There was a wonderful talk at the TED conference here in Oxford about charter cities:
http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_romer.html
I enjoyed it because I've been disillusioned with the possibility of actually changing (significantly) any existing country for the better, despite the constant stream of problems I diagnose. Great masses of people with a certain mindset and companies and individuals with interests in the status quo cannot change their way of life quickly or easily.
On the other hand, founding a few charter cities (or charter countries, as I've fondly imagined) gives us the opportunity not only to allow citizens of poorly developed countries economic opportunities, but could also give people everywhere political and philosophical choice.
Paul Romer was interested in economic improvement without upsetting the leaders or interests that already exist, but he's not mentioned the final idea that allows us to set up a virtuous circle. The idea of charter cities can be used to test ideas for changing rules. We can try different constitutions, different ways of setting up charter cities so that we improve not only economic and political choice, but also all future charter cities!
One of the major problems of the world is the assumption that labour can move freely, as capital does. However, capital moves as easily as the click of a button (or few), coming from one side of the world to invest in another. For free market assumptions to hold true (which they don't in a myriad of other ways too) labour must be free to switch countries. However, labour is trapped by language, capital barriers (people need investment in order to move) and 'externalities' such as political, philosophical and health concerns (ranging from potential natural disasters to local diseases).
My problems with free market fundamentalists can wait for a moment, because here I'm in support of a roughly free market idea: the idea that people should be able to choose the political entity which suits them best.
If we had a free market in countries, with different political systems representing the competing products, then even people with odd and extreme ideas (as mine seem, sadly, to be) might be able to find an enclave somewhere where things would be run as we would like best.
Charter cities offer an excellent method for achieving such political variation. Do we like or dislike the death penalty? Do we want to outlaw gayness? Do we want Sharia law?
If moving cities were as simple as free market fundamentalists think it ought to be for economic purposes, this freedom could be hijacked for political, as well as economic, improvement of people's lives.
