The following interview was originally published in the June 2009 issue of Impact, the monthly newsletter of the Ayn Rand Institute.  The original may be found on their website.  It is republished here with written permission from the Ayn Rand Institute.

This is part of a series highlighting Objectivist community groups. More information can be found at the Objectivist Community Group page at the ARC Web site. Impact would like to thank Rachel Miner, Andrew Miner and Burgess Laughlin for their contribution to this interview.  While we encourage Objectivist community groups, they are not affiliated with ARI or ARC. The appearance of a community group in Impact does not imply ARI or ARC’s endorsement.

Impact: How did the Seattle-Portland Objectivist Network begin?

Burgess Laughlin: The original group in this area was the Portland Area Objectivists (PAO), which I founded around 1993 with the assistance of Brad Williams. We were motivated mainly by the desire to socialize with like-minded individuals— those who understood the basics of the philosophy and agreed with it as far as they had studied it.

A secondary impetus was our own education, and to this aim we formed study groups, ad hoc, as the desire arose. For example, we spent eighteen months going through Leonard Peikoff’s Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand.

The Seattle-Portland Objectivist Network (SPON) was formed in 2003 as a merger of PAO and Andrew and Rachel Miner’s Seattle group.

Impact: How did the Seattle group originally come about?

Rachel Miner: My husband and I began attending PAO’s quarterly dinners in 2002, when we moved from Connecticut to Centralia, Washington. Centralia is about halfway between Seattle and Portland—roughly an hour and a half drive away from each. Seeing that many Seattle residents also attended these dinners, we opened our home to the group as a meeting place in 2003 and received great attendance. In 2004 we moved to the Seattle area and began having regular potluck socials every eight weeks.

Impact: How does SPON find members and organize events?

Andrew Miner: In the beginning we added members mostly by word of mouth. Today we receive many requests through Facebook, which has become our primary organizational tool. Those who are interested in joining SPON must follow the admission procedure on our Web site. If we or they have any questions, we’ll often invite them to our home for a more private, quiet evening. As Burgess has mentioned, the goal is socializing with “like-minded” individuals, and this gives us and them a good chance to learn if we can both achieve that goal.

RM: We set our dates six months in advance, so members always know the date of the next three potluck socials. RSVPs are collected via Facebook and by e-mail. Socials begin at noon on a Saturday, and we usually have twenty to thirty people coming and going throughout the day. Many of the out-of-town visitors spend the night. Sometimes Seattle residents do too if we all get talking late enough. After a leisurely Sunday breakfast, the last attendees head home.

Impact: How has the group evolved?

BL: In the first few years, as it grew in membership, it became a formal organization with rules and officers. Then it devolved. We found that none of the formalities were necessary. What is important is that one or two people be willing to make a persistent, long-term commitment to organizing, scheduling and overseeing the club.

RM: We have gradually grown, but the principles have stayed the same. These are still events where Objectivists can rest from defending their values.

Impact: How many members does the group have today?

AM: About fifty-five for the entire SeattlePortland network.

Impact: Could you provide a few examples of specific events you have organized?

BL: I occasionally lead special events such as the April 2008 “walk and talk” in my neighborhood. Everyone had an assignment to do a little research about one of the buildings along our route: Amtrak; a privately built bridge (1911); “low income housing;” an environmentalist center; high-rise condos; and a whole district transformed by the incentive of greatly reduced taxation. The theme in part was the so-called public-private partnership that statists push today and the effect it has on our world of daily living. The walk was a success. It ended with a dinner in the area.

RM: The cozy potluck socials are the base of our Seattle group. Once a member brought his plane to the local airport and we ferried people from our home for rides. Occasionally other members will host a gathering in the “off” month. I remember one occasion was a BBQ on the rooftop of a member’s condo building. Seattle members will also travel to special Portland events such as the educational walks.

Impact: How has ARI been of assistance to SPON?

BL: As inspiration and as a source of information about Objectivism and activism, and also occasionally as a referral route. The community listing on ARI’s Web site has been a boon, as isolated individuals can now contact us directly.

Impact: How has your group contributed to the spread of Ayn Rand’s ideas?

BL: By encouraging study—as a serious option—and by encouraging donations, but mostly by bringing value-charged individuals together and seeing their individual activist energy (and donations) increase as a result of the excitement that comes from associating with like-minded individuals. SPON is designed for pleasure, but it provides fertile ground from which other efforts can grow. An example is Study Groups for Objectivists, which Brad Williams and I founded last year (www.studygroupsforobjectivists.com/sgoApp/). Our private SPON page on Facebook includes an honor roll for activists and their activities, which have included sending letters to the editor, donating to ARI, engaging in public speaking, maintaining weblogs and even the writing of a novel.

Impact: What has been the most valuable aspect of organizing your community group?

BL: Meeting individuals who are seriously — and successfully — applying Objectivism to their lives. That is refueling personally and it reaffirms my growing confidence in the Objectivist movement and its future.

RM: We relish the friendships and uplifting conversations. It is so inspiring and energizing to hear everyone’s accomplishments and experience genuine admiration.

Impact: What advice would you give to those interested in organizing a community group?

RM: I think the first thing I would do, if I were starting from scratch, would be to place inquiries for local Objectivists in multiple sources, from Objectivist blogs to ARI’s Web site. Then I would survey the responses to determine whether a study group, a social group or perhaps a physical activity group was most likely to succeed. Assuming a sufficient number of responses from individuals who share my values, I would proceed from there.

BL: As concisely as possible, I would suggest a minimum set of three essential guidelines:

1. 1.Define your purposes clearly, ideally having a separate organization for each major purpose: educational, activist, social.
   

2. 2.Set clear written standards for admittance. Even a single inappropriate person can, in the long run, poison the atmosphere of a local organization.
   

3. 3.Avoid organizer burnout: Keep it simple. Each organizer should pick one or two activities he most wants to perform and let other individuals take care of the remaining tasks. If no one volunteers, then leave the other functions not performed. Similarly, if a member wants the group to do an additional function, then that individual needs to organize it, without burdening the group as a whole.
   

1. Back