The mind of the farmer is as varied as the members of the agricultural

class are significantly different. And how great are these differences!

The wheat farmer of Washington state who receives for his year's crop

$106,000 has little understanding of the life outlook of the New

Englander who cultivates his small, rocky, hillside farm. The difference

is not merely that one does on a small scale what the other does in an

immense way. He who knows both men will hardly question that the

difference in quantity leads also to differences in quality, and in no

respect are the two men more certainly distinguishable than in their

mental characteristics.

It appears useless, therefore, to attempt to procure for dissection a

typical farmer's mind. In this country at present there is no mind that

can be fairly said to represent a group so lacking in substantial unity

as the farming class, and any attempt to construct such a mind is bound

to fail. This is less true when the class is separated into sections,

for the differences between farmers are in no small measure

geographical. Indeed, is it not a happy fact that the American farmer is

not merely a farmer? Although it complicates a rural problem such as

ours, it is fortunate that the individual farmer shares the larger

social mind to such a degree as to diminish the intellectual influences

born of his occupation.

The method of procedure that gives largest promise of substantial fact

is to attempt to uncover some of the fundamental influences that operate

upon the psychic life of the farmers of America and to notice, in so far

as opportunity permits, what social elements modify the complete working

of these influences.

One influence that shows itself in the thinking of farmers as of

fundamental character is, of course, the occupation of farming itself.

In primitive life we not only see the importance of agricultural work

for social life but we discover also some of the mental elements

involved that make this form of industry socially significant. From the

first it called for an investment of self-control, a patience, that

Nature might be coaxed to yield from her resources a reasonable harvest.

We find therefore in primitive agriculture a hazardous undertaking

which, nevertheless, lacked any large amount of dramatic appeal.

It is by no means otherwise today. The farmer has to be efficient in a

peculiar kind of self-control. He needs to invest labor and foresight in

an enterprise that affords to the usual person little of the opportunity

for quick returns, the sense of personal achievement, or the

satisfaction of the desire for competitive face-to-face association with

other men which is offered in the city. Men who cultivate on a very

large scale and men who enjoy unusual social insight as to the

significance of their occupation are exceptions to the general run of

farmers. In these days of accessible transportation we have a rapid and

highly successful selection which largely eliminates from the farming

class the type that does not naturally possess the power to be satisfied

with the slowly acquired property, impersonal success, and non-dramatic

activities of farming. This process which eliminates the more restless

and commercially ambitious from the country has, of course, been at

work for generations. It has tended, therefore, to a uniformity of

mental characteristics, but it has by no means succeeded in procuring a

homogeneous rural mind. The movement has been somewhat modified by the

return of people to the country from the city and by the influence on

the country mind of the more restless and adventurous rural people who,

for one reason or another, have not migrated. In the far West

especially, attention has been given to the rural hostility to, or at

least the misunderstanding of, city movements which attempt ambitious

social advances. It is safe to assume that this attitude of rural people

is widespread and is noticeable far west merely because of a greater

frankness. The easterner hides his attitude because he has become

conscious that it opens him to criticism. This attitude of rural

hostility is rooted in the fundamental differences between the thinking

of country and of city people, due largely to the process of social

selection. This mental difference gives constant opportunity for social

friction. If the individuals who live most happily in the city and in

the country are contrasted, there is reason to suppose that the mental

opposition expresses nervous differences. In one we have the more rapid,

more changeable, and more consuming thinker, while the thought of the

other is slower, more persistent, and less wasteful of nervous energy.

The work of the average farmer brings him into limited association with

his fellows as compared with the city worker. This fact also operates

upon him mentally. He has less sense of social variations and less

realization of the need of group solidarity. This results in his having

less social passion than his city brother, except when he is caught in a

periodic outburst of economic discontent expressed in radical agitation,

and also in his having a more feeble class-consciousness and a weaker

basis for cooperation. This last limitation is one from which the farmer

seriously suffers.

The farmer's lack of contact with antagonistic groups, because his work

keeps him away from the centers where social discontent boils with

passion and because it prevents his appreciating class differences,

makes him a conservative element in our national life, but one always

big with the danger of a blind servitude to traditions and archaic

social judgments. The thinking of the farmer may be either substantial

from his sense of personal sufficiency or backward from his lack of

contact. The decision regarding his attitude is made by the influences

that enter his life, in addition to those born of his occupation.

At this point, however, it would be serious to forget that some of the

larger farming enterprises are carried on so differently that the

manager and owner are more like the factory operator than the usual

farmer. To them the problem is labor-saving machinery, efficient

management, labor cost, marketing facilities, and competition. They are

not especially influenced by the fact that they happen to handle land

products rather than manufactured articles.

Much has been made of the farmer's hand-to-hand grapple with a

capricious and at times frustrating Nature. This emphasis is deserved,

for the farmer is out upon the frontier of human control of natural

forces. Even modern science, great as is its service, cannot protect him

from the unexpected and the disappointing. Insects and weather sport

with his purposes and give his efforts the atmosphere of chance. It is

not at all strange, therefore, that the farmer feels drawn to fatalistic

interpretations of experience which he carries over to lines of thought

other than those connected with his business.

A second important influence that has helped to make the mind of the

farmer has been isolation. In times past, without doubt, this has been

powerful in its effect upon the mind of the farmer. It is less so now

because, as everyone knows, the farmer is protected from isolation by

modern inventions. It is necessary to recall, however, that isolation is

in relation to one's needs and that we too often neglect the fact that

the very relief that has removed from country people the more apparent

isolation of physical distance has often intensified the craving for

closer and more frequent contact with persons than the country usually

permits. Whether isolation as a psychic experience has decreased for

many in the country is a matter of doubt. Certainly most minds need the

stimulus of human association for both happiness and healthiness, and

even yet the minds of farmers disclose the narrowness, suspiciousness,

and discontent of place that isolation brings. It makes a difference in

social attitude whether the telephone, automobile, and parcel post draw

the people nearer together in a common community life or whether they

bring the people under the magic of the city's quantitative life and in

this way cause rural discontent.

The isolation from the great business centers which has kept farmers

from having personally a wide experience with modern business explains

in part the suspicious attitude rural people often take into their

commercial relations. This has been expressed in a way one can hardly

forget by Tolstoi in his "Resurrection," when his hero, from moral

sympathy with land reform, undertakes to give his tenants land under

conditions more to their advantage and, much to his surprise, finds them

hostile to the plan. They had been too often tricked in the past and

felt too little acquainted with business methods to have any confidence

in the new plan which claimed benevolent motives. It is only fair to

admit that the farmer differs from others of his social rank only in

degree, and that his experiences in the past appear to him to justify

his skeptical attitude. He has at times suffered exploitation; what he

does not realize is that this has been made possible by his lack of

knowledge of the ways of modern business and by his failure to

organize. The farmer is beginning to appreciate the significance of

marketing. Unfortunately, he too often carries his suspiciousness, which

has resulted from business experiences, into many other lines of action

and thinking, and thus robs himself of enthusiasm and social confidence.

A third important element in the making of the farmer's mind may be

broadly designated as suggestion. The farmer is like other men in that

his mental outlook is largely colored by the suggestions that enter his

life.

It is this fact, perhaps, that explains why the farmer's mind does not

express more clearly vocational character, for no other source of

persistent suggestions has upon most men the influence of the newspaper,

and each day, almost everywhere, the daily paper comes to the farmer

with its appealing suggestions. Of course the paper represents the urban

point of view rather than the rural, but in the deepest sense it may be

said to look at life from the human outlook, the way the average man

sees things. The newspaper, therefore, feeds the farmer's mind with

suggestions and ideas that counteract the influences that specially

emphasize the rural environment. It keeps him in contact with thinking

and events that are world-wide, and unconsciously permeates his motives,

at times giving him urban cravings that keep him from utilizing to the

full his social resources in the country. Any attempt to understand

rural life that minimizes the common human fellowship which the

newspaper offers the farmer is certain to lead to unfortunate

misinterpretation. Mentally the farmer is far from being isolated in his

experiences, for he no longer is confined to the world of local ideas as

he once was. This constant daily stimulation from the world of business,

sports, and public affairs at times awakens his appetite for urban life

and makes him restless, or encourages his removal to the city, or makes

him demand as much as possible of the quantitative pleasures and

recreations of city life. In a greater degree, however, the paper

contents his mental need for contact with life in a more universal way

than his particular community allows. The automobile and other modern

inventions also serve the farmer, as does the newspaper, by providing

mental suggestions from an extended environment.

A very important source of suggestion, as abnormal psychology so clearly

demonstrates, at present, is the impressions of childhood. Rural life

tends on the whole to intensify the significant events of early life,

because of the limited amount of exciting experiences received as

compared with city life. Parental influence is more important because it

suffers less competition. This fact of the meaning of early suggestions

appears, without doubt, in various ways and forbids the scientist's

assuming that rural thinking is made uniform by universal and unvaried

suggestions.

The discontent of rural parents with reference to their environment or

occupation, due to their natural urban tendencies, or to their failure

to succeed, or to the hard conditions of their farm life, has some

influence in sending rural youth to the city. Accidental or incidental

suggestion often repeated is especially penetrating in childhood, and no

one who knows rural people can fail to notice parents who are prone to

such suggestions expressing rural discontent. In the same way,

suspiciousness or jealousy with reference to particular neighbors or

associates leads, when it is often expressed before children, to general

suspiciousness or trivial sensitiveness. The emotional obstacles to the

get-together spirit--obstacles which vex the rural worker--in no small

degree have their origin in suggestion given in childhood.

The country is concerned with another source of suggestion which has

more to do with the efficiency of the rural mind than its content, and

that is the matter of sex. Students of rural life apparently give this

element less attention than it deserves. As Professor Ross has pointed

out in "South of Panama," for example, the precocious development of sex

tends to enfeeble the intellect and to prevent the largest kind of

mental capacity. It is unsafe at present to generalize regarding the

differences between country and city life in matters of sex, but it is

certainly true, when rural life is empty of commanding interests and

when it is coarsened by low traditions and the presence of defective

persons, that there is a precocious emphasis of sex. This is expressed

both by early marrying and by loose sex relations. It is doubtful

whether the commercializing of sex attraction in the city has equal

mental significance, for certainly science clearly shows that it is the

precocious expression of sex that has largest psychic dangers. In so far

as the environment of a rural community tends to bring the sexual life

to early expression, we have every reason to suppose that at this point

at least the influence of the community is such as to tend toward a

comparative mental arrest or a limiting of mental ability, for which the

country later suffers socially. Each student of rural life must, from

experience and observation, evaluate for himself the significance of

this sex precociousness. When sex interests become epidemic and the

general tendency is toward precocious sex maturity, the country

community is producing for itself men and women of inferior resources as

compared with their natural possibilities. Even the supposed social

wholesomeness of earlier marrying in the country must be scrutinized

with the value of sex sublimation during the formative years clearly in

mind.

PSYCHIC CAUSES OF RURAL MIGRATION

IX

PSYCHIC CAUSES OF RURAL MIGRATION

In modern civilization the increasing attractiveness of the city is one

of the apparent social facts.[6] Social psychology may reasonably be

expected to throw light upon the causes of this movement of population

from rural to urban conditions of life. Striking illustrations of

individual preference for city life, even in opposition to the person's

economic interests, suggest that this problem of social behavior so

characteristic of our time contains important mental factors.

Since sensations give the mind its raw material,[7] the mind may be said

to crave stimulation. "In the most general way of viewing the matter,

beings that seem to us to possess minds show in their physical life

what we may call a great and discriminating sensitiveness to what goes

on at any present time in their environment."[8] This interest of the

mind in the receiving of stimulation for its own activity is an

essential element in any social problem. The individual reacts socially

"with a great and discriminating sensitiveness" to his environment, just

as he reacts physically to his stimuli to conserve pleasure and avoid

pain.

The fundamental sources of stimuli are, of course, common to all forms

of social grouping, but one difference between rural and urban life

expresses itself in the greater difficulty of obtaining under rural

conditions certain definite stimulations from the environment. This fact

is assumed both by those who hold the popular belief that most great men

are country-born and by those who accept the thesis of Ward that

"fecundity in eminent persons seems then to be intimately connected

with cities."[9] The city may be called an environment of greater

quantitative stimulations than the country. The city furnishes forceful,

varied, and artificial stimuli; the country affords an environment of

stimuli in comparison less strong and more uniform. Minds that crave

external, quantitative stimuli for pleasing experiences are naturally

attracted by the city and repelled by the monotony of the country. On

the other hand, those who find their supreme mental satisfactions in

their interpretation or appreciation of the significant expression of

the beauty and lawfulness of nature discover what may be called an

environment of qualitative stimulations. The city appeals, therefore, to

those who with passive attitude need quantitative, external experiences;

the country is a splendid opportunity for those who are fitted to create

their mental satisfactions from the active working over of stimuli that

appear commonplace to the uninterpreting mind. If Coney Island, with its

noise and manufactured stimulations, is representative of the city,

White's "Natural History of Selborne" is a characteristic product of the

wealth of the country to the mind gifted with penetrating skill.

Doubtless this difference between rural and urban is nothing new, and

from the beginning of civilization there have been the country-minded

and the city-minded. In our modern life, however, there is much that

increases the difference and much that stimulates the movement of the

city-minded from the country. Present-day life with its complexity and

its rapidity of change makes it difficult for one to get time to develop

the active mind that makes appreciation possible. Our children

precociously obtain adult experiences of quantitative character in an

age of the automobile and moving pictures, and an unnatural craving is

created for an environment of excitement, a life reveling in noise and

change. Business, eager for gain, exploits this demand for stimulation,

and social contagion spreads the restlessness of our population. The

urban possibilities for stimulation are advertised as never before in

the country by the press with its city point of view, by summer

visitors, and by the reports of the successes of the most fortunate of

those who have removed to the cities. In an age restless and mobile,

with family traditions less strong, and transportation exceedingly cheap

and inviting, it is hardly strange that so many of the young people are

eager to leave the country, which they pronounce dead--as it literally

is to them--for the lively town or city. It is by no means true that

this removal always means financial betterment or that such is its

motive. It is very significant to find so many farmers who have made

their wealth in the country, or who are living on their rents, moving to

town to enjoy life. May it not be that a new condition has come about in

our day by the possibility that there are more who exhaust their

environment in the country before habit with its conservative tendency

is able to hold them on the farm? One who knows the discontent of

urban-minded people who have continued to live in the country can hardly

doubt that habit has tended to conserve the rural population in a way

that it does not now. And one must not forget the pressure of the

discontent of these urban-minded country parents upon their children.

The faculty of any agricultural college is familiar with the farmer's

son who has been taught never to return to the farm after graduation

from college. That the city-minded preacher and teacher add their

contribution to rural restlessness is common thought.

In the city the sharp contrast between labor and recreation increases

without doubt the appeal of the city to many. The factory system not

only satisfies the gregarious instinct, it also gives an absolute break

between the working time and the period of freedom. In so far as labor

represents monotony, it emphasizes the value of the hours free from

toil. This contrast is often in the city the difference between very

great monotony and excessive excitement after working hours. It has been

pointed out often that city recreation shows the demand for great

contrast between it and the fatigue of monotonous labor. So great a

contrast between work and play--monotony and freedom--is not possible in

the country environment. In the midst of country recreations there are

likely to be suggestions of the preceding work or the work that is to

follow. It is as if the city recreations were held in factories. Country

places of play are usually in close contact with fields of labor. Often

indeed the country town provides the worker with very little opportunity

for recreation in any form. In rural places recreation cannot be had at

stated periods. Weather or market conditions must have precedence over

the holiday. Recreation, therefore, cannot be shared as a common

experience to such an extent by country workers as is possible in the

city. Since the rural population is very largely interested in the same

farming problems, even conversation after the work of the day is less

free from business concerns than is usually that of city people.

The difficulty of obtaining sharp contrast between work and play in the

country no doubt is one reason for the ever-present danger of recourse

to the sex instinct for stimulation. One source of excitement is always

present ready to give temporary relief to the barren life of young

people. Not only of the girl entering prostitution may it be said that

with her the sex instinct is less likely "to be reduced in comparative

urgency by the volume and abundance of other satisfactions."[10] The

barrenness of country life to the girl growing into womanhood, hungry

for amusement, is one large reason why the country furnishes so large a

proportion of prostitutes to the city. "This civilizational factor of

prostitution, the influence of luxury and excitement and refinement in

attracting the girl of the people, as the flame attracts the moth, is

indicated by the fact that it is the country dwellers who chiefly

succumb to the fascination. The girls whose adolescent explosive and

orgiastic impulses, sometimes increased by a slight congenital lack of

nervous balance, have been latent in the dull monotony of country life

and heightened by the spectacle of luxury acting on the unrelieved

drudgery of town life, find at last their complete gratification in the

career of a prostitute."[11]

Rural Problems of Today · 第 4 / 6 段