Several specific devices and mechanisms are in place to promote appropriate behavior and allegiance of individuals within the Amish community.15 Monitoring individuals to make sure that they are adhering to community expectations is one of the more informal techniques used. Various committees within the community regulate and advise on matters of safety, education, fire, and other issues. When Swartzentruber representatives find out about a church member’s earnings and then instruct him about the proper usage of his wealth, they provide another example of monitoring. A third instance of informal monitoring was uncovered in a conversation with a young Amish mother who noted that her next-door neighbor, who is also Amish, watched her as she did her laundry to see at what time of the morning she hung her clothes outside. The respondent thought the neighbor was watching to measure the woman’s work ethic. Hanging the clothes early was interpreted as an indication of a strong work ethic, while doing it later was seen as evidence of a weaker ethic. In a close-knit community, such monitoring provides an easy and accessible mechanism for enforcing community mores.
The dependence of individuals on each other within the Holmes County Settlement further cements ties within the community. Informally, this dependence takes the form of mutual help when a barn burns down or help is needed on the farm. More formal dependence is seen in the several plans that address medical and housing needs. Sanctions also serve as a means to control behavior. In an extreme case among some affiliations, sanction takes the form of shunning.
The use and effects of the mechanisms of monitoring, dependence, and sanctions generally differ among the affiliations, with their effects being greater in the more conservative churches. Within more “liberal” affiliations, such as the New New Order, external mechanisms of these types appear to be less heavily used. Rather, there seems to be more reliance on inner spiritual and mental containment to control behavior. The New Order churches have also created more outlets for their youth to “stretch their wings,” releasing some of the pressure that expectations place upon their behavior. These outlets include youth sings, Sunday school, and social gatherings. The softer edges of these control mechanisms direct behavior in a desired direction without the harshness of more overt forms of control.
These numerous sources of control would seem to justify a view of the Amish, especially the more conservative groups among them, as a suppressed and oppressed people. An outsider may assume they have few choices and little freedom in their lives. But the meanings of choice and freedom have both subjective and objective dimensions. Objectively, one could argue that, indeed, Amish men and women are subject to rules and other constraints that limit their behavior. But it is another matter to consider how they experience and interpret their choices and freedom, how they view their situation subjectively. It is within the subjective realm that individuals can use their agency to interpret a structural fact in ways that allow comfort or complacency. Since ideas like security and freedom have both subjective and objective meanings, they can be a source of both diversity and cohesion. The position of Amish women provides a good example of how this interpretation works.
Frequently, outsiders view Amish women as being limited in their freedoms and choices. But our interviews with Amish women suggest that they do not see themselves as being either less free or as having fewer meaningful, desirable choices than English women. Almost all of the women we interviewed said that they had at least as much if not more freedom than English women, or that they had all the freedom they wanted. They have the same positive perspective on the choices that are available to them. They are content with the choices they have: “There may be fewer choices [than among English women],” replied one respondent, “but I don’t want those choices.” “I’m satisfied with what I have and am,” said another.
The sense of direction and security that comes from life in the Holmes County Settlement serves as a moral anchor that encourages a particular slant on the meaning of choice and freedom. In the minds of these women, too many choices and too much freedom create confusion and a sense of dissatisfaction and unhappiness. “I think you’d be a lot more miserable actually [with more choices] because you couldn’t decide what to do.” When people “have so many choices, … [their] attention is diverted in so many ways, and it’s harder to decide what to do.” When it comes to choosing clothes and other material things, the Amish woman “doesn’t have to be plagued with that, where that’s a main thing in society today.” In Alan Ehrenhalt’s study of close-knit neighborhoods of the 1950s, he also notes the downside of too many choices: “The worship of choice has brought us a world of restless dissatisfaction, in which nothing we choose seems good enough to be permanent and we are unable to resist the endless pursuit of new selections—in work, in marriage, in front of the television set.”16
Although there are many differences and potential sources for division among the Amish, being mindful of others, helping those in need, and serving the community are enduring values within the community. Photograph by Doyle Yoder.
The reaction of Amish to their freedom is similar. Like choice, freedom takes on a different meaning in the Amish context. One Amish woman, when asked about the extent of her freedom, responded: “It depends on what you call ‘freedom.’” Another replied: “We have just as much freedom, but in a different way.” It is a freedom from concerns that still plague English women: “Our freedom is feeling at peace or a happy home … We have some freedom from the cares that they [English women] have, and the pressures and everything.” “I don’t have to worry about any income, or my husband leaving me. I can do whatever I want to; maybe I just don’t want to do as much as she wants to do.” “[I’m] not a slave to a job like English women.” As in the case of choice, too much freedom has its disadvantages: “You probably get more in trouble … there’s more temptation out there.” Constraints on choices and limits on freedom have their benefits, whereas English women “always want more; there’s no end to it. The more they have, the more they want.” The contentment that seems to characterize life for many Amish is founded in the constraints, meanings, and direction created by their tight relationships and cultural heritage. These features allow an interpretation of freedom and choice that does not threaten cohesion within or separation from their community. Thus they help keep the Holmes County Settlement alive and encourage its growth.
The generally close-knit system of social capital inside the Holmes settlement contrasts sharply with the much looser and superficial set of ties its members have with individuals and groups outside the Amish community. As noted above, this difference is reflected in their feelings about outsiders and the ideal relationships between their own community and institutions like the government. Nevertheless, the ties that are forged with outside elements can also help to maintain the integrity of the Amish community. As we’ve seen, Amish individuals in the Holmes County Settlement are often tied to English outsiders in multiple ways—through their employment, business contacts, medical needs, technological changes, educational experiences, and legal requirements. While these ties can always potentially introduce novel elements that could undermine Amish tradition, they also serve to help the Holmes County Settlement adapt and survive. In their reading of and experience with the wider economy, for example, the Holmes County Amish have been able to identify and carve out economic niches that have allowed them to prosper. In this way, like the many internal mechanisms we have discussed, outside ties help to reproduce the Amish community over generations.
What the Future Holds and What We Can Learn
How will the next generation in the Holmes County Settlement adapt to change and yet remain Amish at their core? How can Amish culture reproduce itself in the face of unrelenting pressures to change? What does the future hold for this community? We recall a concern about the next generation expressed by an Old Order businessman who worried that the new generation of Amish youth may not have the same work ethic as the present generation of adults and that, as they move out of farming
into employment positions with English and Amish companies, they might become too dependent upon their employers to support them. Their sense of self-reliance may become weaker. These concerns are similar to worries that have been harbored by many English parents. Older generations frequently decry the alleged bad habits and lack of grit shown by their youth. As such, this is not an unusual complaint.
But as the Amish have already shown themselves adaptive to the challenges they have confronted, it should be expected that they will find ways to guide their youth into activities and areas that will ensure the reproduction of the Holmes County Amish community. Such guidance is already evident in the organized meetings and workshops in which their youth are involved. It is also found in the kinds of jobs that have been encouraged when the possibility of full-time farming has become more remote. While farming involves directly working with nature and its foibles and has historically occupied a central place in the Amish identity, it is not the only occupation that taps central values in the Amish culture. Engagement in manual labor for the production of goods that have widespread value to the community can still occur in other occupations. Furniture, housing, machines, buggies, clothing, and other products all address fundamental needs. Their production often involves the apprenticing of young workers who are trained by older Amish workers in traditional skills. This on-the-job education allows members of the present generation to pass on not only specific job skills but Amish work habits and attitudes as well. In this way, nonfarm work experiences can contribute to the maintenance of Amish culture.
There are some clouds on the economic horizon for the Amish, however. As for many others, the 2008–9 downturn in the national economy created serious stress for many Amish. In the area around Elkhart County, Indiana, for example, where 60 percent of the country’s recreational vehicles are manufactured, unemployment rates soared to 20 percent in mid-2009. More than half of the area Amish worked in factories, and so many became unemployed. In the absence of immediate job alternatives, pressure grew among the most destitute to accept government aid in the form of unemployment compensation. Some bishops have reluctantly granted permission for especially hard-hit church members to accept this aid. Strong traditions have been severely tested in the face of economic exigency.17
A significant part of the reason for this problem is that employment is so concentrated within a small range of industries among the Elkhart-LaGrange Amish. According to an economic leader in the Holmes County Amish community, employment in the Holmes County Settlement is more widely distributed than it is in the Elkhart-LaGrange Amish community. He estimates that only about 30 percent in the Holmes settlement work for English employers, who are more likely than Amish employers to lay off workers. In general, Amish employers feel an obligation not to lay off workers but to share the burdens imposed by tough economic times. More than half of Amish workers are self-employed, for example, in carpentry crews.
One test of the cultural strength and integrity of a community and its members is their reaction to adversity. Amish employees in the Holmes County Settlement have been affected by recent economic problems, with some having their hours reduced and others having to shift from a five-day to a four-day work week. But rather than viewing this predicament as wholly negative, some have seen it as an opportunity to work more on their own homes, because prices for many building materials and services are down. The greater self-sufficiency, ingenuity, and group support found among the Amish provides them with resources not as readily found among many English who are left unemployed or underemployed. Ingenuity in job creation, a strong work ethic, and community support will very likely help the Holmes County Amish culture maintain its resilience.
Economic developments within the Holmes County Settlement also encourage its continuance in some ways while endangering traditional family arrangements in others. Some Amish businesses are actively seeking broader markets through advertising and word of mouth. Broader markets generally mean a more heterogeneous mixture of customers and partners, which in turn necessitate creativity to make such relationships viable. One especially intriguing relationship is the one between the Amish and the Japanese. Both groups prize quality, efficiency, and work commitment. Both seek to eliminate or at least minimize waste in their enterprises. Consequently, both can benefit from their relationship. At least one Amish owner of a large company has visited the Toyota plant in Kentucky to study Japanese manufacturing techniques and methods. Blending the best of both approaches may yield a business model from which English businesses might learn.
The ascetic concern among the Amish for eliminating waste and seeking efficiency extends beyond business to the health field. The Amish actively search for the most cost-effective care, and they are careful not to overdo their use of health care services. This approach can have an obvious downside, but it is a lesson for those English who abuse the use of drugs such as antibiotics and for those who are trying to make the health care system more efficient and effective.
As more Amish men and their children become employed by businesses away from their homes, relationships within their families may become further altered. The distinction between public work and private home spheres may become more accentuated, making the Amish married woman into more of a traditional housewife, one whose life experiences become increasingly different from those of her husband. Historically, this model has been more characteristic of white English families, especially during the 1940s and 1950s, than of Amish families. The tight relationships that exist within the Amish family may become looser if this trend continues.
Although Amish men are less likely than in the past to be farmers, it has been suggested that there is a farming resurgence in the Holmes County Settlement. Organic farming has gained momentum, fed by a desire on the part of many Amish to return more fully to their agricultural roots and by the demand for food that is naturally grown or bred. The theme of working with rather than against nature is found as well in the increased use among the Amish of solar, wind, and similar natural sources of energy. While they are often thought of as less progressive than their English neighbors, the Amish are national leaders in this area. Traditional peoples are generally thought of as dependent upon nature, subject to the whims of weather and soil conditions, whereas modern individuals are generally seen as independent, “controllers of” rather than “subject to” the forces of nature. But considering the mounting problems of climate change and environmental degradation, one can reasonably ask which approach is the most enlightened. The traditional perspective of the Amish may very well be the most forward-thinking.
Environmental problems are only one of the pressing issues our society faces today. Effective solutions to these and other problems are stalled because of deep suspicions, distrust, and mocking cynicism that bedevil many of our relationships. Evidence from national surveys suggests that Americans’ confidence in their institutions has declined since the 1970s, and at least half believe that other people cannot be trusted.18 This finding is discouraging, because institutions are often a major mechanism through which significant social problems are addressed. Weakened institutions mean weaker attempts to resolve social issues. Ironically, trust has declined at precisely a time when it is most needed. In a “risk society,” when problems spill across local and national borders because of globalization and advanced technologies, trust becomes an increasingly crucial requirement for the smooth operation of social relationships.19
Why is trust lower in some groups than in others? What fosters higher levels of trust? Research suggests that individuals who are in more secure socioeconomic positions are more trusting.20 This group would include white people, as opposed to members of racial or ethnic minorities, and persons with higher incomes who are married, older, and living in a rural area. Surrounding conditions that appear to decrease trust are increased numbers of scandals involving corruption, lies, or similar crimes by political or economic leaders. In other words, individuals are more comfortable who live in groups that
are better off and are prospering within the structure and culture of our current society. Clearly, those who benefit from current arrangements or are isolated from many contemporary social problems might be expected to have more optimistic outlooks.
As we found in our survey, Amish individuals also tend to be less cynical or negative in their outlooks; interestingly, and perhaps coincidentally, they also happen to fall into many of the categories that characterize those who are most trusting. That is, most tend to be economically secure and married, and they live in rural areas and are usually white. Moreover, being less dependent than most English on national institutions, they are relatively insulated from the corrosive effects of political and economic scandals.
But these socioeconomic features are not the main wellsprings of their trust in others. In large part, trust is built on the experience of one’s interactions with others, and in their tight social networks, interaction among the Amish is frequent and often deep and multifaceted. Repeated interactions in social networks provide knowledge of others, whom they can trust or distrust. In addition, trust is fostered by knowledge of and respect for the assumed character of the individuals with whom one is interacting. It is further heightened if there are fundamental similarities in backgrounds and values between the acting parties. All these elements of the trust-building process are found among the Amish. It is a combination of their identification with the similar elements within their history, strong Christian faith, and the broadly predictable behavior that flows from them that nurtures Amish trust in others. These components have also allowed them to forge the tight social networks within which trust and trustworthiness can grow. Trust, in turn, encourages a civic culture, one in which everyone works to the benefit of everyone else and a greater good.
An Amish Paradox Page 34
