Afterword to the Sovereignty Game

Considering Hong Kong Independence in the Digital Age The cover of this book has Hong Kong on it for a reason. It is an emblem of the sovereignty game. The writer has lived in both China and Hong Kong at different times over 25 years, including during the 1997 handover from the UK on a humid, rainy summer evening. The recent 2019 protests in Hong Kong have exposed intense generational conﬂict between those older people who identify themselves as Chinese, beholden to the political entity of the communist government in Bei- jing, and younger, technically adept and adroit, who identify themselves as Hong Kongers, or Hong Kong Chinese, who do not know Beijing or its communist party, except as negative history, from the Great Leap Forward, to the cultural revolution, and Tiananmen square. Their trust is lacking, and patriotism to any Communist identity non-existent. This is similar to many young Taiwanese who consider their identity separate from mainland China. If one visits Hong Kong, or its neighbor, Macau, today, it is as if entering countries very separate from Mainland China. The thinking is different, the processes different, as are the lan- guages. They are all de facto sovereign entities. The one country, two systems concept put in place by Chinese Communist premier leader Deng Xiaoping in a different century is outdated and ﬂawed. Condominium (or co-sovereignty) has never successfully existed in the world, outside of a few islands and water areas split by bigger sovereign powers. In short

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive 161 license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 W. Hickey, The Sovereignty Game, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1888-1 162 AFTERWORD TO THE SOVEREIGNTY GAME

Hong Kong people have an identity problem caught between British colonialism and communist encroachment. However, this is not unprece- dented, a way forward may still exist.

Singapore Independence Singapore, a longstanding British commonwealth colony similar to Hong Kong, attained its independence from Malaysia in August 1965, under the misgivings, now revisionist history as “determinations”, of Lee Kuan Yew. Lee did not want Singapore to leave the grand union with Malaysia, but was forced out due to economic imbalance, a Malaysian Cold War ﬁlter, and Malaysian/Chinese ethnic tension with Kuala Lumpur. No amount of revision today can change Lee’s original lament over the then expulsion, “I have believed in merger and the unity of the two territo- ries”. The economic success of Singapore’s to a “then go it alone” versus today’s ASEANS ﬁnancial hub has changed the conversation from regret to mountain apex in 50 years.

The Goa Rationale Goa and India may be more of a proper comparison to China and Hong Kong with ongoing realpolitik. Goa was the crown jewel of Por- tugal’sAsian Empire for over 450 years, only later to be taken back by force from India in 1961. The Portuguese twofold argument with Goa, now consigned to the dustbin of history, or more plausibly, the fact that Portugal is a tiny country without overseas enforcement might, like the British with the Falkland Islands and Gibraltar, was that when Goa was established by them in the early sixteenth century it was with acquiescence by tribes in today’s Gujarat state. In the seventeenth century, when West- phalia was established India did not exist as a coherent nation-state. Thus Goa and Portugal’s claim, predated India as a political entity, though not a cultural one of course, and that Goa, since the 16th century was a longstanding metropolitan province of Portugal. Similar reasoning today is also held with French Guiana and the Span- ish enclave in North Africa of Ceuta and Mellila. That is, when these provinces or states were created by European colonial powers, there was no countervailing claim with an established nation-state on the other side. Nation-states as in today’s deﬁnition, simply did not exist. Africa and South America were largely tribal areas, with vast swaths laying unclaimed. AFTERWORD TO THE SOVEREIGNTY GAME 163

Today, these areas are considered as integral parts of Europe, not merely colonial possessions, even though far away, as in the case of Guiana. Unfortunately, even though Goa claimed the same status as a metropolitan department of Portugal, India would have none of it and launched a military invasion in 1961. Goa had also been hollowed out by pro-Indian, anti-Portuguese forces for many years, and since tiny Portugal could not defend its far-ﬂung province, it fell in three weeks.

The 1841 Treaty of Nanking and the Qing Dynasty In 1841, the treaty of Nanking for Hong Kong island was between the Qing Dynasty and the British, in order to force open a foreign concession port. The Chinese Qing dynasty wanted it that way. If dynastic China was going to deal with imperialists, better to be in a port faraway from Peking. The founding of the modern Republic of China was not until January 1912 under Dr. Sun Yat-sen, and further, the founding of Communist China would not be until October 1949. Hong Kong predates both these events as a British trade colony in the mid-nineteenth century, bargained with the then Qing dynasty. No one would ever argue that Hong Kong is not culturally and ethnically Chinese, but is that identity ascription in itself enough to justify its assimilation into Communist China as just “another Chinese city” in 2047, when Hong Kong’s status fully reverts fully back to the mainland? Namely, and similar to India with Goa, a country that did not exist as a nation-state later laid claim to, invaded, and absorbed another entity into its territory. Abstract theory? No. A reafﬁrmation of might makes right? Yes. Culturally relevant? Maybe.

The Bond Double Standard Communist China today contends to usurp an agreement as its own that the British Empire made under a very different ruling body in 1841, when Communism did not exist. Karl Marx was still in graduate school in 1841, his manifesto would not yet be written for another seven years, in 1848. However, China is not consistent then in its handling of other agreements if this is the case with its sovereign absorption. We are talking specifi- cally then about sovereign bonds issued during the Qing dynasty before 1911, later defaulted on, and which today’s communist Chinese government (still) refuses to honor. In theory then, as the communist Chinese government in Beijing claims sovereignty over the whole of “China”, it 164 AFTERWORD TO THE SOVEREIGNTY GAME stands now as the inheritor of that debt issued pre-1911 also. In 1912, the Republic of China, China’s first nation-state post its many dynasties, was founded under Sun Yat-sen. The Republic of China lasted until 1949, when it was ousted by the Communist Chinese and fled to Taiwan, where it is labeled as the Kuomingtan (KMT) party today. Nonetheless, paying the bonds, about $1 trillion worth today, when considering inflation, currency translation, and interest, would strengthen Communist China’s legitimacy on superseding both the Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China, in 1949. (Taiwan was recognized as the legit- imate Chinese government until 1979, then unceremoniously kicked out of the UN.) Communist China’s answer of course is that when the Com- munists took control of Beijing in 1949, the new government abolished all unequal treaties including canceling any foreign debts. The Peoples Republic of China stated officially that it does not have an obligation to pay back any outstanding debts after Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT fled to Taiwan in 1949 with a number of loans in hand. This is not a frivolous argument made here. Consider that lesser countries, such as Argentina, have been forced to pay back bond issuance by the world markets long after governments have changed from socialist to military dictatorship to conservative. The markets (that is bond issues enforced through the US legal system in regard to any denominated in US dollars) demanded and doggedly pursued payouts, no matter who was in charge. Considering the amount of trade with China in dollars, and the fact that the Chinese yuan is pegged to the dollar, enforcing payment of these bonds is very possible. Could that be the price then offered to cement claims to Hong Kong? As a footnote, bonds issued under Tsarist Russia, which was overthrown by the Bolsheviks and Lenin in 1918, are still in limbo waiting to be repaid. The USSR ignored them as does Putin today, but the issue still smolders. Nonetheless, Russia unlike China, is not laying claim to a former British capitalist colony. The point is, China wants it both ways, they want to absorb Hong Kong, but ignore debt instruments generated from the same era.

Revisionist History Versus the Digital Age Nation-states have had to consistently change the narrative, and why they did what they did, over time. All this worked fine while feeding a script to captive audiences inside tightly controlled or isolated borders. Whether it be communist, dynastic, feudal, or capitalist, leading and inoculating a AFTERWORD TO THE SOVEREIGNTY GAME 165 local populace again “dangerous ideas” and “foreign influence” became a du jour saying. Might makes right, such as with Goa in 1961 may have worked then, however instantaneous digital communication alongside social media forums with group discussion, has fractured this old playbook of forc- ing things from politics to economics to human rights to even culture. The digital age shows us that underpinning political power on culture, religion, or ethnicity is shaky ground., and that the “might makes right” argument of years ago only encourages more dissidence. By that consider many places with ongoing territorial strife: Syria, Kashmir, South Sudan. Allegiances, alliances, and other affinities now cross nation-state borders, and create different power groups that crystallize differing ideas. Consider the question “what is an American” as asked by minority right groups today brings on a multiplicity of confusing and angry discussion. Atom- ized information has empowered the individual and cannot be neatly and tightly contained by the nation-state. Simply, the cat of control cannot be put back into the bag. Hong Kong is just the most recent example of this intergenerational and cultural clash. Information really is power, transcending the nation- states control legitimacy. In this case, a recent South China Post article by former Singapore diplomat Bilahari Kausikan noting that the entire protest movement is useless and will tightly be controlled by Beijing is wrong. This pessimistic author is stuck in another century and fails to understand (nor mention) that both the technical upheaval and generational issues give a false weighting to “national unity”. Simply, it’s the young people’s future, not the old guards. The realpolitik is that no one expects China to sever its tightfisted claim or control with Hong Kong as Kuala Lumpur did with Singapore in 1965. Chinese leader Xi Jinping and his Politburo legacy before him have made the reabsorption of Hong Kong into China a major tenet of their legitimacy. But all nationalist semantics aside, if the door can be left ajar, perhaps slightly, a logical discussion would be that perhaps China is better off with a prosperous and reliably independent Hong Kong on its doorstep as a proxy into China, similar to how it’s been since Mainland China’s economic liberalization in 1980. Its of note that some tiny countries in the EU, such as Andorra and San Marino are surrounded by giant neighbors, but are allowed to have their own governance functions and independence. 166 AFTERWORD TO THE SOVEREIGNTY GAME

An independent and democratic Hong Kong could serve as an inter- locuter, as it’s been doing, between the West and the Mainland, as opposed to economic juxtaposition to Beijing (i.e., 1965 Chinese majority Singapore and Muslim majority Kuala Lumpur is a pretext). Its independence could create an even stronger nation-state due to its strategic positioning between the worlds’ two superpowers. We actually come full circle then, the entire reason Hong Kong was set up to begin with was as a liaison or a gateway between the British Empire and imperial, dynastic China. It has long since served that purpose, but could it use a rebooting in today’s information-intensive digital era to amplify this rationale? No doubt that this is a highly charged and contentious issue, where reason gives way to nationalist emotion, as Singapore also experienced in 1965 and Goa in 1961. The former gained independence unwittingly, the latter was denied independence and forcefully absorbed (despite any longstanding independence machinations) into India’s political hegemony where no country called India, had ever existed before the Westphalian system of 1648. The Westphalian system of the seventeenth century effec- tively was about stripping the power of monarchies and religious orders and giving them to secular authorities. It was yesterday’s solution to many acrimonious issues but has created today’s problems in sovereignty claims. Putting all nationalist histrionics aside (which may be an impossibil- ity), is that it may be of considerable economic and political benefit for China to give Hong Kong its independence, unlike what the British could not do, and not that it ever had any intention of doing. The digital age of AI, IoT, 5g, facial recognition, blockchain, Firefly, and Airdrops com- bined with attendant mass migration and crushing public goods problems (climate change, plastic waste, illegal immigration, overfishing..) has ren- dered so much of the original ideal of the “nation-state” and what it really stands for (exclusivity) and whom it most benefits (elites) moot. Nonetheless, despite this truth, the trend worldwide has been for the divergence of more, not less, nation-states, such as Kosovo, South Sudan and the aspirations of such, Catalonia, Kashmir, and Artsakh, for example, accompanied by the populism as seen with Trump, Xi, and Putin in ‘defending sovereignty’ that goes with it. More rational arguments are needed, so who really gains by preventing Hong Kong independence or the independence of other would be nation-states? AFTERWORD TO THE SOVEREIGNTY GAME 167

Bibliography http://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/article/3018003/harsh-truths- hong-kong-protests-will-not-achieve-anything. Retrieved on November 2019. http://qz.com/1660460/hong-kong-protesters-use-airdrop-to-breach-chinas- ﬁrewall/. Retrieved on November 2019. Index

A Artiﬁcial intelligence (AI), v, 37, 59, ABA, 148 61, 63, 166 Abkazia, 154 Asian, 33, 45, 53, 93, 95, 111, 134, Aboriginal, 65 155, 162 Aceh, 155, 157 Asian crisis (1997), 110, 111, 134 Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Acre, 18 (AIIB), 92 Afghanistan, 50, 78, 80, 81 Assange, Julian, 118 Africa, 15, 23, 33, 45, 48, 49, 62, 70, Atlantic Magazine, 65 90, 92, 111, 127, 129, 158, 162 Australia, 18, 19, 29, 42, 45, 50, 65, African, 18, 42, 53, 93, 107, 125, 70, 79, 80, 143, 147, 151, 154 129, 155 Australian dollars, 104 Alaska, 67–69 Austria, 5 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), 59 Austrian Empire, 101 Al Qaeda, 20 Austrian school, 100 Amnesty, 133–136 Automatic Exchange of Information Anabaptists, 19 (AEOI), 134, 139–141 Anchor babies, 77, 81 Automation, 59, 61–65, 67, 70–73, 125 An Inconvenient Truth, 47, 52 Antarctic, 30 Arab Spring, 20 B Argentina, 45, 51, 102, 105, 106, “Bad money”, 101 136, 164 Bali, 157 Arranged marriages, 77 Balkan, 78, 81

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive 169 license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 W. Hickey, The Sovereignty Game, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1888-1 170 INDEX

Baltics, 21, 80 Catalonia, 38, 155, 166 Bandwidth, 119 Caterpillar (company), 62, 74 Bangkok, 56, 84 Catholic church, 5, 24, 25 Bastiat, Frédéric, 13 Chain immigration, 77, 81 Belt and Road Initiative (China), 86, Chavez (Venezuela), 106 125 CHF (Swiss Franc), 67, 107 Benelux, 99 China, v, 15, 21, 24, 27, 28, 30, Berlin Conference (1885), 129 34, 36, 45, 48, 51, 53, 56, 57, Bernanke, Ben (Federal Reserve 69, 80, 85–93, 95, 96, 102, Chairman), 104 108–110, 119, 125, 134, 135, Bezos, Jeff, 60 141, 142, 144–149, 154, 155, BHP Billiton, 93 157, 161–166 Big data, 13, 37, 77, 82, 84, 118 Climate change, vi, 2, 15, 17, 19, Big Mac, 26 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 31, 37, Bitcoin, 38, 69, 119, 121–123 41–44, 46–56, 90, 130, 145, Black Plague, 23 146, 148–151, 153, 166 Blatter, Seth (FIFA), 144 CO , v, 27, 45, 47, 56, 149 Blockchain, 25, 37, 60, 69, 121–130, 2 146, 153, 156, 166 Coke (beverage), 89 Blocks, 122, 123 Colombo port (Sri Lanka), 91 Blue dollar (Argentina), 106 Commodities exchange (CME), 147 Blue Oceans, 90 Communist Manifesto, 59, 74 Bond market, 109, 110 Communist Party, 30, 154, 161 BP, 43, 45 Competent authority, 140 Brazil, 85, 86, 104, 108, 133–135 Congo, 20, 23, 34, 137 Brexit, 16, 59, 155, 156 Continuity, 122, 124, 125, 130 Buddhism, 70 Convergence, vi, 27, 34, 96, 154 Burma, 46, 80, 157 Copenhagen, 27, 46, 49, 145 Bush, George, 21 Coptic Christians, 155 Butter’s Law, 123 Corruption, 28, 29, 49–51, 54, 92, 93, 96, 121, 122, 125, 128, 134–138, 144, 154, 158 C Craftsmanship, 62, 63 Cambodia, 19, 46, 71, 79 Cramdown, 101 Canada, 45, 64, 67, 80, 81, 137, 140 Capital expenditures (CAPEX), 62 Croatia, 153 Capitalism, 60, 85, 87, 109 Crozier, Michel (French sociologist), Carbon credits, 29, 50, 56, 145–148, 64, 74–76 150 Crusades 1098, 4 Carey, Henry, 13 Cryptocurrency, 119, 121 Cash transfer, 60, 63, 66–69, 75 Cryptographic, 123 Catalan, 20, 156 Customization, 61, 62 INDEX 171

D European Unions Central Bank, 99, Danish kroner, 107 107 DeBeers (diamonds), 128 Exxon, 93 Decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), 125 Declaration of Independence 1776, 4 F 2 degrees Celcius, 44 Facebook, 59, 81, 106, 117, 118 Dell Theory of Capitalist Peace, 26 Fiat currency, 101, 113, 122 Descartes, Rene, 117 Financial Times, 34 Devaluation, 27, 37, 91, 101, 103, Finland, 64, 67, 72 105–110, 117 Fintech, 128 Digitalization, v, 24, 109 Fishing expeditions, 118, 119, 135, Divergence, vi, 27, 34, 96, 154, 166 140 Divine Rights of Kings, 3 Five-Star Movement (Italy), 59 DMZ (South Korea), 23 Floating nuclear power plants, 88 DNV, 51 Football World Cup, vi Draghi, Mario (European Union Ford Motor, 45 Central Bank Chair), 107 Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act Dynasticism, 10, 14, 15, 36 (FATCA), 28, 134, 139–141 France, 1, 5, 13, 17, 23, 48, 80, 154 Frankfurt, 83, 99 E Friedman, Thomas (NYT), 26, 76 East Coast Railway (Malaysia), 91 Fukushima, 49 East Syria, 38 East Turkestan, 154 Economist, 34 G Ecuador, 103 Garcia, Diego, 23 Egypt, 54, 102, 107, 113, 155, 157 Gates, Bill, 59, 60, 65 Einstein, Albert, 66 General Services Taxes (GST), 64, Electoral vote, 32 133, 134, 136, 138 The End of Work, 61, 74 German Constitution, 6, 8 Energeiwiende, 49 Germanic, 5, 6, 14, 78 Ethnocentric, 21 German mark, 102, 103 Euro, 83, 99, 107, 112, 143 German Reich, 5, 8 Europe, 4, 16, 19, 20, 45, 49, 54, 78, Germany, 1, 3, 5, 7–9, 11, 13, 17, 80, 140, 145, 156, 163 19, 25, 27, 29, 42, 48, 49, 52, European, 3, 6, 8, 14, 16, 17, 23, 24, 54, 57, 78–82, 99, 101, 133, 29, 30, 33, 49, 99, 129, 135, 146 139, 155, 162 Ghaddaﬁ, Moammar, 158 European Union (EU), 16, 26, 29, 565 gigatons, 44 31, 48, 50, 51, 53–56, 78, 80, Globalism, 11, 13, 35, 158 81, 105, 134, 136, 139, 146, Global warming, 22, 27–29, 32, 147, 149, 155, 156 42–44, 47 172 INDEX

Gold bricking, 47, 52 Hong Kong dollar, 104, 107 Goldman Sachs, 147 Hong Kong-Macau-Zhuhai Bridge, “Good money”, 101 88 Google Maps, 61, 80 Hong Kong Monetary Authority Gore, Al (former US Vice President), (HKMA), 104 47, 50, 52, 57 House of Saud, 45 Government to government (G2G), Huawei, 144 97 Great Wall, 4 Greece, 16, 26, 82, 99, 136 I Green “New Deal”, 59 IMF, 23, 26, 50, 89, 92, 133, 134, Greenhouse gas (GHG), 145, 137, 143, 144, 155 148–150 Immutable record, 128 Green Zone, 23 India, 24, 27, 31, 34, 48, 49, 53, 54, Gresham’s Law, 101, 102 56, 67, 69, 70, 72, 85, 86, 90, Gross domestic product (GDP), 67, 91, 102, 104, 105, 112, 133, 91, 133 134, 146, 157, 162, 163, 166 Gross national product (GNP), 66 Indian National Railway, 86 Grundrisse, 13 Indonesia, 18, 25, 27, 39, 42, 45, 49, Guatemalans, 79 67–70, 75, 80–82, 85, 89, 91, Guttenberg, 117 104, 113, 133, 134, 148, 155, 157 Information age, 20, 41, 47, 54, 73 H Infrastructure, 86, 88, 90–94, 113, Hadrian’s Wall, 4 125, 135, 138, 156 Hanke, Stephen (Johns Hopkins), 103 Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 139 Hard border, 159 Investiture Controversy, 24, 25 Harmonization, 54, 107, 134 iPhones, 43, 61 Hashes (#), 122, 123 Iraq, 15, 20, 45, 50, 78, 80, 157 Hashtag (#), 125 Ireland, 17, 25, 39, 156 Hawthorne Effect, 71 ISIS, 20, 22, 28 Hegel, G.W.F., 2, 6–8, 10–13, 16, 22, Islam, 39, 70 35, 37 ISO, 51, 94 heterogenous, 20, 23 Israel, 20, 154 Hinduism, 70 Hippolytus a Lapide, 11 hoi polloi, 38 J Holland, 1, 23 Jakarta, 56 Holy Roman Empire, 1, 2 Japan, 15, 23, 29, 30, 34, 48, 50, 70, Holy See, 2 104, 147, 151 homogenous, 15, 16, 18, 20, 23, 70 Japanese yen, 21, 103, 105, 107, Hong Kong, 20, 84, 89, 102, 107, 144–146 133, 148, 161–166 Jefferson, Thomas, 4 INDEX 173

K Mars, 31 Kamikaze, 42 Marxism, 10, 14, 106 Kazakhstan, 27, 45, 154 Marx, Karl, 2, 13, 14, 37, 59, 74, 163 Keynesian school, 100 Maslow, Abraham, 71 Keystone XL pipeline, 46 Mayo, Elton, 71, 76 King Bhumibol, 156 McDonalds (company), 26, 89 King John I, 3 McKibben, Bill, 44, 154 Kirkuk, 18 McKinsey (consulting company), 91 Kissinger, Henry, 2, 16–18, 22, 37, MDB 1, 135 39 MENA, 56 Klein, Naomi, 47, 57 Meng, Wanzhou, 144 Korea, 19, 23, 69, 70, 72 Merkle trees, 122 Korean won, 104 Mexico, 54, 67, 68, 79–81, 144 Kosovo, 38, 154, 155, 166 Middle-class, 60, 61 Kryder’s Law, 123 Middle Income Trap, 69, 108 Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High Speed ‘Millenium Development Goals’, 50 line, 91 MIT, 61, 62 Kurdistan, 38, 154, 157 Mitsubishi, 93 Kyoto, 27, 46, 49, 145 Modi, Narendra (India Prime Minister), 54, 134, 157 Modularization, 61, 62 L Monaco, 34 Laos, 18, 36, 46, 71, 72 Monetary Authority of Singapore La Paz, 27 (MAS), 104 Latin America, 70, 136 Mongolia, 30 Laudato Si (Pope), 17 Monitoring band, 104 Libya, 32, 80, 154, 157 Monroe Doctrine, 21, 23 Line (social media platform), 117 Moore’s Law, 123 Livingstone, David, 18 Morgan Stanley, 147 Local Content Delivery, 95 Localization, 93, 95, 96 Moyo, Dambisa, 67, 75, 154 Munster (treaties), 1 Musk, Elan, 59, 65, 67, 88 M Muslims, 78, 155, 166 Madrid, 156 Myanmar, 20, 71, 78, 79, 81, 84, 154 Maglev trains, 88, 90 Magna Carta, 4, 31, 32, 47 Malaysia, 25, 27, 28, 48, 80, 86, 91, N 135, 139, 162 Nair, Chandra, 154 Manchester United, 118 Nakamoto, Satoshi, 121 Mantega, Guido (Finance Minister Nationalism, 155, 158 Brazil), 108 Nation-state, v, 2, 3, 6, 9, 11, 13, 15, Mao, Zedong, 30, 48 18–22, 24, 25, 33–35, 37, 38, 174 INDEX

47, 52–54, 77, 79, 81, 84–88, Pay for Passport, 19, 82 90, 92, 93, 95, 96, 99–103, 106, Peace of Westphalia, 1–7, 9, 12, 16 111–113, 129, 134, 135, 137– Peer-to-peer (P2P), 60, 122, 124, 126 142, 146, 149, 150, 153–156, Peg, 103, 104, 107 158, 159, 162–166 Peoples Bank of China (PBOC), 108 NATO, 22, 23, 34 Permanent Fund, 68 NGO, 89 Permian Basin, 45 Niche knowledge, 95 Petronas, 86 Nielsen ratings, 100 Phenomenology of Mind, 12 Nigeria, 27, 45, 48, 54, 102, 107, Philisophes, 117 110, 113 Plastic waste, 28, 56, 130, 145, 166 Nigeria naira, 107, 110 Plaza Accord (1985), 102, 103, 113 N. Ireland, 155 Poles, 5, 17 Nobel Prize, 78 Polyani’s Paradox, 61 Nonce, 123 Portugal, 23, 162, 163 North, Douglas, 2, 14, 29, 31, 32, Post-Reformation, 2, 3 37, 57, 78, 79 350 ppm, 44 North theory, 78 Program Jaring Pengaman Sosial, 68 Norway, 70, 81, 84, 105, 137, 148 Protestant church, 5, 6 Protestantism, 5, 6, 25 Prussia, 6, 8 O Public goods, v, vi, 2, 15, 17, 22, 23, Occupy (Hong Kong), 20 25, 27, 30, 33, 37, 41, 48, 55, Omsk, 35 56, 96, 112, 113, 130, 141–143, One-belt, One-road, 86 150, 153, 158, 159, 166 Operational expenditures (OPEX), 62 Public–Private Partnerships (PPP’s), Organization for Economic Coopera- 91, 92, 96 tion and Development (OECD), Puigdemont, Carles (Catalan leader), 16, 26, 50, 133–135, 137, 140 156 Osnabruck (treaties), 1 Ottoman Empire, 17, 53, 102, 129 Q P Quantitative easing (QE), 27, 104, Palestine, 154, 158 107 Panama, 48, 103, 139 Panama Canal, 23 Papacy, 1, 2, 4, 17 R Papua, 155, 157 Race to the bottom, 66, 70 Papua New Guinea, 79 Rand, Ayn, 60 Parallel construction, 118, 119 Realpolitik, 18, 21, 24, 143, 162, 165 Paris, 27, 46, 66, 134, 145 Reformation, 1, 5, 17, 19, 41 Paris Accords, 15, 41, 42, 49, 149 1951 Refugee Convention, 79, 82 INDEX 175

Reserve currency, 29, 52, 112, 139, Social DNA, 73 149 Social media, 32, 34, 60, 73, 77, RFID chips, 156 82–84, 90, 105, 106, 109, 110, Rifkin, Jeremy, 61, 74 117–120, 135, 137, 153 Robotization, 61, 63 Society for Worldwide Interbank Rohingya, 19, 79–82, 155 Financial Telecommunications Roman Empire, 4, 8, 53 (SWIFT), 148 Rosneft, 86 Soros, George (reﬂexivity), 2 Rothbard, Murray, 37, 100, 101 The South, 14, 15, 23, 26, 30, 36, Roubini, Nouriel (New York 51, 88 University economist), 112, 154 South American, 33, 93 Russia (rubles), 21, 26, 48, 81, 85, South China Sea, v, 15, 26, 30, 36, 86, 91, 105, 106, 149, 154, 155, 88 164 South Korea, 20, 24, 35, 80, 108 South Sudan, 38, 165, 166 Soviet Union, 35, 53 S Space junk, 31 Sachs, Jeff, 154 ‘salami slicing’, 36 Spain, 1, 15, 20, 23, 25, 80, 156 Samsung, 93 Spanish Federal Government, 156 San Francisco, 66, 88 Special Drawing rights (IMF), 143 Sarbanes-Oxley, 147 Sri Lankans (in Indonesia), 82 Saudi Arabia, 45, 64, 86 Stalin, Josef, 30 Saudi Aramco, 45, 86 Standards (ASME, API, SGR, TAFE, Scandinavia, 78, 136–139 ISO, guobiao, NEBOSH, NSQ, Schengen, 78 Soviet), 94 Scotland, 38, 155 State capitalism, 85, 90, 96 Scott, Dred, 22 State of CA, 50, 53 Scrubbing (internet), 118 State-owned enterprises (SOEs), 66, Securities and Exchange Commission 85–90, 92–96, 134–136, 142 (US SEC), 147, 148, 151 Statism, 24 Self-actualization, v, 71 Statoil, 45 Serbia, 79, 82, 155 Sterling (UK pound), 112 Serbia, 79, 82, 153 Structural reforms, 32, 33, 86, 100, Shell, 93 134, 136 Silicon Valley, 64, 72 Sub-Saharan Africa, 15, 79, 80, 158 Sinai, 157 Sudan, 20, 71, 80, 96 Singapore, 20, 23, 64, 69, 75, 84, The Sun Also Rises (Hemingway), 35 145, 162, 165, 166 Surveillance state, 118 Singapore dollar, 104, 145 Sweden (kingdom of), 1, 24, 70, 80, Skills development, 96 81, 137 Small and medium-sized enterprises Swiss franc, 100, 105, 107, 108, 112, (SMEs), 93, 95, 96, 136 144 176 INDEX

Swiss National Bank (SNB), 107 Turkey lira, 21, 105, 110 Switzerland, 1, 48, 50, 67, 72, Turks, 5 107–109, 133 Turnbull, Malcolm (Australia prime Sykes, Mark, v, 18 minister), 79 Sykes–Picot, 17, 18, 78, 129, 158 Twitter, 106, 117 Syria, 15, 19, 20, 28, 32, 78, 80, 81, 126, 157, 165 System D (shadow economy), 126 U UK Lloyds Insurance, 89 Ukraine, 26, 105 T UNDP, 33 Taiwan, 30, 69, 155, 164 United Nations (UN), 15, 16, 21, 23, Taiwanese, 20, 161 30, 34, 36, 48, 50, 80, 82, 126, Tajikistan, 20 154, 155 Tamils, 79 Universal Basic Income (UBI), 11, Technology transfer, 53, 95 59, 60, 63–75, 153 Teitelbaum, Michael (Harvard), 29, Universal enforcement, 141, 145–147, 79 150 Tesla, 56, 59, 100 US dollar, 21, 27–29, 37, 38, 50, Text root, 123 51, 53, 103, 104, 107, 109–112, Thailand, 80, 81, 139, 155, 156 121, 139, 143, 146–148, 164 Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648), 2, 5, US Treasury, 102, 103, 141, 143 7, 10, 16 Thoreau, David, 67 Thurow, Lester, 61, 74 V Tiananmen Square, 154, 161 Value-added tax (VAT), 64, 138 Tibet, 15, 36 Venetians, 1 Time stamp, 122, 123, 130 Venezuela, 19, 21, 26, 32, 45, 48, 51, Toyota, 45 105, 106, 113, 154 Transatlantic Trade and Investment Venezuela (bolivars), 102, 105, 106 Partnership (TTIP), 46 Virginia, 35 TransCanada, 46 Volker, Paul, 103 Trans Dneper, 154 von Bismarck, Otto, 8 Trans-Paciﬁc Partnership (TPP), 46 Treaty of San Francisco, 30 100 trillion note, 102 W Trinity (dilemma), 111, 112 Wax, 16 Trudeau, Justin, 45 WeChat, 117 Trump, Donald, 32, 42, 59, 139, Weimar Germany, 101, 102 149, 166 Werkes (Hegel), 6, 39 Trumpism, 150 Western Electric (Cicero, IL), 71 Turkey, 80, 82, 105, 108, 110, 113 Western Sahara, 153 INDEX 177

Westphalia, vi, 2–6, 8, 11, 14, 16–25, World Cup, 153 28, 30, 31, 33–39, 41, 46–48, World Order (Kissinger), 16, 39 70, 71, 74, 77, 78, 81, 82, 84, Wright, Erik Olin, 60 97, 103, 110–113, 117–120, WWII, 30, 34, 101, 154, 158 137–139, 141, 144, 145, 147, 149, 150, 153, 155, 159 Westphalian, v, vi, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, X 15–20, 22–27, 30–38, 41–43, 45, Xinjiang, 36 46, 50, 52–57, 64, 72, 82–87, 90, 96, 99–103, 105–109, 111, 112, 117, 120, 129, 134, 135, Y 137, 139–141, 143, 145, 146, Yemen, 20, 32, 81, 96 149, 150, 154, 166 YouTube, 118 What is Money (book), 100 WhatsApp, 81, 106, 117 Wikileaks, 118 Z World Bank, 16, 48, 50, 89, 92, 137, Zimbabwe, 102, 105, 154 155 Zuckerberg, Mark, 59, 60, 65, 67