participant-3927, 3:17 AM, January 13
I recommend the movie “The Bounty” with young Mel Gibson and Anthony Hopkins. It’s about the mutinity at the end of 18th century that resulted in the settlement of the Pitcairn Islands. The movie ends when the mutineers arrive at the islands. Now, in 2004, there was a scandal on the island in which seven men were accused of sexual abuse of chilren. As a result, most left the islands, with the remaining population being under 50 people. There’s in fact a group of islands there, not a single one, and the biggest of them was in fact never populated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bounty_(1984_film)
participant-3927, 10:06 PM, January 15
participant-3927, 10:08 PM, January 15
I have now received the book, and started reading. The book is just the actual text of the report prepared by the “auditor” – a Commision (delegation) that was sent by Britain to Freeport to find a reason to regulate the enterprise.
participant-3927, 10:10 PM, January 15
Freeport was never envisioned as a path to a political autonomy. It was a way to make money, and the first 10 years was all about oil refining and factories, there being no tourists or non-workers in the region. The challenge for the owner was to make enough profit through the factories, to buy an additional chunk of land.
participant-3927, 10:12 PM, January 15
Only 10 years-in, the owner (Groves) decided to expand the territory to welcome laymen, through building hotels and residential, shopping areas, school, church, etc. – all elements of a town.
So, basically, Britain just used and abused the talents of this man Groves, having him spent the best period of his life building-out Freeport, only to take it all away when it no longer needed him.
participant-3927, 10:19 PM, January 15
Andrew, are you in contact with any of these people?
participant-4603, 10:22 PM, January 15
It’s been at least 20 years, and I think I did write a piece for them once before. I’m not sure how active they are any longer, but they are heavily pro-Ayn Rand.
Many of these fellows probably do subscribe to Harry’s newsletter. These are the types of guys that, as you once put it, are in the sunset of their careers.
I’d have to dig through my email archives, but no, no recent contacts with them.
participant-4603, 10:30 PM, January 15
Michael Oliver, as I knew him, was a real estate developer out of Vegas with roots in Lithuania—a Litvak. From my understanding, he passed away several years ago.
He was, for sure, involved with different movements when the Bahamas were gaining their independence from Great Britain.
participant-4603, 10:32 PM, January 15
I do wonder if there’s a family connection and if that could be his son. It’s quite possible. You may be right.
And if it is, it would be fascinating to have a discussion with him about his Dad.
participant-3927, 10:39 PM, January 15
Ok, Michael J. Oliver, the guy who published the book on merging Objectivism and Anarchism, is not the same as Michael Oliver, the Minerva guy.
participant-3927, 10:41 PM, January 15
Is there anyone alive still connected with that whole effort ?
participant-4603, 10:42 PM, January 15
Yes, you’re right. Because if the article from reason is correct and he survived the Shoah as a teenager then he might not be around any longer.
participant-3927, 10:42 PM, January 15
ChatGPT said Michael Oliver was born in 1928.
participant-4603, 10:42 PM, January 15
Harry Schultz recently passed away in Monaco. I think a year or two ago. He was one of the financiers.
participant-4603, 10:42 PM, January 15
That makes a lot of sense. So then he would be pushing a 100.
participant-3927, 10:43 PM, January 15
These people may have had bad ideas, but they had the energy, the initiative, and the funding to do things.
participant-4603, 10:47 PM, January 15
They were doing all of this before the internet became commercial, but they were also doing it at a time when many of the European powers were losing their overseas possessions.
One of the attempts that doesn’t get much fanfare is when they tried certain things in Cabo Verde, West Africa. There was also an economic citizenship program in that same country afterward, and nowadays Pronomos Capital is trying to get some sort of a deal there.
But you’re right, the old-school libertarians were true radicals for capitalism, and they saw the writing on the wall back in the 60s and 70s. Ironically, some of them sat in Ayn Rand’s living room along with Alan Greenspan.
participant-3927, 10:48 PM, January 15
“These modern Libertarians are looking for land, lots of land (especially islands), where they can avoid regulations, laws and oversights. Raymond Craib’s book documents some of the spectacular attempts that have been attempted, including several by Michael Oliver, of which his misadventure in the Anglo-French Condominium of the New Hebrides (now Vanuatu), was one of the more disastrous.” <– this is from an article on Vanuatu post. They see Michael Oliver as an anti-hero.
participant-4603, 10:56 PM, January 15
Way before https://www.satoshi-island.com/
Oliver’s Phoenix Foundation sure got around. No doubt.
I have respect for Michael. I can’t imagine what he went through during the War and then he built himself up in real estate. I can understand him having a healthy disliking of the State.
participant-3927, 11:02 PM, January 15
I submitted a message to the Nassau Institute, using their contact form. Looks like they want article contributions, so I told them that I can write one about Freeport. Let’s see if they get back to me. I didn’t tell them about Anthemism yet, no need to open the cards right away.
participant-3927, 6:44 AM, January 16
I have received a positive reply from the Nassau Institute.
participant-3927, 6:45 AM, January 16
Is there anyone who wants to co-write with me an article about Freeport?
participant-4603, 7:35 AM, January 16
That was fast. I stand corrected about them being maybe not so active.
participant-4603, 7:36 AM, January 16
I’m game =
j@participant-795.mc - I have to admit I don’t know a lot about Freeport. But I can try.
participant-4603, 8:28 AM, January 16
While EscapeArtist is more old-school libertarian, and they keep getting revamped. It may be worth contacting them to submit an article, since they are a receptive platform, or at least they used to be.
It’s possible I may have even learned about the Nassau Institute from reading EscapeArtist decades ago. Either that or the Nassau Institute may have advertised in The Economist Magazine, or I may have gotten tipped off by someone. Not sure, but not sure it matters.
Anyway, this is a fun article that I’ve been spamming different Telegram groups with this morning. https://www.escapeartist.com/blog/expat-utopia-lessons-from-the-republic-of-rose-island/
participant-3927, 5:33 PM, January 16
Here is an interview I did last week with Natalya Makulova, in English. It’s broken into three video clips. All together they are 45 min, with mostly me talking and Natalia nodding.
participant-3927, 5:35 PM, January 16
And this is just the audio track of it, probably more convenient
participant-3927, 5:35 PM, January 16
Борис! Спасибо что поделился своим видением! вот запись аудио. Видео на днях опубликую на youtube.
participant-3927, 9:23 PM, January 16
A lover of freedom and innovation, Rosa dreamed of a place unburdened by the pesky rules and regulations of traditional governments. You know, taxes, permits, and all that bureaucratic jazz.
So what did Rosa do? He didn’t just complain about society over espresso and cigarettes. In 1957, he rolled up his sleeves, gathered some like-minded visionaries, and began building a literal island from scratch.
Because why settle for breaking the mold when you can float away from it entirely?
Quote from the article. This is a relevant part for Anthemism too.
participant-3927, 9:24 PM, January 16
“… the structure rose from the waves like a middle finger to terrestrial norms …”. One day, we will be able to show the middle finger, but it’s going to be a long time. Even when the free state is created, it has to get a strong military before it can show that finger.
participant-3927, 9:27 PM, January 16
Worse, [the italian government] suspected it might be a tax haven or—gasp!—a hub for illicit activities. In a dramatic turn of events straight out of a spy novel, the Italian government moved to quash Rosa’s floating rebellion.
They declared the island a threat to national security and dispatched military forces to shut it down. In February 1969, just nine months after its declaration of independence, Rose Island was seized and dismantled by the Italian Navy.
participant-3927, 9:29 PM, January 16
What can I say, fools are quickly parted with their money. Rosa didn’t see this coming when he declared sovereignty? Before going “all in,” he should have enlisted Italy’s rival or at-least a neighbouring country to protect this Island of his, so that Italy would think twice before dismantling it.
participant-3927, 10:53 PM, January 16
Here’s the begining of my next article in progress, titled “Stop Waiting For Godot”
The playwright Samuel Beckett won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1969, largely because of his play “Waiting for Godot” (pronounced “Goh-doh,” with a silent “t”). Its plot follows two characters, Vladimir and Estragon, who are waiting by a tree for someone named Godot, hoping he will bring meaning or purpose to their lives. They talk, pass the time with small tasks, and meet a couple of other characters with whom they have meaningless conversations. Godot never shows up.
The irony is that nothing actually happens in the play. So why do people watch it? Why has it won such acclaim? Because in the characters who are doing nothing and waiting for this Godot figure, the audience recognizes itself. People live in collectivist societies and statist political systems, hoping that other ‘Godots’ will make decisions for them.
participant-4603, 6:53 AM, January 17
Isn’t it a catch-22 though? Suppose Rosa did amass defense capabilities or entered into an agreement with a neighboring country or even a rival—might those actions not have been viewed provocatively by Rome?
In the movie version on Netflix, if I remember right, that was part of the Italian government’s impetus for going after them: the possibility that they would align themselves with someone else.
But I do see the point of not sitting there laying around like ducks.
participant-3927, 6:53 AM, January 17
Well, then he should have waited for an opportune moment.
participant-6456, 9:12 AM, January 17
Anybody coming to Innaguration or Davos?
participant-3927, 5:20 PM, January 17
@participant-4603 Since you have PR’ed their article, can you contact them, offer to write up about Anthemism? You can use as leverage that you have advertized them.
participant-4603, 5:35 PM, January 17
You mean EscapeArtist?
participant-4603, 5:35 PM, January 17
I’ve been chatting with a former editorial executive about that subject. Let me see what she has to say.
participant-3927, 5:36 PM, January 17
Fantastic, thank you.
participant-3927, 5:37 PM, January 17
It’s not about me being lazy, it’s about getting all of you to do stuff, and get involved. It’s not going to fly if it’s a one man show. And you will see, it’s gonna be more fun for you too.
participant-3927, 5:37 PM, January 17
I learned this from founding the Toastmasters club. I have now 5 people in the executive team, all doing something, and it’s like a working machine.
participant-3927, 5:45 PM, January 17
Why don’t I join an existing project started by someone else, and help him, instead? Because I am only aware of one guy trying to create a country on the correct philosophical foundation: Joseph Avatar, with his Society of Reason
https://www.soreason.com/
participant-3927, 5:47 PM, January 17
For a while he had the idea of doing it on a ship. I spoke with him and I thought that I had convinced him that a ship is not desirable, and that land is needed.
participant-3927, 5:52 PM, January 17
Joseph stated on HB Letter he has been at it for over a decade, and that he had made 13 attempts.
participant-3927, 5:55 PM, January 17
I told Joseph that I am ready to join forces with him after I give this idea a run my way (finding conflict zones). That was ~3 years ago. In any case, it was Joseph’s posts on HB Letter who inspired me to start the project.
participant-3927, 5:56 PM, January 17
I have invited him to the Country Founders group, but he did not join.
participant-4603, 5:57 PM, January 17
I used to participate in Toastmasters Montreal.
participant-4603, 5:57 PM, January 17
Wow!
participant-4603, 5:58 PM, January 17
Fair enough. I’m sure he has some principled reason for it.
participant-3927, 5:58 PM, January 17
When I was checking his project, he had some 100+ people his facebook group.
participant-4603, 7:48 PM, January 17
Quality over quantity. I’d imagine many, if not most, Objectivists are in favor of republican forms of government or are some monarchists?
participant-4603, 7:56 PM, January 17
Yes. Though I’ve often liked the analogy of government not as a homeowner’s association. Although that’s a great example, and so too is that of a service provider. But I also like the idea of government as a concierge or a butler that is in your corner to do your bidding. You can fire and hire him at will, for cause or not.
Why shouldn’t, to the extent they’d still exist, you get greeted at your embassy with cappuccino? Why shouldn’t your government pick you up from the airport in a limo? As long as it’s voluntary and not coercive, I don’t see much of an issue with the above. Imagine a government that does work for you and not the other way around. One that acts more like a life coach or private banker than your adversary.
Not that I want to see government work or become likable per se. But why not allow ourselves to dream and fantasize about what could be or what should be? I do realize much of what I’m describing is best left to the private sector. Come to think of it, what isn’t best left to the private sector? Why should the free market only be a sector?
Anyway, I digress.
participant-3927, 8:47 PM, January 17
Definitely not a monarchy. Most are for Constitutional Republic. But really, any system that has a way to chose politicians fairly will work, including the Roman system (senate, tribunes, and assemblies).
participant-3927, 8:48 PM, January 17
Well, imagine you go shopping to a bazaar, but you know that at any time a bomb can explode there. Is that a free market?
Ask yourself: what fact of reality makes government a necessecity, and what functions it should have? It’s really that simple.
participant-3927, 8:55 PM, January 17
Also, a government is not a home owner’s association, and a country is not a home. That’s a misconception on both the Right (nationalists, protectionists) and the Left (socialists, saviours of the weak). A building in a con-dominium, a latin term that means “shared ownership” of property, the real-estate equivalent of holding Nvidia stock. It’s in the interest of all living in the building to maintain the property in a mechanically functioning state (pipes, etc.), as well as to keep it clean (e.g. no dogs allowed). But a country is not a joint dominium. Each house is owned separately, and the pipes in the road are serviced by another business (which could face competition). The goverment can’t impose arbitrary rules, such as “no dogs allowed.” It only needs to protect people’s houses from burglars.
participant-3927, 9:04 PM, January 17
A country is not a home – into your home you decide who you let in, and who you don’t let in. A country, instead, is a set of laws enacted within a geographic area, with an ability to enforce them. Anyone who follows these laws can be in the country, by the principle of inalienable, individiual rights. (And you can’t make a law that forbids entry, anymore than you can make a law legalizing slavely. Both are against individual rights.)
participant-4603, 9:07 PM, January 17
So it’s more an aesthetics thing then. I didn’t think many Objectivists were also Monarchists. It’s interesting, though, because in some instances, Monarchies are less expensive. This is one of the arguments Canadian Monarchists make to retain Charles III versus having an elected head of state.
participant-3927, 9:08 PM, January 17
Costs are not a primary issue. Objectivists in politics are concerted with a social system that protects individualism (rights).
participant-3927, 9:11 PM, January 17
Politics is not the main focus of Objectivism, it’s only one of its conclusions, from more fundamental philosophy. Ayn Rand said: “I am not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and applies it consistently, all the rest follows.”
participant-4603, 9:15 PM, January 17
Okay, right, so then you’re making the point that there must be stronger deterrents so nobody would do something to such a bazaar in your example. That’s fair. But let’s flip it on its head. Has government been so effective in minimizing crime and keeping people safe? Don’t the police react after the fact and not much before it? Which, in many cases, is okay when there is a presumption of innocence and for those who don’t want thoughts to become crimes.
But okay, where were the intelligence services on 9-10? I guess the counterpoint is there may have been many other 9-11s that never happened that we’ll never know about because they got stopped.
I’m not one of these people that’s opposed to government fighting crime. But I’m also not opposed to individuals defending themselves or private security (yes, accountable to government) playing an auxiliary role.
Government healthcare isn’t a great idea, and that’s for sure an important aspect of a person’s life. But I wouldn’t want government to have a default role in it, like a public option – NHS or Health Canada.
participant-3927, 9:19 PM, January 17
“Has government been so effective in minimizing crime and keeping people safe?” – it definitely did and does. For cases like 9/11, it’s not a failure of police. First, there should not be a law against carrying weapons on the plane. If there were other people with guns on the plane, then the whole thing would have been averted. Second, it’s a failure of the government’s foreign policy. US should have attacked Iran in 1979, when its embassy was attacked, and its oil digs were nationalized. These and many following failures have enboldened American enemies.
participant-4603, 9:20 PM, January 17
Sure, a condo association is a better analogy. Though sometimes such associations do regulate what people do with their apartments. Some, for example, do not let you rent or sublet your place. The better-known examples are not letting owners put their apartments on Airbnb. I do get what you mean, though. Homeowners associations are far more invasive and nitpicky on the whole.
Okay, but back to condo associations, don’t some owners have voting rights based on the number of square meters they own? I used to own condos in buildings, and that’s often how voting got allocated. I don’t see an issue with stakeholders having a say.
participant-3927, 9:20 PM, January 17
In any case, having the government failed in effectiveses, is not an argument for abandoning it. The argument should be to improve its functioning.
participant-3927, 9:21 PM, January 17
Homeowner’s associations, are probably a creation of the government regulations. Just like unions.
participant-4603, 9:23 PM, January 17
Okay, I like that, and that makes more sense. So it is because of reason that she was an egoist, and it is because she was an egoist that she favored capitalism. That’s far clearer and more cogent. That’s principled, that’s moral, and that’s ethical as far as I’m concerned.
None of this “natural rights” type stuff which many libertarians and Enlightenment-era thinkers had to foment. I’m assuming “natural rights” are only natural if they can be discerned through reason and not some supreme being.
participant-3927, 9:23 PM, January 17
There are really only two ways to look at real-estate – direct ownership of land, or leasing according to an agreement land of the owner of the whole area. In direct ownership, the owner is not answerable to anybody. No one can tell him to Airbnb it or not.
If he is leasing, then he must do what the owner of the underlying land says. (And that’s in the leasing terms).
If it so happens that he is not leasing, yet has to obey some organization, that’s a creation of the government regulations, and it won’t exist in laissez-faire.
participant-3927, 9:27 PM, January 17
I agree with your first paragraph, you got it. But for the second, I am not sure. All I can say is that Enligthment thinkers thought that rights came from God. Ayn Rand is the first person who proved that rights can be derived through reason (no need for religion).
participant-3927, 9:29 PM, January 17
The failure was in 1979, and over the years. US should have attacked countires that fund terrorism.
participant-3927, 9:30 PM, January 17
Iran is the biggest propagator of Islamic terrorism. Take it down, the rest will fall by themselves.
participant-3927, 9:31 PM, January 17
You have to see the big picture. 9/11 was a result of the weakness US has been showing for decades
participant-4603, 9:31 PM, January 17
Okay, I’ll buy your response. But doesn’t it also sound like you’re blaming the victim and blaming America? Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you about blowback. I’d even throw into the mix the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marines Barracks in Beirut as America having shown weakness. I’m sure you and I could find far too many examples of this. So the lack of a strong, consistent, assertive foreign policy was part of the issue. That’s a fair point. In some ways, it is a stronger point than those who argue that America should have reverted to a pre-WW1 era isolationist policy of neutrality.
I’m assuming Swiss-style neutrality is not something that Objectivists value unless it is beneficial and pragmatic for a country to have due to size or whatever its immutable characteristics might be. But yeah, hunting rifles for sure once were allowed on SwissAir flights. I do not think any of those got taken over because of those guns on board and Switzerland’s policy of neutrality.
Though I do see how a peace-through-strength foreign policy or big-stick diplomacy can work. A new country might do well as a neutral power if that neutrality gets recognized by others and with a civil defense force in place. Otherwise, yeah, aligning with bigger, stronger powers might be needed.
participant-4603, 9:32 PM, January 17
I’m with you, but then the collectivists will use that line of thinking to justify all sorts of areas the government doesn’t belong in, like healthcare and education.
participant-4603, 9:34 PM, January 17
That’s a good point, and I like that thinking because I’ve often viewed many contemporary countries as nothing more than overglorified trade unions that force membership and try to keep out scabs and other union busters.
participant-3927, 9:35 PM, January 17
I don’t believe in conspiracy theories. I go by the standard, well known, published facts.
participant-3927, 9:36 PM, January 17
1979 and Hosseini tell you in your face that they want to destroy the West and America. That alone deserves bombing the shit out of them.
participant-4603, 9:37 PM, January 17
Right, but she’s right because it’s better, even if you do believe in a higher power, and I know you don’t, it’s better to not have to rely on some supreme being to justify your rights. It’s better to be able to prove it and test it through reason. This is where many well-meaning American libertarians and conservatives go wrong.
participant-3927, 9:37 PM, January 17
In any case, 9/11 was given as an example, in line with terrorism. I answered that to Andrew. Let’s not derail the conversation.
participant-3927, 9:38 PM, January 17
I don’t think Islam should be destroyed completely, but it should be downgraded to a cafeteria religion like Judaism and Christianity.
participant-4603, 9:38 PM, January 17
I understand your point. You never said Iran was behind 9-11. Your point, if I understood you right, is that making an example out of them would have scared the others. It would have made them think twice about pulling a 9-11.
participant-3927, 9:40 PM, January 17
It would actually prevent the brewing of all of this, at the root. There wouldn’t be terroristic cells, the history would be changed, as in a movie in which someone goes to the past and kills a batterfly, and the whole history changes.
participant-4603, 9:42 PM, January 17
Okay, fine, fair enough, let’s suppose that is exactly what happened. So what are you going to do about it? I get it. We can talk about the U.S.S. Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Sure. Again, so what? See, this is why I like the idea of shrinking government so they do not have the power to abuse. The power to abuse concerns me much more than the abuse of power.
participant-4603, 9:44 PM, January 17
Oh yeah, one of the “Rambo” movies was about that, if I remember right. Yeah, my enemy’s enemy is my friend. And we’ll back you because you’re against the godless Soviets – or so went that line of reasoning.
participant-4603, 9:45 PM, January 17
Sure, and the Reichstag also got burned, and there were incidents on the German-Polish border that turned out to be the work of Berlin. Go figure.
participant-4603, 9:47 PM, January 17
Yeah, but the U.S. did agree to let the Philippines go. Cuba never got annexed in its entirety either.
participant-3927, 9:56 PM, January 17
Jan 6 was the result of the mindlessness of Trump, and is the reason he belongs in jail. Read Liz Cheney’s book.
participant-3927, 9:58 PM, January 17
Let’s take Ancient Rome, in which you had Pompey and Caesar fighting it out, and then again Anthony and Octavian. Why did it happen? How did it come to that?
participant-3927, 10:00 PM, January 17
No political system, no matter how well it is designed, is going to withstand the power of ideas. The public, starting with the Grachus brothers, went for collectivistm and abandoned individualism. What happened next are cliques that have no respect for the individiual, and which only act as a tribe. And always, at the end of this process, you will get the biggest strongman taking control – in this case Caesar, the dictator, and then Octavian, the emperor, won.
participant-3927, 10:02 PM, January 17
In Russia it’s Putin
participant-3927, 10:02 PM, January 17
In America, it’s Trump
participant-4603, 10:04 PM, January 17
You’re right. But is empire a bad thing? When Octavian became Augustus, was that so bad? I mean, I could see it going either way. Don’t well-managed republics almost always become empires or get absorbed by them? Don’t get me wrong, I’m in favor of limited government, but I also like scaling and economies of scale.
participant-3927, 10:04 PM, January 17
Again, all these people are the product of the public opinion. Instead of resisting Caesar, the people in the Cisalpine areas joined him.
