The experiment requires 250 million people and a lifetime dedication; once in there's no way out. It consists on enclosing people in 5 artificial countries, each country with fixed rules. Each person can choose their country but once they are in, they can't get back.

The goal is to convince at least 50 million people to join each country.

The second country is:

Law of the wild

The basic premise of this country is that everything is permitted and legal, except leaving the country. New people joining as citizens are given the basic tools and resources to survive and prosper for 1 year and then they are left on their own. No security is given to the citizens, they will have to make their own economy and pay their own protection with private police, guards and whatever they can make up.

People joining as new citizens can bring in the new country everything they want with them, and if they bring people they must consent too and be over the age of 18.

Oh also, this being an experimental environment, privacy does not exist, everywhere one goes there are hidden security cameras to record everything that happens.

Clarifications: Those experiments are not made to see if the systems work or not, those experiments are made to play with the human psyche and learn more about the biological behavior of people.

I also understand that societies based on disorder naturally will slowly develop in societies with laws, defeating the Anarchism theme, but we want to see it actually happens and how and not just imagine it, imagination is often wrong about scientific facts and the human mind. We also want to catalogue all the possible survival ethical system which can be developed, so many of these experiments will be repeated.

How do I get a minimum of 50 million people to voluntarily join a country where they could be killed on sight for no reason by a person they've never met?

If the system is not full of people that disagree with it, its not a good test of the system. - John

But that's the point, of the experimentation, if one wanted data on good system they would simply look into history and modern times, where functioning systems already exist.

  • $\begingroup$ What are the bounds of the experiment, is it allowed to run for ten years, fifty, ten thousand? $\endgroup$ Jun 11, 2021 at 16:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ "hidden security cameras to record everything" - who maintains and protects those from vandalism? $\endgroup$
    – Alexander
    Jun 11, 2021 at 17:50
  • $\begingroup$ Also, international trade would go unimpeded, or this country is going to be completely isolated? $\endgroup$
    – Alexander
    Jun 11, 2021 at 17:57
  • $\begingroup$ Why is the number of people needed for this so high? Luxemburg has half a million people and it is its own political entity. $\endgroup$
    – user64888
    Jun 12, 2021 at 5:21
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ How are you going to give them "tools to prosper for a year"? Any person sent after the first month will be enslaved by the local warlord the day they arrive. Look into any real world place where the government collapses, "anarchy" doesn't last long. $\endgroup$
    – Erik
    Jun 12, 2021 at 6:28

6 Answers 6


You got it backward.

How do I get a minimum of 50 million people to voluntarily join a country where they could be killed on sight for no reason by a person they've never met?


Think of all the people that run from their countries for real reasons. Then add all the conspiracy loons with a perceived grudge against their government.

Then add all the cartels. Getting cameras taped, broken, bribing operators. You have just handed them free reign over the place.

Again, your main problem is going to decide who gets in when you are overwhelmed by millions upon millions of people bribing, murdering, and extorting their way further into the line.

As an anecdote: when the project for Mars One (which wasn't viable for the $ involved) asked for people to get a one-way ticket. They got plenty of applicants, even married people with children were eager to leave everything behind for a chance of adventure. Let that sink in.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is wishful thinking unsupported by facts. The entire global immigration is 272 million people. $\endgroup$
    – Otkin
    Jun 12, 2021 at 22:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Otkin few hundred thousands applied(mars one), if I'm not wrong, even if (or maybe because of) the proposal didn't look real from get go. There was/is another similar project, similar in a sense of reality it being done - asgardia. Marketing was good and a lot of people ivolved. Yes 50kk is a bit of a stretch, for variety of reasons, one of which anarchy movements are way less popular and not good at getting people involved. But if one sells it under wild west sauce it may be attractive. If conditions are good, and I think tribal communism was more attractive, then not impossible. $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Jun 13, 2021 at 7:17

The most obvious option is to appeal to those who already politically align to such a system. Anarcho communists, anarcho-capitalists, and voluntarists, for example, advocate for a system without the existence of a state. While their fundamental beliefs may vary significantly (e.g. whether wage labour and private property should exist), this country would give them a perfect blank slate to start their own communities aligned around their political beliefs. Advertising heavily to these groups would be a good start, and once you start getting traction they will likely start pushing the idea within their own communities.

The next would be people with a 'frontier' mindset- offer them the chance to start anew in an untamed area, and found their own homes. For certain people, this would be a very exciting opportunity.

Finally, appeal to those who are disillusioned with society- those stuck in a dead end job, the homeless, criminals, those heavily in debt, social outcasts etc- this country would give them a chance to start from scratch, and their past wouldn't matter. You can probably find many people desperate enough to gamble in this category.


You don't need to do any recruiting

If you recruit normally terrorist and dictators will invade immediately. ThIs senario is a middle East power vacuum and everyone knows it. Therefore, we do the easiest thing.

Drone strikes

The north west of Africa is fairly populous and has roughly 100 million people depending on where you put the border. Draw that line and begin drone striking any leaders, law enforcement, or army in the area. Deliver aid in the form of the one year of supplies as long as people agree to the invasive surveillance. A rebellion will occur, the answer is more drone strikes. So long as you don't care about killing half of the population things will be fine. Eventually it will become clear that no laws in the country are enforceable and people will do anarchy.

Alternative target

Somalia is a country that had no government for over a decade. Offer aid to the country in exchange for universal surveillance. Then supply the local warlords with weapons and explosives. Your experiment can then last as long as foreign nations don't attempt to fix the situation. In fact, if you don't want to supply warlords you can just wait and constantly re-chip the people and eventually you might get anarchy without doing anything.

Wait, they do need to be new recruits

The second the country starts various dictators will war for power using the guns they brought with them. This is a standard power vacuum and anyone who is here is here because they think they can survive that.


Note 1: in preparation of the experiment, it may be wise to select people using two simple criteria: they have no criminal record and they don't carry fire arms. Also I would recommend seeding federalism. Split your population into 100-200 large groups. Use natural boundaries like rivers and mountain chains to allow isolation in smaller urban or larger rural provinces. After that, free traffic exists within the country and between the groups.

Note 2: we can assume political idealism will be an incentive for people to join and with your initial 50M, you'll need a lot. And also take into account, your subjects may join the experiment freely, their future children have not !

PARADOX #1 Acknowledment of competence is accepting authority

At first, your subjects will have the basic means to survive, as you planned. But after a while, you have 50 million inhabitants in a closed country. To maintain autarchy, creative new ideas will be needed to let things work out. You bring modern people in. When you want them to stay alive and make use of their specialized talents, some acknowledgement of people's competence will be needed. That is a challenge for anarchists to accept, because that would imply these people would gain authority ! Anything enabling authority is to remain absent in anarchy ! This ideological block undermines vital activities, such as housing, education and medical science.

Solutions: practice over principle, council democracy, common sense, compromise

PARADOX #2 Anarchist guru

The main challenge will be to assure authoritarian leaders won't emerge. In the real world, the emerging of leaders has turned out to the big pitfall of any anarchist community experiment.. Political gurus will appear in the community. People listen to them. Subsequently, some wise old men will go define "proper anarchism" and impose it on others. Anarchism is actually eliminated at that point.

Solutions: hide the guru, ritualize collective thankfullness, keep freedom of thought


You'll have your volunteers in no time. Your real problem is getting the word out and convincing people that its not a hoax.

Look at all the refugees all over the world fleeing economic collapse or war or whatever persecution you can think of.

Those people aren't necessarily thinking of the danger they're heading to, but the danger they're running from. So anarchy cant be much worse. To them anarchy is a chance to build from the ground up.

Also, think of all the people in the U.S. alone that vehemently voted one way in the last election and still cant accept the loss. If the other candidate had his own country and invited them I think they'd go.

So, as to the problem of getting the word out- a few things: (Assuming your world is Earth)

  1. The internet, social media. Use that.

  2. How to reach people who might not have internet? (yes they still exist, and your refugees might not) have ambassadors literally travel the world as recruiters. Maybe the U.N. would even help in that regard.

  3. Get them there. Offer free plane flights there.

  4. The chance to start over in a new place where you can do as you please without persecution is an awesome incentive all by itself. But add giving them a few acres scott free...? I might just go!


Recruitment will be a big challenge

Global international migration (people moving to a country different from a country of their birth) in 2019 was 272 million people or 3.5% of the global population. Two thirds (2/3) are labour migrants (people who move to another country because of their jobs). The main migration patterns are related to the economy: People move from less developed countries to more developed countries. However, most international migrants move between countries within the same region.

Despite what other answers say, recruitment will be a challenge. People do not move to another country randomly or on a whim. They do it chiefly for 2 reasons: 1) The destination country offers concrete opportunities (an existing and confirmed job offer, existing support networks [family, religious, ethnic, and similar networks]); 2) It is no longer possible for them to reside in their own country due to war, famine, etc. (still most people will not move far).

Personal motivations of migrants are a complex topic outside the scope of this question. I just want to mention that there is no consensus when it comes to migrants. A lot depends on countries of origin and destination, history of migration for both countries, family situation, reasons for migration, and so on.

You also need to consider that migration is not a personal decision, but rather a household or family decision. When you recruit people for your experiment, you need to convince all people in the household, not just one person. Moreover, this is not limited to nuclear families. Extended families (grandparents, uncles and aunts, etc.) will often have a say as well, especially in cultures with traditions of filial piety.

Please also note that it is rather rare for the poorest strata of society to migrate. Poor people cannot afford to move to another country and do not have the necessary social and economic connections.

Your recruitment strategy should focus on:

  • offering people security if they move (since this particular country is a lawless country where every man for himself, you should offer benefits for those who are left behind, e.g. monthly payments to the family, educational and job opportunities for children);
  • recruiting 'villages' instead of individuals (you need a lot of people, so offer to move entire communities instead of people, you have to promise that you will keep them together [whether you stick to it or not is up to you, but if you don't make sure that no one knows about it]);
  • use targeted advertisement strategies (hire someone like Cambridge Analytica that can target small segments of the population with messages tailored to their preferences; it will also save you some money);
  • paid relocation expenses (all expenses should be covered by you, this will make it possible to recruit the poorest people);
  • simple procedures (all immigration procedures should be very simple, so people with low educational levels or people with low attention span are not disadvantaged; again, you need to recruit a lot of people and people do not like to move, so you cannot be choosy);
  • allow families to migrate and stay together (if you limit immigration only to persons of age above 18 you will miss a lot of family men and women who refuse to leave their children behind);
  • you have to be extremely careful when informing people that they are a part of the social experiment (no one likes to be a guinea pig; it is better not to tell them at all but if you must you might want to mislead them to avoid compromising your research data).

With this said, I seriously doubt that you will be able to find 50 million people who will voluntary move to a lawless country where they can be killed on sight for no good reason. Self-preservation is a strong biological imperative. Most people will avoid placing themselves in situations where they can suffer harm for no reason.

What you can expect is a quick formation of law and order in your country. People will form alliances to protect themselves and establish rules. And they will start doing it even before they board whatever is used for transport.

If you try to enforce lawlessness people will band together against you. It would also not be unexpected if your country population develops hostility toward experimenters if their involvement is not limited to discreet observation (which means no cameras). You can check the history of space flights and research in isolated environments to see how relationships between crews and remote control centres can deteriorate.

  • $\begingroup$ Good answer, last part you could link something as an example or provide some keywords for search, if you have, not a regular topic. Also you indirectlympointing that in the answer but 270kk people isn't a small number, and it are those who did overcome resistance in doing so (no matter are those work migrants or anything else) so base for those who would like is bigger. But yeah op will have a lot of problems to solve, tribal communism was better option at least it had some benefits. $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Jun 13, 2021 at 7:41
  • $\begingroup$ But yeah marketing is a king, so needs to avoid thjngs like that "where they can be killed" and switch the roles, lol $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Jun 13, 2021 at 7:44

You must log in to answer this question.