PC\WI: Seasteading Movement

I've been reading Sailing the Farm (1981), which is the origin of the word "seasteading", and wondering about the possibility of a significant cultural movement based around the idea. At least in this book, the plan wasn't for a floating city or anything like that. The idea was, instead, for people to live on boats; and not big, cruise-ship-style things, boats suitable for an individual and his immediate family, and fitted with sails and various solar-powered gadgetry to be as independent of the land as possible.

As I understand it, there were two reasons for this. The first was, if The Man (TM) became too oppressive wherever you happened to be, you could just leave and sail elsewhere. Taxes too high? Drug laws too strict? Find another city or country that's cooler. If enough people started doing this, the thinking went, it could even create competition between cities and countries for who could attract the most citizens.

Second, if Shit Hit the Fan - as in depression, peak oil, eco-catastrophe, nuclear war, whatever - you could just sail away from it, live at sea until things are more stable. The book was written in 1981, so memories of the oil shocks were still pretty fresh, and Ronald "Ray-Gun" Reagan had just been elected president.

Could this grow into a subcultural movement? The expense and difficulty of living on a boat is probably too great for it to get really big, but maybe you could get a few tens of thousands of young types to live on the waves, plus another few million who subscribe to the magazines but can't/won't actually head to sea. It's romantic, individualist, adventurous, eco-friendly, and flips the bird to The Man for screwing up the planet. I'm thinking of it as a sort of lefty-ish version of the survivalist movement. What do you think?
 
The biggest obstacles I see are cost, motivation, and risk.

Cost-wise it would take a LOT of money for someone to set up a sailing ship that would be capable of long-term, extended voyages with the degree of independence proposed from dry land. It's already out of reach for most people and the people who would have the funds and means to do so are also the ones least likely to do so because they have assets, ties, and investments on land that would be more valuable than wandering the open sea for the rest of their lives.

Motivation-wise there's a reason it's become VERY in vogue with libertarian/Objectivist groups in recent years and hasn't registered as a blip on the left's radar: most left-oriented philosophies are centered around the idea of taking back the world for the people instead of abandoning it to seek out personal fulfillment and liberation. Objectivism in particular advocates the exact opposite so it makes perfect sense why they've latched on to it in recent years. If there's a substantial left-oriented contingent in a sea-steading movement I think it would be motivated by a specific mission or goal, think the Sea Shepherd or something similar but on a larger scale, rather than just freedom of the seas for its own sake.

Risk-wise extended sea voyages, especially in small sailing craft, are not exactly a walk in the park. There are storms in the Pacific and the Atlantic that can snap oil tankers the size of skyscrapers in two. If you run out of important supplies or a crucial part breaks and cannot be fixed at sea then you're stuck with what you've got until you can get back into port assuming whatever problem you've run into gives you enough time to do that. That risk factor all by itself would probably keep sea-steading, if it takes off at any level, to a very limited fringe rather than a substantial movement.
 
Last edited:
I'm inclined to agree. Sailing off into the blue in a sailboat sound really romantic, but even in a properly equipped vessel, I don't find it hard to imagine that people could disappear over the horizon and simply vanish. Celestial navigation, for example, would be an absolutely crucial skill, and if you don't have it, God knows where you'll end up.
 
It's possible, but on a small scale.


The price of solar technology and similar resources waseven more expensive around that time period and therefore said individual would require substantial funds to support the expidenture. And we are talking about one person here. The cost will increase, as more food, supplies, living space, and other objects become necessary.


Considering the above, the movment would be focused on families of three and less. It would have to be anyone of the wealthy middle class and above; of course, organizations could be formed to lease funds for the trips. Most people would have to be biologists, meteorologists, geologists, and conspiracy "experts". Famous and rich individuals will use it as a occasional vacation or a means of escaping from...whatever they are trying to escape from.


People living on these boats will sail short distances from the coast, unless their more daring and are willing/prepared to go farther.


Majority of the worlds population will find these stints unsafe, unconvincible, and crazy. Others might see it as a necessary or ideal way of studying relating ocean-weather topics. The remainder would care less.
 
Cost-wise it would take a LOT of money for someone to set up a sailing ship that would be capable of long-term, extended voyages with the degree of independence proposed from dry land. As it's already out of reach for most people and the people who would have the funds and means to do so are also the ones least likely to do so because they have assets, ties, and investments on land that would be more valuable than wandering the open sea for the rest of their lives.

As I understand it, it's not supposed to be complete independence. The idea is that, pre-Apocalypse, you'd spend most of your time in friendly harbors, moving between them as needed to make money and avoid unfriendly legal attention. Post-Apocalypse, you'd head for a deserted island to use as your base, and live off fish and seaweed.

Motivation-wise there's a reason it's become VERY in vogue with libertarian/Objectivist groups in recent years and hasn't registered as a blip on the left's radar: most left-oriented philosophies are centered around the idea of taking back the world for the people instead of abandoning it to seek out personal fulfillment and liberation. Objectivism in particular advocates the exact opposite so it makes perfect sense why they've latched on to it in recent years. If there's a substantial left-oriented contingent in a sea-steading movement I think it would be motivated by a specific mission or goal, think the Sea Shepherd or something similar but on a larger scale, rather than just freedom of the seas for its own sake.

I was thinking of this as analogous to the communes of the 70s. This world is doomed to eco-collapse and nuclear war anyway, so let's get out to sea and found a new one, type of thing. Doesn't have to be leftist, though; I was just thinking it could synergize well with anarhcism and/or the more radical strands of Green thinking.

Risk-wise extended sea voyages, especially in small sailing craft, are not exactly a walk in the park. There are storms in the Pacific and the Atlantic that can snap oil tankers the size of skyscrapers in two. If you run out of important supplies or a crucial part breaks and cannot be fixed at sea then you're stuck with what you've got until you can get back into port assuming whatever problem you've run into gives you enough time to do that. That risk factor all by itself would probably keep sea-steading, if it takes off at any level, to a very limited fringe rather than a substantial movement.

The idea, as I understand it, is that pre-Apocalypse you spend most of your time in harbor.
 
Last edited:
Majority of the worlds population will find these stints unsafe, unconvincible, and crazy. Others might see it as a necessary or ideal way of studying relating ocean-weather topics. The remainder would care less.

That goes without saying. I'm imagining there might be a much larger contingent of land-bound "fans" who think the idea is really cool and dream about buying a boat some day, but in practice are too busy, too poor, or too comfortable to do it. But the number of people who actually do it is likely to be relatively small, thousands or tens of thousands at most.
 
The idea, as I understand it, is that pre-Apocalypse you spend most of your time in harbor.

Yes that may be the idea but you're still talking regular sea voyages between ports which raises the risk of things going wrong especially if you're talking a circuit in somewhere like the Pacific or the Indian Ocean where there will be trips that involve vast distances. This problem is greatly amplified in the case of anyone who is moving around to avoid unwanted legal attention; the more one does that the more one becomes limited in terms of choices for port of call. That increases the frequency and distance of the trips again upping that risk factor.

There's also the issue of how does one sustain a movement that is motivated by immediate apocalypse when the apocalypse predicted doesn't come? Doomsday movements tend to implode very quickly when the long-awaited day doesn't arrive. I'd image the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, which put the nails in the coffin of imminent nuclear war, would make a pretty big dent in their appeal.

I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that the practical elements mean it's going to be limited to a small slice of the upper middle class in a handful of First World nations that isn't deterred by the risk, lives in fear of imminent doomsday, and is sufficiently disillusioned with society to say, "Fuck it, hoist the sails!" It's not likely to get much bigger than a tiny fringe at its peak before the lack of doomsday kills the momentum.

Odds are I'd suspect the region where you're going to see the most sea-steaders is going to be the Caribbean followed closely by Indonesia and the South Pacific. In all three places there's a sufficient number of harbors and ports in close distance reducing wear and tear on the ships as well as the infrastructure in most places to maintain them. The South Pacific I could see as the most attractive destination for the more isolationist-minded seasteaders with the Caribbean as the first destination of choice. Indonesia and southeast Asia I could see attracting sailors on more of a budget.

Of course where there's lots of small, highly expensive craft crewed by largely well-off people running around you're going to attract pirates. That much potential loot and ransom running around in areas of the world that are relatively impoverished would be too much for an enterprising gang with a speedboat and guns to ignore
 
Yes that may be the idea but you're still talking regular sea voyages between ports which raises the risk of things going wrong especially if you're talking a circuit in somewhere like the Pacific or the Indian Ocean where there will be trips that involve vast distances. This problem is greatly amplified in the case of anyone who is moving around to avoid unwanted legal attention; the more one does that the more one becomes limited in terms of choices for port of call. That increases the frequency and distance of the trips again upping that risk factor.

Ah, I see.

Can you tell I don't know much - or anything, really - about sailing? :eek:

There's also the issue of how does one sustain a movement that is motivated by immediate apocalypse when the apocalypse predicted doesn't come? Doomsday movements tend to implode very quickly when the long-awaited day doesn't arrive. I'd image the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, which put the nails in the coffin of imminent nuclear war, would make a pretty big dent in their appeal.

I expect so, yes. But I figure the "get away from the MAN" appeal and general romanticism is likely to be the primary appeal for most people involved anyway; the apocalypse is a theoretical justification but too abstract for day-to-day work. And those sufficiently eschatological to go to sea to escape nuclear war will likely find new things to fear when the USSR collapses. But it would certainly crimp the appeal to those who aren't already on the water.

I don't think this sort of movement would last that long anyway, though. Subcultures, or at least particular expressions of subcultures, seem to have half-lives; even if the USSR stays intact, people will eventually find some other outlet for these impulses without some force keeping them at it. And this is probably a young person's game; in time, the people involved will get older and look for a more sedate lifestyle.

I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that the practical elements mean it's going to be limited to a small slice of the upper middle class in a handful of First World nations that isn't deterred by the risk, lives in fear of imminent doomsday, and is sufficiently disillusioned with society to say, "Fuck it, hoist the sails!" It's not likely to get much bigger than a tiny fringe at its peak before the lack of doomsday kills the momentum.

Best case scenario, how many do you think we could get actually on the water? Hundreds, thousands? What if we have, say, another Cuban Missile Crisis-style public near-miss in the mid-late 70s?

I figure that, for every person who actually lives on a boat, you'd have ten who live on land but own a boat and in practice are little different from other recreational boaters except theirs is stocked with MREs, and another 100-1000 who flip through magazines and dream about it but don't actually do anything.

I think it would also make a great subject for Hollywood, which would be how a lot of the dreamers-not-doers find out about it.

Odds are I'd suspect the region where you're going to see the most sea-steaders is going to be the Caribbean followed closely by Indonesia and the South Pacific. In all three places there's a sufficient number of harbors and ports in close distance reducing wear and tear on the ships as well as the infrastructure in most places to maintain them. The South Pacific I could see as the most attractive destination for the more isolationist-minded seasteaders with the Caribbean as the first destination of choice. Indonesia and southeast Asia I could see attracting sailors on more of a budget.

Of course where there's lots of small, highly expensive craft crewed by largely well-off people running around you're going to attract pirates. That much potential loot and ransom running around in areas of the world that are relatively impoverished would be too much for an enterprising gang with a speedboat and guns to ignore

Makes sense to me. Sailing the Farm, incidentally, does talk about self-defense - he recommends flare guns as one-shot shotgun equivalents that the police are unlikely to notice...
 
Of course where there's lots of small, highly expensive craft crewed by largely well-off people running around you're going to attract pirates. That much potential loot and ransom running around in areas of the world that are relatively impoverished would be too much for an enterprising gang with a speedboat and guns to ignore

Well, Indonesia/Southeast Asia already has pirates, of course, so that would seem to be the option for the more daring seasteader, in addition to the more frugal.

I could see some of the drug gangs in the Caribbean branch into kidnapping people off the high seas, as some already carry out kidnappings on land, but given that it's right in Uncle Sam's backyard, I can't help but feel piracy in the Caribbean would be rather limited. Otherwise the Coast Guard and Navy would come down on you like the wrath of God, I suspect.

Dunno about the South Pacific.
 
Cost-wise it would take a LOT of money for someone to set up a sailing ship that would be capable of long-term, extended voyages with the degree of independence proposed from dry land.

Depends on level of comfort and time desired to be independent. Albin Vega, a popular, small and cheap yacht (LOA 27', beam 8') capable of sailing around the world for a couple cost maybe 10 000 USD with proper equipment for circumnavigation.

http://www.albinvega.co.uk/

With that the'res the basic accomodation, toilet and galley.

During 1970's and 1980's the yachts were comparatively more expensive but not that more expensive.

For more comfort and room a 38' LOA 12' beam cruising yacht well equipped costs around 50 000 USD. With that there's three separate cabins, fridge and shower. It's used comparatively often as a liveaboard yacht.

http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=2079

These are just examples, cheaper and especially more expensive ones are easy to find.
 
Can we discuss sea farming and aquaculture here as well, or should that go in another thread?

Probably best for another thread. Sailing the Farm talks about that (not a surprise, given the title), but I think - although I have not yet gotten to that part of the book - that it's primarily things like gardens and greenhouses on the actual boat, rather than large-scale commercial farming.
 
Compared to what it was in the Golden Age of Piracy, yes, but a quick googling on, say piracy caribbean today indicates it's still around.

This one seems especially relevant:
http://thebeachsideresident.com/2009/05/piracy-in-todays-world/

Well, sure, and I figured it probably would be bigger ITTL. But I suspect it will tend to be more limited compared to SE Asian piracy, let alone the "Golden Age" because of the relative proximity of significant military and paramilitary assets with a significant interest in suppressing it. A matter of occasionally taking a few ransom victims or stealing a nice boat carried out by syndicates focused mostly on the drug trade, rather than a primary line of work, if you will.
 
Here's a rough TL for what I have in mind. Please feel free to make suggestions or provide criticism:

1975: Publication of The Seasteader's Manifesto, calling for countercultural, anarchist, and libertarian types to head for the waves to escape the Man and the imminent destruction of civilization. Maybe a few dozen people actually do it.

1977: Life on the Waves magazine begins publication, with initially a very limited audience - it's basically a zine, with the usual zine "when we get around to it" publication schedule.

1978: Major nuclear crisis, possibly even a nuclear terror attack.

1979: Release of Rough Weather, a major Hollywood film whose protagonist is a seasteader, and which heavily romanticizes the lifestyle. Popular interest in seasteading begins to grow.

1980: Life on the Waves renames itself The Seasteader and ups both its quality and schedule, ultimately becoming a hobbyist's glossy of the type you see in Barnes & Noble. Seasteader reaches millions who will never actually leave the continental US.

1987: Pirates kidnap an unusually photogenic seasteading family in the Caribbean. Although ultimately rescued by the US Navy, the highly publicized incident begins to make the seasteading lifestyle seem less romantic and more dangerous. (There had been previous, similar incidents but none that got as much publicity). Popularity of seasteading peaks, as seasteaders fall out of the movement due to attrition and are not replaced.

1989: Fall of the Berlin Wall further reduces the appeal of seasteading. The same year, several seasteaders are busted for drugs and weapons smuggling, further cementing the subculture's new image as dangerous freaks instead of romantic adventurers. (Again, there had been previous incidents, but these get more publicity).

1996: The Seasteader quietly ceases publication. By this point the subculture has been reduced to a handful of diehards, who will slowly dwindle away over the next decade or so.

What do you think? Also, roughly what order of magnitude do you think we could actually get on the waves at the peak of the movement - hundreds, thousands?
 
Here's a rough TL for what I have in mind. Please feel free to make suggestions or provide criticism:

One could make a point that there actually is a subculture of seasteading and has been for around last 30 years. There are a number of people who travel around the world, usually at warmer latitudes, with their yachts, for years round without intention to come back to home.

More usual route, though, is that a well-off couple or family take a few years off to go cruising. Nevertheless, even students have been able to do this recently due to fact that ocean worthy sailing yachts are getting cheaper every year. This is due to fact that due to aluminium masts and GRP hulls being introduced in mid-to-late 1960's well over forty year old yachts are safe, repairable and affordable for those adventurous enough.

Yachting and cruising, even for years, has never been as affordable as now. However, it cannot become a very popular phenomena since it requires time and effort unless one is very rich and can use just brand new equipment and professional services.

If you want to take an online look at this scene, just check out

http://crusersforum.com

Go to forums and read the blogs which are linked there.
 
I was thinking of this as analogous to the communes of the 70s. This world is doomed to eco-collapse and nuclear war anyway, so let's get out to sea and found a new one, type of thing. Doesn't have to be leftist, though; I was just thinking it could synergize well with anarhcism and/or the more radical strands of Green thinking.

Strange. I've always heard about seasteading in the context of libertarians trying to get away from "big government" and set up their own nation-states in international waters that are more in line with their values. The founder of PayPal, for instance, is big on the idea.
 
Strange. I've always heard about seasteading in the context of libertarians trying to get away from "big government" and set up their own nation-states in international waters that are more in line with their values. The founder of PayPal, for instance, is big on the idea.

There's been more than one group trying to seastead. The modern seasteaders are as you describe, libertarians who want to start their own country, but the term itself comes from Sailing the Farm. I'm not sure exactly where the author of that book falls on the political spectrum other than "unusual" - he mentions interests in esoteric mysticism, dislikes taxes, is very worried about the environment and nuclear war, loves solar energy, and suggests carrying a couple of flare guns instead of a shotgun since they're just as good but attract less attention from the police. I'm guessing some kind of anarchist but he might also be a right-libertarian of unusual stripe.
 
Top