Although the Amish could be termed a society of "high school dropouts" by the standards of the larger culture, (because they attend school only through grade 8), there is practically no illiteracy among them. This despite the fact that most Amish children go to one or two room rural parochial schools and are taught by Amish teachers who themselves have only eighth grade educations. In addition, young Amish men can almost always find employment, either within their own communities or in Mennonite or "English" owned enterprises. The willingness of many employers to hire Amish workers, even during periods of high unemployment, is related to their well-known commitment to the work ethic, to their traditional craft skills and oftentimes, to their acceptance of lower than average wage scales.

Except for some alcoholism, there is almost no adult drug abuse in Amish communities. Neither are illegitimacy nor family disintegration commonplace. Nevertheless, the Amish do face a number of challenges to their traditional ways of life-and Amish lifestyles carry their own kinds of stresses and problems. Pressures for change have been especially intense in those settlements that have experienced the expansion of the larger society into areas that were once predominantly Amish and agriculture, e.g., Lancaster County, Pennsylvania or Geauga County, Ohio. Some of the pressures affecting settlements include the external influences of urbanization, industrialization and tourism and the internal influences of high rates of population growth, coupled with a related movement out of farming and into factory work. Today, only about half of Amish household heads are farmers and, in some settlements, fewer than a third farm, with many others being employed in non-traditional occupations. Although farming remains by far, the most widely preferred occupation among young Amish men, the increasing scarcity of affordable farmland, which has been exacerbated by urban sprawl, has forced the acceptance of other occupations.

Many in the Amish community believe that factory work contributes to defections from the faith among their youth. (About 15%-20% of persons born Amish leave their communities before joining the church but the Amish population continues to grow rapidly due to a birthrate of about seven children per family). An Amish leader recently told me that there had been several (unprecedented) divorces in the Geauga settlement during the past two years, all of which had involved Amish men who worked in factories and who had entered into relationships with non-Amish female coworkers. Despite such problems, most observers believe that Amish culture will survive well into the foreseeable future, although certainly not without some forms of accommodation and change. While Amish society should not be romanticized, nor viewed as a utopian ideal, its ability to largely avoid most of the social problems confronting modern America, i.e., crime, suicide, welfarism, homelessness, family breakdown, unemployment, illegitimacy, drug dependency, social class conflict, illiteracy, etc., should be acknowledged as the extraordinary phenomena that it is – and one that merits close attention and careful investigation on the part of social scientists.

We can lean a great deal about ourselves by studying cultures that are different from our own. And within the United States, there are few subcultures that differ as much from the American mainstream as that of the Amish.

Hostetler (1980) has referred to the Amish as a counterculture and Kraybill (1989, 44) also views them as being countercultural, writing that "the quilt of Amish culture is upside down in many ways … (defying) the taken for granted assumptions of modernity."

In my own work on the Amish, I have further developed the notion that the Amish are a counterculture, theorizing that they belong to a broad category of countercultures which have appeared and reappeared throughout history, i.e., that they represent a subtype of religious anarchist society (Foster, 1987). My purposes here are, (1) to briefly explain why the Amish are countercultural anarchists and, (2) to detail some of the ways in which their culture views the values and institutions of the larger society.

For example, unlike religious fundamentalists, the Amish, who refer to themselves simply as Christians, do not proselytize, do not announce that they have been "born again" (they believe that God alone knows who has achieved salvation) and they do not, under any circumstance, condone the use of deadly force against other human beings, either by individuals, legal institutions or governments.

While some fundamentalists view the Amish as being a misguided sect whose members stand in need of being "born again," the Amish see the fundamentalists as being excessively prideful, overly-emotional and too much given to verbalizations of piety instead of good works. Because the Amish strongly distrust religious emotionalism, individualism, and above all, charismatic styles of preaching, they try to keep their young people strictly away from such fundamentalist-sponsored activities as revival campaigns, Sunday Schools and Bible study classes which, in the past, have, at times, led to conversions and defections. The style of Amish church services is, in fact, almost the antithesis of that of fundamentalist churches, while the latter services are emotionally charged, very verbal, cathartic and, to some degree, individually expressive, the former are emotionally restrained, punctuated by periods of silence, predictable and ritualized.

Such considerations have led some scholarly observers to conclude that the Amish more closely resemble "introspective mystics" than they do religious fundamentalists (Plancke, 1986). The Amish mistrust of words and their use of what Hostetler (1980, 1989) has termed the "silent discourse", both in their religious services and in everyday situations, reflect an almost Zen-like acceptance of silence and inaction as being appropriate ways of dealing with certain of life’s mysteries and paradoxes.

Taking Christ’s Sermon on the Mount as a literal moral credo, the Amish have historically refused to serve in the military services of various nations as combatants. Following the mass migration of Amish from Europe to the United States during the 18^th and 19^th centuries, the Amish won the right to serve in the military as non-combatant conscientious objectors. However, some conscripted Amishmen have continued to choose the option of imprisonment during wartime, rather than accepting alternative service as conscientious objectors (Hostetler, 1989).

The Amish have further attempted to minimize their involvement with the larger society’s legal system which violates their beliefs in two respects: (1) it attempts to employ force to secure conformity to its norms and(2) it requires the swearing of oaths in courts of law. The rejection of law as a legitimate means of social control by the Amish, in favor of custom, which is created by the members of local communities, puts them squarely in league with the beliefs of such ancient anarchists as Lao Tse and with such modern anarchists as Kropotkin (Foster, 1987). Furthermore, the rejection of the use of force, together with their support of a strict separation of church and state, separates the Amish, on the one hand, from most religious fundamentalists and on the other hand, from nearly all political conservatives.

Using a folk model to characterize the Amish is equally inappropriate. The folk model is inappropriate because folk societies are characterized by non-rational, or irrational, conformity to traditional norms, whereas the members of Amish communities rationally evaluate proposed innovations in the light of their traditional values. To borrow Weber’s term, the Amish typically engage in Wertrational action, which means that they do employ reason but they employ it so as to achieve value-determined goals. For instance, in the process of evaluating a new technology or a proposed social practice, members of Amish church communities publicly analyze and discuss the probable consequences of adopting the innovation before arriving at democratically-ratified community decisions. If the adoption of an innovation is seen by the members as being destructive of their cultural values, or as being disruptive of the human organization of their small communities, it will be rejected, despite the fact that it might offer a more efficient means of accomplishing work or of achieving some instrumental goal. Innovations are not rejected by the Amish merely because they are "modern", however, and they have accepted a number of technologies that they believe will not adversely influence their lifestyles (Foster, 1984).

The wellspring and continuing inspiration for Amish anarchism is religion, and is to be found in the Anabaptist interpretation of the Holy Bible. Two of the most important biblical passages for Anabaptists are the scriptural admonitions to "Be unconformed to the world" and to "Be not yoked to unbelievers."

Being unconformed to the world means, to the Amish, that they are obliged to seek conformity to the norms of Christianity and to the role model provided by the life of Jesus. Yet it is left to each church district to develop its own specific interpretations of precisely how to be different, e.g., in matters of local technological adaptations, permissible occupations, allowable places of residence, and so on. These matters become included in the ordnung, or democratically-formulated rules of the church community, and, as such, provide a certain amount of needed flexibility. The ordnung also helps to account for differences in practices between Amish church districts. (If these differences become sufficiently great, they can lead to a situation in which church districts are "not in full fellowship," that is, in which their members are not permitted to attend each others church services).

The model that the Amish look to for the size, organization and relational style of their communities is that of the relationship between Jesus and his disciples. The model is that of a gemeinschaft culture, a culture emphasizing close and intense primary group relationships. Ideally, it becomes the basis for a community of love, an extended family, which has no need for rigid hierarchies, formal laws or authoritarian edicts.

The internal solidarity of Amish communities is further strengthened by the fact that only manual occupations are acceptable resulting in a minimal division of labor and specialization. ("By the sweat of thy brow wilt thou earn thy bread"). Although most Amish families continue to exercise control over the instruments of production which produce their incomes, i.e., as self-employed farmers or craftspersons, the same is not true for those Amish who are employed by outsiders. However, this difference has not led to the formation of distinct social classes among the Amish, possibly because church district rules and the force of tradition have served to limit the size and profitability of their business enterprises.

The Amish are not historically unique as a type of culture but find their counterparts in other religious anarchist societies with pacifist leanings. One finds similarities for example between the Amish way and the ancient Taoists of China, the Moslem Sufis of Persia and the Gnostic Christians of Europe. In each instance, these peaceful anarchists tended to non-violently reject the formal institutions, laws and technologies of large-scale bureaucratized civilization in favor of the informal morality and the simple technologies of small-scale sacred communities. Oftentimes, as with the Amish, or their Anabaptist cousins, the Hutterites, these groups have been persecuted by bureaucrats and government officials and have forced to seek sanctuary in remote and inhospitable regions. Here, they often developed close relationships with the natural world as well as unique strategies of agricultural survival (Foster, 1987). It is not difficult to find examples of modern thinkers who are representative of the latter version of anarchism. Among the best-known may be counted Thoreau, Tolstoy, Gandhi and Schumacher.

Table 1 summarizes some of the many contrasts between Amish values and those of the American mainstream culture. The differences could hardly be more pronounced and they contribute to the deep and institutionalized sense of alienation which the Amish feel toward the secular urban society. While such differences do help the Amish in preserving their cultural boundaries and beliefs against the invasive forces of modernity [they] have also contributed to culture conflict and to persecution by the larger society as the following examples and materials should illustrate. I have (somewhat arbitrarily) chosen to focus upon Amish values involving materialism, technology, art, deviant behavior, and non-violence to demonstrate the schism that exists between the Amish and "English" world views.

While many Americans regard the Amish as being materialistic, e.g., "They have money but they don’t spend it," or "They drive a hard business bargain," the Amish think of the "English" as being materialistic and wasteful. This is because Amish communities set definite limits upon such things as wages, prices and the amount of land that a family may own, while there are no comparable limits placed upon the earnings or holdings of non-Amish persons. Even those Amish families who operate their own businesses, as previously noted, are subject to the control of their community regarding such matters as the nature, size and operational methods of businesses. The material simplicity of the typical Amish home reflects the belief that outer simplicity is linked to inner spirituality - a belief that is echoed in the teachings of Zen Buddhism. The Amish also attempt to shield their children from the various forms of media advertising to prevent the development of a consumer mentality.

An interesting example of how differently the two cultures view material incentives occurred during the making of the Paramount movie "Witness" in Lancaster county Pennsylvania during the summer of 1984. Because the filmmakers wanted to film some of the movies scenes on an authentic working Amish farm, they offered financial remuneration to any Amish landowner who was interested. There were no takers. Paramount then publicly offered $260,000 for the use of an Amish farm as a film site. Not one Amishman agreed (Parsons, 1986). The Amish were so troubled by the fact that the Pennsylvania Bureau of Motion Picture and TV Development had solicited Paramount Pictures to shoot on location in Lancaster that they took the unusual step of sending a delegation of bishops to the state capital to register a protest to the Lieutenant Governor (Kraybill, 1989). The Amish protested that they had not even been consulted about the film. Kraybill writes that the moviemakers violated Amish beliefs in three ways: first, they had always opposed films, photography and television; second, they had traditionally avoided publicity, and third, Hollywood symbolized worldliness, sex and violence in the Amish mind (Kraybill, 1989). In the meeting one of the bishops reportedly mentioned that the Amish might move entirely out a Lancaster County if the state could not assure them that other films would not be made in the future without their consent. After two subsequent meetings with state officials, a promise was extracted from state that stipulated, among other things, that Pennsylvania would refuse to deal with film companies that attempted to film the Amish without their consent or to trespass on their on their property (Kraybill 1989). However, it was too late to stop the filming of Witness, which was successfully completed and which became a big box-office success, grossing some $37.7 million in its first six weeks and increasing tourism to Lancaster County during that period by 13 percent (Kraybill 1989).

The following letter was written by an Amish girl to (then) Governor Thornburgh of Pennsylvania, protesting the making of Witness. It conveys some of the reasons why the Amish were distressed about the filming (Source: Hostetler, 1989: 275):

Dear Governor,

I am a young girl living with my parents. I am writing for the majority of us Amish people. It is concerning the movie Witness .

It is out of character for us to defend ourselves. But in reality the time has come when we must speak up. This is a necessary issue. On most issues we have mainly used faith and prayer as our sources of defense. We have mostly let others (who respect us) speak up for us. We feel they are better qualified. We do not ask others to come to our defense, although we are thankful for what they do to help us.

Our concerns about the movie may seem small to you, but for us it is no small thing. We are disappointed to learn that Hollywood was actually invited to come here by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. We realize the state may need money, but we question whether making a movie will pay off in the long run.

First, we Amish feel we are being used to lure tourists to our community. We do not have any resentment against tourists, but it is the tourist attractions that work against us. The making of the movie and then advertising it "As Seen in the Movie Witness" (by the Pennsylvania Dutch Visitors Bureau) means that more motels and amusement centers will be needed. Where will these places be built? On farmlands? This makes it very hard for us as farmers. We are gradually being crowded out by commercialization.

Second, we are opposed to having so much attention drawn to us. There are those in our areas who are jealous of us for receiving all this attention. They hate us for it. They imply that we enjoy all this attention, which is very false. Concerning either our bad points or our good points, we do not enjoy all this attention. Those who do come to see us in reality are often disappointed and lose respect for us. All this popularity turns into hate against us. Our hands are tied. We are not living this way to attract attention. We want to be left alone like other humans. We are opposed to having our souls marketed.

Could not greater blessings be brought to Lancaster County if the wishes and religion of the Christians were respected? We are not ungrateful for all your efforts to serve our state and country. But please, if it is within your power, do not allow any more movies to be made about us Amish in the future. Please consider. Thank you.

become the only true masters of technology. They are mostly farmers, and they do most of their farm work by hand and by the use of horses and mules. They are pacifists, they operate their own local schools, and in other ways hold themselves aloof from the ambitions of a machine-based society. And by doing so they have maintained the integrity of their families, their community, their religion and their way of life. They have mastered one of the fundamental paradoxes of our condition: we can make ourselves whole only by accepting our partiality, by living within our limits, by being human-not trying to be gods.

In any event, a story told by Monroe Beachy, an Amishman who lives near Sugarcreek, Ohio, provides a good insight into the Amish attitude toward technology - and what it means to be Amish (Source: Hostetler 1989:272).

There are many churches. For example: Church of God, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Church of the Brethren, Christian and Missionary Alliance, United Church of Christ, Church of the Nazarene, Quaker, Mormon, Lutheran, Methodist, Moravian, Presbyterian, Salvation Army, Unitarian, Christian Scientist, Episcopalians, Catholic, Jew, Muslim and so on.

It is interesting to notice that most of these came into being after 1525, which is usually considered as the year when ours started. Now, of course, we dress differently and our lifestyle is different, but are they the only differences between the Amish and all these other churches?

Well, let me tell you a story: Some time ago a group of fifty-two people chartered a bus and came to Holmes county to see the Amisih. They had arranged to have an Amishman meet them and answer some of their questions.

The first question was: "We all go to church," and they named some of these churches, "so we know about Jesus, but what does it mean to be Amish?"

The Amishman thought a bit and then he asked a question of his own. "How many of you have TV in your homes?" Fifty-two hands went up. "Now, how many of you feel that perhaps you would be better off without TV in your homes" Again fifty-two hands went up. "All right. Now, how many of you are going to go home and get rid of your TV?" Not one hand went up!

Now that is what it means to be Amish. As a church, if we see or experience something that is not good for us spiritually, we will discipline ourselves to do without. The world in general does not know what it is to do without!

The Amish exercise strict control over various forms of artistic expression in their communities. Some art forms are entirely prohibited, for instance, the playing of musical instruments, as well as dancing and photography. Painting is permitted if the subjects are "natural", i.e., animals, landscapes or farm settings. There are no individual portraits or sensual depictions of human forms (in drawings or paintings) and often the work is done on slate or wood (or even) on a sawblade, rather than on canvas.

The singing of hymns, in German, is encouraged during "visiting Sundays," which alternate with "church Sundays." There is no musical accompaniment during "singings" and the song are taken from the Ausbund, which is the oldest known Protestant hymnal in existence. The hymns often recount the sufferings of Christian martyrs and are sung in a slow and plaintive manner.

Folk arts flourish among the Amish but these, e.g., quilt-making, embroidery or furniture-decorating, tend to be quite stylized and do not much reflect the individualized imprint of the artist’s personality.

The Amish attitude toward art is a response to their belief that depicting the human form is an expression of pride and egotism.1 Humility, not pride, is the personality ideal. In more conservative Amish homes, even calendars depict only natural scenes or landscapes and bathroom mirrors tend to be smaller or are partially taped over.

Amos Troyer is a 60 year old Amish farmer of my acquaintance whose family suffered a tragedy some 15 years ago when their buggy was struck by a drunk driver. One child was killed outright, another remains in a wheelchair and a third is now in his twenties but was left permanently brain-damaged and mentally retarded.

Once, Amos said, "The modern world is always in a hurry, always rushing but its headed nowhere important. When you’re going down the highway in your buggy, the cars come up behind you fast, real close, and some honk their horns. Maybe one goes fast around you then it just runs into a driveway and stops. Why?" He continued, "The alcohol and drugs are getting worse but putting people in jail won’t stop it. They ought to burn down all those expensive prisons because you can’t force people to be good. Youngsters learn not be good in their families and churches but these are not respected today. That is why we try to keep ourselves separate from the world." "But what, I asked, would be done with all of the criminals if there were no prisons to hold them?" Amos replied, "I’m not sure but I think people need to be taught that if they commit harmful acts, they ought to be ashamed of themselves... they need to be trained to feel guilty when they’re in the wrong. Children need to develop a conscience. They had a good idea back in Colonial times when they put peoples’ hands and feet in the stocks and flogged them. It made criminals feel ashamed but afterward they could go home to their families and that was less cruel and costly than today’s prisons. Of course, there are some people you can’t shame into obedience - we (Amish) have asked these kinds of people to leave our communities. Why couldn’t you send these sorts of people to a Devil’s Island somewhere?"

While non-violent resistance to government authorities is apt to be associated, in the modern mind, with the teachings of Thoreau or Gandhi or their followers, the Amish have long practiced non-violent civil disobedience based upon their understanding of the teachings of Jesus. Although they are generally among the most law-abiding of people, the Amish have historically refused to obey laws that they have interpreted as contradicting their Christian beliefs. For example, in the past, the Amish refused to comply with laws enforcing compulsory high school attendance and many parents were jailed, or had their properties confiscated, until the U.S. Supreme Court granted an exemption in 1972, in the case of Yoder v. Wisconsin. Other historical examples of civil disobedience include Amish non-conformity to the Social Security and Selective Service Systems, and more recently, to local building and zoning ordinances2.

The Martyr’s Mirror is a sacred Amish text that recounts the tortures and executions of thousands of early Christians and Anabaptists. As part of the Anabaptist revolt against the established church and state during the Reformation period in Germany, Holland, and Switzerland, the Amish were severely persecuted and eventually, driven entirely out of the Continent, where none remain today.

An often-quoted and telling story from the Martyr’s Mirror communicates the Amish ideals of non-violent resistance, altruism and martyrdom. In the story, Dirck Willems, a Dutch Anabaptist, is fleeing from religious persecution and arrest by local authorities in 1569. In an effort to escape, he runs across a frozen lake. He is closely pursued by a sheriff but the sheriff falls through the lake’s thin ice and cannot regain his footing. Willems returns and rescues the sheriff, knowing that he will be burned at the stake for his efforts. Following the rescue, the weeping sheriff delivers Willems to a certain fate at the hands of his executioners (Foster 1987)

The foregoing examples of Amish cultural perspectives have emphasized areas in which Amish values and beliefs diverge from those of the mainstream culture. This approach was employed to illustrate that the Amish are, indeed, an anarchistic counterculture. However, it should be pointed out that there are certainly other areas in which the two cultures converge. For example, the Amish hold the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights in the highest esteem because these documents have furnished the basis for the greater degree of religious and political freedom which they have enjoyed in America. Likewise, the Amish do believe in the right of government to exact taxes from citizens and, contrary to much popular opinion, they do pay federal, state, and local taxes. Nevertheless, the essence of being Amish is being "different from the world" and of being a people "who live in this world but who are not of this world." That is why I have focused upon differences, instead of similarities.

But what lessons, if any, can the larger culture take from the example of the Amish? Perhaps, most importantly, the Amish society demonstrates a wide range of unappreciated possibilities to American society. For instance:

• That it is humanly possible to develop a workable economic system that is not based upon the principles of universal greed and material enrichment.
• That it is possible for moral values to take precedence over technological "progress" and economic gain.
• That it is possible for people to actually veto the acceptance of new technologies or social practices that offer comfort or convenience.
• That it is possible to socialize children into moral and altruistic behaviors.
• That it is possible for a society to avoid the development of a consumer mentality.
• That community life is still possible and that it is possible for communities to solve most of their own problems.
• That it is possible to limit the growth of governmental bureaucracies.
• That it is possible to prevent the forces of modernity form engulfing all cultures and subcultures that stand in their path.
• That it is possible for appropriate technologies to be effectively and profitably employed, both in agriculture and in small enterprises.
• That it is possible to avoid social class conflicts.
• That it is possible for a peaceful society to exist without laws, lawyers, police and/or prisons.
• That it is possible to teach people self-discipline and to habituate them to living within community-imposed limits.
• That it is possible that the individual and his or her personal goals are not the supreme reality.

And so forth. But will any of these possibilities ever be actualized within the American mainstream? Perhaps some will be. There is currently a great deal of interest in Amish agricultural techniques on the part of scholars and farmers who are advocates of sustainable agriculture or organic farming. Also, the use of other appropriate technologies by the Amish has stimulated interest among naturalists and environmentalists the world over. While I personally find these developments to be worthy and hopeful, a macrohistorical view suggests that civilizations tend to change their core values very slowly, except perhaps, during times of major crisis. Therefore, I generally find myself in agreement with the poet, who so skeptically wrote "The world, the flesh, the Devil, always win..."

REFERENCES

Berry, Wendell. 1977. The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture. New York: Avon Books.

Foster, Thomas W. 1984 "Separation and survival in Amish society." Sociological Focus 17:1-15

Foster, Thomas W. 1987 "The Taoists and the Amish: kindred expressions of ecoanarchism." The Ecologist 17: 9-14.

Hostetler, John A. 1980. Amish Society. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hostetler, John A. 1989. Amish Roots: A Treasury of History, Wisdom and Lore. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Joll, James. 1966. The Anarchists. New York: Grosset and Dunlap.

Kraybill, Donald B., J.A. Hostetler and D.G. Shaw. 1986. "Suicide patterns in a religious subculture: the Old Order Amish." International Journal of Moral and Social Studies 1: 249-262.

Kraybill, Donald B. 1989 The Riddle of Amish Culture. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Parsons, William T. 1986. "The pernicious effects of Witness upon plain-worldly relations (in) Werner Enninger et. al. Internal and External Perspectives on Amish and Mennonite Life. Essen: Unipress.

Plancke, Fritz. 1986. "The Amish way: a Taoist approach (in) Werner Enninger et. al. Internal and External Perspectives on Amish and Mennonite Life. Essen Unipress.

Plato. 1942. Five Dialogues. Translated by B. Jowett. Roslym, NY: Walter J. Black, Inc.