The Practicality of Creating A Nation

slayerment

slayerment

CrowdFreedom.com
Sep 5, 2007
766
33
0
Los Angeles, CA
www.slayerment.com
TL;DR: Is it possible to raise money to purchase land to create a new nation?

So I have been thinking for a long time now how to actually bring humans to the next level of evolution: namely, a free society with responsible individuals acting in cooperation without force. From my research an Anarcho-capitalist (Ancap) society definitely seems like the best bet, and I don't think that I am alone in my beliefs. Some form of Ancap seems like the philosophical conclusion when one researches economics, government and history. As people grow more educated in these topics they almost always lean more libertarian and anarchist.

So I am curious how feasible it is to actually accomplish an Ancap society. All around the world we have societies acting under force through governments but we don't have any acting under complete cooperation through private property. The force concept is outdated and it is time to move to the next step.

Now, most people probably aren't ready to participate in a free society, I get that. Most people don't want freedom. But this society doesn't have to be for most people. This society only has to be for people who are able to take care of themselves on their own and who are able to participate cooperatively with other humans. There are plenty of people who do want to live in a society without rulers and this society is for them.

There are obviously people trying to do some type of thing right now:

And it has been going on for all of human history. People have always created new nations. Nations rise and nations fall. But as a whole I think each new nation moves the human family forward. I think Egypt, Greece, Rome, Europe and America have all moved the human family forward with each new iteration of society building upon the past, for the most part. And we all know this world is well overdue for the next thing.

So my question is: how practical is starting a new nation? Is it possible to pull off a new nation that stands apart from all the other nations of the world in that it is without rulers? What would need to take place to create such a nation? Let me share some of my thoughts on this issue and I'm sure most of you will have something to add. I am in no way an expert, I am just sharing my thoughts to get a dialog going.

Goals

  • Provide a free society for people to move to
  • Prove a better people organizing model for other nations to adopt
Challenges

  • Financing
  • Location
  • Defense
Overview

My overall thought is the nation would need to be completely outside of any type of government. Since I'm pretty sure all land on this planet is pretty much owned by a government I would think it would need to be purchased. America purchased a large portion of America from the French in the Louisiana purchase for $15,000,000. Obviously that was back then and things are different now, however, purchases of land do happen. In this modern day I would think the price would be in the billions. Is it possible to raise enough capital to purchase a section of land in a more remote area like say Africa or maybe South America? I would think everything has a price, including land. I would think there are plenty of wealthy individuals who would be more than happy to invest in a project like this granted it was thoroughly planned out and realistic.

Even if land couldn't be acquired with direct ownership I would still think there would be some type of way to work a partnership out or some type of contract with a graduated scale where interest increases as profits or results are realized.

(continued in next post)
 


Topics

Property

Private property would be at the core of this nation. Property would be owned by the shareholders who raised the money for the project. Property would be split up as they saw fit and control would be designated as they saw fit. They would also agree upon the terms with the existing nation(s) on how this ownership would work. Initially the property owners would probably enforce their own rules, which would probably lean towards common law and Libertarian principles. Property would be operated as property owners saw fit. Majority would probably work towards creating cities capable of meeting the needs of the citizens.

People

I think the quality of people in a nation are the most important part. Low quality people will bring down any nation. High quality people will uplift any nation. This is a part that I think would be tricky at least initially with a free society. I really don't think you can have low quality people while setting up a free society. Call me biased, but I think you need entrepreneurial-type people in setting up a society with our current nation-state paradigm. It would be too compelling for lower quality people to want to immigrate into a new, prosperous society and drag it down.

So I think initially, and contractually, it may be favorable to only allow certain people in. The aim would obviously be to not have any government and allow everyone to do whatever they want to do. If the world was already operating as a free world I think this could be done. But since the world is not free I think you would have to have some way to keep low quality people out and only allow high quality people in. By high quality I mean entrepreneurial, self-reliant people who have a basic understanding in economics, philosophy, government and history.

Criteria for the type of people allowed in would be set forth by the property owners.

Location

I think the most important part of location is that this area is independent of any other nation. How this is accomplished is the tricky part. And maybe it's not done all at once. Maybe is starts out as a partnership that is eventually bought out.

How feasible would it be to raise capital to buy a portion of land from some more remote area such as South America or even Africa? Are you able to buy land here? Would you have to work some type of deal with the government in control here? Would the Queen of England want her share and try to subvert you through MI6 and the CIA? Would you need to defend yourself at the nuclear level if necessary?

These are all questions that location brings about. I think it could be done at the ocean level, but scale and technology make this seem a bit tricky at the present moment. I think it would be better to have an actual area of land with the possibility of basic farming and other industrial economic cornerstones as a foundation.

Defense

It realistic to go straight to Anarcho-capitalism cold turkey? In other words, is it possible to be the lone Ancap society without having some type of military threat? I know this has been debated over and over again and there are plenty of arguments on both sides. At the end of the day, if an Ancap society is remotely successful it threatens those governments in power and they will do everything they can do destroy you. They may not be gaining much by taking over your land, but they are losing a lot by you taking away their slaves.

I would think based off our current situation of existing governments with huge armies the defensive aspect would be one of the greatest challenges. There are a few ways to look at this.

For one, an Ancap society is going to be the most technologically advanced. The people there are going to be smart and if necessary they would be able to possess the most powerful weapons as they would be the ones who create them. Having some type of Nuclear weaponry makes it a lot more intimidating for anyone to mess with you. Could a new Ancap society have some type of big time weapon like a Nuclear warhead? Something like this may be necessary to keep away the threat of a major nation.

On the other hand, would an internal militia work similar to how it was done with Revolutionary America? I tend to think that this would not work in the present day. I understand that you are usually better off defending your own land, but I just don't think an Ancap society would stand a chance without some type of serious Nuclear weaponry.

Law/Courts

Law would all be handled through common law and courts would be private. Disputes would be handled as businesses and people best see fit. Private courts would operate on whatever creative methods they could devise to handle disputes.

Police

Police would all be private. Enforcement of disputes would be handled non-violently and people unwilling to abide by the property owners would be boycotted and cut off from any further participation with said property(s) until retribution is made.

Education

Education would all be private. Focus would be on teaching entrepreneurship and self-responsibility. I would think education would be the high-point of this society and I suspect children would come out with very little brainwashing and very high creativity and ethics.

Money

Money would be completely open. People can use whatever money they want to use. I don't foresee any real issues here.

Economy

We are not looking to go back to the stone age, but certain industries like agriculture are an essential part to our present day economy. By having the basics under our own internal control makes us less reliant on other nations. Ideally we would just trade and do our own thing, however, it would be in the best interest of more powerful groups to cut us off from trade on more essential things. So I would think being as independent on other nations as possible would be the best foundation for an economy. Obviously this is not entirely possible.

As a starting nation the economy would have to rely mostly on importing all the foundational items such as food and clothing and would export intelligence in the form of technology, science and things of this nature.

Taxes

There wouldn't be taxes. Funds would be rendered through people voluntarily supporting the property owners through services of their liking. Funds would be procured through whatever creative means property owners saw fit.

Leadership

So I'm obviously not in favor of any form of control or leaders, however, in the starting phases I think there must be some form of leadership, due to the current state of the world. I don't think you can just set up shop as a completely Ancap society without somebody coming through and destroying you either overtly or covertly. I think there would have to be some type of leadership team in place initially that would perhaps dissolve when certain contractual milestones or obligations are met. The leaders, would essentially be the property owners.

I would think this team would operate the same as any other company board. You would have a group of investors and executives who would lead the property as it develops and minimize issues as they see fit. As the nation progressed and certain milestones were met eventually these leaders would be contractually obligated to step down from power and assimilate from their positions into society with everyone else, or perhaps they would continue to maintain their property and sell off portions as new opportunities arose.

Summary

So those are some thoughts I've been mulling over in my head. This would operate pretty much like an anarchist society, although there might be a few temporary caveats in place such as only allowing certain people in, perhaps certain defense measures and other things decided on by the property owners.

This post is not as much to say how it should be, but rather to open up a dialogue and allow other people to inject their own ideas. I think with enough people contributing their creativity to this problem we would be able to work out some type of a solution. If there is some type of interest I would be happy to facilitate a formal website designated to the purpose.

So what do you say? Sim City Planet Earth anyone?
 
Seasteading. Been working on it for a while. Not the nice looking unrealistic seasteading.org crap but something that is affordable and realistic. Will post a thread about it once I have more details figured out, gotta do some calculations first.
 
Check out **ALL** of the videos from the first seasteading.org conference.

There is a ton of material in there related to the history of new country projects, considerations etc.

It's basically exactly what you're talking about, done by people who are experts on the topic.

You'll learn about international law too.
 
slayerment said:
People
Click to expand...

No physical land will do because of the "people" problem. The general population is dumb as dirt and freeloaders exist everywhere and the only way for this to work is to completely start from scratch ... you'd have to pull a Moses and exterminate everyone to have any chance for a thriving society.

slayerment said:
Defense
Click to expand...

rocks and spears -> iron age -> bronze age -> gunpowder -> nuclear -> lazer defenses

Having a nuke in your utopia would cause war to be declared immediately. The only possible way to defend is to use tech or bribe every country that comes knocking.
 
Slayerment, if I don't have you on skype, we should hook up (I have a new skype). A second John Galt type project is going up in Chile (the first was in Argentina) and there are probably things you can learn from their challenges and models.
 
Consider reading some academic articles about privatized education. Costs are pretty heavy, and the results vary widely. Although it may not be a problem as children of such minded individuals would be of a different caste.
 
Serious questions,
who pays for infrastructure?
Privatized police force, what's their system of accountability?
 
guerilla said:
Slayerment, if I don't have you on skype, we should hook up (I have a new skype). A second John Galt type project is going up in Chile (the first was in Argentina) and there are probably things you can learn from their challenges and models.
Click to expand...

Got some links please? Sounds interesting, couldn't find anything on Google.
 
I've contemplated this sort of thing since I was a kid, it's nice to know there are other, uh, little people, who contemplate such things as well.

I think you have the right hook on things though. We've certainly reached the point where our natural evolution can take us no farther without complete destruction, and we must, for the first time as a species, choose our evolutionary path.
 
Nations are fictions. Try to avoid even using that language. Trust me, the monkeys aren't going to understand ancap because you called your project a nation, so there is no side benefit to adopting statist teminology.

I think you'd do better to avoid problem solving (not your job, it's the market's job) and work on a business plan where you can obtain land, and you can enforce non-aggression. Enforce, that's open to interpretation whether it's by contract, force, ostracism, exclusion etc.
 
thelorax said:
Serious questions,
who pays for infrastructure?
Privatized police force, what's their system of accountability?
Click to expand...

To add to this:

People
Is there really away to fill a nation with only "high quality" people, especially with ambitious entrepreneurial types? Even tiny companies struggle to fill their ranks without the occasional douchebag. Sure, there are people who truly care about their neighbors and want everyone to do well, but won't sooner or later won't someone come along who wants more property, more power, more pussy etc? Hell, I think most people lean more towards the latter.

As for regulating behavior by voting people off the island, what stops it from becoming a political power struggle? If you want to do something that's against the greater good, you'll naturally start to build alliances with other people who have their own agendas. Then the people who were willing to share will be forced to form their own alliances just to protect what's rightfully there's.

Defense
It really does seem to fall apart here. How do you enforce your sovereignty as a nation-state with no army, no police force, AND no leadership?

Police
What does a "privatized" police force even mean? It doesn't sound like you're talking about a privately contracted force that enforces the rule of law...so then do they basically become private militias for their respective employers? Sounds like you're going to end up with a warlord situation. How do you non-violently handle disputes with people looking to take property by force?

Sufficient prosperity might be able to prevent full-scale physical anarchy, but what will stop the powerful from preying on the weak?

Courts
What do "private" courts mean? Sounds like courts essentially become a form of mediation/arbitration in this scenario. So how do you handle crime or tort? How would you enforce a criminal punishment (if there is such a thing). How do you handle judgment enforcement? More boycotting? If anyone can start their own private "court", who's authority would the boycotters defer to?

With private courts, what the heck is the "common law"? What is the common law without the rule of law? If anyone can be a judge as long as 2 people are willing to turn to them for guidance, how do you enforce binding authority?

Also, how do provide protection (however minimal) against the "tyranny of the majority", without some form of rule of law?

Education
This is probably the most realistic aspect of the whole plan. Still, the world's most successful nations all seem to have some sort of mandatory/free formal education. What about poor ppl who can't afford to educate their kids? How does that not become a tiered society after a couple of generations? You could argue causation =/= correlation, and you'd be right, but still...its a legitimate concern.

Money
Until people start gaming whatever de facto monetary system arises to replace the inefficiencies of bartering, but there really are no easy answers here, and much bigger problems to worry about...

Poverty
I'm not saying I'm a fan of welfare, especially not the kind you see in the US, but there is a reason all 1st world nations have SOME form of support for the impoverished.

I suppose if your society is rich enough, there will still be enough charity to make sure no one starves so that's not a concern (unless you have a recession).

But in a society with no law enforcement and no laws, what will stop someone who can't make an honest living from turning to crime? Do we just kick them out once they lose their job/their business fails? Maybe that would be preferable to welfare, but then who makes that decision? Who enforces it? Do you kick out their family too? As an enlightened society, do we allow homeless people, as long as we can somehow make sure they're not breaking any laws?

Taxes
Like thelorax said, who builds the infrastructure? I'm not a fan of taxes, but how do you manage a nation-state of any significant scale without east some nominal collection for infrastructure? Is every road going to be a toll road? Monetized through ads (lulz)? How does that work?

Even when you're living in a private condo you have to pay fees. If you don't pay...they kick you out. I bitch about condo fees all the time, but honestly I couldn't suggest a better system - no one is fixing the elevator or taking out the garbage or fixing broken common areas out of the goodness of their heart. You could force ppl to take turns, but then its just another form of tax - a much less efficient one.

And without a reserve fund, what do you do if something catastrophic happens...just hope everyone has enough money set aside to fix it? If a 1000 person building can't function smoothly without some sort of enforced contribution, how would a nation?

Leadership
What would stop someone powerful from seizing leadership eventually, whether through force, money or shrewd political maneuvering?
 
I've said for a while..........the seasteaders just need to buy a aircraft carrier from a nation that needs to get rid of one. Would work just as good as a floating island and has everything you need.


I'm also curious why someone doesn't buy off a tribal nation for some land. Most have no/few laws and are quite easy going.
 
@shocker, people aren't doing it because the ROI isn't there. Wait until healthcare in the US gets super poor quality in another generation or so.

Then you'll see boats sitting just outside the territorial waters, ferrying people back and forth with helicopters for day surgery.
 
schockergd said:
I've said for a while..........the seasteaders just need to buy a aircraft carrier from a nation that needs to get rid of one. Would work just as good as a floating island and has everything you need.
Click to expand...

Never heard you say it, thanks for repeating yourself


Up for bid: one aircraft carrier, lightly used, with ski-jump | DVICE

The good news, though, is that she's only expected to fetch about $1.5 million, making her easily justifiable to anyone with even a casual interest in yachting.
Click to expand...
Article is from about 2 years ago, but that sounds like a complete bullshit price TBH. Maybe $50M or so could make something happen.

Just grass in the deck ... make a park, some tennis courts, driving range and you've got something that I'd live on especially considering a dock could be built close to or attached that you could park a real yacht in. The rooms would have to be completely redone, no way anyone would live in bunks but I can see a remodel with 100 or so suites working.
 
erect said:
Never heard you say it, thanks for repeating yourself


Up for bid: one aircraft carrier, lightly used, with ski-jump | DVICE

Article is from about 2 years ago, but that sounds like a complete bullshit price TBH. Maybe $50M or so could make something happen.

Just grass in the deck ... make a park, some tennis courts, driving range and you've got something that I'd live on especially considering a dock could be built close to or attached that you could park a real yacht in. The rooms would have to be completely redone, no way anyone would live in bunks but I can see a remodel with 100 or so suites working.
Click to expand...

I dunno, the US sold a couple a few years back for 20 mil each, and they had engines :)

I'f I'm going to buy old military shit, I think I'd want this place:
http://www.bornrich.com/secret-submarine-base-sale-175-million.html
secret_submarine_base_for_sale_at_175_million_jfsqd.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom