Chapters (38)
- Title Page
- Technolibération
- PART ONE
- Chapter 1
- Chapter 2
- Chapter 3
- Chapter 4
- Chapter 5
- Chapter 6
- Chapter 7
- Chapter 8
- PART TWO
- Chapter 9
- Chapter 10
- Chapter 11
- Chapter 12
- Chapter 13
- Chapter 14
- Chapter 15
- Chapter 16
- Chapter 17
- Chapter 18
- Chapter 19
- PART THREE
- Chapter 20
- Chapter 21
- Chapter 22
- Chapter 23
- Chapter 24
- Chapter 25
- Chapter 26
- Chapter 27
- Chapter 28
- PART FOUR
- Chapter 29
- Chapter 30
- Epilogue
- Author’s Note
“Yes, but it goes deeper than that. Most people join syndicates which effectively are those kinds of society. People want freedom of choice, but they also want a degree of stability. So they enter into agreements which give them a framework in which to organize their lives – agreements which allow for release, of course … but then, most democracies permit emigration. If sixty thousand people in one syndicate agree to pay a portion of their income – subject to audit – into a fund used for health, education, and welfare, disbursed according to policies fleshed out in detail by committees of elected delegates … they may not have a parliament or a head of state, but that still sounds like a socialist democracy to me.”
I said, “So freely chosen ‘government’ isn’t forbidden. But – overall – are you anarchists, or not? Aren’t there universal laws here, which everyone is forced to obey?”
“There are a handful of principles endorsed by a large majority of residents. Basic ideas about freedom from violence and coercion. They’re widely promulgated – and anyone who disagrees with them would be better off not coming here. I won’t split hairs, though; they might as well be laws.
“So are we anarchists, or not?” Munroe mimed indifference. “ Anarchy means ‘no ruler’, not ‘no laws’ … but no one on Stateless loses any sleep contemplating ancient Greek semantics – or the writings of Bakunin, or Proudhon, or Godwin. Sorry, I retract that: about the same percentage of the population as you’d find in Beijing or Paris cares passionately about each of those subjects. But you’ll have to interview one of them, if you want their opinion.
“Personally, I think the word carries too much historical baggage to be salvaged. No great loss. Most of the nineteenth and twentieth century anarchist movements were bogged down, as much as the Marxists, by the question of seizing power from the ruling class. On Stateless that issue was dealt with very simply. In 2025, six employees of a Californian biotech company called EnGeneUity absconded with all the information they needed to make the seed. Much of which was their own work, if not their own property. They also took some engineered cells from various cultures, but too few to be missed. By the time anyone knew that Stateless was growing, there were a few hundred people living here in shifts, and it would have been bad PR to summarily sterilize the place.
“That was our ‘revolution.’ Beats measuring out your life in Molotov cocktails.”
“Except that the theft means you’re saddled with the boycott.”
Munroe shrugged. “The boycott is a great pain. But Stateless under the boycott is still better than the alternative: a company island, every square meter privately owned. It’s bad enough when every decent food crop on the planet is licensed; imagine the ground beneath your feet being the same.”