Well, given that the Vermonters elected Sanders as their senator, I really doubt that a gulch would work there.

check out the civil war and what happened. All the south wanted was to secede, and the north wanted whatever they had and attacked.

Call it something else to not attract attention. I think that a series of smallish "cells" could flourish. Its a great idea. This is not unlike the branch dividians in Waco, TX, or the FLDS commune the polygamous mormons set up. They both became targets due to a cache of guns, or supposed mistreatment of children. Both were turned into the feds by the local citizens who were nosy

Don't forget: part of the plan would be to generate their own electricity and dig their own wells, or else locate on a body of water. Off the grid. And probably "zone" land for farming.

If it follows business competition, they would first try to destroy us, and if that failed, then join us. Similar to what happens when a small innovative company enters a market with a lot of big companies- kind of like UBER did with the cab industry.

would have to be in an uninhabited place like antartica or the amazon jungle to be given a chance to get large enough to be self sufficient before attacked.

Oh, but it might have. Remember: "We started with no time limit in view. We did not know whether we would see the final collapse, or whether the next generation would. We knew only this was how we wished to live. But now we see the collapse happening sooner than expected." That's the key: John Galt succeeded because the society collapsed of its own weight before they could do anything more than take him prisoner--and Ragnar Danneskjöld rescued him anyway.

Interesting idea. If inside the USA, it would be subject to the federal laws, many of which are socialistic and totally opposite what Objectivists would want. Then there would be the state laws and county regulations. You couldnt build the house you wanted unless "approved". You would be subject to resstrictions on cars and off road vehicles. I am not sure that the end of the day there would be much "gulching" left to enjoy. There would be federal taxes, state taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, etc. just like now. Not to mention employee hiring and discrimmination laws to contend with.

Religious groups have tried it, and when they get to a certain size, they are attacked by the feds for some "infraction" and shut down.

Probably the biggest of the private societies would be the mormons in salt lake city. Its a booming area up there due to the work and financial and family ethic of the mormons, but its done quietly and under the cover of "religion"- which helps them avoid federal involvement because of the "religious freedom" part of the constitution. Maybe a new religion should be started which happens to adopt Objectivist principles, and go that way.

A gulch would have to be distributed into relatively small "cells" to minimize detection

Hey, I'm all for the authority to keep people out, if thats the need - Th Right to Travel doesn't wash with me when private property is concerned; that includes national boundaries. Still, it is possible.

The War Between the States gives us the best historical model for what would happen if you tried to set up Galt's State instead of Galt's Gulch. Ragnar Danneskjöld would have to be more than buccaneer or privateer. He would have to command an army, a navy, and an air force. As it was, his activities placed the Gulch at risk anyway.

Lincoln determined that the "Union" can be held together against the will of the States or even the people. If a Galt's Gulch was created, as soon a it was profitable, looters would sweep in and kill the goose . . ....
Years ago I heard of a plan for libertarians to move to one state (I think Vermont was targeted) and elect themselves to offices of control and implement libertarian ideas. Don't know the status of the plan.

Point of interest, The Libertarian Party selected New Hampshire, several years ago and are trying to lure libertarians there much in a Galt's Gulch type community, ultimately changing the entire government to Libertarians. A lot of factors make it reasonable. No Sales Taxes, No State Income Taxes, no Federal aid to Education accepted, and many more factors, plus it is a very pretty place to live, I did before moving to Florida.

Those are great photos. A coworker of mine just spent a few weeks in Argentina as a tourist and she really enjoyed it. She had many photos of the Patagonia area that she shared with me.

That's my fear. At this time some states and, just recently, the feds are passing laws that tie mandatory medical treatments for children to public schools. Here in Cal this movement includes private schools. The schools suck, in general, so I don't know what they're thinking. But, I know many families who want to protect their children from this silent totalitarianism while also preparing them for the rest of their lives. That's what this would be all about.

But...in the grand scheme we (you, me, the kids) are all the real livestock in this picture. Imagine a farmer's reaction if a group of cows decided to break through the fence and start their own barn, free from slaughter.

I haven't thought about that.

Kevinw: Very interesting site. Even the presentation was well thought out. Not just a thought but turning it into reality... big step.

It would be easy to see them resorting to terrorism. But somehow I imagine it being a slow process of choking out federally funded programs, refusing to administer federally funded programs, not allowing federal officials into the state to enforce the programs and their rules. If you had large, heavily federally funded universities in the state and you managed to cut the federal funds coming to it, even slowly, I imagine you would see acts of terrorism.

It would take quite a lot of Objectivists to accomplish anything but then, if you managed to get that many together in one state, I would expect to see some pretty ingenious ways come up to choke out the fedgov. And you might get a long way with it before you were really noticed and targeted.

This came up in my facebook feed. Not Objectivists but interesting timing.

http://pledge.freestateproject.org/fs...

At which point the non-aggression principle comes into play. But, as we all know, events don't happen if they're not reported by the Major Media. I would like events which affect us to be reported correctly, but lets say for some finite time, they aren't. I fear the incorrect reporting which will happen.

If and when such a community thrived would we have to deal with a large inflow of people? The first would most likely be productive but the the looters and moochers would show up eventually. Is there a way of keeping them out? Communities like you describe are everywhere. We have a few nearby that never recovered from the collapse of the steel industry in the US.

Yes . Unless we develop weaponry so far advanced we wouldn't stand a chance against existing armies. I'm still wondering how we would handle newcomers or immigration. As Zen points out the literary Gulch was invitation only. Could we get away with that? If so, how do we keep people out?

Thanks Zen. Not sure why I hadn't thought of that before but the literary Gulch was temporary and wouldn't have suffered from the issues you outline. If we set up a real Gulch with the intention of it lasting generations then a whole new set of problems exist.

As Tech says. The analogy between Galt's Gulch, a literary device, and the actual world falls apart because of the difficulty of the invisibility and the difficulty of projecting the search for invitees on the scale of the US or even the world. More importantly, when thinking of the Gulch in the real world, than immigrants or invitees, is that of what to do with children of residents that can't or won't accept the terms of the Gulch. The nature of humanity dictates that at least some percentage of births will be sociopaths and psychopaths. Incurable and non-controllable. And the Bell Curve applies to all attributes of humanity. A percentage just won't fit or will be unable to reason to a level necessary for productive participation.

There is one author that has attempted it recently using a built up reef system like China is presently attempting in the S. China Sea. But that artificial island nation depends on radical weaponry for defense, a contract between the existing residents of the island and any new-comer, and the negative costs to any other that might wish to try to overpower the island. But again, it's a literary device.

Sure it could exist. Gulchers could peacefully take over a town, elect its own leaders, provide its own private law enforcement, and perhaps setup its own private currency. Even so, state taxes would have to be paid and, I'm sure, some type of use fee and taxes for electricity and water. All that need be done is find a town someplace where a factory closed and most people left, buy the existing homes and buy-out any stragglers.

It wouldn't be a State and State laws would be in effect but day-to-day would be controlled by the people of the community and the local authorities.

Its possible.