The most interesting thing about the idea, to me, is the coupling of a token -- in the form of a crypto token -- to a shared endeavor, like one of the original joint stock companies. The token gets value by shared belief of those within the given network state, as a kind of localized money, an abstraction of the value redeemable in that community for services within and to that community, much like company script in the 19th century, or private money. George Selgin wrote a very interesting book about this latter.

It's hard to imagine a bitcoin version, since the vocal bitcoiners are so opposed to other kinds of tokenized money-like things. But you can nonetheless imagine a network state whose tokens exist alongside 'real' money (which is bitcoin, in this case) that serve as a bridge to the outside world. You can't just throw out the token and keep the rest of Balaji's idea -- the token, as an coordination construct that has power within the domain of the given network state -- plays a key role. You could think of it as a more active kind of equity, I suppose.

Been following Balaji and the broader parallel societies/network states movement for quite some time and gave a talk about building a Bitcoin-centric network state at the Adopting bitcoin conference in El Salvador last week. Would love to connect with fellow bitcoiners who are interested in the concept.

Interesting, here is their "One Sentence" summary:

I should preface this by saying I have not read the book.

I feel like the concept of Network States can only thrive when they bridge into our physical world, by offering safe travel, shared skills or by offering benefits like legal representation.

It’s clear there is a shift and movement to online communities, but people are just happy to limit this discussion to shitposting & giving opinions, and distracting themselves from their real lives. This chatter is like spam to the idea of a Network State, it gets in the way of coordinated action.

Network States to me only reach their potential when there is a geographical HQ, however small, to build from, to meet or to reallocate resources from. It cannot just be distributed and located in the fetaverse. We would otherwise have seen them emerge already.

What Balaji has effectively done is rebrand the popular view that we will see smaller Sovereign Communities, who can generate outsized returns, no longer requiring economies of scale. He’s a very good salesman, but not yet to me a visionary.

Ah good old Balaji.

I enjoying listening to Balaji's 4 hour podcasts is what I will say.

I have a lot of issues with Balaji's shitcoin grifting and angling for government jobs though.

Snow Crash.

I read the book last summer and thought it was great.

Then I went to the Network State Conference last week in Amsterdam. It's a really exciting and positive movement of people building parallel institutions away from inept and often corrupt Big Governments/Institutions. Everything from medicine & housing to finance & media was covered.

I think every Network State of the future will need Bitcoin because if you have broken money you will eventually end up with a broken society. BTC is the foundation and cornerstone. So in a way they all will be "Bitcoiner Network States"

Balaji's concept of "building parallel instead of reforming from within" is very powerful to me. As he says, you could never reform the Fed, Satoshi had to build Bitcoin. Taxi cartels were taken down by Uber in lots of countries. Twitter helped political figures get their message out when mainstream media would have never given them a fair ride. What else? There are lots of incumbents who will fall...

Balaji's network states are not a new concept. He's just the latest to revisit the idea in light of recent events and culture.

Its a concept as old as cypherpunk itself. This 2001 book is a collection of essays with some as old as 1980's.

Also the cyberpunk fiction of William Gibson and Neal Stephenson takes place in imaginary cyberstaes.

“Bitcoiner Network State”

Well, the protocol is what rules us bitcoiners. If we don't play by those rules, we are kindly shown the door by not having our transactions validated or our work not be rewarded at some point. Then you have the software built around the protocol which for the most part are just agnostic tools that can be used to harness the value of the protocol or just create shtitcoin clones. I think the further you get away from the protocol, things start to get political; aka meatspace. But all participants in that meatspace are incentivized to abide by the protocol, and any other non-financial matter just gets in the way of that purpose. So in a way, don't we already have that "state" in communities like this?

I was waiting for an audio book but he has done something different with the release. I think its on github so its able to be changed over time. I am still interested, its just not the first book on my list.

He knows how to talk! It would be funny watching an 11 hour conversation with him & Saylor.

The crypto stuff kinda turns me off a bit. Like when he said "we're all bitcoin maximalists now" no body asked him if he sold all his crypto.

I don't know man. Didn't read it but I don't think I need to. This is nothing new, yet another call to unify, organize, create a state and government, etc. How's that any different that the crap we have now? Different label, different ideology? Why does one have to have a state? For me something NEW it would be the movement that no one really talks about in public too much (just a little to connect at times). But when the shit hits the fan, 100 000 people show up, no one told them to come, they just know. It's like water, we know it's good for us, and we know we can't live without it. No one talks about it but when there is no water, we are all pissed and will walk the streets and kick ass... like really everyone would. Money and government = nothing good comes out of it. Frenchies got it right "laissez-faire", leave it alone, let markets rule. Token? "Child, plaeeze...!" lol. I got shivers when I hear the word token, I would pass just at that point. To each his own, though. Just my 2 satoshis...

I haven't heard of Network States, but it sounds like FediMint. Web3 identity verification would be a dystopian nightmare.