The Freedom Frontier - Innovation Part 5
How Native Americans Invented Modern Liberty Before Europe Did
Alright, quick recap for those just joining or needing a refresher. We're five parts deep into unpacking the hidden machinery of human innovation. We started by kicking the 'big brain = innovation' myth to the curb (Part 1) and identifying Liberty – that glorious, troublemaking human instinct to question authority and tradition – as the real spark (Part 2). We saw how ancient China weaponized this, building history's most potent innovation factory by balancing questioning with stability (Part 3). Then, last time, we watched Europe rise from technological irrelevance, not through divine inspiration, but through desperation, the 'advantage of backwardness,' and a whole lot of synthesizing borrowed ideas – often while strategically forgetting the source (Part 4).
Now, that same spirit of questioning didn't just reshape science and industry...
America: the land conceived in liberty. Brave souls fleeing Old World tyranny – the suffocating hierarchies of kings, nobles, and unquestionable church authority – crossed a vast ocean seeking freedom. They came to build a new world, a society founded not on inherited privilege but on the radical idea of individual rights, self-governance, and the pursuit of happiness, planting the seeds of democracy on untamed shores. It’s the foundational myth, the bedrock narrative of the nation.
Thing is, that simple story of freedom-seekers is largely just modern mythmaking bullshit. The reality of early European arrivals was far messier and driven by a complex mix of motives. Yes, some fled religious persecution, but often only to establish their own intolerant orthodoxy. Many sought economic opportunity, hoping to climb a social ladder, not dismantle it. Others were escaping poverty, debt, or the law. Few arrived with a coherent philosophy of challenging hierarchy itself; they were more concerned with escaping the specific king, bishop, or landlord who made their lives difficult back home.
These newcomers, carrying their own baggage of European assumptions about order, authority, and the necessity of coercion, then slammed headfirst into societies operating on principles that were almost incomprehensible to them. Imagine their bewilderment encountering communities where leaders persuaded but couldn't command, where generosity outweighed accumulation, where social harmony was maintained without prisons and police, and where individuals displayed a level of personal autonomy – insubordination, even, to European eyes – that seemed to defy the perceived laws of human nature. How could such societies even function?
This wasn't an easy or immediate embrace of a superior model. It was a profound, deeply uncomfortable confrontation. It generated confusion, fear, condemnation ("devilish," "savage laziness"), but also, crucially, grudging reports of baffling effectiveness and undeniable human dignity. These weren't abstract philosophical debates; they were living, breathing counter-examples forcing Europeans to grapple with possibilities they hadn't conceived – that maybe human beings didn't require constant threat and hierarchy to cooperate.
It was this persistent, lived challenge posed by Native societies, amplified powerfully by Indigenous critics like Kandiaronk whose ideas eventually stormed European intellectual circles, that provided the real catalyst. The revolutionary content – the practical knowledge of how societies could thrive on widespread individual liberty, democratic consensus, and social equality – didn't emerge primarily from European minds contemplating abstract ideals. It came from observing, interacting with, and being critiqued by the Indigenous peoples of the Americas.
Forget the myth.
The truth is far more revolutionary: Native Americans were living, debating, and refining concepts of freedom and self-governance that fundamentally challenged European norms and provided the crucial spark and substance for the Enlightenment's eventual obsession with liberty—even as that influence was being systematically denied and erased. You thought you knew where American freedom came from? Think again.
Innovation Discussion
When we talk about innovation it's almost always about gadgets, machines, and technology. But what if the most revolutionary innovations in human history weren't things at all, but ideas about how people should live together?
While we've been obsessing over who invented the steam engine or the smartphone, we've completely overlooked the most radical social inventors in human history: Native Americans created modern concepts of individual liberty, democratic governance, and gender equality centuries before Europeans did.
That's right. The political systems we smugly call "Western" were directly inspired by Indigenous societies that Europeans were simultaneously colonizing and destroying. Talk about historical irony.
"I have spent six years reflecting on European society, and I still can't think of a single way they act that's not inhuman"
When Europeans first encountered Native American societies in the Northeast like the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) and Wendat (Huron), they were confronted with something profoundly unsettling: functioning societies organized on principles radically different from their own.
These were communities where:
Individual autonomy was paramount
Leaders held power through persuasion rather than coercion
Women often held significant political influence
Consensus decision-making was valued over hierarchical authority
Economic equality was actively maintained through redistribution
For Europeans coming from societies defined by rigid hierarchies, absolute monarchies, religious orthodoxy, and vast inequalities, these encounters were intellectually explosive.
The most powerful voice in this cultural exchange was Kandiaronk, a brilliant Wendat (Huron) statesman who engaged in a series of dialogues with the French governor of Quebec in the late 17th century. These conversations, published in Baron de Lahontan's New Voyages to North America, presented a systematic dismantling of European society through Kandiaronk's eyes.
Here's Kandiaronk in his own words:
"I have spent six years reflecting on the state of European society and I still can't think of a single way they act that's not inhuman, and I genuinely think this can only be the case, as long as you stick to your distinctions of 'mine' and 'thine.' I affirm that what you call money is the devil of devils; the tyrant of the French, the source of all evils; the bane of souls and slaughterhouse of the living."
This wasn't some noble savage spouting vague criticisms. He was a sophisticated political philosopher systematically deconstructing European social structures decades before Rousseau wrote a word.
The Four Pillars of Kandiaronk's Critique
Kandiaronk's analysis focused on four fundamental problems with European society:
1. The European Obsession with Money and Property
Kandiaronk was particularly scathing about the European fixation on private property and wealth accumulation. He observed how this created a society divided between the desperately poor and the obscenely rich, a situation he found both irrational and morally repugnant.
In Wendat society, resources were shared, and accumulating wealth while others went hungry would be seen as deeply shameful. This critique struck at the very heart of European economic organization, challenging the assumption that private property and wealth inequality were natural or inevitable.
2. The Harshness of European Laws and Punishments
Kandiaronk was appalled by the brutality of European justice systems, with their public executions, torture, and harsh punishments for even minor offenses. He contrasted this with Native American approaches to justice, which focused on restitution, reconciliation, and maintaining community harmony rather than retribution.
He famously asked why, if European laws were so just and effective, there were still so many criminals. In Wendat society, he pointed out, there was little crime despite the absence of prisons, professional police forces, or written laws.
3. The Hypocrisy of European Religion
Perhaps most provocatively, Kandiaronk questioned the moral authority of Christianity itself. He pointed out the glaring contradiction between Christian teachings of charity and humility and the actual behavior of European Christians, who seemed to him obsessed with wealth, status, and power.
He asked how Europeans could claim moral superiority while their societies were rife with poverty, inequality, and cruelty—problems that were much less prevalent in Native American communities.
4. The Lack of True Freedom in European Society
Most fundamentally, Kandiaronk challenged the European concept of freedom itself. He observed that Europeans claimed to value liberty while living in societies where most people were effectively enslaved—if not legally, then economically and socially—to kings, nobles, employers, or creditors.
In contrast, he described Wendat society as one where true freedom was practiced: where individuals were autonomous, where leaders led by persuasion rather than coercion, and where no one could force another to obey against their will.
The Constitution Before "The Constitution"
The Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy provides perhaps the most striking example of Native American political innovation. Their Great Law of Peace (Gayanashagowa) was a sophisticated constitutional system that united five (later six) nations in a federal structure that balanced local autonomy with central coordination.
Established centuries before European contact (most scholars date it to the late 1400s), the Great Law included several features that would later appear in the U.S. Constitution:
Federalism: The Confederacy balanced the sovereignty of individual nations with a central council that coordinated common affairs.
Separation of powers: Different councils and chiefs had distinct responsibilities, creating checks and balances within the system.
Democratic representation: Chiefs were selected by clan mothers and represented their communities in the Grand Council.
Impeachment processes: Leaders who failed to act in the interests of their people could be removed from office.
Women's political participation: Clan mothers played a crucial role in selecting and removing chiefs, giving women significant political power.
This wasn't a simple or primitive system but a sophisticated constitutional order that had maintained peace among previously warring nations for centuries. And it wasn't unknown to the founders of the United States.
Benjamin Franklin, who printed the proceedings of the 1744 Treaty of Lancaster between the Haudenosaunee and the colonies, was deeply familiar with Iroquois political structures. As he himself wrote:
"It would be a very strange thing if Six Nations of ignorant savages should be capable of forming a scheme for such a union, and be able to execute it in such a manner as that it has subsisted ages and appears indissoluble; and yet that a like union should be impracticable for ten or a dozen English colonies."
The Albany Plan of Union, which Franklin proposed in 1754, bore striking similarities to the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, with its balance of local and central authority. While the plan wasn't adopted, many of its principles later appeared in the Articles of Confederation and the U.S. Constitution.
"Everyone is his own master": Individual Liberty Beyond European Imagination
Perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of Native American political thought was its conception of individual freedom. European societies in the 17th and 18th centuries were still deeply hierarchical, with most people subject to multiple layers of authority: kings, nobles, church officials, guild masters, patriarchal fathers.
In contrast, many Native American societies practiced a form of liberty far more radical and comprehensive than anything found in contemporary Europe. We’re not talking about a mere absence of formal constraints, but a positive cultural commitment to individual autonomy that permeated all aspects of social life.
As the Jesuit missionary Jean de Brébeuf observed of the Wendat in 1636:
"They have neither political organization, nor courts, nor laws, nor civil magistrates, nor criminal penalties... Everyone is his own master and does what he likes, without being accountable to anyone else and without anyone taking the liberty of telling him what he should do."
This observation, echoed by many European observers, reflected a fundamental difference in how authority was conceived. In Native American societies, leadership was primarily a matter of persuasion and example, not command and control. Chiefs could advise but not compel; they led by building consensus, not by issuing orders.
Children were raised with minimal coercion, allowed to develop according to their own inclinations rather than being molded to adult expectations. Women maintained significant personal autonomy, including control over their own sexuality and labor. Even in warfare, warriors followed leaders by choice, not obligation, and could withdraw from campaigns without punishment.
In terms of our moral foundations framework from Part 2, Native American societies had found a way to express the Liberty foundation without sacrificing social cohesion. They created systems where individual autonomy was balanced with social responsibility, where leadership existed without domination, and where order was maintained without coercion.
Gambling as Social Technology: How Native Americans Channeled Risk-Taking
Remember in Part 1 when I discussed how humans transformed from ultra-conservative hominids into innovation machines? I suggested that learning to "gamble" on the new was key to this transformation. Native American societies provide a fascinating case study in how the gambling impulse can be channeled productively through ritual.
Throughout the Americas, from the Haudenosaunee of the Northeast to the Pueblo peoples of the Southwest, gambling wasn't a simple pastime, it was a central cultural institution. Games of chance like the Bowl Game, Stick Dice, and Hand Game were played with an intensity that shocked European observers.
Entire villages would gather for days-long gambling sessions where participants wagered everything from personal possessions to clothing to, in some cases, aspects of their personal autonomy.
What Europeans misinterpreted as "primitive addiction" was actually a sophisticated cultural channeling of the Liberty foundation. These societies had developed radical concepts of individual freedom—their political systems featured forms of personal autonomy that would make even modern libertarians blush.
But rather than directing their questioning impulse primarily toward technological innovation, they channeled it into ritual contexts that simultaneously satisfied the human drive for risk-taking while binding communities together through shared experience.
These gambling rituals served multiple functions:
Resource redistribution: Gambling created a mechanism for resources to circulate throughout the community, preventing the accumulation of wealth that might lead to permanent inequality.
Tension release: The competitive energy that might otherwise manifest as conflict could be channeled into structured gambling contests.
Spiritual connection: Many gambling games had spiritual dimensions, connecting participants to cosmic forces of chance and fate.
Social bonding: The shared experience of gambling created strong social bonds across kinship lines.
This wasn't gambling as we think of it today—a purely extractive activity designed to separate people from their money. It was gambling as a social technology, a way to satisfy the human need for risk and uncertainty while strengthening rather than weakening community bonds.
Beyond Politics: Environmental and Technological Innovation
While Native American societies channeled much of their innovative energy into social and political domains, they also developed significant technological and environmental innovations that are often overlooked.
Controlled Burning and Forest Management
Long before European arrival, Native Americans used controlled burning to manage landscapes across North America. This wasn't haphazard or accidental—it was a sophisticated system of environmental engineering that:
Created mosaic landscapes with diverse habitats
Increased food production by promoting berry growth and improving hunting grounds
Reduced catastrophic wildfire risk by eliminating fuel buildup
Controlled insect pests and plant diseases
When Europeans arrived in North America, they didn't find a pristine wilderness but a carefully managed landscape shaped by thousands of years of Indigenous stewardship. The "parklike" forests described by early colonists were the product of deliberate Native American land management practices.
Three Sisters Agriculture: Sustainable Farming 1.0
The "Three Sisters" agricultural system—interplanting corn, beans, and squash together—represents one of the most sophisticated sustainable farming systems ever developed. This wasn't just companion planting; it was a complex agricultural innovation that:
Maximized nutritional output (the three plants together provide complete protein)
Improved soil fertility (beans fix nitrogen that corn requires)
Reduced pest pressure (the three plants deter different pests)
Conserved water (squash leaves shade the soil and reduce evaporation)
Minimized labor requirements (the three crops could be tended together)
This system was so effective that it spread throughout North and Central America, adapting to different environments and climates. It produced higher yields with less environmental degradation than European farming methods of the same period.
Medical and Pharmacological Knowledge
Native Americans identified and utilized hundreds of medicinal plants, many of which were later adopted by European medicine. Approximately 25% of modern pharmaceutical compounds are derived from plants first used medicinally by Indigenous peoples.
Beyond specific remedies, Native healers developed sophisticated medical systems that included surgical techniques (including trepanation), bonesetting methods, pain management approaches, and specialized treatments for wounds, burns, and various illnesses.
These weren't random discoveries but systematic approaches to health and healing based on careful observation and experimentation over generations.
The Great Erasure: How Native American Innovation Was Written Out of History
Despite these remarkable innovations, Native American contributions have been systematically erased from standard historical narratives. This erasure wasn't accidental; it served specific intellectual and political purposes.
First, acknowledging Native American innovation would have undermined European claims to intellectual and technological superiority. If the societies Europeans considered "primitive" had developed more sophisticated concepts of freedom and more sustainable relationships with the environment, what became of Europe's self-image as the vanguard of human progress?
Second, it would have fatally undermined the colonial project. European powers justified their conquest and dispossession of indigenous peoples as bringing "civilization" to "savages." Recognizing that these same "savages" had developed more sophisticated concepts of freedom and more humane social arrangements than existed in Europe would have destroyed this rationalization.
Third, it would have challenged the narrative of Western exceptionalism. If concepts like individual liberty, consent of the governed, and federation weren't unique products of the Western tradition but had been independently developed (and more fully implemented) in Native American societies, then the entire notion of a uniquely "Western" political tradition would have been called into question.
So a more politically expedient narrative emerged: one that minimized Native American influences, retrofitted Enlightenment ideas into a purely Western lineage stretching back to Greece and Rome, and presented concepts like liberty and equality as unique European achievements rather than adaptations of existing indigenous models.
The Irony of "Western" Liberty
The irony here is staggering. The very concepts of freedom and equality that we consider quintessentially "Western" were adopted from societies that Europeans were simultaneously colonizing and destroying.
European intellectuals looked at Native American societies and saw something profound: communities that functioned—and thrived—without the rigid hierarchies, inequalities, and coercive authority that characterized European monarchies. This was a living, breathing alternative to the ancien régime, a testament to the possibility of a more just and equitable social order.
But acknowledging this would have undermined the entire colonial project. How could Europeans justify "civilizing" societies that had already developed more advanced concepts of liberty and equality? How could they maintain the narrative of European superiority while borrowing the very ideas that would define their own "enlightened" future?
So instead, they engaged in one of history's greatest acts of intellectual appropriation: they absorbed these revolutionary ideas while simultaneously denigrating their source. They transformed Native American political philosophy into "Western" political philosophy through a process of selective adaptation, reinterpretation, and, ultimately, erasure.
The Revolution That Never Was
Perhaps the most tragic aspect of this story is that the revolutionary potential of Native American political thought was never fully realized in European and American societies. The ideas were borrowed, but they were also domesticated, stripped of their most radical implications.
The liberty and equality championed by the American and French Revolutions remained limited and partial—extended to white men of property but denied to women, enslaved people, and, ironically, the very Native Americans whose political traditions had helped inspire these revolutionary movements.
The true radicalism of Kandiaronk's critique—his fundamental questioning of property, hierarchy, and coercive authority—was too threatening to be fully incorporated into "Western" political systems. Instead, a more limited version of liberty was adopted, one compatible with capitalism, colonialism, and continued social stratification.
What This Means For Innovation Today
Native American approaches to innovation offer profound lessons for contemporary innovation ecosystems:
Balance individual liberty with community responsibility: Native American societies found ways to maximize individual freedom while maintaining strong social bonds—a balance many modern societies struggle to achieve.
Integrate innovation across domains: Rather than separating technological, social, and political innovation, Native American societies developed integrated approaches that addressed multiple dimensions of human experience simultaneously.
Prioritize sustainability: Native American innovation was guided by a long-term perspective that considered the impacts of decisions on future generations—a perspective increasingly recognized as essential in our era of environmental crisis.
Value diverse knowledge systems: Native American societies recognized that different types of knowledge—practical, spiritual, ecological, social—all contributed to innovation, rather than privileging one form of knowing over others.
Create cultural spaces for managed risk-taking: Through rituals like gambling games, Native American societies channeled the human drive for risk and novelty in ways that strengthened rather than undermined community bonds.
These aren't just historical curiosities but practical insights for addressing contemporary challenges. As we face complex problems like climate change, social polarization, and technological disruption, Native American innovative traditions offer alternative models that might help us navigate these challenges more effectively.
The story of Native American innovation reminds us that the most revolutionary ideas often come from unexpected places—and that our narrow focus on technological innovation blinds us to equally important social and political innovations that might ultimately prove more valuable for human flourishing.
This is part five of a seven-part series exploring the hidden forces that shape human innovation. In part six, we'll examine how the United States—a nation founded at the intersection of European, Native American, and Chinese influences—had an unprecedented opportunity to synthesize these diverse innovation traditions into something new, and the extent to which it succeeded or failed in that endeavor.