# The Amish

Book review: The Amish, by Donald B. Kraybill.

It feels appropriate to review this book right after [The Dawn of
Everything](http://www.bayesianinvestor.com/blog/index.php/2022/03/10/the-dawn-of-everything/)
(TDOE). There are strange contrasts between the cultural views of the
two books.

TDOE clearly exaggerated the extent to which European civilization
disapproved of freedom and equality, yet Amish culture shows an
important kernel of truth behind that exaggeration.

The Amish strongly promote obedience as a virtue. This seems at first
glance like the antithesis of the societies which TDOE promotes, with
their contempt for most forms of obedience.

Yet Amish are selective enough about their obedience that the practical
differences are complicated. Amish pretty consistently reject commands
that conflict with religious traditions. Amish parents refuse commands
to send their kids to high school. The US military occasionally drafted
Amish youth, and got them to show up, but didn\'t get them to provide
any useful support. Some Amish communities disobey commands to put smoke
alarms in their homes.

The Amish are pretty obedient to human authorities when those
authorities give orders that seem compatible with God\'s will. But the
Amish are serious about treating human threats and rewards as
insignificant compared to those of God.

Amish peer pressure to be humble seems much more effective than any
modern liberal or progressive proposals at minimizing inequality between
living people.

Equality doesn\'t seem to be an important Amish goal, but their rules
leave almost no way to create the inequalities that TDOE or
[Piketty](http://www.bayesianinvestor.com/blog/index.php/2018/07/31/piketty/)
complain about. Most of the inequality between living Amish seems to be
a function of age.

When a husband and wife disagree, the husband\'s will prevails. But
there seems to be strong pressure to resolve all disputes by reaching a
consensus rather than by using power. Anyone who frequently used his
authority to settle disputes would likely risk being pressured to
confess to a sin such as pride.

It is said that we can tell a fair amount about how equal a country or
organization is by looking at whether it\'s depicted mainly by photos
(or statues) of its leader, versus photos of many ordinary citizens /
team members. The Amish are off the far end of this scale: they have
firm rules against displaying or posing for photographs. They also
prohibit fancy clothes, jewelry, and pretty much anything that could
signal that one person is better than another.

The Amish actively promote inequality in the sense of giving God, the
bible, and tradition very strong dominance over individual people. Yet
that\'s done in a way that prevents almost all domination of living
humans over other humans (with the main caveat here being that parents
dominate their children up through 8th grade a bit more than is the case
in many cultures).

### Democracy

The Amish are moderately democratic in the sense that TDOE promotes,
i.e. the way that juries are chosen to approximate having average people
in charge. Both TDOE and the Amish dislike modern elections - TDOE calls
them competitions between elites.

An Amish community chooses a set of candidates for leadership by a
process that requires either 2 or 3 members to nominate a candidate.
Then a leader is chosen at random from that set (I consider it random;
they consider it getting God to choose). Cultural pressure against
seeking power apparently ensures that if anyone displayed an actual
desire to be a leader, that would disqualify them. Also, leaders have at
most as much power as a typical priest would have in a Dunbar-sized
village. The Amish have approximately no hierarchy that extends beyond
Dunbar-sized groups. This is part of why the most powerful Amish can\'t
do much more than use their powers of persuasion on as many people as
can fit in a normal weekly service inside a member\'s home.

If an Amish leader abuses his power, there\'s some provision for leaders
in neighboring communities to band together top stop the abuser. That
serves as a check on accumulation of power, without any one leader or
institution gaining more power than the local leader.

What are the most powerful Amish institutions?

The local school seems to be the only Amish institution that has either
a building devoted to it or a salaried employee. There\'s little risk of
schools accumulating much power, since a school\'s only employee is
usually a young teacher who treats her job as temporary, to be replaced
when she gets married and needs to devote time to raising a family.

TDOE claims that the two features which are needed to create oppressive
states are sovereignty and bureaucracy. The Amish are pretty careful to
keep bureaucracy to levels that are barely more powerful than what is
found in an average forager society. And sovereignty (i.e. monopoly on
the use of force) is something that the Amish say belongs to God, not
humans.

### Sex, Gender, Family

What would the Amish think of the current controversy over trans women
in sports? Amish culture is rooted firmly enough in the 17th century
that they\'ll likely insist that gender reflects the role that people
serve in reproduction. But that issue wouldn\'t come up in Amish
attitudes toward sports: the Amish have little interest in
gender-segregated sports. Amish sports are clearly focused on
community-building. It is very antithetical to Amish humility to use
sports to determine who has the best genes, or best upbringing, or
whatever it is that competitive sports are optimized for doing.

Amish life focuses heavily on marriage and raising children.

Amish culture restrains many of the dreams that modern society promotes
of getting really hot sex or a romantic partner who is a perfect match.
In return, it offers a good deal more safety: a good chance of an
adequate marriage, with little risk of being abandoned by a romantic
partner, and little risk of dying alone in a hospital or nursing home.

Where modern city folk often compete with many thousands of people to
achieve romantic relationships that last a few years, Amish compete
within a roughly Dunbar-sized community, with peer pressure strongly
limiting most forms of competition. They compete typically for a couple
of years upon reaching adulthood, then stay married for life.

It reminds me of a spectrum of approaches to employment: some workers
today try lots of jobs, aiming for a match that they can be passionate
about. Whereas the typical worker a century ago aimed for an adequate
job at a location near where they grew up, with something resembling a
lifetime commitment. A moderate number of people have the aptitude for
achieving a career that brings out their passions, but I\'m guessing the
average worker will end up fairly depressed if they feel a need for such
a career.

Strict monogamy ensures that there\'s close to an even number of people
looking for husbands versus wives. That means they mostly avoid the
problem of some men being unable to get sex and romance. Over 94% of
Amish marry by age 30. That seems higher than comparable estimates of
sex and romance for the US.

This seems to be part of a broader pattern of Western culture fostering
conditions that create inequality and an epidemic of loneliness, whereas
the Amish selectively adopt a few of the benefits of Western culture,
while avoiding most of the costs.

Domestic violence seems to be less common in Amish culture - possibly
one tenth the level of American culture, although that evidence might be
biased by reluctance to report violence. In contrast, Amish have levels
of sexual abuse that seem similar to the rest of America.

About the only common use of force is spanking (used strictly as a
training tool - they don\'t condone parents being angry while spanking).

I\'ve been wondering whether Western culture leads to more trauma than
is normal. That might happen via more domestic violence than is the case
in cultures that create strong communities. Or is might happen via
pressure to achieve unnaturally ambitious goals. The evidence from Amish
life weakly supports this conjecture.

### Insurance

Amish hostility to insurance leads me to wonder whether early
[opposition](https://www.overcomingbias.com/2020/11/who-wants-social-insurance.html)
to the existence of an insurance industry was more sensible than I
previously realized.

It makes little sense for an Amish family to insure their buildings,
given that if their barn burns down, their community will rebuild one in
a few days.

The rise of insurance companies might have been a sign that strong
communities were decaying. Insurance might accelerate that decay, by
making it easier to survive without a community.

Medical insurance is a bit more complicated, but [most problems
there](https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/04/20/the-amish-health-care-system/)
are due to dysfunctional bureaucracies.

### Reason

Amish culture rejects rationalism, both in the Less Wrong sense, and in
[philosophical sense](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalism).

But it does so without much that the Amish would consider to be costs.

Amish culture consistently errs in the direction of epistemic humility.

Amish culture promotes the respect for tradition that\'s described in
Henrich\'s [The Secret Of Our
Success](http://www.bayesianinvestor.com/blog/index.php/2016/04/13/the-secret-of-our-success/).
It\'s unlikely that the Amish are deliberately preserving the conditions
under which cultural evolution worked as Henrich describes, but it would
be hard to do a better job of it.

The Amish reject much of modern science, mostly on the grounds that
humans are too fallible to accomplish most of what scientists attempt.
Amish communities are capable of accumulating knowledge the old
fashioned way.

Amish seem unusually serious about acting in ways that will increase
their hope of getting to heaven. Yet they are more reluctant than any
religious group I can think of to claim that Amish people will succeed
or that non-Amish will fail.

If I started with a strong enough prior that the basics of Christianity
were correct, it would seem fairly rational to end up with roughly the
beliefs that the Amish have.

### Population Growth

The Amish population has been doubling about every 20 years for the past
century, due to a persistently high birth rate, and a moderately
consistent pattern of retaining members.

This effect is strongest in the more conservative Amish communities,
where 6 to 10 children per family is common, and something like 75% of
children remain in their communities.

This is in sharp contrast to the [declining
fertility](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/mDkfEjt64DQEtyAmr/retrospective-on-shall-the-religious-inherit-the-earth)
in most other modern cultures.

I expect Amish population growth will continue as long as there\'s rural
land for sale near existing Amish settlements that are tolerated by the
relevant governments.

If population changes were to somehow end up as the most important trend
of the next few centuries, then I\'d expect the Amish population in
North America to stabilize by 2200 due to shortages of rural land. The
rest of the North American population would have slightly less fertility
than is needed for replacement, but enough Amish would migrate to urban
and semi-urban areas to sustain population growth. That growth would be
sub-exponential, as Amish in non-rural areas would get assimilated to a
low-fertility culture.

I.e. the meek shall inherit the earth?

### Conclusion

Without aiming directly for an egalitarian society, the Amish have
achieved something closer to that than most of us dream of.

They have sacrificed some freedom to get there. I feel rather confused
about that trade-off, because large fractions of it sidestep my usual
reasons for wanting more freedom. I\'m sure that some people are hurt by
that loss of freedom, but it\'s unclear whether it harms the average
person. Note that Amish have [substantial
freedom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumspringa) from about age 14
until they choose to either leave or become full members of the
community.

The book mostly answered my questions about the Amish. I have complaints
only about small sections of the book.

My main example: it says we need the Amish, in order to reinforce our
commitment to religious freedom. I doubt that the Amish are able to
influence that commitment. We\'re sufficiently isolated from the Amish
that it\'s somewhat unlikely that we\'d be affected if we swatted them
out of existence, which likely wouldn\'t be hard to do by accident
(Amish culture died out in Europe). Loss of the Amish would be mostly a
symptom of something deeper.

The Amish have provided us with potentially valuable evidence about how
to live a good life, but most of us will likely do little with that
evidence. There are significant costs to becoming Amish. Most of us who
have enough ambition and openness to change to consider becoming Amish
will dream of something better. Few of us will be more thoughtful about
that choice than the Amish are.