I had this crazy dream, about some folks who loved their country who all began to dream the same dream. And when the morning came there arose across this nation people thinking one and the same. The awoke to find their freedoms and all their liberties had gradually been taken away, and when they realized the danger to their posterity I heard those patriotic people say...WE WANT THIS COUNTRY BACK! We ain't just jokin' Jack. We want our liberties, our dignity and our freedoms and our rights restored. We want this Country back! She's been driven way off track, we're wide awake and we're madder than hell now. And we ain't gonna take it anymore! No we’re not gonna take it anymore!
Remember golden days when the Stars and Strips forever symbolized her glorious name? "AMERICA"
But now it's all been changed and when we gaze upon Old Glory it's hard to fight back feelings of shame! We're fed up with lying politicians and greedy corporations who have sold us out time and again. And we're sick and tired of sending our soldiers off to wars that we were never meant to win.
Now we know our cause is right and our victory's on the way. And we won't give up the fight 'Till we hear three hundred million say... We want this Country back! We ain't just jokin' jack! We want our liberty and our dignity and our freedoms and our rights restored. We want this Country back!
And we ain't taken anymore flack! We're wide awake and we're madder than hell now!
And we ain't gonna take it anymore! No we're not gonna take it anymore!
I am working on doing a cover of this song. If anyone would like to hear my capabilities check this link. I Don't Care Where You've Been Sleeping cover of Don Francisco's song... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgO3Wc0X6tY
This is the album I did back in 2008. I hope some of you get something out of it. I have CD's too if anyone would like a copy.
Heck yes and I'm pretty sure several people are already starting their own country in the private domain.... Brandon Joe Williams and some others......looking forward to reading the next part of this!
Yep, it's happening. And the more variants, the harder it will be for states to stand in the way. A multiplicity of efforts is one of the reasons why we should be able to do this peacefully. Thanks!
This will have to be done underground. The eye in the sky will immediately know what is going on. Starting a decentralized nation is an enticing idea of course. But do you think the idiots in the DC swamp are going to not know about it and then let you just go ahead and do it?
This will be like actual wars...all the goofy plans the numbskull (no actual skin in the game) generals make always go to the dogs in the first hour of engagement. I don't think this will be any different. Not implying you are a goofy general or numbskull. You are a visionary..but not like Musk I hope.
I think about this almost everyday...what could replace government that really isn't like government and how do we get there.
So here, in rough and broad strokes, is my thinking on this issue…
There is no way of keeping anything secret. And if you try, it just makes them paranoid. So…
1. Be open, honest, and clear
2. Do not indicate, pose, or advocate any threat, any violence, or even a hint thereof. (That is not a pose, by the way, I really do not think violence of any sort is the answer.)
3. Be decentralized and, ultimately, leaderless.
4. Be worldwide
5. Be long-term. Stretch the timeline out. Politicians et al are generally pretty short-sighted.
Still thinking some of these things through in more detail, but that is my operational strategy atm.
I'm Very Interested Christopher. The obvious biggest challenges include: One World Government, Subversives, Ambitious-Power Hungry Predators in sheep's clothes, Financing.
We're also working on a credit based system to replace the Babylonian debt system, by reverse engineering mortgage fraud and other civil wrongs into credit, all within our own jurisdiction.
I think the concept of creating an alternative jurisdiction is the way to go, not dependent on territory, as has been mentioned elsewhere, the concept of a territory based national or country has reached its expiry date.
Another group i am looking at is found here: https://ignitaveritasunited.org/. Very interesting approach to interact with existing governments on their level as an IGO Intergovernmental Organization.
My thoughts are headed in a similar direction. Although people can have private polities on their own land too, if they want. What matters most is consent.
Sovereignty comes in all different shapes and sizes and doesn't require territory, although the indigenous peoples of the world have had their land Stolen from them by the crown and are due it back, as stated in their own legislation such as the rights of indigenous peoples. Self determination is also granted to all people's under natural law including their own legislation.
Oh man...i remember the feeling I had after reading "The Network States" by Balaji Srinivasan. I walk up to the family table while having dinner and I claimed: "it's time to create a new country!" (they were baffled)
I'm having the same feelings as I'm reading this post...🏴🔥
I got that same feeling, only not from Srinivasan's book, which I had not read at the time. For me, it was a work of fiction, so the feeling came over me more slowly, until I finally realized—hey, something like this can actually work in the real world.
And don't forget, though you are a "seeing is believing" kind of guy, that The Shift is in full swing.
We create each and every bit of our reality, and where we place our attention is what we will create more of. What someone else is doing need not be affecting of what we are creating.
We don't need others to act, do or be anything in order for us to create what we want. Belief systems are losing affecting-ness. It's up to us to figure out how we do it (create our reality through our perception), and then become expert conscious creators.
My comments below are long and detailed, so here’s the tl;dr:
I completely support the urgent need to move away from centralization of decision-making toward a more fully distributed model. All of my own writing is intended to promote this view. Networks are inherently more robust and innovative than the hierarchies we’ve been living under since paleolithic times. But talking about the creation of a new country, is, in my opinion, the wrong place to start. My hope is that your book will focus on the underpinnings of thought, ethics, and the protocols of interaction between disparate communities that are absolutely necessary to advance human civilization and avoid its imminent destruction. I will gladly contribute to that effort any way I can, but I explain below why “starting our own country” seems antithetical to that goal.
So let me begin with the concept of a country. You may mean something very different by “country” than that term’s common usage, but it will be a hard sell to move anyone away from the traditional definition. A country is predicated on the control of territory and the defense of its geographic borders. This immediately shoulders an immense burden that will overwhelm the priorities of all involved. It implies military power and international alliances which inevitably requires siding with one or more gangs against all the others. The entrenched powers will view any territory claimed by such an upstart country in one of two ways: an easy conquest to expand their own territory, or a potential threat that must be subsumed or destroyed. Either way, the project is finished before it begins.
In fact, thinking of a distributed nation as a country seems to me a surrender to the view that civilization must consist of warring principalities seeking hegemony over all others. The challenge, as I’m sure you’re aware, is to demonstrate the failure and obsolescence of that perspective.
It is vanishingly rare for any subset of humanity to have the opportunity to “start from scratch” with new models of social construction. The closest we have ever come is the frontier: those malcontents who risk their lives by venturing into the unclaimed (or sparsely defended) wilderness to forge new communities through mutual contract.
There are few such frontiers available in the world today. Every square inch of land is already claimed by some entrenched power. Every other terrestrial option such as artificial islands or undersea cities have the same issues of territorial defense enumerated above. That leaves space as, truly, our “final frontier.”
This, I believe, is the underlying motive behind Elon Musk’s push for extraplanetary settlement—the opening up of a new frontier where it will eventually be possible for small communities to walk away from the rest of us and start over. I vigorously support this effort, but while it may be our future, it is not yet a starting point for most of us. Any such long-term destination requires a massive coming-together of like-minded people with deep expertise in wide-ranging fields—all of which must happen first, within the (often hostile) confines of the existing governmental and corporate bureaucracies.
So this is going to require working within the existing systems to build the infrastructure needed to transcend the existing systems. Which means there must be profit in it for entities that do not share the end goals. That’s a big challenge, but it is at least possible.
I think Substack is a great place to start, but Substack will eventually fall under the same innovation-killing censorial control that is actively marching civilization into the abattoir of totalitarianism. Talk of forming new countries and new revolutions will hasten that occurrence.
Instead, I suggest that our focus should be more along the lines of “cellular communities” that can achieve practical self-sufficiency while networking together across geographic boundaries (cf. A Cellular Theory of Communities, July 2020, by Linus Lee—https://thesephist.com/posts/cellular-communities/; and also From City to Civium by @deepcode here on Substack—https://deepcode.substack.com/p/from-city-to-civium.)
This approach does not protect against the predatory nature of the existing governments that we remain subject to, but it’s a smaller and less threatening step toward true independence. And in fact, we can start with “virtual cellular communities” that explicitly reject the power of the speech police in a mutual quest to discover new distributed social models.
For example, could we create a Substack forum that is open to anyone to join, but cannot be viewed without agreeing to a statement of principles such as this:
I, James Leth, do hereby disavow any right or demand to be protected from ideas or speech that might offend me or trigger bad feelings, reserving my right to argue against such ideas or speech in good faith, even at risk of offending others.
Thank you for your long and thoughtful comments. Mine need not be as long in reply, simply because we largely agree.
My use of the word “country” is just a placeholder—a gateway to bigger and better things, necessitated by the language we currently have. This project will be nothing like the kinds of countries we have now. It will not be anything like the model you and I both fear and reject.
It is going to take time to lay this all out, but I think you will like it in the end. (And even well before the end.)
Some of what I write will be on thought, ethics, philosophy, etc. However, I have also already written a lot on that, so I will be trying to summarize those aspects and then get on to some practical ideas.
I am glad so many people are now hitting this from so many different angles, discovering new ideas based on our different lights and interests. Together, we are going to make good things happen.
It hasn't really got off the ground, no more than just a toe in to the water now, but some here might find a look at The Seasteading Institute interesting; https://www.seasteading.org/
Love those guys. I went to their breakout session in '23 at FF.
It's a tough job they have, for a number of reasons. Few people want to live in a tiny pod at sea, and that is all that is viable now. And the one family that did it got so harassed by the Thai Navy that they had to bail. When seasteading happens, I think it needs to happen big and all at once, so that it is enticing to more people and not so easy to harass.
"We lost our freedom when we agreed that some of us are born to rule, and the rest to be ruled. That we are so rotten that we cannot possible govern our own lives. That we are slaves in need of masters."
That's without doubt the place from which we must start: the fundamental foundation. It has arguably never been widely held, maybe never been held truly. For, we all think that we are the only one that is born to rule. Even the first man wanted to be like God. Some of us harbor a little doubt, and think that, while not wanting openly to want to be a master of all others, we reserve to ourselves the right to rule ourself(vs.) Even theists cling to the idea that I, unlike everyone else, don't owe ultimate allegiance to God. Now, be honest!
Now that I know the moral truth, I have zero interest in governing anyone else. I just don't want anyone else governing me. I do reserve the right to govern myself.
At some point in the past, before I realized that no form of government is morally supportable, I would have wanted to be in "power" just to do what Javier Milei is doing, and what Barry Goldwater claimed he wanted to do.
I like where this is going so far. Very interested to read more of your premise. I think that the idea of a decentralized nation has a lot of promise.
I am pleased to hear that. I know I have a long way to go to make the case. Thank you for sticking with me.
Decentralized is my favourite word. 🔥
🧡🔥🧡
Yes, same. And 'distributed'.
I pick these things up from computer architecture.
All good things, proven to be so.
Lovin this story so far, a slow drip of ideas to rebuild our once great nation.
"a slow drip of ideas to rebuild our once great nation."
—Or at least parts of it!
I had this crazy dream, about some folks who loved their country who all began to dream the same dream. And when the morning came there arose across this nation people thinking one and the same. The awoke to find their freedoms and all their liberties had gradually been taken away, and when they realized the danger to their posterity I heard those patriotic people say...WE WANT THIS COUNTRY BACK! We ain't just jokin' Jack. We want our liberties, our dignity and our freedoms and our rights restored. We want this Country back! She's been driven way off track, we're wide awake and we're madder than hell now. And we ain't gonna take it anymore! No we’re not gonna take it anymore!
Remember golden days when the Stars and Strips forever symbolized her glorious name? "AMERICA"
But now it's all been changed and when we gaze upon Old Glory it's hard to fight back feelings of shame! We're fed up with lying politicians and greedy corporations who have sold us out time and again. And we're sick and tired of sending our soldiers off to wars that we were never meant to win.
Now we know our cause is right and our victory's on the way. And we won't give up the fight 'Till we hear three hundred million say... We want this Country back! We ain't just jokin' jack! We want our liberty and our dignity and our freedoms and our rights restored. We want this Country back!
And we ain't taken anymore flack! We're wide awake and we're madder than hell now!
And we ain't gonna take it anymore! No we're not gonna take it anymore!
I am working on doing a cover of this song. If anyone would like to hear my capabilities check this link. I Don't Care Where You've Been Sleeping cover of Don Francisco's song... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgO3Wc0X6tY
This is the album I did back in 2008. I hope some of you get something out of it. I have CD's too if anyone would like a copy.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kji98myi4Uwm7NOuOpdGiI07o2XTQhOwg
And check out the link I have for Amy Klang-White too. https://www.courageouslion.us/p/we-want-this-country-back.
Heck yes and I'm pretty sure several people are already starting their own country in the private domain.... Brandon Joe Williams and some others......looking forward to reading the next part of this!
Yep, it's happening. And the more variants, the harder it will be for states to stand in the way. A multiplicity of efforts is one of the reasons why we should be able to do this peacefully. Thanks!
Was just gonna mention Williams. He's created his own nation!
I will have to learn more about this at some point.
Christopher, it is no accident that I stumbled upon You here and now.
I feel encouraged and inspired reading your words.
And we have only just Begun…
Grateful
Ellen
Monterey Peninsula
CA
Thank you for being here and for your support!
This will have to be done underground. The eye in the sky will immediately know what is going on. Starting a decentralized nation is an enticing idea of course. But do you think the idiots in the DC swamp are going to not know about it and then let you just go ahead and do it?
This will be like actual wars...all the goofy plans the numbskull (no actual skin in the game) generals make always go to the dogs in the first hour of engagement. I don't think this will be any different. Not implying you are a goofy general or numbskull. You are a visionary..but not like Musk I hope.
I think about this almost everyday...what could replace government that really isn't like government and how do we get there.
So here, in rough and broad strokes, is my thinking on this issue…
There is no way of keeping anything secret. And if you try, it just makes them paranoid. So…
1. Be open, honest, and clear
2. Do not indicate, pose, or advocate any threat, any violence, or even a hint thereof. (That is not a pose, by the way, I really do not think violence of any sort is the answer.)
3. Be decentralized and, ultimately, leaderless.
4. Be worldwide
5. Be long-term. Stretch the timeline out. Politicians et al are generally pretty short-sighted.
Still thinking some of these things through in more detail, but that is my operational strategy atm.
Authentically radical (from the root upwards) thinking.
I'm Very Interested Christopher. The obvious biggest challenges include: One World Government, Subversives, Ambitious-Power Hungry Predators in sheep's clothes, Financing.
Yep. And there are more challenges than those, I'm sure. But there are always challenges when you do big things!
For sure. How to overcome them is the key.
Do we overcome them? Or do we go around them?
What ever works, especially long term.
This will be a long-term thing.
Great!
Check out this natural law jurisdiction created by treaty.
https://www.universal-community-trust.org/uct-treaty-full/
Quick glance so far—looks fantastic!
We're also working on a credit based system to replace the Babylonian debt system, by reverse engineering mortgage fraud and other civil wrongs into credit, all within our own jurisdiction.
https://www.thebernician.net/uct-bank-the-revolutionary-credit-based-banking-system/
Nice! This is great!!
Great job gentlemen!!
I think the concept of creating an alternative jurisdiction is the way to go, not dependent on territory, as has been mentioned elsewhere, the concept of a territory based national or country has reached its expiry date.
Another group i am looking at is found here: https://ignitaveritasunited.org/. Very interesting approach to interact with existing governments on their level as an IGO Intergovernmental Organization.
My thoughts are headed in a similar direction. Although people can have private polities on their own land too, if they want. What matters most is consent.
Sovereignty comes in all different shapes and sizes and doesn't require territory, although the indigenous peoples of the world have had their land Stolen from them by the crown and are due it back, as stated in their own legislation such as the rights of indigenous peoples. Self determination is also granted to all people's under natural law including their own legislation.
The state has also stolen everyone's land, by arrogating the authority to be a superior landlord over everyone.
. . . love the content and concept.
And it's good to see people actually thinking about a better way forward for humanity.
But personally Im looking into a more isolated existence away from humans and the expectations of "community".
Thanks. I think you will find that that idea will accommodate your wishes just fine! As it unfolds, I hope you will let me know.
Oh man...i remember the feeling I had after reading "The Network States" by Balaji Srinivasan. I walk up to the family table while having dinner and I claimed: "it's time to create a new country!" (they were baffled)
I'm having the same feelings as I'm reading this post...🏴🔥
I got that same feeling, only not from Srinivasan's book, which I had not read at the time. For me, it was a work of fiction, so the feeling came over me more slowly, until I finally realized—hey, something like this can actually work in the real world.
I’m so in!!!
I’m so glad!
Next installment tomorrow…
And don't forget, though you are a "seeing is believing" kind of guy, that The Shift is in full swing.
We create each and every bit of our reality, and where we place our attention is what we will create more of. What someone else is doing need not be affecting of what we are creating.
We don't need others to act, do or be anything in order for us to create what we want. Belief systems are losing affecting-ness. It's up to us to figure out how we do it (create our reality through our perception), and then become expert conscious creators.
Cheers!
And the first step is to feel hope rather than despair!
My comments below are long and detailed, so here’s the tl;dr:
I completely support the urgent need to move away from centralization of decision-making toward a more fully distributed model. All of my own writing is intended to promote this view. Networks are inherently more robust and innovative than the hierarchies we’ve been living under since paleolithic times. But talking about the creation of a new country, is, in my opinion, the wrong place to start. My hope is that your book will focus on the underpinnings of thought, ethics, and the protocols of interaction between disparate communities that are absolutely necessary to advance human civilization and avoid its imminent destruction. I will gladly contribute to that effort any way I can, but I explain below why “starting our own country” seems antithetical to that goal.
So let me begin with the concept of a country. You may mean something very different by “country” than that term’s common usage, but it will be a hard sell to move anyone away from the traditional definition. A country is predicated on the control of territory and the defense of its geographic borders. This immediately shoulders an immense burden that will overwhelm the priorities of all involved. It implies military power and international alliances which inevitably requires siding with one or more gangs against all the others. The entrenched powers will view any territory claimed by such an upstart country in one of two ways: an easy conquest to expand their own territory, or a potential threat that must be subsumed or destroyed. Either way, the project is finished before it begins.
In fact, thinking of a distributed nation as a country seems to me a surrender to the view that civilization must consist of warring principalities seeking hegemony over all others. The challenge, as I’m sure you’re aware, is to demonstrate the failure and obsolescence of that perspective.
It is vanishingly rare for any subset of humanity to have the opportunity to “start from scratch” with new models of social construction. The closest we have ever come is the frontier: those malcontents who risk their lives by venturing into the unclaimed (or sparsely defended) wilderness to forge new communities through mutual contract.
There are few such frontiers available in the world today. Every square inch of land is already claimed by some entrenched power. Every other terrestrial option such as artificial islands or undersea cities have the same issues of territorial defense enumerated above. That leaves space as, truly, our “final frontier.”
This, I believe, is the underlying motive behind Elon Musk’s push for extraplanetary settlement—the opening up of a new frontier where it will eventually be possible for small communities to walk away from the rest of us and start over. I vigorously support this effort, but while it may be our future, it is not yet a starting point for most of us. Any such long-term destination requires a massive coming-together of like-minded people with deep expertise in wide-ranging fields—all of which must happen first, within the (often hostile) confines of the existing governmental and corporate bureaucracies.
So this is going to require working within the existing systems to build the infrastructure needed to transcend the existing systems. Which means there must be profit in it for entities that do not share the end goals. That’s a big challenge, but it is at least possible.
I think Substack is a great place to start, but Substack will eventually fall under the same innovation-killing censorial control that is actively marching civilization into the abattoir of totalitarianism. Talk of forming new countries and new revolutions will hasten that occurrence.
Instead, I suggest that our focus should be more along the lines of “cellular communities” that can achieve practical self-sufficiency while networking together across geographic boundaries (cf. A Cellular Theory of Communities, July 2020, by Linus Lee—https://thesephist.com/posts/cellular-communities/; and also From City to Civium by @deepcode here on Substack—https://deepcode.substack.com/p/from-city-to-civium.)
This approach does not protect against the predatory nature of the existing governments that we remain subject to, but it’s a smaller and less threatening step toward true independence. And in fact, we can start with “virtual cellular communities” that explicitly reject the power of the speech police in a mutual quest to discover new distributed social models.
For example, could we create a Substack forum that is open to anyone to join, but cannot be viewed without agreeing to a statement of principles such as this:
I, James Leth, do hereby disavow any right or demand to be protected from ideas or speech that might offend me or trigger bad feelings, reserving my right to argue against such ideas or speech in good faith, even at risk of offending others.
Thank you for your long and thoughtful comments. Mine need not be as long in reply, simply because we largely agree.
My use of the word “country” is just a placeholder—a gateway to bigger and better things, necessitated by the language we currently have. This project will be nothing like the kinds of countries we have now. It will not be anything like the model you and I both fear and reject.
It is going to take time to lay this all out, but I think you will like it in the end. (And even well before the end.)
Some of what I write will be on thought, ethics, philosophy, etc. However, I have also already written a lot on that, so I will be trying to summarize those aspects and then get on to some practical ideas.
I am glad so many people are now hitting this from so many different angles, discovering new ideas based on our different lights and interests. Together, we are going to make good things happen.
Thanks!
It hasn't really got off the ground, no more than just a toe in to the water now, but some here might find a look at The Seasteading Institute interesting; https://www.seasteading.org/
Love those guys. I went to their breakout session in '23 at FF.
It's a tough job they have, for a number of reasons. Few people want to live in a tiny pod at sea, and that is all that is viable now. And the one family that did it got so harassed by the Thai Navy that they had to bail. When seasteading happens, I think it needs to happen big and all at once, so that it is enticing to more people and not so easy to harass.
Water World.
One of the possible plans is to build up a seamount in the doldrums somewhere. Artificial island.
"We lost our freedom when we agreed that some of us are born to rule, and the rest to be ruled. That we are so rotten that we cannot possible govern our own lives. That we are slaves in need of masters."
That's without doubt the place from which we must start: the fundamental foundation. It has arguably never been widely held, maybe never been held truly. For, we all think that we are the only one that is born to rule. Even the first man wanted to be like God. Some of us harbor a little doubt, and think that, while not wanting openly to want to be a master of all others, we reserve to ourselves the right to rule ourself(vs.) Even theists cling to the idea that I, unlike everyone else, don't owe ultimate allegiance to God. Now, be honest!
Hmm, interesting question.
Now that I know the moral truth, I have zero interest in governing anyone else. I just don't want anyone else governing me. I do reserve the right to govern myself.
At some point in the past, before I realized that no form of government is morally supportable, I would have wanted to be in "power" just to do what Javier Milei is doing, and what Barry Goldwater claimed he wanted to do.
Well, there is a Scottish island for sale 😄: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/30/islamic-state-on-scottish-island/
There are actually quite a few...we could club together and.....fly the flag of freedom!
That isn't the island that is contaminated with nuclear waste, is it?