Of Parties, Valentines, and Declines
February 12, 2007
7:46 a.m., MT

A few of you wonderful people have inquired as to why there’s been no mention of truffles being sold for Valentine’s Day, now just two days away. There are two reasons, and, taking the lesser one first, here they are:
1. Although 2/14 is a major day for the chocolate industry, I have long held that Valentine’s Day as we know it is a trumped-up holiday, boosted by certain business sectors into yet another “spend-as-much-as-you-can, then-spend-a-little-more” orgy of consumerism. And while I would have liked to – ahem – capitalize on some of that action, it felt smarmy even to contemplate writing text for such a page. So I didn’t.
2. We hosted a small party over the weekend. As most of the attendees live a good distance from us, accommodating their schedules was an important consideration in scheduling it. When one attendee mentioned being in the area for business this past weekend, it just made sense to have the party the same weekend, to save her a second trip. I knew there was no way I would be able to successfully juggle party preps, truffle making, and excited snolfs; so I didn’t try. Maybe that was foolish, but it led to a much less stressful week for me last week, and a very enjoyable weekend with friends. I have a few local orders that I will be able to handle over the next two days, and I’m happy with that. (They also give me an opportunity to explore some more flavor ideas, which is never a bad thing.)

One of the recurring themes of conversation at our get-together was the relative lack of social events amongst The Family. While that’s changed quite a bit over the past few years—and I think that the Liberty Round Table conclaves helped spur that change—compared to the left, our socializing remains woefully lacking. The Family seems to be more focused on activism-as-social-activity, or markets-as-culture, rather than just kicking back and having fun. Sure, activism is important (particularly outreach, in my opinion), and freer markets are sorely needed; but those two kinds of commingling are much different than a party. For one thing, they’re purpose-driven—whatever socializing happens is secondary to getting a goal accomplished.

It seems to me that an equally important goal is enjoying one’s life—and few activities surpass a relaxed day of good conversation and good food and drink with pro-freedom friends. Again, some “business” might happen over the course of the event, but if so, that would be a bonus, rather than the focus. If the USSA economy and/or social structure collapses, as some have been forecasting for some time now, and if freedom-loving individuals are to be the shining examples of a better way, then we need to be comfortable with each other, and to trust each other. Social networks used to rely on handshakes, or the understanding that “my word is my bond” braced a verbal agreement, rather than IDs and authority-blessed titles or privileges. Freedom-loving individuals have to build such a network among themselves before it can be stretched to accommodate trustworthy individuals outside The Family. Again, while it is now happening, it seems to be happening a bit fitfully—especially if one believes that the Big Crash is imminent. I can’t speak for our guests, but MAL and I (and the snolfs, albeit in a very different way) very much enjoyed our small gathering, and are pleased to report that future, probably larger gatherings were enthusiastically endorsed.

Moving along to the “decline” portion of today’s ramble, I was a bit surprised to see a commentary by Bill Bonner that addresses several issues that were relevant to my morning musings—viz., declines, social bonds, and the roles systems play in our successes and failures. The piece is A General Theory of Stupidity:

Humans evolved in small groups, where they could know the particulars of things. They understood the threats they faced...and knew what was valuable. But when the scale and sophistication of human civilization increased, man found himself in a situation for which his brain was not prepared. He no longer had the precise, specific, direct information he needed. Instead, he needed to rely on a new kind of knowledge made up of abstractions, generalities and slogans. This new knowledge, which Nietzsche called "Wissen" to distinguish it from the more ancient form of experience-based knowledge called "Erfahrung," trips him up, because it is too far removed from the facts. The Inverse Square law and Darwin’s law both work against him. ....

Today, the average man can barely tell the difference between a fact and a campaign slogan. And so the new ersatz knowledge leads him into error. Modern politics turns the voter into an enabling dupe...makes the amateur investor a chump for Wall Street...and sends the poor, hapless foot-soldier off on a fool’s errand where he can only get himself killed.

I almost always find Bonner well worth reading, but this essay is particularly insightful, and timely.

Sunni

Home
Previous entry: "Noting Differences"
Next entry: "Bleah"