The Communistic Societies of the United States

[willow_girl]

I have this book in print form, and was delighted to find the text available online. It makes for some interesting reading!

http://www.sacred-texts.com/utopia/csus/index.htm

I doubt many Americans today know much about the communal societies that flourished in our country in the 1800s. Probably the Shakers are the most well-known. I became curious about them after visiting the Amana colonies more than 20 years ago. I now live close to another site, the village of Economy.

While none of these societies have continued into the present, many were quite successful in their day! Food for thought.

[Wayne02]

On the whole, though, these 19th century pioneers exceeded the wildest imagination of the hippies, with a whole string of prosperous agricultural colonies from New England to the Pacific.

Dang, those must have been some rocking good times!

[BoldViolet]

I have no problem with people doing it of their own accord, just don't force the rest of the population into it.

[Ernie]

So you read a book but yet failed to learn one of the most important tenets from it.

How many of those communal societies were religious in nature? Where the entire colony was in effect one big church congregation where everyone had a shared value system and a method of enforcement?

How many of those societies are gone now because they lost their shared belief system?

[Txsteader]

Originally Posted by DreamerTheresa

I have no problem with people doing it of their own accord, just don't force the rest of the population into it.

Ditto that.

[willow_girl]

How many of those communal societies were religious in nature? Where the entire colony was in effect one big church congregation where everyone had a shared value system and a method of enforcement?

Yes, I think success would be next to impossible without a highly homogenous population! Most societies shared a common ethnic heritage as well as (in some cases, pretty weird) religious beliefs.

How many of those societies are gone now because they lost their shared belief system?

I didn't re-read the whole book, but if recollection serves me correctly, celibacy was the downfall of several of the societies (Harmonists/Rappites and Shakers). The Amana colonies dissolved as a communal society during the Great Depression, with members taking stock in a for-profit business which is still in existence. (The appliance company was one of its endeavors. Likewise, the Oneida colony manufactured the eponymous silverware!)

I checked Wikipedia to see what happened to the Oneidans (also morphed into a joint-stock venture) and noted that two of their members went on to assassinate U.S. presidents (Garfield and McKinley)!

The Oneidans also were pretty kinky folks who would have given any 1960s free-love commune a run for its money, I'll bet!

I find it interesting that these communities were quite successful, acquiring thousands of acres of land as well as operating manufacturing facilities. Many persisted for more than a half-century, although there sometimes were problems during the transition between generations. (Seems the sons of leaders sometimes were not as competent as their fathers!)

I think most Americans today would argue that human nature is such that successful communal living is impossible, a mere pipe dream, but history teaches otherwise. An interesting lesson!

[Ernie]

I don't know that I'd argue communal living is impossible. There's a number of people I've met in my lifetime with whom I'd go into such a venture, if we had the means.

However I'd argue that it's pretty difficult to do so in modern times. Any time three or more people gather with the same viewpoints the government seems to swoop in and arrest or kill them.

[willow_girl]

Oh, I'm not so sure of that ... the Fellowship for Intentional Communities has 2,336 communities in its database, including Father Divine's Peace Mission Movement of Gladwyne, PA. (I liked the name.)

[watcher]

History has shown time and time and time again this system do work BUT only in small, restrictive groups. When the system is tried on the large scale with all people the wheels start falling off. You get fewer people producing and more people demanding goods.

Think about it. You put in a big garden and have veggies galore so what do you do? You give some to your friends and neighbors. But what if someone told you were going to plant a big garden and you would be allowed to keep the amount of veggies you used last year but any extra veggies were going to be taken from you and given to people you don't know? Do you think you might just not work so hard and produce less? And even if you wouldn't human nature says most people would.

[willow_girl]

History has shown time and time and time again this system do work BUT only in small, restrictive groups. When the system is tried on the large scale with all people the wheels start falling off.

That makes sense.

I wonder, though -- among small, restrictive groups, would (voluntary) communal living produce better results than independence?

The author of the book opines that the residents of several communes fared better than they would have had they set out on their own as immigrants of modest means.

I believe many immigrant groups (past and present) operate(d) in a similar (albeit less formal) fashion, pooling resources to leverage success.

I can see some potential advantages for homesteading families, too, if they were inclined to go this route.

[SquashNut]

What you are comparing to the current situation doesn't apply in any way shape or form.
In a comune every one works and every one gets what they need to survive.
What is being forced on us is criminal. The powers that be are using the needs of the people as an excuse to collect money's that will never go for the benifit of the people.
Big difference.

[willow_girl]

What you are comparing to the current situation doesn't apply in any way shape or form.

If you will go back and read all my posts carefully, you will see I made no comparisons to any present-day situations, nor did I intend do.

I think these societies are interesting, from a historical perspective, and I'm impressed by what they were able to accomplish in practical terms. Also, as I indicated in my last post, there may be some applications for present-day homesteaders. Homesteading is hard, labor-intensive work, and in most cases, families aren't as big as they used to be! So perhaps there would be some benefit to banding together with other like-minded folk. Many hands make the work light, etc.

[The Paw]

Originally Posted by willow_girl

If you will go back and read all my posts carefully, you will see I made no comparisons to any present-day situations, nor did I intend do.

I think these societies are interesting, from a historical perspective, and I'm impressed by what they were able to accomplish in practical terms. Also, as I indicated in my last post, there may be some applications for present-day homesteaders. Homesteading is hard, labor-intensive work, and in most cases, families aren't as big as they used to be! So perhaps there would be some benefit to banding together with other like-minded folk. Many hands make the work light, etc.

There are certainly modern day equivalents. In this part of the world, there are many Hutterite colonies, an Anabaptist sect somewhat similar to the Amish. They have a religous and ethnic homogeneity for sure, but they are more flexible on the use of technology. (trucks, combines, electricity and even computers are in play, TV not so much).

The colonies have both large diverse farming operations, and many have manufacturing enterprises as well. Lots of times they hire out as labour in the local area.

The colonies pay property and sales taxes, and integrate into the modern economy. I believe they get some exemptions or variations on employment standards because of the "crade to grave" compensation plan they have. In Canada, Hutterites are eligible for, and participate in the single payer health care system.

[woodsman]

Hutterian Brethren are also as communist as they come. Here is the information from the FAQ on Hutterite.org:

Ownership
Who owns what in the colony?
Goods are owned communally in the community, i.e., all moneys earned from different businesses belong to everyone on the colony. If members need different items, they ask for it and if it is a necessary item, it is bought for them. Most items are given out according to the need (Acts 2:44-47; Acts 4:32-35). Things like farm equipment, vehicles, etc, are bought and paid for by the colony and used by whoever needs or is responsible for them.

Any kind of Aagnutz (Eigennutz, any method of earning personal spending money) is frowned upon and greatly discouraged, especially by the Schmiedeleut branch. The example of Ananias and Sapphira is often sited as proof that aagnutz is a vice that ought to be avoided (Acts 5:1-11). Hutterites have some personal belongings in their homes though that the colony provides for them or allows them to purchase.

http://www.hutterites.org/faqs.htm

Fascinating.

[bowdonkey]

Sounds like the Onideans is the group for me! At least until they pass the kool-aid around, then I'll find free love elsewhere.

[SquashNut]

Harmonists/Rappites did beleive in celibesy, except the leader must have thought of his self as an elite, becase he had children and grand children while others in the group liniage were allowed to die out.
In this aspect their situation is very much like ours, with what is quickly becoming a class system.

[Prismseed]

http://www.ic.org/

Communes are still going, just noone pays much attention to them. It is amusing when McCain's brother called part of Virginia 'communist country' during the election I knew exactly what he was talking about.