I love seeing Greek history in the the Wall Street Journal, but I was skeptical about this article on why we should revive the city-state. According to the article, city-states develop robust economies because of regional specialization, unlike nation-states which coast along on "agriculture, tourism and a knack for ... design".
The main example of a thriving modern city-state was South Tyrol, an Italian province with the highest GDP and lowest unemployment in the nation. But the more I read about South Tyrol, the more it seemed that the circumstances of its creation would be impossible to duplicate, if not actually undesirable. The region was annexed to Italy as a way of persuading that country to enter WW I against the Central Powers. Decades of upheaval followed since the province was actually 90% German-speaking. Now, as a result of efforts to provide the German speakers with some autonomy, the entire province is largely self-governing.
Based on the serendipitous (and harsh) beginnings of South Tyrol, I wonder whether city-states seem great because we only see the ones that succeed. A city has to have a strong identity and assets worth protecting to thrive under such a system. As with so many things in life, it's great when it works.
image credit Pin It
No comments:
Post a Comment