Startup States FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions About New Countries Founded by Treaty

1. What are Startup States?

Startup States are new, independent countries that are created through lawful and peaceful agreements with existing sovereign states, often by treaty. They are not breakaway regions or hobby micronations. They are deliberately designed jurisdictions that seek full international recognition from their inception. Built with the clarity of a startup and the strategic view of a sovereign investment vehicle, Startup States apply entrepreneurial thinking to governance, law and economic systems. They are sovereign, high performance ventures that are purpose built and optimised for freedom, trust, innovation and long term viability. You can think of them as startup companies in which the product is a country.

2. Why create Startup States?

The return on reform is often diminishing. Many existing countries are weighed down by bureaucratic sprawl, outdated systems and political gridlock that make meaningful change slow or nearly impossible. Startup States offer a blank canvas and a chance to rethink how we organise law, governance, economics and community. They allow humanity to test new ideas, such as transparent governments, post tax economies or rights based digital systems, without overthrowing existing regimes.

Startup States complement, rather than conflict with, the international order. They create a fresh cap table in which laws are coherent, rights are respected and performance is rewarded. Startup States provide upside for stakeholders and optionality for citizens. This is not escapism. It is a strategic reallocation of human talent and capital into more effective, accountable and innovative systems that operate in harmony with the existing international framework while demonstrating that better arrangements are possible.

3. How do Startup States differ from existing countries?

Startup States are built deliberately rather than inherited by accident. Many existing countries arose through historical happenstance such as wars, conquest or colonial entanglements. Startup States, by contrast, are formed through lawful and peaceful agreements with existing sovereigns. Their creation is grounded in consent rather than coercion. They do not undermine sovereignty. They affirm and uphold it. Partner governments become co founders rather than casualties, and the relationship is designed to be symbiotic rather than extractive, with hosts becoming stakeholders who receive dividends or other benefits.

Startup States also rethink the role of government itself. Instead of acting as distant gatekeepers, governments in Startup States operate more like high trust service providers. They function more like a concierge, a butler or a strategic partner. Citizens are treated as clients to be served rather than subjects to be managed. The relationship between countries and their partners, and between governments and their people, is rebalanced toward transparency, alignment and mutual gain.

Rather than being constrained by inherited bureaucracies, Startup States design fit for purpose jurisdictions that are streamlined, coherent and adaptable to today's mobile, digital and interconnected world. They start with clarity, operate with efficiency and are built to scale with trust.

4. Who creates Startup States? Can anyone do it?

Startup States are created by founders, who may be individuals, consortia, companies or institutions that possess the vision, discipline and diplomatic capability to negotiate binding agreements with partner governments. While the idea is open in principle, successful execution requires more than enthusiasm. It demands legal precision, financial backing, geopolitical awareness and a commitment to long term nation building.

These projects are not speculative fantasies. They are real world treaty based ventures. Startup States are forged through structured negotiations rather than slogans. This is sovereign formation for builders who can operate at the intersection of law, diplomacy and capital.

The Startup States Society exists to support credible founders who have the right mix of ambition and realism and to help bring their visions to life.

5. Where are Startup States established? Do they have territory?

Yes. Physical territory is essential. Startup States are not purely symbolic projects or digital communities. They are established on real land through lawful agreements with existing sovereign countries. This is typically achieved through long term leases, special designations or treaty based arrangements that grant meaningful self governance.

Territory may begin modestly, for example an island, an enclave, a coastal zone or a reclaimed port. What matters is the legal foundation. A Startup State must have enforceable autonomy that is secured through binding agreements and respected under international law. Land is the substrate of jurisdictional authority, and Startup States are built to exercise it with clarity, integrity and legitimacy from day one.

While non territorial or purely network based governance models may emerge in future, the present international legal order still treats physical territory as a precondition for recognition. Until that changes, the Startup States Society focuses on terrestrial, treaty based efforts that rest on current frameworks and provide real world enforceability and legal durability.

6. How do Startup States gain legal recognition?

Startup States gain recognition through treaties, in the same way that modern countries formalise relations. Startup States do not simply declare themselves into existence. They are established through lawful and negotiated agreements with existing sovereign states. These agreements are typically structured in accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and provide a recognised legal basis for their formation and internal self governance.

This is not secession, revolution or fantasy. It is contract based nation building. By anchoring their legitimacy in treaty law from day one, Startup States aim for de jure recognition at inception. This legal clarity aligns with international norms and builds investor confidence, diplomatic stability and institutional trust over time. It is sovereignty gained through structure rather than struggle.

7. How are Startup States governed?

Governance in Startup States is deliberately designed rather than inherited. Founders have flexibility to choose the model that best fits their vision. It could be a constitutional principality, a lean technocracy, a transparent republic or a structure that is entirely new. The specific form may vary, but the foundation must be solid. A Startup State requires clear constitutional frameworks, transparent rule of law and authority that rests on consent.

In this context, governance is not primarily ideology. It is infrastructure. Startup States treat governance like high reliability architecture. It must be accountable, auditable and aligned with international norms. Respect for rights, legal clarity and operational efficiency are required. The goal is not to replicate the past but to build systems that function with integrity, coherence and trust.

8. What kind of people choose to live in Startup States?

Startup States tend to attract high agency individuals such as founders, funders, builders, thinkers and globally minded citizens who seek more clarity, competence and freedom in how they live. These are people who want to help shape the systems around them from the ground up. Entrepreneurs, technologists, investors, educators, researchers and digital nomads who are frustrated with inherited dysfunction and are ready to co create better models are likely candidates.

They are not united by ethnicity, ideology or accident of birth. They are united by voluntary association and shared intent. Many of them are more likely to read term sheets than manifestos. They prefer aligned systems over arbitrary ones and see governance as a product, with citizenship as a stake in something meaningful. Anyone who has ever wanted to help build a country from day one is the kind of person a Startup State may attract.

9. Are Startup States legal under international law?

Startup States can be legal under international law when they are structured correctly and formed through mutual consent. They are not acts of secession or force. They are peaceful and treaty based initiatives grounded in established international norms. The Montevideo Convention sets criteria for statehood, including defined territory, permanent population, government and capacity to enter into relations with other states. The United Nations Charter affirms sovereign equality and peaceful coexistence. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties governs the legality of binding international agreements.

Startup States are designed to comply with these frameworks deliberately and precisely. This is not political theatre or roleplay. It is lawful and negotiated sovereignty for the twenty first century. Structured with legal precision, Startup States represent legitimate and peaceful entry into the global community based on the same rules that support international order.

10. How do Startup States fund themselves?

Startup States fund themselves through innovation, alignment and value creation rather than through extraction. Instead of relying on heavy, compulsory taxation or unsustainable public debt, they operate more like lean sovereign enterprises. They are designed to be efficient, high trust and strategically oriented.

Revenue streams may include land value appreciation, sovereign wealth funds, residency or citizenship programmes, digital asset issuance, arbitration services, consulting, or sector specific economic clusters. Some Startup States may offer low or zero tax environments to attract capital and talent. Others may generate yield through fintech, tourism, research or asset management.

Startup States think in terms familiar to private equity. They align incentives, minimise waste and work to maximise returns. Their model is intentional and investable. Economic growth is designed rather than inherited, with an emphasis on long term prosperity, transparency and trust.

11. Why not reform existing countries instead of building Startup States?

Reform in existing countries is often slow, constrained and unreliable. Many states are locked into complex bureaucracies, interest group entanglements and constitutional barriers that make structural change extremely difficult. Political inertia and regulatory debt block progress not because better ideas are lacking but because viable pathways to implement them are scarce.

Startup States offer a clean slate. Instead of lobbying for marginal improvements, they allow capital, talent and governance to realign from day one under coherent and purpose built systems. This is not about abandoning what exists. It is about creating something fundamentally better alongside it.

Just as startups can outpace legacy firms, Startup States can evolve more quickly than traditional governments. They are version two of the nation state model. They are faster to build, easier to upgrade and designed to scale with clarity, accountability and trust.

12. How do Startup States ensure they are ethical and inclusive?

Startup States can embed ethics in their foundations through constitutional design and legal structure. Their frameworks can enshrine civil liberties, protections for minorities, environmental stewardship and transparent governance from the outset. Inclusion and fairness become design principles rather than afterthoughts.

Instead of relying only on slogans or top down mandates, Startup States align incentives around ethical conduct. With opt in consent, contractual accountability and systems that reward transparency and responsibility, they can create governance models in which acting ethically is both expected and advantageous.

Because people join voluntarily, Startup States can foster inclusion through accessible on boarding, contribution based membership, interoperable identity systems and institutional trust. People choose to join and to remain because the system works. Ethics is implemented through architecture, and inclusion is supported through opportunity and design.

13. Can Startup States coexist with traditional nations peacefully?

Yes. Peaceful coexistence is central to the concept. Startup States are not created through secession, protest or conflict. They are established through lawful and voluntary agreements that affirm the sovereignty of partner nations and seek mutually beneficial outcomes.

Rather than undermine existing countries, Startup States complement them. They function as high trust and contractually defined zones of innovation that bring capital, talent, jobs and global attention. For host countries, they can function as sovereign co investments that provide prestige and economic upside in exchange for granting autonomy within a clearly defined framework.

This is diplomacy by design. Startup States offer a model of constructive partnership in which nations cooperate to build something new, lawful and beneficial for all parties involved.

14. What values or principles guide Startup States?

Startup States are built on consent, accountability and voluntary participation. They prioritise systems in which governance serves people rather than rules over them. Founders and residents choose frameworks aligned with transparency, contract enforcement, innovation and respect for human dignity.

These jurisdictions are grounded in personal agency and first principles. They tend to minimise coercion, maximise choice, reward performance and enforce agreements. While specific values may differ from one Startup State to another, the core ethos is that systems should work, that alignment should be rewarded and that excellence should compete.

Startup States do not seek to impose a single ideology. They offer opt in, results driven environments where legitimacy flows from alignment and effectiveness. The focus is not on enforcing dogma but on creating space for principled and high trust governance to thrive.

15. How can Startup States help solve global challenges?

Startup States can act as agile laboratories for bold solutions. Because they are not constrained by deeply entrenched bureaucracies or polarised political environments, they can pilot innovations in areas where traditional institutions stall. These areas may include climate resilience, digital governance, public health, refugee resettlement, decentralised finance and legal modernisation.

Where other institutions might spend years in consultation and analysis, Startup States can build and deploy prototypes. For example, they can implement blockchain based identity, cryptographically secure land registries, artificial intelligence assisted legal systems, dynamic residency models and climate neutral zoning. These are not only theoretical reforms but real systems in operation.

By designing for adaptability and accountability, Startup States offer testbeds for policy breakthroughs that can scale. They work to build, measure and refine new structures. As a result, they can expand the frontier of what governance and cooperation are able to achieve.

16. Are Startup States only for the rich or privileged?

No. While some early founders may bring capital or specialised expertise, Startup States are envisioned as inclusive and opportunity driven societies that are open to contributors from many backgrounds. These jurisdictions aim to reward value creation rather than pedigree.

Access may be earned through residency contributions, aligned participation, specific services or proof of work style engagement. Some Startup States may create affordable entry paths, scholarships, digital citizenship options or contribution based on boarding. Over time, access can scale in a way similar to a well designed platform.

Startup States are not intended to function as closed enclaves. They are meant to function as merit oriented ecosystems in which participation is earned rather than simply inherited. If you bring genuine value, there should be a way to belong.

17. How do Startup States support innovation and human flourishing?

Startup States seek to remove unnecessary friction and to create alignment. Free from legacy bureaucracy and risk averse culture, they can offer high trust environments in which innovation is more likely to thrive and human potential is more likely to scale.

These jurisdictions are optimised for clarity, creativity and execution. With interoperable legal frameworks, transparent governance and support for experimental policies, such as open source civic systems or AI augmented institutions, Startup States can function more like accelerators than traditional administrations.

By eliminating avoidable drag and prioritising freedom, meaningful purpose and trust, Startup States aim to make human flourishing the default rather than the exception. In such systems, innovation can compound and people can build, grow and contribute in ways that are more aligned with their capabilities.

18. What kinds of economies do Startup States typically support?

Startup States are usually built to support future facing and high leverage economies. Rather than replicating heavy industry or resource extraction, they tend to focus on digital services, clean energy, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, financial technology, education, tourism, asset tokenisation and creative sectors. These are economies designed for high yield, relatively low physical footprint and global scalability.

Many Startup States may also serve as hubs for arbitration, intellectual property, decentralised technologies and treaty based governance. They can offer strong legal protection, streamlined regulation and capital structures that are aligned with innovation.

They are not meant to be improvised tax shelters or unstable enclaves. They are intended to function as sovereign accelerators and jurisdictions that are intentionally designed to attract talent, protect innovation and facilitate value creation in the post industrial age.

19. Can Startup States be democratic?

Yes. Startup States can be democratic, and in some cases their democratic processes may be more meaningful than those found in some traditional states. Because they are not bound by historical precedents, they are free to explore new forms of democratic governance that prioritise legitimacy, consent and decision making throughput over ceremony or tradition.

These models may include liquid democracy, quadratic voting, sortition, participatory budgeting, token weighted voting or other digitally verifiable and opt in systems. Democracy in a Startup State is intended to be purposeful rather than performative. The aim is not to mimic existing systems but to build frameworks that are accountable, efficient and aligned with the consent of those governed.

20. What happens if a Startup State fails?

Like startups in business, Startup States carry real risk. However, unlike revolutions or secessions, their foundations are contractual rather than violent. If a Startup State dissolves, it does so under pre agreed legal terms. These may involve reversion of land to the host country, the resolution of contracts and the protection of residents and investors through clearly defined mechanisms.

Failure is not intended to be catastrophic. It is meant to be contained. Assets can be reassigned, rights can be safeguarded and disputes can be handled through structured resolution frameworks. The overall model is designed to be anti fragile. Failed attempts can provide valuable lessons, refine best practices and strengthen the broader movement.

In this sense, failure in a Startup State is not terminal. It is iterative. Founders can reboot. Capital can reallocate. The ecosystem can become more informed and resilient.

21. Are Startup States just a rebrand of micronations?

No. Micronations are typically symbolic or hobby projects that lack legal standing, treaties and recognition under international law. They may express identity or protest, but they generally do not have enforceable agreements, institutional durability or serious pathways to legitimacy.

Startup States are fundamentally different. They are formed through lawful treaties with existing sovereign nations and are grounded in international legal frameworks such as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. They are designed to be recognised, self governing and institutionally robust. They are backed by capital, governed by enforceable rules and structured for long term sustainability.

This is not pageantry or protest. It is contract based sovereignty that is designed for legitimacy, scalability and real world relevance from the beginning.

22. How are Startup States different from Charter Cities or Special Economic Zones?

Charter Cities and Special Economic Zones are subnational experiments. They remain legally and politically subordinate to the host country. Their autonomy is conditional and can often be revoked. Their status can depend heavily on changing domestic politics. A shift in leadership or legal interpretation can reduce or end their autonomy quickly.

Startup States are not subnational constructs. They are sovereign countries that are formed through treaties rather than domestic decrees. Their autonomy is not a favour granted. It is a right secured through mutual and enforceable agreement. They are designed to endure rather than to depend.

While Charter Cities and SEZs can bring value to host countries and can sometimes serve as stepping stones for reform, they also involve risks. Some can be extractive, externally imposed or disconnected from local needs.

A Startup State engages the host country as a respected stakeholder and co architect rather than merely as a regulator. Its formation affirms the sovereignty of the partner state. With a bit more effort than that needed to enact a Charter City or SEZ, a host country could negotiate a Startup State and gain a more durable and dignified symbiotic arrangement. If prosperity proves possible in one zone, there is little reason to stop there.

The Startup States Society respects those who work to improve governance through subnational models. However, the Society's mission is distinct. It champions full, lawful and treaty based self governance and sovereignty built from first principles where this is appropriate and desired.

23. How are Startup States different from Network States?

Network States are often described as digital first or ideology driven communities that seek to become sovereign in the future. While many ideas in this space are imaginative and sometimes well intentioned, most of these projects lack the foundational pillars of statehood under international law. They usually do not have clearly defined territory, formal recognition or binding treaties with existing sovereign states. This creates serious legal vulnerabilities regarding legitimacy and enforceability.

Under current international law, sovereignty is not achieved by community consensus or online declarations. It is secured through state to state agreements, recognised borders and compliance with instruments such as the Montevideo Convention and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. By attempting to bypass these legal structures, Network States risk being seen as micronations or non state actors that lack the juridical capacity to enter international relations, enforce contracts or defend claims to territory or autonomy.

Startup States reject this ambiguity. They begin with law rather than ideology, with territory rather than symbolism and with recognition rather than aspiration. Founded through lawful treaties with existing sovereign countries, they can meet the criteria for de jure statehood from day one. They are not speculative social experiments. They are contract backed jurisdictions that are designed for real governance, legal clarity and long term stability.

The Startup States Society respects those who explore Network State concepts where this is done ethically, lawfully and without coercion. However, the Society's method is different. Network States often aim to disrupt the nation state model by bypassing its legal foundations. Startup States work within the international order rather than against it. The Society believes that sovereignty should be earned through lawful consent rather than declared unilaterally. The focus is on building nations that can last rather than networks that simply attract attention.

24. Is trying to start a new country unrealistic or naive?

It is not unrealistic if you approach it like a serious founder rather than as a fantasist. Every significant innovation once seemed improbable until someone built it. Startup States are not mere thought experiments. They are executable strategies that are grounded in law, diplomacy and real world precedent. New countries do emerge, frequently through peaceful negotiation rather than conflict. Startup States aim to make that process more professional and more structured.

This is not naive. It is a form of jurisdictional arbitrage. What matters is legal footing, strategic clarity and the willingness to execute. Startup States can be viewed as a form of minimum viable product for governance in which treaties, capital and structure replace slogans and improvisation.

The Startup States Society exists to turn credible vision into viable projects. It does not romanticise rebellion. It works to structure sovereign emergence within existing international frameworks. That approach is ambitious but it is not naive.

25. Will Startup States just become tax havens or libertarian enclaves?

Some Startup States may prioritise financial freedom or low tax models, but that is only one possible vertical rather than the entire vision. Startup States are not ideologically uniform. They can be progressive, traditional, technocratic, artistic, communal, climate oriented or combinations of these. What defines them is not a single political ideology but the principle of voluntary association and the structure of lawful self governance.

Startup States are open platforms rather than rigid echo chambers. Their diversity is a feature. Some may focus on financial innovation or asset protection. Others may specialise in biotechnology, arbitration, public health, artificial intelligence governance or regenerative design. What unites them is jurisdictional clarity, investor aligned economics and operational efficiency rather than a race to the bottom.

A well designed Startup State does not need to choose between ethics and competitiveness. It can aim to be both principled and profitable. The Startup States Society supports lawful, peaceful and treaty based efforts regardless of ideological orientation, provided that they respect dignity, consent and international norms.

26. Is this just digital colonialism in disguise?

No. Digital colonialism is extractive, imposed and top down. Startup States are the opposite. They are lawful, opt in and co created. They are formed through treaties rather than through unilateral imposition. They are built on mutual consent, shared value and full respect for the sovereignty of partner nations.

There is no conquest or coercion. A Startup State cannot exist without the active agreement of the host country. These projects are not land grabs or private enclaves. They are joint ventures for aligned growth, with enforceable terms, transparent governance and measurable local benefit.

Startup States validate the sovereignty of host nations rather than undermining it. They require partnership, not passive permission. Their formation affirms the legal dignity of all parties involved and is structured for mutual uplift rather than exploitation.

27. Why would any existing country allow a Startup State on its land?

A host country may see a Startup State as an opportunity rather than as a concession. Startup States can offer high upside and relatively contained risk. They can unlock dormant land value, attract foreign direct investment, deploy advanced infrastructure and elevate the host country's global standing. With treaty based safeguards and clearly defined terms, the arrangements are fully contractual, sovereign to sovereign and designed for mutual benefit.

This is not extraction. It is co creation. Startup States can be understood as development as a service. They provide a way to generate new revenue streams without taking on new debt or raising taxes. Revenue can come from land leases, equity stakes, service agreements and long term capital flows. The host country chooses its partner and the terms and retains dignity and sovereignty.

Forward looking nations may eventually compete to co found Startup States, in the same way that top investors compete to back strong startups. These are not meant to be hidden arrangements. They are headline partnerships. A Startup State is not imposed on a host country. It is invited, because it offers upside that is aligned with honour, law and sustainable growth.

28. What stops a host country from revoking a Startup State's status later?

Treaties under international law are binding legal instruments rather than casual arrangements. A host state that attempts to revoke a Startup State's status without cause may face international arbitration, reputational harm, financial penalties and reduced credibility in future treaty negotiations.

Startup States are engineered for durability. Their founding agreements can include legal safeguards such as exit clauses, third party dispute resolution, escrowed contracts and clear triggers for termination or renewal. Some may adopt condominium or shared sovereignty structures to support enforceability and continuity across domestic political cycles.

Revocation is not an unchecked threat. It is a contractually defined variable with legal, diplomatic and economic consequences. Startup States are not squatting on borrowed land. They are co founded ventures that are fortified by law, aligned economically and protected by international norms.

29. Are Startup States just a way to bypass regulation or responsibility?

Startup States are not intended to be regulatory voids. They are designed as regulatory upgrades. The goal is not to escape responsibility but to re engineer it. The aim is to build leaner, smarter and more just systems of governance that deliver clearer and better outcomes.

Startup States do not reject law. They refine it. By designing precise frameworks with clear incentives, opt in participation and transparent enforcement, they can replace bloated compliance regimes with aligned and high trust systems. This is not simple deregulation. It is re regulation that starts from first principles.

Done properly, Startup States can set new benchmarks in rights protection, sustainability, legal clarity and civic accountability. Responsibility is not avoided. It is defined more clearly, implemented with rigour and scaled with integrity.

30. What legitimacy do Startup States have on the world stage?

Legitimacy is earned rather than simply declared. Startup States begin by meeting the legal criteria of statehood under the Montevideo Convention, including defined territory, permanent population, effective governance and the capacity to engage in foreign relations. From that starting point they pursue recognition through formal treaties rather than unilateral declarations and they operate in compliance with international law.

Law alone is not sufficient. Startup States build legitimacy through performance by delivering effective governance, upholding rights, respecting international norms and creating tangible value. Diplomatic recognition, investment and global respect tend to follow clarity, competence and credibility.

This is sovereignty that is earned through execution. Capital follows trust. Recognition follows legal compliance. Legitimacy follows performance. Startup States do not merely demand a seat at the table. They aim to build one.

31. How can I get involved in Startup States?

Startup States depend on talent, initiative and high agency collaboration. Whether you are a founder who wants a sovereign sandbox, an investor who seeks asymmetric upside, or a contributor with expertise in law, policy, infrastructure or diplomacy, there is likely a role for you in this ecosystem.

The Startup States Society serves as a gateway that connects serious builders, funders and advisors with aligned opportunities to co create new jurisdictions. You can contribute as a strategist, researcher, advisor or prospective founder. The Society welcomes collaborators across disciplines, especially those ready to apply their skills to real world sovereign ventures.

The Startup States Society does not solicit public donations and does not operate as a mass membership association. It focuses on partnerships rather than patronage and facilitates meaningful involvement for those who are ready to contribute capital, capability or credibility to lawful, self governing countries.

32. Can I move to a Startup State?

In many cases, yes. Each Startup State will define its own residency pathways. These may include physical relocation, digital on boarding or invitation based access. Some will begin as small and curated communities with limited capacity. Others may offer scalable programmes for residents, contributors and prospective citizens.

The point is not escape but alignment. If you value clarity over chaos and purposeful participation over bureaucratic drift, a Startup State may offer a new type of jurisdictional home. It can be understood as early stage access to a high growth country that is intentionally designed for freedom, trust and opportunity.

Whether through residency, digital citizenship or structured stakeholder roles, Startup States will open their doors to people who want to live with intent and belong by choice rather than by accident.

33. Can I invest in or help create a Startup State?

Yes. Startup States represent a frontier opportunity in which geopolitics, innovation and capital intersect. Whether you are a venture capitalist, a sovereign wealth fund, a family office, an infrastructure builder or a policy entrepreneur, there are multiple ways to participate in sovereign formation.

Opportunities may include land vehicles, sovereign equity, tokenised infrastructure, legal architecture and governance as a service protocols. Startup States create deal flow at the edge of policy and profit. You can help design the blueprint, fund the build out or join a founding team. This is not only investing in a project. It is joining the cap table of a country.

The Startup States Society facilitates strategic introductions and supports serious contributors who are ready to shape, fund and launch jurisdictions from first principles. If you are looking for long horizon impact combined with asymmetric upside, this is an invitation to explore.

34. How does the Startup States Society support new Startup States?

The Startup States Society is the originator and home of the Startup States concept. As the think tank and policy institute that coined and formalised the model, it serves as a strategic incubator, legal studio and global facilitator for sovereign builders.

The Society provides legal frameworks, governance blueprints, diplomatic playbooks, technical whitepapers and access to a network of advisors, investors and host country partners. It helps to curate founding teams, to structure sovereign deals and to reduce risk along the path from concept to recognition.

In addition, the Society conducts original research in international relations, governance innovation and sovereign design. It contributes to the global understanding of lawful and peaceful state formation in the twenty first century.

The Society does not itself act as a state builder. Instead, it supports serious founders who aim for sovereign product market fit and need a partner to assist them.

35. What are the first steps to founding a Startup State?

The first step is to develop a clear, compelling and credible thesis. This includes defining your legal structure, governance architecture, economic model, preferred locations and diplomatic strategy. A Startup State is not a protest. It is a detailed proposal. It begins with law and structure rather than with slogans or improvisation.

The next step is to recruit the right partners, including legal experts, economic strategists, capital providers and diplomatic operators. This is sovereign deal making, not activism. You will need to engage host nations, secure aligned capital and build the trust necessary to negotiate treaty based agreements.

The Startup States Society can support this process. It helps founders move from conceptual pitch to structured protocol and from vision to viable project. You can think of the Society as a seed stage accelerator for geopolitical ventures.

36. Is there a directory or list of existing Startup States?

A curated directory is in development. The Startup States Society is compiling a vetted registry of emerging and recognised Startup States. This registry will include information about treaty structures, governance frameworks, founding teams, jurisdictional details and key performance indicators.

The directory is intended to be an investor grade resource rather than a casual list. It will function as a specialised intelligence layer for institutional partners, serious contributors and aligned stakeholders. Each entry is evaluated for legal validity, execution progress and adherence to the Society's standards.

A public facing version is planned. Until then, vetted partners may gain access to internal briefings, case studies and prototype models through the Society's network. The goal is to build credibility first and then expand public transparency.

37. Can organisations or small communities form Startup States?

Yes. Startup States are not limited to individual founders. They can be initiated by think tanks, decentralised autonomous organisations, cooperatives, diaspora communities, religious orders, innovation hubs or other mission driven groups. The key is not the type of founding group but its seriousness, internal coherence and legal credibility.

If an organisation has a clear vision, an aligned team and the capability to execute on a lawful path to treaty based sovereignty, a Startup State can serve as its sovereign wrapper. The determining factors are intent, capacity and structure rather than sheer size.

The Startup States Society works with qualified groups to help them formalise their proposals, identify viable host countries and move from conviction to execution.

38. Do Startup States offer citizenship, residency or digital identity?

Yes. Startup States are expected to offer layered and programmable forms of access. Most will provide a mix of physical residency, legal citizenship based on treaty grounded recognition and interoperable digital identity. These are core elements of sovereign design rather than secondary extras.

You can expect tiered pathways, including temporary or permanent residency, contribution or performance based citizenship and sovereign digital credentials. Digital identity in Startup States may include blockchain verified identifiers, smart contract based registries and integration with digital and physical systems.

Each Startup State will determine its own model, but a shared objective is that identity should be secure, portable and consent based. In this sense, Startup States seek to integrate the best aspects of e residency, citizenship by investment and decentralised identity into a single coherent framework.

39. What risks should I be aware of before joining a Startup State?

Startup States carry real risks, including legal, political and institutional factors. These may involve changes in host country policy, limited recognition, jurisdictional volatility or weakness in internal governance systems. This is a frontier space with meaningful consequences rather than a no risk environment.

However, these risks can be mitigated through strong legal engineering, robust treaties, clear contracts and well designed exit pathways. The Startup States Society aims to ensure that credible projects are built on sound foundations and that they embody due diligence, transparency and operational safeguards from the start.

Early stage participation comes with both risk and opportunity. Founders and early participants may gain influence, equity or long term positioning, but they must proceed with awareness. Anyone considering involvement should perform diligent research, understand the jurisdictional landscape and treat Startup States as ventures in which upside is earned and risk is real.

40. How will Startup States change the future of governance and sovereignty?

Startup States represent a new chapter in the evolution of sovereignty. They shift governance from an inherited monopoly to an opt in service that is programmable, transparent and investable. Rooted in lawful consent and high trust design, they offer dignified and scalable alternatives to systems that are constrained by inertia or decline.

As treaty based jurisdictions succeed, they will change how people think about what it means to be a state. Sovereignty will become a platform that is available to those who can deliver legitimacy, law and leadership rather than a status reserved only for historical powers. Governance becomes competitive. Legitimacy is earned. Citizenship becomes more voluntary and more aligned with preference.

Startup States are not only experiments in administration. They are ventures in civilisation design. They participate in a broader realignment in which individuals and communities reorganise around preferences, purpose and voluntary association. This is a reassembly of political order based on clarity, consent and creativity.

This is not escapism. It is an attempt to build new architectures for peace, possibility and long term alignment, using law rather than force and precision rather than drift.