(The first of a series; places that are the most likely to be congenial to the establishment of a more or less neoreactionary regime).
I have lived in Alaska for many years, and have grown to appreciate some reasons it may be a congenial place to establish some type of sovereign neoreactionary order. These same reasons apply to certain other parts of the U.S., and other parts of the world, which we’ll look at in later entries.
An earlier post outlined some practical aspects of establishing a sovereign neoreationary regime/government (or a reasonable facsimile thereof), and some possibilities:
I see these options, either currently available or becoming available during the historical/technological developments of the next 10-20 years: 1) Taking over the machinery of an existing nation-state; 2) Taking over the machinery of an existing U.S. state (something like the Free State Project); 3) Seasteading/Spacesteading 4) The NR as a world-distributed phyle a la The Diamond Age; 5) A city-state in America 3.0.
From my U.S. point of view, 1) is highly, highly unlikely, 3) only a little less so, 4) is already happening a little at a time (here’s a draft Oath you might want to consider); and some combination of 2) and 5) seem to be not only reasonable but practical, when the time is ripe.
So, a few words about the Free State Project are in order, because I was seriously considering joining back when it got going in 2001-2. There were lively message boards with a lot of smart people and witty talk regarding where and how to try and set it up; the main problem turned out to be…democracy. Wyoming was the completely obvious choice based on population and culture, but apparently a bunch of East Coasters didn’t want to be in some place so far separated from the Kulturny and New Hampshire was voted in. Since that date, of course, perhaps 10 Blue Staters have arrived in NH for every Libertarian, completely blowing the idea–which some of us pointed out back then.
Anyway, they throw a good party.
The general method of concentrating agreeable people into a small geographical area is a good one. Web communities are great organizing tools, but eventually you have to turn off the computer and go outside to real life, and if that includes graffitied, littered, unsafe streets, no sense of community with your neighbors, high taxes flowing to those who contribute little…well, that’s the lot of many millions in the vibrant, multicultural areas of Europe, North America, Australia and other spots around the globe. Friends on the internet can help one bear these circumstances, but no one wants to live like this for a lifetime. If a really safe, prosperous, ethical and free community was established somewhere in the world I have no doubt that tens or hundreds of thousands of the right kind of people would want to come.
So, why Alaska? What are the specific characteristics that might make possible the formation of a neoreactionary polity (city-state? We shall leave that discussion for later).
- Existing majority independent/conservative/libertarian political culture (e.g., voted heavily against Obama).
- Huge undeveloped areas of land available for settlement, if developing a completely new community is contemplated (FedGov owns most of it, but it can’t even stop people from blowing dope all day, as of now).
- A number of pleasant small towns and small cities, where a concentration of NRs would soon have the ability to run things (and a good many locals may already be aligned).
- A climate cold enough or wet enough (in some areas, both) to screen out the “sunshine patriots” and “fairweather friends.” This is not a bug, but a feature, as only the dedicated are going to leave the temperate zones.
- Tremendous natural beauty, wilderness, fish and game resources.
- Physical separation from the continental U.S. (while this is more psychological than real, there are no “progressive” states that would freak out over some “fascists” setting up a polity nearby).
And of course, there are also obstacles and possible negative factors:
- Alaska’s current economy is heavily dependent on oil (high world prices) and FedGov net tax inflows. Both of these are subject to sudden disruption and change, which could lead to economic depression. Any potential NR community needs an economic plan to be prosperous independent of these factors.
- Because of geography, distance and transportation issues Alaska is a high cost area for goods and services (though perhaps no higher than Manhattan). There is almost no manufacturing base. Most modern products and foodstuffs must be imported from long distances. Any NR polity or city/state would be vulnerable to economic and physical blockade.
- Distance from rest of “civilization” would probably discourage a large proportion of potential residents, even compared to Wyoming or other Western U.S. location.
Alaska has some unique and intriguing features to offer as a base for the Neoreaction (and fellow travelers who might not adopt the label but would like to live in the community).
Some of these same pluses and minuses apply to other remote/rural locations, both in the U.S. and in other nations. I would be most interested to hear comments on Alaska, and suggestions for other geographical areas to consider.