Published: April 11, 2017

This essay is part of a series about Ralph Borsodi and his book, Inflation is Coming And What to Do About It. Click Here to go to the beginning of this series.

Before delving further into Ralph Borsodi’s book on inflation preparedness, I want to highlight some of his accomplishments and ideas. As mentioned in the previous essay, Ralph Borsodi was a man of action, particularly known for establishing small communities.

His most renowned community was the School of Living in Suffern, New York, founded in 1934. This institution also published his book, “Inflation is Coming And What to Do About It.”

While researching the School of Living, I came across the New School of Living blog. For those interested in a comprehensive biography of Ralph Borsodi, Bill Sharp’s writing on this blog is an excellent resource. These three essays, in particular, offer significant detail and insight:

The Life of Ralph Borsodi: Unsung American Back-to-the-Land Pioneer

Ralph Borsodi and The School of Living

The School of Living And The Community

One aspect of Ralph Borsodi’s philosophy that resonates with me is his perspective on education. He even authored a book on this topic, which I aspire to read someday. This excerpt from the second linked article provides a glimpse into his views:

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000} span.s1 {font-kerning: none}

“The two volumes of Education and Living are split between a detailed critique of “mis-education,” and a new model of “right” education.  “Mis-education” is merely indoctrination.  It feeds tyranny.  He was critical of Dewey’s progressive education and the centralization of education.  He strongly disagreed with the school taking over many of the social functions of the family.”

If I understand correctly, the Borsodi children were homeschooled during the 1920s. Borsodi’s School of Living, in a way, emerged from this homeschooling experience.

While I appreciate this aspect, I have mixed feelings about Borsodi’s concept of a school as the core of a small intentional community. Shouldn’t there be a spiritual dimension?

All educational systems are founded upon a worldview shaped by faith-based beliefs. These beliefs delve into fundamental questions: Where did we come from? Does God exist? Who is God? How did the world originate? What is our purpose? What is reality? What happens after death? What defines good and evil? The answers significantly influence the direction of education, inherently connecting it to spirituality.

The historical model communities of New England and Europe, which Borsodi sought to emulate, were unified not by secular schools, but by Christian churches. These communities shared religious beliefs, traditions, and even festivals throughout the year, a concept Borsodi strongly advocated.

I understand why Borsodi might hesitate to place a church at the heart of his community. Unfortunately, churches in American culture can be as divisive as they are unifying, hampered by doctrinal differences, spiritual pride, and human flaws. A society with transient church attendance could lead to unstable communities if built solely around a church instead of a school.

This presents a dilemma. While I envision a church as central to any intentional community I’d join, I recognize the potential pitfalls. It’s worth noting that Borsodi did envision churches existing within his communities, just not as the central institution. However, I’m uncertain if this ever came to fruition.

Let’s move on.

Here’s an intriguing excerpt from Ralph Borsodi, shared by Bill Sharp in his essay:

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000} span.s1 {font-kerning: none}

“The three most important occupations in my considered view are neither governing nor engineering, as most men believe today, nor business and money-making, as most men believed yesterday.  The most important occupations are educating, homemaking and farming; the first because it is the educators of mankind who either humanize or fail to humanize both man and society; the second, because it creates the environment in which the young are either rightly or wrongly prepared for living like normal human beings, and the third because it [encourages] collaboration with Mother nature, for man’s co-operation with the living soil, the living plants, and the living animals of the Earth.” 

I find these sentiments appealing, but I’m always wary of those who emphasize “Mother nature.” Perhaps I’m being overly particular with language, but I would never use terms like “Mother earth” or “Mother nature.” I hesitate to attribute any part of God’s creation to an entity like “Mother nature.” This is just my personal viewpoint, and I digress.

It’s clear that Ralph Borsodi was on to something significant with his vision for intentional homesteading communities. I’m glad his writings and ideas persist on the School of Living website.

One final point about intentional communities and Borsodi’s School of Living: Later in his life, Borsodi entrusted the School of Living to Mildred J. Loomis, perhaps his most devoted follower. Although elderly during the back-to-the-land movement of the 1970s, she remained influential alongside figures like Scott & Helen Nearing. And she was an anarchist!

Before picturing a window-smashing, bomb-throwing Marxist, know that Mildred J. Loomis was a kind, elderly woman. It turns out there’s a peaceful side to anarchism, even encompassing Christian anarchists.

Here’s a brief introduction to Mildred Loomis:

CLICK HERE To go to Part 5 of this series.