
Megacities, not nations, are the world’s dominant, enduring social structures - samsolomon
http://qz.com/666153/megacities-not-nations-are-the-worlds-most-dominant-enduring-social-structures-adapted-from-connectography/
======
hackuser
Michael Bloomberg wrote an article in Foreign Affairs saying that cities are
now the centers of public policy innovation, in part because state and Federal
governments are either controlled or blocked by people who want no policy and
no innovation.

[https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2015-08-18/city-
cent...](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2015-08-18/city-century)

My anecdotal, off-the-top-of-my-head memories bear that out: Almost all
innovative policy, from biking to fighting obesity to climate change, seem to
come from cities. State and Federal governments struggle with such useful
policy issues as, should we have taxes and is climate change real.

~~~
jameshart
Any region which isn't urban is, basically, Incapable of adaptation. It is
totally beholden to the natural resources it has. Fertile soil? Shale oils?
Nice beaches? Forests? The environment you have basically fixes your destiny.
A government presiding over a rural area basically has to become like a
corporation whose sole purpose is stewardship and exploitation of that natural
resource.

Whereas cities are human constructs and so governing them is about stewardship
and exploitation of the population of the city, which is far more adaptable -
and requires more sophisticated governance.

~~~
unethical_ban
That's a very insightful thought.

I do find it interesting how people are coming to the idea that local
governments are where new ideas are formed, but degrade the concepts of
States' rights or smaller federal intervention as racism whenever it doesn't
suit a liberal agenda.

~~~
infosample
Because "States' rights" has historically been used as a dog-whistle for
racism, segregation, and voter suppression. Moreover, the article is referring
to city/local government which is different from the state. I don't see how
conflating local innovation with state oppression is a liberal agenda.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States%27_rights#States.27_rig...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States%27_rights#States.27_rights_as_.22code_word.22)

~~~
stcredzero
_used as a dog-whistle_

Such an overloaded term. It is also used to mean "something only some can
hear, but I can't."

States have also been a source of innovation. California, Oregon, and
Washington were noted as "bellwether" states, whose pioneering policies were
sometimes adopted by other states. California's pollution/vehicular laws have
been a force for positive change and innovation in the auto industry.

~~~
Bjorkbat
You could argue that it was the cities that gave these states such pioneering
policies.

Urban California is a pretty liberal place, but rural California really isn't.
Granted, I have my doubts it would be as conservative as the Deep South, but
if Central California were a state of its own they'd probably repeal a number
of these "pioneering" laws that cut into farm profits.

I would argue that states with a liberal voting record also likely have a
majority urban population of registered voters, even if we're talking about a
large state with plenty of land being used for natural resources.

------
sspiff
Article contains almost no data, no information to speak of to confirm its
title. Instead it goes off and asserts the authors opinions and political
views as facts.

Perhaps it is intended to be an opinion piece, but the title is that of a PR
message accompanying the release of a research paper.

~~~
user10001
It seems mostly like an advertisement for some guy's book, which is also
mostly an opinion piece.

------
stegosaurus
Intuitively this seems like an obvious result of the network effect. (edit:
I'm not intending to belittle anyone here and I apologise if it may seem that
way).

Axiomatically, socially the sum of two humans is greater than the two humans
apart.

And large cities, with metros, many villages that melt into one, employment
opportunity, talks, bars, etc, are the embodiment of what it means to be
social (with some exceptions - community feel being an important one).

In the UK this is at the forefront of politics - it is obvious to anyone that
the country is governed as 'London plus appendages'. The rail and road
networks are basically built around the capital. Most public transport
subsidies go to the capital. The important (in a status sense, not in an
absolute sense) businesses are headquartered there.

~~~
MagnumOpus
> Most public transport subsidies go to the capital

Most public transport revenue also comes from the capital. While literally
millions of London's commuters pay thousands of dollars a year each for the
privilege of being herded into overfilled cattle cars twice a day,
Welsh/Scots/Northerners don't actually use the public transport they demand
and hence it runs at a massive loss until it inevitably gets shutdown yet
again.

~~~
bograt
> Most public transport revenue also comes from the capital

This is incorrect. 40% of 'Transport for London' (TfL) spending comes from
fares, and approx. 27% from government [0]. That represents a real cash
subsidy of £3.1B per year for londoners.

The disparity in infrastructure spending per resident is even more stark [1].
London receives more than half of all such spending in England despite
containing less than a sixth of its population.

[0] [https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/how-we-work/how-we-
ar...](https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/how-we-work/how-we-are-funded)
[1]
[http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/07/london-...](http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/07/london-
gets-24-times-as-much-infrastructure-north-east-england)

~~~
Retric
That's a reasonable argument because roads have zero subsidies. Wait, no.

The real issue is does London pay more or less in taxes for transportation
than it receives in transportation projects. Considering the population and
relative income of London it ends up subsidizing the rest of the UK.

------
emeerson
Other than intuitive observation of the creative class economy, this article
offers neither a definition of "dominant, enduring social structures" nor
evidence outside of GDP as a metric. So far it's like "duh GDP in this day and
age is a product of high-density geographic regions." Am I missing something
here?

~~~
ianai
Perhaps the bit about companies setting up near an airport. Thus they ensure
global access and think of their "home city" as mostly yet another venue.
That, I think, someone serves as an insular force for the present "big"
localities - localities large enough to have an international airport.

------
msellout
Circles in circles is a terrible chart. Humans have a very difficult time
comparing relative areas of circles.

Much better would be to add a separate bar chart comparing all the countries
and each bar separated into stripes for the city vs total. Perhaps on a log
scale.

The chart they made might be more beautiful, but it's less informative.

~~~
mirimir
> Humans have a very difficult time comparing relative areas of circles.

Area ~ diameter^2 so ...

But maybe too abstract.

~~~
collyw
When you are talking about comparing charts, I think he means visually, not
mathematically.

~~~
mirimir
I also meant visually.

------
clamprecht
Nassim Taleb (author of _Antifragile_ ) has talked about this:

[http://www.economist.com/node/17509373](http://www.economist.com/node/17509373)

[https://theglobalobservatory.org/2014/09/risk-and-
robustness...](https://theglobalobservatory.org/2014/09/risk-and-robustness-
nassim-nicholas-taleb/)

------
smegel
Italy seems a good example. Merchant cities that have stood alone for
centuries, tolerating whatever ruling clan or invaders happen to be laying
claim. Italy as a nation is basically a manufactured concept around these mini
city states.

------
troels
From the article: "Today cities have become the world’s dominant demographic
and economic clusters."

Seeing that cities are essentially clusters of people, isn't this fairly self-
evident?

~~~
superuser2
No. There was a period in the mid-late 20th century where it appeared that the
future was really in car-oriented sprawl, and the cities were abandoned to the
poor people and minorities who couldn't afford to get out. The population
growth, wealth, voters, political power, consumers, and the American Dream
itself were in metro areas but definitely not city limits.

The idea of that cultural moment having ended is relatively new.

------
personjerry
This reminds me of the ancient greek political philosophy arguments for the
city-state republic as the primary form that government should be, for example
Aristotle.[1]

[1] [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-
politics/](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-politics/)

------
danharaj
There was an economist whose work focused on how cities act as the fundamental
hub of economic activity that supports the rest of a region, but his/her name
escapes me at the moment. Some names were mentioned in the article, but they
did not ring a bell. Anyone know whom i'm talking about?

~~~
Sniffnoy
Jane Jacobs?

~~~
bmh_ca
I was going to post her name. Jane Jacobs wrote, among other books:

\- Cities and the Wealth of Nations

\- The Death and Life of Great American Cities

\- The Economy of Cities

Her last book, in 2004, was ominously titled "Dark Age Ahead".

Incidentally, I worked down the street from where she lived at the time of her
death (the Annex, in Toronto). Her ideas were a recurring topic at the pub,
the Duke of York.

------
roywiggins
I'm reminded of some of the descriptions of Discworld's Ankh-Morpork- it keeps
getting invaded but in the end each wave of invaders ends up subsumed into the
metropolis, and the city continues more or less unchanged.

------
sremani
Greater Delhi is entirely in Pakistan covering Islamabad and Lahore. Before
any one picking pitchforks or tactical nuclear weapons, they should correct
that in that map.

------
panic
For a deeper look into the role of cities in society, check out the work of
Jane Jacobs:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs#Works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs#Works)

------
tim333
I guess it makes sense if you think about it. Nations can change on a whim
pretty much, think Scottish independence or the possible creation of
Kurdistan. On the other hand city buildings like those in Rome are there for
hundreds or thousands of years.

Vid of Europe's changing borders and nations:
[https://youtu.be/uxDyJ_6N-6A?t=1m19s](https://youtu.be/uxDyJ_6N-6A?t=1m19s)

