Rebooting the constitution and starting a micronation

[wingnexius]

I was wondering what the possibility of making a new country would be and who would support the creation of a new country, especially their potentially wild politics. I have decided to embark on a project to organize all the documentation needed for creating a new country, including transcripts any international law regarding the insemination of a new country and colonization of areas including space.


One potential benefit to this project is getting an overreaching grasp of what constitutional law and politics really mean. It brings out the true character of a person to be in such a position of power as to be the author of laws and rights. I have noticed that the risk of corruption is high if left unchecked and one must always remember essence at the core of the ideal.


I have drafted a constitution and some aspects of a federal code for the preliminary overview of my peers. The constitution is based on the original united states constitution and includes Abraham Lincoln's emancipation proclamation, the bill of rights, and select amendments to the united states constitution, there are also expansions of passages and entire new sections. All modifications were done in the spirit of constitutional righteousness and to maximize benefits to the common people.


I know people would consider posting the entire constitution of this hypothetical country a wall of text, so please have a look at https://archive.org/details/irislund and read over the documents there to read the current documents regarding the country. The project is what I like to call a "national portfolio" which has many elements of the actual country pre-conceived on paper and ready to be enacted.


Please take a moment to think of any changes, amendments, or clarifications you think are necessary to the constitution, federal code, or state/local laws. Please attempt to make any suggestions for code relevant to constitutional law (E.G. No laws banning annoying kids while shopping, etc...) and also make an attempt to work out issues and future proof ideas you present. I have gone through lots of different peoples ideas to help improve the constitution and make a better country, and I think I have gotten my draft developed enough that it is ready to unleash to the public.


Anybody who can cite me some law regarding the legality of creating a new country, for example; Setting up some permanent platforms in international waters and drudging up the ocean floor to pile it up into an artificial island. Accumulate a population of permanent residents in the territory. Declare your independence and file for recognition in the UN. Use the micronation as a launchpad into space and asteroid mining to create the first space dwelling colony!


Not only the chances of being recognized, but would the sovereignty of the citizens be ensured, for example, to repel an invasion of pirates? What process must be adhered to to create a new nation? What are the laws of colonizing space? Any help in understanding the particulars increases the possibility of actually achieving this someday!


I would like to note that this work is a legitimate attempt to perpetuate freedom for future generations and should not be considered simply a manifest.

 

[Ronin Truth]

I predict a lonely job.

Good luck.

 

[TheTexan]

This works great, but be sure to get permission first

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Just so you know, newcomer: Ronin Truth is just being snarky and bxm is being sarcastic. Obviously "getting permission" is docile, in-the-box thinking and not something we libertarians would encourage, in general, though sometimes it may be useful.

I would recommend getting the books Starting Your Own Country and Lonely Planet's Guide to Micronations. You can also read a "book" of sorts on Seasteading at the Seateading Institute website. Buying a boat and living on it and declaring it an independent nation may be one of the most practical ways of starting a micronation, and I would suggest you look into it. On another hand, Vit is having tremendous success, almost unbelievable success, with his new nation Liberland in a small unclaimed territory along the Danube. You could try to duplicate those results by finding some other patch of land with an unclaimed, disputed, or otherwise quirky status.

There are many possibilities you could pursue and many of us are highly interested in the possibility of such projects succeeding. If you are serious, keep posting, and you may get more help than you expected.

 

[Dianne]

Are you kidding? The United States and The New World Order would mow it down within seconds, unless you agree to be part of the World Bank and hand over all your citizens' money.

 

[TheTexan]

Remember to also keep in your Constitution a catch-all provision that enables the government to do whatever it wants, otherwise you end up with the problem we have today, where when the government does what it wants, there's an irritating minority making annoying claims about it being "unconstitutional" and what-not.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Remember to also keep in your Constitution a catch-all provision that enables the government to do whatever it wants, otherwise you end up with the problem we have today, where when the government does what it wants, there's an irritating minority making annoying claims about it being "unconstitutional" and what-not.

And don't forget to use mealy-mouthed waffle-words like "general welfare" - those can be a great help against extremists who want to pin you down to clear and specific meanings ...

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

I for one welcome our new one post overlords.

 

[RonPaulIsGreat]

Best chance of libertopia would be to wait 10 years for reusable rockets to get perfected and thus getting into orbit will be cheaper, and then do a kickstarter to start a moonbase, or a space colony.

 

[wingnexius]

Best chance of libertopia would be to wait 10 years for reusable rockets to get perfected and thus getting into orbit will be cheaper, and then do a kickstarter to start a moonbase, or a space colony.

The moon treaty and the outerspace treaty would shut that down unless the colony was activated by an already existing nation and for example was not exerting an extension of the territories of said nation.

 

[Spikender]

Just move to Liberland and help them get started.

 

[osan]

I was wondering what the possibility of making a new country would be

Nearly zero under conditions of the general status quo. When national stability degrades to a point, then perhaps one has their greatest chance, but peaceable secession is not terribly likely these days. Which of the raft of power-mad little corporals you see parked behind me here do you think will simply say "OK, diminish me and make your own nation"? Right.

I have decided to embark on a project to organize all the documentation needed for creating a new country, including transcripts any international law regarding the insemination of a new country and colonization of areas including space.

Non-starter endeavor. Your mind is stuck in the slave mentality, what with your appeals to "international law" and other "documentation". All this for whose benefit? So you can get permission to make your own country? You might benefit greatly by thinking on that bit for a good long while until the salient truth sinks in.

One potential benefit to this project is getting an overreaching grasp of what constitutional law and politics really mean.

You must be VERY young. I already know what it means. It is force and violence; death, poverty, misery, and endless injustice by the few against the rest. It is nothing better than this, and this is the rosiest picture of the truth.

I have drafted a constitution

It fails. I can do nothing but fail because that is what these things ultimately do. Why? Because people fail so long as they choose corruption over virtue, and they do that 99.999% of the time.

The human race was OK so long as they maintained a relatively primitive lifestyle and/or low population numbers. But once technologies reached a threshold of capability, everything changed very much for the worse, on the average.

Work it until you realize it is a waste of time. Then be satisfied that you have learned something actually worth learning. It will make you a wiser individual.

Good luck.

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

Get your finances together and hire some Dutch people. Find a shallow part of sea outside of territorial waters of another country and make an island. Done.

 

[Jan2017]

"Rebooting" the Constitution . . .
(jpg edit pending)

do we have a winner for the Rand 2016 Campaign slogan yet . . . ?

Well done 'mate !

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

I have drafted a constitution

It fails. I can do nothing but fail because that is what these things ultimately do. Why? Because people fail so long as they choose corruption over virtue, and they do that 99.999% of the time.

wingnexius, osan is a member that has failed or refused to agree and accept that the authors of the framing documents intended for Americans to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights and that the ultimate PURPOSE of free speech is to enable the unity required to effectively alter or abolish.

This post is going to be an education for the sincere American lurker, or you if you are a sincere American.

The idealism and naïveté your idea presents indicates the strong possibility that you are a schill for the covert cognitive infiltrators of the forum to beat down.

The concept you present is one the elite oppose. Accordingly they want to demonstrate it failing over and over so they've coordinated various schills to present concepts they oppose to try and get the sincere public to give up on the idea before it becomes something Americans might consider and there are numbers enough to make it happen.

Our existing constitution of 1787 is a great place to start and thing to perfect if your intentions are sincere. Consider, there are millions that already believe in it and support it and it really does define valid absolutes of principle.

Accordingly, IF you are sincere about what constitutions can provide, THEN you will post that you agree and accept these two principles.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

Agreeing with and accepting these prime principles does not mean you should give up on your ideas. In fact, agreeing with them works towards assuring you will have an environment in which to share them that has PERFECT context.

Lurkers, pay attention here!

 

[wizardwatson]

wingnexius, osan is a member that has failed or refused to agree and accept that the authors of the framing documents intended for Americans to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights and that the ultimate PURPOSE of free speech is to enable the unity required to effectively alter or abolish.

This post is going to be an education for the sincere American lurker, or you if you are a sincere American.

The idealism and naïveté your idea presents indicates the strong possibility that you are a schill for the covert cognitive infiltrators of the forum to beat down.

The concept you present is one the elite oppose. Accordingly they want to demonstrate it failing over and over so they've coordinated various schills to present concepts they oppose to try and get the sincere public to give up on the idea before it becomes something Americans might consider and there are numbers enough to make it happen.

Our existing constitution of 1787 is a great place to start and thing to perfect if your intentions are sincere. Consider, there are millions that already believe in it and support it and it really does define valid absolutes of principle.

Accordingly, IF you are sincere about what constitutions can provide, THEN you will post that you agree and accept these two principles.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

Agreeing with and accepting these prime principles does not mean you should give up on your ideas. In fact, agreeing with them works towards assuring you will have an environment in which to share them that has PERFECT context.

Lurkers, pay attention here!

He's Back!

EDIT: Ok, looking at post history, looks like I just wasn't noticing him. Spooky.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

He's Back!

EDIT: Ok, looking at post history, looks like I just wasn't noticing him. Spooky.

How about you? I know I've asked before, but its good the lurkers see your group in action.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

 

[wizardwatson]

How about you? I know I've asked before, but its good the lurkers see your group in action.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

You, know. I actually do agree with those two statements.

What's your point?

I prefer 'inalienable' by the way, but tomato tomato.

My agreement with Chris that began in this thread was not honored to my standards and was canceled by me under less than amicable circumstances.

I admit the statements are true. But HIS intent is anti-Christian by my account.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

You, know. I actually do agree with those two statements.

What's your point?

I prefer 'inalienable' by the way, but tomato tomato.

That makes you educated and capable of critical thinking relating to your education about the framing documents and their basic intents. Unlike most members here.

You've gained more credibility than you may realize in my opinion, if that matters.

"Unalienable" is more accurate according to legal terms. Your rights cannot be "Liened". I do believe they mean the same basic things but the legal origins of "unalienable" probably apply more directly because that is exactly the termed used in the Declaration of Independence.

My point is that covert cognitive infiltrators cannot make that agreement and accept those principles because it goes directly against their agenda of preventing unity. Now I know you are a sincere American. There is no other way to tell in this medium.

 

[wizardwatson]

That makes you educated and capable of critical thinking relating to your education about the framing documents and their basic intents. Unlike most members here.

You've gained more credibility than you may realize in my opinion, if that matters.

"Unalienable" is more accurate according to legal terms. Your rights cannot be "Liened". I do believe they mean the same basic things but the legal origins of "unalienable" probably apply more directly because that is exactly the termed used in the Declaration of Independence.

My point is that covert cognitive infiltrators cannot make that agreement and accept those principles because it goes directly against their agenda of preventing unity. Now I know you are a sincere American. There is no other way to tell in this medium.

My agreement with Chris that began in this thread was not honored to my standards and was canceled by me under less than amicable circumstances.