5 ms·
A number of reasons: 1) Starting their own country wouldn't offer them much they don't already have. 2) There's no unclaimed land. That means you either need
by philk 16y ago
A number of reasons:
1) Starting their own country wouldn't offer them much they don't already have.
2) There's no unclaimed land. That means you either need to build your own land (which is really expensive) or take it off someone else, which probably makes you a criminal around the world and might ruin your life already.
3) Once you've got the land, you've got to defend it, and mercs[1] + military hardware gets expensive really fast.
4) Even then, the nasty things you'd have to do to establish a country and get it recognized around the world will probably cripple your commercial activities.
5) They don't necessarily have much ability for governing/retaining power.
[1] No-one is going to die for Gatestan out of patriotism.
- sad_hacker 16y agoI doubt you need to defend it right away... if you get more powerful - yes, why should anyone want to attack your micronation? They rather do it in diplomatical way so other countries don't recognize your sovereignty.
- arethuza 16y agoAn American billionaire or (billionaires) sitting on a completely undefended island somewhere... Don't you think that would be a magnet to just about every terrorist organization in the world? Not to mention if it is anywhere near East Africa I would image a few boat loads of real pirates turning up pretty quickly - even in a lot of what would look like safer neighborhoods I would expect you would start getting a lot of attention from organized crime and other very scary people.
- salvadors 16y agoActually there is still some unclaimed land: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Byrd_Land http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Byrd_Land I'm sure at least one of these guys might enjoy the challenge of making it hospitable :)
- Tichy 16y agoInteresting. I'd wage a guess that making it hospitable would at least be easier than colonizing Mars.
- arethuza 16y agoThere is a reason nobody wants it: "Byrd Station provided a template for the doomed Antarctic base in the horror movie John Carpenter's The Thing."
- hugh3 16y agoIf you actually wanted to build a base on Marie Byrd Land, I'm sure it could be done relatively cheaply, in the tens-of-millions-of-dollars range. Then quite a few more million dollars a year to keep it supplied and running. Certainly well within the capabilities of any multi-billionaire. It's still not clear why you'd want to, though. I doubt you could avoid much in taxes, and it's really unpleasantly cold down there. On the upside you'd probably be safe from pirates. edit: A nice yacht is probably cheaper per square foot than an Antarctic base, and tends to have much better weather.
- PostOnce 16y agoDoesn't matter. Article IV of the Antarctica Treaty says "no new claims shall be asserted while the treaty is in force;", Signatories include pretty much everyone and it dates back to 1959. You can claim anything you want, but it won't matter unless everyone else recognizes and respects your claim. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System
- sp332 16y agoYeah, but I didn't sign it :-) If I renounce my citizenship here, and move to Antarctica, who could tax me?
- sqrt17 16y agoMaybe there would be no tax, but the cost of getting internet, energy and food supplied there would be very taxing. (What good is a year's worth of ramen if you have no fire to cook it on?)
- patrickk 16y agoIn the 1970s a Las Vegas millionaire tried to claim his own nation when he discovered a coral reef that was exposed to the air at low tide, so he decided to build his own island: http://articles.privateislandsonline.com/island-industry/republic-of-what/ http://articles.privateislandsonline.com/island-industry/rep... Didn't turn out too well.
- yummyfajitas 16y agoIn short: new countries give citizens of existing countries more options to vote with their feet. Existing countries will use violence to prevent this.
- listic 16y agoVery interesting story. Didn't he try to ask for foreign help to defend from the intervention?
- stcredzero 16y agohttp://seasteading.org/ http://seasteading.org/ 1) The seasteading.org folks aren't rich, though they can get resources from rich people who like their program. 2) They have a well thought-out program for making their own land. 3) The land they have is very small, and it's perched on top of tall towers, therefore easy to defend. Private security and agreements with local governments should suffice for their needs. 4) The seasteading folks plan to use flags of convenience, or plan to just not be noticed. The platforms will most likely be mobile, so if they don't like their neighbors, they'll just move. 5) Since each unit is relatively small, they can use the same legal framework that captains aboard oceangoing vessels use. [1] The seasteading folks seem to be about Libertarian ideals of freedom. I understand that there are indeed some folks willing to die for those ideals. I am not saying if this this is a good idea or not. Disclosure: I am not a member of seasteading.org. I just think they have neat engineering ideas.
- ebaysucks 16y agoTSI is a great project, but the main function is to get noticed and spread ancap ideas IMO. Reason: There will never be new country on the ocean in a world full of nation states. The reason there are lawless international waters 13 miles offshore is because there is no threat to incumbent nations there. The moment Seasteads start floating around, the UN will abolish the concept of international waters thus rendering the entire project worthless.
- rdl 16y agoI think TSI/Seasteading as a technology could be successful, I just don't think the Seastead as Sovereign State thing is going to be viable in the next 20-50 years. Putting a Seastead in someone's 200 mile EEZ, with that country's blessing, to run a private marine park, offshore free trade zone, etc. seems quite viable. By being physically separate and potentially mobile, a host country would have a lot less ability or desire to regulate beyond basic things. There are also some inherent advantages to an offshore platform in a marine environment (there are some concrete platforms floating in the Great Barrier Reef of Australia to support scuba diving operations already). TSI does a decent job of splitting the technical (difficult, but reasonably feasible, and predictable) from the political, compared to most free-state projects in the past.
- listic 16y agoIs it possible to buy out an island from an existing country to start your own?
- brazzy 16y agoI'd say that depends completely on that existing country's willingness to give up part of its territory. As it is, pretty much all of them don't like that idea at all.
- listic 16y agoI wouldn't bet on it, but I think some of around 200 countries might want to give up a small part of its territory for an appropriate sum of money.
- hugh3 16y agoThe only countries who might be willing to do that (tinpot little dictatorships, presumably) are also the ones who are likely to claim it back after a couple of years. ("What? We never sold you this island!")
- noverloop 16y agoI heard Greece could use some money
- nickpinkston 16y agoGermany actually suggested that Greece sell some island to pay their debt - more of snub than a real comment though I think
- stagas 16y agoEven though, they'll still belong to Greece, it's the same as buying any other property. Just a bit more expensive.
- 16y ago
- Havoc 16y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bir_Tawil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bir_Tawil 2,060 km2 (795 sq mi) of unclaimed land next to Egypt.