Where Communism Works in America

9/22/2003 | Dan Evans

[Dan Evans]

Another way of looking at it is that the Anabaptists are born into their lifestyle. Nobody gets converted to be a Hutterite or Amishman. Mennonites are a different story, but that isn't such an austere existence.

But only a small percentage of Amish children leave now that they are branching into manufacturing. So it is remarkable how flexible humans really are.

I think communism fails because it is an inherently unstable monoculture. All it takes is for one evil person to take advantage of the system.

[Hank Rearden]

Interesting, too bad you couldn't resist the gratuitous shot at unions though.

Gratuitous, hell. Necessary! Obvious! Lazy, corrupt, government-subsidized bastards.

Unions must die.

[Joe Hadenuf]

But bring up illegal immigration and there's always some pinhead who says something like, "But who's going to pick the crops. You'll pay five bucks for a head of lettuce?".

Or, they will immediately scream, "racist".

[Dan Evans]

Do you mean 40,000 kitchens a year? That must be a big family or they have a lot of other employees. I think the $12,000 figure applies to the average farmer.

I also get the impression from my research that a favorite sport of the Amish is lying to overly inquisitive Yankees.

Terrible, though, that they confuse the IRS. Tsk.

[SAJ]

The assistant swine manager works for the hog boss.

This latter person, I presume, is not to be confused with Boss Hogg?

[Dan Evans]

"Why not point out that the successful American communes predominantly religious based, and that Communism eschews Christianity as well as Judasm?"

Yeah, I thought about that, but then some wise guy is going to say, "Communism is a religion and what about the Cubans, they're Catholic?"

But you are right, Western Civilization was pretty much created by Christians. It is only appropriate they should save it.

[JerseyHighlander]

So we pass a law allowing the sale of this land as farm land under covenant agreement such so that no motorized vehicles can be used. Ever see a Amish farm, they have Deere tractors, but the non-Amish farm hands operate and repair them.

Your piece has very disturbing racialist undertones. Mostly by a poor choice of words, using the word "spawn" to describe family growth, etc.

You are, and most Americans are, confused between the ideologies of Communitarianism and Communism. Communitarianism comes from the groups you described, and Quakers, Shakers, and more recently Catholic Liberacion clergy in South America. Many of those illegal aliens you (and many, including myself to some degree) fret over, were raised in Mexico and Gautemala by Liberacion ideology, which is the leader in the Communitarian ideology as far as increasing numbers of believers/followers. As far as opening up the national lands, I'm all for it, but the East Asians gevernments might not wnt anyone to disturb their Federal reserve debt collateral.

[NewRomeTacitus]

What is disturbing? The Hutterites practice the communal model while the Amish are community oriented. No Amish guy is going to walk into your house in the middle of the night to use "communal" property. The Mormons are more Hutterite than Amish through their purposely designed involvement in each other's personal lives.
In all the world only America provides a framework where such diverse interests can co-exist side by side. Churches, temples and mosques manage to share city blocks here without nary a person feeling he has to blow himself up. It's all about Freedom.

[jennyp]

I think communism fails because it is an inherently unstable monoculture. All it takes is for one evil person to take advantage of the system.

Your article mentioned that the communes split up after they reach 150 people. There's a lot of research that shows that the average person can keep track of relationships with at most 150 people. Above that size, an organization becomes too bureaucratic, and too many of the interactions become arms-length & impersonal, which erodes the constant, personal sense of being accountable for your actions. This is why large-scale communism can never work. IMO.

[Fledermaus]

But these Amish communities trade, do integrate with modern society, pay taxes, own private property and are very religious.

Almost everything communism wasn't, especially the religious and moral aspect.

[Fledermaus]

True communism allows slackers, for a period of time (which destroys the ideal), to suck off the work of others.

Eventually, the "others" ask them to leave. Which again proves communism is a fraud. Why? Just look at how they defend their utopia...they'll tell you communism would work perfectly if it wasn't for the failings of their fellow humans.

DUH!

Even lesbians on a communal farm in Mississippi get that concept: Produce or get out as they sell their beaded jewelry and homemade honey at the New Age store in town...and through the cataloug...website...toll free number...

[Dan Evans]

Regarding the Amish use of non-Amish helpers: This seems to be a growing trend, especially in manufacturing, that bothers me and I hope they know what they are doing. The danger is cultural osmosis as they associate more with the outside world. But, there are a lot of different Amish churches each with different ways of doing things.

On Communitarianism and the Liberacion clergy, you're right I am confused. I see little in common between Hutterites and that of South American rebels. Is there such a thing as "Communitarian ideology"? If so, it must not work below certain latitudes if they need to come north and climb over the fence to get work.

As far as the collateral for the Federal Debt goes, maybe that's the key here. Let them foreclose on all that land and then they'll have to sell it off to the Hutterites.

[JerseyHighlander]

You don't see the Jeffersonian racialist "yeoman farmer" ideal scaled up to a Communitarian level in the concept of having certain religious groups controlling farm production to limit the ability of immigrants to acquire jobs in this country? I agree with the reduction of farm subsidies, but that's a corporate vs. citizen owner/operator/farmer argument, whether the citizens are Southern Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, Anglicans or whatever.

And what of this:In a few generations we'll have all the baby-makers and lettuce pickers we'll ever need.

That is Orwellian, and uses religion as a manipulative tool of control. What fundamental difference will there be in 40 years between baby-making farm wives of Anabaptist communes and babymaking farmwives of Catholic Church communities? They would both be made to serve the pampered princesses of the consumerist class, who won't reproduce. This is better then our current fate of Third World invasion? No, it's the same result, except the color of the underclasses' skin pigment is different.

On that note, I support Rep. Tancredo's stances by and by, and want to see a rational immigration policy come into law, funded and vigorously enforced. Bringing in anti-immigrant rhetoric reminiscent of the Anti-Irish rhetoric of 2 centuries ago is a discredit to the public argument.

[Dan Evans]

Yes, I assumed they split up (they call it "branching") was because the land couldn't support more than 150 people. But maybe what they do is buy land that can support 150 people because they know that they can't manage more than that many.

[Dan Evans]

If you want to evaluate this rationally maybe it's best to forget about rhetoric and look at what is actually being proposed. I say my proposal is the least coercive than the traditional approach. It is simply land reform. Why is land reform bad if you do it in America? Controlling illegal immigration via border control and harassment of employers is coercive -- it requires men with guns making threats. Allowing Amish and Hutterites to expand their numbers will solve the problem without coercion.

Amish and Hutterites are not an "underclass" and they are not victims. If you don't believe me, ask them. They will tell you that they feel more fortunate than you. But ask the same question of the typical migrant farm worker and you will hear a list of grievances and threats to take back "the land the gringo's stole". This is not about skin pigment but about creating a civilized people. The Anabaptists do that better than anyone.

I'm sorry if anyone doesn't like this rhetoric but Western Civilization is headed for the rocks and we need think about what created it and how we can save it.

[auggy]

"Comparing Hutterites with communists was slightly mischievous on my part, though. The point is that communism is invariably evil and Hutterites are at the other extreme. "

I agree. Commune living is in no way communism.

It is an interesting theory with the Hutterites and Amish, but if we all lived like they did we all would still be riding horses to work and going to church in our buggies. We could never be a superpower, which would be OK, as long as, we were never invaded.

We would have been invaded years ago, no doubt.

[Dan Evans]

"but if we all lived like they did we all would still be riding horses to work and going to church in our buggies. We could never be a superpower, which would be OK, as long as, we were never invaded. "

Yes, Auggy, this is exactly my point in the final paragraph. Liberals talk a lot about diversity but they only have a vague idea about why it is good.

Compare a nation to a living body. If all the cells in the body did the same thing, the body would die. We need all kinds of cells, but they need to be the right kind. You can not take just any cell from outside the body and transplant into a body without serious risk. All it takes is a tiny amount of a toxic bacteria to kill you. Likewise, cells from your body can not live long outside it. The Amish have tried living all over the world but they thrive mostly in North America.

I say we need the Anabaptists as much as they need us.

[Held_to_Ransom]

I also get the impression from my research that a favorite sport of the Amish is lying to overly inquisitive Yankees.

They don't lie. They just guard their privacy. You can't lie if you don't speak.

As for the bit about Yankees, you have it totally backwards. Robert E. Lee himself was profoundly confused by the Amish and Pennsylvanians in general, as that state contributed more volunteers on the war against slavery than any other state in the Union, Amish included. THe Amish, like most other Yankees, always considered slavery to be the height of sloth and self indulgence.

[Held_to_Ransom]

Oh, yes, the kitchens. Kitchens worth 40,000 each. Doesn't take to many to break the $12,000 barrier, and no, they don't seem to sell many below the Mason Dixon line.

[Dan Evans]

Amish refer to non-Amish as "the English" or "Yankees". And, yes, they were a major part of the Underground Railroad that hid so many runaway slaves. I wasn't aware that they enlisted in the Army though. I thought that would get them tossed out of the church.