1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar




Best Possible WORKABLE Solution

Home Forums Research Law and Politics Best Possible WORKABLE Solution

This topic contains 19 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of OCEANOPOLIS OCEANOPOLIS 3 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1170
    Avatar of cardgame
    cardgame
    Participant

    So I have read many different topics on this site since finding it and although the overall idea is a good one, the solutions are constantly being debated because there is too many philisophical, technical and legal issue to overcome if the intent is to create something NEW. I have looked at the idea of creating a new country/social civilization for about 3 years now and in every case there is a major obstacle to a NEW country.

    In this forums people have debated Floating of Fixed location. There are pros and cons of both but in the end the big con for each solution is no other country will be interested in having you exist. What do SeaSteaders have to offer? some kind of needed economic trade that you can’t get from somewhere else? no. What it does provide is a harbor for illegality even if the seasteaders don’t see it as such. SOMEONE WILL. Most likely the USA and then all bets are off. The high seas rules make fix positions almost a non-starter and floating make it almost impossible to conduct any kind of viable economy. Its really hard to buy from you if your address changes every day. Eventually people will just stop looking. And as I said a minute ago, what do Seasteaders have to offer that would make people seak you our for trade… nothing. So floating doesn’t work either, unless every seasteader is super rich and can just live off their interest payments. Of course that would eventually cause massive inflation and everyone would go broke thereby crushing the idea again.

    There was talk about no flag vessels and temporary flag of convience vessels. Obviously since you can’t get insurance for non flagged vessels, constructing one with investment besides your own is out of the question. Beside the fact that any ship (like the USA, Russian or Japan) can just show up and say thanks for the vessel, its ours now. A temporary flag of convience just leads you back to the previous issues of Fixed or Floating, plus it imposes the laws of the flagging country on you which again hampers economic growth and freedom.

    SO… the only real choice is your own country. But as I said, no one wants a new country so who is going to support your sudden creation of a new island by dumping dirt on a seamount or morring your barge to the same seamount. no one. You may ask why you need a country. Well if you want to flag vessels that operate under free market principles, state protection and laws that provide support for a wandering floating armada of homes and the possibility of any kind of viable economy, you have to have a country WITH LAND. Amazingly enough, an option exist to make this a reality. It called the UN Non-Self Governing Territory.

    The NSGT is a list of associated countries that have not sought independence but the UN and other nations WANT them to seek independence. That’s right the UN WANTS to help create a list of new countries. Most are not options like Western Sahara, but two do exist that could work for SeaSteaders. One is Tokelau in the Pacifc need Kiribati and American Somoa. The other one is St. Helena in the Atlantic need Africa. St. Helena, although the one with the better land and bigger area, is steadfastly ingrained into the british empire and the UK is not that interested in their independence. But Tokelau is a different story. A set of three Atolls with an indiginous population of rough 1,000 people is aligned with New Zealand. New Zealand wants them to be independent and the UN wants that too. In fact they have force 2 votes on the subject to get them to change their minds. BUt the Tokelau people have no economy to speak of and their only form of survivability is subsistance fishing and the money they get from NZ and the Aid from the UN. So why should they sever their ties to the their only source of income and wealth.

    But, if enough money, resources, people and potential economic growth were brought into Tokelau, then there could be a change in the decision of independence. The issue is gettin the Tokelau people to adopt a Libertarian Constitutional Republic as teh form of government, BUt that is just negotiations and money. If you can get that, then you have a country with LAND that can support an airport and a shipyard/port, and indiginous populace from which to develop an economic workforce, a state from whihc to flag floating and fixed seasteaders and protective laws that govern free trade and mobility around the seas. The atolls of Tokelau offer the homestead achor from which to expand and seek fortunes. Also, since the land exists it can be added onto ARTIFICALLY and count as part of the land.

    After what seems like years of talking and discussion going on in the forums here, this is the only real chance of establishing a new country and a new opportunity for freedom and liberty. It would be a lot easier to spend time with the Tokelau people and get them on your side of independence than fight the entire world of laws and national snobbery.

    Just a thougth (actually years of thought)

    #9171
    Avatar of xns
    xns
    Participant

    Seems to me you’ve missed out several important factors on why some of us are interested in seasteading. I.e;

    - Voting with your property

    - Rising sea levels

    - Dynamic infrastructure (cities that reorganize themselves)

    - Modular geography (Resizable countries)

    That and… are you suggesting we INVADE the natives of these places? Granted it would be relatively peaceful, but if these islanders wanted UN intervention/sovereignty they’d have asked for it. Either way, it’s a good workable solution to specific seasteading factors, but it’s I wouldn’t say it’s the best one possible :p

    King Shannon of the Constitutional Monarchy of Logos.

    #9175
    Avatar of i_is_j_smith
    i_is_j_smith
    Participant

    The issue is newness. We need to break free from the shackles of land and start something new…something fresh. This is a philosophical issue, I know, but an important one that I think often gets pushed into the background. Why chain yourself to three small atolls that are barely above water at high tide? Just because it’s easier? It’s still going to cost you millions upon millions of dollars. So why spend all that money moving into and sharing somebody’s old, dusty apartment when you can make your own new house and build it like you want it?

    It’s this tabula rasa that I stress so much. I think you underestimate how much of a pull that can be to people all over the world. You say seasteads have nothing to offer, but there are plenty of people who long for a fresh start. We just have to market to these people.

    I also think you overestimate how much existing nations will get all “up in our shit”. You anchor a large floating barge in the middle of the ocean and proclaim a new nation, and they won’t even care. They will only start caring when you start impacting their bottom line. So that means no drug trade, no terrorism, no interfering with commercial shipping, and above all else no tax or data havens. But beyond that they will just write you off as another crackpot and ignore you.

    And as I said in the other thread, I think you overestimate how easy it will be to walk in and change the entire Tokelau way of life so that it matches your own. They are very happy with the status quo, which is why they keep rejecting self-governing status. You say that getting them to accept your form of government is simply “negotiations and money”, but people are not rational beings. The Tokelauans are highly religious, very nationalist, and have a strong tribal culture. I believe it would be very difficult to convince them to accept a “Libertarian Constitutional Republic”.

    #9180
    Avatar of cardgame
    cardgame
    Participant

    1. It isn’t invading when you are invited and it becomes your country just as much as theirs. Think of it in terms of political asylum which Tokelau grants you citizenship.

    2. there are plenty of sea mounts within the Tokelau EEZ so spread out and find a place that doesn’t bother their (our) land. The point is there is an EEZ in which to spread out. there is a naation in which to FLAG vessels. There is a nation to offer protection from laws of the sea.

    3. I understand what the goal is. the problem is no country around the pacific including the US will be particularly interested in promoting the idea. So as utopian as the idea is, the laws of the sea, the UN and other countries are counter productive. If you want to see the dream come alive, establish a base from which to begin, THEN prove that the idea has merit, THEN get the UN and other to change laws, THEN you can have your utopia. Otherswise, you might as well reserve yourself to discussing this topic on internet forums for the foreseable future.

    #9181
    Avatar of J.L.-Frusha
    J.L.-Frusha
    Participant

    Tekelau is in another thread… BTW, that thread discussed buying it, cheaply, like the colonists did with the Native Americans, but with cash, instead of whiskey and beads.

    You seem to want the same thing. Something for nothing. Ain’t gonna happen.

    Look at the Tokelau debt GDP is 1/4-1/3 the national anual debt, AFTER the gimme-money. The only thing they have is native crafts, semi-wild pigs, web-domains for sale and 3 not-so-hot islands. Even their population is on the down-swing.

    Next problem with Tokelau is, it already ‘belongs’ to New Zealand, or some such. Yes, the UN wants them to self-govern, no, that isn’t happening. the Tokelauan people have voted it down, every time it comes down the pipe.

    Have to go for a swim, I guess(figuratively speaking). Choices seem to be: offer the same thing, cheaper; offer the same things certified organic(or green); start with a bunch of self-sufficient folks and build a community; offer places to do normally illegal things(pretty-well shot-down, considering)…

    Everyone seems to think it’s easy, or impossible. It won’t be easy, but it’s not impossible.

    I haven’t heard this option: Get allied with a good nation, as a territory. Guam and Puerto Rico come to mind, as does the various Carribean claims and many other places. Do I know how to do that? No. It has happened and could happen. Problem is the whole open-culture thing, with Anarchists yelling for nukes, others wanting their drug-dens, some suggesting various schemes based on medical proceedures(I include assisted suicide in this category), tourist traps and various things that are considered illegal and/or immoral.

    I say, worry about tomorrow, not some debatably decades away might be. Get Homesteads on the sea, first. Let that grow and be seen as beneficial, if odd. THEN worry about whether or not it first becomes a city, county, state or nation, when it’s big enough to actually be seen as those things. How many places are there, right now? Deal with that problem first. The rest will follow, in good time.

    Later,

    J.L..F.

    If you can’t swim with the big fish, stick to the reef

    #9184
    Avatar of i_is_j_smith
    i_is_j_smith
    Participant

    cardgame wrote:
    1. It isn’t invading when you are invited and it becomes your country just as much as theirs. Think of it in terms of political asylum which Tokelau grants you citizenship.

    Again, you assume that it will be easy to get invited. They have a good thing going, why would they change? To negotiate both parties must bring something to the table. What can you offer them…money? What do they need money for? They have everything they need at little or no cost to themselves, plus very strong cultural reasons for not changing. I don’t think you have anything they want.

    Are you gonna give each Tokelauan a million dollars? That’s $1.5 billion…do you know what an incredible seastead I could build for $1.5 billion?

    I understand what you are saying…latch on to a small developing country as a stepping stone to full seasteading. But I don’t think that stepping stone is required. Take all the money and resources you would spend on that stepping stone, put it into building a seastead in international waters, and declare statehood.

    #9188
    Avatar of Gentry
    Gentry
    Participant

    J.L.Frusha wrote:
    Problem is the whole open-culture thing, with Anarchists yelling for nukes,

    Pedantic I know, but why would anarchists want nukes? Or any form of militarism for that matter.

    #9191
    Avatar of J.L.-Frusha
    J.L.-Frusha
    Participant

    Gentry wrote:

    Pedantic I know, but why would anarchists want nukes? Or any form of militarism for that matter.

    Got this from Wikipedia, perhaps the second section section of the second def. means something? Generally acceptable as “down with everyone, but me,” works. Basically anti-governmental, so make yourself a threat to the status quo.

    Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, “without ruler“) may refer to any of the following:

    • “No rulership or enforced authority.”[1]
    • “Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder.”[2]
    • “A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder).”[3]
    • “Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere.”[4]

    Later,

    J.L..F.

    If you can’t swim with the big fish, stick to the reef

    #10187
    Avatar of safira
    safira
    Participant

    Why not start your own country in on a island that is in international waters?

    #10192
    Avatar of wohl1917
    wohl1917
    Participant

    Safira that are not claimed by some country some where. That’s why we’re into seasteading…

    < http://ocr.wikia.com/wiki/Oceanic_Citizens_Republic_Wiki>

    Avatar of Terraformer
    Terraformer
    Participant

    If you find a small island nation willing to let you, go for it. Another alternative is to democratically conquer a small island and push for independence – one of the Shetlands springs to mind…

    Seasteading is to Boat Living what Traction Cities are to Vandwelling – simply a matter of scale.

    #10252
    Avatar of OCEANOPOLIS
    OCEANOPOLIS
    Participant

    that was agreed long time ago that The Seastead will be an artificial floating island ——–> A.K.A, ” the territory” of a floating nation…..

    #10254
    Avatar of J.L.-Frusha
    J.L.-Frusha
    Participant

    OCEANOPOLIS wrote:

    that was agreed long time ago that The Seastead will be an artificial floating island ——–> A.K.A, ” the territory” of a floating nation…..

    Part of what’s happening is, it appears that there are several ideas that may work. They are neither mutually exclusive, nor truly compatible. Some of us want our own, individual space, where neighbors are a boat ride away. Others want massive constructs, floating cities, if you will. Yet others want communities that are like a mass of boats, tied together.

    All told, these 3 ways fit within a loose definition, that fits your description… There is no “wrong” answer to this, as time shall prove. Wrong approaches, yes. A raft made of reeds, or even an ancient Egyptian boat made of them, will hardly take the test of time… Now, if someone shows up at a massive construct, with that for transport, then it got them there…

    Until there is an actual example of these methods and any others, no one will know if it’s even “do-able.” Even then, it will take the right mind-set, to make each solution work.

    Better if we agree that there are many ways to get there and try to find the more practical ways, while hammering-out ways to make them work… The devil is in the details.

    Suppose me and mine have or little house on the ocean, some easily traveled distance from one of the larger methods… We want to go to town, have friends and do our trading somewhere… Does the ‘town’ want our business and friendship? Maybe we are providing food that isn’t being handled by the towns-folk…

    Would that I had a few hundred million to build the ones I think will work…

    Later,

    J.L.F.

    If you can’t swim with the big fish, stick to the reef

    #10258
    Avatar of i_is_j_smith
    i_is_j_smith
    Participant

    OCEANOPOLIS wrote:
    that was agreed long time ago that The Seastead will be an artificial floating island ——–> A.K.A, ” the territory” of a floating nation…..

    Agreed to by whom? Not me. I’m still nowhere near convinced that you will ever get anyone to accept a man-made floating artificial island or installation as “territory”.

    But I have started leaning back towards the “just proclaim sovereignty and see what happens” side. Not all the way there yet, but I can see the possibilities.

    #10259
    Avatar of i_is_j_smith
    i_is_j_smith
    Participant

    J.L. wrote:

    Better if we agree that there are many ways to get there and try to find the more practical ways, while hammering-out ways to make them work… The devil is in the details.

    It becomes a question of resources. Does it make sense for TSI to pursue all three methods of seasteading if not all of them are practical or viable? Shouldn’t we spend time deciding which of the three is the best approach and then sink all available resources into making that approach a reality? If we attack all three approaches at the same time it will spread out the already sparce resources we have available.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.



Posted on at

Categories:

Written by

Blog/Newsletter

Donate