The capital of the notion of something being 'legal' is wearing thin.
It's interesting to observe what will replace it - make no mistake, the
working system will pop up, so that the business can go on, and it won't
be something simple as ad-hoc brute force threats.
I guess that a well-defined (possibly overlapping) power-legal domains
will emerge, so it will be clear to all involved what it exactly means
when principality X says, for example, "this will be the taxation rate
for these activities". Depending on the coverage of X's domain, this may
mean that you don't care, or that you will implement it ASAP. We need
some kind of more accurate domain-dependent rules, in order to predict
and plan.
Concepts of nation-states, national sovereignty and 'international law'
are not applicable tools any more. Invoking them is pointless, as they
cannot be enforced (the purpose of such invocations is to 'show the
people' how badly these concepts are violated in hope of creating
outrage and restoring them, but that doesn't work any more, as people
know well it's all bs.)
We are already seeing de facto emergence of these new legal domains. Now
we need the code.
The Opinions of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention are
legally-binding to the extent that they are based on binding
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
