Bitcoin Forum

Of nauru of course =P

But seriously if just 10,000 libertarians could afford to purchase citizenship there than we could take over the government (since it has a population of less than 10,000 we could outvote everyone). Peter schiff as secretary of the treasury. David friedman could sit on the supreme court. just imagine. What the heck are we waiting for. Everyone contact your favorite big name libertarian and pitch this idea. I couldn't just start a crowed funding project and get anyone to sign up, im a nobody, but if we could get doug casey behind it who knows how much we could raise with crowed funding + a big name.

Just think of it like the free state project except instead of taking over the city council we could take over a sovereign state.

of course the elite on nauru surely value their position and so would only allow us to take over their island if we payed more than a fair price for it. Really it would just be a little bit of a trick, they sell us citizenship and then we vote them out so really its just an underhanded way of getting them to sell the island. But we may be able to raise more money than you would at first expect for the aforementioned reasons so who knows, and your account would only get dinged if we raised enough to convince them to sell. And just look how much has been raised just to get krugman to debate murphy, imagine how much we could raise for the cause of buying our own totally legit sovereign nation. And if the crowed funding goal goes through you actually get something, you get citizenship to another country, even if we dont manage to take over the government that would have value in and of its self to most libertarians.

bump

cmon guys this is a great idea. Don't leave me hanging.

Nauru doesn't' have open immigration policy.

Seasteading is more realistic.

im suggesting that we crowed fund an initiative to buy citizenship in bulk.

Unfortunately, there is something called "patriotism", you know. They will not sell.

There are people who work full-time on this problem, for years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patri_Friedman

Such simple ideas as "buying citizenship" were analyzed by them thousand times. It's not feasible.

Oh yes they do sell. "Nauru had sold about a thousand for a reported $1500 each."
Interesting read about Nauru http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2013/1-2/the-naughty-nation-of-nauru (http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2013/1-2/the-naughty-nation-of-nauru)

Much easier will be using some SR stuff to build your own libertarian reality around you  ;D

Lets say we offered them 10,000 per person for 10,000 immigrants. That would be a single bulk payment of 100million dollars. They have a total gdp of 36 million. Holy crap yes they would accept that offer. And i would gladly pay 10000 if i knew for a fact that we would have a population of majority libertarians, and crowedfunding could ensure that we would only have to pay if all the funding was raised. It cant lose! (unless the us government nuked us but there are good reasons to expect they wouldnt)

sure it is now, but it wouldn't be dull for long if all of us moved there! Surely true freedom is worth more to you than the cost of a little sun burn.

Money?

For many people from South America or Africa, even food would be sufficient ; )
This is not a problem.


I still think, however, that seasteading is better: they have existing organization, legal research teams, ect. No seastead currently exist, but many people are already committed to this cause; so this is simpler than starting from scratch.

http://www.seasteading.org/

http://blueseed.co/

bring your wives?

sea steading doesnt seem as simple as land steading to me.

Huh.  Considering the world's about 70% water, seasteading seems like a neat idea.

What happens when your city springs a leak, tho?

Blueseed needs "only" 20 million $ (148 000 BTC) to start.
And they claim to have profitable business model.

I support the idea of libertarians moving somewhere remotely. Especially if it is so remote that I will never be there.  ;D

Oddly enough, I agree with you. In particular the part about you never being there.

I very strongly respect your right to get to gather with other authoritarians to create your hierarchical authoritarian paradise. I'm very glad to hear that you extend a very similar respect to me!  ;D

i live by the rule of doubling my expectations. if i calculate that i will need 20 minutes to get ready in the morning i wake up 40 minutes early =P cuz there is always something that you didnt think about. Still 40million doesnt sound that bad. Any how many people they expect the stead to be able to hold? or more specifically the expected price per capita?

So everybody is happy.  ;)
FYI: This is actually called pogo anarchism.

On a serious note I am not really what you call an authoritarian, I may be a traditional anarchist, I have not exactly figured that one out, I just see Libertarianism as hypocrisy.

No, not quite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_Pogo_Party_of_Germany

Not really at all, in fact.

You haven't visited their site it's much more accessible in German though. As for Libertopia that would be quite close to the "Gewalt Erlebnis-Park" (violence theme park) as I can practically imagine. :P

thats fine we can take on the debt but they would have to sell us the island for relatively less to offset that cost.

So you believe that a society that was predicated on the most fundamental notion of libertarianism which is that the initiation of violence is unacceptable would be a particularly violent place? that's like saying that you expect commune X to be one of the highest consumer of beef per capita in the world because its comprised entirely of vegans.

I just think that the rigid definitions of ownership and social contracts will get in the way. Any squatter knows more about ant-authoritarianism than you guys.

Which one of our two principals do you dislike? the method for original appropriation which is homesteading or the method of transfer which is voluntary exchange?

I just told you.

i guess im just not all that bright then, i hope that you will be patient with me. i dont understand how that answered my question. unless you mean to say that you dont believe in the consept of property in general?

You are close.
The concept of property is inherently tied to the application of force, or if you will lack thereof when one instance has been accepted. This is what you call power, the potential application of force.

I think your English broke.

"or if you will lack thereof when one instance has been accepted." ???

Well it's not my mother-tongue.

Application =/= initiation

That's what fighting kids say too once you stop them.

Let me make it simple for you, with a concept as old as Rome:

Vim Vi Repellere Licet

Yeah that makes it sound more romantic.  :)

What was your first?

German

cool story?

Couldn't agree more.

But ElectricMucus , yes property rights imply at least the threat of the application of force to enforce that property right. If you have ethical objections to that you must be a communist :)

Thesis: Property is something natural and God-Given.

Antithesis: There is no property, it's an illusion.

Synthesis: Property rights don't necessarily have to be tied to individuals, but can also apply to collectives (collective property rights aka communism). But the collective could also be of size 1, an individual. There is an intuitive understanding among human beings what is someone's (or a group's) natural possession, what is just and what is unjust property (e.g. large unproductive amount land owned by aristocrats, while folks around have no land and starve, would be felt as unjust and detrimental to the further development of this society). Such property would be disputed; thus, in general, upkeep of large property is not free, as it would have to be defended by its inconsiderate owners. Compensation would have to be spent on guards. This essentially means there's corrosion or depreciation of land property just like with most natural goods. A more civilized implementation of this fact would be some kind of land tax. If we don't trust a government to collect tax, a more decentralized way of collecting and redistributing unearned wealth would have to be found.

or just general respect among a society for libertarian principals.

The only reason aristocrats have ever been aristocrats is because the public believes that they are aristocrats. Sometimes wealth is justly acquired and sometimes it is unjustly acquired, but always it is a constant that property rights are a reflection of the beliefs of individuals, nothing more. If i were to just run out into the street naked screaming i own the whole world would that make the whole world my property? why not? because no one would take me seriously. We could have a society where an aristocrat claiming that he owns some big plot of land somewhere that he has never touched would seem equally as ludicrous as the afore mentioned example with me naked in the street.

Quick question:

Wouldn't the existence of a president imply there's a strong national government, which would go against libertarian ideals?

Thinking it all boils down to the question: Will Nauru once taken over by 10,000 libertarians actually be (and continue to be) a liberal state - or will it automatically develop into a less liberal state based on egoistic human nature which inevitably leads to abuse of power sooner or later?

But. This. Is. One of the core mistakes of Marxists/socialists. Or perhaps this "only" leads to one of the greatest mistakes. Indeed there is very strong intuitive understanding what possession is "natural" or "appropriate" or "unjust". Everyone has such feeling. But... somehow, each single person has it different.
There is no single "objective" fair distribution of property which all people will feel as right and natural. There is not even some "reasonable interval" which everyone will intuitively perceive as right. In the extreme case, hoarder of millions can feel as much as robbed as poor hungry guy when someone forcefully takes bread from him. And both of them have exactly the same right to feel so. And property of both should be protected by the same principle to the same extent.

Property of aristocrats gained not by voluntary trade, but by applying force, violence or threat of such is of course something completely different.

i think the island is so small that will make it so that we have a real serious effect on the politics, unlike in developed nation states. Is there someone among us capable of casing the ring into the fires of mt doom? i really dont know, maybe but maybe not. I think i would do it, of course you have no reason to think that i would do it. But maybe if we elected the staff of the mises academe to all of the positions of power they would be like me, of course maybe they wouldn't. Hard to know but it seems to me worth a shot. the internet changed things.

B

Money would still rule the minds.

No matter what path libertarians might take to get to their desired freedom destination, its going to take a lot of time and work. Why not join the over a thousand who have already moved and started doing the work, and become a participant in the Free State Project (http://freestateproject.org). We have a port for those who want to build a seasted, lots of folks already getting elected and starting to make real change, a lot of folks who are opting out of the system altogether, and more coming all the time. We also have one of the longest running weekly bitcoin meetups as well as several bitcoin businesses.

If you do join, please put down Ron Helwig as the person who referred you so I can get a Golden Porc award  ;D

Nauru? Check it out on Google Maps, and read about it Wikipedia. The place is a dump--80% of the island is an abandoned open-pit mine. I suggest you choose somewhere more appealing.

cmon guy, the same reason why its a dump is the reason why we might actually be able to afford to buy it. Sure its ugly now but just close your eyes and picture it with sky scrapers so tall that they dwarf the hong kong sky line. Imagine a city that is taller than it is wide.

Imagine that city disappearing in a burst of white-hot light.

haha oh wow.  :D

ah it's that island, i heard about the obese island phenomenon...

i'm afraid we'd bring even more wealth to this island already debauched enough by the disruptive and invasive western fast food culture  :-[

"We"?

I didn't think you were part of the libertarian crowd here.

those who ain't with you must be against you, right?

Well, the thread is entitled "if 10,000 libertarians moved to Nauru," and you've been against me so many times it's hard to think you're with me now. ;)

right we would have to formalize a plan and buy marketable citizenship in bulk but it would appear that nauru might just consider selling the sovereignty of a small part of the island. apparently they have been talking to wirtland about this. This would simplify the process a great deal.

Down

new hampshire will just have to be a stepping stone to our first legitimate seastead.

I view it as a stepping stone to establishing an economy external to the state, just as bitcoin is.