On Georgist Conferences: Was the 1974 Conference on Inquiry a Model to be Resurrected for the Future?

Edward J. Dodson

[February 2006]

Several years ago, I began a project to create a biographical history of the Georgist movement. The process began by reviewing material I had accumulated over my twenty-five years of association with Georgists around the globe. More recently, I have researched boxes of stored papers at the Henry George birthplace in Philadelphia. This biographical history is supplemented by an on-line library of materials written by and about the individuals whose histories are in some respect captured.

A secondary offshoot of this biographical history I have also undertaken is to create as comprehensive as possible list of those who attended Georgist conferences over the decades going back to the early 1900s.

This type of research is rich with many surprises, as you might expect. Of those listed in the biographical history, only a minority were attendees at any of the various Georgist conferences. Thus, the list of conference attendees is much shorter than I initially thought would be the case. My very incomplete research has thus far identified fewer than 1,500 different attendees between 1926 thru the most recent conference. This also includes conferences hosted by the International Union for Land Value Taxation and Free Trade. Even assuming the final number will turn out to be double the 1,500 identified to date, this is a remarkably small number of people sufficiently committed to such a crucial enterprise for social and economic justice.

In the United States, the annual conferences began in 1926 as "Henry George Congresses" organized by the newly-established Henry George Foundation of America. In the 1940s, the Henry George School in New York began to hold annual conferences to bring together Georgists committed to the educational program. One of the major events was held in 1947, a "Henry George School Rally" in New York City in tribute of Anna George de Mille (Henry George's last surviving offspring, who died earlier in the year) at which over 1,000 people attended. For some years, the Henry George Foundation of America held separate conferences, which were focused on political activism.

During the early 1970s, the Henry George School in New York experienced a dramatic loss of funding from the Lincoln Foundation. The result was the dismantling of the system of extensions and affiliates and an end to the annual school conferences. The last conference to be held occurred at the Francisco Torres Conference Center in Goleta, California. Interestingly, at this conference there was apparently no indication that the school's activities were about to be scaled back. The following report on the conference appeared in the July-August issue of the Henry George News:

"The '74 School Conference was a gratifying experience and I think we can expect new directions to emerge from the work we have done here in Goleta," Henry George School president Arnold A. Weinstein commented on leaving Southern California Sunday, July 14, to return to New York.

Titled a "Conference of Inquiry" and hosted by the Henry George Schools of California in Los Angeles, working sessions began Wednesday morning, July 10, and were held morning, afternoon and evening - with the exception of a Thursday afternoon sightseeing trip in Santa Barbara - through to Sunday morning.

Goleta is a small town north of Santa Barbara where the mountains shelter the area in the East and the Pacific Ocean on the West provides natural air conditioning. The result is an idyllic atmosphere for conference activities.

The Conference format, while new to the School, has long been used by organizations serving the business community. Each session was given a topic which, although not rigorously explored, served as a guidepost for discussions. After brief presentations by those who had submitted papers, the assemblage was broken up into groups where discussion was led by the speakers and other assigned to the task. Each group was given two or three questions to consider. After something less than an hour of such give-and-take, a "reporter" for each group offered a summary of his confreres deliberations.

This conference technique has several advantages. For one thing, and perhaps the most important, the participants were enthusiastic about being able to join in discussion, as contrasted with the usual situation in which they must sit and be talked at. For another thing it allows for the airing of widely diverse opinions with out acrimonious arguments - people in small groups are more inclined to be courteous.

As used at Goleta, however, the format had some disadvantages. For one, the papers that were presented never became the subjects of discussion. For another, with the signal exception of the Saturday afternoon session devoted to a demonstration of the high school program the School is developing in public systems (see story elsewhere in this issue) none of the sessions appeared to have done any more than interest or entertain those present - perhaps an accomplishment in itself.

Also at the conference, Harry Pollard structured a session to give attendees a sense of what students experience who are taught economics using his InterStudent program. The Henry George News reported:

The Saturday afternoon session of this year's conference had the excitement often generated by competition as close to 100 people divided into ten teams to work their way, like high school students, through mini-courses.

As Harry Pollard, director of the host School in Los Angeles, explained in his paper: "Thirty years of teaching adults was inadequate for a confrontation with high school students - as we found when our Interstudent Program began in 1970." So at the Conference Mr. Pollard called on Janet Terry, teacher in the Foothill High School in Santa Ana, Calif., to assist in presenting the new techniques developed. Miss Terry was the first to use the mini-course in her classroom and had a large hand in its formulation.

The technique involves the use of written questions, the answers to which are designed to lead students, step-by-step, toward a conclusion. The series of questions are interspersed with test questions that give the teacher a gauge to student progress. Working in competing teams the students earn points on the accuracy of their answers as well as their alacrity in completing the material. The students are told, Mr. Pollard explains, "they can lie, cheat, steal from each other and spy on each other." The ineffectiveness of such devices is a lesson in practical morality.

The competition takes the first four days of a course, the fifth is given over to debate of prepared material. At present there are six mini-courses, each designed to progressively develop the philosophy of freedom. At the conclusion of each course, each team must drop one of its members. Those excluded then form a new team. Moreover, the winning team is disbanded and the remaining teams, starting with the poorest rated, choose one of from among the winners.

A room full of adults competing in teams was a fascinating sight. Unfortunately too little time was made available for the demonstration and the conferees were deprived of the experience of the fifth-day debate. Considering the length of the Conference, more time might have been better spent on further demonstration of the Interstudent Program. As it stands this technique has accomplished a good deal in having brought the School into the public and some private school systems. It has great potential although much development and refinement need be done.

Upon reflection, the concept of an annual "Conference of Inquiry into Social Problems" has a good deal of merit, although I do not find the approach the right one for an annual conference of Georgists - whether educators or political activists. This type of conference might be a valuable periodic (if not annual) activity designed and organized by Georgist leaders in order to engage a primarily non-Georgist audience.

Some creative thinking went into the design of the program. One day was devoted to an exploration of "Social Man - Voluntary and Involuntary Cooperation."

• Voluntary Organization (cooperation by contract): the motivation behind voluntary action; how to persuade people to do things; how to recruit, run and finance volunteer operations;and, is voluntary organization worthwhile?
• Involuntary Organization (cooperation by coercion): the argument for and against the need for Government; anarchy, autarchy, limited and collective Government; franchise power and majority decision-making; the proportional and alternative voting systems; congressional versus parliamentary.

A second day dealt with "Individual Man - What Man is - What Man could be."

• Basic Concepts (the nature of Man and the nature of his world): what is Man?' how does he differ from other animals?; supernature, mysticism, religion; how sensitive are we to each other; living with - or in spite of - our environment.
• Human Potential (mental and physical health): how does he act and how could he act; has he reached an evolutionary cul-de-sac; changing - internally to become a better man, externally in social relationships.

This day was followed by sessions on "Man's Values - the Choice of Right and Wrong."

• Correct Thought (morality and ethics): choosing the code of conduct; the basis of choice; what and who should be considered; may others be hurt?; where lies responsibility; are there natural duties and natural rights; what is right?
• Correct Action (production and distribution): what is production and how is it produced; how much is needed; should growth be limited; who should effect the limitation; who owns it?; how should production be shared; the concept of equal returns; what is equal?
• Conflict of Ideas (economic versus ecological): Man's greatest triumph - the City; Man's greatest disaster - the City; no matter the cost - the necessity for food and fibre; trading off; using the earth efficiently; using up the earth; property rights - private and public; the correct amount of pollution; the inexhaustible planet.

The fourth day provides a unique opportunity for Georgists to bring much of the discussions from the previous days together for participants:

• Education I (the basic concepts): what is truth?; how may it be validated?; what is wisdom?; how do we know?; are you taught or do you learn?; how may wisdom be discovered, stored and shared?; is education the stimulus that causes change?; it change desirable?
• Education II (the InterStudent Program): how students learn by teaching; using human nature to accomplish education purpose; how to induce voluntary learning at a compulsory school; conning the student.
• Education III (a Pride of Professorial Ph.D.'s): does advanced education help?; do advanced degrees narrow the view or broaden the mind?; the concept of an advanced degree; do we need less specialization and more "General Practitioners"?

As a wrap-up, the conference dealt with "Tomorrow and Tomorrow." The message of this session is that there is no easy road (and perhaps no road at all).Every previous civilization has fallen. Our own civilization has been pursuing an eerie parallel path to those which have gone before.

Clearly, the scope of such a conference demands very knowledgeable and skilled discussion leaders. The Georgist movement has always included a number of very effective presenters and educators. To take on the challenge of organizing and putting on a conference with something like the above structure would require a new level of institutional and individual commitment.