In one of my ever fewer forays into /r/Libertarian I found an interesting link by a user who was looking for feedback on a proposted libertarian constitution he wrote. I decided to take a look at it and noticed that it started off with “We the Citizens of the State of New Hampshire…” That brought up a criticism I have of most attempts by libertarians to establish a libertarian society: they have a tendency to based their society on geographic regions.
I believe it’s time to free ourselves of those imaginary lines drawn on pieces of paper. Geographic regions mean far less today than they did a century ago. The advent of efficient and quick transportation technology combined with effective real-time communication technology has allowed humanity to live a more mobile existence than it did in the past. Thanks to modern avionics I can be anywhere in the Continental United States in a matter of hours. Likewise, I can communicate with my associates via e-mail, instant messenger, video conferencing or telephone from wherever I end up. These technologies have allowed me to become members of geographically separate groups. Throughout the year I communicate with my Defcon friends and once a year we all travel to Las Vegas to meet. I would argue that I’m more of a member of the Defcon community than I am of the Minnesota community. The same goes for my membership in the shooting, gun blogging, agorist, and anarchist communities.
Communities, when all said an done, are groups of people who interact with one another. The Internet has allowed these interactions to take place regardless of geographic separation, which has rewritten the rules on social agreements. Libertarian societies, in my opinion, should take shape in the form of mutual aid societies. What other reason would libertarians get together other than for mutual benefit? Libertarian philosophy, especially when you begin moving towards complete anti-statism, isn’t based on geography; it’s based on voluntary interactions. Those interactions can largely take place regardless of physical location. If one of my fellows is in need of assistance I can transfer a quantity of Bitcoin (or pieces of paper with pictures of dead presidents) to him instantly and he can use that to access needed resources local to him.
There are times when geographic agreements make sense. A group of people living around a lake, for instance, would likely benefit from laying down some common mutually agreeable ground rules. But general agreement between fellows one voluntarily interacts with need not be so restricted.
It would do the libertarian community well to toss off the shackles of physical location. We live in a great big world that floats around in a great big universe. Why restrict ourselves to infinitesimal points in a practically limitless area?
Thanks for the link! I really only drew it up like this for practical reasons. The assumption being that if we ever are going to free ourselves it will most likely start with secession. So at least initially there would be a territorial element to it.
But you’re right that in an ideal world it wouldn’t be territorial. Anyone who wants to join can do so. People who dont want to join dont have to. Technically, this is how it works within the territory governened by this constitution.
It could, in theory, be extended to other territories, but there is no way to actually enforce it if the other territory is still claimed by another state. People in China could join this compact, but unless the chinese government abdicates, there isn’t much that can be done.
But long term you’re right, the governance shouldn’t be territorial.
No problem. Your proposed constitution gave me a chance to consider something that I’ve been toying with for a while, whether humanity has outgrow the need to based communities on physical locations. Thought exercises are a great deal of fun and I don’t get to think deeply about libertarian concepts often enough.
That’s not necessarily true. Non-state organizations have developed many ways of enforcing rules within itself for ages. The most common example, albeit a bad one, is the mafia. A better example is the lex mercatoria, which was a private law system developed by merchants during the medieval period. Because merchants of the era spanned numerous jurisdictions and lost time meant lost money merchants developed an internal legal system that wasn’t restricted by geography and emphasized speed and efficiency. It was also separate from national court systems of the day.
The system was voluntary and merchants refusing to participate in it or abide by its decisions were effectively black listed. Few other merchants or consumers would do businesses with them and that threat encouraged participation.
I think any legal system amongst organizations will have to take a similar form in the future. Business simply spans too far to be governed by any specific jurisdiction.