Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 143 posts

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#131

Post by lupire »

Factorium wrote: post #126
zepto wrote: post #6

Good article in general, except for the title. I know many people and see many people online who understand these truths. The hard part is creating a viable alternative culture that can make collective choices about technology use. It’s also worth noting that the Amish rely on the ‘English’ I.e. American legal system and military for their defense. Their way of life doesn’t stand alone outside of American society.

The Amish are typically eligible for a lot of welfare programs, due to their low income. However, they also reject Government support as part of their ethos. Whilst the Amish are reliant on the rest of society's laws and defenses, there are other ethnocultural groups within the USA that are reliant on the rest of society for their housing and food supply. That's a lot further down the hierarchy of needs.

which other groups?

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#132

Post by squarefoot »

zepto wrote: post #127
Aerroon wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but I, as an individual, don't have to follow along. If I don't want a TV I don't have to get one. If I want a TV I should be able to get one. It shouldn't be my government or community saying that I have to get one or that I can't get one.

What if you want to transmit TV?

That is a different matter since the airwaves are a scarce resource that can't be used by everyone at the same moment, therefore it has to be regulated somehow. As an example, take the FM radio spectrum from 88 to 108 MHz; each channel has to be separated 100KHz from the next and previous ones, therefore one can have maximum 10 stations in 1 MHz, and that spectrum is 20MHz wide. The total is 200 "slots" in which fit all transmitters. Now thankfully at these frequencies radio waves don't propagate easily beyond line of sight, compared to HF which benefits from ground wave and sky wave propagation (allowing for example foreign stations reception), so -roughly- each moderately distant city can have its own 200 frequencies free of interference from the next city (state, country). Still, we have only 200 possible stations in a place where there could be thousands of people willing to set up their FM radio, which of course is not possible. Hence the need to regulate the resource.

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#133

Post by daniel-cussen »

vkou wrote: post #130
kymaz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That and getting shot.

If you're going to escalate in that direction, I'll point out that an organized group of criminals will happily escalate the issue to the point where 'Just use your guns for self-defense' is not going to end in your favor. They'll only need to make an example out of a few people to make it clear that giving in to their demands is much cheaper than fighting them.

I have my doubts about how little this scum fears death when it's really imminent eg death row; how intrinsically lucky they are to escalate and escalate, always win and never lose; and how fearlessly they react when faced with a man who hasn't crossed the law trains his gun on them, for a legitimate reason.

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#134

Post by Dudeman112 »

mikem170 wrote: post #62
satellite2 wrote: post #26

I think this articles attributes intent and wisdom where it is not due and as such should be at best considered a romanticization of their culture. Even tough it seems they understand the choice they are making regarding some technology and even tough in many case with hindsight it appears that they made some judicious choices for their society wellbeing, I argue they do not have the tools to make those choices in an…

> I argue they do not have the tools to make those choices in an unbiased manner as those tought experiments are also technological byproducts. I wonder if the rest of us use technology in an unbiased experimental manner without regard to the consequences? As the decades go by we become increasingly stressed having to deal with commutes and corporations and bureaucracies and living in a world of phone zombies, mass m…

> wonder if the rest of us use technology in an unbiased experimental manner without regard to the consequences?

There aren't bloggers out there implying the rest of us are sagely engaging/disengaging with the technology.

I think GP is annoyed by attributing unwarranted wisdom. Maybe it is a result of wisdom, but those bloggers certainly aren't giving good arguments for it.

What would we observe differently if it were regular technophobia?

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#135

Post by jerf »

zepto wrote: post #31
jerf wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could manage without our legal system, I'm sure, but I think there's some profundity in the military point. It does no good to create some sort of utopia if that utopia hasn't got an answer to smart bombs or paratroopers, etc. The fundamental game theory of the modern world's arms race has to be considered in any attempt to structure the perfect society.

Our legal system is what protects their land and property from just being taken by other Americans. It also allows them to maintain a lifestyle with minimal interaction with the state.

There are ways other than legal systems to prevent that. I'm sure they would have no problem deploying their own police forces and providing basic protections against anyone less than a military force who would try to just take their land.

Military forces are a separate problem from legal problems. I think rather a lot of the people rushing to correct me are conflating the two in their heads. When you say "just being taken by other Americans", are you thinking of a rogue criminal or some sort of organized invasion?

Personally, I suspect that even if you tried the sort of organized invasion that a civilian might try to put together that you'd still find yourself up against some stiff resistance. Criminals in general are less than excited about stealing from people when they can almost count on being shot at. They steal from people who won't shoot at them.

The problem is when you get to military levels of invasion, at the level where you start putting together forces that count on being shot at and still overpowering you.

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#136

Post by iammisc »

rvbissell wrote: post #118
iammisc wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is shunning problematic. If they didn't shun, they would no longer be amish, or be able to preserve their culture. Perhaps we should appreciate the upside of asceticism.

Note that my comment was about comparisons between the Amish & JW flavors of shunning, rather than the Amish specifically. I believe my first paragraph was clear that I think the Amish model of shunning is the more reasonable of the two. Let's also notice that you chose to say 'preserve their culture', whereas in the comment you replied to I was speaking of religions (and also, albeit implicitly, cults.) I'll come ba…

> religion & culture can be orthogonal to varying degrees

I fundamentally disagree and I think this is where a lot of Westerners get hung up on dealing with other countries. There are non-religious cultural practices for sure, but these are not practiced independent of religion.

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#137

Post by LunaSea »

Aerroon wrote: post #121
LunaSea wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Countries can't defend themselves and thus exist if they don't have a strong military force and a strong economy. Said strong economy being most of the time directly linked to the technology level of the country.

Sure, but I, as an individual, don't have to follow along. If I don't want a TV I don't have to get one. If I want a TV I should be able to get one. It shouldn't be my government or community saying that I have to get one or that I can't get one.

Not wanting a TV is one thing.

But if you don't want say a gun but then profit from an army that does use guns that does sound a bit hypocritical.

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#138

Post by zepto »

jerf wrote: post #135
zepto wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our legal system is what protects their land and property from just being taken by other Americans. It also allows them to maintain a lifestyle with minimal interaction with the state.

There are ways other than legal systems to prevent that. I'm sure they would have no problem deploying their own police forces and providing basic protections against anyone less than a military force who would try to just take their land. Military forces are a separate problem from legal problems. I think rather a lot of the people rushing to correct me are conflating the two in their heads. When you say "just being…

> I'm sure they would have no problem deploying their own police forces and providing basic protections against anyone less than a military force who would try to just take their land.

Sounds like a militia.

Also, you don’t seem to be being taking seriously what it means not to have a legal system.

For example why are you talking about criminals? If there is no legal system, there are no criminals. A bunch of guys with AR-15s and pick up-trucks and walkie talkies really wouldn’t find it hard to displace a religious community who are relying on old hunting rifles, horse drawn buggies, and no wireless comms, especially since the Amish would have families to protect.

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#139

Post by zepto »

squarefoot wrote: post #132
zepto wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you want to transmit TV?

That is a different matter since the airwaves are a scarce resource that can't be used by everyone at the same moment, therefore it has to be regulated somehow. As an example, take the FM radio spectrum from 88 to 108 MHz; each channel has to be separated 100KHz from the next and previous ones, therefore one can have maximum 10 stations in 1 MHz, and that spectrum is 20MHz wide. The total is 200 "slots" in which fit…

Are you sure it is a different matter?

The value of a TV is completely dependent on who can broadcast.

“Saying if I want a TV I should be able to buy one.” is a meaningless comment on freedom given that broadcasting is regulated.

The government doesn’t have to control who can buy TVs if it controls who can broadcast.

Re: The Amish have negotiated a pact with modernity (2018)

#140

Post by terr-dav »

zepto wrote: post #34
terr-dav wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The hard part is creating a viable alternative culture that can make collective choices about technology use. This alternative culture is impossible under capitalism, where the tendency is for any and every technology to be acquired and applied in the service of the already rich and powerful.

The tendency exists for sure, but there is nothing supporting the claim that it’s impossible . The Amish themselves are an example. Also there are other eco villages and communities that have managed.

It seems like they have chosen to abstain from capitalism and have been allowed to exist because they don’t represent a threat to the capitalist order.

Also, by definition, if collective choices are being made about the use of technology, then it’s not capitalism.

Post reply on HN