One thing I sort of wished was touched on a little more: the concept of country is surprisingly modern. Modern international relations theory tends to trace the concept back to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, but honestly, even that is really too early.
The map shown of 14th century Europe is doing better than most in that recognizes that several borders (but still too few) are fuzzy rather than lines on a map. The other problem you run into is that, in most non-state societies (in the Weberian sense of "monopoly on the legitimate use of force"), political linkages tend to be fragile and based more on personal ties so that a Big Man's successor may well repudiate the alliances and homages the Big Man makes. Which makes it hard to draw maps, because is Burgundy a part of France? The Duke of Burgundy is as often as not fighting the French king.
This is what makes adjudicating the "oldest continuous republic" hard, because at what point do we say that the homages San Marino is paying stops counting as being part of that country?
Yeah, this is sometimes really interesting. For eg Scotland, Wales, NI and England are technically all different countries. Just like Aruba (and other Carribbean/island micro nations) which technically is still in the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Games like EU4 do have multiple views of the map for this reason. There are so many ways you can subdivide and draw borders differently. Language, culture, religion, imperial, etc.
Westphalia did two big things in my view… 1. is permanent diplomacy and 2. it made sure that things were on a secular not papal foundation. It’s a big deal but to claim that countries weren’t a thing before it is a bit of an overstatement.
I had the priviledge of visiting San Marino. Charming little country, and the food was amazing. Granted, it was only one day. I even had lunch next to the co-regent in a restaurant.
The whole of San Marino proper (the capital) was blanketed by fog, so my pictures were worthless, but the regent guard and their Christmas attire (Red and Green uniform) always made me chuckle.
> Their populations are content, their governments are highly functional, their economies hum along, and nothing of note has happened in any of them since World War II.
"in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."
(Harry Lime in the movie "The Third Man")
In reality, of course, they produce a great deal more than cuckoo clocks; one of the most competitive pharmaceutical industries in the world, industrial chemicals, defence technology, agriculture, financial services, food processing, etc - up to a trillion or so per annum IIRC.
The cuckoo clock was intended to be a contemporary reference to the Renaissance period, not an exhaustive assessment of what Switzerland contributed to the present day.
and nothing of note has happened in any of them since World War II.
the timeframe does not appear to be pinned to the Renaissance period. Further, the quote I replied to was from The Third Man a movie made and released in 1949 that was set in post world war II Vienna.
Further again, that quote appears to address present era Switzerland 500 years after the infamous time of the House of Borgia.
1/ The referenced quote in the parent comment is clear (while false - more below) to everybody but you. Being taken from a movie, it cannot be germane to the present flow of comments, you claim to reply to. Rather the quote reads: "By the time in Italy [this], in Switzerland [that]."
2/ The OP is about San Marino; the quoted excerpt is referencing the European city states of San Marino, Liechtenstein, Monaco, and Andorra; hence the flow of comments you point at is not concerned with Switzerland per se.
3/ The referenced quote is nevertheless false, because cuckoo clocks were invented in the Dresden in early 1600s; only popular culture associate them to Switzerland.
I would be wary of drawing big conclusions from the example of countries like these. The kind of boredom enjoyed in San Marino and Liechtenstein is probably not available to bigger countries.
I think so? I have been to Switzerland a few times. It is an amazingly beautiful country, but expensive. I guess people don’t mind that much if they think their taxes are put to good use.
It's incredible how little respect there is for political systems that incentivize stability.
Parliamentary republics do tend to form less stable governments, but it's also true that you can really govern by compromising both with your party, allies, and opposition.
In over 50 years not a single parliamentary republic has turned authoritarian, in fact only Sri Lanka in the 70s has done so since world war 2.
Presidential and semi-presidential republics? They are all just waiting for the right person at the right time, from Turkey to Nicaragua to the Philippines to Russia, etc, etc.
I don't think any modern country should aim at anything less than boring, albeit unstable, parliamentary republics, with presidents that are not elected by popular vote (like in Germany or Italy) and have no executive power.
If your country is doing good, you likely want minor/middle steer adjustements, not radical changes at each new vote.
I think it's the explicit lack of executive power that's the important part, not the lack of a direct popular vote. There doesn't seem to be much of a difference between say, the presidency of Finland (elected) and that of Estonia (appointed).
In fact, I'd say that Ireland's (directly elected) presidency has been one of the most notably successful, particularly in the post-1990 period when it's taken on more of a "cultural" rather than "political" focus.
I might be biased because I'm Polish, where the president is elected, and I hate the system compared to Germany or Italy.
A political head of state is not good imho, just ends up vetoing and doing politics instead of acting as a guardian of the constitution and institutions.
It's just a matter of "elect president from government's opposition and he's now emboldened to veto and block anything because he has popular mandate to do so".
Politicians electing the president seems a better option because they need to compromise on an individual that will allow any party to govern and be checked.
Counterpoint when things aren't going well you may need major adjustments. For example The Civil War, the Great Depression etc.
> In over 50 years not a single parliamentary republic has turned authoritarian, in fact only Sri Lanka in the 70s has done so since world war 2.
Also I take issue with this stawnt as basically no Presidential Republic that had a functioning Presidential Republic prior to WW2 has gone authoritarian. What your pointing to has more to do with the overall legitimacy of governments themselves.
In addition your claim itself is false as we have plenty of parliamentary republics that devolve into authoritarian dictatorships including but not limited to
- Mynamar
- Nigeria
- Ghana
- Uganda
- South Korea (Second Republic)
- Syria
- Pakistan experiencing various military coups.
This was a delightful read! I found the section on San Marino's political adventures in the 20th century particularly amusing; they did a mini version of everything else that was going on the world in the 20th century, but it turns out that when you're a small peaceful moderate country, it's hard for things to get too too out of hand at any given moment. Like yeah sure they had a Fascist period followed immediately by a Communist period, but apparently in the mildest way imaginable, and it's been mildly moderate ever since.
Coincidentally, I am visiting southern CA for Hackaday Supercon in Pasadena and went to the Huntington today. It's incredible! I would go all the time if I lived here.
Yup, the day ticket can feel a bit expensive, but the membership is pretty cheap in comparison. Both definitely worth it (and I think you can chip in the value of your day ticket towards a membership)
The same author has written about quite a few countries over quite a few years, there's lots more to read. And it's delightfully LLM-free writing, too.
It makes sense that they each sell. I dunno, a dozen of those a year, as the largest part of the (industrial) GDP? the easiest places to find a citizen, though?
Yeah it's quite a nice city! By Italian standards it's not spectacular but that's only because Italian standards are spectacular. Lift Rimini off the Adriatic coast and fly it to, say, Denmark, and suddenly it's the nicest place of the country.
I thought the beach area was utterly uninteresting but the old town is very nice indeed. And lots to do, random wine festivals, amazing views, beautiful old architecture (incl a beautiful Roman bridge), etc.
Admittedly I went for the Italo Disco and found none (zero! zilch! in the birthplace of italo disco! wth guys!), so that was a disappointment.
The only reason why these states exist is because of tax evasion methods used by business people in countries around them.
For example in Andorra you can rent an apartment for 100k a year and move your entire online business to the country and pay virtually no taxes at all.
I once passed through Andorra, it's main city looked like a giant tax-free shopping area. It was terrible, only slightly better than sitting in an airport.
...did you read the article? San Marino is a bunch of random villages in the Italian countryside, indistinguishable from the Italian side except in the one pretty spot that gets all the tourists, and the one larger town near Rimini that has all the tax free shops etc. No gates, no Florida.
Yeah, that’s the only difference. The gates. Otherwise it’s primarily a retirement and retiree support community of aged people. Everything follows from there.
One thing I sort of wished was touched on a little more: the concept of country is surprisingly modern. Modern international relations theory tends to trace the concept back to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, but honestly, even that is really too early.
The map shown of 14th century Europe is doing better than most in that recognizes that several borders (but still too few) are fuzzy rather than lines on a map. The other problem you run into is that, in most non-state societies (in the Weberian sense of "monopoly on the legitimate use of force"), political linkages tend to be fragile and based more on personal ties so that a Big Man's successor may well repudiate the alliances and homages the Big Man makes. Which makes it hard to draw maps, because is Burgundy a part of France? The Duke of Burgundy is as often as not fighting the French king.
This is what makes adjudicating the "oldest continuous republic" hard, because at what point do we say that the homages San Marino is paying stops counting as being part of that country?
You also have three distinct concepts:
– country (geographically defined territory with something binding it)
– state (political entity with sovereign authority over a territory)
– nation-state (a state in which most people share some common identity)
Yeah, this is sometimes really interesting. For eg Scotland, Wales, NI and England are technically all different countries. Just like Aruba (and other Carribbean/island micro nations) which technically is still in the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Games like EU4 do have multiple views of the map for this reason. There are so many ways you can subdivide and draw borders differently. Language, culture, religion, imperial, etc.
Westphalia did two big things in my view… 1. is permanent diplomacy and 2. it made sure that things were on a secular not papal foundation. It’s a big deal but to claim that countries weren’t a thing before it is a bit of an overstatement.
I had the priviledge of visiting San Marino. Charming little country, and the food was amazing. Granted, it was only one day. I even had lunch next to the co-regent in a restaurant.
The whole of San Marino proper (the capital) was blanketed by fog, so my pictures were worthless, but the regent guard and their Christmas attire (Red and Green uniform) always made me chuckle.
TFA was a nice read, cheers!
> Their populations are content, their governments are highly functional, their economies hum along, and nothing of note has happened in any of them since World War II.
Another reminder that boring is good.
"in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock." (Harry Lime in the movie "The Third Man")
If you want greatness, throw human suffering at it
Cute.
In reality, of course, they produce a great deal more than cuckoo clocks; one of the most competitive pharmaceutical industries in the world, industrial chemicals, defence technology, agriculture, financial services, food processing, etc - up to a trillion or so per annum IIRC.
The cuckoo clock was intended to be a contemporary reference to the Renaissance period, not an exhaustive assessment of what Switzerland contributed to the present day.
In the flow of comments;
the timeframe does not appear to be pinned to the Renaissance period. Further, the quote I replied to was from The Third Man a movie made and released in 1949 that was set in post world war II Vienna.Further again, that quote appears to address present era Switzerland 500 years after the infamous time of the House of Borgia.
1/ The referenced quote in the parent comment is clear (while false - more below) to everybody but you. Being taken from a movie, it cannot be germane to the present flow of comments, you claim to reply to. Rather the quote reads: "By the time in Italy [this], in Switzerland [that]."
2/ The OP is about San Marino; the quoted excerpt is referencing the European city states of San Marino, Liechtenstein, Monaco, and Andorra; hence the flow of comments you point at is not concerned with Switzerland per se.
3/ The referenced quote is nevertheless false, because cuckoo clocks were invented in the Dresden in early 1600s; only popular culture associate them to Switzerland.
According to co-writer Graham Greene (who retired to Switzerland) they had been importing the clocks from Bavaria
https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/politics/miscellany/history...
It’s important to note that Switzerland has produced these things at least partially through the grace of the countries surrounding it.
Things would be very different in Switzerland if it bordered the Eastern Bloc or the Mediterranean Sea.
I would be wary of drawing big conclusions from the example of countries like these. The kind of boredom enjoyed in San Marino and Liechtenstein is probably not available to bigger countries.
Indeed. They've had Universal Basic Boredom (since 2011 or so):
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sanmarino/...
https://youtu.be/AwjeTiTdsF8
gives you a good picture. (Seems like he was incarcerated for domestic violence..)
I've heard that kind of description used for Switzerland as well. Accurate?
I think so? I have been to Switzerland a few times. It is an amazingly beautiful country, but expensive. I guess people don’t mind that much if they think their taxes are put to good use.
Switzerland is not expensive due to high tax rates.
It's incredible how little respect there is for political systems that incentivize stability.
Parliamentary republics do tend to form less stable governments, but it's also true that you can really govern by compromising both with your party, allies, and opposition.
In over 50 years not a single parliamentary republic has turned authoritarian, in fact only Sri Lanka in the 70s has done so since world war 2.
Presidential and semi-presidential republics? They are all just waiting for the right person at the right time, from Turkey to Nicaragua to the Philippines to Russia, etc, etc.
I don't think any modern country should aim at anything less than boring, albeit unstable, parliamentary republics, with presidents that are not elected by popular vote (like in Germany or Italy) and have no executive power.
If your country is doing good, you likely want minor/middle steer adjustements, not radical changes at each new vote.
I think it's the explicit lack of executive power that's the important part, not the lack of a direct popular vote. There doesn't seem to be much of a difference between say, the presidency of Finland (elected) and that of Estonia (appointed).
In fact, I'd say that Ireland's (directly elected) presidency has been one of the most notably successful, particularly in the post-1990 period when it's taken on more of a "cultural" rather than "political" focus.
I might be biased because I'm Polish, where the president is elected, and I hate the system compared to Germany or Italy.
A political head of state is not good imho, just ends up vetoing and doing politics instead of acting as a guardian of the constitution and institutions.
It's just a matter of "elect president from government's opposition and he's now emboldened to veto and block anything because he has popular mandate to do so".
Politicians electing the president seems a better option because they need to compromise on an individual that will allow any party to govern and be checked.
Counterpoint when things aren't going well you may need major adjustments. For example The Civil War, the Great Depression etc.
> In over 50 years not a single parliamentary republic has turned authoritarian, in fact only Sri Lanka in the 70s has done so since world war 2.
Also I take issue with this stawnt as basically no Presidential Republic that had a functioning Presidential Republic prior to WW2 has gone authoritarian. What your pointing to has more to do with the overall legitimacy of governments themselves.
In addition your claim itself is false as we have plenty of parliamentary republics that devolve into authoritarian dictatorships including but not limited to - Mynamar - Nigeria - Ghana - Uganda - South Korea (Second Republic) - Syria - Pakistan experiencing various military coups.
It's hip to be square.
Fascinating read, especially about how San Marino stayed independent, love this writer's work.
This was a delightful read! I found the section on San Marino's political adventures in the 20th century particularly amusing; they did a mini version of everything else that was going on the world in the 20th century, but it turns out that when you're a small peaceful moderate country, it's hard for things to get too too out of hand at any given moment. Like yeah sure they had a Fascist period followed immediately by a Communist period, but apparently in the mildest way imaginable, and it's been mildly moderate ever since.
For a moment I thought it was about the city/neighborhood in LA, where The Huntington Library is (highly recommend to visit this place)
Coincidentally, I am visiting southern CA for Hackaday Supercon in Pasadena and went to the Huntington today. It's incredible! I would go all the time if I lived here.
Yup, the day ticket can feel a bit expensive, but the membership is pretty cheap in comparison. Both definitely worth it (and I think you can chip in the value of your day ticket towards a membership)
Was surprised to find Andorra grouped in here. If you're into nature it's a whole different story!
There's really amazing hiking out there.
This was much more complete and better written than I expected.
I’d love to buy a book of a compilation of his trip notes if they are all as thorough as this
The same author has written about quite a few countries over quite a few years, there's lots more to read. And it's delightfully LLM-free writing, too.
>Biggest export – “Washing and Bottling Machines”
Not sure if these count.. they are an oddly specific subset of "washing machines"
https://www.lasplendor.sm/servizi/igiene-ambientale/tecnolog...
https://www.lintrepida.sm/noleggio-attrezzature-per-pulizia/
It makes sense that they each sell. I dunno, a dozen of those a year, as the largest part of the (industrial) GDP? the easiest places to find a citizen, though?
Evidence of others?
“Rundown” isn’t the best definition for Rimini, though.
Yeah it's quite a nice city! By Italian standards it's not spectacular but that's only because Italian standards are spectacular. Lift Rimini off the Adriatic coast and fly it to, say, Denmark, and suddenly it's the nicest place of the country.
I thought the beach area was utterly uninteresting but the old town is very nice indeed. And lots to do, random wine festivals, amazing views, beautiful old architecture (incl a beautiful Roman bridge), etc.
Admittedly I went for the Italo Disco and found none (zero! zilch! in the birthplace of italo disco! wth guys!), so that was a disappointment.
The only reason why these states exist is because of tax evasion methods used by business people in countries around them. For example in Andorra you can rent an apartment for 100k a year and move your entire online business to the country and pay virtually no taxes at all.
I once passed through Andorra, it's main city looked like a giant tax-free shopping area. It was terrible, only slightly better than sitting in an airport.
Shush... they are cute little innocent countries. Lots of culture, many heritage, very architecture.... and a little bit of inbreeding.
This seems like one of those Florida retirement communities that are gated. Except it’s in Italy. Similar dynamic.
...did you read the article? San Marino is a bunch of random villages in the Italian countryside, indistinguishable from the Italian side except in the one pretty spot that gets all the tourists, and the one larger town near Rimini that has all the tax free shops etc. No gates, no Florida.
Yeah, that’s the only difference. The gates. Otherwise it’s primarily a retirement and retiree support community of aged people. Everything follows from there.
It’s because I read it that I said this.
would be very interesting to see you spend 6 months in india and tour kashmir, kerala, north east india, west, cities, rural areas etc.
If you want to suggest a new travel destination for Matt Lakeman, you'll have to use the comment functionality on his site instead of here.