Bright green environmentalism is an environmental philosophy and movement that emphasizes the use of advanced technology, social innovation, eco-innovation, and sustainable design
to address environmental challenges. This approach contrasts with more
traditional forms of environmentalism that may advocate for reduced
consumption or a return to simpler lifestyles.
Origin and evolution of bright green thinking
The term bright green, coined in 2003 by writer Alex Steffen, refers to the fast-growing new wing of environmentalism, distinct from traditional forms.
Bright green environmentalism aims to provide prosperity in an
ecologically sustainable way through the use of new technologies and
improved design.
Proponents promote and advocate for green energy, electric vehicles, efficient manufacturing systems, bio and nanotechnologies, ubiquitous computing, dense urban settlements, closed loop materials cycles and sustainable product designs. One-planet living is a commonly used phrase. Their principal focus is on the idea that through a combination of well-built communities, new technologies and sustainable living practices, the quality of life can actually be improved even while ecological footprints shrink.
Around the middle of the century
we'll see global population peak at something like 9 billion people, all
of whom will want to live with a reasonable amount of prosperity, and
many of whom will want, at the very least, a European lifestyle. They
will see escaping poverty as their nonnegotiable right, but to deliver
that prosperity at our current levels of efficiency and resource use
would destroy the planet many times over. We need to invent a new model
of prosperity, one that lets billions have the comfort, security, and
opportunities they want at the level of impact the planet can afford. We
can't do that without embracing technology and better design.
The term bright green has been used with increased frequency
due to the promulgation of these ideas through the Internet and recent
coverage by some traditional media.
Dark greens, light greens and bright greens
Alex Steffen describes contemporary environmentalists as being split into three groups, dark, light, and bright greens.
Light Green
Light greens see protecting the environment first and foremost as a personal responsibility. They fall into the transformational activist
end of the spectrum, but light greens do not emphasize environmentalism
as a distinct political ideology, or even seek fundamental political reform. Instead, they often focus on environmentalism as a lifestyle choice. The motto "Green is the new black" sums up this way of thinking, for many. This is different from the term lite green, which some environmentalists use to describe products or practices they believe are greenwashing, those products and practices which pretend to achieve more change than they actually do (if any).
In The Song of the Earth, Jonathan Bate
notes that there are typically significant divisions within
environmental theory. He identifies one group as “light Greens” or
“environmentalists,” who view environmental protection primarily as a
personal responsibility. The other group, termed “dark Greens” or “deep
ecologists,” believes that environmental issues are fundamentally tied
to industrialized civilization and advocate for radical political
changes. This distinction can be summarized as “Know Technology” versus
“No Technology” (Suresh Frederick in Ecocriticism: Paradigms and Praxis).
Bright Green
More recently, bright greens emerged as a group of
environmentalists who believe that radical changes are needed in the
economic and political operation of society in order to make it
sustainable, but that better designs, new technologies and more widely
distributed social innovations are the means to make those changes—and
that society can neither stop nor protest its way to sustainability. As Ross Robertson writes,
[B]right
green environmentalism is less about the problems and limitations we
need to overcome than the "tools, models, and ideas" that already exist
for overcoming them. It forgoes the bleakness of protest and dissent for
the energizing confidence of constructive solutions.
The book was translated into several languages, and in short order "sold a million copies."
According to a 2021 essay in The New York Times, "In the 19th-century United States, only Uncle Tom’s Cabin sold more copies in its first years than 'Looking Backward.'" Bellamy's book influenced many intellectuals, and appears by title in many socialist
writings of the day. "It is one of the few books ever published that
created almost immediately on its appearance a political mass movement."
In the United States alone, over 162 "Bellamy Clubs" sprang up to discuss and propagate the book's ideas. Owing to its commitment to the nationalization
of private property and the desire to avoid use of the term
"socialism," this political movement came to be known as Nationalism
(not to be confused with the political ideology of nationalism). The novel also inspired several utopian communities.
Synopsis
Bellamy's time travel novel tells the story of a hero figure named Julian West, a young American who, at the end of the 19th century, falls into a deep, hypnosis-induced sleep and wakes up 113 years later. He finds himself in the same location (Boston, Massachusetts), but in a totally changed world: It is the year 2000, and while he was sleeping, the United States has been transformed into a socialist utopia.
The remainder of the book outlines Bellamy's thoughts about improving
the future. The major themes include problems associated with capitalism,
a proposed socialist solution of a nationalization of all industry, and
the use of an "industrial army" to organize production and
distribution, as well as how to ensure free cultural production under
such conditions.
The young man is awoken to a guide, Doctor Leete, who shows him
around and explains all the advances of this new age, including
drastically reduced working hours for people performing menial jobs and
almost instantaneous, internet-like delivery of goods. Everyone retires
with full benefits at age 45, and may eat in any of the public kitchens
(realized as factory-kitchens
in the 1920s–30s in the USSR). The productive capacity of the United
States is nationally owned, and the goods of society are equally
distributed to its citizens. A considerable portion of the book is
dialogue between Leete and West wherein West expresses his confusion
about how the future society works and Leete explains the answers using
various methods, such as metaphors or direct comparisons with
19th-century society.
Although Bellamy's novel did not discuss technology or the economy in detail, commentators frequently compare Looking Backward with actual economic and technological developments.
For example, Julian West is taken to a store which (with its
descriptions of cutting out the middleman to cut down on waste in a
similar way to the consumers' cooperatives of his own day based on the Rochdale Principles of 1844) somewhat resembles a modern warehouse club
like BJ's, Costco, or Sam's Club. He additionally introduces a concept
of "credit" cards in chapters 9, 10, 11, 13, 25, and 26, but these
actually function like modern debit cards.
All citizens receive an equal amount of "credit." Those with more
difficult, specialized, dangerous, or unpleasant jobs work fewer hours.
Bellamy also predicts both sermons and music being available in the home
through cable "telephone" (already demonstrated but commercialized only in 1890 as Théâtrophone in France).
Bellamy's ideas somewhat reflect classical Marxism. In chapter 19, for example, he has the new legal system explained. Most civil suits have ended in socialism, while crime has become a medical issue. The idea of atavism,
then current, is employed to explain crimes not related to inequality
(which Bellamy thinks will vanish with socialism). Remaining criminals
are medically treated. One professional judge presides, appointing two
colleagues to state the prosecution and defense cases. If all do not
agree on the verdict, then it must be tried again. Chapters 15 and 16
have an explanation of how free, independent public art and news outlets
could be provided in a more libertarian socialist system. In one case, Bellamy even writes, "the nation is the sole employer and capitalist."
Publication history
The decades of the 1870s and the 1880s were marked by economic and social turmoil, including the Long Depression of 1873–1879, a series of recessions during the 1880s, the rise of organized labor and strikes, and the 1886 Haymarket affair and its controversial aftermath. Moreover, American capitalism's tendency towards concentration into ever larger and less competitive forms—monopolies, oligopolies, and trusts—began to make itself evident, while emigration from Europe expanded the labor pool and caused wages to stagnate. The time was ripe for new ideas about economic development which might ameliorate the current social disorder.
Edward Bellamy (1850–1898), a relatively unknown New England-born novelist with a history of concern with social issues, began to conceive of writing an impactful work of visionary fiction shaping the outlines of a utopian
future, in which production and society were ordered for the smooth
production and distribution of commodities to a regimented labor force.
In this he was not alone—between 1860 and 1887, no fewer than 11 such
works of fiction were produced in the United States by various authors
dealing fundamentally with the questions of economic and social
organization.
Bellamy's book, gradually planned throughout the 1880s, was completed in 1887 and taken to Boston publisher Benjamin Ticknor, who published a first edition of the novel in January 1888.
Initial sales of the book were modest and uninspiring, but the book did
find a readership in the Boston area, including enthusiastic reviews by
future Bellamyites Cyrus Field Willard of the Boston Globe and Sylvester Baxter of the Boston Herald.
Shortly after publication, Ticknor's publishing enterprise, Ticknor and Company, was purchased by the larger Boston publisher, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., and new publishing plates were created for the book.
Certain "slight emendations" were made to the text by Bellamy for this
second edition, released by Houghton Mifflin in September 1889.
In its second release, Bellamy's futuristic novel met with
enormous popular success, with more than 400,000 copies sold in the
United States alone by the time Bellamy's follow-up novel, Equality, was published in 1897. Sales topped 532,000 in the US by the middle of 1939. The book gained an extensive readership in Great Britain, as well, with more than 235,000 copies sold there between its first release in 1890 and 1935.
The Bellamy Library of Fact and Fiction', by William
Reeves, a radical London publisher, printer and bookseller was a
systematic effort to organize this literature. The Bellamy Library
codified series of texts designed to make political works, defined by
their radical content and popular appeal, both intellectually and
financially accessible to working-class activists and lower-
middle-class radicals. It was especially popular among working men's clubs.
The first version of the novel published in China, heavily edited for the tastes of Chinese readers, was titled Huitou kan jilüe (回頭看記略). This text was later retitled Bainian Yi Jiao (百年一覺 ), or "A Sleep of 100 Years" and in 1891–1892 this version was serialized in Wanguo gongbao;
the organization Guangxuehui (廣學會; Society for Promoting Education)
published these pieces in a book format. This first translation, the
first piece of science fiction from a Western country published in Qing dynasty China, was done in an abridged format by Timothy Richard. The novel was again serialized in China in 1898, in Zhongguo guanyin baihua bao (中國官音白話報); and in 1904, under the title Huitou kan (Looking Backward), within Xiuxiang xiaoshuo (繡像小說; Illustrated Fiction).
The book remains in print in multiple editions, with one
publisher alone having reissued the title in a printing of 100,000
copies in 1945.
Precursors
Though Bellamy tended to stress the independence of his work, Looking Backward shares relationships and resemblances with several earlier works—most notably the anonymous The Great Romance (1881), John Macnie's The Diothas (1883), Laurence Gronlund's The Co-operative Commonwealth (1884), and August Bebel's Woman in the Past, Present, and Future (1886). For example, in The True Author of Looking Backward (1890) J. B. Shipley argued that Bellamy's novel was a repeat of Bebel's arguments, while literary critic R. L. Shurter went so far as to argue that "Looking Backward is actually a fictionalized version of The Co-operative Commonwealth and little more". However, Bellamy's book also bears resemblances to the early socialist theorists or 'utopian socialists' Etienne Cabet, Charles Fourier, Robert Owen, and Henri Saint-Simon, as well as to the 'Associationism' of Albert Brisbane, whom Bellamy had met in the 1870s.
In 1897, Bellamy wrote a sequel, Equality,
dealing with women's rights, education, and many other issues. Bellamy
wrote the sequel to elaborate and clarify many of the ideas merely
touched upon in Looking Backward.
The success of Looking Backward provoked a spate of sequels, parodies, satires, dystopian, and 'anti-utopian' responses. A partial list of these follows.
The result was a "battle of the books" that lasted through the rest of
the 19th century and into the 20th. The back-and-forth nature of the
debate is illustrated by the subtitle of Geissler's 1891 Looking Beyond, which is "A Sequel to 'Looking Backward' by Edward Bellamy and an Answer to 'Looking Forward' by Richard Michaelis".
The book was translated into Bulgarian in 1892. Bellamy personally approved a request by Bulgarian author Iliya Yovchev to make an "adapted translation" based on the realities of Bulgarian social order. The resulting work, titled The Present as Seen by Our Descendants And a Glimpse at the Progress of the Future
("Настоящето, разгледано от потомството ни и надничане в напредъка на
бъдещето"), generally followed the same plot. The events in Yovchev's
version take place in an environmentally friendlySofia
and describe the country's unique path of adapting to the new social
order. It is considered by local critics to be the first Bulgarian
utopian work.
The book also influenced activists in Britain. Scientist Alfred Russel Wallace credited Looking Backward for his conversion to socialism. Politician Alfred Salter cited Looking Backward as an influence on his political thought.
The Russian translation of Looking Backward was banned by the Tsarist Russian censors.
In the 1930s, there was a revival of interest in Looking Backward.
Several groups were formed to promote the book's ideas. The largest was
Edward Bellamy Association of New York; its honorary members included John Dewey, Heywood Broun and Roger N. Baldwin. Arthur Ernest Morgan, chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority, also admired the book and wrote the first biography of Bellamy.
Despite never mentioning the book by name in any of his works, Looking Backward postulated a socialist-fueled utopia that "confounded" Orwell, and his Nineteen Eighty-Four can be seen as a dystopian counterpoint to the utopian genre, of which Looking Backward was a progenitor.Orwell wrote of Oscar Wilde's The Soul of Man Under Socialism that "these optimistic forecasts make rather painful reading."
Looking Backward was rewritten in 1974 by American socialist science fiction writer Mack Reynolds as Looking Backward from the Year 2000. Matthew Kapell, a historian and anthropologist, examined this re-writing in his essay, "Mack Reynolds' Avoidance of his own Eighteenth Brumaire: A Note of Caution for Would-Be Utopians".
In 1984, Herbert Knapp and Mary Knapp's Red, White and Blue Paradise: The American Canal Zone in Panama appeared. The book was in part a memoir of their careers teaching at fabled Balboa High School, but also a re-interpretation of the Canal Zone as a creature of turn-of-the-century Progressivism, a workers' paradise. The Knapps used Bellamy's Looking Backward as their heuristic model for understanding Progressive ideology as it shaped the Canal Zone.
A one-act play, Bellamy's Musical Telephone, was written by Roger Lee Hall and premiered at Emerson College in Boston in 1988 on the centennial year of the novel's publication. It was released as a DVD titled The Musical Telephone.
The first 21st-century work based on Bellamy's novel was written in 2020 by American political scientist and utopian socialist William P. Stodden, titled The Practical Effects of Time Travel: A Memoir.
The book, which differs significantly from the original, though follows
a similar narrative arc, details a female protagonist's journey, via
time machine, to a future where need has been eliminated via a strong Universal Basic Income and National Service Program,
while cooperation has replaced competition. The book also discusses a
strong influence of technology and robotics in freeing humans from
grueling manual labor. The book focused heavily on moral and ethical theory and ethical socialism, rather than materialism, as the ideological foundation of the utopian society.
Looking Backward from the Tricentennial: A Timely Tale of Nonviolent Revolution
was a post-pandemic retelling of Bellamy's novel. While keeping the
main characters and some details of the original, it portrayed Julian
West as a formerly incarcerated Black man waking up (via cryonics) in 2076. The utopian future was the result of a radical revolution of values based on the lessons of Martin Luther King,
which were combined with game theory to stage a nonviolent revolution
in the ballot box. The American Union Jobs Program, a form of unconditional basic income, was implemented using monetary reform,
unlocking a path to addressing King's triple evils of poverty, racism,
and militarism. A variety of tutors school Julian in the details of
monetary theory, the principles of nonviolence, the workings of the people's legislative assembly which has crowdsourced Congress, and the application of game theory
to electoral politics. The novel concludes with Julian West time
traveling back to 2023, hoping to implement the new paradigm and prevent
the United States from undergoing a civil war.
Gandhian economics is a school of economic thought based on the spiritual and socio-economic principles expounded by Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi.
It is largely characterised by rejection of the concept of the human
being as a rational actor always seeking to maximize material
self-interest that underlies classical economic thinking. Where Western
economic systems were (and are) based on what he called the
"multiplication of wants," Gandhi felt that this was both unsustainable
and devastating to the human spirit. His model, by contrast, aimed at
the fulfillment of needs – including the need for meaning and community.
As a school of economics the resulting model contained elements of protectionism, nationalism, adherence to the principles and objectives of nonviolence and a rejection of class war
in favor of socio-economic harmony. Gandhi's economic ideas also aim to
promote spiritual development and harmony with a rejection of materialism. The term "Gandhian economics" was coined by J. C. Kumarappa, a close supporter of Gandhi.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhian_economics
Gandhi's economic ideas
Gandhi's
thinking on what we would consider socia-secular issues (he himself saw
little distinction between the sacred and its expression in the social
world) was influenced by John Ruskin and the American writer Henry David Thoreau. Throughout his life, Gandhi sought to develop ways to fight India's extreme poverty, backwardness, and socio-economic challenges as a part of his wider involvement in the Indian independence movement. Gandhi's championing of Swadeshi and non-cooperation were centred on the principles of economic self-sufficiency. Gandhi sought to target European-made clothing and other products as not only a symbol of British colonialism
but also the source of mass unemployment and poverty, as European
industrial goods had left many millions of India's workers, craftsmen
and women without a livelihood.
By championing homespun khadi
clothing and Indian-made goods, Gandhi sought to incorporate peaceful
civil resistance as a means of promoting national self-sufficiency.
Gandhi led farmers of Champaran and Kheda in a satyagraha (civil disobedience and tax resistance)
against the mill owners and landlords supported by the British
government in an effort to end oppressive taxation and other policies
that forced the farmers and workers into poverty and defend their
economic rights. A major part of this rebellion was a commitment from
the farmers to end caste discrimination
and oppressive social practices against women while launching a
co-operative effort to promote education, health care and
self-sufficiency by producing their own clothes and food.
Gandhi and his followers also founded numerous ashrams in India (Gandhi had pioneered the ashram settlement in South Africa). The concept of an ashram has been compared with the commune,
where its inhabitants would seek to produce their own food, clothing
and means of living, while promoting a lifestyle of self-sufficiency,
personal and spiritual development and working for wider social
development. The ashrams included small farms and houses
constructed by the inhabitants themselves. All inhabitants were expected
to help in any task necessary, promoting the values of equality. Gandhi
also espoused the notion of "trusteeship," which centred on denying
material pursuits and coveting of wealth, with practitioners acting as
"trustees" of other individuals and the community in their management of
economic resources and property.
Contrary to many Indian socialists and communists, Gandhi was
averse to all notions of class warfare and concepts of class-based
revolution, which he saw as causes of social violence and disharmony.
Gandhi's concept of egalitarianism
was centred on the preservation of human dignity rather than material
development. Some of Gandhi's closest supporters and admirers included
industrialists such as Ghanshyamdas Birla, Ambalal Sarabhai, Jamnalal Bajaj and J. R. D. Tata,
who adopted several of Gandhi's progressive ideas in managing labour
relations while also personally participating in Gandhi's ashrams and
socio-political work.
Rudolph argues that after a false start in trying to emulate the
English in an attempt to overcome his timidity, Gandhi discovered the
inner courage he was seeking by helping his countrymen in South Africa.
The new courage consisted of observing the traditional Bengali way of
"self-suffering" and, in finding his own courage, he was enabled also to
point out the way of 'Satyagraha' and 'ahimsa' to the whole of India.
Gandhi's writings expressed four meanings of freedom: as India's
national independence; as individual political freedom; as group freedom
from poverty; and as the capacity for personal self-rule.
Gandhi was a self-described philosophical anarchist, and his vision of India meant an India without an underlying government. He once said that "the ideally nonviolent state would be an ordered anarchy."
While political systems are largely hierarchical, with each layer of
authority from the individual to the central government have increasing
levels of authority over the layer below, Gandhi believed that society
should be the exact opposite, where nothing is done without the consent
of anyone, down to the individual. His idea was that true self-rule in a country means that every person rules his or herself and that there is no state which enforces laws upon the people.
This would be achieved over time with nonviolent conflict
mediation, as power is divested from layers of hierarchical authorities,
ultimately to the individual, which would come to embody the ethic of
nonviolence. Rather than a system where rights are enforced by a higher
authority, people are self-governed by mutual responsibilities. On
returning from South Africa, when Gandhi received a letter asking for
his participation in writing a world charter for human rights, he
responded saying, "in my experience, it is far more important to have a
charter for human duties."
An independent India did not mean merely transferring the
established British administrative structure into Indian hands. He
warned, "you would make India English. And when it becomes English, it
will be called not Hindustan but Englishtan. This is not the Swaraj I
want."
Tewari argues that Gandhi saw democracy as more than a system of
government; it meant promoting both individuality and the
self-discipline of the community. Democracy was a moral system that
distributed power and assisted the development of every social class,
especially the lowest. It meant settling disputes in a nonviolent
manner; it required freedom of thought and expression. For Gandhi,
democracy was a way of life.
Gandhian economics and ethics
Gandhian
economics do not draw a distinction between economics and ethics.
Economics that hurts the moral well-being of an individual or a nation
is immoral, and therefore sinful. The value of an industry should be
gauged less by the dividends it pays to shareholders
than by its effect on the bodies, souls, and spirits of the people
employed in it. In essence, supreme consideration is to be given to man
rather than to money.
The first basic principle of Gandhi’s economic thought is a
special emphasis on ‘plain living’ which helps in cutting down your
wants and being self-reliant.
Accordingly, increasing consumer appetite is likened to animal appetite
which goes the end of earth in search of their satisfaction. Thus a
distinction is to be made between 'Standard of Living' and 'Standard of Life',
where the former merely states the material and physical standard of
food, cloth and housing. A higher standard of life, on the other hand
could be attained only if, along with material advancement, there was a
serious attempt to imbibe cultural and spiritual values and qualities.
The second principle of Gandhian economic thought is small scale
and locally oriented production, using local resources and meeting local
needs, so that employment opportunities are made available everywhere,
promoting the ideal of Sarvodaya
– the welfare of all, in contrast with the welfare of a few. This goes
with a technology which is labour-using rather than labour-saving.
Gandhian economy increases employment opportunities; it should not be
labour displacing. Gandhi had no absolute opposition to machinery; he
welcomed it where it avoids drudgery and reduces tedium. He used to cite
the example of Singer sewing machine as an instance of desirable
technology. He also emphasised dignity of labour, and criticised the society’s contemptuous attitude to manual labour. He insisted on everybody doing some ‘bread labour’.
The third principle of Gandhian economic thought, known as
trusteeship principle, is that while an individual or group of
individuals is free not only to make a decent living through an economic
enterprise but also to accumulate, their surplus wealth above what is
necessary to meet basic needs and investment, should be held as a trust
for the welfare of all, particularly of the poorest and most deprived.
The three principles mentioned above, when followed, are expected to
minimise economic and social inequality, and achieve Sarvodaya.
Environmentalism
Several of Gandhi's followers developed a theory of environmentalism. J. C. Kumarappa
was the first, writing a number of relevant books in the 1930s and
1940s. He and Mira Behan argued against large-scale dam-and-irrigation
projects, saying that small projects were more efficacious, that organic
manure was better and less dangerous than man-made chemicals, and that
forests should be managed with the goal of water conservation rather
than revenue maximization. The Raj and the Nehru governments paid them
little attention. Guha calls Kumarappa, "The Green Gandhian," portraying
him as the founder of modern environmentalism in India.
The founder of the Hutterites, Jakob Hutter, "established the Hutterite colonies on the basis of the Schleitheim Confession, a classic Anabaptist statement of faith" of 1527, and the first communes were formed in 1528. Since the death of Hutter in 1536, the beliefs of the Hutterites, especially those espousing a community of goods and nonresistance, have resulted in hundreds of years of diaspora in many countries.
The Hutterites embarked on a series of migrations through central and
eastern Europe. Nearly extinct by the 18th century, they migrated to Russia in 1770 and about a hundred years later to North America. Over the course of 140 years, their population living in communities of goods recovered from about 400 to around 50,000 at present. Today, almost all Hutterites live in Western Canada and the upper Great Plains of the United States.
History
Spread of the early Anabaptists, 1525–1550Bill of impeachment
The Anabaptist movement, from which the Hutterites emerged, started in groups that formed after the early Reformation in Switzerland led by Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531). These new groups were part of the Radical Reformation, which departed from the teachings of Zwingli and the Swiss Reformed Church. In Zürich on January 21, 1525, Conrad Grebel (c. 1498–1526) and Jörg Blaurock (c. 1491–1529) practiced adult baptism to each other and then to others. From Switzerland Anabaptism quickly spread northward and eastward in the timespan of one year. Balthasar Hubmaier (c. 1480–1528), a Bavarian from Friedberg, became an Anabaptist in Zürich in 1525 but fled to Nikolsburg in Moravia in May 1526. Other early Anabaptists who became important for the emerging Hutterites were Hans Denck (c. 1500–1527), Hans Hut (1490–1527), Hans Schlaffer († 1528), Leonhard Schiemer (c. 1500–1528), Ambrosius Spittelmayr (1497–1528) and Jakob Widemann († 1536). Most of these early Anabaptists soon became martyrs of their faith.
Tyrol
Anabaptism appears to have come to Tyrol
through the labors of Jörg Blaurock. The Gaismair uprising set the
stage by producing a hope for social justice in a way that was similar
to the German Peasants' War. Michael Gaismair
had tried to bring religious, political, and economical reform through a
violent peasant uprising, but the movement was squashed.
Although little hard evidence exists of a direct connection between
Gaismair's uprising and Tyrolian Anabaptism, at least a few of the
peasants involved in the uprising later became Anabaptists. While a
connection between a violent social revolution and non-resistant
Anabaptism may be hard to imagine, the common link was the desire for a
radical change in the prevailing social injustices. Disappointed with
the failure of armed revolt, Anabaptist ideals of an alternative
peaceful, just society probably resonated on the ears of the
disappointed peasants.
Before Anabaptism proper was introduced to South Tyrol,
Protestant ideas had been propagated in the region by men such as Hans
Vischer, a former Dominican. Some of those who participated in
conventicles where Protestant ideas were presented later became
Anabaptists. As well, the population in general seemed to have a
favorable attitude towards reform, be it Protestant or Anabaptist. Jörg
Blaurock appears to have preached itinerantly in the Puster Valley
region in 1527, which most likely was the first introduction of
Anabaptist ideas in the area. Another visit through the area in 1529
reinforced these ideas, but he was captured and burned at the stake in Klausen on September 6, 1529.
Jakob Hutter
was one of the early converts in South Tyrol and later became a leader
among the Hutterites, who received their name from him. Hutter made
several trips between Moravia and Tyrol—most of the Anabaptists in South
Tyrol ended up emigrating to Moravia because of the fierce persecution
unleashed by Ferdinand I. In November 1535, Hutter was captured near Klausen and taken to Innsbruck,
where he was burned at the stake on February 25, 1536. By 1540
Anabaptism in South Tyrol was beginning to die out, largely because of
the emigration to Moravia of the converts to escape incessant
persecution.
Therefore, Moravia, where Hubmaier had also found refuge,
was the land where the persecuted Anabaptist forerunners of the
Hutterites fled to, originating mostly from different locations in what
is today Southern Germany, Austria and South Tyrol. Under the leadership of Jakob Hutter
in the years 1530 to 1535, they developed the communal form of living
that distinguishes them from other Anabaptists, such as the Mennonites
and the Amish. Hutterite communal living is based on the New Testament books of the Acts of the Apostles (chapters 2 (especially verse 44), 4, and 5) and 2 Corinthians.
A basic tenet of Hutterite groups has always been nonresistance,
i.e. forbidding its members from taking part in military activities,
taking orders from military persons, wearing a formal uniform (such as a
soldier's or a police officer's) or paying taxes to be spent on war.
This has led to expulsion from or persecution in the several lands in
which they have lived.
In Moravia, the Hutterites flourished for several decades; the
period between 1554 and 1565 was called "good" and the period between
1565 and 1592 was called "golden". During that time the Hutterites
expanded to Upper Hungary, present-day Slovakia. In the time until 1622 some 100 settlements, called Bruderhof, developed in Moravia and Kingdom of Hungary, and the number of Hutterites reached twenty to thirty thousand.
In 1593 the Long Turkish War, which affected the Hutterites severely, broke out. During this war, in 1605, some 240 Hutterites were abducted by the Ottoman Turkish army and their Tatar allies and sold into Ottoman slavery. It lasted until 1606; however, before the Hutterites could rebuild their resources, the Thirty Years' War
(1618–1648) broke out. It soon developed into a war about religion when
in 1620 the mostly Protestant Bohemia and Moravia were invaded by the HabsburgEmperor Ferdinand II, a Catholic, who annihilated and plundered several Hutterite settlements. In 1621 the Bubonic plague followed the war and killed one third of the remaining Hutterites.
Renewed persecution followed the Habsburg takeover of the Czech lands
in 1620 and in the end annihilated them there as an Anabaptist group.
In 1622 the Hutterites were expelled from Moravia and fled to the
Hutterite settlements in Hungary, where overcrowding caused severe
hardship. Some Moravian Hutterites converted to Catholicism and retained a separate ethnic identity as the Habans (German: Habaner) until the 19th century (by the end of World War II, the Haban group had become essentially extinct).
Transylvania
In 1621 Gabriel Bethlen, prince of Transylvania and a Calvinist, "invited" Hutterites to come to his country. In fact he forced a group of 186 Hutterites to come to Alvinc (today Vințu de Jos, Romania)
in 1622, because he needed craftsmen and agricultural workers to
develop his land. In the next two years more Hutterites migrated to
Transylvania, in total 690 or 1,089 persons, depending on the sources.
In the second half of the 17th century, the Hutterite community was in decline. It had suffered from Ottoman incursions during which the Bruderhof at Alvinc was burned down in 1661. Towards the end of the century, community of goods was abandoned, when exactly is not known. Johannes Waldner assumes in Das Klein-Geschichtsbuch der Hutterischen Brüder that this happened in 1693 or 1694.
In 1756, a group of Crypto-Protestants from Carinthia who in 1755 were deported to Transylvania by the Habsburg monarchy,
met the Hutterian Brethren at Alvinc. These Carinthian Protestants read
the "account of the belief of the Hutterian Brethren" written by Peter
Riedemann, which was given to them by the Brothers, and then decided to
join the Hutterites.
This latter group revived the Hutterite religion, became dominant among
the Hutterites and replaced the Tyrolean dialect of the old Hutterites
by their Carinthian one, both being Southern Bavarian dialects. In 1762 community of goods was reestablished in Alvinc.
Wallachia
In 1767 the Hutterites fled from Transylvania first to Kräbach, that is Ciorogârla in Wallachia, which was at that time some 7 kilometres (4.3 mi) from Bucharest. When the Hutterites left Transylvania, their number was down to 67 people.
In Wallachia they encountered much hardship because of lawlessness and the war between Russia and Turkey
(1768–1774). The Russians took Bucharest on November 17, 1769. The
Hutterites then sought the advice of Russian army commander "Sämetin"
(Генерал-майор Александр Гаврилович Замятин, General-Mayor Aleksandr
Gavrilovitch Zamyatin) in Bucharest, who proposed that they emigrate to
Russia where Count Pyotr Rumyantsev would provide them with land all they need for a new beginning.
Ukraine
On
August 1, 1770, after more than three months of traveling, the group of
about 60 persons reached their new home, the lands of Count Rumyantsev
at Vishenka in Ukraine, which at this time was part of the Russian Empire. In their new home, the Hutterites were joined by a few more Hutterites who could flee from Habsburg lands, as well as a few Mennonites, altogether 55 persons.
When Count Pyotr Rumyantsev died in 1796, his two sons tried to reduce the status of the Hutterites from free peasants (Freibauern) to that of serfs (Leibeigene). The Hutterites appealed to TsarPaul I, who allowed them to settle on crown land in Radichev, some 12 km (7 miles) from Vishenka, where they would have the same privileged status as the German Mennonite colonists from Prussia.
Around the year 1820 there was significant inner tension: a large
faction of the brothers wanted to end the community of goods. The
community then divided into two groups that lived as separate
communities. The faction with individual ownership moved to the
Mennonite colony Chortitza
for some time, but soon returned. After a fire destroyed most of the
buildings at Radichev, the Hutterites gave up their community of goods.
Because the lands of the Hutterites at Radichev were not very
productive, they petitioned to move to better lands. In 1842 they were
allowed to relocate to Molotschna, a Mennonite colony, where they founded the village Hutterthal. When they moved, the total Hutterite population was 384 with 185 males and 199 females.
In 1852 a second village was founded, called Johannesruh and, by 1868, three more villages were founded: Hutterdorf (1856), Neu-Huttertal (1856), and Scheromet
(1868). In Ukraine, the Hutterites enjoyed relative prosperity. When
they lived among German-speaking Mennonites in Molotschna, they adopted
the very efficient form of Mennonite agriculture that Johann Cornies had introduced.
In 1845, a small group of Hutterites made plans to renew the
community of goods, but was told to wait until the government had
approved their plans to buy separate land. A group led by the preacher
George Waldner made another attempt but this soon failed. In 1859
Michael Waldner was able to reinstate community of goods at one end of
Hutterdorf, thus becoming the founder of the Schmiedeleut.
In 1860, Darius Walter founded another group with community of goods at the other end of Hutterdorf, thus creating the Dariusleut.
Trials to establish a communal living in Johannisruh after 1864 did not
succeed. It took until 1877, after the Hutterites had already relocated
to South Dakota, before a few families from Johannisruh, led by
preacher Jacob Wipf, established a third group with communal living, the
Lehrerleut.
In 1864, the Primary Schools' Bill made Russian
the language of instruction in schools; then in 1871 a law introduced
compulsory military service. These led the Mennonites and Hutterites to
make plans for emigration.
Hutterite migrations in Europe 1526–1874 before their move to North America
United States
After sending scouts to North America in 1873 along with a Mennonite delegation,
almost all Hutterites, totaling 1,265 individuals, migrated to the
United States between 1874 and 1879 in response to the new Russian
military service law. Of these, some 800 identified as Eigentümler (literally, "owners") and acquired individual farms according to the Homestead Act of 1862, whereas some 400 identified as Gemeinschaftler (literally, "community people") and started three communities with community of goods.
Most Hutterites are descended from these latter 400. Named for
the leader of each group (the Schmiedeleut, Dariusleut and Lehrerleut, leut being based on the German word for people), they settled initially in the Dakota Territory. Here, each group reestablished the traditional Hutterite communal lifestyle.
Over the next decades, the Hutterites who settled on individual farms, the so-called Prärieleut,
slowly assimilated first into Mennonite groups and later into the
general American population. Until about 1910 there was intermarriage
between the Prärieleut and the communally living Hutterites.
Several state laws were enacted seeking to deny Hutterites
religious legal status to their communal farms (colonies). Some colonies
were disbanded before these decisions were overturned in the Supreme
Court. By this time, many Hutterites had already established new colonies in Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Michael Hofer – Martyr
During World War I, the pacifist Hutterites suffered persecution
in the United States. In the most severe case, four Hutterite men, who
were subjected to military draft but refused to comply, were imprisoned
and physically abused. Ultimately, two of the four men, the brothers Joseph and Michael Hofer, died at Leavenworth Military Prison after the Armistice
had been signed, bringing an end to the war. The Hutterite community
said the men died from mistreatment; the U.S. government said the men
died of pneumonia.
Canada
The Hutterites responded to this mistreatment of their conscientious objectors by leaving the United States and moving to the Canadian provinces of Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. All 18 existing American colonies were abandoned, except the oldest one, Bon Homme, where Hutterites continued to live. Other colonies moved to Canada but did not sell their vacant colonies.
In 1942, alarmed at the influx of Dakota Hutterites buying copious tracts of land, the Province of Alberta passed the Communal Properties Act, severely restricting the expansion of the Dariusleut and Lehrerleut colonies. Although disallowed by the federal government
in 1943 – the last time provincial legislation was so disallowed in
Canadian history – and eventually repealed in 1973, the act resulted in
the establishment of a number of new colonies in British Columbia and Saskatchewan.
The Hutterian Brethren Church was recognized by Parliament in 1951.
As of March 2018, there were approximately 34,000 Hutterites in
350 colonies in Canada, 75 percent of the Brethren living in North
America. During summer 2020, many colonies struggled with outbreaks during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada
because "Hutterite colony members eat, work, and worship together in
community settings and share possessions", according to one report. The
groups were taking steps to minimize the spread of the virus.
One news report defined the business operations of colonies as
"industrial grade farms that produce grains, eggs, meat and vegetables,
which are sold to large distributors and at local farmer's markets".
Section 143 of the Income Tax Act of Canada, introduced in
2007 and modified in 2014 with section 108(5), contains special rules
to accommodate Hutterite colonies. According to a 2018 Senate report, colonies do not file income tax returns as corporations, but as individual members:
Based on a memorandum of understanding between the
Hutterites and the Minister of National Revenue, section 143 creates a
fictional trust to which all the property of the Hutterite colony and
any associated income belongs. The trust's income may then be allocated
to the individual Hutterite members, according to a formula set out in
section 143, who can then claim the income on their personal tax
returns.
In 2018, the Senate of Canada asked the House of Commons to review the legislation, because Hutterites were not being allowed to claim the Working Income Tax Benefit refundable tax credit (WITB), which was available to other farmers in Canada.
Partial return to the U.S.
During the Great Depression when there was a lot of economic pressure on farming populations, some Schmiedeleut moved back to South Dakota, resettling abandoned property and buying abandoned colonies from the Darius- and the Lehrerleut. After World War II some Darius- and Lehrerleut also went back to the U.S., mainly to Montana.
Theology
Contrary to other traditional Anabaptist groups like the Amish, the Old Order Mennonites and the Old Colony Mennonites, who have almost no written books about Anabaptist theology, the Hutterites possess an account of their beliefs, Account of Our Religion, Doctrine and Faith, of the brethren who are called Hutterites (original German title Rechenschafft unserer Religion, Leer und Glaubens), written by Peter Riedemann
in 1540–1541. There are also extant theological tracts and letters by
Hans Schlaffer, Leonhard Schiemer, and Ambrosius Spittelmaier.
The founder of the Hutterite tradition, Jakob Hutter, "established the Hutterite colonies on the basis of the Schleitheim Confession, a classic Anabaptist statement of faith". In accordance with this confession of faith, Hutterite theology emphasizes credobaptism, a belief in the Church invisible, Christian pacifism, and the rejection of oaths. The Hutterite Churches also believe in "a set of community rules for Christian living and the principle of worldly separation". Former members are shunned and are not to be spoken to.
Hutterite communes, called "colonies", are all rural; many depend largely on farming or ranching,
depending on their locale, for their income. Colonies in the modern era
have been shifting to manufacturing as it gets more difficult to make a
living on farming alone. The colony is virtually self-sufficient as far
as labor, constructing its own buildings, doing its own maintenance and
repair on equipment, making its own clothes, etc., is concerned. This
has changed in recent years and colonies have started to depend a little
more on outside sources for food, clothing and other goods.
Hutterite agriculture today is specialized and more or less
industrialized. Hutterite children therefore have no close contact with
farm animals any longer and are not protected from asthma through close contact with farm animals, like Amish children are, but are now similar to the general North American population.
Governance and leadership
Hutterite colonies are mostly patriarchal
with women participating in roles such as cooking, medical decisions,
and selection and purchase of fabric for clothing. Each colony has three
high-level leaders. The two top-level leaders are the Minister and the
Secretary. A third leader is the Assistant Minister. The Minister also
holds the position as president in matters related to the incorporation
of the legal business entity associated with each colony. The Secretary
is widely referred to as the colony "Manager", "Boss" or "Business Boss"
and is responsible for the business operations of the colony, such as
bookkeeping, cheque-writing and budget organization. The Assistant
Minister helps with church leadership (preaching) responsibilities, but
will often also be the "German Teacher" for the school-aged children.
The Secretary's wife sometimes holds the title of Schneider
(from German "tailor") and thus she is in charge of clothes' making and
purchasing the colony's fabric requirements for the making of all
clothing. The term "boss" is used widely in colony language. Aside from
the Secretary, who functions as the business boss, there are a number of
other significant "boss" positions in most colonies. The most
significant in the average colony is the "Farm Boss". This person is
responsible for all aspects of overseeing grain farming operations. This
includes crop management, agronomy, crop insurance planning and assigning staff to various farming operations.
Beyond these top-level leadership positions there will also be
the "Hog Boss", "Dairy Boss", and so on, depending on what agricultural
operations exist at the specific colony. In each case these individuals
are fully responsible for their own areas of responsibility, and will
have other colony residents working in those respective areas.
The Minister, Secretary, and all "boss" positions are elected
positions and many decisions are put to a vote before they are
implemented.
The voting and decision-making process at most colonies is based
upon a two-tiered structure including a council — usually seven senior
males — and the voting membership, which includes all the married men of
the colony. For each "significant" decision the council will first vote
and, if passed, the decision will be carried to the voting membership.
Officials not following the selected decisions can be removed by a
similar vote of a colony.
There is a wide range of leadership cultures and styles between
the three main colony varieties. In some cases very dominant ministers
or secretaries may hold greater sway over some colonies than others.
Women and children hold no formal voting power over
decision-making in a colony, but they often hold influence on
decision-making through the informal processes of a colony's social
framework.
Overarching all internal governance processes within a single
colony is the broader "Bishop" structure of leaders from across a
"branch" (Lehrer-, Darius- or Schmiedeleut) such that all colonies
within each branch are subject to the broader decision-making of that
branch's "Bishop" council. A minister of a colony who does not ensure
his colony follows broader "Bishop" council decisions can be removed
from his position.
Community ownership
Hutterites practice a near-total community of goods:
all property is owned by the colony, and provisions for individual
members and their families come from the common resources. This practice
is based largely on Hutterite interpretation of passages in chapters 2,
4, and 5 of Acts,
which speak of the believers' "having all things in common." Thus the
colony owns and operates its buildings and equipment like a corporation,
with all profits reinvested in the community. Housing units are built
and assigned to individual families but belong to the colony, and there
is very little personal property. There are no paychecks on Hutterite
colonies, as members are expected to work for the good of the community.
Allowances are given, with the monetary amount varying heavily between
colonies. Lunch and dinner meals are taken by the entire colony in a
dining or fellowship room. Men and women sit in a segregated fashion.
Special occasions sometimes allow entire families to enjoy meals
together, but individual housing units do have kitchens which are used
for breakfast meals.
Daughter colonies
New colony
Each colony may consist of about 10 to 20 families (may not always
apply), with a population of around 60 to 250. When the colony's
population grows near the upper limit and its leadership determines that
branching off is economically and spiritually necessary, they locate,
purchase land for and build a "daughter" colony.
The process by which a colony splits to create a new daughter
colony varies across the branches of colonies. In Lehrerleut, this
process is quite structured, while in Darius and Schmiedeleut the
process can be somewhat less so. In a Lehrerleut colony, the land will
be purchased and buildings actually constructed before anyone in the
colony knows who will be relocating to the daughter colony location. The
final decision as to who leaves and who stays will not be made until
everything is ready at the new location.
During the construction process, the colony leadership splits up
the colony as evenly as possible, creating two separate groups of
families. The two groups are made as equal as possible in size, taking
into account the practical limits of family unit sizes in each group.
Additionally, the leadership must split the business operations as
evenly as possible. This means deciding which colony may take on, for
example, either hog farming or dairy. Colony members are given a chance
to voice concerns about which group a family is assigned to, but at some
point, a final decision is made. This process can be very difficult and
stressful for a colony, as many political and family dynamics become
topics of discussion, and not everyone will be happy about the process
or its results.
Once all decisions have been made, the two groups may be identified as "Group A" and "Group B".
The last evening before a new group of people is to leave the "mother"
colony for the "daughter" colony, two pieces of paper, labeled "Group A"
and "Group B", are placed into a hat. The minister will pray, asking
for God's choice of the paper drawn from the hat, and will draw one
piece of paper. The name drawn will indicate which group is leaving for
the daughter colony. Within hours, the daughter colony begins the
process of settling at a brand new site.
This very structured procedure differs dramatically from the one
that may be used at some Darius and Schmiedeleut colonies, where the
split can sometimes be staggered over time, with only small groups of
people moving to the new location at a time.
Agriculture and manufacturing
Hutterite colony in Martinsdale, Montana, with an array of reconditioned Nordtank wind turbines
Hutterite colonies often own large tracts of land and, since they
function as a collective unit, they can make or afford higher-quality
equipment than if they were working alone.
Some also run industrial hog, dairy, turkey, chicken and egg production
operations. An increasing number of Hutterite colonies are again
venturing into the manufacturing sector, a change that is reminiscent of
an early period of Hutterite life in Europe. Before the Hutterites
emigrated to North America, they relied on manufacturing to sustain
their communities. It was only in Russia that the Hutterites learned to
farm from the Mennonites. Because of the increasing automation of
farming (large equipment, GPS-controlled seeding, spraying, etc.),
farming operations have become much more efficient. Many colonies that
have gone into manufacturing believe they need to provide their members
with a higher level of education.
A major driving force for Hutterite leadership nowadays is the
recognition that land prices have risen dramatically in Alberta and
Saskatchewan because of the oil and gas industry,
thus creating the need for a greater amount of cash to buy land when it
comes time for a colony to split. The splitting process requires the
purchase of land and the construction of buildings. This can require
funds in the range of C$20
million in 2008 terms: upwards of $10M for land and another $10M for
buildings and construction. This massive cash requirement has forced
leadership to reevaluate how a colony can produce the necessary funds.
New projects have included plastics' manufacturing, metal fabrication,
cabinetry and stone or granite forming, to name a few. One unique
project came together in South Dakota. A group of 44 colonies joined to
create a turkey processing center where their poultry can be processed.
The plant hired non-Hutterite staff to process the poultry for market.
This plant helped to secure demand for the colonies' poultry.
Use of technology
Hutterites
do not shun modern technology, but may limit some uses of it. Many
attempt to remove themselves from the outside world (television sets –
and in some cases the internet – are banned), and up until recently,
many of the Lehrerleut and Dariusleut (Alberta) colonies still had only
one central telephone. The Schmiedeleut, however, made this transition
earlier, where each household had a phone along with a central telephone
for the colony business operation. In many colonies, telephones are
tied into the sort of commercial private branch exchange (PBX) systems more commonly used by businesses, with which toll restriction features could easily be programmed.
Today, Hutteries widely use telephones for both business and
social purposes. Cell phones are also very common among all three groups
today. Text messaging has made cell phones particularly useful for
Hutterian young people wishing to keep in touch with their peers. Some
Hutterite homes have computers and radios; and some (mostly liberal
Schmiedeleut colonies) have Internet access. Farming equipment
technology generally matches or exceeds that of non-Hutterite farmers.
Lehrerleut colonies have recently struggled with the proliferation of
computers and have clamped down, so that computers are no longer allowed
in households and their use is limited to only business and farming
operations, including animal, feed and crop management. As the world
evolves more, however, and technology is used more and more for work and
communication, many Hutterite young people use computers, photos, and
the internet for keeping in contact with their friends and relatives and
meeting new people outside the colony.
Education
Schmiedeleut Hutterites at school in Crystal Springs Colony, Manitoba, Canada
Hutterite children get their education in a schoolhouse at the
colony, according to an educational agreement with the province or
state. The school is typically run by a hired "outside" teacher who
teaches the basics, including English. In some Schmiedeleut schools,
teachers are chosen from the colony. The "German" education of colony
children is the responsibility of the "Assistant Minister" at some
colonies, but most colonies elect a "German Teacher", who in most cases
also takes care of the colony garden.
His job entails training in German language studies, Bible teaching,
and scripture memorization. The German Teacher co-operates with the
outside teacher with regard to scheduling and planning. Some Hutterite
colonies are allowed to send their children to public school as the
parents see fit, but in some cases it is customary to remove them from
school entirely in 8th grade or at the age of 15; however, many colonies
offer them a full grade 12 diploma and in some cases a university
degree. Public school in these instances is seen as a luxury and
children are sometimes made to miss days of school in favor of duties at
the colony. In a few rare cases, allowing a child to continue attending
school past this limit can result in punishment of the parents,
including shunning and removal from the church.
Major branches
Three different branches of Hutterites live in the prairies of North America: the Schmiedeleut, the Dariusleut and the Lehrerleut.
Though all three "leut" are Hutterites, there are some distinctive
differences, including style of dress and organizational structure. However, the original doctrine of all three groups is identical. The differences are mostly traditional and geographic.
There are two other related groups. The Arnoldleut—also referred to as the Bruderhof Communities or currently, Church Communities International—is
a group of more recent origin which, prior to 1990, were accepted by
the Dariusleut and Lehrerleut groups as a part of the Hutterite
community.
The Schmiedeleut were divided over the issue. One group is called the
'oilers', because of an issue over an oil well. The other is the Prairieleut
– Hutterites that lived in separate households rather than in colonies
after settling on the American prairies. At the time of immigration the
Prairieleut amounted to around 2/3 of the Hutterite immigrants. Most of
the Prairieleut eventually united with the Mennonites.
Since 1992, the Schmiedeleut, until that point the largest of the
three "leut," have been divided into "Group One" and "Group Two"
factions over controversies including the Arnoldleut/Bruderhof issue and
the leadership of the Schmiedeleut elder. This highly acrimonious
division has cut across family lines and remains a serious matter almost
two decades later. Group One colonies generally have relatively more
liberal positions on issues including higher education, ecumenical and
missions work, musical instruments, media, and technology.
Photography
Alberta Hutterites initially won the right not to have their photographs taken for their driver's licenses. In May 2007, the Alberta Court of Appeal ruled that the photograph requirement violates their religious rights and that driving was essential to their way of life. The Wilson Colony based its position on the belief that images are prohibited by the Second Commandment. About eighty of the photo-less licenses were in use at the time of the decision.
Besides the Alberta Hutterite groups (Darius and Lehrerleut), a handful
of colonies in Manitoba (Schmiedeleut) do not wish their members to be
photographed for licenses or other identity documents.
However, in July 2009, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled 4–3 (in Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony)
that a Hutterite community must abide by provincial rules that make a
digital photo mandatory for all new driver's licenses as a way to
prevent identity theft.
From 1972 to 1980, Chicago photographer Mary Koga traveled to rural Alberta to photograph members of the community for her series The Hutterites.
A 2018 report published by the Huffington Post contained a series of photographs made by Jill Brody over several years at three colonies in Montana.
Clothing
Hutterite women return from working in the fields at sunset.
In contrast to the uniformly plain look of the Amish and Old Order
Mennonites, Hutterite clothing can be vividly colored, especially on
children, although many Hutterites do wear plain dress. Most of the clothing is homemade within the colony. Shoes were homemade in the past but are now mostly store-bought.
Men's jackets and pants are usually black. Generally, the men
wear buttoned-up shirts with long sleeves and collars, and they may wear
undershirts. Men's pants are not held in place by belts, but rather by
black suspenders. These pants are also distinctive by their lack of back
pockets.
Women and girls each wear a dress with a blouse underneath. Most Lehrerleut and Dariusleut also wear a kerchief-style Christian headcovering
which is usually black with white polka dots. The Schmiedleut also wear
a kerchief-style head cover, but without the dots. The pattern of
kerchief thus indicates to which branch the women belong: large dots
indicate Lehrerleut, small dots Dariusleut and no dots Schmiedeleut. In
some cases Dariusleut kerchiefs also have no dots. Female members of the
Bruderhof wear solid colored kerchiefs in black, blue or white and
sometimes no kerchief at all.
Young girls each wear a bright, colorful cap that fastens under the chin.
Church garb is generally dark for both men and women. The
clothing worn for church consists of a plain jacket for both genders and
a black apron for women. Men's church hats are always dark and usually
black.
Dialect
Just as the Amish and Old Order Mennonites often use Pennsylvania Dutch, the Hutterites have preserved and use among themselves a distinct dialect of German known as Hutterite German,
or Hutterisch, sometimes regarded as being a language in its own right.
Originally mainly based on a Tyrolean dialect from the south-central
German-speaking Europe from which many of them sprang in the 16th
century, Hutterisch has taken on a Carinthian base because of their history: In the years 1760–1763, a small group of surviving Hutterites in Transylvania were joined by a larger group of Lutheran forced migrants from Carinthia, the so-called Transylvanian Landler.
Eventually, this led to the replacement of the Hutterites' Tyrolean
dialect by the Carinthian dialect. The Amish and Hutterite German
dialects are not generally mutually intelligible because the dialects
originate from regions that are several hundred kilometres (miles)
apart. In their religious exercises, Hutterites use a classic Lutheran
German.[citation needed]
In the courts
As part of their Anabaptist
teachings of nonresistance, Hutterites historically have avoided
getting involved in litigation within the secular justice system. One of
the early founders of the Hutterites, Peter Riedemann, wrote about the Hutterites' stand on going to court in Peter Riedemann's Hutterite Confession of Faith:
"Christ shows that Christians may not go to court when he says, 'If
anyone will sue you and take away your coat, let him have your cloak
also.' In effect Jesus is saying, 'It is better to let people take
everything than to quarrel with them and find yourself in a strange
court.' Christ wants us to show that we seek what is heavenly and
belongs to us, and not what is temporal or alien to us. Thus, it is
evident that a Christian can neither go to court nor be a judge."
Consistent with their beliefs, records do not indicate any
litigation initiated by the Hutterites up to the twentieth century.
However, in their more recent history in North America some Hutterite
conflicts have emerged in court litigations. Several cases involved the
Hutterite Colony defending their religious lifestyle against the
government. This includes the recent conflict over photographs on driver's licenses in Alberta v Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony. Another recent case in the United States, Big Sky Colony Inc. v. Montana Department of Labor and Industry, forced the Hutterites to participate in the workers' compensation system despite the Hutterites' religious objections.
The willingness of the colonies to take matters to secular courts
has also resulted in internal religious disputes being brought before
the court. Two of these cases have come to appeal before the Supreme Court of Canada: Hofer v. Hofer (1970) and Lakeside Colony of Hutterian Brethren v. Hofer (1992). Hofer v. Hofer involved several expelled members of the Interlake Colony in Manitoba
who sought a share of the communal property. The Supreme Court of
Canada ruled that according to the religious tenets of the Hutterites,
the Hutterites have no individual property and therefore the former
members cannot be entitled to a share of the Hutterite colony's goods.
In the case of Lakeside Colony of Hutterian Brethren v. Hofer,
Daniel Hofer Sr. of Lakeside Colony challenged the right of the
Hutterian Brethren Church to expel him and other members. The igniting
issue focused on who owned the rights to a patented hog feeder. The
Board of Managers of the Colony had ruled that Hofer did not own the
patent of the hog feeder in question and should stop producing the item.
Hofer refused to submit to what he considered was an injustice and also
refused to obey the colony's order of expulsion. In response Jacob
Kleinsasser of Crystal Spring Colony, elder of the Schmiedleut group of
Hutterites, tried to use the state to enforce the expulsion order.
Daniel Hofer Sr. initially lost the case. Hofer also lost his first
appeal but finally won on an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, who overturned the expulsion.The outcome of these two cases has strongly influenced the outcome of similar cases in Canada. When some members of The Nine sued their former colony in Manitoba in 2008 over lost wages and injuries the case was never even heard in court.
In the United States judges have repeatedly dismissed cases that
were brought against the colony by colony members or former members.
Such cases include Wollma, et al. v. Poinsett Hutterian Brethren, Inc. (1994) in South Dakota, and Eli Wollman Sr. et al. v. Ayers Ranch Colony (2001) in Montana. More recently in North Dakota,
a case was brought by some of The Nine against Forest River Colony and
was again dismissed by a judge in March 2010, ruling that the courts did
not have subject matter jurisdiction over the case.
Subgroups
Chart depicting the development of the different Hutterite branches.
In the last 150 years several subgroups of Hutterites emerged. When
the Hutterites migrated to the United States in 1874 and during the
following years, there was a division between those who settled in
colonies and lived with community of goods, and those who settled on
private farms according to the conditions of the Homestead Act of 1862. The homesteaders were called Prärieleut, while the ones who settled on the three communal colonies developed into three branches: Schmiedeleut, Dariusleut and Lehrerleut; in the 1990s the Schmiedeleut split into two subgroups.
During the 20th century three groups joined the Hutterites, two of them only temporarily:
The Owa Hutterite Colony,
a Japanese Hutterite community founded in 1972, did not consist of
Hutterites of European descent, but ethnic Japanese who had adopted the
same way of life and were recognized as an official Dariusleut colony. The inhabitants of this colony spoke neither English nor German. The colony was disbanded on December 31, 2019.
In similar fashion, a "neo-Hutterite" group, called the Bruderhof, was founded in Germany in 1920 by Eberhard Arnold.
Arnold forged links with the North American Hutterites in the 1930s,
continuing until 1990 when the Bruderhof were excommunicated because of a
number of religious and social differences.
They are now an international group with communities in several
countries including England and are theologically quite similar to
Hutterites, while being more open to outsiders.
The Community Farm of the Brethren, also called Juliusleut, is a Christian community with communal living at Bright, Ontario,
created under the leadership of Julius Kubassek (1893–1961). It was in
fellowship with the Hutterites from its beginnings, in 1939, until 1950.
Starting in 1999, three Hutterite colonies separated from their
original "Leut" affiliation and became independent. For these three
colonies spiritual renewal became a major concern. One of them,
Elmendorf, branched out two times, so that there are now five colonies
of that kind, which co-operate closely, thus forming a new affiliation
of Hutterite Christian Communities.
Fort Pitt Farms Christian Community is a Christian Community of Hutterite Dariusleut
origin and with many Hutterite traditions but fully autonomous since
1999, when it was excommunicated from the Hutterite Church, whereupon
about one-third of the people of the colony decided to stay with the
Dariusleut Hutterites.
Elmendorf Christian Community, founded in 1998, is a Christian community of Hutterite tradition, but is much more open to outsiders, so-called seekers, than other Hutterite communities.
Population and distribution
In 1995, the total North American Hutterite population was about 30,000.
Approximately 75% of all Hutterites reside in Canada, with the remaining 25% living in the United States.
In 1995 there were a total of 285 Hutterite colonies in Canada (138
in Alberta, 93 colonies in Manitoba and 54 in Saskatchewan). By 2011,
there were 345 across the Prairies – a 21 percent increase. The 2016 census recorded 370 Hutterite colonies in Canada, of these: 175 were in Alberta, 110 in Manitoba and 70 in Saskatchewan.
The same 2016 census which recorded 370 colonies, counted a total
Hutterite population of 35,010 people (up from 32,500 in 2011).
As of March 2018, there were 120 colonies in the United States, of which: 54 colonies in South Dakota, 50 in Montana, nine in Minnesota and seven in North Dakota.
A Montana government report in 2010 published a specific list of
colonies and schools in that state. Hutterite colonies have existed in
the rural farming areas of eastern Washington state since the mid-20th century.
The approximate U.S. population of Brethren was 11,000 in 2018.
In 2020, the U.S. Religion Census counted 15,531 Hutterites (in
145 congregations), of which: 9,041 of Schmiedeleut group (77
congregations), 4,754 of Lehrerleut (43 congregations), 1,409 of
Dariusleut (22 congregations) and 327 in other groups (3 congr.).
As of 2021, there are 572 Hutterite colonies in existence.
Growth
The very high birth rate among the Hutterites has decreased dramatically since 1950, as they have dropped from around ten children per family in 1954 to around five in 2010.
Hutterite fertility rates remain relatively high compared to the
general North American population, but relatively low compared to other
traditional Anabaptist groups like the Amish or the Old Order
Mennonites. While Hutterite women traditionally married around the ages
of 20 or 21, marriages in the 21st century very often are delayed until
the late 20s. Whereas Hutterite women traditionally had children until
their mid 40s, today most Hutterite women have their last child around
the age of 35.
Birth rate (per 1000)
Year
Hutterites
South Dakotans
1950
45.9
23.4
1970
43.0
14.7
1990
35.2
12.1
Year
Fertility rate
1940
10.57
1950
9.83
1970
7.22
1980
6.29
1990
4.63
Depiction in media
49th Parallel (1941) has a segment that takes place at a Hutterite community in Manitoba, Canada.
The Hutterites
is a documentary filmed by Colin Law in 1964 with the following
synopsis: "The followers of religious leader Jakob Hutter live in farm
communities, devoutly holding to the rules their founder laid down four
centuries ago. Through the kindness of a Hutterite colony in Alberta,
this film, in black and white, was made inside the community and shows
all aspects of the Hutterites' daily life."
In the Kung Fu
episode "The Hoots" (December 13, 1973), the sheepherder members of a
Hutterite religious sect offer no resistance to persecution by bigoted
cattlemen until they learn from Kwai Chang Caine that, like the
chameleon, they can change and yet remain the same in the American Southwest.In Season 1, Episode 9 of the TV series Movin' On, "Hoots" (November 21, 1974), gypsy truckers Sonny Pruitt (Claude Akins) and Will Chandler (Frank Converse)
make a delivery to a Hutterite colony and soon find themselves
embroiled in a violent conflict between the pacifists and rival farmers
who are angry about the colony outcompeting them.
On May 29, 2012, the first episode of American Colony: Meet the Hutterites aired on the National Geographic Channel. Filmed primarily at King Ranch Colony near Lewistown, Montana, with Jeff Collins
as executive producer, the colony was paid $100,000 for permission to
produce a documentary of Hutterite life. Immediately after the first
airing, many Hutterites began to complain that the show did not
represent a true picture of typical colony life and ended up being a
reality show or "soap opera" rather than a documentary.
Some of the Hutterite cast later said that some of the scenes were
scripted and that they were not aware of how the final version would
portray the Hutterites.
Jeff Collins stated that he believes King Colony members were coerced
to write retractions, under threat of excommunication from Hutterite
leaders.
Colony leaders from King Ranch Colony wrote a letter to the National
Geographic Society asking for an apology and that the show be
discontinued, citing a false portrayal of Hutterites and a "breach of
contract and defamation of our life and our character" as the reason.
In 2013, How to Get to Heaven with the Hutterites was broadcast on BBC2 and looked at the lives of the people within the community.
Another film about the Hutterites is The Valley of All Utopias (2012), a documentary about a Hutterite colony in Saskatchewan directed by Thomas Risch.
Hutterites were featured in the CBC TV series Heartland in Season 8, Episode 7, "Walk a Mile" (2014).
