The Realistic Application of a Micronational Socialism

Author’s Note: This treatise serves a dual purpose for both micronationalism and macronationalism.

It is the reality of our duty as micronationalists1, who see themselves as heads of their own independent governments and states, to seek for the realistic and sovereign implementation of our micronational policies. These policies are derived in many ideological forms by micronational governments, which express a legitimate authority over the sovereignty of their citizens and the jurisdiction of their legitimate territory. These policies for individual micronations may differ from one to another and, as described in The Fire of the Central Hearth, those micronations with pragmatic and realistic policies tend to be amongst some of the most stable and successful micronations in terms of sovereignty and legitimacy. Whilst the sovereignty of micronations is dubious by the lack of recognition granted by macronations, who are defined as being world powers recognised as the legitimate and sovereign caretakers for a land or for a people, micronations are successful in the self-creation and self-genesis of independent states or countries. Indeed a few micronations go beyond the basic and minimal expectations of macronations, such as Flandrensis’ accomplishment of providing a stable government in Belgium whilst that macronation could not gather a government for more than a year. Many micronations, in fact, which are defined as nation-projects or secessionist micronations are some times more capable than other macronations and have engineered ways independent ways of governance, politics, law, and policies from the macronational world. One of such of those ways would be to create an independent micronations based upon the multiple political experiences of many different civilisations. Especially for this socialist micronation of Sandus2, one such would be the political and economic experience of the Tawantinsuyu, or the Incan Empire.

In fact, this is rather common knowledge and common curriculum in universities and public schools. In the World History Advanced Placement course, a major topic is the economic systems of the pre-Columbian American empires such as that of the Incan Empire. Compared to the Aztec Empire, which utilised a tribute system based upon the ravaging of other city-states by the Aztec elite with a hard-working proletariat, the Incan Empire existed as a major example of what has been known in the past century as a proto-Socialist civilisation. By utilising and analysing Spanish documents from after Pizarro’s conquest of the Inca, the Incan Empire appears to be a monarchy which implemented some of Marx’s basic tenets for Socialism. From the testimony of Martin Cari, an Incan chief or cacique principal in the anansaya3 of Chuquito, Incan economy was based upon Marx’s basic tenet of labour investment: “From each according to their ability, to each according to their need” and, as in the Soviet Union and this state of Sandus, “to their work” as well4. Cari describes the arrangement rather well, including how his citizens “can plant 3 fanegas5 of seed” and “10 Indian females are employed for each topo6 of land”. The Incan Empire, as well, was known for its expansive trading system and road network and those workers who travel them for interregional trade receive according to their work again by being “given for their maintenance chuño, dried meat, quinua and coca and they are also given wool to exchange for food from those parts”. Cari continues to describe the Marxist labour arrangement in the Incan empire in detail of his anansaya as in the rest of the Tawantinsuyu under the Quecha7 nobility: “[From] the town of Chuquito […] 60 Indians of service are provided each year and 10 are employed in guarding animals and 25 are employed in Moquegua working on maize lands”. Even those under the jurisdiction of Cari describe their employment to the Incan government in the ways of Marx’s labour investment: “we cultivate 150 fanegas of potatoes and in other years we cultivate the same amount in quinua and the harvesting and preparing are done by all the members of the community”. In fact, it is often described that this labour arrangement was so successful for the Incan government under the Quecha nobility and regional administration that it explains the reason why so many independent countries and peoples willingly accepted Incan rule and why the Tawantinsuyu grew to be the largest empire in pre-Colonial Americas, for being incorporated into the Incan empire allowed an end to regional wars and a stable system of governance and economy. When compared to other and more modern socialist politics, the Incan empire is easily defined as being a successful socialist society even by the time of José Carlos Mariátegui in 1928 by his authoring of the Seven Interpretive Essays on Peruvian Reality. The pragmatism depicted in the socialism of the Inca is also depicted centuries later under the Socialist Party of America.

It was much later, under the Socialist Party of America and its few elected governments in places such as Milwaukee, Wisconsin, that a new type of socialism was formed. Sewer socialism, another example of a common curriculum for American history, is a less studied form of pragmatic socialism, due to the small size of the people and jurisdictions it affected. However, it is so named because of a rumour that a few of the Socialist Party city members for Milwaukee would meet in the sewers some times to discuss business. The work of the Socialist Party of America by utilising sewer socialism maintained an importance for Wisconsin, certain areas of New York, and Vermont who have, either in past or current legislatures, have elected socialists to their city, state or national legislatures as representatives; a modern example being the Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont who is a democratic socialist. Both of these ideologies and experiences of socialism could be utilised in micronationalism and, in many cases, have been utilised by some of the micronations and micronational governments as described in The Fire of the Central Hearth as passive and progressive secessionist micronations8. Whilst no example of an economy within this State of Sandus’ immediate intermicronational community exists, the basics of socialism as an economic system are found in many micronations throughout the sector.

The very basis of Realism is pragmatism. It is from this pragmatism that these policies may be utilised not only in our State for Socialism, but in all micronations for their politics. However, on the occasion of the first anniversary of the founding of this State and the third anniversary of the genesis of this micronation, it is fitting that these policies of Realism should be observed in relation to our Socialist Revolution and State. According to Article 6 of the Founding Law, the economy of the State of Sandus is comprised of the basic equivalent of the Incan anansaya: the cooperatives. The Incan nobility and regional administration is comprised of the Central People’s Government of Sandus, nominally from the Office of the Sôgmô9 of the State. In these broad terms, the cooperatives are created to form a basic economy by beginning with socialism first. In such a way, the evolutionary process of Socialism that was founded in the Incan empire will be created in Sandus. The basic system of the Incan economy, which understood the basic tenet of Marx’s labour investment, will be mirrored by the Sandum anansaya of the cooperatives. Already we can see the beginning of Socialism in our State by the creation of the Collegio Sacerdae10, whose importance is to conduct and perform religious and cultural rites and practices. Such a Collegio has set forth a new precedent in Sandus, as well, to influence the Citizens’ Communist Party of Sandus11 to become a cooperative of the State in this spring’s Citizens’ Communist Party of Sandus’ Congress. Of all of these cooperatives, the guiding hand of the State by the Government, that is – by both of them together as one, has been the necessity for their creation, their implementation, and their function. It is by the government of the individual micronation that Socialism can be created and founded on a micronational level. By the immediate implementation of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union’s First Five-Year Plan for collectivisation12, due to the self-creation of a socialist state and society by an independent people – such as Sandus’ example, Vladimir Lenin’s New Economic Policy13 can be utilised in transitioning to a fully collective and Socialist economy whilst the economy of a micronation continues to expand from the same Chaos14 of capitalist macronationalism, that is – capitalist macronational society.

It is by the implementation of policies synonymous with Native American and primarily Incan proto-Socialism, recognising their ability to maintain a strong and powerful state in Pre-Columbian America, along with the pragmatism of Sewer Socialism that formed from the socialist minority in American political society, that a micronation can evolve into a wholly socialist state and society in its own right and among its own people by a strong and decisive effort by the micronational dictatorship of the proletariat15. It is by the effort of the Citizens’ Communist Party of Sandus, the ideological academic body of the socialist State of Sandus, that Socialism can be created under its incorporation into the Central People’s Government. By doing so, the Citizens’ Communist Party of Sandus can guide the State in affairs concerning economic, government, political and social policies of the State.

— Sôgmô Sörgel.

  1. Micronationalism is considered to be a movement of individuals who create their own countries, complete with governments, cultures, and societies within them. They are considered to be smaller, artificial and self-created nations, compared to macronations such as United Nation member-states.
  2. Sandus is the micronation of the author and is the focus of this essay as it was created with the dual intention of serving as a topic for this Political Science research paper and as a treatise for the official journal of Sandus, Veritum Sandus.
  3. An Anansaya was the basic government jurisdiction of the Incan Empire.
  4. Marx’s Labour Investment, “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need”, is found in Marx’s Critique of the Gotha Program and forms a necessary part of Socialist ideology. In the Soviet Union, the word “need” was replaced with “work”; in Sandus, the clause “and work” is added after the word “need”.
  5. Fanegas are Incan grain measures of about one and a half bushels.
  6. A Topo is a land measure of fanegas comparable to 1.6 acres.
  7. Quecha was the main constituent nation of the Incan Empire; the Inca, as well as his governors and provincial administration, was Quecha.
  8. Secessionist Micronations are the most serious and professional level of the scale of micronational “seriousness”. They tend to ground their policies in fact and reality and  for the actual benefit of their micronation; as opposed to hobby micronations, whose policies are for fun and amusement.
  9. The Sôgmô is the leader of the State of Sandus whose title originates from the Abenaki word for Chief. The author of this essay is the Sôgmô of the State of Sandus.
  10. Collegio Sacerdae is a cooperative in the State of Sandus whose importance is to conduct religious rites and cultural events, as well as to conduct academic research on cultures, history, and society.
  11. Citizens’ Communist Party of Sandus is the main political organisation of the State of Sandus whose Congress on the 14th of April shall decide if the Party shall become a cooperative of the State.
  12. First Five-Year Plan was the first of thirteen Five-Year plans of the Soviet Communist Party. Its importance is that is discarded Lenin’s New Economic Policy and collectivised the USSR.
  13. New Economic Policy was a policy enacted by Vladimir Lenin and the All-Union Communist Party that tolerated liberal-socialism and minor small private businesses.
  14. Chaos in this sense is the Hellenic deity that all existence was formed from.
  15. Dictatorship of the Proletariat is a concept created by Marx in the Critique of the Gotha Program which explains that communism can only be created after a period of a socialist dictatorship of the working people following the overthrow of Capitalism.


4 thoughts on “The Realistic Application of a Micronational Socialism

  1. Speaking on behalf of the Communist Party of Tiana – this is a good article. However, we have a few minor critiques.

    -“From each according to his ability, to each according to his work” is the manor in which socialist society is organized. This wasn’t an exclusively Leninist concept, it was a Marxist concept from the very beginning. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” refers to a communist society, which [although I’m sure this is not news to comrades in the CCPS, for less informed readers when it comes to Marxism] would naturally arise out of a socialist society. According to Marx, as the division of labor ceases to exist and work becomes somewhat of a pleasurable task, goods no longer need be distributed according to one’s work.

    -The term “dictatorship of the proletariat” by no means refers to a dictatorship of a man, nor a minority group. To understand the term, we have to understand the context in which Marx meant it. “Dictatorship” is understood to mean the imposition of rule on an unconsenting group. Capitalistic liberal “democracies” are the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, as private property laws, or, the ownership of the means of production by a very small minority of society, are imposed on the majority which does not have control over the means of production – the proletariat. In a post revolutionary society, the proletariat is to hold all political power, as the means of production of bourgeois resisters to socialism and the petty bourgeoisie are expropriated. The state begins to “withers away”, as all states are tools for the suppression of one class by another, and the state begins to lose its function as no classes remain to be suppressed. If “democracy” is understood to mean the rule of the majority, then, we can see that the dictatorship of the proletariat is the most democratic state possible.

    -The New Economic Policy was not ideal, and not socialist. Lenin himself most likely understood this, and it was meant to be temporary. Workers’ democracy, however, was retained, however, which allowed socialism to continue to develop. This can be seen in sharp contrast to the policies of say, Deng Xiaoping in China, which crushed workers’ democracy and gave no room for socialism to develop. Micronationally, I don’t believe any type of NEPesque policy is needed, only for the reason that in a very small nation, it’s not difficult to run the means of production, agriculture, etc, in a democratic and collective manor.

    Anyhow, along with these short critiques, the Communist Party of Tiana endorses and recommends this essay.

    • 1. It wasn’t made to appear a solely Leninist concept in the article, which is why I titled it “Marx’s Labour Investment”; it is a wholly Marxist concept that explains the workings of a socialist society. The CCPS recognises and the CPSU surely recognised that Marx’s complete equation was for communist society, but that is why the CPSU changed “need” to “work” and why the CCPS added “and work” to the end of “need”. You are very much correct in stating that it would have to be a communist society for Marx’s correct Labour Investment equation to work, and I apologise for not making that difference more clear.
      2. I shall add this to this essay later, you are correct and I feel the importance of a proletarian dictatorship should be expressed to understand its democratic intentions. I regret that I did not make this distinction, though it was an issue of grand proportions during the Great Ideological Conflict.
      3. Though the NEP was not socialist, it helped to transition the Soviet Union to the function of attaining socialism. Even though Holodomor did exist, I am sure Lenin understood that if collectivisation was implemented immediately after the founding of the USSR and the end of World War I then there would be greater death and hardship which the young revolutionary state could not handle or bear. And whilst I agree whole-heartedly with your statement that no NEP-esque policy should be adopted, I believe that as the economy of an inherently socialist micronation begins to develop and grow, that the tendencies or the influence of the capitalist society — the “primeval waters” that the socialist society grew out of — will not die over night.

      Regardless, it is not my intention to begin fights on this national holiday. I do appreciate your response, M. Puglisi, it has led me to realise that there are still some changes I must add, especially for the final draft. It is always appreciated to receive these critiques and criticisms; Gratias.

  2. It is very well that we must learn of the achievements of past civilizations and implement those successes into our own modern era, and chart their mistakes as examples of the possible failure with which we may tie our own noose if careless. Modernization must come along with collectivization, else a socialist state is doomed to fall behind the current powers of the world. We must be highly pragmatic, with this I agree, for the world does not run on theory itself, and no doctrine can be solely on the physical gain alone if it is to be used for societal construction, but must be for some great, unifying cause.

  3. Pingback: Anthology of «Realism» | Veritum Sandus

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s