(to table of contents of FNF archives) (to start of short story)
The Interview Commences
(to top of page) (to outline)
Here I will tell a story of how a new free nation comes to exist in our present world.
Nine months ago we published "Toward a New Country in East Africa"1 for the New Country Foundation. In response to that article we received more inquiries than usual. Then, in January of this year, I was fortunate to attend a briefing on the East African possibility2. As such, I have a bit more that I can tell.
But what I have learned about the possibility in Africa seems cloaked in layers of uncertainty. And, since we in FNF strive to build the believability of the free nation movement, I do not want to report as fact anything which I have been unable to confirm. Yet, our readers ask for more.
I want others to believe, with me, that a new free nation can, somehow, somewhere, be created. And since the details I have heard about the East African possibility bring that possibility to life in my mind, I have hit upon this scheme: to tell it as fiction. Some of the details here have been inspired, in part, by what I have learned about the possibility in East Africa. But most of the details I have cooked up alone. Please consider it all as fiction—but also consider whether it seems plausible.
(to top of page) (to outline)
In writing this story I will try to satisfy another request which we sometimes get from our readers. Several people have asked for a Constitution, a specific Constitution which FNF proposes for a new free nation. Probably you know that FNF has published a draft of a virtual-canton constitution by Roderick Long.3 But this has the status of a working paper for discussion, not of a proposal endorsed by this Foundation.
My personal view of Roderick's constitution is this: it is as good a constitution as I know. For our purposes it is probably better than the original U.S. Constitution, though I suspect I still have things to learn from the U.S. Constitution. But I am not prepared to endorse any constitution as theoretically ideal for a libertarian nation, because I still feel ignorant of the theory of institutions needed to support order in human society.
Theoretically, since I have trouble justifying any coercive government, I have trouble justifying any specification (any "constitution") of such a government. But practically, since we live in the real world and can proceed only in some sequence of steps, when real opportunity comes knocking I will compromise. I am prepared to embrace some sort of constitution or contract, just as long as that document represents a big step in the right direction.
For those who hunger to see a constitution, for a new libertarian nation, let me point out that the story which follows does present the constitution of a free nation—in a sly sort of way. It exploits another meaning of the word "constitution." It tells of the assembly, of the coming into existence, of a nation. While I remain vague on one kind of constitution, the kind which is a document which specifies a government, I ask you to consider whether this other kind of constitution, the assembly of a nation, might advance our aims.
(to top of page) (to outline)
Most maps of Africa show a country called Subotoland. Two hundred years ago European colonial powers gave that name, "Subotoland," to this eastern stretch of coast which rises to mountains. Eventually, the Europeans learned their inability to superintend this part of the world, and they left. But they wanted to save face back home. So on their way out they set up a "government," or at least something which Europeans would think was a government. They also designated a capital, the ancient seaport of Halieerz.
To fill the highest offices in this government the Europeans turned to the Yakihili tribe. Among the Yakihili the Europeans found individuals eager for the trappings of office. The Yakihili, who comprise about 20% of the population in Subotoland, have been know among other local tribes as "water carriers for white men."
In the far end of Subotoland lies the province of Rumbdier, 1600 square kilometers, mostly windy desert. Ninety-five percent of Rumbdier's 50,000 inhabitants live in the coastal city of Squazzi. No paved road penetrates Rumbdier's interior, but most of it can be navigated in four-wheel-drive vehicles.
The year is 1999. Forty kilometers inland from Squazzi a settlement is growing.
One year ago, on 1 September 1998, the government of Subotoland signed a 99-year lease with the Economic Opportunities Consortium. Thus started Naraville, a politically autonomous enclave now populated by 2100 people.
On this one-year anniversary, Logic magazine has sent a reporter to interview H. Ramirez, who now serves as Chair of the five-member Representative Council at Naraville.
The interview commences.
Logic: How did this idea, that some businesses might combine and create a new free nation, get started?
Ramirez: Well, we are flattered when anyone says that we have created a nation. Because what we have here really is too tiny, compared to the real nations, for most people to see it as "a nation." And we do have a limited leasehold, of 99 years.
But, to answer your question, some people have thought all along that it should be possible to attain some sort of sovereignty. There have been many attempts, through the past few decades, to start new little nations. But most people do not know about this, because most people have not followed the movement. And the attempts have seemed almost too ridiculous to report.
None have worked, until this project. And this one has flown, so far at least, because a few people with money, owners of medium-sized businesses, finally believed in the potential of such a project.
Logic: So we understand these business owners formed the Economic Opportunities Consortium, which has carried out the plan. Who are the major players in the Consortium?
Ramirez: Well first there is my employer, Narayn Inc., headed by Mr. Narayanan. We manufacture television chassis. This site, here in Naraville, is our sixth facility, the other five being in Malaysia and Korea. At each of these facilities we employ between 300 and 2000 employees.
The second largest player is Process Automation, a software company which dominates their niche in manufacturing control systems. They were looking mainly for a place where their professional staff, who are pretty high-paid people, could work without paying half, or more, of their earnings to some parasitic government. They have about 250 employees here now, many with families.
Other important players are Bergen, the Swiss based insurance company, and Fisk Security International.
And then there are minor players. The hotel is run by Comfort Lodgings. They have about 30 employees now.
Logic: What is the political status of Naraville?
Ramirez: Well, in this sense we are like a nation, in that we fend for ourselves, negotiating as we need with the governments of nations, and calculating where we stand—how secure we are—as a player in the game of nations.
Of course we have the 99-year lease with Subotoland. And that creates the outlines of our situation. We are, provided we live up to that agreement, independent to manage our own affairs, with about as much scope of choice as most nations.
Logic: How much rent do you have to pay for this land?
Ramirez: We think it best not to disclose that in this medium.
Logic: Does your agreement with Subotoland require you to do other things, besides pay rent?
Ramirez: Yes. We must not attack Subotoland, or other neighboring nations. We must not provoke attack, by some other nation upon Subotoland. We must not pollute, in damaging ways. That is about it.
Also, of course, we need to avoid provoking attack upon ourselves. But the lease does not say that.
Oh, and we also have to treat the Zonsan, a tribe which has lived in these hills, humanely.
Logic: You leased most of the land area of Rumbdier, is that correct?
Ramirez: Yes the lease maps out about a thousand square kilometers, which we may use as specified. Our boundary skirts around Squazzi, and the few villages, by a wide margin, so what we got was empty of permanent settlements.
Logic: How do you know you are secure?
Ramirez: Our security involves having a sense of who might attack us, and why, and taking steps to make sure we do not offend those parties, in such a way that would provoke attack.
We feel quite safe, vis-a-vis the government of Subotoland, because we pay them rent which makes almost one fourth of their national budget. They accept and welcome us.
And, regarding our acceptance by governments in other nations, it is important to note that the government of Subotoland is a member in good standing in the United Nations, and that it maintains peaceable-enough relations with other governments in Africa. So our favorable relationship with the government in Halieerz starts us with a good footing.
If things should come to a falling out, but I do not anticipate this, the Fisk Security Agency has weapons which, we believe, would render unprofitable any attempt to invade which might be mounted from any nations in this part of the world. Our lease states, explicitly, that we can arm ourselves, and act, in our own self-defense.
And then, a big part of our security lies in our being spread out. Most of our banking is still done in other nations. So if the government of Subotoland suddenly revoked the lease and seized Naraville, assuming it had capacity to do that, it would not get much of value to it. Here we have—not wealth—so much as the capacity to produce wealth—under the right circumstances. Most of us here would not work, and probably could not work, profitably within an incompatible regime.
Logic: But what about big and powerful nations, like the U.S., France, or Iran. How do you know that one of these will not find an excuse to invade?
Ramirez: Well, that of course is an important question. It does occupy our attention. But notice that the Earth is covered with little nations which exist without provoking attack. We in Naraville believe that we can practice diplomacy, as well as these.
Underneath our confidence lies the fact that we really are not aggressive, except in producing good products for good prices. We are in fact a good neighbor.
Now sometimes there will be some interests, probably businesses hurt by competition, which are motivated to paint us as a danger, so that they try to get their nation's government to support some act of aggression upon either Naraville, or upon the particular competing business in Naraville. This can happen, and we need to watch for it. But it does not need to defeat us. It is, in fact, a manageable problem, when you face it and deal with it.
Logic: I understand that you have insurance against invasion.
Ramirez: Yes. One of the partners in the consortium is Bergen, the Swiss firm which specializes in international insurance. Most of us with property here have policies with Bergen.
On the quarter acre lot, for instance, which my wife and I own and on which we are building a house, we have a policy in which Bergen insures 60%, should we lose our property because of international invasion. That is 60% of an appraised value. And, should we find ourselves kicked totally out of here, they will pay in any of the 22 cities around the globe, where they have an office.
And they also insure against fire, theft, natural disaster—the sorts of things Americans are used getting in homeowners' policies.
The businesses also, for the most part, have invasion insurance with Bergen. Although, in my plant, Mr. Narayanan has decided to insure only some of the most expensive machinery. He has decided not to insure the investment in the buildings and land.
Logic: Isn't this unusual? How can Bergen insure against invasion?
Ramirez: Well, they can. They have a history of insuring unusual things. And this does not strain them at all. All of the assets in Naraville combined do not add up to be anywhere near as big as one of their larger accounts. And do not worry about them. They charge, plenty. Our insurance premiums are about ten times what they would be in the U.S., for homeowners' policies.
The good news is that another insurance company has started to negotiate with Fisk. I think they have figured out that they could decrease their exposure to loss by paying Fisk to beef up, to present an even stronger force against invasion. I think they will be able to undercut Bergen, and still make a handsome profit. At least I hope so.
Logic: You said you "own" a lot. How can that be, given that the whole contract is just a lease, for 99 years?
Ramirez: Well, you are right. We have it for 99 years, so it is more like a sublease than complete ownership. But, in a sense, we own more than property owners in other countries, because we do not face zoning or other land-use regulations. As long as we do not injure our neighbors in some way, we can do anything we want with our land, for those 99 years.
Logic: What is your position, Mr. Ramirez, in the Consortium?
Ramirez: I am a minor shareholder in the Consortium. I own about 1% of the shares. I hold no office in the Consortium, and my long-term influence obviously is no greater than the percentage of shares which I own.
But, since I am the ranking employee here of Narayn, which owns the largest block of shares in the Consortium, I have been elected by the Consortium to one of the five seats on the Representative Council at Naraville, which you might think of as the executive branch of the government here. And, starting today, I serve my year in rotation as Chair of that Council.
In this role I do not lead so much as represent. And, in an important sense, I serve at the pleasure of my boss. My chances for reelection to the Council, if I should want it, depend upon my continued acceptability to Mr. Narayanan.
Logic: What kind of entity is the Consortium?
Ramirez: The Consortium is an extended partnership, a contract among its members, with control vested in the ownership of shares. Narayn Inc. owns the largest block, 40%. And, since Mr. Narayanan owns most of Narayn stock, he is the most influential person in the Consortium. He is Chairman. Process Automation controls about 22% of Consortium shares. Bergen and another major investor each hold about 10%.
Logic: Where do your workers come from?
Ramirez: Of course I can speak best for Narayn. About two-thirds of our factory workers are ethnic Chinese, refugees from a purge in Vietnam, where their ancestors had lived for 300 years. Many refugees from this purge had become boat people. But Mr. Narayanan saw the great opportunity. These people are great workers, hard working, eager to learn—to live. So, with the grateful consent of the UN, we offered employment contracts to 400 of these, who have come with their families. In our plants it turns out that most of the human labor can be performed by people who have two to three weeks of training. We provide this training as part of the arrangement with the workers.
As for our higher-skilled technical and supervisory staff, we draw from a sufficient pool of staff already trained in our five other facilities.
As for Process Automation, their 250 staff are mostly highly skilled and highly paid computer specialists. Most of these came from the U.S., but many also came from Europe and a few from Japan.
Logic: Before you found this site, in East Africa, what were you looking for?
Ramirez: Well, speaking for Narayn, as our business grows we are constantly looking for new sites for our plants. Of course we want a politically stable environment, low taxes, and a reliable workforce. In recent years the major consideration in siting a plant has been the friendliness of the government, the extent to which we can expect that the government will leave us alone.
Logic: What were the political and geographical considerations?
Ramirez: After the Consortium formed, we started looking for some land we could rent, or buy. The Earth is just covered with land which is barely populated at all, but we needed to find some land in the domain of a government which would welcome our payments. So this meant probably a poor, third-world country, where national pride would not keep the government from wanting our payments.
It had to be secure. We wanted to see, when we looked at the map, that no government in the region would be likely to take significant offence at our presence. Also it helps to see, among neighboring nations, none which is likely to organize a potent threat, in military terms, to our small but well-equipped security contractor. This allows us to avoid most worry about shifts of power in neighboring nations.
From a marketing standpoint, we could have settled almost anywhere in the world. The world is a smaller place now, in terms of shipping expenses.
Of course we all wanted a mild climate, and a beautiful setting in nature, and we were lucky in what we found here in East Africa. But these were secondary considerations for most of our settlers, to date at least, because these people just want to live and work, free of oppression.
Now there is a whole category of potential settlers who seek a tropical paradise, for a tax haven or retirement. We here in Naraville have not generally served that market. But it has potential, and I expect our tourism will increase.
Logic: Why didn't you try to find a site within a more advanced nation? For instance, within the continental United States there are large tracts of land which are perfectly habitable, but which are almost empty. Why didn't you go there?
Ramirez: Many people have asked this. But this seemed impossible to us, because the government of the nation with which we dealt would have to accept the idea of selling sovereignty from its rule. Officials in the governments of most first-world nations are proud. They really seem to believe in what they are doing. But in the third world we can find many more leaders of governments who do not try to pretend that their rule is ideal.
Also, most first-world governments are electoral democracies. Government office holders in these countries cannot make choices which differ far from the will of the majority of the people. To sell the idea in these countries, of selling sovereignty to a new little nation, it would become necessary to convince 50% of the populace. But that is a huge chore which we doubt that we could do. It may be impossible.
We were looking just for some government with which we could deal. We were looking for a landlord-tenant relationship, in which the landlord really wants, and needs, the rent payments. And we could not expect to find this in the first world.
Logic: Tell us about the circumstances that you found here in Subotoland.
Ramirez: Westerners really do not understand the culture and the peoples here in Africa. The whole concept of "nation" does not fit here. These people are members of their tribes, first and foremost. The idea of a nation comes out of Western thinking, because Westerners all live in nations, and identify that way. But what we found here was people we could deal with.
Logic: I do not understand what you are saying about the "Western concept of nations."
Ramirez: Well, if you look in an atlas, at a map of the world or of Africa, you will see all the land divided up into different-colored regions, which are labeled as nations. This is a Western concept.
For instance, you and I talk about Subotoland, the country from which the Economic Opportunities Consortium leased this land. Well, Subotoland is a Western concept, a Western creation. The people who live on the land which Westerners call Subotoland do not think of themselves as citizens of Subotoland. They think of themselves as members of their tribes. They are not governed by the government in Halieerz. They are governed by their tribal apparatuses. And they do not get justice from the government in Halieerz, or seek it there. They have tribal systems of justice.
And they do not obey the government in Halieerz. In fact, if that government ever tried to impose a regulation, or collect a tax, more than ten miles from its center of power in Halieerz, probably its agents would get shot. So they stick close to Halieerz.
For almost all of the inhabitants of this part of Africa, life carries on as it has for the last thousand years—guided by tribal elders and tribal justice.
Logic: But you have your lease with the government in Halieerz, don't you? How is it legitimate, if that government has no power out here in Naraville, 400 miles from Halieerz?
Ramirez: We deal with them because that is the government recognized by the UN, the United States, and by major Western nations. Since we want to keep peace with those powers, we deal with the government that they recognize. And, in making a friendly deal with that government, which they announced in glowing terms in the UN, we came most of the way toward attaining international security.
Logic: "Most of the way," you say. What more did you have to do to get security?
Ramirez: Well, of course, the next major concern is the domestic scene: can we get along with the people who are here. And this is a separate question, it has nothing to do with Halieerz. Except that both we and Halieerz, for the sake of acceptance in the international community, wanted to have a clause in the lease which required us (the Consortium) to extend certain considerations to the local inhabitants. We had no trouble with this, because it simply put into writing what we always intended and wanted.
Logic: So what have you had to do to make the local tribes happy?
Ramirez: Well, there is really only one tribe, the Zonsan, who have, in recent centuries, made use of the land which we are inhabiting. It is desert, and the Zonsan, at least those who still cross these parts, have used it only sporadically for grazing their goats, where grazing could be found.
Practically speaking, we could probably have set up our perimeter fence and settled here, just as we have done, without negotiating with the Zonsan at all. This land is worth so little to them that they have not established ideas like property rights in the land, and I think none of them would have considered themselves cheated if we simply took use of this land.
But morally and politically we felt we had an obligation anyhow. Even if they did not expect something in trade, we felt we should try to give it.
So we pulled some numbers out of the hat. We hired an agricultural specialist who estimated how much grazing value, in terms of hay, this land had offered to all users. It was not much. We multiplied that by five. Then we made an effort to find all the family groups who might, in the future, have made use of this grazing. And we gave to each a value which we guessed to be their share of that total. Generally, they thought we were crazy.
We also established a water trough just outside our perimeter, which, for 99 years, we will keep supplied with water. Our agricultural specialist assures us that this alone is worth more than all the grazing, on occasional clumps of grass, that this land ever provided. And we have had to learn something from that. We intended it to be for goats, as a goodwill gesture to passing shepherds. But we've had some come up in pickup trucks. They siphon the water into 55-gallon drums and take it away. That water does cost us money, and if this goes too far, it looks like we are going to have to establish a goat check point.
Logic: Were you helped in any way by organizations such as the Free Nation Foundation, in North Carolina, which have worked on theory, and academic issues, relating to creation of a free nation?
Ramirez: Yes, it seems that some important groundwork was done by the Free Nation Foundation, in making the idea acceptable. Not that everyone accepts the idea. In fact, as you know, most people on Earth do not know that Naraville exists. But before FNF started to build the credibility of the idea, almost no level-headed business people thought of it as a possibility. Then suddenly, I think perhaps to the credit of FNF, there were a few businessmen, Mr. Narayanan among them, who were saying, "let's do it."
Logic: How do you govern, in the enclave?
Ramirez: There is not really any governing to do, to speak of. The Representative Council represents, more than governs. And the representing that we need to do is mostly to the outside world. Internally, we are a collection of private neighbors.
Logic: How do you administer justice? What would you do with criminals?
Ramirez: Well, for the time being we have the Council Adjudication Board. This is three judges, selected by the Consortium. This is our ultimate authority for local law, should we need it. But its monopoly will end, in a sequence of steps during the first ten years.
Logic: What are those steps?
Ramirez: We are now still in startup phase. During startup phase, which lasts three years, all settlers and companies, anybody who has any contractual presence here, has agreed to accept the judgments of the CAB. Other arbitration and settlement means may be used, if all parties to a dispute agree. However if any one party wants CAB, then it comes before CAB.
The cost of operating CAB during this phase is assured by the Consortium, through its internal contracts. But CAB judges are expected to assess court and enforcement costs upon parties it deems both liable and able to pay.
During the second phase, which lasts seven years, alternate systems of judgment will be encouraged to grow. The provision that any one litigant may demand a hearing before CAB will expire. The Consortium will continue to underwrite CAB, but with each passing year will pay a smaller proportion of CAB expenses. At the end of the second phase, CAB, if it still exists, must meet all its expenses by charges levied upon litigants.
For the ultimate phase, which lasts for the duration of the lease, adjudication boards will be entirely private, separate from the Consortium I mean. They will meet their own expenses, without help from the Consortium, and will be selected by the concurrence of the litigants, just like any other voluntary contract.
Logic: But what if a criminal refuses to come before a judge?
Ramirez: Well, if you are wronged, you can always go before the CAB, or some other respected authority, alone. If you have a strong-enough case the CAB might, after trying to solicit a voluntary reply from the defendant, write an opinion for you, saying that an action which you suggest against the criminal seems justified. Then, if you carry out the act, or if your insurance company hires Fisk to do it for you, you are on pretty solid ground. The criminal, assuming he sees this coming, may decide it is wise to appear before CAB, to make his case.
Logic: Can't this system of justice go sour?
Ramirez: Yes, it is frightening, to sit and imagine all the ways it could go wrong. But so far we seem to be doing fine, and the transition to private law will be gradual.
And you know, ultimately I find comfort in realizing that we are free individuals. If some of us face a problem which we had not foreseen, and we get together and agree that we have a problem, we can organize, and act. We can always draw up new contracts.
And do not forget that I have insurance, on my life and property. So do most others here. Bergen's policies are good. Local justice might fail to protect me. But I also have insurance on the things that are most precious to me.
Logic: I am skeptical of just the startup phase, of "company town" law. Why would the CAB ever give justice to people who had complaints against Narayn?
Ramirez: That is a reasonable concern. All of us have had to sort of take a leap of faith. But, now that we are part way down the road, we see that we were more worried than we needed to be.
To start with, Mr. Narayanan is a kind man. He has only good intentions. You may doubt it. But I know this, and people who know him know it.
Additionally, he is not dictator. He has 40% control. If he went mad, the other 60% could organize and make decisions.
And finally, a friend reminded me, when I was questioning the wisdom of deciding to live under CAB law, that I had lived in Mexico for four years, in a previous job. I had decided to risk living under their law, which does not have a good reputation, because of the benefits offered by that employment contract.
Why should I hold Naraville to a higher standard? And my friend reminded me that people who go on ocean cruises, or airplane flights, accept the law of the captain, for that time.
Perfect justice, I decided, is an illusion. Before we say "no" to a proposal, because it is not perfect, we should examine what we live with anyhow.
Logic: So, what has happened during the first year?
Ramirez: Speaking for Narayn, we were able to start up rapidly, and ship our first chassis only six months after the lease was signed. Process Automation got started even sooner. Their work is more divisible, and their employees do not require training, only moving.
Before signing the lease, the Consortium agreed to start in a focus area, the square kilometer of the current settlement. The auction, to divide land in the focus area, using tokens issued in proportion to shares in the Consortium, took place one week after the signing. On the next day, Mr. Narayanan's crews landed at Squazzi. They landed with heavy construction equipment, supplies, and an armed escort. A week after that we had a working airstrip and housing for 200 people.
The Consortium, unfortunately, lacked experienced real estate developers. Mr. Narayanan decided to try his hand at it, and I joined him. We are learning, and so far we are doing well enough. Right now, if you are willing to print this ad, we are searching for manufacturers of prefabricated housing suitable to our circumstances.
Logic: How do you see the future of Naraville unfolding?
Ramirez: As you know, so far we have occupied less than one tenth of one percent of the land area which we have leased. This could grow into a huge and prosperous city. And as far as I can tell, that will happen. Certainly Narayn is growing as fast as we can. Process Automation plans to bring in another 80 employees next month. The hotel is taking bids from contractors to build three times more space. Prices on land still owned by the Consortium, which is most of it, are rising rapidly.
Logic: What about drugs, recreational drugs, here. Do people come here to get high?
Ramirez: As far as I know, probably some visitors at the hotel consume drugs while here. It is not my business. If it becomes a problem for the hotel, they will deal with it.
Logic: What about international drug dealers? Have some settled here, and started to use Naraville as their base?
Ramirez: Now this could be my business, or could have an impact upon me, because other nations regard drug dealing as evil. If they invade, to stamp out a drug business, that could be a big problem for me, and for other settlers here who had no part in their business, to the extent that our insurance premiums go up because of a risk that they take.
Logic: But don't your libertarian ideals require you to allow any business at all to settle here, including drug smuggling, just so long as your rights are not hurt?
Ramirez: Certainly. But my ideals do not demand that I pay for someone else's stupid mistakes. If someone chooses to enter a business that might provoke attack from a foreign government, then I would say that person has made a very risky choice. And while I would say that they have a right to make that choice, I would also insist that I have no obligation to help pay for their defense. If my security insurance premiums go up because of something they do, then I have cause for aggravation.
Logic: Do you feel personally vulnerable, Mr. Ramirez? What if you had a falling out with Mr. Narayanan, if he decided to fire you and kick you out of Naraville? Where would you go?
Ramirez: Mr. Narayanan could fire me from my job, any day. But he could not kick me out of Naraville. Not directly anyhow, through any legal arrangement or contract. Of course he has enough power here that he could make things mighty uncomfortable for me, if I tried to stay on against his will. But I think, if for some reason my employment with Narayn did end, the much more likely scenario is that I would stay on here, peaceably enough, and try to find other work. The job market is still tiny, but I got an offer just yesterday, for a job as a chef. My wife needs a chef in the diner she has started.
Logic: Thank you, Mr. Ramirez. D
(to top of page) (to outline)
1 ["Toward a New Country in East Africa"] Formulations, Vol. IV, No. 2 (Winter 1996-97).
2 FNF Member John Kingman organized a meeting in Houston, Texas, at which a briefing was given by Jim Davidson, on behalf of the New Country Foundation.
3 FNF Working Paper: Draft of a Virtual-Canton Constitution, Version 5. May 1994.
(to table of contents of FNF archives) (to top of page) (to outline)