Billionaire funding creation of artificial libertarian islands

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Creation Funding
Click For Summary
Peter Thiel has invested $1.25 million in the Seasteading Institute, which aims to create floating libertarian nations in international waters, free from existing laws and regulations. The initiative is seen as a platform for testing libertarian policies, but concerns arise about the potential societal implications, including the risk of inhabitants being unable to reintegrate into conventional society. Critics argue that the concept resembles a regression to a lawless "Wild West" scenario, raising fears about safety and governance. Supporters suggest these islands could serve as research havens for controversial scientific endeavors, though the practicality and ethics of such experiments are debated. Overall, the discussion highlights a clash between libertarian ideals and the necessity of regulations in maintaining societal order.
  • #121
Evo said:
There's a difference? :-p

Yes, because "Libertarianism in the UK" doesn't make a very good Sex Pistols song.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #122
rhody said:
Chi,

I know my home state is not perfect, far from it, but the Luciano's could easily come from Little Italy in New York. Our poor state has enough political corruption, financial trouble and grift now as it is. Can you please give Rhody a break ?

Rhody...

Sorry Dude,

I live right next door in Groton, CT, and I work with several people who are in RI, and the trash business is totally cornered there. It may be "legit," but it is a strong arm version of legit. Good luck to the guy who wants to start a competitive trash business there!

And Flex, I am aware of the ideology, but I have also become aware of reality. We had unbridled and unfettered capitalism here in the US a century ago. The results were the establishment of laws because the people of this country did not like it so much when all of a certain type of business was controlled by a single entity. OSHA, anti-trust laws, anti-child labor, building codes, clean-air and clean-water acts, etc are not a result of government trying to impinge on capitalism, they are the result of over-exuberence of the not-so-good aspect of capitalism.

I will totally concede that some laws go too far, and I also concede that corporations have a right to their profits. My mirthful rant above is more to point out the near silliness of this floating nation idea. With "dozens" to even "hundreds" of yachts lashed together, what kind of family will want to live there? there won't be any manufacturing going on, so businesses will all be Corporate HQ, middleman importer-exporters.

It's as naive as the hippie commune utopias dreamed up in the 60s and 70s. Even Howard Roark would laugh.
 
  • #123
FlexGunship said:
I can't figure out where that misconception came from! It seems to be pervasive though.
You were painting a picture where all of the functions of a government were privatized. If there isn't a government that is doing things, that's anarchy.
 
  • #124
Hurkyl said:
You were painting a picture where all of the functions of a government were privatized. If there isn't a government that is doing things, that's anarchy.

Well, where services were privatized. The functions of legislation, adjudication, and execution are quite separate from social services.

You can't privatize a legal system, or foreign diplomats. Nor can you privatize the writing of laws or execution thereof. Certainly you could privatize a police force, but what would it mean to have privatized courtrooms?

EDIT: Libertarianism is a long way from anarchism. Anarchism advocates the lack of a centralized government. Libertarianism advocates a centralized government designed specifically for the purpose of protecting the liberties and freedoms of individuals.
 
Last edited:
  • #125
rhody said:
Or as I have learned as of late from Don, there are Rhody Red CHICKENs as well. ACK !

Lisa,

Plants ? Ghost peppers, I am lost here...

Rhody... :blushing: :eek: :confused:

Rhododendrons...often called rhodies :smile:.
 
  • #126
mheslep said:
Why do folks constantly equate libertarianism with anarchy?

bad press?

90: Approximate number of times the prefix “Anarch-“ is used in the wiki entry on Libertarianism.
 
  • #127
Chi Meson said:
...With "dozens" to even "hundreds" of yachts lashed together, what kind of family will want to live there? there won't be any manufacturing going on, so businesses will all be Corporate HQ, middleman importer-exporters.

It's as naive as the hippie commune utopias dreamed up in the 60s and 70s. Even Howard Roark would laugh.

Me too! :smile:

Howard Roark
As the protagonist and hero in the book

But it's a good thing you put that [NR] in your previous post:

http://www.nwcn.com/news/123545864.html"
...
One man told KGW from his boat that he stays on the water because shelters won't allow him to bring his dog along.
...

Freedom from anti-dog tyranny! Go dude!

(But as you said, they're dumping their trash in the river, and like https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3457560&postcount=27" ultimate libertarian society, they're pooping under our bridges.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #130
lisab said:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/paypal-founder-to-create-island,21205/

The island will levy an "Occasional arbitrary tax on the population just to give them something to get riled up about, which, for many libertarians, is their sole reason for existing" :smile:

:smile:

Stop it!

...

breathing again...

Ok, we need to get serious here... I was curious why no one questioned why I had no "Tea-Party" island society mentioned:

OmCheeto said:
A socialist island: Take the fish away from the fisherman, throw the fish in a pot and feed everyone.
A democratic island: Pay the guy for the fish, throw the fish in a pot and feed everyone.
A republican island: Only the people who invested in Fishing Inc. get to eat.
A libertarian island: The guy with the most money buys the fish, and eats it.

It would be a great insult if we were to marginalize them...