Crowdfunding for a Floating City

[PeaceRequiresAnarchy]

I agree sea steading mini city-states will only be tolerated until they are too prosperous and helpful to freedom to be allowed to continue. But the idea is that the sea steading ships will be at least 12 miles offshore, in international waters, thus legally subject to international/UN laws, and not the US regime.

Of course, that won't stop the jackboots from drone striking them illegally, as international/UN rules are for everybody else to follow, not the US/UK/Israel.

Just as most people seem to think that the US government has a right to rule Americans, but that the UK government does not have the right to rule Americans, etc, I think that the public will look at people living on Seasteads existing away from landmasses associated with particular governments and believe that those governments have less of a claim to rule them than they would if they were living on the landmasses associated with those particular governments. As to how much more freedom this will allow people on Seasteads to obtain, I am not sure, but I think it's almost definite that they will be able to achieve some significant amount more.

 

[PeaceRequiresAnarchy]

A stupid idea for too many reasons to list.

I can't help but smile when I see comments like this due to the fact that it doesn't matter what you think. That's the great part about establishing new free societies rather than trying to change peoples' minds in an existing society to make it free--we don't have to change your mind or the minds of the millions of others who agree with you on anything. We can just go make new free societies.

It's like when Cody Wilson asked, "How's that national conversation [about gun control] going?" To a large extent it doesn't matter how the conversation is going--whether public opinion has swayed to support peoples' rights to have guns or not--since with new technologies people will be able to get guns if they want them regardless of whether or not people want them to be able to get them.

 

[The Free Hornet]

A stupid idea for too many reasons to list.

The sea isn't my choice of where to live, but if it was, a floating city would make a great port to visit.

Retired Couples Sailing the Sea
Retiring to the Open Sea

Every ocean should have a free floating city/port. Every country a free state. Every state, a free county. Every county, a free village/city/municipality.

The practical difficulty of these schemes - aside from buoyancy - is that people often want to stay near where they grew up. But why not support every endeavor and then maybe the free destination of our choice will be available in the future.

 

[Keith and stuff]

Just as most people seem to think that the US government has a right to rule Americans, but that the UK government does not have the right to rule Americans, etc, I think that the public will look at people living on Seasteads existing away from landmasses associated with particular governments and believe that those governments have less of a claim to rule them than they would if they were living on the landmasses associated with those particular governments. As to how much more freedom this will allow people on Seasteads to obtain, I am not sure, but I think it's almost definite that they will be able to achieve some significant amount more.

No offense but not only is that opinion of yours absurd and completely out of place, it is clearly not in anyway connected to the current situation we are all facing, I'm not sure why you said that nonsense.

 

[mad cow]

A stupid idea for too many reasons to list.

Hey,I got nothing against Libertarian City-States,all of my reasons are practical reasons against it.

The picture in the OP floating in the middle of the ocean is as practical as the picture in post #3...for too many reasons to list.

Buy an island.

 

[Keith and stuff]

I agree sea steading mini city-states will only be tolerated until they are too prosperous and helpful to freedom to be allowed to continue. But the idea is that the sea steading ships will be at least 12 miles offshore, in international waters, thus legally subject to international/UN laws, and not the US regime.

No offense meant. You aren't the first person around here to mention such silly rumors. There are no international waters near the US. Seasteading has a yearly event that happens on a river delta in CA. The goal is to eventually operate in US ocean waters. Perhaps the folks want to negotiate with the US but they will be subject to all US federal laws and the Coast Guard will be allowed to board and search the ship on mere suspicion. So people are likely to have a lot more legal freedom living in a freeish state than Seasteading. That said, it isn't a horrible idea for the rich and I'd love to see it happen off of NH. I'm pretty sure there will be helicopters. It might just have to be moved once a year or so to dodge a big storm.

 

[PeaceRequiresAnarchy]

No offense but not only is that opinion of yours absurd and completely out of place, it is clearly not in anyway connected to the current situation we are all facing, I'm not sure why you said that nonsense.

None taken

 

[PeaceRequiresAnarchy]

Hey,I got nothing against Libertarian City-States

I do. States are not justified--even minimal "Libertarian City-States."

 

[TaftFan]

If they wanted to spend a lot of money, they could make it like a Death Star from Star Wars with the ability to travel. Using nuclear power I assume like they do with subs.

 

[TaftFan]

On a related note, this website lets you receive all funds whether the goal is met or not. Ben Swann has a huge oversight by missing this website.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

No offense meant. You aren't the first person around here to mention such silly rumors. There are no international waters near the US. Seasteading has a yearly event that happens on a river delta in CA. The goal is to eventually operate in US ocean waters. Perhaps the folks want to negotiate with the US but they will be subject to all US federal laws and the Coast Guard will be allowed to board and search the ship on mere suspicion. So people are likely to have a lot more legal freedom living in a freeish state than Seasteading. That said, it isn't a horrible idea for the rich and I'd love to see it happen off of NH. I'm pretty sure there will be helicopters. It might just have to be moved once a year or so to dodge a big storm.

It's not a rumor, it's an actual claim made by seasteading supporters. At my local LP county meeting that I chair, we scheduled a Seasteading rep last month to explain the logistics of setting up a floating city independent of US jurisdiction, and '12 miles' was his answer. Whatever the US claims in response, the concept is there IS somewhere that the US's jurisdiction ends. If not 12 miles, maybe 25 miles---it's somewhere.

The floating cities only need enough proximity to a major country to facilitate an easy boat ride offshore (or to onshore) to conduct commerce. If the US won't recognize international waters, the city could relocate to different regions of the world that do. This is the re-invention of walking power, or emigrating away from tyrannical central governments, only now by sea. If technology advances such that aerial or 'sky cities' (or livable space station cities) become possible, same principle. "You can't take the sky from me..."

 

[torchbearer]

"You can't take the sky from me..."

+1

 

[Keith and stuff]

It's not a rumor, it's an actual claim made by seasteading supporters. At my local LP county meeting that I chair, we scheduled a Seasteading rep last month to explain the logistics of setting up a floating city independent of US jurisdiction, and '12 miles' was his answer. Whatever the US claims in response, the concept is there IS somewhere that the US's jurisdiction ends. If not 12 miles, maybe 25 miles---it's somewhere.

The floating cities only need enough proximity to a major country to facilitate an easy boat ride offshore (or to onshore) to conduct commerce. If the US won't recognize international waters, the city could relocate to different regions of the world that do. This is the re-invention of walking power, or emigrating away from tyrannical central governments, only now by sea. If technology advances such that aerial or 'sky cities' (or livable space station cities) become possible, same principle. "You can't take the sky from me..."

Yeah, if the boat/platform was located off China or Russia, that might work. Though, then the people would be subject to the will of that country, as the law of the sea treaty calls for 230 miles off the coast as an exclusive economic zone. For example, if the boat was 150 miles off of Russia and fishing, Russia would have the internationally respected right to throw everyone on the boat in jail. Next time you see a Seasteading person, you might want to remind him that it is 230 miles off the coast of a country other than the US. For the US, there is no safe zone.

If Seasteading people are really telling people 12 miles, that is unfortunate. For 1 thing, 12 nautical miles is really over 13 miles. Sad stuff

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

 

[PeaceRequiresAnarchy]

Yeah, if the boat/platform was located off China or Russia, that might work. Though, then the people would be subject to the will of that country, as the law of the sea treaty calls for 230 miles off the coast as an exclusive economic zone. For example, if the boat was 150 miles off of Russia and fishing, Russia would have the internationally respected right to throw everyone on the boat in jail. Next time you see a Seasteading person, you might want to remind him that it is 230 miles off the coast of a country other than the US. For the US, there is no safe zone.

If Seasteading people are really telling people 12 miles, that is unfortunate. For 1 thing, 12 nautical miles is really over 13 miles. Sad stuff

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

Governments cannot just enforce whatever laws they want. There are certain things that the public would not tolerate them doing and their power is limited by this. It may be true that this is the current stated "Law of the Sea," but this law has never been tested. Once a community actually attempts to be autonomous on a Seastead somewhere, it might be the case that the public will not stand for government intervention. In other words, even if the written law says that a government can throw the Seastead people in jail, perhaps the public would not tolerate something so obviously unjust and thus the politicians in government would choose not to throw them in jail for fear of losing the public's support.

 

[MRK]

The seasteading organization states on its websites that the problem they've encountered is that they must be 12 + 200 miles outside of the country to avoid undue influence of the mainland country.

What they are doing to alleviate that problem is negotiating with different countries to try to see if they could get a contractual exception where they could just be a few miles offshore and be left alone. This way ferrying to and from the mainland would not be an onerous task.

Clearly there are trade benefits to having a free trade economic zone right next to your country. You get the benefits of a thriving economy and spillover wealth onto the mainland without actually giving up a plot of taxable land to the people.

I assume there will be some Asian, African or Carribbean countries who are very much willing to explore this idea and allow for a close settlement.

 

[Keith and stuff]

The seasteading organization states on its websites that the problem they've encountered is that they must be 12 + 200 miles outside of the country to avoid undue influence of the mainland country.

What they are doing to alleviate that problem is negotiating with different countries to try to see if they could get a contractual exception where they could just be a few miles offshore and be left alone. This way ferrying to and from the mainland would not be an onerous task.

Clearly there are trade benefits to having a free trade economic zone right next to your country. You get the benefits of a thriving economy and spillover wealth onto the mainland without actually giving up a plot of taxable land to the people.

I assume there will be some Asian, African or Carribbean countries who are very much willing to explore this idea and allow for a close settlement.

That is nautical miles. Which means 13 miles and 230 miles. If Russia or China wants to do something, it will do it, regardless. The US doesn't follow those rules as it refused to ratify the treaty. But let's be honest, if Russia or China doesn't want to follow the treaty, they won't. Pretty much, Seasteading would be useless within several hundred miles of the US or 200n miles of the largest counties in the world. The planks obviously not well thought out. I would like it to be successful. Perhaps if it was 201n miles away from a poor county and there were dozens of armed folks on board (to protect from pirates), it could work.

 

[osan]

That is nautical miles. Which means 13 miles and 230 miles. If Russia or China wants to do something, it will do it, regardless. The US doesn't follow those rules as it refused to ratify the treaty. But let's be honest, if Russia or China doesn't want to follow the treaty, they won't. Pretty much, Seasteading would be useless within several hundred miles of the US or 200 miles of the largest counties in the world. The planks obviously not well thought out. I would like it to be successful. Perhaps if it was 201 miles away from a poor county and there were dozens of armed folks on board (to protect from pirates), it could work.

Yes - the problems with this idea are enormous, but if people want to try it, what the hell.

What about maintenance? If it is build of metal, it WILL have to be periodically maintained. Paint, barnacle scraping, and so on. There will be breaches in time - sea water is one of the most corrosive agents on the planet. How is that done? What happens if NOBODY is willing to sell them plate and other materials for repairs? Battle damage? How is that repaired after encounters with pirates?

If concrete, the same questions stand.

 

[Keith and stuff]

My best guess would be if they could somehow put several oil rig platforms together that are so old and dysfunctional that an oil company retires them. Maybe hire a team of oil rig builders to rebuild the platforms and connect them. They still would need a plane, copters or boats to leave the rigs if the weather got too bad. Maybe train some of the people living there on rig maintenance.

As for the location, I don't know of a good solution.

 

[PeaceRequiresAnarchy]

The seasteading organization states on its websites that the problem they've encountered is that they must be 12 + 200 miles outside of the country to avoid undue influence of the mainland country.

What they are doing to alleviate that problem is negotiating with different countries to try to see if they could get a contractual exception where they could just be a few miles offshore and be left alone. This way ferrying to and from the mainland would not be an onerous task.

Clearly there are trade benefits to having a free trade economic zone right next to your country. You get the benefits of a thriving economy and spillover wealth onto the mainland without actually giving up a plot of taxable land to the people.

I assume there will be some Asian, African or Carribbean countries who are very much willing to explore this idea and allow for a close settlement.

Thank you for mentioning this. I was going to, but I forgot about it. On the Seasteading Crowdfunding Campaign page they write:

As pragmatists seeking incremental steps toward new nations at sea, we plan to seek de facto autonomy for the first floating city, without locating too far out to sea. The advice of our geopolitical team has narrowed our choices to a few coastal countries we think are likely to trade autonomy for the direct benefits of a seastead located in their territorial waters. In other words, we are seeking a contract with a host nation which will grant the floating city substantial autonomy within its territorial waters in exchange for the economic, social, and environmental benefits the seastead will bring to the country. DeltaSync’s design will demonstrate the benefits and aesthetic appeal of what we are bringing to the table – a seed for a dynamic city and model of future governance. We are currently in the diplomatic process of securing a deal with one of the nations we have identified.

This would avoid the whole problem of states claiming the right to control what happens in the water 200+ miles of the coast.

My concern is what would compel the chosen state to uphold their contract? What if they decided to break it and start imposing taxes on the seastead and coercively regulating other seastead behavior in violation of the autonomy contract?

States get to resolve disputes in cases involving themselves, so I suppose then that the Seasteading Institute will have to rely on certain incentives to persuade the state not to break the contract. The two incentives that come to mind now are: (1) If the contracting state breaks its contract then its reputation will be hurt and future Seasteaders will be likely to choose other host nations to contract with rather than the nation that has a history of breaking such contracts and (2) If a host nation taxes or regulates a Seastead too heavily then the Seastead will no longer be economically viable and the project will have to be abandoned meaning the state will lose all of the benefits of having it.

Looking at these two incentives together, it seems that it may not be worth it for the host nation to tax/regulate the Seastead a small amount in violation of the contract, since these small benefits to the state would not be worth the risk of losing future Seasteads to other host nations who would be more willing to uphold the autonomy contracts.

 

[PeaceRequiresAnarchy]

Randolph Hencken posted an announcement:

Thank you!

A big thanks to all of our contributors for helping us surge past the $20,000 goal with more than a week remaining in the campaign. With matching funds from the Thiel Foundation, the design and feasibility component of our Floating City Project is fully funded! We are grateful for your support and look forward to sharing DeltaSync's design and report with all of you.

Now what?

There are two primary reasons to still donate if you haven’t already – each as important as raising funds for the design. 1) We have all seen ultra-successful crowdfunding campaigns – our community has the opportunity to signal our combined strength and market demand to those who will invest in the development of the seastead. 2) Additional donations will be allocated to the diplomatic component of our project, seeking a host nation for our floating city.

Please keep sharing this campaign with your network and encourage your contacts to give.

Host nation.

We are seeking meetings with influential people in governments of coastal nations across the globe. We have identified 20 countries we believe would consider hosting a seastead within their territorial waters, while still granting the city substantial autonomy. Our list of countries is being kept confidential for the time being, to prevent media and other second-hand sources from misrepresenting our intent or presuming we have secured a deal with one of the nations.

There are several reasons for seeking a host country for the first floating city. 1) It will be less expensive to build a seastead engineered for relatively shallow and calm waters, 2) it will be easier for residents to travel to and from the seastead, as well as to acquire goods and services from existing supply chains, and 3) a host nation will be able to protect a city within its territorial waters from interference by other nations.

If you are able to connect us with influential people in a coastal nation as a foot-in-the-door for more formal meetings with government officials, please contact Randolph Hencken at [email protected].

Onward to a floating city!

When we complete the first phase the Floating City Project we will work with a partnership of investors and developers to further our plans and ultimately begin building the world's first floating city before the end of the decade.

Thanks again everyone! We are thrilled by the show of support.