Gulching: Can we create an Atlantis?

[Capitalism Forever]

Could an individual, or group of individuals, purchase a piece of land somewhere and "legally" establish a new country, founded and incorporating a political system based upon Objectivism?

No. America's founders tried to do just that, and guess what, King George did not think it was "legal." Tyrants will never relinquish their power voluntarily; that's what makes them tyrants in the first place.

The act of trying to buy your freedom automatically ensures its own uselessness. That which you have to buy is not yours by right; by saying "I will give you $40 billion for my freedom," you agree that your freedom is something to be bought and sold and not an inalienable right. If you strike such a deal with any dictator, bureaucrat, or military caudillo, he'll very soon be knocking at your door again, offering to sell you more "freedom."

Besides, there are already a number of tax-free islands in the Caribbean and elsewhere. The "international community" absolutely hates them and is constantly pressuring them to reduce their freedom in order to avoid "harmful tax competition." If a country gets labeled as an "uncooperative tax haven," it is bound to face restrictions of trade and other disadvantages.

So having your own country means less than you might think. The important thing is to have weight, in terms of military power and economic significance. These were the things that allowed America to become independent, and in Atlas Shrugged, it's the latter of these that allowed John Galt and his fellow heroes to triumph.

[hunterrose]

'Course, it's extremely hard for individuals to attain military/economic power that could deter threatening nations.

I agree with Frederick Cookinham. In his opinion, space would be the place where such a country could be created. Theoretically, if you have enough money, you could start right away moving to the moon

I like the space idea, but terran nations would still claim whatever rock was colonized when they begin to see some siphonable advantages.

[Halsey17]

*** Merged with a related topic. - sN ***

Long time lurker here. Anyway, the most popular boards in this forum are the Political and Current Events boards, and naturally the theme is how much we'd all like an Objectivist society. Most debates about Objectivist principles being implemented in a society seem to mostly refer to America. Now it seems to me that America isn't generally moving towards becoming an Objectivist society; every step forward is met with at least one step back. So, why stay? We are all free to move out of the country at any time. I think most of us stay for the money and, despite shortcomings, the quality of American society. No other civilized country offers as many conveniences, opportunities, and observed liberties as here. As much as I'd like to move to some remote island, I wont find an engineering job there that starts out at 70k with full benefits.

Face it, if an Objectivist society occurs in any of our lifetimes it would probably have to be formed new instead of from a change of government in America or anywhere else. Also, actually forming a capitalist or Objectivist society by purchasing massive amounts of land or any of the other methods that have been considered (ocean city, cruise ship) are so expensive as to require an unrealistic amount of cooperation with pooling of funds or someone extremely wealthy willing to back it. So basically the foreseeable future does not hold any big Objectivist America like most of us dream of. So, it's stay here and fight/debate for your rights, or leave and lose the many benefits of civilization.

But at what point does the cost of living here outweigh the benefits? That point will come, if it ever does, when you retire. Has anyone else entertained the idea of retiring to one of the more undeveloped parts of the world <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries>? Solar and wind power make living remotely a possibility in some places. Internet can be gotten via satellite, and a massive freezer and/or garden can make up for lack of restaurants and stores. The most expensive aspect is buying or building a house with modern amenities. Get your friends to retire there (where?) too, and eventually you might have the beginnings of a village. Maybe in one of the least densely populated countries like Mongolia or one of the small ones in South America it could be done. Lately I've been imagining buying and living on a 40-100 ft. seafaring yacht. For any of these options you'd want at least $200,000 or so which could be financed if you've got the credit and income.

Sorry for the long post, but I'm wondering if anyone else has seriously considered or implemented an escape or gulch. I'm just tired of discussing what should be, could be, but never will be. These possibilities seem very real assuming you can afford it and lack a bunch of friends and family tying you down.

Edited July 22, 2009 by softwareNerd
Merged notice

[LovesLife]

My solution to this exact issue was to leave the US and semi-retire to New Zealand. It's not perfect, but for me, it's a big step up. My ancestors did a similar thing a few hundred years ago when they left an oppressive Europe and moved to the US.

I considered moving somewhere more remote, but my (non-Objectivist) wife and family would never go for it. I thought about the yacht idea, too, and actually looked into it a bit. One issue is that maintenance and operating costs are very high. Plus, living completely at sea would be very isolating and lonely. And of course you still depend on land-based resources for things like supplies, repairs, fuel, etc.

I would love to get a bunch of Objectivists together -- perhaps at the bottom of the current collapse -- and with combined resources, approach several countries to see if they would be willing to sell off a small piece of coastal land that would become a new country. I don't see any reason why that shouldn't be possible. There's a lot of land in the world today that's considered almost worthless for one reason or another (desert, etc), but that could be made both livable and valuable by a group of motivated individuals. The logistics would be challenging, but not impossible.

[Jake_Ellison]

I believe the option of forming a new country is a perfectly viable one if the conditions in the United States and Europe become oppressive enough to motivate creative independent people to leave.

The proof that such a plan is viable is of course the state of Israel, which was formed out of very little, and has constantly been under attack, yet it manages to be both prosperous and relatively free. Of course, the fact is that Israel is nowhere near a pure capitalist society, and there's a huge religious influence in government there, but that isn't really relevant to the way it was formed: on the principles of individual freedom, with individuals who chose to move there and build their own lives, because they were rejected in their countries of origin. The fact that they have no natural resources to speak of, and yet they thrive, speaks volumes about the possibility of a new, capitalist state being extremely successful.

[DavidOdden]

But at what point does the cost of living here outweigh the benefits? That point will come, if it ever does, when you retire. Has anyone else entertained the idea of retiring to one of the more undeveloped parts of the world

I thought about it, momentarily. Here are some countervaling considerations. First, you have to pick a stable free society -- moving to Zimbabwe just to have your land expropriated by the state or on-hand currency devalued by the weekly addition of a zero won't make for a happy retirement. That really weighs against most of the LDCs. Note also that these "life is cheap" countries are also "we've got nothing" countries, so the cost of a computer or a car is astronomical -- although rice and cassava may be cheap. Retired folks tend to be concerned about health issues, and I'd hate to have to fly back to the US for a regular doctor's appointment. I'll tell you that you are talking your life in your hands if you have to have surgery at one of the district hospitals in Tanzania. These places are cheap for a reason (and that cheapness is going away in places like Dar es Salaam).

[Maximus]

I would perfer, at this time, to remain in the US and fight to preserve our Republic. It is worth saving.

[Mensch]

It does seem bleak here in America at the moment, but I do not think that we will have a total collapse into a collectivist ideology. We are sliding ever closer, but there is a counter pull as well. When I go around the internet I see many blogs and sites that support the ideas of Rand. Often I see Objectivists jumping into a discussion and make statements about their thinking. The ARI is very active in the universities, there will be some fundamental change through this eventually.

To this day the US is still one of the best places on earth. We have all the conveniences that modern life can have. There is still a fundamental will in the populous to protect freedom. It seems a nebulous sort of thinking, but it is there. It is only sleeping right now, in need to get a cold bucket of water thrown at it. I think we are being doused right now, there will be an awakening.

And with that in mind, I would not go to some underdeveloped place to retire (heck I will not retire at any age anyhow, that would make a good topic I think). I like what DavidOdden had to say:

I thought about it, momentarily. Here are some countervaling considerations. First, you have to pick a stable free society -- moving to Zimbabwe just to have your land expropriated by the state or on-hand currency devalued by the weekly addition of a zero won't make for a happy retirement. That really weighs against most of the LDCs. Note also that these "life is cheap" countries are also "we've got nothing" countries, so the cost of a computer or a car is astronomical -- although rice and cassava may be cheap. Retired folks tend to be concerned about health issues, and I'd hate to have to fly back to the US for a regular doctor's appointment. I'll tell you that you are talking your life in your hands if you have to have surgery at one of the district hospitals in Tanzania. These places are cheap for a reason (and that cheapness is going away in places like Dar es Salaam).

The dream of a perfect country to live in can come true. But changing minds is a slow process. We have at this time a great opportunity, there is certainly a big vacuum now where rational ideas can take hold at the ground level, we have with Objectivism a philosophy that is ready to be implemented in the form of Laissez-faire. It will take many years, but I think that it must succeed, all else has failed.

So I would suggest to work within what we have and not leave only to get the dream smashed by the reality of living in isolation.

[Zip]

I can't help thinking a couple of things with regard to this.

1. I keep coming back to the statement made by the liberal poster JohnS that as long as the Atlases of the world are only chained just so much that they (the socialists) can keep the men of the mind as quasi-prisoners forever. At what point does the will to work inside the current mixed system to bring about freedom and LFC constitute nothing more than pragmatism?

2. With the election of what is probably the most socialist President in your countries history, with the abandonment of fiscal prudence by the conservatives and with those asking for bailouts lined up like dominoes can you really say things are getting better?

3. If the people who settled North America had waited till they had the comforts of home, and all the modern amenities before striking out for the new world we would still be stuck in Europe, waiting for someone else to do all the heavy lifting, all the innovation and creating freedom.

[Mensch]

1. I keep coming back to the statement made by the liberal poster JohnS that as long as the Atlases of the world are only chained just so much that they (the socialists) can keep the men of the mind as quasi-prisoners forever. At what point does the will to work inside the current mixed system to bring about freedom and LFC constitute nothing more than pragmatism?

I think the chained men of the mind will have to discover that they are chained. That comes about by showing them that there is another way, that they do not have to accept being enslaved. It requires getting more active in the political realm, in finding the philosophy that works for them and not against them. I do not think that trying to work from within is a pragmatic approach, it is the only approach that is open to us, there is really no choice left.

2. With the election of what is probably the most socialist President in your countries history, with the abandonment of fiscal prudence by the conservatives and with those asking for bailouts lined up like dominoes can you really say things are getting better?

At this point things are not getting better. But this very fact that we are getting ever deeper into a collectivist system, fostered by the left and the right, will make thinking people more aware, will wake them up and will make them get off their sofa and start moving. The beneficiaries (parasites) of this current system will only follow whatever is, but some of them will also get a wake up call.

3. If the people who settled North America had waited till they had the comforts of home, and all the modern amenities before striking out for the new world we would still be stuck in Europe, waiting for someone else to do all the heavy lifting, all the innovation and creating freedom.

It is true that the pioneers rather preferred living in hardship than living oppressed in their old countries, but those were different times and oppression was at a much more severe level. People did not have comfort at all unless they were wealthy. There was a continent open to take and discover and mold. There is no such thing today. You can only go where somebody already has laid claim. The sea and the planets are the only areas open to develop. Neither are really feasible at this time.

PS. I am a staunch optimist about this, I am fully aware that I will not see this in my lifetime. I hope to see the beginning though

[Halsey17]

Definitely good points all around. If you've got a wife and kids, your options are limited depending how on much she enjoys sort of roughing it because in order to enjoy freedom in a less developed country like New Zealand you'd probably have to live rather remotely. That means trucking in a backhoe so you can dig a septic system and possibly a well. It's a bit of work. Deserts are potentially great because of solar power and possibly wind-let the sun power the AC.

Seems like there are 3 options to escaping:

1) Move to a somewhat remote part of a safe but less developed country (like Brazil or Mongolia maybe).

2) Move to an area in one of the cluster of islands in the Pacific.

3) Live on a yacht.

You could try moving to a remote part of the US (northwest or Alaska), but you'd better be low key about anything illegal or you could end up like Ruby Ridge. Anyway, these are just musings for me at this point, but I'd be eager to see if anyone has successfully managed a getaway where they are living freely but still relatively safely. Cheers for everyone who is optimistic about America though. There are definitely still some states and locales in the US where police will mostly leave you alone. I mean, if you can get 300+ acres in a wooded area and live in the middle of it, no police will probably bother you, but I can tell from experience that living where neighbors can't see your house means robbers can be a problem.

[Halsey17]

So I would suggest to work within what we have and not leave only to get the dream smashed by the reality of living in isolation.

Joe the Plumber sees us as fringe nutjobs. Chances are your friends and co-workers would sadly agree to you being imprisoned for not paying taxes or owning an illegal drug or weapon. What I'm saying is that we are isolated in a way. At least that's how I feel, and the escapes are actually the dream.

[Sir Andrew]

I feel like I'm intellectually gulching. Does that count?

[John McVey]

Definitely good points all around. If you've got a wife and kids, your options are limited depending how on much she enjoys sort of roughing it because in order to enjoy freedom in a less developed country like New Zealand you'd probably have to live rather remotely.

New Zealand is not a lesser-developed country. It is a fully-fledged modern and industrialised nation that scores very highly on the Human Development Index - NZ ranks 19th in the world as of 2007 from among a tight bunching of similar scores, and which score is higher than that of the G7 countries of Italy and Germany. Over on the Heritage Index of Economic Freedom, New Zealand ranks 6th, one behind the USA at 5th. Australia ranks 3rd, but given the recent elections here and in NZ, they may well over take us before long.

If you guys are serious about looking for places to go if the US no longer wants freedom, then Australia and New Zealand should be among the first thoughts you have - Ireland would be, too, but I think the European statists would cast evil beady eyes on it before long. I would definitely pick here or NZ as a place to go (stay, in my case) and try to fix up local problems long before I'd consider undertaking the enormous effort and highly risky proposition of gulching a new country.

JJM

[Solid_Choke]

Have any of you considered seasteading?

[Zip]

Have any of you considered seasteading?

Yes, but of the options it is the most expensive. That and if it were primarily made up of Libertarians the first time some tin pot dictator showed up with a blunderbuss and a rusty bread knife they'd fold faster than a cheap suit, just like they did on Minerva reef.

I applaud the Libertarian zeal for trying again and again to get these things done but most of the plans are pie-in-the-sky dreams that ignore the realities of today. Sovereignty is the most exclusive club and no one is going to give it away. That means if you are serious then you will probably have to fight for it, and from what I've read and know about the Libertarian movement when it comes to these points where reality really begins to intrude on their fantasy they don't have the philosophical cohesion to render a decision much less defend their scattered ideology.

[Mensch]

Joe the Plumber sees us as fringe nutjobs. Chances are your friends and co-workers would sadly agree to you being imprisoned for not paying taxes or owning an illegal drug or weapon. What I'm saying is that we are isolated in a way. At least that's how I feel, and the escapes are actually the dream.

Joe the Plumber might. But he has a real streak of "get the darn Government off my back" in him. So I would not agree with you in this assessment. It is true that to a great extent people have accepted that it is their duty to pay taxes and follow the rules about gun ownership and drugs and look at people like us as outsiders or even anarchists (since they do not really know what anarchist means). But there are a lot of people who wait in the wings to seize an opportunity to change things. I live on an island, here most people are more freedom loving, as most people who choose to live on islands are. Maybe that would be a solution for you, to move within your country where you find more of an agreement on those issues. I also have no problem dealing with people that have another ideology, most still have some values that are appealing. It happens to be though that I love being by myself, so there is not much contact anyway.

I find it much better to be here where I live than going through all the trouble settling where I "might" find what I would like to have. My husband and I have discussed this often, we are independent job wise (internet), but we decided against such a move because we do not want to give up what this country has to offer still, as bad as the raping of us all is.

I feel like I'm intellectually gulching. Does that count?

Sure does But is that not the case for thinkers and creators anyhow?

Have any of you considered seasteading?

I have looked into that, but oh the discomfort and inconvenience for a gain that is not all that great. Those attempts are limited in scope, they are not a real example of what countries of a larger size would have to do to achieve this freedom we all dream about. I stick to working from the inside, hollow out that old rotten wood and make it collapse. I do that by engaging young people, make them aware that there are options other than what they know.

Yes, but of the options it is the most expensive. That and if it were primarily made up of Libertarians the first time some tin pot dictator showed up with a blunderbuss and a rusty bread knife they'd fold faster than a cheap suit, just like they did on Minerva reef.

I applaud the Libertarian zeal for trying again and again to get these things done but most of the plans are pie-in-the-sky dreams that ignore the realities of today. Sovereignty is the most exclusive club and no one is going to give it away. That means if you are serious then you will probably have to fight for it, and from what I've read and know about the Libertarian movement when it comes to these points where reality really begins to intrude on their fantasy they don't have the philosophical cohesion to render a decision much less defend their scattered ideology.

Agree with you Zip. Libertarians do not have what it takes to defend their ideas, there is a vacuum where philosophy needs to be. I would never join them to start a country, they base their decisions on pragmatism and would not hesitate to initiate force against their fellow man (taxes). Can you imagine the tariffs they would put on goods that we all would need living on one of those rust buckets?

--------------------------------------

I do think that we should never give up our dream of having a truly free system in our respective countries. But going away and scraping a few pieces of land together so we might all suffer in unity is not the way to go. In developed countries there are enough rational people to carve out a decent life, even if those people do not share our kind of ideology. There is enough of an economic base to work from and eventually reason will have a chance.

I have made myself independent enough to work from any place on earth, but I have chosen to stay in the US, because with all its flaws, it is still the best life that I can imagine to have. I have not amassed wealth, but I can live a very comfortable life here. I could not do so if I were to choose one of those ideas of separating into an enclave where any day some power lusting thug could come in and take all. Look at the waves of pirates now stealing anything that floats. One could defend against those people, but the cost would be prohibitive.

Playing with the idea of starting a country from scratch is a great exercise, it might give us a chance to work through all the possibilities and how to set up such a thing in reality. Those principles can then be taken and applied in the real word. Do not forget that romantic notions often are lacking what it means to live within reality. Reality has a way of cutting down fantasies and wishes.

Edited November 30, 2008 by Mensch

[Maximus]

Do not forget that romantic notions often are lacking what it means to live within reality. Reality has a way of cutting down fantasies and wishes.

Truer words rarely spoken!

[JMeganSnow]

Face it, if an Objectivist society occurs in any of our lifetimes it would probably have to be formed new instead of from a change of government in America or anywhere else.

What are you basing this statement on? How can you define probability where free will is involved?

I fail to see how anyone could claim to be an Objectivist and still engage in the kind of pointless self-martyrdom that such "gulching" would require--especially if it made it impossible for you to pursue your chosen career to the best of your ability.

As for the Israel example someone else mentioned: Israel only exists because it was established by other, larger nations and is propped up by constant, sacrificial donations from those nations (primarily the U.S.). It's hardly a good example.

[Steve D'Ippolito]

Seasteading? Let's see. Their smallest prototype is supposed to fit in a beer glass. And has not been constructed yet (or they'd be trying to sell copies).

ATNA. All Talk, No Action

[Steve D'Ippolito]

...And by the way, not *all* libertarians are pacifists who would fold, like the idiots at Minerva Reef were. In my experience most own guns.

Mind you I still don't think they will ever pull anything off, because they will be too busy arguing anarchy vs. minarchy, and a host of other issues. And that optimistic assessment of how unified they'd be assumes they don't bring a bunch of anti-gun environmentalist or religious LINOs (Libertarians in Name Only) with them just to have a big tent.

[Halsey17]

Ok, I guess gulching is something few people consider let alone pursue. The cost and work required definitely make it prohibitive to many.

Playing with the idea of starting a country from scratch is a great exercise, it might give us a chance to work through all the possibilities and how to set up such a thing in reality. Those principles can then be taken and applied in the real word. Do not forget that romantic notions often are lacking what it means to live within reality. Reality has a way of cutting down fantasies and wishes.

I agree that scratching together a country is largely a fantasy, but the ideas I mentioned would work for an individual up to maybe a dozen or two people. For most peolpe who were raised in the city and have never chopped wood or been anywhere without bathrooms, gulching is probably a fantasy. However, there was a time when your average fellow (like my dad) could hunt, fish, fix cars, build houses, and figure stuff out. Being a year away from a degree in mechanical engineering (Go Bears), I can say building and fixing things on your own isn't impossible. If you do consider living remotely, a pilots license and small 3-seat plane suddenly makes the world a lot smaller.

What are you basing this statement on? How can you define probability where free will is involved?

I fail to see how anyone could claim to be an Objectivist and still engage in the kind of pointless self-martyrdom that such "gulching" would require--especially if it made it impossible for you to pursue your chosen career to the best of your ability.

As for the Israel example someone else mentioned: Israel only exists because it was established by other, larger nations and is propped up by constant, sacrificial donations from those nations (primarily the U.S.). It's hardly a good example.

Seriously? From an admin? This pointless martyrdom, if you read the thread, is beneficial in that one is free of the ridiculous laws, notions, and opinions of this society. Again, if you read the thread-actually the original post-you'll see that I said gulching is most plausible after you have retired. Also, I don't want this to become a debate about the likelihood of the US becoming Objectivist, but based on the fact that we make up probably less than one one hundredth of one percent (that's about 30,000) of the nation, there is an extremely low probability of the US becoming Objectivists.

I really don't think there's a big need to defend gulching being as the word was invented by Rand in Atlas Shrugged and applied in a way almost exactly like we're discussing.

Edited November 30, 2008 by Halsey17

[JMeganSnow]

Seriously? From an admin? This pointless martyrdom, if you read the thread, is beneficial in that one is free of the ridiculous laws, notions, and opinions of this society. Again, if you read the thread-actually the original post-you'll see that I said gulching is most plausible after you have retired. Also, I don't want this to become a debate about the likelihood of the US becoming Objectivist, but based on the fact that we make up probably less than one one hundredth of one percent (that's about 30,000) of the nation, there is an extremely low probability of the US becoming Objectivists.

I really don't think there's a big need to defend gulching being as the word was invented by Rand in Atlas Shrugged and applied in a way almost exactly like we're discussing.

You could be free of the ridiculous laws, notions, and opinions of this society in seconds by committing sucide--does that appeal to you? Are you aware that things only have value in a particular context and you have to judge whether they're worth pursuing by what it's going to *cost* you?

What percentage of people living in Russia were explicitly Marxist? Broad cultural movements aren't brought about by getting the majority vote but by a small group of intellectual elites.

And I've read Atlas Shrugged at least fifteen times without ever encountering such a word as "gulching" used in *any* context. Sure, many of the strikers referred to the valley as "Galt's Gulch", but "gulching"?

[AllMenAreIslands]

Here's my 25 cents (damn inflation has had its way with everything!)

The interest level among non-Objectivists is growing, but there is fear that it won't work. What will happen with roads, schools, health care, etc.?

What if, instead of thinking in terms of developing a Galt's Gulch in isolation, hidden away, we think up a plan to develop a Model Version and seek investors among the rich? The plan would involve making a reality tv kind of show, documenting how problems are solved, how the region grows and prospers. SHOW the people, the doubters & naysayers and convince them that way that their fears are unfounded. It's hard for people today to imagine what it was like to witness the change from the horse & buggy to the automobile.

They've made TV shows in which people go back to various points in time to live those conditions, for example 1900 House. So how about a show that depicts how life would be in a fully capitalist, fully voluntary-funded government? I bet there would be thousands of applicants to be "on the show," in effect, to live the life of a modern-day pioneer.

The thing is, of course, that the TV show would be for the purpose of educating the public at large, but the point of the exercise IS to create a Galt's Gulch type of county which is in full view of the public and is an ongoing area.

I bet there are many possible sites around the US or even in Canada. Most important would be to secure freedom from ALL government intervention on the part of the existing government infrastructure. A bold experiment, but one that has more chance of working in my view, than disappearing into the woodwork to live our lives quietly. We need to make a real stand for freedom in as big a way possible.

Thoughts?

[Zip]

Here's my 25 cents (damn inflation has had its way with everything!)

The interest level among non-Objectivists is growing, but there is fear that it won't work. What will happen with roads, schools, health care, etc.?

What if, instead of thinking in terms of developing a Galt's Gulch in isolation, hidden away, we think up a plan to develop a Model Version and seek investors among the rich? The plan would involve making a reality tv kind of show, documenting how problems are solved, how the region grows and prospers. SHOW the people, the doubters & naysayers and convince them that way that their fears are unfounded. It's hard for people today to imagine what it was like to witness the change from the horse & buggy to the automobile.

They've made TV shows in which people go back to various points in time to live those conditions, for example 1900 House. So how about a show that depicts how life would be in a fully capitalist, fully voluntary-funded government? I bet there would be thousands of applicants to be "on the show," in effect, to live the life of a modern-day pioneer.

The thing is, of course, that the TV show would be for the purpose of educating the public at large, but the point of the exercise IS to create a Galt's Gulch type of county which is in full view of the public and is an ongoing area.

I bet there are many possible sites around the US or even in Canada. Most important would be to secure freedom from ALL government intervention on the part of the existing government infrastructure. A bold experiment, but one that has more chance of working in my view, than disappearing into the woodwork to live our lives quietly. We need to make a real stand for freedom in as big a way possible.

Thoughts?

I actually like this idea but the kicker is that they wouldn't let it keep going once the "show" lost the interest of the viewers.