I'd vote for this book.
That's about it. Hollywood
is about the cash.
Posted on 08/06/2005 6:46:16 AM PDT by schaketo
History affords many unfortunate examples of groups that failed to propagate their cultural beliefs and adapt their behaviors to changing circumstances and environments. Some of these groups were absorbed or otherwise eclipsed by larger groups that came to dominate them, while others suffered complete cultural extinction. A prime example of the latter is the Shoshonian Sheep-Eaters of the American West, who, in the 1700s, numbered in the thousands and lived the good life. Their traditional lifestyle limited family size to only one or two children, putting them at a distinct disadvantage when tens of thousands of aggressive foreign tribes moved in on them in the early 1800s and drastically changed their environment. The Sheep-Eaters failed to adapt to the new situation. They changed neither their reproduction rate, nor their way of life. They also failed to recruit new members from other tribes. The new people, unwilling to accommodate or even tolerate the Sheep-Eaters way of life, created an environment hostile to the Sheep-Eater's cultural and physical existence. In the mid-1800s the last few destitute surviving Sheep-Eaters asked the Crow tribe for protection. During the next fifty years, the Sheep-Eaters became culturally Crow, resulting in the extinction of Sheep-Eater culture, values, language, and philosophy.
Perhaps the Sheep-Eaters could have engaged in rational debate with the hostile tribes and won new members to their own tribe, thus ensuring their tribe's continued existence. However, it is more likely that the Sheep-Eaters could have survived by simply adding more children to the tribe, either via procreation or adoption. Their failure to do so resulted in their becoming an unfortunate example of cultural extinction, and a social/political model to avoid. Libertarians by emulating the Sheep-Eaters Model are perhaps only a generation or two away from the same fate.
To avoid the Sheep-Eater's fate, libertarians should look for successful political-cultural models, not only for survival purposes, but also for expanding liberty in Montana and the West. The best example of a successful Western model is the Mormons (Latter-Day Saints). With only a few thousand hardy pioneers, the Mormons picked the very worst area of the real West to immigrate (the Great Salt Lake and surrounding barren desert), and within two generations created a Greater Zion that reflected their philosophy. Rather than waste their efforts in futile attempts to convert their numerous critics, they invested their energies to creating and adopting children.
Mormons have always recruited to expand their ranks, as have various other waning or floundering groups, such as Lutherans, Unitarians and the Flat Earth Society. Doubtless, there are other factors involved, but it seems that having large families was the most significant factor in the rapid growth of these groups. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young knew that to guarantee the success of their cause, they needed to persuade Mormons to make more Mormons at a much faster rate than their enemies. Mormon culture encouraged families to be as large as possible, and to adopt children if they could not conceive them. Indeed, not too many years ago, Mormons looked down on families with less than nine or ten children. The Wyoming Mormon "Wild Bill" Hickman had 34 known children (perhaps a bridge too far).
In the mid-19th Century, when the Sheep-Eaters were dying out, a Mormon nuclear family (not polygamist and 80+% pf the LDS) averaged eight to nine children. The population of the Mormons grew from 11,999 in 1850 to 44,000 in 1860, to 87,000 in 1870. to 143,000 in 1880, and to 277,000 by 1890. Some of the growth can be explained by conversions, but a large factor in the growth was their large number of children both naturally conceived and adopted.
Several other factors aided the Saints in their domination of greater Zion, most of which libertarians in Montana can replicate:
A. Parents, as well as passing on their genetic make-up, also tended to pass on their beliefs and values to their children.
B. Relative isolation from hostile groups helped in generating the society desired by reducing outside influences.
C. Geographic concentration of their reproductive efforts within Utah and greater Zion increased the speed and probability that the local environment could be changed or kept suitable for making more Mormons. If early Mormons had dispersed across the nation, they probably would have faced extinction in a hostile environment they were powerless to change.
D. Loosely structured grassroots' leadership constantly encouraged the philosophy of the Saints.
The Mormon Procreation Model has accomplished the following in Utah and greater Zion (among others):
A. A state and culture that reflects their values at all levels: political, economic, social, cultural, and moral.
B. Recognition and acceptance outside their culture by others, whether those others like them or not.
C. Because the Mormons have won the war of numbers in greater Zion, smaller families are now possible (a luxury that winners can afford).
In Montana and the Triad (Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming), it should be possible for serious libertarians to follow the Mormon Procreation Model. The New Libertarian Paradigm Model should be similar to the Saints in regards to family size and in the selection of a gathering point for us to live -- the libertarian's Zion of Montana, and "Greater Zion" of Idaho and Wyoming.
If libertarians would commit to having large families, real liberty in the lifetime of the young would be a reality in less than fifty years. It isn't possible for some libertarians to have giant families because of age or economic conditions, a fact that makes it even more important for younger Libertarians in the middle-income group to have more children (8-12+ children). If libertarians followed the Mormon model in Montana, there would be ever increasing gains in liberty over the next fifty years. Adjusting for today's drastically lower infant, child, and adult death rates, the Mormon model suggests that if 8,500 libertarians moved to Montana by 2010, by the year 2060 there would be 250,000 new libertarians in the state. That number when combined with the native freedom-seekers would give libertarians political control of Montana with or without conversions. However, it should be expected that so many new liberty-minded people would generate thousands of converts. Of course, if each libertarian averaged more than just five children, Montana would become a liberty zone even faster. The New Hampshire Free State Project intends to get 10,000 freedom types there in the near future. Such numbers in Montana, if the New Libertarian Paradigm is followed (at just the 5-child rate per libertarian), would generate enough libertarians by the second generation to permit virtual political control over Montana, and in another single generation, over the entire Triad.
Even with a 250,000+ increase in Montana's population (counting all three generational survivors), the state would still have far fewer people than many Eastern states that are considered rural. Montana is also several times larger than most states. Thus, such numbers would have minimal impact on elbow-space and the Western way of life (Metro Spokane, Washington has more people).
Some libertarian friends are prone to note that they cannot afford to have over one or two children, and certainly not five or six. Perhaps libertarians are less industrious than Zion's Mormons and Montana's Hmong and Hutterites (all rapidly expanding groups). Maybe it is because the here and now materialism and the good-life (remember the Sheep-Eaters) is more desirable to them than their survival or the rapid expansion of liberty? Liberty isn't free, and economic sacrifices (?) are needed for freedom to flourish and spread. It should also be mentioned that Mormons et al. believe that large families make things much easier for them in old age. Seven or eight grown children can help take care of their parents much better than one or two or none.
In summation, Libertarians moving to Montana (or the Triad) should commit themselves to:
A. Having large families (Thomas Jefferson Model) of at least five or six children via procreation, adoption, or, ideally, both.
B. Instilling and promoting libertarian values to all their children, and not wasting effort on those who will never accept libertarian philosophy.
C. Making the necessary (if needed) sacrifices in the short term to guarantee liberty in Montana (or the Triad) in two to three generations.
D. Consider reducing family size once Montana (or the Triad) is a liberty zone.
Individuals interested in becoming involved with the Montana and Triad movement might wish to join chats groups such as the Western Alliance for Liberty (W-A-L) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/W-A-L/ and the Free Montana Project http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreeMontanaProject/ , or the Free Western Alliance at www.freewest.org/ .
There's a lady who's sure all that glitters is gold
And she's buying a stairway to heaven.
When she gets there she knows, if the stores are all closed
With a word she can get what she came for.
Ooh, ooh, and she's buying a stairway to heaven.
There's a sign on the wall but she wants to be sure
'Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings.
In a tree by the brook, there's a songbird who sings,
Sometimes all of our thoughts are misgiven.
Ooh, it makes me wonder,
Ooh, it makes me wonder.
There's a feeling I get when I look to The WEST,
And my spirit is crying for leaving.
In my thoughts I have seen rings of smoke through the trees,
And the voices of those who standing looking.
Ooh, it makes me wonder,
Ooh, it really makes me wonder.
And it's whispered that soon if we all call the tune
Then the piper will lead us to reason.
And a new day will dawn for those who stand long
And the forests will echo with laughter.
If there's a bustle in your hedgerow, don't be alarmed now,
It's just a spring clean for the May queen.
Yes, there are two paths you can go by, but in the long run
There's still time to change the road you're on.
And it makes me wonder.
Your head is humming and it won't go, in case you don't know,
The piper's calling you to join him,
Dear lady, can you hear the wind blow, and did you know
Your stairway lies on the whispering wind.
And as we wind on down the road
Our shadows taller than our soul.
There walks a lady we all know
Who shines white light and wants to show
How everything still turns to gold.
And if you listen very hard
The tune will come to you at last.
When all are one and one is all --
To be a rock and not to roll . . .
And she's buying a stairway to heaven.
Sure, if you pay the adoption fees I would gladly have five or six more kids.
If libertarians would commit to having large families, they would begin to understand that "the individual" is balanced, and in many ways trumped, by the needs of the family group. They would also learn that the Mormons succeeded primarily as a result of their reliance on God, and not some vague and individually-defined notions of "liberty."
Both of these inconvenient facts are antithetical to the notions of libertarianism, as usually promulgated. And, unlike the libertarian utopia laid out here, we know from historical demonstration that these "inconvenient facts" actually do usher in liberty; whereas the nearest we've come to seeing the libertarian ideals in action is ... Hollywood.
I have yet to meet people who regretted having too many children, though I am sure there are a few out there.
Neat - thanks for posting this. I'm a small-l libertarian, my Pop is Mormon (well... jack Mormon these days), and I have 6 little 'uns. Alas, I won't join the Montana Big Family Lib Club anytime soon, having decided Hawaii is the better locale for a large family.
This is real "family planning." Muslims are kind of ahead of us though.
Also, the public schools will subvert the values you try to pass on to your children, and television will finish the job.
Isn't support for open borders still part of the Libertarian Party's platform?
I'd vote for this book.
That's about it. Hollywood
is about the cash.
Don't find this particularly interesting or the argument very valid...
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Gee, just like the GOP's platform on immigration.
Indeed -- and how many libertarians have we seen instructing us, "let the market decide?" Libertarians may often claim to be about something other than the cash, but the practical application of libertarianism seems always to reduce to the cash.
Simply exposing kids to the Republican and 'Rat parties is usually plenty sufficient to turn them against both Big Stupid Government entities.
The title should really read, "How To Teach Your Children To Continue To Labor In Political Obscurity And Stay On The Fringe."
Hmmm, let's compare the economic and population growth rates of Nevada, argueably America's most libertarian state, vs. West Virginia. Maybe West Virgina would do some good by copying some of those libertarian values which to sum up are a belief in less government intrusion in life and business.
 |
I wasn't quite clear. I meant "about cash" to mean about the big world of complicated finances, "relationships" and strange business things. Not superficial focus on the "bottom line." Have you read this book? This book, along with Gore Vidal's review of it (collected somewhere, and open to paid Review of Books subscribers) might make your head spin. If Hollywood were simply libertarian it would make more sense! |
Maybe so. But the libertarian statement of "let the market decide" is not sensitive to such nuances. It explicitly reduces morality (about which you appear to be talking) to a bottom-line issue. As such, Hollywood does in fact demonstrate the logical endpoint of a libertarian "market morality."
Which brings us back to the root question: is there more to morality, and more to our behavior, than what "the market decides?" And if so, how can one square that with the libertarian ideal of untrammeled individualism? Libertarian theory often tends to founder here, because it usually fails to account for the existence of moral requirements that originate outside of the individual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.