I work in an office, but I also telecommute regularly. There certainly are benefits to being in close proximity to co-workers. But there are also benefits to telecommuting. I get essential benefits from both worlds. I think, however, that I would be giving up a lot if I only telecommuted and rarely went to the office. So, I appreciate what Carb is saying.

I can’t find a link, but a recent study found that nearly 25% of single adults in the U.S. live entirely on their own. They have no family or close friends upon which they can rely. Many of them prefer to refrain from involvement in the kinds of mediating institutions you have discussed. Although the folks at Reason Magazine think this is just peachy, it seems like a very unhealthy trend to me.

As I have referred to them here, and as I understand de Tocqueville’s writings, yes.

What mediating institutions do you have in mind, Connor?

I hope you don’t want a comprehensive list, but the following would, in my mind, be qualifiers:

• Rotary Club
• Kiwanis Club
• Boy Scouts of America
• Boys and Girls Club
• Church organizations
• Philanthropic organizations
• Chamber of Commerce
• Lions Club
• Sports teams
• Advocacy groups
• Business networking groups
• Parent Teacher Association
• Trade associations
• Environmental organizations
• etc.

Carb,

Even if I know what I want to do, just how am I supposed to get it done when I have no idea where to start?

Welcome to the perennial dilemma of nearly all entrepreneurs. My experience leads me to suggest simply doing what you think is right. If you mess up somewhere, you’ll likely find out, and be able to correct it as is necessary.

Just when is it time to abandon ship?

That depends which ship you’re referring to… :)

Reach & Connor,

The question of proximity for effective group effort has been on my mind a lot lately. For instance, it may be great if we can get 1 million members for a cause on Facebook. But if they are spread throughout the country, what can we do to effect change in the government? How can we choose a location to build a hospital or other useful institution? Where will it be run from?

Take blogging: Never have so many said so little to so few.

Whenever we render real service to others, and whenever we have strength in numbers, it is always easier, and more effective when we do things in person and in close proximity.

Connor:

I’ve reflected on the mediating institutions by virtue of a newsletter from George Wythe about a year ago. I even wrote a letter to the author. He and I had a “spirited” exchange. He explicitly focused on getting away from the libertarian mentality of the individual and getting together in little platoons (yes, he mentioned Burke as well as de Tocqueville) to reform a constitutional nation. It was largely due to that exchange that I recognized some weaknesses in the libertarian ideology. I still believe it is closer to the ideal than what we have today. But it is not the ideal to strive for.

The other day I wanted to start a branch of the Independent American Party in Colorado. But I had no idea how. I wrote the branch in Utah and Nevada. No response. I’ve asked friends for advice. No one else knew either. I’d like to try. But I can’t seem to find out how. Even if I get the legal entity put together, I have no idea how to promote anything . . .

My question to you (and others on this blog) is: Even if I know what I want to do, just how am I supposed to get it done when I have no idea where to start?

To your other point (the disservice of reclusion) I wonder if it is too late. I’m reminded of Galt’s Gulch. I see Dagne Taggert resisting the move. Are we at that stage? Is it too late? Or is there still hope that “We the People” can still steer the government from its runaway train mentality? Or are we fighting against futility? Just when is it time to abandon ship?

It certainly is a whole lot easier to find a cave somewhere and stay until the rest of the world destroys each other. I know that isn’t what we’re supposed to do. But I just don’t know how to do anything else.

That’s a really good question, Reach. Are social networks a substitute for traditional ones?

Let’s ask this question to perhaps illustrate another application: would families function properly if everybody lived separately and communicated over IM? Or are telecommuting coworkers as productive as those that share office space?

Personally, I recognize the value and efficiency that technology has introduced into these types of associations. However, I think that there are certain aspects of relationships (family, business, political, social, etc.) that have no other substitute. I would much rather have a group discussion face to face—replete with all the associated emotion, gesticulation, and the like̵than on Skype.

Putnam says that ever since the advent of TV and other modern in-home and personal media there has been a steady decline in participation in everything from Rotary and Girl Scouts to bowling leagues and reading clubs — the kinds of associations frequently depicted in the 1960s cartoon series Meet The Flintstones.

Putnam’s critics say that he is ignoring newer forms of associations and social connectivity, much of it made possible by the new media. Due to email, texting, and Twitter, for example, much more targeted events can be quickly organized. This phenomenon is called ‘smart crowds.’

Does this newer type of temporary association perform the democratic support functions de Tocqueville discusses?

These mediating social institutions, also called “little platoons” by Burke, are what make America tick. That’s why bigger government and more reliance on government, especially federal government, is so dangerous, it disintegrates these middle levels of society.

For this reason, I believe that Obama’s proposal to eliminate tax benefits for charitable donations is dangerous, as well as the recent Hatch/Kennedy bill that increases the federal service corps. They would both transfer participation from the little platoons to federal bureaucracy.