You will be pleased to know ( well, maybe not, but for
the sake of argument )
that on this issue I come down squarely on the
Libertarian side. Now and then, anyway,
I indulge one of my passions, namely, micronations.
This is a type of geofiction.
With micronations, though, it isn't imaginary countries
on distant planets you
get to design all by yourself ( and if the government is
democratic or a constitutional
monarchy or a customized theocracy in which faith in UFOs
is the state religion,
that is your call ) . Instead you divvy up parcels of
Earth real estate at your discretion.
For example, I myself, on behalf of a so far secret
micronation, claim about
25 % of the surface of Antarctica, plus several Pacific
islands no-one is using anyway,
plus various counties across the USA, as parts of my
sovereign Grand Duchy.
This includes the eastern half of Lane County, here in
Oregon, which is the
capital of the Duchy and is global redoubts.
Some micronation people, though, take this further. Like
Sealand, referred to in
the article --an actual place, on a previously unclaimed
and previously derelict
oil rig platform in the North Sea. This is also a refuge
for pirate radio. Technically it still
is British but Her Majesty's gvt has had no inclination
to do anything at all
with the platform and so it has become a new "state" in
Europe.
A few folks have created scams based on the idea, and
have done such things
as selling, for real money, condos on Caribbean islands
that don't exist, or that
may well exist, but as undeveloped specks of land in the
middle of nowhere.
True , these scams do not interest me, but otherwise,
heck, why not ?
Next time you want to visit Antarctica, though, you'll
need to first obtain
a passport from my Grand Duchy.
Details upon request.
Since you are a friend there will be no fee. All
non-friends will need to
shell out $ 50.
To get there you may wish to fly in the comfort of the
imaginary airline
of the Duchy. Or perchance, go there in style in one of
the Duchy's
imaginary cruise ships, really a splendid experience,
never to be forgotten.
signed :
Baron von Wilhelm
--on behalf of all of the subjects of the secret Duchy
The latest hysterical response to libertarian ideas
David Harsanyi | September 2, 2011
With the electorate getting more comfortable with
libertarian ideas, a Maginot Line of hackery is being
built to keep the barbarians out.
The latest is over at Reuters,
where Sally Kohn writes one of the silliest pieces on
the topic I’ve ever read. Using Peter Thiel’s
seasteading efforts (”sovereign nations built on
oil-rig-type platforms anchored in international
waters”) as her touch-point she expounds on this
“sinister” and “un-American” ideology lurking deep in
the dark souls of otherwise “tame-seeming
libertarians.”
Don’t like the idea of tax dollars paying for
public schools or highway construction or
Medicare—or don’t like the idea of taxes at all? The
brave new floating world offers just the solution.
And if the self-appointed creators wish it, there
would be no restrictions on guns or automatic
weapons. Or, for that matter, no prohibition against
murder. Pesky “moral suasion”!
Automatic weapons and murder for all! (The
Most Dangerous Game starring Peter Thiel
as Zaroff.) Was she joking? I can’t tell.
No, I don’t “like” the idea forcing citizens to join
a Washington-run health care program or forcing
parents to pay for crappy school that fail their kids
year after year. But I’ve yet to meet a libertarian
who opposes restrictions on homicide. Perhaps I don’t
get out often enough. I always knew there were many
schools of libertarian thought, all of them having
something to do with an underlying belief that an
individual ought to have the freedom to live his/her
life as he/she likes as long he/she respects the
individual rights of other hes/shes. Critics always
seem to ignore the latter half of the idea. Imaginary
anarchy, racism, and hedonism ensue.
Kohn also informs us that libertarians don’t want
roads and would like to abolish FEMA and the TSA—which
God gave us in 1979 and 2002, respectively—because if
government isn’t helping no one is. (I suspect the
folks at the Reason
Foundation have probably done more thinking
about transportation today than Kohn has in her entire
life.)
She tells us that anti-corporate he-devils used to
avoid regulation—even the law—for personal gain but
today he-devils want to start new countries even as
they look to destroy old ones. Never mind, that the
modern-day Robber Baron has a better chance enriching
himself by buying into government. As long as it’s
environmental friendly cronyism this is to be admired.
There are many substantive arguments available in
this debate, but it seems that the effort is to either
misinform or scare the hell out of people.
Do libertarians like Peter Thiel really want to live
in America? (Evidently he doesn’t? Right?) I suppose
you’d have to ask him. I’m only a mushy small “l”
classical liberal type and I like living in America.
But if America becomes a place where government has
its coercive hands in every aspect of life and
business—the kind of America that Kohn envisions—then
seasteading is going to look mighty attractive.
David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze.
Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi.
--
"Anyone who
thinks he has a better idea of what's good
for people than people do is a swine."--P. J. O’Rourke
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
