Re Jonanthan Andelson's post on Amana and Oneida:
When the participants in transformative communalist movements decide that in
order to "save" their community or to "continue" being a community they must
take on a corporate rather than a communal form, it may be too harsh to say
that they have "lost their morale," but it would seem that they have at the
least substituted a conservative morale--a commitment to struggle to keep as
much as possible of the way of life they have created--for a transformative
one. After incorporation, do they any longer constitute a "social movement"?
Do they any longer fulfil the function Nikolai Rozov suggested for "social
movements"--as an instrument of expansion different from the corporate?