Cities, wars, and culture

As the world seems intent on pretending that the latest Middle East crisis is over, and the Twelve Days of War is all that there is going to be, we here at TPOL have our doubts.

As do many others, especially lovers of liberty. The idiotic and often fatal games people in power play are not over. Iran, Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and especially the FedGov and the EU and UK all have their hands in the pot: and don’t care if they get burned, because only the expendables will really get hurt. The prospect that a Putin, a Supreme Leader, an Israeli PM or a British one, or a POTUS, are going to get injured and killed by “enemy action” from some other nation is of very low probability.

The possibility of an American airman or British trooper – or especially a Revolutionary Guard or IDF soldier or Russian infantryman or a dozen others? Injured, maimed, killed? The probability is near unity.

Why? Because power and wealth trump the value of human lives to those who have the power in this world: political and social and economic.

There have been times in history when that seemed to be changing – and perhaps it did: Exodus, the overthrow of the Roman monarchy, the American Revolution, the Texas Revolution? Perhaps. Perhaps even the English Civil War and before that the Medes and Persians defeat of Babylon, or whatever events led to the abandonment of the cliff dwelling in the Southwest might have changed things for a time.But as a rule, world history is full of tyranny, of masters lauding it over slaves (whatever they are called), and of men and women seeking and fighting for, and all too often dying without, freedom.

Which brings us to the discussion of cities. Cities are a tool of control, and have been since the time of Nimrod and the establishment of Babel (better known as Babylon). And honestly, cities are bad places. Oh, as Jim Rickards recently pointed out, there are a few nice things about cities. (But frankly, the same things are available in areas that are NOT urban – and sometimes not even really suburban or rural, but are frontier areas). Arts, museums, diversions of all kinds, fancy restaurants, libraries, educational opportunities are all to be found even in small communities. Even Jim recognizes (even if he downplays it) that cities have massive problems: crime, noise, pollution, and more.

So as he points out the exodus from urban areas is ongoing and growing. More and more people are fleeing. But we at TPOL suggest that the real reasons are as much due to matters of tyranny, of massive and growing control, as to the physical and mental downsides of living in cities.

Has this not been the case throughout history? The cities are “wealth-generating” but they are also both wealth consuming and make it easier for the parasites to steal from those who have and generate the wealth. (Even from each other.) Lovers of liberty, including Jefferson and Spooner, have long promoted rural society and culture as being the breeding ground of liberty, and the bulwark of freedom. Again, we see that in history: it took the semi-nomad Abram and his workers to rescue the kings of cities who were attacked, robbed, and kidnapped by the rulers of bigger cities way back in 2000 BC or so. It wasn’t the dwellers of the urban core of Roma that fought (and admittedly, were led on) for liberty in ancient Italy, it was the independent yeoman farmers. Yes, it was the denizens of Boston who triggered the War for American Independence but it was the rural farmers and merchants of Massachusetts and Connecticut and the planters of Virginia and Georgia who provided the bodies and arms that let the Thirteen State secede from the Empire.

Why? Not just the fact that it is more difficult for the parasites, the powers-that-be to loot and control the people of rural and frontier areas. Not just because things are usually more healthy and more dispersed and more tied to things that cities seek to control and often to prevent or destroy. It is also because of culture.

The culture of cities is a culture of dependence. It is a society in which freedom of action is restrained, not just by government edict, but by the need to conform and restrict. Even self-governors give up most of their freedom in the most libertarian of urban settings. You have to be careful that your elbow does not accidentally end up coming in contact with someone else’s nose (or worse).

On the other hand, rural and especially frontier areas (that is, areas with low population density and “elbow room”) give you more opportunity for liberty. Not just as self-reliant individuals (though that is possible far more than in cities) but for voluntary cooperation between people. People in churches, people in businesses, people in organizations, and even people in limited forms of nonmandatory “government.” And especially, living in rural and frontier areas teaches a sense of our place in the universe, personal responsibility, and provides time to reflect on things. That even 16th Century London or 1st Century BC Jerusalem or 10th Century Angor Wat could not provide.

Yes, supposedly “civilization” is based on cities. But there is no requirement to do so, especially not with the current technology we have: communications, transportation, and machines that can and do make life far easier. But can, as always, turn into tools for evil: for tyranny and abuse.

The choice is ours. Fifty different restaurants, a dozen different entertainment venues, a plethora of (increasingly poor quality) educational opportunities? Or just a few choices but with space to grow and live free? And honestly, be the kind of humans we were created to be? Again, the choice is ours.

READ MORE