Network Nations
= "translocal communities united by shared identity, purpose, and values that govern their own affairs across borders without any territorial claims". [1]
URL = https://networknations.network/
Definition
Network Nations Network:
“A network of geographically unbound but interconnected local units. This structure allows for communities that are both locally rooted and globally connected, enabling them to act collectively as a larger, interwoven whole without being confined to a single territory.”
(https://networknations.network/)
Description
Network Nations Workshop:
"“Network Nations” are:
(1) interdependent political communities
(2) united by shared aspirations, values and culture
(3) leveraging networked technologies
(4) to govern themselves, mutualise resources and engage in collective action,
(5) in a sovereign manner (i.e. independent layer alongside existing jurisdictions)
Network Nations aim to provide an institutional framework for emergent political communities of kinship to govern and coordinate themselves through networked technologies, creating new layers of sovereignty that subsist beyond the reach of nation states and private corporations. By acknowledging, and at times even furthering, their interdependencies — with one another, and other political actors — Network Nations can contribute to more effectively tackling global governance challenges that require global coordination.
Indeed, by reintroducing a sense of belonging to communities that people genuinely want to "live for," Network Nations strive to rebuild trust among individuals and provide hope that they and their communities have a meaningful voice and role in the political arena."
(private Google doc, October 2024)
Difference with the Network States concept
NetworkNations.network:
"The Network State is a similar concept by Balaji Srinivasan. The Network State and Network Nation definitely share some similarities. The main differences are that Network Nations don't have a need for territorial claims, physical infrastructure and other needs that emerge from building territory based ecosystems. The Network Nations are aterritorial, allowing for sovereign communities to organize and self-govern in as a nation building endeavor one abstraction layer above territorial jurisdictions."
(https://networknations.network/)
Comparison Table: Network Nations vs Network States
| Dimension | Network States | Network Nations |
|---|---|---|
| Core definition | A coordinated online community that seeks territorial control and formal sovereignty through a start-up logic, aiming to exit the current system. | A community-rooted, commons-driven civic fabric that builds functional sovereignty through culture, cooperation, and shared stewardship. |
| Sovereignty model | Territorial sovereignty | Functional sovereignty |
| Governance orientation | Top-down, investor-driven (start-up society) | Bottom-up, community-driven |
| Path to legitimacy | Exit-based (raise capital, acquire land, secede, negotiate recognition) | Practice-based (legitimacy through care, participation, and belonging) |
| Membership structure | Market-based (participants aligned through investment) | Stake-based (members as co-creators and stewards) |
| Organizing logic | Market logic (CEO or founder as leader) | Commons logic (collective stewardship) |
| Economic dynamics | Competition and extraction | Cooperation and mutual care |
| Institutional form | Corporate machine | Civic imagination |
Source: https://networknations.network/
Characteristics 1
Networknations.network:
“Network nations are
Interdependent translocal communities
These are geographically distributed yet highly aligned groups that coordinate across digital and physical spaces. Rather than being anchored to a single place, they emerge through interlinked nodes of people and places across different localities, bound by a shared sense of kinship. This structure empowers locally rooted yet globally connected communities to act collectively as part of a broader, interwoven whole.
Sharing a collective identity, culture and aspiration
A form of distributed nationhood is cultivated, defined not by geographic proximity, but by relational closeness. This collective identity emerges through sustained interaction, mutual recognition, and shared cultural practices. Unlike traditional nations tied to inherited citizenship, cohesion here is derived from active, voluntary participation, offering an alternative model of nation-building.
Leveraging Networked Technologies
Decentralised technologies—from blockchain protocols to peer-to-peer platforms—provide the foundation for scalable and autonomous self-governance. This technological stack enables communities to manage their own affairs while resisting censorship and minimizing dependence on external authorities. They are not merely digital communities but technopolitical formations whose sovereignty is tied to their control over their own tools.
Mutualizing Resources
Resilient communities are created by pooling and sharing resources across a distributed network, enabling each node to access capabilities far beyond what it could achieve individually. This commons-based approach operates on reciprocity and mutual aid, creating a positive feedback loop that strengthens the entire network and ensures resilience against shocks.
Exercising Self-Governance
Self-governance is the capacity to define, implement, and adapt the rules of collective life without relying on external authority. Governance systems are built from the bottom up, distributing decision-making across the network. Legitimacy arises not from a centralized mandate but from active participation, mutual accountability, and the continual renegotiation of shared rules.
Engaging in Collective Action
Political agency emerges from the coordinated alignment of autonomous nodes around a common agenda, rather than from centralized authority. This networked coherence enables the community to influence broader systems, shape public discourse, and address global challenges, demonstrating a form of political influence traditionally reserved for major state and market institutions.
As a Common Political Entity
Shared norms and infrastructures transform loose coalitions into distributed polities, empowering value-aligned groups to construct a common identity without territorial borders. Belonging emerges from mutual coordination, not fixed geography. By decoupling citizenship from location, new spaces for political agency open up, offering alternative pathways for collective action on a global scale.
To operate with Functional Sovereignty
The aspiration is to achieve functional sovereignty—the capacity to govern essential domains of community life with a high degree of autonomy. This sovereignty is not rooted in territory, but in the ability to set rules, manage resources, and coordinate internally. Instead of replacing nation-states, these entities work alongside them, reimagining sovereignty as operational autonomy.
(https://networknations.network/)
Characteristics 2
From the Network Nations Alliance:
NEITHER LOCAL NOR GLOBAL BUT TRANSLOCAL
A network of geographically unbound but interconnected local units. This structure allows for communities that are both locally rooted and globally connected, enabling them to act collectively as a larger, interwoven whole without being confined to a single territory.
NEITHER CENTRALIZED NOR DECENTRALISED BUT POLYCENTRIC
A system with multiple centers of decision-making that have mutual influence over one another. Unlike a top-down centralized model or a fully flat decentralized one, polycentricity allows for nested, overlapping, and autonomous governance bodies to coexist and coordinate.
NEITHER SUPREMACY NOR SUBORDINATION BUT FUNCTIONAL SOVEREIGNTY
The capacity for a community to self-organise and govern its own affairs independent of external interference. This form of sovereignty is not based on territorial control, but on the functional ability to manage its own systems and resources, empowering civil society.
NEITHER STATE NOR MARKET BUT COMMONS
An economic and governance model based on the mutualisation of resources. Instead of resources being controlled exclusively by the public sector (State) or private sector (Market), they are collectively owned and managed by a community, including the governance infrastructure itself.
NEITHER DEPENDENT NOR INDEPENDENT BUT INTERDEPENDENT
A state of 'entanglement' that creates a shared future through incentive alignment. By creating high exit costs and shared stakes, this model fosters deep collaboration over pure independence, which helps mitigate free-riding and the tragedy of the commons.
NEITHER EXIT-BASED NOR VOICE-BASED BUT STAKE-BASED
A governance model where influence is tied to one's stake in the community. This moves beyond the traditional dichotomy of 'exit' (leaving) or 'voice' (protesting). Having a tangible stake—economic, social, or reputational—incentivizes constructive participation.
NEITHER POLITICAL NOR APOLITICAL BUT METAPOLITICAL
Operating on a level that shapes the conditions for future politics. The agenda is to empower civil society with more agency for self-governance while acknowledging planetary interdependencies, creating new (geo)political actors through commons-based stewardship.
NEITHER INSIDERS NOR OUTSIDERS BUT BEYONDERS
Transcending the dichotomy of working within the system or fighting it from the outside. Inspired by Buckminster Fuller, Beyonders focus on building new models that make the existing reality obsolete, creating alternative systems that operate on different principles.
NEITHER TECHNO-UTOPIAN NOR TECHNO-DYSTOPIAN BUT TECHNO-REALISTS
Adopting a pragmatic and balanced view of technology. This approach avoids both blind optimism and paralyzing fear, focusing instead on thoughtfully designing and deploying tools to serve community values, acknowledging both their potential and their limitations.
NEITHER DESCRIPTIVE NOR PRESCRIPTIVE BUT EMERGENT
A process-based approach to solving complex problems like the 'polycrisis.' Rather than prescribing a rigid solution, this focuses on creating an interconnected, adaptive system from which novel solutions can emerge through the interactions of its empowered members."
(https://networknations.network/)
More information
* Article: Network Nations. Reclaiming Sovereignty in the Digital Age. By Primavera de Filippi & Felix Beer.
URL = https://networknations.network/essay/
“With the advent of digital technology, the wheel has turned again. The internet has shattered geographic constraints, and enabled new forms of coordination that transcend national borders. People organize across jurisdictions, cultures, and time zones, not as a result of physical proximity, but because of shared affinities. In this context, sovereignty—once tightly coupled with territorial control—is increasingly being reframed through the logic of digital networks (Castells, 2004).
This shift has sparked new claims to authority in the digital realm. States are attempting to assert control over the digital space through surveillance and the regulation of information flows. Corporations govern billions of users via platform rules and algorithmic systems. Perhaps most interestingly for the purpose of this essay, newly emerging online communities are aspiring for new forms of network sovereignty, experimenting with self-governance, shared ownership, and collective agency both in the physical and digital space.
In this essay, we first introduce the three classical dimensions of sovereignty — space, population, and institutions — and explain how digital networks are reshaping them (Section 2).
We then investigate how three types of actors—platforms, states, and networked communities—are competing to assert authority in the digital realm (Section 3).
Finally, we present the concept of Network Nations (Section 4) as translocal communities united by shared identity, purpose, and values that govern their own affairs across borders without any territorial claims.
Our goal with this essay is not to prescribe what network sovereignty should be, but what it’s becoming—and how we may design better systems in its wake.”
* Books:
More Everything Forever: AI Overlords, Space Empires, and Silicon Valley’s Crusade to Control the Fate of Humanity by Adam Becker. Basic Books, 2025. 384 pages.
The Hidden Globe: How Wealth Hacks the World by Atossa Araxia Abrahamian. Riverhead Books, 2024. 336 pages.
Children of a Modest Star: Planetary Thinking for an Age of Crises by Jonathan S. Blake and Nils Gilman. Stanford University Press, 2024. 326 pages.