4 ms·

That's a very good point. Obviously the only way any country can be bootstrapped is with military power. If Liberland is serious they should immediately engage

by tinco 12y ago

That's a very good point. Obviously the only way any country can be bootstrapped is with military power. If Liberland is serious they should immediately engage Paraduin with a show of force. Secondly, I think the best course of action would be to secure funding for buying a protectorate like situation with either Croatia or Serbia. Though I don't know what the political consequences of such a situation would be. Imagine if from those 160.000 signups they could get 5.000 people to pay $1000 in taxes per year, that could fund a Serbian police/military officer and a small office. Just his presence and his commitment to engage in violent conflict with aggressors could deter any other party. (Killing him would be an act-of-war or at least a criminal act against his country)

mikeyouse 12y ago
It seems like killing the only security officer in a country would probably be the end of the war.. Most of the expressions of interest I've seen are explicitly because people think they'll be able to stop paying taxes so I'm curious what kind of voluntary funds they would be able to raise.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  I think the point was that killing a Serbian military officer would start a war with Serbia. Of course, the challenging part would be convincing Serbia to back the scheme; if Serbia was going to defend the territory they'd be more likely to claim it themselves.
  - salex89 12y ago
    Serbia has no intention to claim this territory whatsoever. Serbia treats the Danube as the border and that is it. The new Danube stream that is, the one now dividing the two countries. There is an old Danube stream which is almost completely gone decades ago, and Croatia considers it its border. The reason is that there are some other inversely interweaving parts which are pretty and maybe a nice tourist attraction and both countries want them. So, accepting Liberland as their own territory would mean waving the right to those other, more profitable, territories. But TBH, using the old stream as the border would just cause more trouble. To be fair, I'm a Serb and I fully welcome Liberland. Since the two neighbors cannot decide on their boundaries, I do not see why anyone else cannot take a no-mans land. The issue is that we must define our borders sooner or later, and I am afraid there will be no more space for Liberland. But, that will be Croatia's business then, I hope :D .
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      Neither Serbia nor Croatia claim the land because they both -- under different interpretations of the underlying agreement -- recognize it as land belonging to the other under an agreement between the two of them. This also makes it unlikely that either would act as a guarantor of the independence of a new sovereignty that sought to establish itself on the land, or even to recognize such a sovereignty.
inDigiNeous 12y ago
Obviously ? Are you from the US? If so, I can understand where you're coming from. Maybe violence is not the answer, or have you thought about this possibility ? Their motto is "Live and Let Live", doesn't that tell you something ? Or maybe you're a professional pro-war troll?
- ctdonath 12y ago
  While the founding principles may be pacifist, the invading conquerers likely are not.
- tinco 12y ago
  If your countrymen hadn't killed 126.000 Russians, and maimed 180.000 more, you would now be governed by homophobic, corrupt and oppressive Vladimir Putin. I am not pro-war. I am not suggesting anyone should be attacked, but if you don't have the power to defend what you stand for, you will trampled by those who do. I am from the Netherlands. The only reason we exist is because the U.S. won the second world war, and we allied ourselves to them. We're not as strong and mighty as the Fins, we use diplomacy and money to establish our sovereignty.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - inDigiNeous 12y ago
    This kind of thinking leads to war. What I'm saying is that if we really want to create peace, we should think about peace. Not attacking. It doesn't matter who is attacking. If somebody is doing it, then it leads to more of this action. Sorry for offending you, was not my cause. Just trying to see why somebody would think they should show force even though they are a new country and they have the possibility to act differently than we have done before. I understand this is not a popular view, as we are being taught that we are "naturally" violent and warmongering race of beings, but I do not feel it is true. I feel it is something that is taught, and something that can be taught out of also.
    - 12y ago
jobigoud 12y ago
> if they could get 5.000 people to pay $1000 in taxes per year, Not sure they appreciate the concept of shared expenses though, from their objectives "a country where honest people can prosper without being oppressed by governments making their lives unpleasant through the burden of unnecessary restrictions and taxes.".
- juliangoldsmith 12y ago
  The key word there is unnecessary. Having some sort of police or military would be considered to be necessary by most.
  - jobigoud 12y ago
    That's why it's hard to make a country. You have to allocate resources to education, defense, health, public goods maintenance, etc. And inevitably some people will think that some expenses are not necessary.
hjura 12y ago
I think that before they start to launch home made missiles they should check if Paraduin is not just some Dutch artists making a communication joke.
axus 12y ago
If they could get 100k people to use Amazon affiliate links for all their purchases, they'd have another revenue source.
s73v3r 12y ago
"Imagine if from those 160.000 signups they could get 5.000 people to pay $1000 in taxes per year" Wasn't the point of founding this country to get away from taxes? How ironic

by tinco 12y ago

mikeyouse 12y ago

It seems like killing the only security officer in a country would probably be the end of the war.. Most of the expressions of interest I've seen are explicitly because people think they'll be able to stop paying taxes so I'm curious what kind of voluntary funds they would be able to raise.

dragonwriter 12y ago
I think the point was that killing a Serbian military officer would start a war with Serbia. Of course, the challenging part would be convincing Serbia to back the scheme; if Serbia was going to defend the territory they'd be more likely to claim it themselves.
- salex89 12y ago
  Serbia has no intention to claim this territory whatsoever. Serbia treats the Danube as the border and that is it. The new Danube stream that is, the one now dividing the two countries. There is an old Danube stream which is almost completely gone decades ago, and Croatia considers it its border. The reason is that there are some other inversely interweaving parts which are pretty and maybe a nice tourist attraction and both countries want them. So, accepting Liberland as their own territory would mean waving the right to those other, more profitable, territories. But TBH, using the old stream as the border would just cause more trouble. To be fair, I'm a Serb and I fully welcome Liberland. Since the two neighbors cannot decide on their boundaries, I do not see why anyone else cannot take a no-mans land. The issue is that we must define our borders sooner or later, and I am afraid there will be no more space for Liberland. But, that will be Croatia's business then, I hope :D .
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    Neither Serbia nor Croatia claim the land because they both -- under different interpretations of the underlying agreement -- recognize it as land belonging to the other under an agreement between the two of them. This also makes it unlikely that either would act as a guarantor of the independence of a new sovereignty that sought to establish itself on the land, or even to recognize such a sovereignty.

inDigiNeous 12y ago

Obviously ? Are you from the US? If so, I can understand where you're coming from. Maybe violence is not the answer, or have you thought about this possibility ? Their motto is "Live and Let Live", doesn't that tell you something ? Or maybe you're a professional pro-war troll?

ctdonath 12y ago
While the founding principles may be pacifist, the invading conquerers likely are not.
tinco 12y ago
If your countrymen hadn't killed 126.000 Russians, and maimed 180.000 more, you would now be governed by homophobic, corrupt and oppressive Vladimir Putin. I am not pro-war. I am not suggesting anyone should be attacked, but if you don't have the power to defend what you stand for, you will trampled by those who do. I am from the Netherlands. The only reason we exist is because the U.S. won the second world war, and we allied ourselves to them. We're not as strong and mighty as the Fins, we use diplomacy and money to establish our sovereignty.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- inDigiNeous 12y ago
  This kind of thinking leads to war. What I'm saying is that if we really want to create peace, we should think about peace. Not attacking. It doesn't matter who is attacking. If somebody is doing it, then it leads to more of this action. Sorry for offending you, was not my cause. Just trying to see why somebody would think they should show force even though they are a new country and they have the possibility to act differently than we have done before. I understand this is not a popular view, as we are being taught that we are "naturally" violent and warmongering race of beings, but I do not feel it is true. I feel it is something that is taught, and something that can be taught out of also.
  - 12y ago

jobigoud 12y ago

> if they could get 5.000 people to pay $1000 in taxes per year, Not sure they appreciate the concept of shared expenses though, from their objectives "a country where honest people can prosper without being oppressed by governments making their lives unpleasant through the burden of unnecessary restrictions and taxes.".

juliangoldsmith 12y ago
The key word there is unnecessary. Having some sort of police or military would be considered to be necessary by most.
- jobigoud 12y ago
  That's why it's hard to make a country. You have to allocate resources to education, defense, health, public goods maintenance, etc. And inevitably some people will think that some expenses are not necessary.

hjura 12y ago

I think that before they start to launch home made missiles they should check if Paraduin is not just some Dutch artists making a communication joke.

axus 12y ago

If they could get 100k people to use Amazon affiliate links for all their purchases, they'd have another revenue source.

s73v3r 12y ago

"Imagine if from those 160.000 signups they could get 5.000 people to pay $1000 in taxes per year" Wasn't the point of founding this country to get away from taxes? How ironic