No subject

-------------------------------------------------------
Frances Moore Lapp=C3=A9=E2=80=99s essay captures numerous facets necessary=
 to
understand the current state of farming as well as the possibilities for
the future. Along the way she dispels many false notions (dare I say
myths?) about industrial agriculture and the potential for small farms and
presents a compelling case for the importance of agroecological approaches
to farming and living. And you can never explain too many times that the
persistence of hunger and malnutrition amidst plenty is not an issue of
production=E2=80=94there is sufficient food produced to feed everyone in th=
e
world=E2=80=94but of disparities of economic and political power.

Let me turn to a few of Lapp=C3=A9=E2=80=99s central points, ones that I co=
mpletely
agree with. We know how to produce food in ecologically sound ways and that
true empowerment of small farmers in the poor countries of the world, along
with ecologically sound growing techniques can have profound beneficial
effects. In addition, small farm production using agroecological principles
and practices can produce high yields per acre (hectare) and encourage
community members to work together. Assistance is needed to make rural
areas more attractive with amenities provided for a good life. This will
help reduce the mass migration to slums of the South=E2=80=99s cities that =
have few
job opportunities, help the countryside to flourish, and assist in
achieving food security for a region, and perhaps, a country.

A few bulleted (well, =E2=80=9Clettered=E2=80=9D) statements will help me t=
o clarify a
number of issues:

a) I would suggest that the heart of the matter is *not* =E2=80=9Can econom=
ic model
and thought system,=E2=80=9D but rather natural outcomes of the way the eco=
nomic
system of capitalism functions. The model and thought system are ways
people try to describe this particular economic system, they are derived
from living in its midst.

b) Concentration of production in agriculture (input industries, processing
industries, and in farming itself) or manufacturing is a natural outcome of
a competitive system in which production is for the purpose of making
profits. Smaller firms and farms are not able to compete with the market
power or economies of scale=E2=80=94which include both physical economies o=
f scale
along with strictly financial ones=E2=80=94of larger units and go out of bu=
siness.
(In the wealthy countries, some small farms are able to survive by fitting
into limited niche markets.)

c) Decisions made by capitalist firms=E2=80=94be they in the service sector=
,
manufacturing, or in farming=E2=80=94are made for the purpose of producing =
profits.
Greatest income minus input costs.

d) This means that ecological or social effects are at best secondary or
tertiary concerns during the decision making process, although in most
cases they aren=E2=80=99t considered at all. (Regulations, if they are enfo=
rced,
may alter this, of course.)

e) This is the origin of the social and ecological problems that arise from
the way the capitalist economic system works. Economists call them
=E2=80=9Cexternalities,=E2=80=9D even though they are very much internal to=
 how capitalism
operates. They are best viewed as costs that businesses, instead of paying
for, force onto people and the environment. Decisions that are completely
rational within the logic of capital are at the same time ecologically
and/or socially irrational. For example, Carrier recently announced that it
is moving manufacturing of furnaces and heating equipment to Mexico,
putting some 1,400 employees in Indiana out of work. A Carrier manager
explained it clearly: =E2=80=9CThis is strictly a business decision.=E2=80=
=9D That is
precisely the logic of capital. It is the same logic that makes sense of
the factory system for raising animals. The whole purpose is to produce
animals to marketable weights and have them processed as quickly and
cheaply as possible so as to maximize profits. But
there is nothing socially or ecologically rational about the inhumane
raising of animals with routine use of antibiotics, separating the animals
from the fields that produce their feed (necessitating large amounts of
fertilizer application on the cropland while piles of manure accumulate on
the factory animal farms), the poor treatment of farm labor and workers in
the processing plants, etc.

f) There are many examples of successful agroecological projects, and Lapp=
=C3=A9
cites one in Ethiopia. But Ethiopia is also one of the prime targets for
the 21st century land grabs which are displacing the inhabitants and
providing few (if any) jobs. A successful agroecology project shows what is
possible, but the existence of the self-interest of powerful economic and
political forces indicate the enormity of what must be dealt with in order
to create a better life for all inhabitants.

This brings me to the last paragraph of the essay. To me the issue is to
change the economic-political-social system to one that depends upon
(modified, by deletion, from Lapp=C3=A9): =E2=80=9CDemocratic governance=E2=
=80=94accountable to
citizens, not to private wealth=E2=80=94makes possible the necessary public=
 debate
and rule-making=E2=80=A6 within democratic values and sound science.=E2=80=
=9D

But the only way truly democratic governance and ecologically rational
decision making about what goods to produce and how to produce them can
meaningfully occur is outside the logic of capital and the =E2=80=9Clogic=
=E2=80=9D of the
market. Markets might serve a minor purpose in a post-capitalist society,
but only if there is true equity and social justice. However, extreme care
is needed because as market mechanisms =E2=80=9Cnaturally=E2=80=9D function=
, they reproduce
power (wealth) relations. They cannot do otherwise as long as significant
differences in =E2=80=9Cprivate wealth=E2=80=9D exist.

I would suggest that that food, clean water, sanitation, health care,
education, and other basic human needs should *not* be commodities=E2=80=94=
produced
in order to sell in the marketplace with the objective of making profits.
Rather, such goods should be produced for the purpose of people using them.
While distribution might entail the use of markets (though other mechanisms
are possible), these goods should be considered to be among those that are
the right of every human being. For this to happen, we need a profoundly
democratic and equitable economic-political-social system that, by the very
way it functions, supplies the basic needs of everyone using approaches and
techniques that ensure the world ecosystem in which we are embedded=E2=80=
=94with
all its complexities, essential cycles, and biological
interrelationships=E2=80=94remains healthy over the long term.

Fred Magdoff

**************************************************

February 29, 2016