The radical libertarian city builders of the tech-bro set have an audacious new proposal: They want to convert Guantánamo Bay, host to the infamous prison, into the high-tech charter city of their wildest imaginations, which will double as a “proving ground” for migrants seeking to enter the United States. The Charter Cities Institute, or CCI, which has lobbied the Trump administration on setting up so-called freedom cities in the U.S, suggests the president take advantage of Guantánamo’s special legal status to convert the controversial detention camp into “a beacon of 21st-century prosperity.”
CCI promotes the worldwide development of charter cities, semiautonomous zones designed to be exempt from the regulations and taxes of the nations in which they’re located. The freedom cities idea pushed by CCI and other groups fits this mold: tech hubs that would be exempt from some federal laws. Adherents to this movement argue that these arrangements drive innovation and prosperity. But as New Republic contributor J.J. Anselmi explained back in March, there’s not much innovation to be had—freedom cities are little more than spit-shined reboots of the “company towns” of yesteryear. Nevertheless, the president has proven receptive to the idea, and the groups have claimed that his inner circle is engaging with their proposals.
Now they’ve come up with an eye-catching new site for him to consider. “By transforming Guantanamo Bay into a charter city, the U.S. government can catalyze economic growth, manage immigration flows, and project America’s unparalleled capacity for innovation and statecraft—all while requiring no legislation,” claims the CCI proposal from earlier this year.
“This parcel of federal land on the Caribbean coastline presents a striking opportunity to reimagine American governance and reassert U.S. global leadership.”
CCI argues in its proposal that the substantial development it plans to unleash would bypass the “multi-tiered hurdles” of “zoning boards, county regulations, city councils, and environmental legal frameworks” that the group claims is holding back similar charter city projects in the U.S. It further argues that this relaxed regulatory environment would encourage cutting-edge R&D in areas like biotech, artificial intelligence, and nuclear microreactors, likening the new enterprise to an American Dubai, capable of attracting billions of dollars in capital over the next five to 20 years.
More controversially, CCI proposes to do something very akin to what the Emiratis are best known for doing—erecting a labor economy that more readily resembles modern-day slavery. The big selling point for its GITMO haven suggests that the hypothetical city could house migrants who wish to move to the U.S., keeping them under surveillance for a “probationary period” while “evaluating their contributions to the local economy and society.”
“High performers become prime candidates for U.S. residence, while those who disrupt public order can be repatriated quickly—no labyrinthine state courts involved,” the authors write.
“The site’s location close to the Cuban mainland offers an added symbolic advantage,” the report emphasizes: “A thriving free-market enclave next to a stagnating Communist regime.”
Charter cities have long been a fascination of Silicon Valley’s libertarian right. Tech billionaire Peter Thiel was an early investor in “seasteading,” the dream of seaborne libertarian enclaves floating beyond sovereign jurisdiction. In recent years, high-profile Silicon Valley investors Marc Andreessen and Balaji Srinivasan have joined the movement, which has turned its attention to land-based fiefdoms.
CCI promotes the establishment of these kinds of projects worldwide. It was an early champion of Próspera, a charter city in Roatán, Honduras, which is currently engaged in a legal battle with the Honduran government over its continued existence. It is also involved in several city projects in Africa, including one in Nigeria called Itana. Próspera and Itana have both received funding from Pronomos Capital, a venture capital firm backed by Thiel and Andreessen, whose right-leaning Silicon Valley faction has grown in influence since Trump entered the White House.
CCI told The New Republic that it had “spoken to staff within the administration and both aisles of Congress” about freedom cities and issues relating to housing and economic dynamism but said it wasn’t actively lobbying for freedom cities. However, CCI founder Mark Lutter is still listed online as part of the Frontier Foundation team, a nonprofit advocating for freedom cities.
CCI didn’t comment on whether the Guantánamo proposal had been presented to anyone in government.
Guantánamo experts aren’t convinced this plan will ever come to fruition. “I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with using space for a more productive, beneficial purpose than a military base,” said Joseph Margulies, professor of the practice of government at Cornell University and author of Guantánamo and the Abuse of Presidential Power. “But what’s troublesome is the idea that you are seeking a place that is beyond the law. That is the perennial attraction of Guantánamo, right?”
Margulies says this myth is “part of the imagined reality of Guantánamo.” “You would not be able to create as a matter of law this regulation-free zone where you could do whatever you want simply because you’re in Cuba.”
Guantánamo is still largely remembered for the abuses of the Bush administration during the so-called “global war on terror.” During Bush’s presidency, the military prison played host to as many as 780 detainees, frequently in conditions that violated both their human rights and their rights to anything resembling due process.
Due to a legal arrangement ratified in the aftermath of the 1898 Spanish-American War, Cuba retains sovereignty over Guantánamo Bay, but the U.S. exercises complete jurisdiction. However, Supreme Court rulings in the 2000s on the rights of Guantánamo detainees upheld the right of U.S. courts to intervene there.
Calling the CCI proposal “zany,” Jonathan Hansen, senior lecturer on social studies at Harvard University and author of Guantánamo: An American History, suggested logistics would also present an issue for the plan. The layout of the site, he says, requires supplies to be delivered to the area housing residents by boat, which means that “it’s just always … going to be costly and inconvenient just to move things.”
Margulies called the migration element of the proposal “just dystopian.” “It contemplates the creation of a place where human beings exist solely to demonstrate their capacity to participate in a neoliberal experiment,” he added. “That’s just horrific.”
While Democratic Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama each promised to close down the detention center at Guantánamo, neither was ultimately successful in his attempts. Trump, by contrast, has twice committed to keeping it open.
His efforts to build up the prison presage a difficult road ahead for the freedom city advocates. In February, Trump ordered an existing migrant detention facility at Guantánamo to be expanded to hold 30,000 people. However, the plan encountered hurdles almost immediately, not least of which was the sheer expense of expanding the facility’s capacity. Some tents set up for the expansion have since been removed, and migrants transported there have since been returned to U.S. facilities or deported elsewhere.
Nevertheless, CCI argues the plan’s dubious optics could in fact be a boon. “Guantánamo Bay’s success would not only revitalize the U.S. brand abroad but also serve as a powerful reminder of how quickly the nation can pivot from war on terror legacies to economic ambition,” the group writes.
While it’s unclear whether the plan has any die-hard supporters within the administration, Hansen says it has one thing going for it: It is “classically Trumpian” in its bombast and hubris.
“I could, of course, see him saying something ridiculous [like this] because he has no conception of Guantánamo,” says Margulies. “It exists solely as a symbol, and I could see him invoking it for some symbolic purpose. ‘We’re going to create a capitalist Nirvana here. Make it so.’
“And it would collapse. The idea would collapse because it’s legally impossible, because it’s logistically impossible, because it would be horrifically expensive. But he doesn’t really care about that.”
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( The Libertarian Tech Bros’ Weird, Dystopian Plan for Guantánamo Bay )
Also on site :
- Joanna Gaines' Crunchy-Sweet Asian Salad Is Easy to Love
- New Pope elected
- White smoke pours from Sistine Chapel chimney, signaling a new pope on second day of voting