Showing posts with label Silicon Valley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Silicon Valley. Show all posts

Thursday, July 17, 2014

“State of Jefferson” Backers Remain Optimistic, While 6-Way Partition of California Heads for 2016 Ballot


The mixed results in three northern-California county ballot proposals on forming a “State of Jefferson” have not discouraged proponents of the idea—nor have its low chances of success even if majorities could be rallied.  Meanwhile, a more bizarre and ambitious plan to subdivide California into six separate states (discussed recently in this blog) has now gathered enough signatures to be put to voters in a state referendum in 2016.


The “Six Californias” initiative is the brainchild of the Silicon Valley venture-capitalist and sitcom actor Tim Draper, an enthusiastic Bitcoin investor and all-around eccentric cocky billionaire, who wants to divide the Golden State into the separate states of Jefferson, North California, Central California, West California, South California (that idea has its own grassroots movement, as discussed in this blog), and a—knock on wood—libertarian utopia in the State of Silicon Valley.  This week, his allegedly bipartisan group of backers revealed that more than the required 807,615 signatures—out of a promised eventual total of 1.3 million—have been collected and delivered to the state legislature in Sacramento, which enables the partition plan to be put to voters on the 2016 state ballot.

This Draper is a bit of a mad man himself.
In a recent poll, 59% of Californians were against the idea, which means some public-relations work will be necessary between now and then—though that is smaller than the gap an aggressive Québécois sovereignty campaign was able to nearly close in the 1995 referendum on secession from Canada, which it lost by a whisker.

An early map of the proposed entity
The numbers look a little different, though, when you examine the far northern rural reaches of the state along the Oregon border, where in June of this year three counties held referenda on whether to join a future State of Jefferson (reviving a 1941 plan to create an—as it then would have been—49th state straddling the old California–Oregon line).  In last month’s vote, 56% of voters in Tehama County gave the 51st-state idea a thumbs-up, and that advisory (i.e. non-binding) measure result was bolstered on July 15th by Tehama’s board of supervisors voting 5-0 to back the idea in light of public opinion.


In two other northern counties which polled voters on the question in June, Del Norte and Siskiyou, the idea was defeated by “no” votes of 59% and 56%, respectively.  In Siskiyou, at least—which is the heart of the Jefferson movement—the final count probably belies a majority support for the idea: some voters were turned off by a more radical strain of Jeffersonian separatism which wanted to erect a libertarian-anarchist-style “Republic of Jefferson” with its own currency and judicial system.  The head of the Jefferson Republic Committee, Anthony Intiso, promises a new approach after the Siskiyou results, saying voter turnout could be key.  Opposition to the idea was strongest in the county’s southern half—data Intiso plans to use as the republicans regroup. “With better education,” Intiso says, “Measure C would have passed, I believe. Last time, we pulled the entire thing together in just six months. I think we did pretty good for that.”

Anthony Intiso, third from left, father of the “Republic of Jefferson” movement
Even some of the opposing voices in Tehama should give Jefferson proponents reason for hope.  A letter to a Tehama County newspaper by one Diana Thompson, a former county administrator now living in Red Bluff, Tehama’s county seat, warned direly the other day, “The result [of a full-on push for statehood] would not be a State of Jefferson, but a U.S. Government protectorate or territory, something between Samoa and Puerto Rico because Congress will never accept us as a state.  In effect, we will lose all representation and be governed by Congress like Alaska and Hawaii were before statehood, which took decades.  Both the Philippines and Puerto Rico have [sic] been waiting almost a century to become states, and as we all know, Congress takes forever, if it even does anything.”  In addition to apparently thinking the U.S. still owns the Philippines (it became independent in 1946) and that U.S. territories don’t have their own legislatures, Thompson, bless her heart, also seems to think that it would be constitutionally possible, through some occult legal process, for Tehama County to sever itself irreparably from California—but not the United States—without gaining any kind of new status.  (And just think: this is a sample from the minority of Tehama County residents who even read newspapers to begin with!)  If I were a Jefferson proponent, I would be thinking: this lady is somebody who, if she had the right Tea-Party-distorted factoids lobbed in her general direction, could be brought around to believing just about anything.  (You know, like Bernice Cressey, who wrote to the same local paper, the Red Bluff Daily News, to warn that “those who oppose the State of Jefferson are either stupid or just plain liars.  Liberals will do anything to get their agenda passed.  Look at the I.R.S., N.S.A., V.A. scandals, too many to mention.  We’re already dealing with Agenda 21, with Common Core brainwashing our kids.”  Etc.)  (You know, she’s beginning to make sense.  Come to think of it ... say, I’m not sure I trust the pointy-headed intellectuals who run that newspaper in the first place.  After all, doesn’t “red bluff” mean ... Communist lie?!)

One proposed shape of a State of Jefferson, with counties
that have held referenda or passed resolutions on the matter highlighted in red.
But Thompson is right about one thing: any candidate for statehood must be approved by the U.S. Congress, and something like the State of Jefferson, which would be solidly Republican, would never gain the necessary votes unless a solidly Democratic 52nd state—with two Democratic senators to balance out the two new Republican Jeffersonian senators in the nearly perfectly divided upper chamber—were admitted simultaneously.  And why would Congress bother?  Both parties are busy enough trying to shore up and maintain their precarious 50%-ish share of national power without introducing crazy new variables like new states.

The original movement began in 1941.  (As you can see from the dateline,
other political matters were about to crowd out 49th-state movements
just as the Jefferson push gained momentum.)
Multiply that degree of unlikelihood by six and you get something like the level of quixotic, hallucinatory self-delusion necessary to think that California could simply tic the box for six-way partition and then move inexorably toward just such a subdivision.  For one thing, why would Tim Draper’s borders be better than those which county-level referenda might generate (and, in Jefferson, are, after a fashion, generating)?  Can you just imagine the decades of wrangling, at county, state, and congressional levels, over which of the 58 current counties would belong to which of the six states?  Draper—who, in addition to managing astronomical sums of money, played Principal Schmoke on the Nickelodeon series The Naked Brothers Bandinsists that all that could be sorted out later.  He is optimistic that leaner, nimbler, more accountable smaller governments can be put in place, with the people bypassing the party “oligopoly” in the legislatures.  How he plans to keep the very body exclusively entrusted with creating new states—Congress—out of the process is unclear.  It would require some kind of revolution—which is much more the State (or Republic) of Jefferson’s style than Silicon Valley’s.  Watch this space.

The tie that unbinds: Tim Draper’s sartorial choice
on the day he announced the petition threshold had been reached.

[For those who are wondering, yes, this blog is tied in with my forthcoming book, a sort of encyclopedic atlas to be published by Auslander and Fox under the title Let’s Split! A Complete Guide to Separatist Movements, Independence Struggles, Breakaway Republics, Rebel Provinces, Pseudostates, Puppet States, Tribal Fiefdoms, Micronations, and Do-It-Yourself Countries, from Chiapas to Chechnya and Tibet to Texas.  The book, which contains dozens of maps and over 500 flags, is now in the layout phase and should be on shelves, and available on Amazon, by early fall 2014.  I will be keeping readers posted of further publication news.  Meanwhile, please “like” the book (even though you haven’t read it yet) on Facebook.]

Related: hear the author of this blog discuss the Cascadia independence movement in OregonWashington, and British Columbia in a recent interview for Seattle’s N.P.R. affiliate station KUOW-FM.  Click here to listen.



Related articles from this blog:

Sunday, February 16, 2014

Study Finds Silicon Valley’s 6-Way California Split Is Doable


In December, when the Silicon Valley entrepreneur Tim Draper suggested splitting California into six separate states, it seemed like a pie-in-the-sky side show to the more serious movement gaining steam in the state’s far north, to create a separate State of Jefferson.  But Draper’s “Six Californias” idea has just got a sort of thumbs-up—from Sacramento, no less.  A 16-page report drafted for the California legislature concludes that splitting the Golden State into pieces is “clearly legal and doable.”


This would probably not be the flag of the State of Silicon Valley,
but it’s a nice try.
Draper may be best known to the general public as Principal Schmoke on the teen situation comedy The Naked Brothers Band, but in tech circles he is heir to a high-profile venture-capital dynasty.  Silicon Valley’s discontent with California’s corporate regulations and its redistribution of tax revenue from the wealthiest areas to the poorer, more remote ones has been discussed in this blog recently—notably with the San Francisco genetics entrepreneur Balaji Srinivasan planning the Valley’s “ultimate exit” from the state by some means or other, as well as organizations like the Seasteading Institute which want to set up floating free-market cities off the California coast outside United States jurisdiction.  But Draper’s solution is more old-fashioned, following a state-secession trend going back to Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys, who sliced a new state, Vermont, out of New York’s western flank in the colonial period.


Creating new states through secession has occasionally worked in the past.
Draper’s “Six Californias” plan includes a State of Silicon Valley, which would include the San Francisco Bay area and points south; a State of North California running in a thick band from Napa Valley to Lake Tahoe; a State of Jefferson composed of the state’s 14 northernmost counties; a primarily agricultural State of Central California centered on Fresno; a State of West California, stretching from San Luis Obispo to Long Beach, including liberal Los Angeles; and a State of South California composed of some of the inland, conservative, desert states that a Riverside County politician (as reported in this blog) is already trying to form, with a coastal toehold at San Diego and the Republican Party stronghold of Orange County.


A sketch by Draper shows which counties would be in which of six new states:
Jefferson (top), North California (just below it), Silicon Valley, Central California (the largest),
West California (including L.A.), and, at the bottom, South California.
The current state of California, the most populous in the U.S. and the most diverse in terms of ethnicity, landscape, and local economy, is, according to Draper, “ungovernable.”  There is already a movement to gather the necessary 1 million signatures which will put the proposal on the ballot in November.  The report, which was prepared by a legislative expert, Mac Taylor, and a financial specialist, Michael Cohen, notes that the states of Silicon Valley and North California would each have a higher per capita income than California’s current $46,477.  In fact, Silicon Valley would surpass Connecticut and become the state with the highest average income.


Tim Draper—guru of the state-partition movement
Draper says the highest interest in the “Six Californias” proposal is in the areas that would be Central California and the State of Jefferson.  The problem is that which counties want to be in Jefferson (listed in this blog as one of “10 Separatist Movements to Watch in 2014”) is being sorted out right now at the grass-roots level, without waiting for a top-down partition by any city-slicker millionaire technocrat.  To date, the boards of supervisors in Siskiyou and Modoc counties have voted in favor of secession, and Siskiyou and Tehama will put the question before voters in June.  Other counties are considering it, and in Siskiyou there is even going to be an alternate ballot initiative to create a sort of sovereign “Republic of Jefferson” within Siskiyou County’s territory.



But ultimately, the problem is that Draper is approaching the alleged problem of California’s ungovernability like a businessman, not a politician, and it will be politics that will decide, all on its own, whether to partition the state.  Just for the sake of argument, even if the U.S. Congress did agree to a subdivision of California that, let’s say, maintained the same balance between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate, that still doesn’t tell us why California Democrats, who already control the largest state in the U.S., would settle for a smaller place to run.

Related articles from this blog:
“Glenn County Becomes 4th California Jurisdiction to Opt to Join ‘State of Jefferson’” (Jan. 2014)
“Northern Californian Voters Torn between ‘State’ or ‘Republic’ of Jefferson” (Jan. 2014)
“10 Separatist Movements to Watch in 2014” (Dec. 2013)
“State of Jefferson Idea Won’t Go Away: Activists across Northern California Push for Statehood” (Nov. 2013)
“Silicon Valley Technocrats Plan to Flee U.S. for Libertarian Floating Cities” (Nov. 2013)
“Modoc County Joins Siskiyou in Seeking to Split from California as State of Jefferson” (Sept. 2013)
“Other California & Oregon Counties May Be Jumping on ‘State of Jefferson’ Bandwagon” (Sept. 2013)
“Siskiyou County, California, Takes the Plunge, Votes to Secede as Kernel of New ‘State of Jefferson’” (Sept. 2013)
“Colorado’s Secession Wildfire Spreads to Northern California: Siskiyouans Raise “State of Jefferson” Flag” (Aug. 2013)
“Let a Thousand Secession Petitions Bloom: The U.S. Balkanized, but Perhaps Only on the White House Website, Nowhere Else—but Most Importantly: What Does All This Have to Do with Topless Car Washes and the State of Jefferson?” (Nov. 2012)
“‘South California’ Statehood Movement Reignites in Election Year” (Sept. 2012)



[For those who are wondering, yes, this blog is tied in with my forthcoming book, a sort of encyclopedic atlas to be published by Auslander and Fox under the title Let’s Split! A Complete Guide to Separatist Movements, Independence Struggles, Breakaway Republics, Rebel Provinces, Pseudostates, Puppet States, Tribal Fiefdoms, Micronations, and Do-It-Yourself Countries, from Chiapas to Chechnya and Tibet to Texas.  The book is now in the layout phase and should be on shelves, and available on Amazon, by early fall 2014.  I will be keeping readers posted of further publication news.  Meanwhile, please “like” the book (even though you haven’t read it yet) on Facebook.]

Friday, November 1, 2013

Silicon Valley Technocrats Plan to Flee U.S. for Libertarian Floating Cities


Already, Republican and Tea Party malcontents in liberal California are seeking to split away with candidates for statehood like “South California” and “the State of Jefferson” (as reported on extensively in this blog).  But the newest cries for independence in the Golden State are coming from Silicon Valley élites, and they want out of the United States altogether.  Or something.  Sort of.


Earlier this month, a tech entrepeneur named Balaji Srinivasan, co-founder of a San Francisco genetics start-up called Counsyl, delivered an address titled “Silicon Valley’s Ultimate Exit” to a crowd at a seminar run by the venture-capital firm Y Combinator.  The “ultimate exit” in question is not assisted suicide but instead, as he put it, a “need to build [an] opt-in society, outside the U.S., run by technology.”  He declared, “We need to run the experiment, to show what a society run by Silicon Valley looks like without affecting anyone who wants to live under the Paper Belt” (i.e., us poor schmucks who are so two-weeks-ago that we use Stone Age technologies like paper and telephone lines and money that isn’t Bitcoin and computers that sit on desks instead of being implanted in our corneas).

A slide from Srinivasan’s talk “Silicon Valley’s Ultimate Exit”
But Srinivasan’s “experiment” supposedly won’t involve rebel armies, impromptu border checkpoints, coups d’état, or other tools familiar to readers of this blog.  Though he left it deliberately vague, his futurist fever dream, which has become the buzz of the industry this week, is more likely to involve any number of utopian visions that have been tossed about in the break rooms of Silicon Valley firms.  (Okay, I guess “break room” is a pathetically outdated “Paper Belt” idea: I suppose techies spend their work breaks bouncing around in ball-pits or locked in sensory-deprivation tanks or whatever.)

Elon Musk
The C.E.O. of Google, Larry Page, said earlier this year that he wants to “set aside a part of the world” where technology can be innovated without government regulation.  The founder of SpaceX and Tesla Motors, Elon Musk, has plans for an extrajurisdictional Martian colony, in visions unmistakably inspired by the libertarian science-fiction author Robert A. Heinlein.

Heinlein wrote fantasies about intergalactic homesteading
which some techies now take seriously.
Likewise, something called “seasteading,” analogous to homesteading, is becoming popular, thanks partly to one Patri Friedman, who looks, to my mind, suspiciously like one of the moai of Easter Island ...


..., but who is also a grandson of the late 20th century’s most revered free-market guru, the dwarflike Nobel-Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman ...


Friedman the younger heads a high-profile, increasingly popular organization called the Seasteading Institute.  Seasteading is an idea which dates to the founding of the Principality of Sealand, in the late 1960s, on a disused sea-fortress turned pirate-radio station just outside the United Kingdom’s territorial waters.  Sealand is still the most famous and successful “micronation” in the world, and (as has been reported on in this blog) has attracted the attention of hackers and Wikileakers interested in stationing their illicit computer servers there.

The Principality of Sealand (actual size)

More recently in micronational history, in 1972, during a renaissance of Ayn Rand–style libertarianism in the U.S., a Lithuanian-American real-estate mogul named Michael Oliver barged tons of sand from Australia to a South Pacific coral reef too low-lying to qualify under international law as territory.  There, he built up a land-mass which he christened the Republic of Minerva, luring settlers and investors for a free-market utopia.  But it was quickly snuffed out by troops from the Kingdom of Tonga.

Backed by gold, naturally
Then, as the British–French co-ruled colony of the New Hebrides moved toward independence in the late 1970s, Oliver tried to piggy-back his utopian dreams on a “cargo cult”–based separatist movement in the north of the archipelago.  These plans for a libertarian Republic of Vemwrana did not take the native people’s culture or aspirations into consideration much at all.  Equally short-sighted was an idea to settle thousands of boat people from Vietnam on the small island group.  (Didn’t he reckon they’d had enough of American-style “liberation” from socialism?)  “Vemerana” collapsed, and its territory is now a part of the independent Republic of Vanuatu.  Oliver also tried something similar in the Bahamas also on the eve of its independence, crawling into bed, unfortunately, with paranoid white settlers fearful of Black socialism.

Flag of the short-lived Republic of Vemerana
Not long after, in 1983, American free-marketers developed a plan for seasteading on a similarly unclaimed seamount called the Cortes Bank, south of California’s Channel Islands, near Mexico’s marine boundary.  They planned to call it Taluga.

In the modern era, there have been plans by the New York University free-market economist Paul Romer—a former student of Friedman’s at the University of Chicago—to build a Singapore-style free-market city-state in, or I suppose on top of, the sleepy fishing village of Trujillo, Honduras, on the Caribbean.  There, Romer says, entrepreneurs can build capital and maximize value for their shareholders by avoiding unreasonable regulations.  See how deftly he avoids the word “sweatshop”?  Maybe that specter is why the idea has gotten a cool reception in Honduras, or maybe it is the choice of locale.  Trujillo, almost certainly not coincidentally, is the final resting place of William Walker, a 19th-century pro-slavery mercenary who tried to annex Baja California, and later Nicaragua, to the U.S.  For Central Americans, he is a despised emblem of norteamericano economic imperialism.

An auto tycoon’s vision of an autonomous Commonwealth of Belle Isle in Detroit
Not too long ago, in Detroit, the former C.E.O. of Chrysler, Larry Sperlich, tried to stoke interest in turning a 982-acre island in the Detroit River, into a Singapore-style free-market city-state to be called the Commonwealth of Belle Isle.  And right-wing survivalist types are building something in the Idaho mountains called the Citadel, which they envision as a separate, heavily-armed community of “patriots” outside the control of Barack Hussein Obama’s jackbooted thugs.  It is more or less directly modeled on “Galt’s Gulch,” the remote Rocky Mountains redoubt of the capitalists in Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged who tuned in Adam Smith, turned on to Ludwig von Mises, and dropped out of society as it collapsed in socialist inefficiency.

So far, Idaho’s “Citadel Community” is just a website
Of all of these dreams, the one with the most money behind it so far is the pilot seasteading project proposed by PayPal’s founder, Peter Thiel, called Blueseed.  It is to be an anchored or floating non-territorial structure—a vast one—lying just outside U.S. waters west of the San Francisco Bay area.  It will be home to tech firms which can take advantage of U.S. citizens commuting from the mainland via helicopter or speedboat and foreigners who can live on Blueseed and work for the firm without getting visas.
An artist’s vision of Blueseed
Blueseed is a fantastic idea, except for its unworkability.  The international law of the sea says that every vessel on the high seas needs to be flagged by a recognized nation, and its laws will then apply there as though it were real territory.  The same is true of anchored structures on the high seas, like oil rigs.  They are not no-man’s-lands.  Sealand is only allowed to exist because not much happens there.  If it started housing companies earning millions, to say nothing of WikiLeaks, you can bet that the U.K. government would sweep in and shut it down if it didn’t agree to be taxed.  (Since its founding, Sealand has found itself suddenly within a legally expanded U.K. marine boundary.)


With this in mind, Blueseed proponents concede that they may have to relent and fly a “flag of convenience” such as that of the Bahamas, Bermuda, Panama, or the Marshall Islands, as many vessels do when they skirt the edges of national law at times.  The Republic of the Marshall Islands has, in fact, been mentioned specifically and repeatedly by Blueseed proponents.  But the Marshalls are a former U.S. colony and now independent state in “free association” with the U.S., so Marshallese-flagged entities on the high seas would not necessarily escape all scrutiny.  Remember the scandal a few years back when Congress investigated conditions in sweatshops in the nearby Northern Marianas Islands?  I’m sorry, did I say “sweatshop” again?  I meant to say “entrepreneurial enterprise operating free of government regulation.”

Ain’t no OSHA in Oceania ...
and that’s what libertarians like about it.
And even if Blueseed did somehow prevail, without sovereign states shutting it down in order to recoup possible revenue, it could set up dangerous precedents.  It wouldn’t just be pirate radio stations and unregulated, untaxed tech firms that would take advantage of a seasteading loophole.  We could also expect to see things like floating headquarters for Somali-coast pirates, floating al-Qaeda training camps, and floating child brothels.  Perhaps there are some good reasons why all human activity on Earth is under the aegis of some sovereign state or other.

Who knows?  All sorts of industries could thrive in floating cities,
free of oppressive government regulation.
Suffice to say: it’ll never happen.  But don’t say that around Srinivasan and the other visionaries of Silicon Valley.  They’re so excited building their Lego cities of the future.  I just don’t have the heart to tell them.



[You can read more about Blueseed, Belle Isle, Vemerana, and other micronation, independence, and new-nation movements, both famous and obscure, in my new book, a sort of encyclopedic atlas just published by Litwin Books under the title Let’s Split! A Complete Guide to Separatist Movements and Aspirant Nations, from Abkhazia to Zanzibar.  The book, which contains 46 maps and 554 flags (or, more accurately, 554 flag images), is available for order now on Amazon.  Meanwhile, please “like” the book (even if you haven’t read it yet) on Facebook and see this interview for more information on the book.]


Subscribe Now: Feed Icon