The Farmer and His Community
()
About this ebook
Read more from Dwight Sanderson
The Farmer and His Community Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Farmer and His Community Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Related to The Farmer and His Community
Related ebooks
The Making of a Country Parish Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsOn Farms and Rural Communities: An Agricultural Ethic for the Future Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Evolution of the Country Community A Study in Religious Sociology Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Evolution of the Country Community Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Wages of Relief: Cities and the Unemployed in Prairie Canada, 1929–39 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsChurch Cooperation in Community Life Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsMixed Harvest: The Second Great Transformation in the Rural North, 1870-1930 Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5The Changing Face of San Antonio: An Insider's View of an Emerging International City Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCooperatives in New Orleans: Collective Action and Urban Development Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsDothan, Alabama: A Personal Journey Through History. Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsAmerican Community: Radical Experiments in Intentional Living Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsUrban Ministry Reconsidered: Contexts and Approaches Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCitizenship in the Western Tradition: Plato to Rousseau Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsStreetwise: Race, Class, and Change in an Urban Community Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Children Of The Fountain Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Country-Life Movement in the United States Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsAgrarian Socialism: The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation in Saskatchewan: A Study in Political Sociology Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Tonala: Conservatism, Responsibility, and Authority in a Mexican Town Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSmall Cities, Big Issues: Reconceiving Community in a Neoliberal Era Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSilent Rise Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCaste, Class, and Power: Changing Patterns of Stratification in a Tanjore Village Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Community Food Forest Handbook: How to Plan, Organize, and Nurture Edible Gathering Places Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsZambia’s Urban Areas Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCitizenship and Governance in a Changing City: Somerville, MA Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Farm Then and Now: A Model for Sustainable Living Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe American Missionary — Volume 54, No. 3, July, 1900 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPersistent Progressives: The Rocky Mountain Farmers Union Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsStrategies for Change in the South Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsRural and Small-Town America: Context, Composition, and Complexities Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsChapters in Rural Progress Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Classics For You
A Farewell to Arms Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Le Petit Prince Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Anna Karenina Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Little Prince (translated) Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Flowers for Algernon Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Animal Farm: A Fairy Story Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Old Man and the Sea Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Troy: The Greek Myths Reimagined Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5In Search Of Lost Time (All 7 Volumes) (ShandonPress) Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Beyond Good and Evil Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Bell Jar: A Novel Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5On the shortness of life Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Murder of Roger Ackroyd Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5For Whom the Bell Tolls Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Siddhartha Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Franz Kafka - Collected Works Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/51984 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5If On A Winter's Night A Traveler Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Trial Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Corrections Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5H. P. Lovecraft Complete Collection Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Mythos Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Invisible Cities Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/51984 - Orwell Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Contact Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Animal Farm And 1984 Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5
Related categories
Reviews for The Farmer and His Community
0 ratings0 reviews
Book preview
The Farmer and His Community - Dwight Sanderson
Dwight Sanderson
The Farmer and His Community
Published by Good Press, 2022
EAN 4064066145330
Table of Contents
FOREWORD
THE FARMER AND HIS COMMUNITY
CHAPTER I
THE RURAL COMMUNITY
CHAPTER II
THE FARM HOME AND THE COMMUNITY
CHAPTER III
THE COMMUNITY'S PEOPLE AND HISTORY
CHAPTER IV
COMMUNICATION THE MEANS OF COMMUNITY LIFE
CHAPTER V
THE FARM AND THE VILLAGE
CHAPTER VI
COMMUNITY ASPECTS OF THE FARM BUSINESS
CHAPTER VII
HOW MARKETS AFFECT RURAL COMMUNITIES
CHAPTER VIII
HOW COÖPERATION STRENGTHENS THE COMMUNITY
CHAPTER IX
THE COMMUNITY'S EDUCATION
THE SCHOOL
THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
THE COUNTRY WEEKLY
CHAPTER X
THE COMMUNITY'S EDUCATION (Continued)
THE EXTENSION MOVEMENT
CHAPTER XI
THE COMMUNITY'S RELIGIOUS LIFE
CHAPTER XII
THE COMMUNITY'S HEALTH
CHAPTER XIII
THE COMMUNITY'S PLAY AND RECREATION
CHAPTER XIV
ORGANIZATIONS OF THE RURAL COMMUNITY
CHAPTER XV
THE COMMUNITY'S DEPENDENT
CHAPTER XVI
THE COMMUNITY'S GOVERNMENT
CHAPTER XVII
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
CHAPTER XVIII
COMMUNITY PLANNING
CHAPTER XIX
COMMUNITY LOYALTY
APPENDIX A
INDEX
THE FARMER'S BOOKSHELF
KENYON L. BUTTERFIELD
FOREWORD
Table of Contents
In recent years we have heard a great deal about the rural community and rural community organization. All sorts of organizations dealing with rural life discuss these topics at their meetings, the agricultural press and the popular magazines encourage community development, and a number of books have recently appeared dealing with various phases of rural community life. The community idea is fairly well established as an essential of rural social organization.
One might gain the impression that the community is a new discovery or social invention were he to read only the current discussions. It is, however, a form of social organization as old as agriculture itself, but which was very largely neglected in the settlement of the larger part of the United States. This new emphasis on the community is, therefore, but the revival in a new form of a very ancient mode of human association. The community becomes essential because the conditions of rural life have changed and rural people are again being forced to act together in locality groups to meet the needs of their common life.
The author has attempted to define the rural community and to describe the new conditions which are determining its structure and shaping its functions, in the belief that an understanding of the nature of the rural community should aid those who are seeking to secure a better social adjustment of the countryside. It attempts to relate The Farmer and His Community.
The problems and methods of community organization have been discussed but incidentally, and the book is not designed as a handbook for community development. Its chief aim is to establish a point of view with regard to the rural community as an essential unit for rural social organization through a sociological analysis of the past history and present tendencies of the various forms of associations which seem necessary for a satisfying rural society. It is hoped that such an analysis presented in an untechnical manner may be of service to rural leaders who are working for the development of country life by giving them a better understanding of the nature of the community and therefore a firmer faith in its future and greater enthusiasm and loyalty in its service.
The present volume is a brief summary of a more extended study of the rural community, not only in this country but in other lands and in other times, which is now in preparation for publication.
Dwight Sanderson.
Cornell University.
May, 1922.
THE FARMER AND HIS COMMUNITY
Table of Contents
The core of the community idea, then—as applied to rural life—is that we must make the community, as a unit, an entity, a thing, the point of departure of all our thinking about the rural problem, and, in its local application, the direct aim of all organized efforts for improvement or redirection. The building of real, local farm communities is perhaps the main task in erecting an adequate rural civilization. Here is the real goal of all rural effort, the inner kernel of a sane country-life movement, the moving slogan of the new campaign for rural progress that must be waged by the present generation."—Kenyon L. Butterfield, in The Farmer and the New Day.
CHAPTER I
THE RURAL COMMUNITY
Table of Contents
No phase of the social progress of the Twentieth Century is more significant or promises a more far-reaching influence than the rediscovery of the community as a fundamental social unit, and the beginnings of community consciousness throughout the United States. I say the rediscovery
of the community, for ever since men forsook hunting and grazing as the chief means of subsistence and settled down to a permanent agriculture they have lived in communities.
In ancient and medieval Europe, in China and India, and among primitive agricultural peoples throughout the world, the village community is recognized as the primary local unit of society. In medieval France the rural "communaute" was the local unit of government and social administration. Its people met from time to time at the village church in regular assemblies at which they elected their local officers, approved their accounts, arranged for the support of the church, the school, and local improvements. In most of France and throughout much of Europe the farm homes are still clustered in villages, from which the farm lands radiate. There the village is primarily a place of residence, and with the lands belonging to it forms the community.
New England was settled in much the same manner, being divided into towns which still form the local units of government, and which for the most part are single communities, though here and there more than one center has sprung up within a town and secondary communities have developed. The New England town meeting has ever been lauded as the birthplace of representative democratic government in America, and in its original form it was a true community meeting, dealing not only with the political government, but considering all religious, educational, and social matters affecting the common life of the town.
Although the New England tradition determined the form of local government in the areas settled by its people in the central and western states, the township was but an artificial town resulting from methods of the land surveys. The homesteader took up
his land with but little thought of community relations. He traded at the nearest town; church was first held in the school-house and later churches were erected in the open country at convenient points; his children went to the district school; and his social life was chiefly in the neighboring homes. His life centered in the immediate neighborhood. As railroads covered the country, villages and town sprang up at frequent intervals, and gradually became the real centers of community life, but usually there was but little realization on the part of either village or farm people of their community interests. The farmer's attention was on the farm, the townsman's chief interest was his business, and not infrequently their interests were in conflict and they gave little thought to their real dependence on each other.
In the South the plantation system of the landed aristocracy, which as long as it existed was quite self-sufficient, gave little encouragement to community development. The county was the most important unit of local government and the carpet-baggers'
efforts at establishing local townships were repudiated with the ending of their régime. Only in recent years have conditions throughout the South, largely the result of increased immigration and the breaking up of large plantations, favored the development of local communities.
In general, the American farmer has voted and taken his share in local politics and government, has attended his own church, has traded where most convenient or advantageous, has joined the nearest grange or lodge, and with his family has visited nearby friends and relatives and joined with them in social festivities; he has loyally supported these various interests, but until very recently, he has had little conception of the interrelations of these institutions in the life of the community or of the possible advantages of community development as such. But new wants and new problems have arisen which may only be met by the united action of all elements of both village and countryside. The automobile demands better roads and both farmer and businessman are interested to have them built so that the natural community centers may be most easily reached. Better schools, libraries, facilities for recreation and social life, organization for the improvement of agriculture and for the better marketing of farm products, are all community problems and force attention upon the community area to be served by these institutions. A consolidated school or a library cannot be maintained at every crossroads. Only by the support of all the people within a reasonable distance of a common center are better rural institutions possible.
The trend of events was thus bringing about a recognition of the place of the community in the life of rural people, when the Great War hastened this process by many years. Liberty Loan, Red Cross, and other war drives
were organized by communities which vied with each other in raising their quotas. A new sense of the unity of the community was brought about by the common loyalty to its boys in the nation's service. Having created state and county councils of defense, national leaders came to appreciate that the primary unit for effective organization for war purposes must be the community, and President Wilson wrote to the State Councils of Defense urging the organization of community councils. Thousands of these had been organized when the Armistice was declared, and although most of them were not continued, the importance of the local community was given national recognition and attention was directed to the need of the better organization of local forces for community progress.
What, then, is the rural community? Is it a real entity or is it merely an idea or an ideal? Where is it and how can we recognize it?
We are indebted to Professor C. J. Galpin, now in charge of the Farm Life Studies of the United States Department of Agriculture, for first developing a method for the location of the rural community. Professor Galpin[1] holds that the trading area tributary to any village is usually the chief factor in determining the community area. He determines the community area by starting from a business center and marking on a map those farm homes which trade mostly at that center. By drawing a line connecting those farm homes farthest from the center on all the roads radiating from it, the boundary of the trade area is described. In the same way the areas tributary to the church, the school, the bank, the milk station, the grange, etc., may be determined and mapped. The boundaries of these areas will be found to be by no means coincident, but it will usually be found that most of them center in one village or hamlet, and that the trade area is the most significant in determining the area tributary to this center. When the areas served by the chief institutions of adjacent centers are mapped, it is usually found that a composite line of the different boundary lines separating these centers will approximate the boundaries of the communities. A line which divides adjacent community areas so that most of the families either side of this line go most frequently to, or their chief interests are at, the center within that boundary, will be the boundary between the adjacent communities. Thus, from the standpoint of location, a community is the local area tributary to the center of the common interests of its people.[2]
As indicated above the business center may usually be taken as the base point or community center, from which to determine the boundaries of the community. However, in the older parts of the country or in hilly or mountainous regions, the trade or business center is not always the same as the center of the chief social activities of the people, and may not be the chief factor in determining the community center. Not infrequently a church, school and grange hall located close together may form the nucleus of a community which does its business at a railroad station village some distance away, possibly over a range of hills. The chief trading points cannot, therefore, be arbitrarily assumed as the base points for determining community areas, but those points at which the more important of the common interests of the people find expression should be considered as community centers. It is not simply a question of where the people go most often, but of where their chief interests focus.
With this concept of a community it is obvious that the center
of a community must be the base point for determining its area. It would seem that the community center is essential to the individuality of any community: The community center
need not necessarily be at the geographical center of the community; indeed in many cases it is at or close to one of its boundaries, though in an open level country it will tend to approximate the center.
The term community center
is here used in a literal sense of being the center of the activities of the community. It should be distinguished from the community-center idea
which refers to a building, whether it be a community house, school, church, or grange hall, as a community center.
Such a building in which the activities of the community are largely centered may be a community center in a very real sense, but in most cases these activities will be divided between church, school, grange hall, etc. No one of them can then be a center for the whole community, but taken together they constitute the center in which the chief interests of the community focus. Every community must necessarily have a more or less well defined community center; it may or may not have some one building in which the chief activities of the community have their headquarters. Such buildings, of whatever nature, may well be called community houses or social centers.
Although attention has been directed to the area of the community, the community consists not of land or houses but of the people of this area. Its boundary merely gives a community identity, as does the roll of a company or the charter of a city. The community consists of the people within a local area; the land they occupy is but the physical basis of the community. The nature of the community will depend very largely upon whether its people live close together or at a distance. In the Rocky Mountain States many communities are but sparsely settled and may have a radius of forty or fifty miles and yet be true communities, while on the Atlantic seaboard a definite community with as many people may have a radius of not over a mile or two.
Nor is the community a mere aggregation or association of the people of a given area. It is rather a corporate state of mind of those living in a local area, giving rise to their collective behavior. There cannot be a true community unless the people think and act together.
The term neighborhood
is very frequently used as synonymous with community,
and should be definitely distinguished. In the sense in which these terms are now coming to be technically employed, the neighborhood consists of but a group of houses fairly near each other. Frequently a neighborhood grew up around some one center, as a school, store, church, mill, or blacksmith shop, which in the course of time may have been abandoned, but the homes remained clustered together. Or the neighborhood may be merely six to a dozen homes near together on the same road or near a corner. The school district of the one-room country school is commonly a neighborhood, but as there are no other interests which bind the people together it cannot be considered a community. Likewise people associate in churches, granges, etc., but church parishes overlap, and the constituency of any one of these associations is not necessarily a community. Only when several of the chief human interests find satisfaction in the organizations and institutions which serve a fairly definite common local area tributary to them, do we have a true community. In many cases the neighborhood, particularly the school district, forms a desirable unit for certain purposes of social organization, and, indeed, in many cases it may be necessary to develop the neighborhood as a social unit before its people will actively associate themselves in community activities, but the neighborhood cannot function in the same way as the larger community which brings people together in several of their chief interests. The community can support institutions impossible in the neighborhood, such as a grange, lodge, library, various stores, etc. The community is more or less self-sufficing. A community may include a variable number of neighborhoods. The community is the smallest geographical unit of organized association of the chief human activities.
Bringing together these various considerations concerning the nature of the rural community we may say that a rural community consists of the people in a local area tributary to the center of their common interests.
Obviously the community thus defined has nothing to do with political areas or boundaries, for very commonly a community may lie in two or three townships or counties. That rural areas are actually divided into such communities and that the community is the primary unit of their social organization may best be tested by taking any given county or township and attempting to map its area into communities on the basis above described. In most of the northern and western states and throughout much of the South, most of the territory may be quite readily divided into communities. This has been demonstrated by the rural surveys of the Interchurch World Movement[3] and by the community maps made by County Farm Bureaus.
A very large part of the South, however, has no natural community centers and in such sections it will be found very difficult if not impossible to define community areas. The store may be at the railroad station, the church in the open country, and the district or consolidated school at still another point. Some people go to one store or church and others to another. Under such conditions, no real community exists. Usually, any form of social organization is more or less difficult under such conditions, for the people are divided into different groups for different purposes and there is nothing which makes united activities possible. It seems probable that only to the extent that certain centers of social and economic life come to be recognized by the people, and community life is developed around them, will the most effective and satisfying social organization be possible.
Recognition of the community as the primary unit for purposes of rural organization has now become quite general. Several mid-western states have passed legislation permitting school districts to combine into community districts for the support of consolidated schools or high schools, irrespective of township or county boundaries. The present tendency in the centralization of rural schools seems to be in the direction of locating them at the natural community centers. Rural churches are coming into a new sense of responsibility to the community and the community church is increasingly advocated. The American Red Cross in planning its peace-time program is recognizing the importance of the rural community as the local unit for its work. The County Farm Bureaus, working in coöperation with the state colleges of agriculture and the United States Department of Agriculture, very soon discovered the value of the community as the local unit of their organization, and carry on their work through community committees or community clubs. Possibly no other one movement has done so much to bring about the definite location of rural communities and their appreciation by rural people. A conference of national organizations engaged in social work in rural communities held in 1919 summed up the experience of a group of representative rural leaders in the statement: In rural organization it is recognized that the local community constitutes the functional unit and the county or district the supervisory unit.
In other words, it is the rural community which really carries on,
whatever the executive organization of the county or district may be.
The strength of the rural community as a social group lies in two facts. First, it is not so large but that most of its people know each other. The size of the community in this regard does not depend so much upon the actual number of square miles involved as upon the number of its population. People may all be acquainted in a sparsely settled community covering a ten-mile radius, and there may be less acquaintance in a small community with a dense population. Secondly, the great majority of the people in the average rural community are dependent upon agriculture for their income, either directly or once-removed. These two facts make possible common interests and a social control through public opinion which is not possible in larger social units such as the county or city. Sir Horace Plunkett appreciates this when he says:
"Our ancient Irish records show little clans with a common ownership of land hardly larger than a parish, but with all the patriotic feeling of larger nations held with an intensity rare in modern states. The history of these clans and of very small nations like the ancient Greek states shows that the social feeling assumes its most binding and powerful character where the community is large enough to allow free play to the various interests of human life, but is not so large that it becomes an abstraction to the imagination."[4]
This inherent social strength of the rural community, the fact that the community is relatively permanent, and the appreciation that only through community effort may rural people realize their natural desire to enjoy some of the advantages of cities, force the conviction that the community must be the primary unit for the organization of rural progress. It is from this point of view that we shall discuss the community aspects of the various human interests of the farmer and the consequent relations of The Farmer and His Community.
Footnote
[1] Galpin, C. J., The Social Anatomy of an Agricultural Community.
Research Bulletin 54, Agricultural Experiment Station of the University of Wisconsin, May, 1915; and also in his "Rural