I think that, as you imply in the article, industry that is local, so has a stake in the place it is impacting, and is of a scale that restricts its impact, does indeed have significant positive potential. The deregulation of global capital and the promotion of large corporations ahead of small businesses unfortunately mean we have "shareholders' interests" driving decisions rather than local people's. The big money descends, exploits, extracts and moves on with no care at all for the landscapes or communities it leaves behind. Yet, our mainstream politicians seem to believe that this global growth mantra is inescapable whilst our populist politicians are these very wolves in sheep's clothing.
Couldn't have said it better myself Steve. That is why I found the Schwarzwald to be refreshing - here were some big businesses bucking the trend. That a number are still family owned and not owned by distant shareholders certainly played a part (should have mentioned this in the essay!)
Hadden, you've put your finger on something interesting here. The Schwarzwald seems to be thriving, and your instinct that the Mittelstand is doing the heavy lifting seems correct. What strikes me, though, is that what you're describing isn't really "industrialism" in any sense that Orwell or Berry would recognize. So I decided to use AI to do some research and draft the following. (Apologies for using AI - but my gut told me there was more to what you observed in terms of how it came about that I needed to research and used ai as a more efficient method. It does have it benefits.)
——
The current Black Forest balance is something specific and harder to replicate: a centuries-deep civilizational infrastructure. Regional banks (the Sparkassen) that are legally bound to stay local and can't be absorbed by global capital. A vocational training system that produces skilled craftspeople who don't have to flee to cities to find meaningful work. An inheritance pattern in the southwest of Germany that historically pushed peasant families into cottage crafts like clockmaking, glassblowing, woodworking just to survive on subdivided land, and those craft traditions eventually became the Mittelstand firms you admired. That's not "industry" as a policy choice; it's the residue of a very particular way of life, accumulated over generations.
I’d also gently push back on the forestry picture. The selective logging and managed forest practices you observed are real and genuinely superior to clearcut regimes but the forest itself is in more trouble than a visitor would easily see. Germany's own surveys show the vast majority of trees nationwide are damaged or dying from climate-driven drought, bark beetles, and storm damage. That crisis is forcing serious debates right now about whether the dominant Norway spruce monoculture can survive at all. The ecological foundation you're rightly celebrating is under considerable pressure.
And there's a political backstory worth naming that your essay leaves out entirely and which one of your commenters hinted at with the acid rain reference. The Black Forest we see today didn't just happen. It was nearly destroyed by industrial air pollution (Waldsterben - “forest death") so severe that by 1990 nearly half the trees were damaged. The public and political response was fierce, it helped launch the German Green movement, and it eventually produced the emissions regulations that turned the tide. The "good industry" you observed operating sustainably inside healthy forest didn't choose to behave well out of pure virtue, it was operating inside a regulatory and cultural framework that was built through hard political fights. That context matters enormously for anyone who wants to draw lessons for other rural regions.
——
None of this undercuts your central argument, which I think is right: the rural and the economic don't have to be enemies, and rootedness — of businesses, families, and institutions — is the key variable. But I suspect the harder question your essay is circling without quite landing on is: what prior conditions make "good industry" possible in the first place? The Schwarzwald answer seems to be dense community roots, craft culture, patient capital, and a state willing to defend the commons. Those aren't things you can import by example. They have to be grown which is maybe the more sobering and more interesting challenge for ruralists to sit with.
Oil, without which none of the modern monstrosities could have been built is the great accelerant, multiplying 100 fold the 'workforce'. I wonder if we need to distinguish between human scaled 'industry', and that which is artifically magnified by the largest bonfire in human history. Fortunately at present the tap has been turned slightly down . . . (What that might mean for my forthcoming trip to the UK, only time will tell. Thanks for the essay, Hadden.
PS The englishman considers himself self-made, thus a)absolving God of a terrible responsibility, (with thanks to CS Lewis), and b) MUST NOT ASK FOR HELP! :-)
I am just leery that outside that specific apparently hard won context there is ever enough - patience? - tolerance for nuance? - (in Uk or USA) to get beyond the hardened reactionary extremes of ‘class warfare’ labels - ‘Billionaires Capitalist Big Business’, vs ‘Marxist Socialist Communist’ that anyone arguing for a ‘third way’ gets tarred & feathered with. I am skeptical that most modern ‘industrial’ entrepreneurs would embrace such cooperative or collective ownership arrangements. 🤷♂️
I think that, as you imply in the article, industry that is local, so has a stake in the place it is impacting, and is of a scale that restricts its impact, does indeed have significant positive potential. The deregulation of global capital and the promotion of large corporations ahead of small businesses unfortunately mean we have "shareholders' interests" driving decisions rather than local people's. The big money descends, exploits, extracts and moves on with no care at all for the landscapes or communities it leaves behind. Yet, our mainstream politicians seem to believe that this global growth mantra is inescapable whilst our populist politicians are these very wolves in sheep's clothing.
Couldn't have said it better myself Steve. That is why I found the Schwarzwald to be refreshing - here were some big businesses bucking the trend. That a number are still family owned and not owned by distant shareholders certainly played a part (should have mentioned this in the essay!)
Hadden, you've put your finger on something interesting here. The Schwarzwald seems to be thriving, and your instinct that the Mittelstand is doing the heavy lifting seems correct. What strikes me, though, is that what you're describing isn't really "industrialism" in any sense that Orwell or Berry would recognize. So I decided to use AI to do some research and draft the following. (Apologies for using AI - but my gut told me there was more to what you observed in terms of how it came about that I needed to research and used ai as a more efficient method. It does have it benefits.)
——
The current Black Forest balance is something specific and harder to replicate: a centuries-deep civilizational infrastructure. Regional banks (the Sparkassen) that are legally bound to stay local and can't be absorbed by global capital. A vocational training system that produces skilled craftspeople who don't have to flee to cities to find meaningful work. An inheritance pattern in the southwest of Germany that historically pushed peasant families into cottage crafts like clockmaking, glassblowing, woodworking just to survive on subdivided land, and those craft traditions eventually became the Mittelstand firms you admired. That's not "industry" as a policy choice; it's the residue of a very particular way of life, accumulated over generations.
I’d also gently push back on the forestry picture. The selective logging and managed forest practices you observed are real and genuinely superior to clearcut regimes but the forest itself is in more trouble than a visitor would easily see. Germany's own surveys show the vast majority of trees nationwide are damaged or dying from climate-driven drought, bark beetles, and storm damage. That crisis is forcing serious debates right now about whether the dominant Norway spruce monoculture can survive at all. The ecological foundation you're rightly celebrating is under considerable pressure.
And there's a political backstory worth naming that your essay leaves out entirely and which one of your commenters hinted at with the acid rain reference. The Black Forest we see today didn't just happen. It was nearly destroyed by industrial air pollution (Waldsterben - “forest death") so severe that by 1990 nearly half the trees were damaged. The public and political response was fierce, it helped launch the German Green movement, and it eventually produced the emissions regulations that turned the tide. The "good industry" you observed operating sustainably inside healthy forest didn't choose to behave well out of pure virtue, it was operating inside a regulatory and cultural framework that was built through hard political fights. That context matters enormously for anyone who wants to draw lessons for other rural regions.
——
None of this undercuts your central argument, which I think is right: the rural and the economic don't have to be enemies, and rootedness — of businesses, families, and institutions — is the key variable. But I suspect the harder question your essay is circling without quite landing on is: what prior conditions make "good industry" possible in the first place? The Schwarzwald answer seems to be dense community roots, craft culture, patient capital, and a state willing to defend the commons. Those aren't things you can import by example. They have to be grown which is maybe the more sobering and more interesting challenge for ruralists to sit with.
Oil, without which none of the modern monstrosities could have been built is the great accelerant, multiplying 100 fold the 'workforce'. I wonder if we need to distinguish between human scaled 'industry', and that which is artifically magnified by the largest bonfire in human history. Fortunately at present the tap has been turned slightly down . . . (What that might mean for my forthcoming trip to the UK, only time will tell. Thanks for the essay, Hadden.
PS The englishman considers himself self-made, thus a)absolving God of a terrible responsibility, (with thanks to CS Lewis), and b) MUST NOT ASK FOR HELP! :-)
This substack re Distributism I think goes exactly where you were going and even points to W Germany as a model. https://nationaldistributistparty.substack.com/p/chesterton-belloc-and-the-distributist?r=4v9rk&utm_medium=ios
I am just leery that outside that specific apparently hard won context there is ever enough - patience? - tolerance for nuance? - (in Uk or USA) to get beyond the hardened reactionary extremes of ‘class warfare’ labels - ‘Billionaires Capitalist Big Business’, vs ‘Marxist Socialist Communist’ that anyone arguing for a ‘third way’ gets tarred & feathered with. I am skeptical that most modern ‘industrial’ entrepreneurs would embrace such cooperative or collective ownership arrangements. 🤷♂️
Felt a bit odd to read about the Black Forest and industrialization impact without mention of the period of acid rain in the’80’s and ‘90’s.