building another city.

unchocked 12y ago
Very bad optics. Surviving revolutions requires a show of strengths, and retreating to a military base is very much a sign of weakness.
- speeder 12y ago
  Also as in Brazil case, the government consider that the biggest threat is the military itself (to the point it created recently another quasi-military organization completely separated from the military, it left the main military bases VERY FAR from the capital, and built those new "quasi-military" bases near the capital).
  - philwelch 12y ago
    But what stops the quasi-military from staging a coup? The military?

speeder 12y ago

In Egypt case, the new capital looks to be too close to Cairo to give this sort of protection. Brazil changed the capital for that purpose too, and made it masterfully: Brazil had two previous capitals, the first is in Salvador, the capital was there for foreign military reasons: The city is a natural fortress, to attack Salvador by sea you need to navigate inside a bay that has cannons on both sides of the entrance, and the coast is VERY high (Salvador major landmark is a elevator, that take people from the coast to the city proper... obviously a invader army cannot use said elevator, it was deliberately designed to not support an army). Later it was moved to Rio de Janeiro, because Rio de Janeiro was the new focus of economic activity, mostly for agricultural reasons (Brazil southeast is much more fertile than northeast, also in southeast countryside you could mine gold). Currently, São Paulo-Rio Megalopolis has 40 million people (out of 200 million on the whole country), crammed in 0.5% of the country territory. And precisely to avoid this, the capital now is Brasília, Brasília is in the middle of nowhere, to get there by road you cross hundreds and hundreds of kilometers of roads bordered by forests, tiny villages and farms, the only actual "reasonable" way to get in or out of Brasília is by plane, in fact when Brasília was first built, all construction materials that could not be gathered on-site had to be shipped by plane. And the city itself was designed in a way that the population cannot take over, the government buildings are wide apart, there are lots of sniper spots on said buildings (ie: defenders can snipe attackers easily), and it also allows tanks to roll around as necessary. We have unrest here in Brazil, tomorrow, I expect many thousands to take the streets to try to topple the government (most of the protesters want impeachment, but many want outright army coup, even civil war is necessary), but all of those people will be in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro... The government will be sitting safely in the capital, the president even called all ministers to the capital to wait, and the federal government has a separate defense militia (we have federal police, armed forces, and the "National Guard", the "National Guard" does not obey the defense minister, neither the police hieararchy, and is directly under the president, also the "National Guard" people can easily rally and wait in the capital, their numbers are only enough to defende the capital, many of their members are government supporters, and the army suspect that the National Guard was created precisely to counter the army itself.

eitally 12y ago
Regarding Brazil... but on the other hand, Niemeyer's Brasilia ended up being a place completely pedestrian-unfriendly, full of red dust, and generally speaking, not a desirable place to live. Sure, lots of federal employees live there, and take those jobs because they pay well and offer incredible security, but the wealthy who work in Brasilia typically reside in SP or Rio and just fly in to Brasilia Mon-Thurs or similar... including the politicians. They may have succeeded in designing a city that was strategically defensible, but if everyone who matters is mostly in Rio or SP anyway, ....

frik 12y ago

Top Gear Burma special: Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uwTnP8ioiU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uwTnP8ioiU Empty 20 lane highway in the [Burma] nation's brand new capital. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-reviews/10678667/Top-Gear-episode-6-review.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-r..., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(series_21) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(series_21) @downvoters: what's wrong? watch the video it's rather on-topic and interesting!

forgotX2 12y ago
Man I wonder why automotive tourism isnt more popular. I'd love to rent a sportscar and go driving through that city

civilian 12y ago

Another historical example is Ravenna! The capital of Western Roman Empire in Milan was not secure from barbarians, so they moved it to Ravenna, a little city hidden among the swamps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenna#Ancient_era http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenna#Ancient_era