So much talk and 0 action, lets actually make a sovereign territory

[liberty90]

http://www.seasteading.org/

http://blueseed.co/

[1713867804]

1713867804

[1713867804]

1713867804

[1713867804]

1713867804

[manfred]

Stock take:

Vatican City: no
Monaco: no
San Marino: no
Tuvalu: no
Tonga: no
Pitcoin Islands: no
Marshall Islands: no
Micronesia: no
Kiribati: no
Iceland:  no
Nauru: unlikely*  no
Greenland: ?

Slab City:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vVCSUafFVI:  no
Freetown Christiania;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freetown_Christiania:  no
Principality of Hutt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Hutt_River:  no
http://www.wirtland.com/:   no feedback yet
http://chartercities.org/concept:   no feedback yet
http://www.seasteading.org/:   no
http://blueseed.co/:   no

*Nauru currently lacks money to perform many of the basic functions of government; for example, the National Bank of Nauru is insolvent.
There are no personal taxes in Nauru. The unemployment rate is estimated to be 90 percent, and of those who have jobs, the government employs 95 percent
Tourism is not a major contributor to the economy
In the 1990s, Nauru became a tax haven and offered passports to foreign nationals for a fee,
The inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) identified Nauru as one of 15 "non-cooperative" countries in its fight against money laundering. During the 1990s, it was possible to establish a licensed bank in Nauru for only $25,000 with no other requirements.
From 2001 to 2008, it accepted aid from the Australian Government in exchange for housing the Nauru detention centre. (reopend 2012)
There are no banks or ATMs in Nauru
Nauru had 9,378 residents as of July 2011.
The country is a member of the United Nations.
The Currency in use is the Australian dollar (AUD)  GDP 2006 estimate Total  $36.9 million
Nauruans are the most obese people in the world.
Nauru is the world's smallest republic.

[wachtwoord]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_nullius#Current_terrae_nullius

Well, I suppose we could colonize mars.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/123486-Mars-Colonization-Mission-Now-Taking-Applications

Enjoy

[Anon136]

Stock take:

Vatican City: no
Monaco: no
San Marino: no
Tuvalu: no
Tonga: no
Pitcoin Islands: no
Marshall Islands: no
Micronesia: no
Kiribati: no

Create country: no
Slab City:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vVCSUafFVI:  no
Freetown Christiania;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freetown_Christiania:  no
Principality of Hutt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Hutt_River:  no
http://www.wirtland.com/:   no feedback yet
http://chartercities.org/concept:   no feedback yet
http://www.seasteading.org/:   no feedback yet
http://blueseed.co/:   no feedback yet

Nauru??

Nauru currently lacks money to perform many of the basic functions of government; for example, the National Bank of Nauru is insolvent.
There are no personal taxes in Nauru. The unemployment rate is estimated to be 90 percent, and of those who have jobs, the government employs 95 percent
Tourism is not a major contributor to the economy
In the 1990s, Nauru became a tax haven and offered passports to foreign nationals for a fee,
The inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) identified Nauru as one of 15 "non-cooperative" countries in its fight against money laundering. During the 1990s, it was possible to establish a licensed bank in Nauru for only $25,000 with no other requirements.
From 2001 to 2008, it accepted aid from the Australian Government in exchange for housing the Nauru detention centre. (reopend 2012)
Nauru had 9,378 residents as of July 2011.
The country is a member of the United Nations.
The Currency in use is the Australian dollar (AUD)  GDP 2006 estimate Total  $36.9 million
Nauruans are the most obese people in the world.
Nauru is the world's smallest republic.

Lets back the backpacks!

Nauru wow i really like it! all the free state people should have moved there. I move to declare nauru as bitcoin island!

[BTCLuke]

This may be a long post, but I promise it's going to be the best one you've read this week.

Taking over any land that governments can reach is simply not going to have a happy ending. I'm sorry.

Let's say you crowdsource enough to flat-out buy land, with full soveriegn rights, from a poor country like Honduras or an island like Nauru...

Your first problem is that the other countries of the world won't recognize you as a country, and can sanction the hell out of you if not flat out murder you in your sleep without any consequences whatsoever.

Nations are most definitely an "old boy's club" like someone else here said before. They do not like competition in the least. They have a loooong history of simply invading the weaker nations and start-up attempts, if there is event the smallest resource there worth taking. Which brings us to the second, bigger problem...

Even if you have no resources whatsoever, and set up shop on an empty sandbar 1 foot above high tide directly on the equator in the middle of the pacific, you now face the problem of not wanting to be successful.

This problem will stop any variation of the "new colony" idea, even seasteading! Simply put, A completely free economy will rapidly become extremely valuable. -And then it's lunchtime, and you're the main course.

I was active in Seasteading for years. I even built some great little floating models and wrote some nice essays... & I thought if we could get far enough out, inbetween the continents so we weren't closer to any one big country, then we'd be safe enough, but then I started reading history and figuring out what the timeline of such a colony would look like.

The problem all boils down to success being a bad thing. You don't want to go out there to live like Gilligan, right? But if you succeed in building a capitalist society without paying taxes to another nation for protection, then you are doomed. You'll have become exactly what they would find most easy and most profitable to conquer.

Nations are simply evil and have no problems killing every last person on this settlement, EVEN ONE ON MARS, because their guns are bigger than ours and they really just don't like losing.

[myrkul]

This may be a long post, but I promise it's going to be the best one you've read this week.

I was skeptical. I shouldn't have been.

[manfred]

Now Iceland is the frontrunner to have Crypto money first. Good location, way better than Nauru people know and accept bitcoins and the pirate party already has a say about it in parliament.

http://falkvinge.net/2013/04/28/icelandic-pirate-party-wins-enters-parliament/

[benjamindees]

Of course decentralization is preferable, when it's possible to achieve goals in a decentralized way.  Sometimes it just isn't.  Sometimes it might be better to voluntarily band together for support.  But the dilemma then becomes "what is the line between voluntary and involuntary centralization?"

That was the entire insight of Keynesianism, and the reason the 20th century was marked by centralization and warfare.  Keynes said "sometimes it's better to band together when under attack," and a bunch of megalomaniacs interpreted this as "create constant attacks as a means of centralization and control."  So, that's what we got.

But the question isn't between centralization versus decentralization, per se.  It's between voluntary versus involuntary.

Look at Bitcoin.  I say that Bitcoin is a voluntary system and that individuals own and control their Bitcoins.  Some people say that Bitcoin is a democratic system and that ownership of Bitcoins is decided by the whim of the network majority.

Bitcoin was supposed to be decentralized.  Now it has a government-sanctioned foundation, and a de-facto client, and a registered trademark, and a single major exchange, and a group of "core" developers, and official spokespersons, and regulators and investors who sit around all day trying to make the price of Bitcoins go up so that they can cash out and pay taxes instead of actually using Bitcoins to trade and to build a real economy.

As long as we all agree that decentralization is the goal, and we recognize the threats to Bitcoin achieving that goal and agree that voluntarism is a pre-requisite to temporary or conditional co-operation, it comes down to a cost/benefit analysis for each of us with regards to how much, and what kinds, of centralization we are willing to tolerate.

[myrkul]

Of course decentralization is preferable, when it's possible to achieve goals in a decentralized way.  Sometimes it just isn't.

Name 3. Hell, name 1.

[benjamindees]

Of course decentralization is preferable, when it's possible to achieve goals in a decentralized way.  Sometimes it just isn't.

Name 3. Hell, name 1.

If you have a gallon of milk in your refrigerator, you relied on some degree of centralization to get it there.  It didn't come out of a cow in your backyard.  It came out of a cow on a big farm, and was processed and packaged in a big facility, and was carried through a big distribution network to a big grocery store operating on fossil fuels that came from a big mine or a big oilfield, protected and controlled by a big government with a big military, paid for by a big monetary system.

Replacing the monetary system doesn't change any of the rest of that overnight.

Because if it had come out of your backyard, you would have had to have foregone some other luxury in order to have achieved that.  Your entire standard of living is dependent upon some degree of centralization.  It's all around you.  Just open your eyes and look.

But, ultimately, you decide how much centralization you will put up with.

[myrkul]

Of course decentralization is preferable, when it's possible to achieve goals in a decentralized way.  Sometimes it just isn't.

Name 3. Hell, name 1.

If you have a gallon of milk in your refrigerator, you relied on some degree of centralization to get it there.  It didn't come out of a cow in your backyard.

I think you're mistaking the meaning of "decentralization" here, then. Division of labor still applies.
Yes, the cow lived at a farm, but it's not the only farm.
Yes, the milk was bottled at a plant, but it's not the only plant.
Yes, I bought the milk at a store, but it's not the only store.

I also relied on a great degree of decentralization in order to get my milk, and because it is so decentralized, the milk was cheaper than if it had all been produced on a central supply chain.

[Anon136]

http://www.seasteading.org/

http://blueseed.co/

these are both kinda dumb ideas i think. What we should instead do is like the free staters. Except we move to a very small sovereign state. One so small that we could easily take over the highest law of the land. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru with google maps. its SO tiny and remote. It has financial trouble so we could probably broker a pretty cheap bulk deal with the existing nauru power elite for citizenship. No begging and scraping around for international recognition of legitimate sovereignty, we would have our own totally legitimate internationally recognized sovereign nation.

Of course you can insert any nation similar to nauru who is REALLY small and will give the cheapest citizenship.

[Anon136]

Of course decentralization is preferable, when it's possible to achieve goals in a decentralized way.  Sometimes it just isn't.

Name 3. Hell, name 1.

myrkul read my last post. Do you want to help me organize a libertarian exodus to nauru so we can take over the government and vote in ron paul as president (just not of the united states). C'mon man we gotta do this! our 21 km2 plot of land will out shine the entire globe with the full might of true free market capitalism.

[myrkul]

Of course decentralization is preferable, when it's possible to achieve goals in a decentralized way.  Sometimes it just isn't.

Name 3. Hell, name 1.

myrkul read my last post. Do you want to help me organize a libertarian exodus to nauru so we can take over the government and vote in ron paul as president (just not of the united states). C'mon man we gotta do this! Our 21 km2 plot of land will out shine the entire globe with the full might of true free market capitalism.

That's actually what I'm afraid of. It will be great... while it lasts. Read Luke's post.

[btceic]

Does a large boat/ship in international waters count?
Or how about we purchase a defunct oil rig?

-----
Edited for spelling.

[Anon136]

Does a large boat/ship in international waters count?
Or how about we purchase a defunct oil rig?

-----
Edited for spelling.

I think we would be very well advised just to attempt to take over an established sovereign instead of trying to gain international recognition on an oil platform or a boat. check out nauru, its almost as small as a large boat and its internationally recolonized by pretty much every governing body in the world as a totally legit sovereign.

[btceic]

Does a large boat/ship in international waters count?
Or how about we purchase a defunct oil rig?

-----
Edited for spelling.

I think we would be very well advised just to attempt to take over an established sovereign instead of trying to gain international recognition on an oil platform or a boat. check out nauru, its almost as small as a large boat and its internationally recolonized by pretty much every governing body in the world as a totally legit sovereign.

Nauru, officially the Republic of Nauru and formerly known as Pleasant Island, is an island country in Micronesia in the South Pacific. Its nearest neighbour is Banaba Island in Kiribati, 300 kilometres to the east.

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

[Anon136]

Of course decentralization is preferable, when it's possible to achieve goals in a decentralized way.  Sometimes it just isn't.

Name 3. Hell, name 1.

myrkul read my last post. Do you want to help me organize a libertarian exodus to nauru so we can take over the government and vote in ron paul as president (just not of the united states). C'mon man we gotta do this! Our 21 km2 plot of land will out shine the entire globe with the full might of true free market capitalism.

That's actually what I'm afraid of. It will be great... while it lasts. Read Luke's post.

he makes a big error here. He says "without paying taxes to another nation for protection, then you are doomed" No one suggested not purchasing defense. But if we get to purchase it from any sovereign in the world than it will, technically, be being provided to us by a competitive market. We can simply fly a flag of convenience and probably pay out the fucking nose for it, but still it would be worth it.

plus in every other failed attempt that i know of it was not the same thing that i am proposing. a) it was in the past that everyone tried to create new sovereigns. b) it was before the internet, now the public can see government crimes and the people on this island would not be foreigners, they would be peoples relatives from all over the world.

also sorry i keep adding to this. We dont have to step on anyones toes. Its not like we would be a harbor for pirates, digital or otherwise. We wouldnt have to do anything more than make something awesome and sell it abroad to sustain ourselves. Import transistors and plastic export computers.

[btceic]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/25/Nauru_on_the_globe_%28Polynesia_centered%29.svg/1000px-Nauru_on_the_globe_%28Polynesia_centered%29.svg.png

[btceic]

http://www.howtobuyaprivateisland.com/starting-your-own-country.htm

"Can I start my own country" is frequently asked by people interested in private islands. Despite all the hopeful dictators and Kool-Aid drinkers out there, it's pretty difficult to start your own country.
Pirate Island

Islands are a natural choice for starting a country. Islands create a sense of autonomy and independence because their border is already clearly defined. However, there are no undiscovered or unclaimed islands on the planet. Every island on the planet falls under the jurisdiction of one country or another. And countries are naturally quite protective of their territories. You cannot buy an island from a country and claim independence anymore than you can declare sovereignty from your armchair inside a suburban bungalow.

However, you may be able to find a country that is so poor or so corrupt that it would surrender sovereignty over an island in exchange for cash. If you can find a spot that exists outside the territorial waters of any country, you could build your own island. Alternatively, you could create a floating city on a ship. A 'citizen' on a floating city in international waters could be a citizen of the world.

Cautionary Tales of Those Who Tried
sealand passport

People have tried to get around the endless problems of sovereignty by building their own islands, through sand reclamation or floating platforms, often ships. Regardless of where you build, or float, you will probably land in the hot territorial waters of one country or another. Building an island from scratch, like the failed World island project in Dubai, requires relatively shallow waters. If you're far enough offshore to be outside territorial waters, you will need an awful lot of sand (and money) to reach the bottom. If you should decide to take over a small island and create your own banana republic, be prepared to defend yourself against a large neighbouring country who will not take your invasion lightly.

Principality of Sealand
The Principality of Sealand, home to the Bates family since 1967, is a dilapidated and algae covered eyesore, 10 miles off the coast of Suffolk, England. Sealand's claims to sovereignty aren't recognized by any country, but Sealand is still managed (and defended with gunfire if necessary) by the Bates family as though it were recognized. In 1975, Paddy Roy Bates introduced a constitution, flag, national anthem, currency and passports to Sealand. In 2000, HavenCo was said to have established a secure offshore data haven on Sealand, intended to be the Cayman Islands of hosting. HavenCo's Acceptable Use Policy prohibited child pornography, spamming, and malicious hacking, but all other content was acceptable. After HavenCo collapsed, Sealand's government is building a new online casino expected to be open by 2012. Thirty employees would work in Sealand. We'll see.

Minerva Reefs
Claiming sovereignty over an island is nearly impossible, but that hasn't stopped a few people from trying in recent history. Libertarian millionaire Michael Oliver attempted to create a sovereign micronation called Minerva by reclaiming underwater reefs in the Pacific in the 1970s. The site was located about 400 miles south of Fiji and 250 miles west of Tonga. Oliver shipped in some sand from Australia and planted his flag. After Oliver had staked his claim by sending out a declaration of independence to neighbouring countries, Tonga responded to Oliver by dispatching an angry and armed envoy of Tongans to defend their turf. Minerva's flag was unceremoniously removed and Tonga laid real claim to the reef.