Spatial Ambiguities & Charter Cities

Talking about Guantanamo in class reminded me of something I came across recently. It's not directly related but it does kind of speak to the idea of spatial ambiguity and rethinking governmentality/sovereignty.

Economist Paul Romer (not related to Christina Romer) has proposed this idea of charter cities. The idea is that a lot of developing countries do not have the political legitimacy bc of histories of political/economic instability. SO his great plan is to have developed, First World countries, primarily those in the West (ie former colonizers), to rent unoccupied lands in "undeveloped" countries for contracted periods up to 99 years. During their lease, the FW tenants will set up what Romer believes are better rules of governance and lend their political legitimacy to attract foreign direct investors/transnational corporations.

When I first read this, I thought "Wow, what neocolonial bullshit!" It's problematic in more ways than I want to discuss in this post. But the scary thing is, the former president of Madagascar was in serious talks with Romer and potential tenant countries to implement this. However, he was overthrown by a coup-- a good example of how no matter how much you try to naturalize/neutralize ideas of free market capitalism, you can't remove the political from economics.

Crazy interview: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-politically-incorrect-guide-to-ending-poverty/8134/

( Excerpt of interview: Are the sweat shops in special economic zones desirable?
That is something you should ask the people who flock to places like Shenzhen. Charter cities would have to provide a lot of low-cost jobs in industries like garments and light manufacturing. Those jobs don’t look attractive to you and me, but to poor people struggling to make a living in rural areas, things look different. )

Article from The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-politically-incorrect-guide-to-ending-poverty/8134/