Silicon Valley billionaire funding creation of artificial libertarian islands

I would prefer for them to collapse internally but I'm not too picky.

Nope. I was never trying to say they would be.

I don't know. They do have ensure the host survives. If they don't and do land then they will have to fight a civilian militia which may be able to fight off pirates (depending on their level of weaponry). That said, no billionaire is going to hang around.

 

Are you 12?

Freeloaders would most certainly be dealt with. It wouldn't be like the USA where people are encouraged to be lazy and then rewarded when they are. It would be a country where everyone supported themselves.

 

Do you think the founders of Europe are rolling in their graves on the foundations of their civilizations? Probably, but see you missing the key ingredient. Nations shouldn't be bound to the past. We should at the past and take caution on the steps towards of our own future and make sure we make no mistakes on screwing future generations but shouldn't be bound to the past.

Nations and People should always strive to be greater than the previous generations. How you get there is your own direction. I'm not saying follow me because I'm a Messiah,I'm not. I'm saying you must use your hands and heads to get out of your present condition. All political parties failed to realize that.

But that is my idea. I hope they really think this out, but then again most of these billionaires never put in a real day of work on anything. If they did, they would be building the rig themselves. But still I wish them the best of luck.

 

But the rich are already able to support themselves. The poor have to work. And isolating them on an artificial island built by the rich, to the rich's specifications, where all the power is held by the rich is a recipe for the enslavement of the poor.

 

The boy doesn't understand that there already is a real libertarian island. It's call Cayman.

 

You guys keep getting stuck on the billionaire thing. And then, if you aren't rich you must be a poor slave. Good grief.

I'd say if they accepted citizens to seastead they would have to qualify in some way or another. I don't think they would want to accept people who didn't want to work, had no ambition, or in general were liberals. So I don't think you have to worry.

 

They don't have to ensure the host survives if one attack is enough to net them enough to live off of for the rest of their lives.

 

So even the rich would be forced to work in Seastead? I doubt it.

These will turn into nothing more than mini-Dubai's: rich overlords importing in foreign workers and than treating them like veritable slaves.

 

That is true but one must be fairly certain of those gains given the risks, especially if the island is far from one's home.

 

Why do you still keep thinking that only Somalis are pirates? You don't think organized crime in Europe, Asia, or the Americas will want to hit these places?

 

Yes, they will want to hit these places. Do you think billionaires will not consider that? That they will not hire bodyguards? How do you propose that organised gangs in Europe or the U.S. arrange a flotilla to land in this location?

The reality is that the Randys will be saved by the U.S. or others and then will claim independence. If big business can get the U.S. to topple governments for mining rights or to fund paramilitaries for cashcrops then they will have no problem getting the U.S. (or another govt) to covertly save them.

I don't know what the issue is however, it will merely be a holiday resort. A kidnapping would be the best way to go.

 

This is like a billionare's version of sim city I think.

 

Actuallly, it's less likely to be populated by the wealthy because those with more wealth tend to prefer not to be crowded together. More likely it will be entrepreneurs who have enough money for the fee (about $125,000 for small condo), perhaps have children they want schooled without government intervention, and who can work from anywhere in the world.

There are a great number of people involved in the seasteading project who have little or no money, but are hard workers and creative thinkers. They sponsor the Ephemerisle project every year, for instance, which I haven't been to (it interferes with some other events I attend) but many of my friends attend.

 

There is a great documentary series by Adam Curtis called All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace. It discusses the idea that machines would lead to utopia. Anyway, at one point they mention communes that were set up as prototype model societies. Well, they collapsed.

Now the two aren't comparable because of their particulars it does make for an interesting consideration. This project will face the problems of externalities, justice and (as covered) defense.

The main problem with such projects is that they are started by optimists who work doubly hard to ensure success but one cannot expect people to remain eternal optimists, or indeed for the next generation to be optimists.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see it go ahead, even just to learn from it. I expect it to fail, or to not be a 'real' community in the ways I outlined (i.e. tax haven/resort etc.) but I'm not an oracle.

 

Libertarians don't support slavery. They are against it to the core. I don't think you are getting all of this.

 

Europeans probably thought the same thing about the United States. Look how that worked out.

 

I would say there is a bigger difference between a country and a small community which relies on interpersonal ties. Furthermore the U.S. was flexible in that it changed laws. The U.S. of 200 years ago is not the U.S. of today. The point stands however, not all projects fail, but those who rely on idealism with no pragmatism more often than not, do fall.

 

I think you'll find self-made people pragmatic. And some countries are smaller than some of our States. Size isn't the problem. Billionaires aren't the problem, strict pragmatism isn't a problem, nor is empty idealism. The people putting this together understand success and can create something new without government approval. They will take what works and what doesn't they will invent for themselves.

Most countries rely on relationships with other countries. Any country can change their laws just as a seastead can.

 

Size does matter in this case. When everyone knows each other the interactions are qualitatively different.

The fact that they are mostly billionaires is also relevant as it changes how we have to interpret the results.

If the seasteads have to compromise too much then they are not libertarian and have failed in creating a libertarian society.

 

Libertarians also hate government intervention and parasites, yet you guys have made it clear that you would be willing to mouch of the US taxpayers in order to defend you version of Rapture.

 

Hang on, you do realise I am not a libertarian?

 

You're not the only one who has posited that governments could protect these little Randian paradises.

 

or as I like to call them...

Methlab Islands

 

Ah ok. I was saying that that is probably what would happen given the fact that billionaires tend to be in bed with politicians and that the U.S. and British armies (among others) have often been corporate goons.

 

If you're a sovereign nation you get into a military alliance with the US and its allies. There are numerous small island nations with wealth, yet the pirates don't seem to have overrun them.