Don't buy an island, build your own!

[Yan]

Raymond, have you tried the idea yet?

I mean like gathering the bottles and such?

It would actually be a good way to get friends and family engaged on a experimental project, who knows, even making it factual if it works.

I personally doubt it would, but I say give it a shot and see what happens, otherwise you can only wonder.

A dream is no good if it is all you got, you must try to fulfill it to see if it works or not.

And there is no point with trying to convince you that to try to realise it might not be a good idea as I sense that being someone who is somehow related to micronationalism, you may be as stubborn as most of the micronationalist-related I got in touch with usually are.

So I say, go for it and find out.

That would be a true micronationalist path.

If it fails, at least you tried, and had some fun on the process and good memories to laugh about.

Because this is why I believe we are here, to have fun, not to try to chop eachothers dreams off, that would just be petty.

[J]

The real costs are associated with putting up a structure worthy of inhabitation. Not to mention stocking up on supplies of any kind. But ask yourself this question: would you really want to be thousands of miles from any major city/port? In the middle of the high seas all isolated on a remote little platform with very slow and expensive internet access at best.

[xon]

My opinion is that if you are willing to stop short of statehood and opt instead for remaning but a nation, you could just go the route of certain Indian tribes and religious communities in the United States and incorporate. You'd get all the rights a corporation gets. You'd be able to raise funds as easily as selling stock. Give the shareholders citizenship and you'd have a unique cooperative structure. Invest in hot properties and the stock market. Using the interest, build a magnificent "capital" out in Montana somewhere, complete with its own rules and regulations all within US law. There, you could have Internet polls to elect the "government officials" and adopt or reject referendi affecting inhabitants.

The corporation for the nation could operate more like a business than a government, at least in the areas not dominated by social issues. This would give it both more effectiveness and more flexibility. It would raise "taxes" by charging fees on services, but at rates that are competitive. There would be no reason reason why the nation could not also be for-profit. Profits would allow it to increase its "GDP" so that it could invest more and grow.

After accomplishing all that, and having at least decamillions in purchasing power, purchasing and operating an island as a privately-operated resort for corporate shareholders and non-shareholders alike would not be difficult. Such an island would be operated mostly as a tourist attraction. Anyone could book a hotel room and vacation there. The drama of a banana republic would most likely be nonexistant because it would be run like a corporation, with budgets to follow, deadlines to meet, and the goal of friendly customer service. It would be a paradise where wealthy shareholders would build their mansions so that they could experience an ultimate level of independent living.

Of course, most micro-nationalists want to start with proclaiming sovereignty and then build their empire up from there. This approach is has the appeal of seizing on the very odd chance that it might be possible due to the nature of politics at the local, national, or international levels. However, I think that his approach is less likely than the incorporation approach, when it does not take into account the incredible costs involved in setting up a new nation. Someone has to foot the bill. Even the administrative oversights that allow Sealand to exist do not give it financial freedom; the Sealanders have entered into many a business venture to improve their nation (and get richer as individuals). Also, though a nation, for example, Cuba,with many foreign nationals outside of its homeland might donate to support a change of regime there, micro-nations in general do not have these thousands to provide them moral and financial support, only a dedicated few.

[J]

Xon,

Finally, someone comes out and lays out an actual plan. Many existing states like Kuwait, Dubai and Singapore have "Sovereign Wealth Funds." Granted, most countries that have such accounts are petroleum exporting. Not to mention most actually are Sovereign and have a large degree of autonomy. This coupled with low or no real debt as a percentage of GDP, does help to keep taxes flat, low or at zero.

The trick might be to register a corporation in a stable offshore centre. It might also be to attract actual investors in a legal manner that can invest in such a company. The problem you automatically face are investors from the United States whom have great difficulties in investing in schemes originating in the offshore world. Aside from that minor detail, there is the credibility problem, the "blank check" company syndrome and many others to contend with. Generally, it helps to have a business background, or to know people with such a background that would be willing to promote such a project, if possible on contingency. Good luck.

[Yan]

Yes, at last a plausible possibility.

Could someone name some stable offshore centers?

And indeed, if you are not an american (or russian) citizen it seems that the possibilities to such enterprizes are much easier.

However, i believe if the idea is to found a nation is the people. There are two ways it seems, not just how much money you can come with, but also how many people are willing to take this enterprise with you.

In old times here in europe anyone who had a certain ammount of followers could claim the title of king and fight its way, or just establish oneself as such, what became harder to do once the concept of state and nationalism, that now seems to be decaying since we are entering an era of globalization.

So the idea of establishing a corporation on the best "Dune" style (the book, nevermind the movie) seem to be what globalization is creating.

So yes, a corporation is plausible.

That was really a good point.

But what shoud that corporation be based on? What would it sell? What would be its drive? Purpose? I dont think people would invest on someones ego only.

But it is plausible, I still remember when the US wanted to tax computers and Bill Gates threatened to buy an island on the pacific establishing a nation there and moving the corporation where no one there would pay taxes as they would be working for Microsoft, making the american government back down on its demands.

So what to do that could make people invest money on the idea.

[J]

I am very hesitant in naming any offshore centers. Americans do not benefit from the Offshore world. Except perhaps those that have assets worth protecting and the resources to defend usage of such shelters.

However, hypothetically, if I were say a citizen of Canada, I might be tempted to look into Nevis for example. Political independence is key. I wouldn't trust Bermuda or the Cayman islands. But yet many do and entrust them with hundreds of billions. Nevis offers a very competitive tax regime, it's a small and efficient jurisdiction. Nevis also happens to be English speaking. The downsides of Nevis are that it is small and would likely buckle under pressure. Nevis also has been slammed by hurricanes. Hong Kong isn't bad but they do impose domestic taxes and they do not enjoy the same degree of political freedom as Nevis. There are many other fairly liberal areas but most are very untested or remote.

[xon]

But what shoud that corporation be based on? What would it sell? What would be its drive? Purpose? I dont think people would invest on someones ego only.

The idea is to fulfill the definition of a self-governing, sovereign nation as much as is possible. That definition would probably be based on historical notions of the nation-state and might include some additional innovative aspects, such as the internet-based voting and the shareholders of the incorporated nation having automatic citizenship. The incorporated nation would need to establish itself commercially, geographically, population-wise, governmentally, and also enter into the public's eye. The establishment of the government may have to progress in stages, from virtual government to eventual actual government and true self-sovereignty within a macronational context. The last stage would be contingent on the purchase of undisputed land (or at least land with no great threat of being disputed) such as a remote island.

But it is plausible, I still remember when the US wanted to tax computers and Bill Gates threatened to buy an island on the pacific establishing a nation there and moving the corporation where no one there would pay taxes as they would be working for Microsoft, making the american government back down on its demands.

That is interesting. I can imagine that being used by Bill Gates to make a point, if not an actual threat, about the computer taxation. If the US government taxes corporations too much, they may find it less expensive to do business elsewhere. BTW, I have read that Microsoft has moved a lot of its operations to Vancouver, BC.

So what to do that could make people invest money on the idea.

People invest money to make it grow, so one marketing technique for the incorporated nation would be to tell people that it will make their money do just that. Investors and shareholders will also want to know how we plan to accomplish that and, after we provide them with that information, hopefully they will consider it a good investment. Really, this is something that someone with the business or finance education and background would help the incorporated nation accomplish.

[J]

In the old days of colonization, many colonial companies were joint-stock in nature. From North America, to both of the Indies and even Africa, such powerful companies ruled vast swabs of land. This isn't exactly a new idea, but it is one that happens to work, at least historically.

[Nosredneh]

As it has happened before, if an artificial island is buildt, the modern conventions give the right to any nearby already recognised state to claim sovereignity over the new island.

I do not remember the name of the project, but Tonga recently has taken over such an attempt.

However, if anybody needs ideas on how to build them, check the project:

http://www.theworld.ae/

I agree, I suggest you research the UN "Law of The Sea" treaties.  Methinks you would fare better by overthrowing a banana republic with the aid of a mercenary force.

[J]

Me thinks any talk of overthrowing anything is a very bad idea. Not to mention it's wrong, unless we're talking about North Korea or Zimbabwe.

[Raymond]

LysanderSpooner, I'd still love to get those numbers you have, that say it would cost $100,000 per acre to build this. I'm very eager, because my estimates places the cost signifinately higher. If I'm gonna do this, I'd love to hear ways to reduce cost  

And to clear up sopmething, I came up with the micronation idea and seasteading idea separately. Later, I thought that since I was doing both, why not combine them?

[J]

I'll have to dig that up for you. I know there was a Sea Cells company out of Florida that could do up basic platforms on the cheap. Not certain if they were legit or if they're still operational. One of the SeaStead foundation's principals works for none other then Google.

[Raymond]

I'll have to dig that up for you. I know there was a Sea Cells company out of Florida that could do up basic platforms on the cheap. Not certain if they were legit or if they're still operational. One of the SeaStead foundation's principals works for none other then Google.

Ah, you speak of none other than Patri Friedman. I check his livejournal each day and I have his seastead site in my favorites.

By Sea Cells, do you mean this company? http://members.aol.com/ajbjja/ssi.html

I have been meaning to call them, because their prices are not quite clear to me. You said that it would take $100,000 per acre? Was that with or without an estimation of the weight on the platform? If it's with nothing on it, I'm not sure of your calculations. Please tell me any more info you have, along with any calculations you may have made.

[J]

I don't know whether the number is still in service. But give it a shot. Yep, 100k for acre nothing on it. That strikes me as right if memory serves me correctly.

[igor]

The Brazilian state-owned oil company called Petrobras intends to create an artificial island, containing heliport, warehouses and lodgings. You can read more about it here. This artificial island would work as an offshore hub, similar to the JMOB (Joint Mobile Offshore Base) concept. The project will serve as a test for Brazil's sub-salt deposits.

There is an illustration of the JMOB (a.k.a. Battle Island) below.