Sometimes it takes one person to ask the correct questions… Understand, we ALL have our own ideas, and most of us disagree on many issues. I’m really big on independence, self sufficiency, sustainability, eco-friendliness and many other things.
One of the biggest problems I see is the almost total lack of concern for food security, sanitation, and sustainability.
An issue that seems attractive to most, in here, is ferrocement construction. However, when you look at it, it’s not really sustainable to dump tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, to make the necessary ingredients to make that ferrocement hull. My choice? Basalt Composit Rebar and Geopolymer, using ingredients available on every landmass on the planet, without using the same Slaked Lime formulas that dump CO2 into the atmosphere, without having to mine and smelt Iron Ore… and do so at potentially 1/2 the cost of a normal ferrocement structure… I’ve put those ideas in here and they have gone mostly ignored.
Food production? Covered it a number of ways and generally agreed upon, but NOBODY, other than Robert Ballard and I seem to think it’s an issue, but NOBODY ELSE is even considering starting from a position of food security… That supply-line dries up and we’re 3 DAYS from disaster.
Ignore the naysayers and put it out here. LET them pick it apart… It will actually help you refine your concepts. Not just ‘because I said so’, DOCUMENT the approach, show the reasoning and LET the arguments push you FORWARD…
Heck, I’ve begged for a Naval Architect, emailed quite a few. I KNOW how expensive it will be JUST to get my plans drawn up well enough to make a model for wave tank testing. Look at my early attempts to render an image of my concepts. Look at my smallest, last rendering. I STILL cannot draw it in CAD, but I HAVE a refined, if too small design. It WILL NOT meet the needs I want to cover, but it would give me a proof of concept…
The original vision was always to have a large number of different types of societies.
Understand that that would mean a level of competition between these societies for citizens.
Before that though there is a competition for ideas, for funds, for support. That sort of competition is reflected in this forum. And being the nature of competition it can be negative.
Personally, I am in favour of a company being primarily responsible for the running of the society with some level of democratisation, but rigid limits on the scope of government. My preference would also be to become part of the British Commonwealth if possible in some form. There are benefits from being a kingdom or part thereof, but particularly in this case it would give a legitimacy to the society.
I think mostly those on this forum would not appreciate the case for a kingdom since they tend to be from America (a republic) and the overriding feeling is for some form of libertarianism or at least very limited government (nothing wrong with that though).
You do not have to convince others, you only need to ensure you remain convinced yourself, and putting it out there will help you to do that, as Frusha has said.
When someone gets actual seasteads out there and especially if they are seen as successfully attracting others, I would expect a lot of criticisms to come from all quarters where people will suddenly feel threatened. It is likely to make this forum look meek and mild.
And yes, Shiina Ai, I for one am seriously interested in your concept.
I have no problem with people picking it apart. I answer assumptions and contrary opinions as they come with my limited knowledge. I welcome people who argue their case and I expect them to respect my arguments too. What I don’t accept are people who ridicule other’s idea and offer nothing helpful to the discussion other than snide remarks because it goes against how they believe things should happen.
We do worry about food production. That’s why from the very start, we create our structure around the idea of food production, residential quarters and clean drinkable water. As for CO2, I don’t really see the problem with our method of construction. Risenia’s method of construction involves de-acidizing the water by taking carbon from the sea (carbonic acid) and sending it back to the atmosphere. After which, maybe the carbon dioxide can be captured and utilized or stored away, though we are not so concerned about that yet. At a large enough scale, Risenia project can slow down the acidization of the oceans by removing carbon from where it’s not needed as a byproduct of our construction method.
We do have a blueprint of the superstructure drawn (not finalized and not professional grade) and that was how he was able to convince those rich kids to foot the bill and agree to make him king.
Thank you for your words.
But I must state that we are of no threat to any of the other projects (imagined or real) because we are not here to get funding from the small pool shared by many fish. We already have funding, it may be smaller than we’d like and our research funding may be miniscule but we have enough money to build the superstructure of the megastructure at least. Any more funding and development can be acquired later from companies through trade concessions or special rights. We are not worried about this. The running joke among us is “He can sell water to dolphins and get payment in gold”.
Yes, among the reason why we chose the kingdom model or in your and Elwar’s case, the company model, is because it’s a lot easier to get recognition. If you get something built, you have a constitution and a set of laws, you have proven that your government is somewhat stable and can be trusted on not to go crazy, it’s only a matter of time before your kingdom seastead gets recognition. Even if it’s not granted a full country status.
Libertarian societies on the other hand are so different that established countries look at them with suspicion if not outright hostility. Libertarian societies offer low or no taxation, discrete banking practices, the freedom to create and distribute banned substances and among others, the legalization of child pornography. No, I’m not saying that a libertarian society will abuse their freedom and legalize money laundering, create child pornography or trade in methamphetamine, I’m saying the established nations fear that they will, among other fears. Libertarian societies have existed for years, but they don’t go overboard and thus were barely tolerated. The members still pay government taxes, abide by banking laws and they don’t try to go independent. When you create a libertarian society in the open ocean, you are trying to go independent and they don’t take kindly to that.
Regardless, whether it’s libertarianism, kingdom, republic or company, Part 5, Article 60 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea considers that ‘Artificial islands, installations and structures do not possess the status of islands. They have no territorial sea of their own, and their presence does not affect the delimitation of the territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone or the continental shelf’. Therefore, regardless of the form of governance there is little chance for a seastead to be recognized by the UN. But we’re not worried about that much, because this is just a convention, we do not care being part of the United Nations. Individual countries can still recognize our sovereignity. We’ll fight it one step at a time.
Or we can take a different method by poking holes in the convention, stating that we didn’t build it. Because the sea built it for us.
I do not worry about criticisms too much, but at least people should address the issue instead of ridiculing it just because they can’t understand how it can work. This isn’t a movie maniac or college forum. This is a professional community, and everyone should take childishness out of the equation and be professionally critical, even if they’re not a professional in that field. As for criticisms once the actual seastead are out there, I’ll just sneer at them and think of it as the bark of a loser while saying, “I’ve built it, what have you built?” But until that happens, I guess I’m still somewhat insecure and being ridiculed without being told why it won’t work really piss me off.
As far as I can tell, there is not any financing available in this forum. One pretender and another possible fake, but TSI isn’t funding anyone in this forum, though they have had a couple of contests with some sort of awards. They DO, however, ask for donations…
I had forgotten your intent to use seacrete. Not the same as ferrocement, at all. Ferrocement uses ordinary Portland Cement. That requires Slaked Lime. Baking Limestone, to make Slaked Lime releases something like 1-2 tons of CO2, for every ton of slaked lime produced, and that does not include the energy used to mine, or bake limestone to make it.
There is some good documentation here, in the forum, on secrete, that may help.
You have a plan. Fine tune it in here. Use the search function, ask questions. Most of us may not agree on much, but, aside from having different goals, most are helpful…
In a word, no. One expects to have some level of influence on how collective taxes are spent, if not directly, then in the selection of representatives. One may agree to binding decisions being imposed even if the decision is sub-optimal on a personal level, but that’s not the same as having no say whatsoever, or having a system where one person has greater rights than another (which is most people’s objection to nobility and kings- the inherent inequality of representation.)
Class stratification, set in law, is problematic because it limits opportunity for excellence to come from any person, rather than just offering opportunity to a few at the expense of the many.
Just a question- where do you expect to recruit your peasants from? Do they have a role other than labor? Do you have a plan for a “yeoman” class? How many degrees of nobility are there, and what is it based upon? What are the duties of nobility (other than initial investment)?
[quote=“Shiina_Ai, post:25, topic:2689”]
I guess I’m still somewhat insecure and being ridiculed without being told why it won’t work really piss me off.[/quote]
That’s because you are young and you judge your well being by what other think. As you mature, you get to the point that you don’t give a rats ass what someone else thinks. So when your tired of being pissed off, good. Then re-evaluate you. You are the most important person in your world as I am in mine. That makes you a sovereign, but so is everyone else. That is the basis of libertarianism.
When you force me to pay taxes, you are taking away my sovereignty. You have demoted me to a servant. Your servant, as you are reaping the benefits of my life against my will. I said all of that to try to explain any ridicule. Mostly its in your head because most of us don’t pay enough attention to the inexperienced to make the effort. However, this is just an explanation for you as you asked.
I don’t need to comment on having a king. That idea was defeated 250 years ago. And your idea of taxes won’t work anyway so why should we worry about it? You see at sea, you really are free. Try to tax me, I give the old FU and leave. At sea, you are going to have to sell people on moving to your kingdom. Too easy to be independent to feel the need to pay taxes. And the only way to get people to pay taxes is the threat of force.
Governments are inefficient and evil. The bigger the government, the more evil it is. Run away from evil in all of its forms. Or, just ignore me.
There is no peasant in the Risenian model. There is no yeoman either. Everyone under the king is equal. The existence of the king is not to symbolize societal barrier, but only serves to ensure nobody goes too far. In effect, the king is just like everyone else. He has a government salary, he works 5 days a week and he takes a break two days a week. Just like everyone else, he also has a hobby and can take vacations. The only difference is in what job he does.
Basically, the hierarchy is based on the the simplest form of government, the Greek City-states system with minor difference. A city is its own nation, led by a benevolent king, who hold absolute power but lends his power to the executive office elected through a democracy. If an elected official go too far and refused to resign, like what’s happening in Malaysia right now, the king has every right to take back the power lent to him, unlike what’s happening in Malaysia right now. This is important, because without a single incorruptible king who watches for people to mess up, a country can fall deeper and deeper with no stopping, like what’s happening in Malaysia right now.
You may be asking if the king can take back the power lent at any time. The answer is no. The power is only taken from an elected official if either 1) He messed up too far; 2) He is accused of wrongdoings such as bribery or scandal and refused to relinquish his office to allow for unbiased investigations; or 3) He fail to gain the people’s support but refuse to step down.
There is no nobility class. The title of ‘lord’ is purely ceremonial, given to those who made contributions above and beyond what is expected of an average citizen. The reason our financial backers agreed to fund it was not because they wanted to lord over the average people. They agreed to fund it because they are tired of our government’s bullshit and wants a more progressive nation to call home. A place where they can do whatever they want within the limits of human decency and not having to suffer higher income tax bracket or wealth tax just because they’re a bit smarter and more hardworking than the average people.
Sorry, forgot to answer your question of where we recruit our people. We already got 80 people signing up with us so far. Whether they will join us in the end depends on them. Maybe we’ll get more, maybe we’ll get less. Basically, our population comes from population that are tired of their overbearing government and just wants something different.
Actually, there are quite a few modern Monarchies… No reason to be uncivil. They have their ideas, you have yours, agree to disagree… and, no this is not the same as fighting back against Wil, Wil chose to denigrate almost every idea in this forum that wasn’t his, and refused to follow his own demands for ‘scientific debate’ be refuting documentation and demanding opinions, among other things. Thankfully, we are no longer being constantly spammed by his scams.
Monaco, being a City State is a Constitutional Monarchy:
[quote=“JL_Frusha, post:33, topic:2689”]
No reason to be uncivil[/quote]
Opps, it wasn’t supposed to be uncivil, sorry if it came across as such. I was trying to explain how to not let the opinions of others effect your mental well being. That was why is said “tired of getting pissed off, good.” With the intent of “now go to something about it”. We all know that her ideal won’t work. Not in the ocean. But that is not to say that the ideas that come out of the ones that don’t work, won’t be amazing. It just takes time.
And JL, in the words of Lt. Frank Drebin of Police Squad,
“Protecting the Queen’s safety is a task that is gladly accepted by Police Squad. No matter how silly the idea of having a queen might be to us, as Americans, we must be gracious and considerate hosts”. (Naked Gun)
Actually, they seem to have the backing to try, which is more than most of us. Personally, government of some sort is a necessary evil, imho. Someone has to set and maintain certain regulations, ensure the well-being of the community, including health and safety measures. Does it really matter who? As Captain of my vessel, my word is law. Along with that authority comes responsibility. As Captain, I am also responsible for the actions of those aboard my vessel. Is that not ALSO a type of sovereign ‘kingdom’? All a matter of scale.
There are two aspects of sovereignty: internal sovereignty and external sovereignty. Internal Sovereignty means some persons, assembly of group of persons in every independent state have the final legal authority to command and enforce obedience.
[quote=“JL_Frusha, post:36, topic:2689”]
As Captain of my vessel,[/quote]
I have served under a lot of captains and have yet had one to tax me. If that had happened, for one I wouldn’t stay there and secondly I would let others know about his bribe demands.
And there is a better way. In Marinea, we will ask business that wish to be part of our network to give 2% of the stock or ownership to Marinea. This puts the interest of the community on the same side of the ledger as the business. No start up licenses or taxes, and everything the community can do to help the business would also help themselves at 2%.
Labor should also be moved from an expense to a percentage of ownership. Hourly wadges is that slave mentality at work. Lets say that a company makes a million dollars a year and has 10 employees. Under the old system of hourly wadges. The manager knows how profitable the business is and his bonus is depending on how much he has to pay his employees. He wants to pay the least that he has to. Employees don’t care how profitable the business is so won’t do a thing to stop shrinkage.
At $10 an hour that is $20800 per year, times 10 is expected to be $208,000 plus bonus for manager and higher wages for the manager and assistant, $30,000 = $238,000. The business would allow for overages and set the cap at $250,000.
Now do it the revised way. each employee is awarded 2% of the profits. an extra 5% for the manager 2.5% and assistant totals 27.5%. There will be other salaries needed for pt employees so the company’s labor side is 30% 0r $300,000 per year. However, since everyone benefits when the company is more prosperous, its well worth the extra $50,000. This amount could be compensated in the reduction of shrinkage alone. Everyone wins.
You performed duties as ordered? Presumably you were paid for these services. Did you receive equal pay with the captain? There are taxes, then there are taxes… Just because it isn’t formally labeled as such does not mean there is not some form of a tax. Being of lesser authority and lower pay grade, didn’t your labor help pay, in part, the captains wages and vessel operating costs, possibly even the lean on the vessel? If the vessel was wholly owned by the Captain, presumably he/she obtained an even greater share of the profits.