Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
GoluboiOgon
Aug 19, 2017

by Nyc_Tattoo

Helsing posted:

It is really fascinating to see an outsider interpretation of the Amish and you can really see how he is using them to make arguments about the failures of centralization. From the perspective of the Chinese government the Amish might seem like an unacceptable liability because they refuse to fully integrate with the larger society, but Wang clearly thinks that this is a superior system when he writes that: "Some management methods in American society are actually unmanaged. This is a more effective management method under certain conditions."

This is a fascinating criticism of China but is it an accurate read on the Amish? I think Wang overstates the case. The Amish might not drive cars but plenty of them use modern tractors. I think there are also more institutionalized vectors for engagement with the outside world than this author admits - the Amish are a lot more influenced by and integrated into modern society than they might seem to be at first blush. That having been said, I don't think any of this undermines his overall point about hands-off management of different social groups being a potentially more effective way of buying social peace.

It seems really odd to me that he thinks of the amish as ethnic minorities. they certainly don't think of themselves as non-white. they may seem technologically backwards now, but even in the 1930s the average us farmer still used horses for farming instead of tractors; when the amish settled in iowa they wouldn't have been seen as inferior technologically. the only time the amish were ever discriminated against was for speaking german during wwi.

they are allowed to reject modernity now because they participated in settling 'empty' lands from which the indians had been removed, and because they are actively participating in capitalism. they may still use horse-drawn carriages, but they put the proceeds from their organic produce and hand-made furniture into modern banks. they aren't really separately managed economically, they still take out loans from banks like the rest of farmers in the us. they may not use atms, but local banks have teller windows that can fit horse-drawn carriages.



also, thank you for translating this kangxi. i'm not sure i've read anything quite like it before.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

GoluboiOgon
Aug 19, 2017

by Nyc_Tattoo

Glazius posted:

This is a fascinating read!

"The changes in nature cannot be avoided" is a pretty good turn of phrase for the things a farmer has to take care of without machines.

Was migrant work a huge factor in American farming at the time? Is that going to be brought up in a later chapter?

he mentions a 'long-time worker'. plus, he doesn't need to spend that much time farming with all the tractors, + his wife, + his father, + his kid (who definitely did pig related chores for 12+ years). as i understand it, migrant labor on farms is usually for crops that need to be picked by hand like fruits and vegetables. you don't need that much in the way of hand labor for corn and soybeans if you have modern tools, which this farmer clearly does.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply