How Would the Gulch Not Devolve Into Statism?
Posted by CircuitGuy 11 years, 2 months ago to Government
Talking about my question of *where* a Gulch could be located, Lana wrote "Maybe the real first step is to form a group of serious members and outline the goals of such a community."
That made me realize I'm not even sure what a Gulch government would be like. Suppose somehow a libertarian state comes into existence. How would it be different from the US?:
1. Self-reliance - The first generation there would be self-reliant by definition. The struggle would be pass those values to all the children.
2. Regulations - Maybe some things that are handled by regulations would be handled by courts in the Gulch. Regulations in the US control things that used to be settled by litigation, making the US less litigious than it used to be. Would the Gulch keep some regulations but keep them more narrowly focused on activities that have a clear proven cost on others?
3. Taxes - Most people who think taxes are too high want to maintain spending on at least one of the three largest areas of spending: military, Social Security / Medicare, Welfare for the poor. It's a cliche that politicians like to say "I'll balance the budget without raising taxes, or touching Social Security or the military," Unless we agree to cut all those things, there need to be separate Gulches. That means when some evildoers are laying the possible foundation for WWIII, our response has to be, “we have a small army supported by minutemen if the evildoers come here.” If grandma becomes paralyzed by a stroke, the family and maybe people from her church get ready to open their pocketbooks or provide care once she spends through her $200k life savings in four year's time. I say people can rise to those occasions, but would we have to resist the temptation to look to gov't for a solution.
4. Weapons - In my mind there's a continuum between banning mild weapons such as pepper spray and allowing people to build weapons of mass destruction. Most Gulch citizens would want to allow shotguns, semi-auto rifles, and handguns. There might be debate about someone who wants to protect his house with a UAV equipped with high explosives. If there were a Gulch would the same gun debate persist but just about different weapons?
5. War on Drugs / Terror – The simple solution is to treat drugs as a medical problem for those who seek addiction treatment and treat “terrorism” as a criminal problem using the same court system that tries people who commit murders for more quotidian motives, e.g. to get the insurance money. Would everyone buy into that?
6. Disgusting Behavior – Disgusting behavior is grown adults flirting with 12 y/o boys and girls, someone contacting the family of a murder victim claiming to know how the victim died as cruel prank, lewd behavior in public, burning flags or other items held as sacred to get attention, drawing pictures glamorizing rape, incest, murder, etc. Do we just allow these things as the price of liberty? Do we state somehow in the Constitution, we won't give in and start using force to stop disgusting behavior.
Suddenly I think the biggest problem with Gulch is NOT where to hide it or how to coexist with existing power structures. It's how not to slide back to statism. On all six (6) of those issues, I can see us going from a very free society to right back where we are-- a little island micronation with moderately high taxes, with half the taxes going to defense, and half going to social spending, and all other gov't functions sustained through borrowing. The same people who defend their right to have an automatic rifle, want men with guns to protect the children from drugs and other human problems. That's depressing. If you tell me, "but taxes would be 25% less b/c we wouldn't be buying baby formula for some irresponsible single parents and we wouldn't be subsidizing grandma's medical care," it doesn't make it that much less depressing. Great, instead of sending 40% of our profits in fed and state quarterly estimates, we get to send 30% of our profits. That's a small step toward liberty, but not libertarian paradise.
If I want a liberal paradise where the vast majority are politically liberal, work in jobs related to research, science, and technology, and believe in respecting civil liberties even for unpopular things like polyamory, I already live there. My luck I was born here. I have heard there are rightwing versions all over. How do we get the libertarian version?
Even assuming the Gulch magically existed in the open and other gov't's and peoples of the world left it alone and never attempted to meddle, how would we keep the Gulch from devolving into statism?
That made me realize I'm not even sure what a Gulch government would be like. Suppose somehow a libertarian state comes into existence. How would it be different from the US?:
1. Self-reliance - The first generation there would be self-reliant by definition. The struggle would be pass those values to all the children.
2. Regulations - Maybe some things that are handled by regulations would be handled by courts in the Gulch. Regulations in the US control things that used to be settled by litigation, making the US less litigious than it used to be. Would the Gulch keep some regulations but keep them more narrowly focused on activities that have a clear proven cost on others?
3. Taxes - Most people who think taxes are too high want to maintain spending on at least one of the three largest areas of spending: military, Social Security / Medicare, Welfare for the poor. It's a cliche that politicians like to say "I'll balance the budget without raising taxes, or touching Social Security or the military," Unless we agree to cut all those things, there need to be separate Gulches. That means when some evildoers are laying the possible foundation for WWIII, our response has to be, “we have a small army supported by minutemen if the evildoers come here.” If grandma becomes paralyzed by a stroke, the family and maybe people from her church get ready to open their pocketbooks or provide care once she spends through her $200k life savings in four year's time. I say people can rise to those occasions, but would we have to resist the temptation to look to gov't for a solution.
4. Weapons - In my mind there's a continuum between banning mild weapons such as pepper spray and allowing people to build weapons of mass destruction. Most Gulch citizens would want to allow shotguns, semi-auto rifles, and handguns. There might be debate about someone who wants to protect his house with a UAV equipped with high explosives. If there were a Gulch would the same gun debate persist but just about different weapons?
5. War on Drugs / Terror – The simple solution is to treat drugs as a medical problem for those who seek addiction treatment and treat “terrorism” as a criminal problem using the same court system that tries people who commit murders for more quotidian motives, e.g. to get the insurance money. Would everyone buy into that?
6. Disgusting Behavior – Disgusting behavior is grown adults flirting with 12 y/o boys and girls, someone contacting the family of a murder victim claiming to know how the victim died as cruel prank, lewd behavior in public, burning flags or other items held as sacred to get attention, drawing pictures glamorizing rape, incest, murder, etc. Do we just allow these things as the price of liberty? Do we state somehow in the Constitution, we won't give in and start using force to stop disgusting behavior.
Suddenly I think the biggest problem with Gulch is NOT where to hide it or how to coexist with existing power structures. It's how not to slide back to statism. On all six (6) of those issues, I can see us going from a very free society to right back where we are-- a little island micronation with moderately high taxes, with half the taxes going to defense, and half going to social spending, and all other gov't functions sustained through borrowing. The same people who defend their right to have an automatic rifle, want men with guns to protect the children from drugs and other human problems. That's depressing. If you tell me, "but taxes would be 25% less b/c we wouldn't be buying baby formula for some irresponsible single parents and we wouldn't be subsidizing grandma's medical care," it doesn't make it that much less depressing. Great, instead of sending 40% of our profits in fed and state quarterly estimates, we get to send 30% of our profits. That's a small step toward liberty, but not libertarian paradise.
If I want a liberal paradise where the vast majority are politically liberal, work in jobs related to research, science, and technology, and believe in respecting civil liberties even for unpopular things like polyamory, I already live there. My luck I was born here. I have heard there are rightwing versions all over. How do we get the libertarian version?
Even assuming the Gulch magically existed in the open and other gov't's and peoples of the world left it alone and never attempted to meddle, how would we keep the Gulch from devolving into statism?
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
Interesting thought, isn't it?
Here's another thought: eliminate fiat currency entirely. If all currency was merely a representation of an actual item of value (gold, silver, platinum, etc.) then neither a private nor government bank can rip people off by printing money.
In other words, John Galt, with Midas Mulligan's help, decided the term of the strike would be INDEFINITE. And one does not sustain a virtual community indefinitely.
Furthermore, Ellis Wyatt, Andrew Stockton, et al. needed a real community to retreat to. After their public decamping from Wyatt's Junction, Colorado, and its various communities (Marshville, Hammondton, etc.), they had to HIDE. And they weren't comfortable with hiding in plain sight.
And any virtual community needs a real counterpart to sustain it. Whether that's the United States Mail or the Internet Corporation for the Assignment of Names and Numbers. Only the very real community of Galt's Gulch could be beyond the reach of either.
If the gulch is created in the US what would be the assumptions that it would have to work with?
I was assuming that the gulch would have to have a strategy to deal with the US government and all of its demands. I assumed that the strategy would strive to hold onto as much of the earnings of its
members as possible. That in the creation of wealth in the gulch that the interactions with the US government would skewed in favor of the gulch by taking advantage of the current laws etc....etc
Someone or some entity will have to deal with the outside world.
point 2. I have a hard time seeing the Gulch today as land based. I think its members would be much more effective as a virtual community. You can "re-charge" no matter where you are and what you are accomplishing on the "outside."
2. The society is basically feudal in that one man, i.e. Midas Mulligan, owns all the land. In the Middle Ages, he would carry the title of Duke, meaning one who can lead. To be sure, this society does not have all the trappings of feudalism. No one is bound to the land. MIdas might own the land, and its mineral wealth, and can lease it out to whomever will strike a good enough deal with him. But he does not own anyone's labor on any part of that land.
3. Remember what a privateer is: a sea raider who works under license. This, as opposed to a buccaneer, or one who seizes wealth by force for his own benefit without regard to anyone's rights.
These are just ideas on beating the tax system given that nothing will be done to change it.
MYOB -- Mind Your Own Business.
You have the right to say no to anyone about anything.
In 1776 these would be givens. In 2014 they have to be spelled out.
1. why Rearden over Wyatt on the safety committee?
2. why is it a feudal society? Classic definition is not Rand-like. I mean serfs, the only way to advance was through the military (protection) etc...
3. I love the privateering angle. Ragnar's "take back to gulch"
I read your earlier comment about your profession. db's brother is a pathologist and has a lab in Mayo and his dad had his own lab in western Kansas for many years.
A takeover can come entirely from within. In business there is a saying, "From shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations."
I do not know how to defend against takeovers. The recommendation I have heard is eternal vigilance.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Galt%27s_Gu...
Galt's Gulch is a feudal society. Membership, don't forget, is by invitation only. So the ultimate sentence for overly irrational behavior is banishment.
Midas Mulligan is the feudal landlord. He, Francisco, Hank Rearden, and Ragnar Danneskjöld are the primary stakeholders. These four form a Committee of Safety--though actually Midas sends John Galt to act as his proxy on that Committee.
Committees of Safety classically consist of a combination of those who have the biggest stakes in law and order, and those specialists in the application of force who are best able, and motivated, to exert force when the Committee deems it necessary. Midas, Francisco, and Hank (after he joins) are stakeholders. (So will Dagny be, once she builds a railroad to serve Francisco's copper mine.) Ragnar is a force specialist. He has a ship, and a method for defense (or offense). The others can best afford to pay for that defense, because they have the most to lose from either:
A) invasion, or
B) a breakdown in law and order.
The people pay rents to Midas, but do not pay taxes as such. (Taxes are "moneys paid to ensure law and order," from the Greek "taxei" meaning "order.") Instead, Midas, Francisco, and Hank pony up most of the funds, and provide volunteer guards where needed. Ragnar does his sea raiding and, I imagine, takes a little bit off the top as his fee in addition to making full restitution to the strikers.
Everyone is allowed to have any sort of weapon he deems necessary. But in an invitation-only community, crime never pays, because crime can never last.
Seats on the Committee of Safety are open to anyone willing to support its activities in a big-enough way. But that Committee has no authority to lay or collect taxes, duties, imposts, or excises. Remember: these are civic-minded, and like-minded, individuals who have the most to lose, so they exert the greatest effort. Anyone who thinks the Committee is over looking anything, is invited to join. But "if you're gonna stay, you gotta play."
Questions?
Your talking about a non-proft company to provide for everyones needs?!
I would say all of the shortcuts (regulations) the US has used to avoid writng law or litigation is precisely the avenue used by statists. Our Constitution was designed to resist change and move slowly to make sure footed steps. In activity in COngress is the best thing fro the counry... look what happens when they run.
It has never happened, and will never happen. The most free nations have eventually devolved, it is the cycle of the body politic. If you've never seen it, you need to look at it.
This cycle has been observed so many times in history that it may as well be called a law. People in Bondage are emboldened by Spiritual Truth. Spiritual Truth gives them Great Courage. From Great Courage they earn their Liberty. Liberty yields Abundance. Abundance eventually devolves into Selfishness. Selfishness yields Complacency. Complacency matures into Apathy. Apathy turns into Dependence. And Dependence once again puts the original founders' descendants back into Bondage.
And so, when you all want to whine and complain at me here, yet again, about how I bring up religious liberty and *gasp* spiritual truth, plainly detailed in the Bible, then fine, whatever... I'm just telling you what's happened already. If you want to preserve freedom, you need perfect human beings. Ain't ever been one of those on this planet, except one time.
BUT, if you at least have people striving to follow those perfect principles, then you can preserve it longer than you otherwise would be able to. But all men fail eventually. I don't think even a nation governed by true (not fake) Christian men can last indefinitely, because they're all imperfect human beings.
Don't form a state.
Load more comments...