A Blueprint for Independent Enclave Communities

A lot of people talk about building independent communities in the United States. Let's discuss how to actually do it

This material is based off research that was conducted about two years ago. Those intending to design systems like this are welcome to reach out. There’s a lot that goes into it, and ensuring a functional social and fiscal dynamic can be tricky.

Introduction

There’s a lot of groups and individuals trying to “get out” of the modern managerial hegemony. Progressives and pedophiles are happily working together to try and institute a new era of glorious narcissistic equality (where some people are a lot more equal than others). Nationalists and ethno-nationalists are trying to forge a nation that actually exists for the interests of it’s own people a radical far-right notion (especially if you ask the media). Both are experiencing difficulties because the Powers that Be are not inclined to share power, and extremely difficult to dislodge. Thus alternative options are now subject to consideration: intentional embedded communities.

I have previously compared modern sociology to a prison-culture. A culture where people are divided into groups for mutual protection. The division exists under the auspice of a managerial state that, in attempting to appease every one, works for no one. If it can’t classify you on a spreadsheet and make you consoom product, then it has no use for you and wants you dead (see MAID in Canada). You’ve got the white gangs, the black gangs, the hindu gangs apparently. Those with a few neurons to rub together are looking for an exit. Those who aren’t servile seek to live in a culture that doesn’t actively try to turn men into machines of economic production and consumption. An escape route.

The modern bureaucratic state is highly corrosive. Birth rates are falling. Children are taught pornography in school rather than mathematics. The public systems in the United States (and the West in general) has abandoned citizens to focus on aiding hostile foreigners. Citizens are arrested for complaining when foreigners rape and murder them. Nearly all western nations have lost their mandates to rule in the sense of John Locke, but maintain power through surveillance and coercion.

Thus, it stands to reason that most are trying to get out. The whole world is ruled by somebody. No land is free, and there’s no frontier to leave to. Those attempting to escape are limited in options:

• Become wealthy: join the top 0.5% by grinding all day and night for the rest of your life and there’s a chance you might put together 50 million dollars. Once you enter the upper class, then the rules don’t really apply to you any more and you can hire lawyers to handle that nonsense for you.

• Move to an easily bribed third-world nation, which is basically all the same as the previous option, but where you’re rich in comparison to every one else… but have to deal with half-built infrastructure. A number of guys are doing this in The Philippines, Vietnam, North Africa, and similar places. Not a terrible option if you’re not planning to raise a family.

• Organize an independent off-grid community. That’ll work great until the IRS sees you stopped paying taxes and decides to kick in your door and seize all your stuff. See Ruby Ridge and Waco for how those have been dealt with in the past.

None of the traditional options are great. Which is why this article proposes a new one. An intentional localized community of like-minded individuals. This option is good if you’re intending to have kids and provide to the next generation the same values you grew up with. An intentional community doesn’t need to be off-grid or separate from the economic and legal power structures. In fact, you can build a community as a subdivision of the larger system. Economic independence for a group, with the possibility of growing that group in terms of status and economics.

Rather than “escape” the system, this model proposes placing a barrier between the system and ones own neighborhood. Up front costs are high, but potential benefits are massive, and this model has been successfully applied in the past: immigrant neighborhoods and religious enclaves are common across the United States. We who wish to be free need consider our position as foreigners in hostile Western nations.

While abandoning the homeland for foreign soil works, doing so abandons also ones cultural history… and that’s assuming things remain globally economically stable for the next century; highly unlikely. Third world nations are going to suffer first and worst when global resources start to run scarce.

---

---

Intentional Community Design

The primary reason for developing an independent community is in the last word: community. Modern culture has been unbelievably corrosive to community and family dynamics. Women aren’t having children, men aren’t getting married, no one can afford rent, almost no one has a family farm they can move back to. Community provides options, time and resources. Without options time or resources, working 40 hours a week to afford a shit-box apartment is the best most people can hope for.

With strong community backing, some one can help care for the baby when you’re tired. A community can pool resources to send a brilliant member for a medical degree with the expectation that once a Doctor, that individual will return. The people can afford the time and space for large projects (constructing a new barn or building an off-grid communications system). A business can be started with help and equipment from extended family, a business that’d be impossible to start in a micro-apartment with no tools. Large communities manage resources more efficiently than individuals, that’s why humans organized into tribes in the first place.

A community pool can also utilize a shared data plan and shared health insurance. Disconnecting medical coverage from an employer radically changes the way in which families behave. No longer is dad tied to a specific soul-crushing employer because his daughter broke her arm and needs to have the bone fixed.

Note that the primary benefits of community-living are not “living in the woods and farming.” The benefits are derived from an extended familial culture: time, fiscal security, social support. One does not need to be living out in the woods to gain these benefits. Wherever space can be acquired and like-minded families can congregate, it’s possible to build something.

• A single apartment building of reasonable size can provide these benefits

• A farmstead with multiple homes on it can provide these benefits

• A suburb where all homes are purchased in a specific area with a single cultural goal can provide these benefits

• A neighborhood surrounding a specific church, using the church as the community gathering-grounds can provide these benefits

An organized intentional community can be produced independently in cities, suburbs, and rural farmland alike. Doing so requires a lot of up front investment from one or two interested parties. Operating it requires organization systems separate from national law; a social (and perhaps written) set of bylaws to set the structure.

It will also be limited in scale. Dunbar’s number is going to be the limiting factor. That is: the number of people with whom it is possible to have a close personal relationship. Assuming that a member has between a third and a half of their “socio-intellectual” capacity absorbed by the community, that limits the size to between 50 and 75 people (that’s individual people). Assuming families of 4, that’s between 12 and 20 families.

Going above this number will cause community breakdown due to an inability of people to work together without a formalized (i.e. coercive) legal system. The organization must therefore be relatively simple, insular, and delineate a clear in-group/out-group preference. The proposed structure is similar to the Hasidic Jewish communities in New York and the Amish and Hutterite communities on their various farms.

---

Also important: it isn’t necessary for members to be employed within the organization, in fact, it’s preferable that they’re not. Members should work in the outside world to network contacts and bring in resources. China-Towns in various cities in the United States had highly insular and organized communities, but members would often find work outside for other employers: construction, mining, farming, etc. It is important that an intentional community not be so insular as to prevent its members from working in the outside world.

It’s dangerous to build fortresses because isolation is dangerous.

Rather the community operates as a micro-state where people are encouraged to work doing whatever it is they’re good at while also bringing resources back to the community as a whole. A cultural enclave like this may easily develop solely around a method of collective housing. Close proximity is a requirement for these types of communities (dropping your kid off at the neighbors needs to be a reasonable option).

In the current era in the United States, it’s actually extremely easy to create a community like this… if you have the money up front. Buy a building or two (or land and build a few buildings) and offer people exceptionally cheap rent on an invite-only basis. Once the initial cost is sunk, then it’s easy to bring in people who are already struggling under extreme housing cost burdens. If you’re going to be working on constructing an intentional community, now is the time to do it. Remember though, the up-front cost is high. Either multiple individuals or a single wealthy individual will need to be willing to eat that cost. At time of writing (Jan 2025) the estimated minimum cost for this type of set up is in the range of $600,000 in the United States.

---

So far, nearly everything I’ve written has been published for free. A paid subscription is $6 a month; a cup of coffee. I implore you to pay for a subscription. Hopefully I can actually build something like one of these proposed communities some day. Subscribing will also gain you access to direct communications, telegram, etc. to work on a large project like this together.

So let’s see how this plays out in an example… let’s set the location to be Rural United States. Not too rural, we still want to be close to a city that residents can work in.

---

Building an Enclave A Rural American Model

A lot of optimization can be done depending on where one is, and how the community is intended to function. For this thought experiment these are the initial conditions:

• Big Don has around $600,000 to throw at the project. Low-end of what’s needed, but doable.

• Big Don intends to build a community to minimize the tax burden regarding land-taxes.

• Big Don intends to organize his community in a rural location where members can have their own households. He wants space, and wants members to be able to farm. They can build barns or machine shops if they want. For this, he needs some acreage.

• Big Don is only willing to make this investment if he owns a significant share. He’s willing to make compromises to keep members happy, but there are limits to his charitability.

• Big Don wants to raise four kids, and wants the other families that join the community to be doing the same. This is intended to be a multi-generational project.

• Big Don already has a number of friends; couples that would probably join the community if he can put down money up front.

  ---

Setup: The Wonderful World of Non-Profits

Note that none of this is legal advice, and having a lawyer on hand to make sure that everything is well organized will be critical.

The initial setup requires bringing in 4 or 5 additional people. This is to create a 501c3 non-profit. The benefit to using a non-profit is that the institution becomes a tax-free organization as long as they’re adhering to their mission statement (and doing all the other non-profit things they’re required to do). A title like “Regional support network for the native peoples of [place]” could work. A mission statement emphasizing “preserving traditional communities and educating X group about acceptance and alternative lifestyles” may also help.

The evil Woke Progressives in government love their magic words. There’s no reason not to use them provided the definitions are sufficiently malleable to suit our purposes.

The purpose of the non-profit is to be the primary holder of the land. Land held by a legal non-profit that is adhering to its own mission statement will have a tax burden dramatically different from land held by a private for-profit corporate interest. Big Don becomes the chairman of the non-profit and the other initial members become the board of directors. Once the non-profit is created, Big Don donates his $600,000 to the non-profit and gets a massive tax write-off (which can be used by an accountant to ensure he doesn’t pay any taxes for a few years). The four members of the board of directors also donate (and also get massive tax write-offs). Let’s say at the end of it, there’s now $800,000 in the coffers of the [peaceful and diverse inclusive tolerance project].

This is how the billionaire class do it, there’s no reason you shouldn’t use the same tools. The non-profit can then go about acquiring land to start building.

---

Location

The ideal location for an intentional community is outside of a small town, and within a reasonable driving distance for a larger metropolitan area. The small town should be less than 5000 people, ideally a 2 or 3 bars type of town. The reasoning being that if your people do well for themselves and are friendly upstanding citizens, you’ll have a few thousand people who like that you’re there. If in a decade or two, people from your enclave go on to buy one (or all) of the local bars and local mechanics shops, then you now has access to the social capital of a full town of 5000 people.

The Sheriff, the Mayor, the high school principal and the guy who owns the bar are the leadership caste of a town like that. It might take a decade or two, but putting your own people into those positions will create an outsized impact on the local economy and culture.

Within a 20 to 40 minute drive should be a major metropolitan area, or better, two or three. That way members can get paid big city money without having to suffer the problems of living in the city. They’ll have a small town of a few thousand folks who know them back home, and an even more tightly knit group of good neighbors. Being able to pull metropolitan money in while living in a small town is a great combination.

Give it a decade or two, and children will grow up in a high-trust in-group where they’re provided with plenty of starting resources and a fallback should anything go wrong. Half to two thirds of the next generation is likely to stick around and keep building on what mom and dad started.

---

Construction

Big Don finds a place with decent farmland and a little stream running through it. It totals about 35 acres. Location is important, because most of the men will be driving into the city for work. With that in mind, Big Don finds a chunk of land 30 minutes from two small metropolitan areas. It’s next to a small town of about 1200 people. The land costs $450k, but the location is worth it.

The land is zoned as A1 agricultural land. This is going to be useful. Big Don is paying attention to the zoning restrictions of the land.

The [peaceful and diverse inclusive tolerance project] purchases the land for four hundred thousand dollars. Initially there’s not much on it, but a run down old shed. That’s fine. That’s what the other four hundred thousand dollars are for.

The [peaceful and diverse inclusive tolerance project] immediately hires another company to begin construction: [Big Don’s Maintenance llc.], which may hire a general-contractor to start building. It’s important to note that A1 zoned land can only be host to a single family home… and housing for workers.

For several hundred thousand dollars, [Big Don’s Maintenance] constructs a single family home, and a several “multi-room worker-homes.” Some of them are really nice, but legally it’s just worker housing. As construction (which takes a year or two) nears its end, [Big Don’s Maintenance] hires another company: [Big Don’s Culturally Indigenous Farmers].

[Big Don’s Culturally Indigenous Farmers] works the land and hires employees. To work the land, [Big Don’s Culturally Indigenous Farmers], must rent land to work. [Big Don’s Culturally Indigenous Farmers] decides to rent land from the [peaceful and diverse inclusive tolerance project]: now there is a company with workers renting the land from the nonprofit. The workers also just happen to be the board of directors of the non-profit. Those workers need housing; luckily, Big Don’s Maintenance built “worker housing” to put them and their families in.

Now everything is taxable, above board, and contained in a complex corporate structure. Big Don’s Maintenance can sell shares to prospective members of the intentional community. Say for $5000 up front, you can buy a concrete pad where you can build a home or place a trailer.

Big Don intends to sell 60% of the shares to members while retaining a 40% stake. This means that the community can out-vote Big Don if they get together on something, but for the most part, it’ll be Big Don calling the shots on how things are run. This way he gets a social return-on-investment, and every one else has the security that they can vote him down if he really screws up.

What has effectively been created is a low-tax territory embedded adjacent to a small town. The members pay maintenance fees to Big Don’s maintenance, which are then enacted for community improvement (basically taxes to keep water running, clean the septic tank, fix the road, etc.). The community has the power to out-vote Big Don, but only on something that matters. This allows Big Don to justify eating the initial cost.

---

Cooperate Organization Structure

→ A non-profit owns the land occupied by the intentional-community

→ The non-profit hires a company to manage the land (and pays them)

→ The land-management company hires a company to work the land (and pays them)

→ The land-working company then rents the land from the non-profit (and pays them)

All 3 of these organizations are owned by the same group of people. This creates 3 taxable events every month so that money is always circulating. As long as money is circulating and minor taxes are being paid, the IRS and state government have no reason to bother the enclave; everything is above board. (Have a lawyer and an accountant handy to ensure that).

Residents are also (legally) employees of one of the companies (the land-management company probably) and own shares in that company equivalent to their initial buy-in. Because residents are legal employees of the company, they can be compensated with healthcare packages (a group health-insurance plan) and a company cell-data-package (a group digital communications plan).

Members are also expected to pay monthly rent/taxes for maintenance to keep everything running… in addition to paying into the system which then pays them out their own “wages” so that they can legally be counted as employees. The non-profit is run by the board of directors which are the employees of the land-working company and the share holders of the land-management company.

The whole thing is a little complex but will keep everything running smoothly even in our bureaucratic dystopia.

The land can be managed internally by the land-management company. Thus, it doesn’t need to be subdivided or rezoned for every one to have their own legally defined plot, and for the land held in the commons to be properly managed. Shares can be sold to prospective residents, but only with unanimous approval from residents already there. Otherwise, shares can only be inherited. This helps ensure that every one who joins is properly vetted.

It’s possible to include a contract stipulation that if the non-profit ever loses its non-profit status, it also loses its rights to the land (which will go to the land-management company). If that ever happens, then the non-profit declares bankruptcy (for back taxes) and a new non-profit is formed and the land donated to the new non-profit for… you guessed it, another massive tax write-off.

Note that this is dependent on being good neighbors. If you’re assholes to the local towns folk they will find a way to throw you all out; if you’re kind to them, they’ll prevent any one else from ever doing so.

Some people say this setup resembles a small kingdom or something

I’m a monarchist, remember?

Membership

Often overlooked in the creation of intentional communities is member demographics. Due to the extremely high modern cost of living, getting a group of guys together who are willing to forgo some individual-liberty in exchange for a support community and cheap rent is high. Unfortunately, single men aren’t the demographic one must try to attract.

For a community like this to be functional, it needs to consider the next generation. Membership has to be restrictive: married couples with children, married couples who intend to have children… common law couples who intend to have children. Allowing single men into an intentional community of this type in the first generation is going to spell disaster. The development of this type of community (urban or rural) will require that people join as couples, and that they do so intending to produce offspring.

A community organizational system like this needs to focus on the idea of building their own culturally-distinct entity. That will entail a certain loss of autonomy for the individual. An-caps are going to chafe under the auspice of an intentional community, even one that’s relatively free-form. Left wing extremists are sure to try and get in the way as any community of intelligent healthy well-adjusted people is an inherent threat to them (being themselves incompetent useless losers). It’ll be easier to build something like this in a conservative rural state than an urban liberal one. Be aware of that potential hurdle. One can only imagine the gnashing of teeth that’ll be heard should a group of white men try to build something for themselves outside the “accepted” socio-economic system.

---

Costs

There’s around a minimum initial cost of $600,000 to the guy who starts up the project. In this scenario, four people each donate another $50,000 to the project to get it off the ground. Each of them is given a significant initial stake in the company and non-profit. Every one involved will be aware of the fact that they’ll never be able to sell for a profit. Thus they have to go into this project with the understanding that the social structure they’re creating is the profit that they’ll be reaping. (Of course free/cheap rent for the rest of your life also sounds pretty good).

Some additional funds might be raised directly into the non-profit. Non-profits often receive funds from wealthy people just trying to get their taxes down. It may be possible to gain additional funding from wealthy benefactors desperately looking for something to donate to at the end of the fiscal year. A lot of non-profits can pull in a reasonable sum of money this way.

There aren’t many people willing to eat this enormous up-front cost, but building something is never free. Even Elon Musk recognizes that his Mars project is going to be high-cost with minimal economic reward. An intentional community is a group of people acting on hire aspirations than mere immediate profits.

Should current trends continue and the United States grow evermore aristocratic, there will be a growing separation between land owners and serfs. If that were to occur then, creating (and becoming a significant share-holder in) a multi-generational community may reap dramatic rewards. Rewards like your great grand children being the future equivalent of nobility or knights. In the immediate short-term future though, the investment occurs not because it’ll be profitable, but because it’s necessary.

---

Why We’re Here

As stated, modern managerial culture is clearly a dead end. Populations are dropping faster than ever before in human history, and mentally stunted progressives are bandying about how importing slave labor from the third world is “actually a good thing.” We’re here because clearly intelligent creative people are unwanted in the modern cultural zeitgeist. The available options are limited for those who want out, and designing an intentional community (5 to 20 families) is one of the best exit plans. It’s also one of the most expensive.

Unlike leaving for Vietnam or Brazil, the construction of an independent enclave like this has multi-generational staying power. The Visigoths who settled in Rome became Germans, Austrians and Italians. Semi-independent enclaves throughout history, are how the future was founded. Tribes that form in times of pressure and are positioned take advantage of weaknesses in the ruling hierarchy. Multi-generational fraternities.

The progressive left and managerial state have done an excellent job of eradicating fraternal social systems from the West. At the same time, a basket of legal loop-holes and incompetent enforcement systems have produced new opportunities. If organized into a localized geographic area, a culturally homogeneous group of individuals can have a dramatically outsized impact both socially and economically. We’ve already seen it in the modern era in Silicon Valley, and in they way the Amish swung the 2024 election in Pennsylvania. Now, fractured into micro-cultures, all we need to do is organize a productive microculture into an enclave. Mutual trust will take care of the rest. It’s a lot easier to experiment and engage in creative endeavors when you aren’t worried if you can make rent next month.

---