The Decentralist Movement |
[Reprinted from Land and Freedom, July-August 1940]
|
Where is Rurban Corners? Rurban is that kind of community that is established outside the speculative greenbelt area of our cities by a dozen or more families who have
bought their land at farmland prices because they tired of
paying high urban rent to landlords. Rurban is the community created by an ever-growing decentralization movement on
the part of people who no longer want to live in over-crowded cities. The adult male members of this community will
keep one foot in the city, taking from its sustenance that
which is necessary to build houses, buy cars, and the other
mass production goods that today can only be secured from
monopoly. But beyond that, these people will not contribute
one iota of money or population to monopoly land values.
They will produce the primary necessities of life of their individual one or two-acre plots, and produce them at less cost
(labor cost, mark you) than in the exchange market.
Consider the outgo of the average $1500 to $3000 family
income. A fourth of it goes for shelter (and in New York
this factor comes closer to being a third of a man's income).
Food and raiment take most of the rest, leaving possibly
fifteen per cent for transportation, luxuries, health requirements, insurance, and gratuities. In order to satisfy the desires of the average family it has become commonplace for
the wife to take a job in industry or commerce. Startling
repercussions to our social life have resulted.
Ralph Borsodi, who conducts the School of Living, at
Suffern, N.Y., in the realization that most $1500 to $3000
families living in big cities either do not own their homes, or
spend a life-time paying for them, asked the question: Why
not encourage a way of life that promotes home-owning
without sacrifice to other needs? Why not make it possible
for the young housewife to produce at home for direct consumption what she was producing for exchange in the office
or the store or the factory? Why not find a means whereby
children will be considered an asset, as of old, and not a
liability, as they are today?
Mr. Borsodi realized that so long as Georgeists continued
to aid landlordism by supplying urban centers with their
population, just so long would they be nurturing the condition we are trying to rectify. Consequently, he removed
his own family from the city to set up its Rurban productive
homestead. He established the School of Living in the first
productive homestead community that was developed from
his researches and instruction.
Here is Rurban Corners, a hypothetical homestead community started outside any city in America. This community,
let us say, was created out of the endeavors of a couple of
families who discussed the possibilities of collectively improving their economic status in a strangulated economy of
exchange. When there are a half dozen couples in this group,
a credit union is formed, and incorporated. This little banking institution creates a credit backlog on which money can
be borrowed from a bank or loan association for the purchase of land at farmland prices within commuting distance
of the city.
With this land as equity the first group of prospective
homesteaders takes the plunge. An architect, possibly one
who has joined the decentralized group, draws plans for the
houses. Perhaps some of the homesteaders will use basic
plans that can be procured from the School of Living, because these plans embody the experience of homestead
dwelling construction.
Each family, as it pays off its loan from the credit union,
replenishes the banking fountain with funds for the development of new homes, by the enlarging group of urbanites who
will be following the initial participants.
Throughout all this program of Rurban preparation and
Rurban living, it is valuable for every homesteader to seek
the services of the School of Living. Bulletins have been
prepared showing the contrast in the cost of direct production of foodstuff and raiment against the cost of these
needs in the exchange labor market. It is conservatively estimated (based on five years of homestead statistics compiled
by the School of Living) that the average housewife who
plans her work as she would have to do in the city job will
spend less hours of labor a day. Her productive effort should
average about a thousand dollars a year.
But have not most economists argued for an extreme division of labor? Yes, but Henry George himself has pointed
out that there is a point of diminishing return in that division (Progress and Poverty, Book I, ch. 5). I propose to
show that decentralist homesteading not only offsets the so-called economies of mass production, but serves as a powerful factor in bringing socially-minded people into the Georgeist fold, and bringing Georgeism into our economy.
The price of an article in mass production has always been
established at its point of manufacture. This is usually about
one-fifth to one-third of what the consumer pays for it.
Warehousing, cross-country transportation, refrigeration,
vast accounting structures, advertising and retailing have
brought the price of goods far beyond the cost of initial
production. Granted that distribution is a part of production;
still, if I can produce my primary needs at a lower cost than
I can exchange my services for these needs, is it not better
that I produce them? If by cooperative action, men in a
homestead community can produce goods at a lower cost
than they can buy in the world market against their services,
is it not better to achieve that reward in a community of
low economic rent? Is it not better to let urban landlords
find their properties deserted as a result of denying capital
and labor opportunity to secure a fair return for services?
I am of the opinion that there is nothing so challenging
to vested landlordism as the de-urbanization of our cities. A
coordinated decentralist program that embraces a limited exchange brings us nearer to the goal of Georgeism. Five million families in as many years removing themselves from
urban centers, and telling municipal government and landlords why they are homesteading, will create some mental
disturbances among the status quo powers' that will be salutary to correct thought. Right action will follow.
It takes imaginativeness, stamina, vision and a spirit of
adventure to make a move like this. These homesteads will
be peopled with twentieth century pioneers, analogous, to a
degree, to those who left the habits of a life-time to explore
and settle America two centuries ago. With five million
families removed from the food and part of the clothing
exchange in our wealth production, many of the husbands in
this group will lose their jobs. But these same men will be
developing cooperative factories, stores and services in the
homestead communities with far better cooperative opportunities than ever existed in modern urban exchange.
Under the auspices of the School of Living, every family
that joins an urban forum group to make preparations for
Rurban living is indoctrinated with Georgeist views immediately. The forum member becomes a prospect for the Henry
George School of Social Science, and a possible subscriber
to one of the Georgeist publications. The first factor made
clear to those joining decentralist forums is that the private
collection of the economic rent is driving them more forcibly
to insecurity so long as they maintain urban residence.
Every piece of literature coming out of the School of Living has in its bibliography a listing of Progress and Poverty. The School's library and book store is replete with
Georgeist literature for student use. An extension class of
Henry George School is conducted at the School of Living, and the forums in various cities will undoubtedly
augment the decentralist discussion with the regular ten-week course offered by the Henry George School.
The productive homestead communities are a group of
Georgeists within a township population of only modest
density, and the collective Georgeist voice is heard in each
local Town Hall, so you can well imagine what effect this
has on the politicians. You can well realize that a township
in which several rurban communities are settled soon becomes overwhelmingly Georgeist in complexion.
Can you foresee what effect such township (and later,
county) strongholds in Georgeism have on State legislative
representatives of those areas? Can you see what effect a
solid body of Georgeists has on villagers and farmers, when
the latter folk realize that the taxes on their improvements
are subsidizing urban landlords?
Yes, we have too long worked in the city. We have
proselytized; we have been Davids in the midst of Goliaths,
and our insecurity has frequently committed us to silence
for fear of reprisals from employer-monopolists. There is
real opportunity in the homestead movement for quicker
understanding to fellow citizens of what constitutes a natural economic order.
|