Float On
After reading several accounts of the Ephemerisle Festival (for those interested, a more in-depth explanation of the event – and seasteading – can be found here), I’m more convinced than ever that I really need to attend one of these events. As I’ve said earlier, however, I don’t expect any floating cities to launch in my lifetime, and reports from Ephemerisle haven’t done much to change this assessment (The Irish Times‘ take on the conspicuous absence of nautical know-how isn’t exactly confidence-inspiring).
That said, the movement’s impressive groundwork suggests that enthusiasm for seasteading is more than a fad, and the idea of floating communities has, at the very least, provoked some incredibly interesting discussion. But I wonder if all of this enthusiasm is misplaced. My lack of engineering knowledge notwithstanding, the technical barriers to creating sustainable floating cities seem enormous. The political complications arising from seaborne secession also strike me as an important (and under-appreciated) hurdle to seasteading; if floating communities become as subversive as their boosters suggest, I think the likelihood of some two-bit dictator’s navy nipping the project in the bud increases dramatically.
The logic of seasteading, however, remains compelling. Creating a mechanism for persistent, non-theoretical political experimentation strikes me as a very worthy goal. So why not channel all of this energy into reclaiming the states as laboratories of democracy (or libertarianism)? The political barriers to a federalist revival are also immense, but they seem downright trivial compared to the challenges facing prospective seasteaders. I can’t help thinking that it would be easier for libertarians to claim Vermont as their own than to recreate Galt’s Gulch on an abandoned oil platform.
One possible objection is that experimenting within an American political context constrains the scope of potential experiments.* To be perfectly honest, I think this is a feature, not a bug. Whether through dumb luck or wise statesmanship, the West seems to have narrowed the spectrum of acceptable political systems down to variants of democratic capitalism. All that’s left, then, is to further refine the formula through more experimentation. A return to federalism strikes me as the best (and most feasible) way to accomplish this goal.
*One other possible objection is that libertarians have already tried – and failed – to jump-start a federalist revival.
Couldn’t they also just claim a territory like American Samoa or Guam, that’s how it was done in the 1800’s? All the fun of being in the middle of nowhere, land to cultivate, and no nautical expertise required.Report
There is plenty of land in the middle of Alaska for settlers. there is little or no gov intervention, they would get money from the state each year and have no state taxs. I wonder why they havn’t moved into the scenic Arctic for their utopia????Report
Seasteading seems to me to be in the long tradition of American utopian communities. They may work for small committed groups, but I’m not sure how much they have to say about large heterogeneous populations. Part of the genius/struggle/frustration of democracy is how to have a bunch of people get along. Maybe they could call one of the seasteads the SS Amana.Report
Rapture.
What could possibly go wrong?Report
Bioshock WIN!!Report
Dude, if you want to come next year, you’re more than welcome to sign on to my yet-to-be-named platform — provided that you’re willing to pull your weight in construction and provisioning, of course.
There’ll likely be 10-11 people of a fairly philosophical cast of mind, with representatives from many points on the political spectrum. Should be fun. Signing onto our crew will also almost certainly be cheaper than renting a houseboat or somesuch.
Let me know,
~WReport
Will Wilson –
That sounds absolutely awesome. Pencil me in as a definite maybe. Can I bring a friend or two for the crew?Report
Almost certainly yes. Email me for details.Report
I wonder how many attendees were engineers.
Ah, libertarianism. A philosophy so self-centered that it could only thrive in a post-industrial country.
So let’s talk about sea-steading for a second. As Captain Bligh, among many others, discovered, the first thing you need in the open ocean is fresh water. People and plants consume a startling amount of water every day, so you need either to generate it, dock on the mainland regularly to refill, or have people bring it to you. The second and third options are, obviously, inconsistent with the philosophy of seasteading, which requires independence from terrestrial governments. But generating potable water from seawater requires both substantial amounts of energy and complicated technologies and manufacturing facilities for the membranes.
Then you need food. While fish pens and artificial reefs can probably generate the needed protein, you still need vitamins. So for every body, you need a certain amount of greenhouse space.
Shelter is the easiest bit. The British Navy for years allocated only 14 inches of hammock space per foredeck hand. Of course, getting people to volunteer to such cramped quarters may be a little challenging.
Then defense. No nation would allow anyone to build a platform in coastal waters and declare independence. The Coast Guard would be ordered to establish the rule of law. Even small islands don’t work; when stories of persistent child abuse at Pitcairn Island (speaking of Capt Bligh) surfaced, the New Zealand government essentially invaded. So defense is established by evasion, ie being a floating city.
Now we’re turning into Waterworld. That’s a place with no soil to grow things, no minerals to be mined and no fresh water. You’re planning on coupling this with enormously complex and, yet, robust agricultural and manufacturing facilities.
Seriously, best of luck.
p.s. Wouldn’t establishing an enclave or series of enclaves in a currently lawless environment, like Somalia, be easier? You have to defend a fixed position, but on the other hand you can grow food and capture rainfall.Report