Table of Contents
Balaji Srinivasan's Network School in Malaysia proves that alternative societies aren't just theory—150 people from 100 countries are living it for $1,500/month, all-in.
Key Takeaways
- The Network School in Malaysia houses 150+ people from 100 countries for $1,500/month including food, gym, and apartment
- Network states represent a "third type of thing" alongside internet companies and internet currencies—internet communities with physical presence
- Remote workers unable to get Western visas make up the largest demographic, seeking like-minded communities and lower living costs
- The concept mirrors historical patterns where universities and towns developed together, from Harvard to Stanford to now crypto societies
- Physical network effects emerge when online communities meet in person, solving isolation while maintaining digital-first economics
- Balaji funds diverse "startup societies" globally—vegan, carnivore, Hindu, Christian, Sanskrit immersion—testing different community models
- The project represents a counter-balance to both failing Western governance and authoritarian Chinese systems through "internet-first" values
- Voting with your feet becomes the ultimate democratic act when you can physically relocate to aligned communities
- Bitcoin's rise signals the transition from American empire to a China vs. Internet dynamic, where digital gold becomes political infrastructure
The Physical Reality Behind the Network State Theory
Most people know Balaji Srinivasan as the guy talking about network states on Twitter. What they don't realize is that he's actually building one. Six months ago, Srinivasan found underutilized apartment buildings in Malaysia and created what might be the world's first functioning network state node. For $1,500 a month—all-in—150 people from over 100 countries now live, work, and build together in what he calls the Network School.
This isn't some Silicon Valley fantasy anymore. It's Saturday morning and there are people grinding on their laptops, attending talks, working out in the community gym, and drinking quality coffee that rivals San Francisco standards. These aren't just crypto bros either—though there are plenty of those. The community includes remote workers who can't get visas to Western countries, ideological believers in startup societies, and people who simply want to be around like-minded individuals while building companies or finding life partners.
The setup works because it solves real problems that traditional cities create. Instead of spending $4,000 a month on rent in San Francisco just to be surrounded by people stressed about keeping up economically, these residents pay less than what most Americans spend on rent alone. They get housing, food, gym access, and most importantly, a community of ambitious people who chose to be there.
"We've unbundled the world onto the internet and everybody's alone at home," Srinivasan explains. "Now when you rebundle the world into the physical world, you actually solve a lot of problems." The physical network effects are obvious once you see them in action—online relationships becoming offline collaborations, spontaneous learning opportunities, and the kind of serendipitous encounters that build careers and companies.
Why Smart People Are Choosing Alternative Societies
The demographics tell an interesting story about global mobility and opportunity. The largest group consists of remote workers from countries whose passports don't grant easy access to Western nations. These aren't people trying to escape their home countries permanently—they're globally minded individuals who want to participate in the internet economy while living somewhere that values their contributions.
Then there are the ideological migrants—people who believe the current systems are broken and want to help build better ones. They're drawn by the same instincts that attracted early cryptocurrency adopters: a mix of technological excitement, business opportunity, and genuine belief that alternatives are necessary. Some come because it's interesting and weird. Others come to learn the template for building their own startup societies.
What unites them is being "internet-first" rather than tied to any particular geography or traditional nationality. They believe that online, all nodes are equal. You can have the same monetary policy through cryptocurrencies, the same contract law through smart contracts, and the same transaction systems regardless of where you were born. It's a practical manifestation of the promise that the internet would level global playing fields.
The appeal becomes clearer when you consider the alternative. High-earning tech workers in places like San Francisco often spend most of their income just to afford basic housing. Their entire lives revolve around economic anxiety about keeping up with an impossible cost structure. Moving to a place where your skills are valued but your living costs are reasonable creates mental space for actually building things rather than just surviving financially.
The Thousand City System vs. Two-Party Democracy
Srinivasan argues that what they're building represents a fundamental shift from democracy as we know it toward something more like consumer choice. Instead of fighting over 51% vs 49% majorities where nearly half the population disagrees with every decision, people can migrate to communities that align with their values and participate in more consensual governance.
The Starbase example illustrates this perfectly. When Elon Musk's SpaceX team and local residents voted to incorporate their Texas community as "Starbase," they won with 97% support. That level of consensus is possible because people who moved there specifically wanted to be part of a rocket-building community. They voted with their feet first, their wallets second, and their ballots third—creating alignment that traditional geographic democracies rarely achieve.
This "thousand city system" acknowledges that people have genuinely different preferences about how to live. Some communities might prioritize environmental sustainability, others technological progress, others traditional values, others experimental lifestyles. Rather than forcing everyone into the same political framework and fighting endlessly, different groups can optimize for their preferred trade-offs.
The Network School functions as a proof of concept for this idea. Everyone there chose to be there. Everyone can leave if they want. The community works because it's self-selecting for people who value things like entrepreneurship, learning, international perspectives, and building rather than just consuming. When you remove the coercion inherent in geographic accidents of birth, you get much higher satisfaction and functionality.
Historical precedents support this approach. Universities and towns developed together throughout American history—Harvard with the Massachusetts Bay Colony, land grant colleges building up the Midwest, Stanford and Berkeley catalyzing Silicon Valley. Each created communities around shared purposes and values, training people who then built the surrounding society.
The Economics of Optimized Daily Life
One aspect that becomes clear when visiting is how much efficiency you can gain by thoughtful community design. Instead of spending thirty minutes each way traveling to a gym, the gym is in your building. Instead of hunting for decent coffee shops, there's quality coffee available steps from your workspace. Conference rooms, office pods, and common areas are distributed based on actual usage patterns rather than random urban planning.
Srinivasan describes this as "minimizing all of the transit times" and "rack and stacking more office pods, more coffee stations as a function of demand." It sounds corporate, but the effect is liberating. When you're not spending hours daily on logistics and transportation, you have more time for actual work, learning, or relaxing on the beach.
This optimization extends beyond physical infrastructure to community programming. Regular talks, networking events, and social activities happen because there's sufficient density and shared interest to make them worthwhile. In a traditional city, organizing such events requires massive coordination overhead. In a purpose-built community, they emerge naturally from proximity and alignment.
The economic model works because it's subscription-based rather than ownership-based. Residents pay for access to optimized systems rather than trying to individually acquire and maintain everything they need. This reduces both financial requirements and decision fatigue while improving outcomes across the board.
America's Imperial Decline and the Internet Alternative
The conversation reveals Srinivasan's broader thesis about geopolitical transitions. He sees American empire following the same trajectory as British empire—initial success giving way to overextension, internal conflict, and eventual decline. The difference is that this time, the alternative isn't just another nation-state but the internet itself as a organizing principle.
The data he presents is sobering. China now controls more manufacturing capacity, research output, and shipbuilding than most people realize. Meanwhile, America's internal divisions, demographic challenges, and fiscal problems continue worsening. The tariff policies and immigration restrictions that appeal to some voters also alienate potential allies and trading partners globally.
"Four forces are pointed down," he explains. "Red America is against the deep state, blue America is against the Trump administration, tech America is against the regulatory state, and China is against US hegemony." This creates unprecedented pressure on existing institutions without clear alternatives emerging from within the traditional system.
Bitcoin's appreciation against the dollar—from 0.1 cents to over $100,000—represents more than investment returns. It demonstrates that alternatives to national currencies can gain adoption and legitimacy. When Bitcoin reaches $1 million, Srinivasan predicts, "people understand like empire's over." The psychological impact of that milestone will force recognition that monetary sovereignty no longer belongs exclusively to nation-states.
The internet alternative isn't just technological—it's ideological. "Internet-first" communities can embody both libertarian values (individual freedom, voluntary association, minimal coercion) and progressive values (equality, democratic participation, scientific advancement) without the corrupted institutional forms these values have taken in recent decades.
Building Infrastructure for Post-National Communities
What makes the Network School more than just an expensive co-living space is its role as infrastructure for a new kind of social organization. The residents aren't just consuming an amenity—they're learning systems that can be replicated elsewhere. Multiple startup societies are already operating globally, funded by Srinivasan and others, testing different approaches to community building.
The template includes both practical elements (how to optimize daily loops, source quality coffee, design community programming) and governance innovations (how to achieve consensus, handle conflicts, maintain shared values while respecting individual differences). Some communities focus on specific ideologies or lifestyles—there are Hindu societies, Christian societies, carnivore societies, vegan societies, Sanskrit immersion communities.
This diversity is intentional. Rather than imposing a single vision of optimal community, the network state concept assumes that different groups will prefer different approaches. The goal is to enable experimentation and let successful models spread organically rather than through top-down planning.
For investors and entrepreneurs, this represents a new category of opportunity. Just as internet companies and internet currencies created massive value over the past decades, internet communities may generate similar returns. The difference is that these communities have physical components, real estate implications, and governance challenges that pure digital platforms don't face.
The regulatory approach focuses on compliance rather than confrontation. "Everybody here pays taxes. Everybody here obeys regulations," Srinivasan emphasizes. Most countries actually want to attract educated, high-earning remote workers who contribute economically without competing for local jobs. The value proposition for host governments is compelling—capital and talent inflow with minimal infrastructure requirements.
The Future of Human Organization
Six months into this experiment, the Network School has proven that alternative social organization isn't just theoretical. People will relocate internationally to join communities aligned with their values. They'll pay subscription fees for optimized environments. They'll participate in governance systems based on voluntary association rather than geographic accidents.
Whether this scales beyond niche communities of privileged remote workers remains to be seen. The model currently works for people with internationally valuable skills and location independence. Expanding it to broader populations would require addressing healthcare, education, family considerations, and economic opportunities that don't translate across borders as easily as software development.
But the psychological impact of demonstrating alternatives may be more important than immediate scalability. When people see functioning examples of voluntary communities, consensual governance, and optimized social organization, it changes their expectations about what's possible. The current dissatisfaction with traditional institutions becomes actionable rather than just frustration.
"People want to build communities in the physical world," Srinivasan observes. "We spent so much time online. We want to build things offline." The Network School succeeds because it bridges that gap—taking online relationships and shared values and manifesting them in physical space where deeper collaboration becomes possible.
The ultimate test will be whether these communities can maintain their advantages as they grow, whether they can develop economic models that don't depend on external income, and whether they can navigate the political challenges that come with success. But for now, 150 people from 100 countries are proving that the future of human organization doesn't have to look like the past.
