Why did city-states fall out of fashion? You'd think that

>>2161688
You underrate the benefits of belonging to a larger network of urban centers, reaping the output of very large areas of farmland, mineral rights from all over, etc. All other things being equal, large nations outcompete small nations, simple as that.

>>2161716
Hong Kong and Singapore vastly outcompete everyone else in the region by a large margin, and they would not be in their current position had they been dragged down by China and Malaysia, respectively.

Similarly, cities have different political outlooks and different demographics. Current examples like London being pro-Remain and advocating for London visas after Brexit, or New York City voting over 80% against Trump make it clear that such cities don't resemble their countries politically, ethnically or culturally.

>>2161742
Safety from foreign agression is a benefit, even if it's protection from their self-appointed protector (e.g. Hong Kong prefers to belong to China than to be agressed on by China until it comes to belong to it anyway).

I stress material and historic motives against fleeting politcal, ethnical and cultural motives. Losing that EU cash will be a blow to London, but harming it's economic ties to the rest of the UK and it's national mythos would be bigger blows.

>>2161688
>Why did city-states fall out of fashion?
Because extensive Empires and other expansionist entities with vast resources under command blow them the fuck out.
>Muh Greece! Muh Greece!
Barely even held on versus Persia. BTFO by the expansionistic Macedonians.

>>2161742
Hong Kong is protected by China.
Singapore by multiple treaties, among them by ex-Britcucks.

They're both economic powerhouses but politically bankrupt. Hong Kong is a subject of a bigger state. Singapore can barely influence its poorer SEAsian neighbors.

>>2161742
>Hong Kong and Singapore vastly outcompete everyone else in the region by a large margin, and they would not be in their current position had they been dragged down by China and Malaysia, respectively.
Cut them off from their military treaties and protectors. Let's see how fast these cunts survive versus Nation states.

>>2161793
What about Venice? How did that corrupt parasitic hellhole live on for so long?

>>2161809
Great diplomats a superb navy and a naturally defensive place for a city state

>>2161809
Because their actual territory was much more than just the city during their height

>>2161688

Really mostly for national defense. New York City would absolutely be better off as an independent state in the same way Singapore is better off than Malaysia. But maintaining its independence would be difficult.

Being completely dependent on other nations for all your resources is kind of a bad thing.

File: Venezianische_Kolonien.png (92KB, 1206x796px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1206x796px

>>2161809
Venice was literally an empire. Also many Italian city states controlled more than just their cities.

>>2161809
Venice was actually considered a standard of civic virtue until the 16th century, and they were a more or less Netherlands sized country at that point anyway, so it hardly compares to Hong Kong or Singapore.
The republic was also never at any point a city state for that matter, since it started out as a federation of coastal towns banding together and the actual city of Venice (previously the fishing village of Rivo Alto) only became the capital a century after the republic (well duchy back then) was born.