LOADED, BUT BORED..?
WANT TO LEAVE A LEGACY..?
WHY NOT CREATE A PRINCIPALITY..!
Among the many exciting possibilities that could arise from the OA-City concept is the foundation of many new city states, each with their own unique political system.
An individual wealthy enough to self-finance an OA-City could declare himself Prince of his very own tiny Principality, like Monaco or Liechtenstein.
A COUNTRY IS SIMPLY A COMPANY WRIT LARGE
300 years ago much of Europe was a patchwork of mini-states – Kingdoms, Principalities, Duchies, Counties, Margravates, Bishoprics, Free Cities, Republics, and various other political entities. Although nominally part of the “Holy Roman Empire” (“not Holy, not Roman, not an Empire” as quipped Voltaire) they were effectively independent states. Life and liberty in those small states was probably much better and freer than in a big centrally-ruled absolute monarchy like France. Small states also facilitate more competition and innovation than large ones. In many ways a country is just a company writ large, and who – who believes in competition – wants a small handful of huge monopoly companies dominating everything? Yet that is the situation we find ourselves in with our giant (in terms of population) top-down centrally-ruled so-called “democracies”. If you hate the way your country is being run you can, in theory, move to another country and many have done just that. But the choice of decent countries is very limited and most of them are not very different politically – wasteful bureaucracies, welfare statism, and arrogant self-important leftist elitist “do-gooders” imposing politically-correctness, “diversity”, multi-culturalism, etc., on a reluctant and virtually powerless populace.
Suppose that a famous entrepreneur like Richard Branson were to announce to the media…
“I am planning to establish a new COMPANY run as a co-operative. It will employ thousands of people, all of whom will be shareholders”
Given Richard Branson’s infectious enthusiasm and track record, such an announcement would generate a huge amount of positive publicity. But what if he were to change just TWO words and say instead….
“I am planning to establish a new COUNTRY run as a co-operative. It will HOUSE thousands of people, all of whom will be shareholders”
The dream of owning and living on an island is an irresistible fantasy for most of us. Small islands are especially appealing; an island sufficient for “40 acres and a mule” but not much larger than that. Islands that can be taken in with a single gaze from no great distance. Richard Branson’s Necker Island would be a classic example of that dream.
Richard Branson owns Necker, a 30 hectare Caribbean Island he bought for just $180,000 in 1980. But Branson has fallen well behind in the billionaire league. In 2025 Forbes estimated his net worth as about $3 billion, about the same as it was 25 years ago. And yet I would imagine his island alone would fetch at least $1 billion today and many billionaires might want to buy Necker just because they can. But why buy an island – which doesn’t generate much if any income but comes with many problems and extra costs like staff, transport, supplies, not to mention mosquitoes and hurricanes – the island was devastated in 2017 – when for a similar amount of money (depending on location) you could create an Oasis-City – a virtual island.?
Unlike an Island in the Sea, an Island in the Land (Oasis-City) would be a big income generator – rents, tariffs, taxes, visitor entry-fees, etc. AND, if financed by a wealthy individual, that person could declare himself PRINCE of his very own PRINCIPALITY..! From his penthouse perch at the very summit of his virtual island domain our Prince could overlook and survey his entire 30-hectare realm.
If Branson were to build an OA-City he would want to make his city charter appealing to prospective citizens, so it would make no economic sense for erstwhile Prince Richard (or any founder for that matter) to impose unreasonable, unpopular, or unjust laws. On the other hand, he also wouldn’t want to admit anyone who might not be an asset to his realm. A private company (although maybe not a government) wouldn’t want to employ anyone who might be a burden on it, so why should a private country which (in this case) would be an Oasis City micro-state..? Given Branson’s enthusiasm and reputation many thousands would want to apply for residence and would flock to his Principality without showing too much concern about what rules or political system he would impose on his subjects. Prince Richard will be able to cherry-pick his citizens.
This underscores the logical case made by Hans Herman Hoppe in “Democracy, the god that failed” – that a hereditary ruler will tend to run his country in a much more responsible manner than would the leader of a so-called Democracy. Because a monarch would want to look after the long-term interests of his realm and will thus usually make decisions with the long-term foremost in mind, and not be swayed by short-term political popularity. Democratic leaders are always focussed on the pressing need to “win the next election” and, as a result, are constantly tempted to make bad policy for short-term electoral expediency. “Democratic” leaders are impelled to recklessly weaken the states institutions and finances in order to satisfy their selfish short-term ambition of “staying in power”.
But the very thought of relinquishing control over even a soccer pitch-sized piece of land is regarded by narrow-minded “nationalists” as a “shameful” loss of so-called “territorial integrity”. So, whilst nation states remain dominated by such narrow-minded thinking, potential princes will have to wait patiently in the wings.
For now, the idea of founding a new country sounds an impossible dream but – since we are only talking of leasing a tiny parcel of land (perhaps 10km2) – I am hopeful that, in the near future, territorial leases will become a politically acceptable and even routine practice, as it once was.
“Democracy”, widely considered to be the well-spring of freedom, is another barrier to the new freedoms that OAeCities could potentially bring forth. Opposition parties will try to derail any agreement to lease territory, no doubt citing the usual “loss of territorial integrity” bogeyman.
The first country to breach this stubborn nationalistic irrationality will most likely be a poor and largely forgotten place such as PARAGUAY – one that would welcome the investment, the local employment, the publicity, and the prestige that would come from hosting an Oasis City.
Let the River of Freedom flow freely..!
Before anything this sensible can happen, this narrow-minded nationalistic log-jam – the abject fear of relinquishing control over even the tiniest slice of territory – must first be cleared for this river of freedom to flow. If just a single country were to overcome this fear, then others would soon follow..!!!
