The Amish: A Reflection of How Utopians Would Exist Today?

Written in the early 1500s, Sir Thomas More was unable to foresee how this idea of Utopia would translate in modern society. One can agree with this place described, and even go as far as to say it is an ideal society that we would benefit from modeling ourselves after today; however I just wonder how those same supporters feel about converting to Amish lifestyle and customs. This utopian society he describes is very similar to the Amish sects living here in the US.

Essentially Utopia thrives and survives on the fact that there is little, if any, communication or contact with others outside their society. I believe the Amish are a sterling example of how this theory of Utopia would play out over time. The key to Utopia’s success, and furthered maintenance, rests profoundly on the necessity of isolation. 

This notion I offer can be supported by the eroding of customs, lifestyle and prominence of the Amish in the US. More and more Amish youth are leaving their communes to be apart of American life. Along with that, more and more leniency is given to the customs they have held for centuries to better adapt to the increasingly modernized and industrialized world around them. I believe the Utopian society described would inevitably succumb to the types of corruption that infects all modern societies of man if it were faced with the type of globalization that is present today.

In terms of equality and moral code, perhaps one can argue that the Utopians, and Amish, seem to have it better; however what of quality of life? Cultivating creativity and passion. Experiencing personal achievement and celebrating individuality. These are things that Utopia does not account for, or hold in any high regard. At the time of More's publication, societies that function in this manner had not been observed over long periods of time to know whether or not such a place would actually function as a "utopia" for those who live there. 

In my opinion, the Amish represent a longitudinal study of how a place like Utopia can exist over time, and how such a society would maintain itself today. I believe they highlight the efficiency of such a community being self-reliant; however the issues of discontent that arise from the forced compliancy and suffocated individuality that is inherent in such a society, along with the knowledge of starkly different ways of life that is available to them due to industrialization and globalization, reflects the reason a place like Utopia would not exist in harmony over time.

What we find is that Utopia sounds ideal in theory. 

Yes, they may meet all practical functions to live such as food, shelter, clothing, occupation, protection, however there are more to modern man's needs than merely survival. This can be seen with the Amish communities. Their way of life is almost exactly how Utopia is described, and most agree that this way of life is undesirable compared to American society and culture. This is not to say that there isn’t much to be learned from Amish culture and customs, however I believe the key point here is “learned from.” We can gain an arguably purer perspective from their customs and ideals without having to convert to their lifestyle, just as Europeans could learn from the description of Utopia, and consider adjusting aspects of society, without supporting the complete upheaval of Capitalism for Communism.

Obviously the Amish culture is based wholly on religious beliefs, however their lifestyle, moral code, general isolation, work ethic, rules of dressing, communal self-sufficiency etc. can be closely paralleled to that described for Utopians. So do you agree that the plight of the Amish, that are trying to maintain their customs and culture, are a good example of how More’s Utopia would fail to stand the test of time?

Letter: From Confused Post-Grad to Her Friend

Dear Tess, 

    I've been feeling weird again lately. It's hard to describe how I feel, but it's just not "normal." I find myself feeling very lost since graduating and constantly wondering- what defines a person? What defines a life well spent? How must one tread this steep path of existence without a map to find their way?

    Ya know, I often preach truths and consider myself endowed with certain answers to the mystical journey of satisfying existence, however I cannot seem to reach them. I do not know how to acquire the results I seek, yet I believe with every fiber of my being that I have been given the equations to get there. But what is one to do with the answers- with the means to reach their personal all encompassing end- when they are inept with the understanding of how to use them?

    I don't for a moment believe that all have been given this ability to see the truth of life and their desired ultimate goals; however I hesitate to call this a gift. At times this seeming "eternal wisdom" feels like a burden to carry. To know what you should be, and to see how beautiful like can be, before you fully possess the capacity to properly employ the necessary steps toward that illuminating future is often debilitating and all consuming in its very nature. It's like I feel too much too soon and know too much too prematurely for this to show to benefit me in any way beyond passionate bursts of verbal wisdom in the shape of outward declarations to a mind unstable. 

    I'm writing to you, Tess, because I cannot keep these thoughts and feelings to myself anymore. My thoughts reside within me as a knot in my conscious being. Trying to assert my time and energy toward unravelling this knot has shown to inhibit me from making any concrete progress in life, outside of my inner struggle that is my current existence.

    I can see the light at the end of this tunnel I'm in. I know I will find my place in this world, and that I will fulfill every goal and dream I've set for myself, I just feel like I'm struggling with turning these dreams into reality and myself into a full adult. 

    I look forward to hearing back from you, and I'd also like to hear about how you've been as well.

                                         Sincerely,

                                                 Kate

Journalism's Affect on the Colonization of the New World and the Imposition of Democracy in the Middle East

When reading Hariot’s travel journal, I was keen to keep in mind how his accounts were meant to persuade his European audience to support this colonization. His audience was living in a time of little prospect for social mobility, and thereby highly vulnerable to the appeal of a land of boundless opportunity and possibility. By exaggerating and accentuating the native cultures as being primitive and simple, Hariot depicted these native populations in a way that Europeans wouldn't feel as badly about colonizing or, if need be, killing. I believe these alluring ideas about the potential this new world would hold, led to the acceptance and rationalization of European supremacy over the seemingly savage native population and any land they held. This tactic is one that would not fare in our humanitarian global society that we live in today.

Just as governments in power during the time of these travel journals used these writings to promote and gain mass support for the colonization of the "new world," perhaps the governments in power today are utilizing the reports and writings of journalists and news correspondents to gain the support of imposing democracy throughout the Middle East. The difference is that we are living in a post-colonization, post-slavery, post-WWII society. Strict ethical codes have been established that all nations are expected to abide by. In today's society we would not accept learning of more primitive cultures and agree to their colonization or mass killing. However, if a seemingly less civilized society--or nation of people--was deemed as being savage and a threat to innocent people, especially our own nation, we may see the great majority agree to the use of military force to establish a democracy that we see fit.

I am not calling everything we learn and read about in the news to be propaganda or some kind of conspiracy theory. I just think it would be reasonable to suggest there is a distinct possibility--just as society has evolved in so many ways to become more humanistic based on the trials and tribulations of history--that the methods of delivering information to the public, by those aiming to control what we’re told and steered to believe, have evolved to cater to this new social context as well. Therefore a practical way for a government to succeed in an agenda to radically change a group of people's way of life today, would be to convince their citizens--through journalism and the media-- that the elusive "other" is in some way a threat to innocent people, and to promote the establishment of democracy, by military force, as socially acceptable and even ethically obligatory.

So the question I leave you with is: Is the journalism we form our opinions with today necessarily any different that the travel journals, such as Hariot’s, that Europeans based their opinions on during the years leading up to colonization? One could say that the travel writings catered to describing the native populations in such a way that would make it easier for their audience to support questionable treatment of these people and their land, for the better good of themselves. Just as one could also say that news journalism of today reports on and describes the Middle Eastern populations in such a way that would make it easier for their audience, us, to support questionable military action and imposition of our political ideology, for the benefit of feeling safer and possible control over oil.


What I am offering here is not necessarily a directly paralleled situation. I do not believe that our nation has ulterior motives, or is in any way seeking to claim territory through our involvement in the Middle East. My only intention is to highlight how we are now, as we were then, only as informed and aware of our nation's political agenda, as the reports and writings that they provide us with--specifically aimed to shape our beliefs-- through journalism and the media.