South Island Independence Movement - Micronation versus Veneered Separatism?

“For Our People, Our Island & Our Future!”
The South Island Independence Movement (SIIM) was established in 2013, when Solomon Tor-Kilsen (STK), then running the Timaru youth centre “ZR Klub”, (now rebranded South Zealandia) launched its digital platform advocating South Island autonomy. SIIM promotes a vision of regional autonomy anchored in grievances over regional economic marginalisation, centralized state control and perceived government overreach. Re-emerging amid New Zealand’s Covid-era ‘freedom’ collectives and broader ‘Alt-New Zealand’ milieu of government opposition, SIIM channelled similar grievances over health mandates and institutional distrust into its own project. A project buttressed through prosocial strategies and a side business selling novelties and sweets. 

While framed as a sovereign initiative, SIIM proposes “The Free Realm of South Zealandia” (FRSZ) complete with its own currency, flag, military and a constitution anchored in natural law [lore] concepts. Numerous monologues are dedicated to ‘state building’ with references to the British Empire, USSR, and false equivalencies to several countries including South Africa and Greece. STK’s constitution interprets a menu of “rights” and states those rights are enforceable by “any means necessary”, including armed resistance - “from the barrel of a gun”. A strong sense of regional identity and euro-centric nationalism is evident in the focus on nation building. Policies include a limitation on foreign ownership of land, resources, and infrastructure, requiring what SIIM deem as ‘non-citizens’ to divest assets or face auction. 

More recently, SIIM allied with ‘Settlor Asset Protection’ (SAP) to promote a gold and silver exchange which reinforces its sovereign-styled sentiment and distrust of mainstream institutions. SAP’s connection to SIIM is presented as a way to “fortify the Southern Economy” and online posts encourage people to use a code “TSBE” ( Timaru Settlor Bullion Exchange) so a percentage goes towards the creation of regional bullion depositories around the South Island. The claim is made that the banks are able to legally seize people’s money to keep them solvent hence “protect yourself now with people who care about the future”. However, these sovereign pseudolegal tactics appear to be an entry-point, beyond them SIIM’s framework expands into a broader anti-government, anti-institutional, exclusionary nationalist agenda. Additionally such efforts may raise the ire of the Commerce Comission and Inland Revenue (IRD) if monetary services / payments are truly taking place. 

Expanded Ideological Framing and Affiliations:

The project is framed around self-governance and national pride however citizenship is stratified by financial contribution (to a mainstream bank) which suggests a hierarchal and exclusionist national identity.  That reflection correlates with SIIM’s documented overlap with known white supremacy entities. For example, STK’s involvement with online groups “Make New Zealand Great Again” and “Kiwis against the Islamification of NZ”, the latter of which was removed by Facebook.

In a 2017 interview with journalist Kirsty Johnston, STK explicitly self-identified as “alt-right”. He argued that the online groups represent genuine concerns about immigration and “New Zealand”, adding “We get called racist, xenophobic, backward…”, before making a statement that problematically conflated all Muslims with terrorism. One 2017 tweet included the hashtags #NotAllWhitePeople #Leftishhypocrisy and promoted “Remember the real victims of this attack – white people – who will now face a backlash” after the Finsbury Mosque attacks in the United Kingdom. 

A element of consideration in any analysis of SIIM are the publicly visible telegram interactions that clearly link SIIM’s profile to white supremacy actors, such Action Zealandia, Kyle Chapman, and Independent Nationalists New Zealand (INNZ), the latter led by Philip Arps. Furthermore, unmoderated SIIM online content has included questionable Osama bin Laden memes, and includes endorsement of ‘Nuremburg 2.0’ for politicians, journalists and “experts”. Notably, unlike sovereign/pseudolaw entities in New Zealand, SIIM’s manifesto ignores the Treaty of Waitangi or any Maori sovereignty claims, underscoring a predominately Euro-centric nationalism lens of assimilation. Moreover, SIIM’s discourse fits within the broader ‘Alt-New Zealand’ milieu, wherein anti-government actors repurpose cultural anxieties, particularly over covid-era restrictions and institutional distrust to challenge state legitimacy. 

In parallel with its conceptual structure, SIIM initiatives promote a program of community mobilisation designed to anchor its separatist ambitions in public life. For example, “community pride days”  to foster regional identity, however such events potentially double as soft-power recruitment tools and reinforcing a narrative of cultural reclamation and South Island exceptionalism.  In addition, STK advocates for the placement of political candidates that would help facilitate the FRSZ concept. Hence the involvement of Helen Houghton, leader of the New Conservative Party as not only a supporter, but as a speaker at SIIM events (2023), suggests an alignment between SIIM and elements of New Zealand’s fringe conservative political spectrum. By hosting a minor party leader, SIIM gains a veneer of political legitimacy, while the New Conservative Party benefits from alignment with a highly mobilised, albeit radical, audience regardless of size. 

As both a youth activity organiser (via “South Zealandia”) and SIIM founder, STK’s  activities have drawn concern from officials. For example, MP Andrew Falloon flagged SIIM’s content as harboring  anti- immigration and  Islamophobic rhetoric among other concerns. Senior Sergeant Antony Callon (NZ Police, Timaru) was quoted as saying that much of the ideology expressed on SIIM platforms “doesn’t fall into line with the values in the police as an organisation”. SIIM pages also hosted comments encouraging defiance of post-2019 Mosque attack firearm laws and reflected hostility towards any potential police enforcement. STK admitted moderation was minimal unless flagged, and that inflammatory content was used to provoke engagement. Despite public exposure, comments remained on SIIM social media that included threats of violence, hatred towards law-enforcement and paranoia about government surveillance related to the Christchurch mosque attacks

During a 2023 presentation, STK boasted his Facebook page had more “followers” than “legacy” political party New Zealand First. While SIIM claims over 35,000 followers on Facebook, audits of social media did not substantiate this claim. In addtion, its Instagram had 19 followers, and X/Twitter had 145 followers. Actual engagement ranges from zero to under 100 reactions across social media, and real-world traction is difficult to quantify. A 2023 petition to Government General obtained 607 signatures indicates a ‘strong in narratives’ image while weaker in actual mobilisation. Regardless, these figures fall far short of the 50,000 plus citizens SIIM seeks to declare full sovereignty. In addition, follower numbers may actually reflect Covid-er dissent, populist drift, or general  disenfranchisement with political representation.

Although SIIM invokes the language of micro-nations, its core proposition aligns with that of  a functioning state rather than true sovereign believe doctrine or dissent . SIIM’s use of ‘natural law’, alternative identity documents, and bullion-backed ‘settlor’ exchanges mirrors the pseudolaw memeplex identified by Netolitzky (2018) where legalistic language and hollow rights claims mask a broader anti-state project. Simultaneously, by posturing for secession and regional autonomy, SIIM taps a familiar grievance narrative as a political mobiliser. While typical micronations are usually symbolic, artistic, or lifestyle experiments with low political threat SIIM’s formal structures, policy ambitions, and rhetorical alignment with regional nationalism demonstrate veneered racial and cultural separatism rather than satirical statehood or true sovereign pseudolegal doctrine. 

————————————-

Analysis of online content indicates that SIIM’s adoption of “natural law,” alternative identity documents, and a bullion-backed “settlor” exchange is not genuinely about sovereignty or digital independence. Instead, these features are part of a broader anti-state cultural project. Cloaked in sovereign and micronational language, they act as strategic deflection, projecting a palatable exterior and plausible deniability while pursuing institutional displacement and ideological consolidation.

The emulation of state functions, manifesto, parallel governance, and stratified citizenships, signals ambitions that move beyond fringe eccentricity into the territory of opined soft separatist insurgency. By operating in a tactical grey zone between civil discontent and radical extremism, SIIM is able to mask anti-state and racialised identity goals under the guise of symbolic sovereignty. This positioning allows SIIM to evade deeper scrutiny while gradually recruiting would-be “citizens” and normalising exclusionary doctrines.

While racist motifs do appear in pseudolaw and sovereignist milieus, they usually serve as auxiliary narratives that reinforce anti-state conspiracies. SIIM, however, inverts this order: its pseudolaw and micro-national rhetoric are merely a thin legitimising veneer for a fundamentally racial separatist project, where exclusionary identity and Euro-centric nationalism are the core rather than the periphery.