One-Man's Land

Ever have an idea, then see someone beat you to it? That happened to me with North Sudan.

I read about this situation a few months ago: Egypt and Sudan have a border dispute. There were two different treaties marking out the border between them, and each country recognizes a different border. And surprise! They each wasn't the border that gives them the best land. Egypt says the border is a straight line, while Sudan says it has a kind of S-curve in it near the coast. Thus, there's a little bit of land on the Red Sea that they both claim.

Buy here's the weird part: there's another area further inland that neither country claims. According to Sudan’s border, it’s in Egypt, and according to Egypt’s border, it’s in Sudan. As far as I know, it's one of the few places on earth (outside Antarctica) that's not claimed by anyone. Of course, it’s not really surprising that no one wants it, since it's just desert. No people live there, and there are no resources. But still, you'd think someone would want it. And now someone does.  I thought someone should try claiming the unwanted land and declare their own country.

Someone in Virginia has done exactly that. He's claimed the land and declared independence. I have to admit, he has far more commitment than I do. I would have just issued a press release claiming the land. He actually went there and planned a flag, in spite of Sudan being nearly at war with South Sudan, and Egypt in a state of permanent revolution.  He's declared it "North Sudan," and installed his family as the royal family. (Though they rule from Virginia.)

This is far from the first oddball country to be created. Lots of people have tried declaring their own property to be a sovereign country, in varying degrees of seriousness. Sealand has become semi-famous.  There are a number of small places in Europe that cling to claims of independence. In many war-torn regions, there are de facto governments set up that rule small areas, such as Somaliland. And then there is Taiwan, which had existed in legal limbo for decades.

I'm actually surprised it doesn't happen more often, given the huge number of out-of the way islands there are. I suppose part of the reason we don't see it is that strange aspect of human nature whereby the people least satisfied with their own government are usually the ones who take greatest ownership of their country. For instance, The Tea Party may be angry with the American government, but they are the ones least likely to abandon their country and start again somewhere else.

But you would think rich people would get in on it too. Consider: Britain and France are both deep in debt, and have a huge number of small territories around the world. Don't you think that if you offered France $20 billion for the Marquesas they'd at least think about it?  They're on the opposite side of the planet; they won't miss them. And Britain had an island called Inaccessible Island. Why would they want to keep that?

Some wealthy Libertarians have proposed building their own floating cities, where they can craft a government (or lack thereof) to their liking.  This has been especially pushed by Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal. He seems to share the ingenuous spirit of fellow founder Elon Musk, but not the politics.  A floating city with few rules would be entertaining to watch, but that's an awful lot of expense and technology, even for the people involved.  So I doubt that will happen.  Though you could make the whole thing into a reality show and it would pay for itself.

The fact that rich people rarely try creating their own countries would seem to betray the fact that they aren't as offended by their demonization at the hands of the Occupy types as they would have us believe. Or maybe it's because the sort of person who becomes super-rich has to be enough of a people-person that they don't want the solitude of their own country. Not even the quieter techie sidekicks like Paul Allen or Steve Wozniak feel the need for their own private nation.

Go West, Life Is Peaceful There

There's been a recent wave of anti-gay laws in Africa. It's a strange phenomena, given that gay rights in the west has been accelerating to a pace I never thought it would achieve.

To make things even weirder, it turns out that a lot of the impetus for African anti-gay bills comes from western organizations. Further, their current laws against homosexuality are mostly vestiges of colonial (usually British) laws. Ironic, given that Britain is now one of the more gay-friendly countries.

So these African countries are taking laws imposed on them by the west (but not actually used by the west anymore) and expanding them on the advice of westerners (who are no longer welcome at home.) And that's what I don't get about this: Africans have become understandably sceptical of western advice over the years, so why are they so quick to take western advice that the west doesn't follow?

One explanation is that they see our adoption of gay rights as a western taint on the concept. Rather than see homophobic laws as western ideas so bad even the west has left behind, they're seeing it as evidence that gay rights is part of western decadence.

Another, more sinister explanation is that this is nothing personal against gays, they're mearly an easy scapegoat. If western religious nuts are going to come in and demonize a group at their own expense, then that's a great deal for a government who could use a convenient enemy to distract their people from the state of the nation.