Sorry for all the election posts, but I would be remiss if in closing I didn’t say a word about one of the weirder/more entertaining aspects of the 2024 election that dovetails neatly with my own eccentric interest in religious demography and politics: the rise of the Amish as political kingmakers.
In general this election has thrown a wrench in the “demography is destiny” ideology (I say ideology because there was never a lot of evidence to the idea that immigration would cause permanent democratic majorities; of course I’m partial but the DNC could have, you know, actually spoken to a demographer at some point, maybe?)
Still, this is one example where we are beginning to see the inexorable outcomes of demographic fundamentals in another way. To briefly summarize, according to some reports the largely neutral Amish were shaken out of their previous political apathy after health officials raided some of their raw milk outlets: registering in large numbers and voting republican, giving Trump tens of thousands of votes in the vital swing state of Pennsylvania. This doesn’t mean that they will vote republican forever, or that the democrats can’t find an angle to make a play for their votes, but in an increasingly secular world it shows the paradoxical power of small, highly fertile religious groups. In a world where modernity inevitably decreases fertility, the only highly fertile societies left are either those that are too poor to be able to afford modernity such as Francophone Africa, or religious groups that have voluntarily removed themselves from modernity such as the Amish, Haredim, and to some extent the Hutterites.
Of course, since after the trek West we have decided to live our faith in the world, to hold our religious faith in the face of modernity, as well I think we should for a number of reasons (I enjoy the fleshpots of modernity too much), but it is clear that in this world to have the kind of community, kin, children, and people-oriented culture that we enjoyed during the early Utah-era, with TFRs in the 7 range, it would require a sort of Benedict Option that has been adopted by the Hutterites, Amish, and Haredim. Again, I don’t think that’s the path we should take, but it is still fascinating to watch their fruits in real time.
For example, the Amish have a doubling time of twenty years. Of course, the way exponential growth happens is that it slow burns for a while before it explodes.
If we do some back-of-the-envelope math:
Given that the state of Pennsylvania will more or less remain demographically stagnant for the foreseeable future, we can reasonably heuristically double the Amish share of the population every 20 years. Right now they are a little under 1% of the PA population (.7%). If we double this every 20 years, then there is a chance that my newborn will live to see the Amish constituting over one fifth of the population of Pennsylvania. If that growth rate continues, during this time their total numbers across the world will increase from 394,720 today to 12 and a half million. That’s impressive, of course, but it’s really just queuing it up for the explosion that will happen in the next hundred years after that, where they will reach 400 million, or greater than the current population of the US.
Now, do I think this will happen? No, 200 years is a very long time and something will probably have to give. Still, while Amish fertility has slightly declined from a half century ago, their nature of being resistant to the very modernizing forces that have been so ruthlessly effective in cutting fertility rates means that they will probably be able to continue rapid growth for some time, and it’s dynamics like these that, according to the classic Stark hypothesis, led to Christianity eventually conquering Rome in 300 years. At the very least I would bet even odds that my descendants in 200 years will be living in societies that are 10% or more Amish. Consistent differentials across time can lead to world-shaking changes. Additionally, these numbers may in fact be conservative. The more traditional branch of the Amish, the Swartzentruber Amish, which have TFRs closer to 9, grew 171% in 20 years from 1991 to 2000, so they may become an increasing share of the Amish. As the demographic balloon of the Amish community grows the seemingly esoteric distinctions drawn between the different factions could become as salient as the differences between different Protestant denominations.
Oh, and during this same time the Haredi Jewish population to their east will be growing at a similar rate. We should count our stars that these rapidly growing groups are quintessentially peaceful (my understanding for example, is that the Israeli settlers trying to stir up trouble with the Palestinians are not Haredim, but are largely Modern Orthodox, but I might be wrong).
Also, as a personal, anecdotal sidebar, I won’t claim more than passing familiarity with them, but when we lived in Philadelphia we would sometimes travel through Amish country and buy their produce, and their reputation for being the nicest people is well-earned. And yes, I’m sure they have serious issues like all groups, but if we’re going to go there the kind of people who revel in criticizing peaceful, happy, tight-knit religious groups for their issues probably have even deeper issues. They just don’t make it onto Netflix specials.
Politically speaking, we as Latter-day Saints have some experience with the power of block voting by small, “weird” religious groups. Once we were large enough to court politicians we started getting goodies like the Nauvoo city charter and Nauvoo Legion. In the same way that the Haredim are increasingly becoming the kingmakers in the Israeli Knesset, I believe we’ll see the day when the Amish are a political force to be reckoned with in certain states. Of course, they might lapse back into political apathy; if they follow the trends of the Haredim they won’t care about, say, Ukrainian NATO membership or trade with China, and will give their support to whoever will maintain their religious privileges.
Religiously it makes for interesting thought experiments. For example, do missionaries proselytize the Amish? I don’t know, and I don’t know anybody who’s given Amish-Latter-day Saint dialogue much thought. In the world of Latter-day Saint interfaith relations and diplomacy I suspect that in the coming centuries the Haredim, Amish, and Hutterites are going to become much, much more salient than, say, the Episcopalian or United Methodist Churches, mainstream prestigious institutions of yesteryear that have a storied past but not as much of a future. Whatever the case with these particulars, it is clear that the religious landscape of my grandchildren and great-grandchildren will be quite a bit different than what we have now. While currently we and other faiths are fighting an all-consuming wave of secularism, I would not be surprised if, the relationship between fertility and religiosity being what it is, in a few centuries down the road we are back to a world where we are competing against distinct religious worldviews instead of all of us competing against secularism. Time will tell.