In the beginning of April, world got a brand new country: The Free Republic of Liberland. It occupies 7 square kilometers of no man`s land between Croatia and Serbia. The self- appointed president is Vít Jedlička, a regional party leader of the Czech Republic`s northern district and part of the Free Citizens Party of libertarian views.
Liberland already has its own flag, a national anthem and a provisional government although it is still unclear whether it is a real country or not. One issue is associated with its president that has a history of pulling pranks and pointed out in a recent interview that Liberland started out as a protest and political stunt. He also admitted that his actions were inspired by Jeremiah Heaton, an American who claimed a remote patch of land between Egypt and Sudan and claimed by neither, so his 14- year-old daughter could be a princess.
Apart from these (common- sense) reservations there is also the questionable accordance to the formal and empirical sovereignty demands. Formal apply to the legal equality of nation-states in terms of their rights and obligations in the international system. An empirical aspect of sovereignty demands states to have population, territory, effective rule over territory and population and the recognition of other nation- states. Thus, sovereignty is both a legal and empirical phenomenon; it must display certain observable characteristics however, this is not enough. For a state to be perceived as sovereign it must be recognized as such by others; arguably, sovereignty is therefore mostly granted in a socio- legal context.
Liberland, for now, has sort of a territory, sort of population and a sort of rule over its citizens, formed on voluntarist basis. By purely legal means, Liberland is not a state. Its population is largely the President and the self- proclaimed citizens, who all still seem to be living in the Czech Republic. Additionally, Liberland does not exercise effective rule over its territory, since the entry into the “country” is granted by Croatian border patrol. Effectively, in terms of international law, the best we could say on the sovereignty of Liberland is that it is a failed state, occupied by a foreign nation. Pragmatically speaking, Liberland is just a website that Jedlička made.
The issue with sovereignty is also closely linked to the philosophy of Liberland (if we can imply such a thing), which is based on libertarian political thought. Libertarianism is formed on the idea that upholds liberty as its key objective; accordingly it seeks to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, political freedom and voluntary association; it is also against discrimination and strongly supports non- aggression. Libertarians are highly disinclined to state authority however, the desired scope of state activities differs in various schools of libertarianism. The prevalent school of thought represents the idea that governments should do as minimal as possible, limiting its responsibilities to a standing army, local security and courts system. In the case of Liberland, we see a more radical approach, for Liberland will not have an army and the country is designed to find out the minimum amount of taxes and regulations needed to live. All the coverage of basic needs and services- banks, cell phone service, hospitals etc.- are to be provided on an entirely voluntarist basis. Therefore it is hard to determine whether the Liberland government does nothing because it is so libertarian (and this is a concept I am sure the late Douglas Addams would greatly appreciate) or because it simply does not exist.
The outlined characteristics of this new proto- country at the same time point out to the mostly criticized libertarian principles and in my opinion most important social and economic consequences of libertarian thought. The calls for minimum taxes and minimum government involvement definitely align with the current wild neoliberalism and businesses, enamored with tax havens. Clearly, this is exactly what Jedlička had in mind, for he was quoted saying “I would categorize it [Liberland] as tax haven. The reason why Liberland was created was that the rest of the world ended up being a tax hell”. Additionally, he vocalized his hopes that Liberland would become a successful financial center due to its loose tax laws. In a world of incomprehensively disproportional wealth distribution, it is obscene to form yet another financial haven, accompanied with political clichés about individual freedom, liberty and recognition of private property.
In terms of economic criticisms, another very important one is also connected to the moral philosophy of libertarians. Within libertarian framework, choice is a binary concept: either it is consensual or coerced, good or evil, beneficiary of malevolent. Therefore, following this line of argument, a worker being underpaid and working in inhumane conditions is not faulty, because the responsibility rests solely upon the worker to submit himself to such conditions. This is a very dangerous concept because it disregards the impact environment, living conditions and social options have on individual choices. It also introduces the belief that the poor are to blame for their state of livelihood and the rich deserve to be rich. The accompanying line of thought here is the belief in the trickle down economy, which we noticed is not working, since the 1 % of richest people combined wealth is greater than that of the remaining 99 %. Choices are not binary, they are a scope of intertwined elements, presenting possible and more importantly, acceptable choices individual has in the terms of pros and cons for each of the presentable options.
I am sure that a true libertarian would counter me on the last paragraph, correcting me that the injustices and inequalities spring out only due to the existence of regulated international system of states and other institutions. If we dismantle the letter, the sun will be shining, the grass will be greener and everybody will be happy (or at least have exactly what they deserve). I believe that the issue with the lack of rules and authority is firstly, the lack of coordination and secondly, the inevitable clashes between stretches of personal liberty, whereas the letter is actually the consequence of the former. To expect that a world of 7 billion people can operate on a stateless basis, according to individual personal morality and choices is really a political equivalent of getting a tongue ring or a hideous tattoo at the age of 16. It just does not work in the long run, not at the current state of mind of people and at the level of social and technological human evolution.
That is also why the libertarian thought, put in practice, only comes across as another neoliberal triumph of private property and tax evasion; individual rights are in the current world framework translated from Libertarian-ese to English only with business and its profit. Accordingly, the greatest catchphrase Liberland is associated to is not that it is a haven for freedom- seekers but that it is a new haven for the wealthy. In the world, where every country is a h(e)aven for the wealthy, excuse me for not being too excited about the newest sprout of Friedmanism.
