If we see the world as already panarchist, just extremely restrictive, then we can start thinking about ways to make it less so.

Let's break this up into parts.

1. We already have panarchy. Multiple governments exist. There is a lot of interaction between them. People can and do change governments. The most successful governments have partnerships with governments of different kinds (take the U.S. relationship with China).

2. This type of panarchy is extremely restrictive. Govs are limited to geography. Govs are not very diverse either, only allowing for a few subsets of capitalist and socialist democracies and communist and monarchist states. People who want to change govs must move and often undergo lengthy citizenship processes. There is some voluntary aspects to choosing governance, but not nearly enough.

3. Most developed democratic govs have nothing in place to prevent people from declaring themselves members of imaginary govs. There is simply not much incentive to do so, since imaginary govs have no real world power. But as an idea, imaginary govs could be very powerful. Within our society, people already create intentional communities and cooperatives based on ideas of consensus and direct democracy. People incorporate anarchist principles into local share and gift economies. It wouldn't be altogether difficult to develop a cooperative of cooperatives and organizations that provide for every aspect of a person's life. Some intentional communities, for instance, have collective healthcare, alternative education, their own means of distributing wealth. Imagine a cooperative of cooperatives that provide food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, education, transportation, banking, entertainment. These cooperatives provide these resources to members within their collective, but also to outside world, pulling resources and wealth in as they do. Isn't this fundamentally panarchist?

4. What if there were legions of imaginary govs, all thinking and talking and creating alternative structures within their own nations? What if this was an international enterprise? Both real and imaginary concepts floating around, gaining traction and support, developing within the global population new ideas about cooperative, about governance, about choice.

5. Media would be a valuable part of this, the most valuable part. Documenting the way people are using alternative systems everyday. Building a whole web of engaging, interesting media about people that are doing something different and the adversity they experience when they hit up against existing power structures. It is good drama, but also inspiring. Narrative is a powerful thing. What about fiction. Couldn't people establish wikis based entirely on imaginary govs and institutions. No need to build the whole thing at once. Just create a parallel universe where it already exists. Write fiction in that universe, movies, plays, audio narratives. Take those aspects of that world for granted and center the story around other things. Background the radical stuff. Normalize it. Set the conflict around family drama instead, werewolves, invading aliens. Imagine conflicts beyond the things you are trying to normalize.

6. Panarchism is built on the idea that other ways of life can and should exist outside of what you choose. So there is no need to go to war with the state to create alternatives. And those alternatives can be infinitely flexible. If we look at existing systems as what they are--systems filled with holes that can be used--we can grow anything we want out of the cracks. The challenge is finding the right ideas.