"Could "virtual nations" become a thing?" Topic

My youngest and I were having a conversation about politics, Syria, and ISIS the other day, and an intriguing idea came up.

What makes a nation? And once we've figured that out, could you have a nation that exists only in cyberspace and in its citizens' minds?

Looking at ISIS, you have this widely distributed group of people connected by 1) a loosely-shared ideology and 2) modern telecommunications. There are also online phenomena such as Second Life and MMORPGs, which form small insular communities of their own in cyberspace.

Could that be taken a step further? If there was an online nation-state that had its own currency (a la BitCoin), a constitution, voting mechanisms, citizenship requirements, and criminal code, it could effectively function as a virtual nation. It need not be like Second Life, with a Sims-like virtual world, but that might be helpful to some folks. A virtual nation -- let's call it VN for short -- could issue passports, enforce tariffs on digital goods and services, and even have a virtual defense force keeping hackers at bay. People who wanted something different than one VN offers could join or start another VN.

Of course, these VNs would be reliant on the real world to feed, house, and provide physical services to their citizens, not to mention keep their servers secure and running. But still, as a philosophical thought-exercise, VNs could actually become a thing. After all, what makes a nation? Borders on a map?

I'm sure this has been done in a William Gibson novel…

Matrix anyone?

More like Shadowrun

In theory, anything is possible. I guess you'd have to be a dual-citizen though, since you have to physically reside somewhere as well.

Someday, maybe, with current technology and the need for an actual physical body, not a chance.

Certainly possible

Not sure what the advantage would be, though – especially if what you wanted to do was at odds with what an actual nation (like things like cops and soldiers) wanted you to do

Read diamonds age and snowcrash, both by neal stephenson. There are virtual nations, that work like afiliations (sorry about my english), not vinculated to any land. There are "philes" that are something like big "urban tribes" with legal status
From wiki:
Phyles Edit
Society in The Diamond Age is dominated by a number of phyles, also sometimes called tribes. Phyles are groups of people often distinguished by shared values, similar ethnic heritage, a common religion, or other cultural similarities. In the extremely globalized future depicted in the novel, these cultural divisions have largely supplanted the system of nation-states that divides the world today. Cities in The Diamond Age appear divided into sovereign enclaves affiliated or belonging to different phyles within a single metropolis. Most phyles depicted in the novel have a global scope of sovereignty, and maintain segregated enclaves in or near many cities throughout the world.

> After all, what makes a nation? Borders on a map?

Reading a couple of the answers makes me shake my head, what makes a nation is the ability to enforce laws. No nation is going to allow some other nation, virtual or otherwise, to enforce any law upon its citizens in its own territory. Someone might voluntarily "submit" to laws in a virtual nation but the instant they decide they do not like said laws they can go to the real nation for the ACTUAL laws to be applied.

I look at a virtual nation like a homeowners association – sure they have rules and regulations but those rules and regulations are only as allowed by law…

Actually, the primary job of any nation is enforcement of property rights.

Street kids stealing all the fruit from your produce stand? Property rights issue.

Thugs stealing your household goods? Property rights issue.

Goons in nice suits stealing your house? Property rights issue.

Goons in funny uniforms stealing your land? Property rights issue.

So until a "virtual nation" can keep goons from stealing my stuff (or punish them after the fact), it cannot be a nation in fact.

and criminal code,
That would be a problem wouldn't it? So your 'country' doesn't punish x but all your neighbors do or vis versa. Who are you going to call when x happens, the virtual police?

I suspect those in power will frown on this concept, rather severely, if it starts to adversely impact them.

I can't wait to go to war with Reddit.

In my view, a Nation State is a geopolitical entity that exercises a monopoly on the use of deadly force within its borders.

How does a nation sans borders enforce a criminal code? Your nation may well ban playing the harmonica. If the neighbor's kids play the harmonica on your front lawn, who could enforce that law if your neighbor does not also belong to the same nation? What if everyone in an apartment block belonged to a different nation? Then what?

Look for "Micronations" online.

listofmicronations.com

micronations.webs.com/index.html

Bear in mind that the political concept of the "nation" is a relatively recent development in human history. A couple of hundred years at most.

And oh what joy it unleashed upon the world.

And oh what joy it unleashed upon the world.

…as opposed to the Hobbesian state of nature that preceded it?

Aren't we TMP-ers already a virtual nation?

@Mobius: the Criminal Code is largely an outgrowth of property rights. Note that the first 3 examples I gave are theft (and the fourth one is theft by another definition and requires a different, much more massive, response).

I could just as easily included thugs physically assaulting or killing you and yours just as easily. If you aren't secure in your person, you don't have any other rights worth caring about. Personal Safety is the core of any person's happiness, they add other things to drive their behavior when they no longer need to worry about personal safety. Basic psychology.

My response would involve the UN's desires and probably get me Dawghaused so I shall refrain from replying.

What you are describing is a "movement" not a nation.

@Lion in the Stars
I agree with you, but some may try to equate property rights just with money and thus greed.

@Martin Rapier
Yes, the nation state was a more recent development, but it evolved from kingdoms and empires. They enforced the same laws on those within their borders. Though some empires encompassed a number of kingdoms or satraps that did allow local customs to dictate a number of different laws provide that the empires laws were observed as well. Sort of like the US local, state and federal system. In some of these empires there were groups without a territory and their customs were somehow handled as law.

VNs, as pointed out, kind of already exist at least on a cultural/philosphical level – though as things currently stand they would never be recognised as any kind of legal entity. By the time we get over our 'nationalist' hang ups enough to allow VN's the idea of a VN will probably be considered just as anachronistic as real nations!

I could see this becoming a micromanaging dictator's dream….