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




Perhaps an evolutionary approach would be best?

Home Forums Research Law and Politics Perhaps an evolutionary approach would be best?

This topic contains 3 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of DanB DanB 5 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #806
    Profile photo of MikeyB
    MikeyB
    Participant

    What I mean is that perhaps it would be better to begin seasteading with the help of a government body and slowly evolve into something else. My line of thinking is this: It may be beneficial to enlist the help of an agency like NASA to help test certain concepts namely large groups of people living in relative isolation and completely dependent on technology. To me the whole idea of seasteding is similar to what science fiction has described as space stations and the like. Perhaps approaching the topic of seasteading as if it were a terrestrial type of “space station” would be beneficial in that it would help get the seasteading idea built. If it were sold initially as a research initiative it would be less threatening to governments and they may even help built it as it could provide useful data for future space-based outposts etc. If the idea becomes popular and once the technological requirements have been perfected there may be a case for the existing seasteads to become somewhat autonomous much in the way this site envisions. I have found that, both socially and politically, gradual transitions are far more palatable than abrupt changes. Let governments, and their populations, get used to the idea of large groups of people living off shore before those people go and declare themselves independent and whatnot. I’m assuming that seasteading is not intended as a provocative movement but one of exploration and ingenuity. In that sense it is very much like a space station. As a research outpost it would not be provocative and may be able to depend on a national navy for protection until the details of its existance are worked out. I foresee a time where these ‘outposts’, with hundreds or perhaps thousands of residents, one day declare themselves independent from whichever nation state has previously sponsored them but by that time the concept of a seastead will have found a place in the public psyche and the transition to autonomous rule would thus hopefully be peaceful.

    #4835
    Profile photo of Thorizan
    Thorizan
    Participant

    The concept of seasteads on these boards is all about research and finding the best ways for living in a system of limited resources, so I think there is definitely something with your approach worth looking into. Delibrate steps tend to be best ones to take. As a mentor of mine said recently, “If you don’t know where you are going, the solution isn’t to speed up.” A point to ponder, at least. Thank you for your thoughts.

    #4916
    Profile photo of libertariandoc
    libertariandoc
    Participant

    Most of the research NASA is doing on similar problems (eg the Mars missions) is done by volunteers, with very little assistance from either academic institutions or the government.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashline_Mars_Arctic_Research_Station

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Desert_Research_Station

    As far as large populations completely dependent on technology, look no farther than any large city. What do you think would happen to (for example) NYC if the water system failed for 24 hours?

    #4925
    Profile photo of DanB
    DanB
    Participant

    I like the gist of this idea. Given how much money is being thrown around by the US govt. these days, it should be possible to them to pick up the tab for some seasteading research.

    1) I’m sure the DoD wants floating offshore military bases that are cheaper to construct than aircraft carriers

    2) I’m sure the DoE wants research on offshore wind power generator setups (there’s another thread about this).

    3) Maybe FEMA would like to be able to rapidly set up housing and facilities near hurricane-ravaged areas.

    4) Refugee asylum zones. The feds probably want somewhere to put refugees that doesn’t allow them to get into the country, but doesn’t require them to be sent back to Libya/Egypt/Pakistan where they’ll be tortured. I think this is an even bigger problem in Australia. See http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/arp/faqs.html

    5) CubaStead. Set up a seastead off the coast of Florida for Cubans fleeing from Castro. That might be popular in Florida, which is a key swing state.

    6) Humanitarian refuges for Africans. There’s a big dillemma in foreign aid which is that you want to help people in e.g. Zimbabwe, but you can’t give money to Zimbabwe because it will just be stolen by Mugabe and used to pay off his cronies. So you set up a seastead off the coast and send the money there instead. Could maybe get Bill Gates to help with funding.

    Just brainstorming here. The key is to get someone else to help fund the prototypes.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.



Posted on at

Categories:

Written by

Blog/Newsletter

Donate