Forming Your Own Micronation -- Part I -- "Good God, Why?" -- Hum, Plan, Soc, $$$

*
Ambitious futurists often want to reshape everything about their world, and for some, just changing their own lives isn’t enough. Some dreamers want nothing less than their own sovereign nation. Whether it’s a matter of changing society today, gaining independence from petty national governments or simply having a place where you can wield absolute power, the idea is popular with a surprisingly large number of futurists with very different backgrounds and philosophies.

Whatever else you can say about these people, you can’t fault them for thinking small. So let’s take a look at what someone who wanted to start their own country (or “independent microstate”) would have to deal with.

When you tell your friends and family “I’m planning to start my own micronation,” you’re apt to hear a number of replies. “Why on Earth?” “Are you serious?” “How would you even do that?” And my personal favorite, “Are you insane?”

These comments could phrased more tactfully, but they’re actually a good place to start. When someone asks you, “Good God, why?” – give it some thought.

What do you want an independent nation for? Until you answer that question, there’s no point to your grandiose (or even humble, realistic) plans.

Ask yourself: Do you want it to take advantage of banking loopholes? To engage in cutting edge research that some advanced countries don't approve of (stem cell research, perhaps future gene therapy enhancement work)?

Do you just want an escape route, a bolt hole to flee to if the world starts to disintegrate?

Or do you think that only a transhumanist nation would be accepting and supportive of the emergence of genuine transhumans/ superhumans/ posthumans?

Will this be the cornerstone of your all-conquering transcontinental/ global/ interplanetary/ interstellar/ intergalactic empire?

Or something else?

Here, for example, are the edited comments of one random enthusiast I asked this question of on the Net:

“Fears:
-Research restrictions that inhibit beneficial research based on ignorance or nearsightedness.
-Restrictions on applications of research.
-Fast tracked research on products can't be trusted due to the reasons behind the fast tracking... money (i.e. Vioxx and the new testosterone patch for women).
-Not trust in media information because major media companies are interested in viewers and ratings so they may sensationalize stories or report only part of the story... this overall has negative effects on society.

"Goals:
-A sovereign society built on democratic transhumanist ideals.
-Socially progressive - no money, no debt, no poverty, no greed, each person is self governed. Liberal, free. Free to do anything so long as it does not physically or emotionally harm another person. Fairness and equality.
-A government that is proportionally representative. And has checks and balances for human nature, to inhibit greed and corruption, and promotes ethics and transparency.
-Government documentation available without restriction to every citizen as every citizen is a member of the government.
-Computerized allocation of resources to make sure that everyone gets a fair share of the societal wealth.
-Self sustainability.

"I have a strong suspicion that yes, only a transhumanist nation would be totally accepting of genuine transhumans. I think this because of what has been shown again and again throughout human history. Innocent people and entities will die before change in an existing society will occur. If we create a society that is accepting of those people and entities even before they exist, then no one will have to suffer needlessly. That's just my opinion though, and i can't think of everything, so chances are there will still be plenty of risks, and maybe even a few mishaps.”

One thing the above comments illustrate is not to assume that someone interested in creating a micronation necessarily shares your goals. Prominent groups interested in establishing microstates are often assumed to be, among other things, radical libertarians, fascist militarists, apocalyptic cult groups, ethnic or nationalistic xenophobes, religious extremists and/or cultural throwbacks. A megalomaniacal leader is often consider a good accessory. Yet our above commentator sounds more like another social democrat with visions of a non-coercive utopian paradise. Time to add another category. Or just to toss our assumptions out the window.

That doesn’t mean nobody shares your precise dissatisfactions with modern life in the West. Just that most of them don’t, and statistically speaking, never will. People are diverse.
Deal with it.

The key thing here is to figure out what you want... and what you're scared of. If you can find enough people who share your interests (or concerns), or whose goals work well with your own, you might be able to organize a micronation on whatever scale you feel you need.

So given that you actually have some goals, let’s consider your options.

One thing I'd like to emphasize is that many ambitious goals could be accomplished without founding your own mini-country -- or by "micronations" of varying size and capabilities. This is important, because even if you're dead set on an independent nation as an absolutely necessary interim step to your goals (say, a new, supernation, or transhuman/ posthuman existence)... there are still smaller steps you could be taking on the way to your microstate.

For example, regarding the first three fears mentioned above (restrictions on research, restrictions on applying research, research directed unwisely)…

Option 1 (of Many): Move to a country that generously supports the research you're interested in. Most people realize they have this option -- but if you go this way, you should probably make sure you're doing it on your own terms. First off, pick a country with first class scientific facilities and infrastructure (unless you plan to move everything you need in yourself, and have some other way to attract top-notch talent).

For example, go to Canada (few restrictions, ready access to the U.S. for tech and more people, just a step across the border). Or look at Ireland or Sweden in the EU (vast English fluency, huge scientific/tech infrastructure, but variable political moods in these and other countries).

One way to move towards creating your independent state would be to start an independent city -- an incorporated research city or research zone inside the borders of an advanced nation. If you could insure the level of private support and talent such an enclave would need to be world class, there's plenty of countries that would jump at the chance to host it.

Such an option could also exist in the U.S., and arguably already does, in several places. Consider the San Francisco Bay Area (including Silicon Valley), Boston (with its tech industries and legions of universities, including Harvard and MIT), and others, including even Raleigh-Durham in North Carolina and Austin in Texas -- both "red states", for those following American politics. So you have a number of choices with respect to both human resources and political climate, even in a single country.

Going abroad (outside North America), your obvious alternatives include major research centers in the EU, Japan, Australia, South Korea, Singapore, India and New Zealand (contingent, of course, on just what you want to research and what kind of capital you will need to draw on).

The fourth fear, of blocked or distorted media coverage pushing society down the wrong path, is a harder one to influence. Of course, you could always start your own media company, or help others who supported similar goals start or take over one. Again, though, a nation with a smaller population might be easier to influence, but countries with more powerful tech and biotech lobbies might provide you with more allies.

I'm in business, not politics, so I couldn't say. So I’ll leave this issue to people who are actually interested in influencing politics.

And now, let’s look at some positive goals:

“-A sovereign society built on democratic transhumanist ideals.”

Cool, though obviously you'll want some agreement on what those ideals are. Take a look at the Transtopians for a very different viewpoint from that of Betterhumans or the Extropians. Or to put it another way, just because you’ve adopted a label doesn’t mean that everyone else under that label has the same plans. Folks with revolutionary ideas about the future often have incredibly divergent concepts about what is realistic, what is desirable and even what a small group can accomplish.

Once again, consider your bedfellows carefully.

”-Socially progressive - no money, no debt, no poverty, no greed, each person is self governed. Liberal, free. Free to do anything so long as it does not physically or emotionally harm another person. Fairness and equality.”

This would be harder. You've got a lot more libertarians (and also just well-paid professional and entrepreneurial types) in Transhumanism's ranks. They wouldn't all jump on board with a (perceived) far-left/ socialist idea. Also, you'd have to be able to trade with the outside world, which means keeping some track of your resources.

This doesn't necessarily have to be a deal-breaker, however. One option would be for the group to agree on a set of core principles, with a plan that at some future date, the various groups (hopefully no more than two or three) would split off one-by-one as they mustered the resources and form additional, separate but allied Transhumanist states. Splitting nations shouldn't be too hard, especially if you're looking at something physically small and mutable -- like a collection of ships bound together. Splitting a few vessels off from the main mass should be relatively easy.

Hence, you could have the radical Libertarian micronation not far from the social democrats micronation, not far from the Zen Buddhist micronation, etc. Any political or philosophical ideas considered too far from the stated "core principles" could be rejected up front (white supremacists, etc).

”-A government that is proportionally representative. And has checks and balances for human nature, to inhibit greed and corruption, and promotes ethics and transparency.”

An effective participatory democracy shouldn't be too hard to sell. Really, there’s not much else to say. On this point.

”-Government documentation available without restriction to every citizen as every citizen is a member of the government.
-Computerized allocation of resources to make sure that everyone gets a fair share of the societal wealth.
-Self sustainability.”

Regarding wealth, since this is going to be such a tricky issue, you might want to focus on mutual goals. You all want to be prosperous, and none of you want to be a "servant class" to people vastly richer than yourselves, with no hope of progressing up the ladder. And ultimately, as technologies capable of making Transhuman people emerge, you all want to have reasonably equal access to them.

You can probably use a few such points of agreement to come up with an effective model.

My favorite option? Get really rich (you and all of your confederates), so that you have the resources to get this thing started, and more of the contacts who could help make it happen. Having done that, you could conceivably set up some kind of mutual trust for yourselves that would serve as a fallback net for people who "bought into it," either through money/ resources, labor, or both.

There are doubtless other options, but with a fairly tight knit group of people who were all financially independent and all working hard at their projects or businesses, you could easily come up with something.

The key thing, I suspect, would be to agree to share new Transhuman enhancement tech as it emerged, to the extent that it was practical to do so. For example, if a safe gene therapy method emerged that could increase intelligence, then everyone on the raft/island/space station would get a chance to use it (and be free to say "No" to it as well). But if it were an incredibly expensive cybernetic implant, then the community wouldn't be obliged to come up with $50 to $100 million for each poorer applicant.

Obviously, your mileage may vary on any of these suggestions. But the point is that reasonable compromises can likely be found for any number of major issues -- especially if your organization is working from a position of strength… Say, a highly skilled, motivated populace with a great excess of working capital.

“I have a strong suspicion that yes, only a transhumanist nation would be totally accepting of genuine transhumans. I think this because of what has been shown again and again throughout human history. innocent people and entities will die before change in an existing society will occur. If we create a society that is accepting of those people and entities even before they exist, then no one will have to suffer needlessly. That's just my opinion though, and I can't think of everything, so chances are there will still be plenty of risks, and maybe even a few mishaps.”

And this is your motivation for forming a microstate. The next guy/gal will probably have a totally different reason and may want nothing to do with your plans. And that’s fine. If your positions were going to create that much friction between you, you probably didn’t want her/him onboard anyway. =)

Next time, Part II -- Some Practical Considerations. Yes, I did say practical. =)


Future Imperative