Confronting the Frontier: American Expansion and the Liberty Preference
Not just anybody is willing to embark on an adventure into the unknown for a better, or perhaps just different, life. Nevertheless, the story of our species has largely been driven by such brave expansions of Earth’s overlaying human sphere. From the cradles of civilization to the pinnacles of modernity, individuals, families, and even entire folks have uprooted themselves from places of certainty and confronted the frontier.
But what sort of person does it take to make such a decision? What groups will separate themselves to make a mark of their own on this planet’s skin? Intuitive wisdom and recent research alike tell us that there are certain personality traits common across those who seek the life of a frontiersman, and they lead to a preference towards openness, self-reliance, rebelliousness, and tenacity — a preference towards liberty.
University of Cambridge researchers examined personality profiles of over three million Americans across 37,227 ZIP codes to determine whether there are distinct traits among those in more mountainous areas. The research sought to explore what sort of people were attracted to mountainous frontier regions by analyzing the remnant “Big Five” personality traits of those areas’ present populations.
Unsurprisingly, the researchers found that mountainous frontier populations tended to be less agreeable, less conscientious, less extroverted, less neurotic, and perhaps most importantly, more open to experience.
While I will address the greater implications of each of these areas soon, now is a good time to note what other group displays the same personality tendencies as mountainous frontiersmen: libertarians.
Indeed, research shared by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that libertarians likewise score lowest on extraversion among all US political groups, as well as lowest in conscientiousness, lowest in agreeableness, lowest in neuroticism, and second highest in openness to experience. Remarkable, no?
In hindsight, this overlap very well may seem obvious, and it kind of is. It is not without good reason that the American Libertarian archetype has been associated with the hills of Appalachia, the White Mountains of New Hampshire, the rugged Rocky Mountains, and untamed wilderness of Alaska.
It is very easy to understand why openness to experience is associated with the frontier. Especially in cases where relocation was not compelled by natural disaster or other tremendous forces, the voluntary expansion of people into the unknown is undertaken by those who are most open to adventure and uncertainty. It takes a remarkable comfort with the prospect of discomfort to make the decision to settle the unsettled.
In those politically oriented towards liberty, this openness to experience serves to broaden the opportunities for human action, both in terms of economic horizons and social freedoms.
Low agreeableness also benefits the frontiersman, as being less trusting, caring, forgiving and kind often becomes an unfortunate necessity for survival. The Cambridge researchers note that this correlation also converges with previous studies indicating that self-focused survival strategies were central to settling mountainous areas.
Libertarians, with their low agreeability, are often the assholes in political dialogue, but not without good cause, particularly when on the fringes of the state’s infrastructural power. In systems without a paternal government authority figure, the agreeable may get trampled by the less agreeable unless the even less agreeable stand up for what is right and good. Moreover, checks on government overreach demand the disagreeable to take action, while the even more disagreeable outright separate or rebel.
Low conscientiousness is similarly associated with rebelliousness and non-compliant behavior, both of which could push, or force, someone to the frontier. Other research studying the influence of geography on personality has also made the distinction that US mountainous regions display lower conscientiousness on the civic obligation and obedience aspects of the trait, but higher on organization, which would logically benefit the settlement of a frontier.
Low conscientiousness is responsible for libertarians’ preference towards decentralization, disobedience, and flexibility, as well as their tendency towards self-focus and egocentric individualism.
Introversion among frontiersmen also makes intuitive sense, due to the strong possibility of social seclusion, isolation and self-reliance during the settlement of new areas.
The prospect of being socially secluded, isolated and self-reliant is relative utopia to many with libertarian inclinations, so it is no wonder they also tend to be introverts.
Lastly, low neuroticism also logically benefits those braving the frontier. Tenacity is a must when tough times are a near certainty. The aforementioned isolation of many frontier situations makes self-confidence and a strong will necessary.
Low neuroticism among libertarians could help explain their rejection of a “nanny state” as well as their strong promotion of “anti-fragility” as a foundational concept. The fact that libertarians are also the most male-dominated political demographic may also well explain the correlation.
So what lessons are to be learned from this realization, that a desire for liberty and the frontier go hand in hand? First, that human history and expansion has likely been fueled, to some degree, by discontent “libertarians” braving the frontier. Second, that these lingering personality trait patterns may be significant even in the contemporary political landscape and elections. And finally, that libertarians will have to be creative in forging new “frontiers” to settle.
As the population of Earth continues to grow and the amount of unexplored and unsettled land continues to dwindle, those discontent with the status quo of the systems beneath their feet will continue to face the same decision as millions of humans before them: to stay or go.
But bar a few particularly inhospitable terrains far from any post office or tax collector, there are not many places left on Earth where one can find a true chance to start anew free from the watchful eye and influence of those you wish to escape.
However, building new communities on the periphery of state infrastructural power has been central to the story of mankind, and must continue to be lest we stagnate into decay or accelerate the system we have into self-obliteration. True reform comes from those on the boundaries, the cutting edge of the human project.
Those who are open to the unknown, unafraid to act and blaze a trail, to forge a new way of life free from former constraints, to confront all the harsh realities and threats of primal survival, and to do so with a smile on their face — the future belongs to them.
