Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Joanie Higgs's avatar

God help us.

Expand full comment
bharat y's avatar

This is my first comment here.

Firstly, I love the title of the blog/publication/whatever-subtack-calls-em.

I am not a farmer, but have had a few generations of my family in that field - but who had to quit it either because of financial issues or because later generations moved to "less intensive / risky / more stable" fields of office work. But those generations did tell me about some of the both richness and the labour involved in farm work - of eating fresh produce, having un'pasteur'ised milk and so on. India is now in different stages of corporatised farming, mind you.

The opening picture caught my eye, and while one is sympathetic and understanding - if not in direct agreement with the idea/fact that farmers are required for us to survive, the opening picture is a study in contrast. The picture is from a protest where farmers protested against having the option of corporate-contracted farming.

Some background:

The opening picture is from the made-for-western-press "farmers protests" in Northern India, spefically one section of Rich - and Uniquely mollycoddled set of farmers in Northern India. Their access to the Capital of India gives them more eyeballs than practically 90% of Indian farmers - who don't drive around in SUVs from Mercedes / BMW / Lexus etc.,. (Think of people getting close to the DC or NY tri-state area getting privileged coverage in the US)

The average farmer in India is usually privileged to earn about 3000$ a year - average median income in India. These SUVs referenced usually cost double what they do overseas - whether in US or Europe - primarily because they aren't built in India but imported. So think closer to 80,000$ or more likely 100,000$. These privileged farmers protested because their earnings would be impacted - by competitive farming elsewhere in the country.

There are a ton of farmers elsewhere in India who are unable to have a choice because these farmers hold the discussion hostage - by virtue of their ability to bring Delhi - the capital of India to halt. Unlike Laundrytown, DC, the Indian capital is actually a densely populated Economic & Political Powerhouse - and these farmers attempted to shut its economy.

Note that no one outside that small periphery actually cared to protest - and Indian farmers constitute a significant chunk of Indian workforce, estimated to be upwards of 40 to 60% of the workforce. Here, for example (https://web.archive.org/web/20220425064031/https://www.cnbctv18.com/business/companies/backstory-kfcs-inauspicious-beginnings-in-india-13265412.htm) is a protest that shut out KFC from Southern India - successfully for about 15 years. Until the Farmers association president passed, KFC did not try to come back.

Now, should Corporate farming be the primary mode of farming? I don't think so.

But should that be an option - perhaps yes, especially when the alternative is lot of people leaving the ancestral farming trade and just setting out to trade farmland (for a good price) and thereby anyway give way for a backdoor-ish corporate farming. It is better when there are two stakeholders than just 1, don't you think?

(already a long enough comment but I can elaborate/add more probably in replies)

Expand full comment
61 more comments...

No posts