Reading Alex’s argument about the hollowing-out of governmental authority, I am reminded of Richard Norton’s term a “feral city”, something he defines as a metropolis with over a million people in a state whose government has lost the ability to maintain the rule of law within the city’s boundaries yet remains a functioning actor in the greater international system.
In a feral city social services are all but nonexistent, and the vast majority of the city’s occupants have no access to even the most basic health or security assistance. There is no social safety net. Human security is for the most part a matter of individual initiative.
Yet a feral city does not descend into complete, random chaos. Some elements, be they criminals, armed resistance groups, clans, tribes, or neighborhood associations, exert various degrees of control over portions of the city. Intercity, city-state, and even international commercial transactions occur, but corruption, avarice, and violence are their hallmarks.
Read more here in the Naval War College Review.
Crucial to the term, I think, is the assumption that “ferality” can visit any city, even if for only for a few hours. Look at Copenhagen, a model of tranquility, wrecked by riots in 2006 and 2007.
