36 CHOICES Second Quaner 1997

1 Viewpoint I. by Harold F. Breimyer

Why Defend Proprietary ("Family Farm") Agriculture? A Soliloquy

A minister friend of mine recently does the giant corporate structure that larger part of the u.s. economy. The raised penetrating questions about what is now taking over the industrializa­ revamping has recently reached is happening in the make-up of u.s. tion of agriculture bear on the wel­ agribusiness. It is merchandising-ori­ agriculture. "The takeover of family fare-the dreams and goals-of its ented, enormously large scale, and in­ farms and ranches by company and/or human participants? tensely systematized. It's hierarchial, run corporate giants," he wrote, "I judge I disagree with the many agricultural from the top down. for the most part to be a negative economists who subscribe to the idea My bold language is that the kind value." He then asked, "Why is it tak­ of Economic Man, who is said always of economy we are drifting into ing place?" followed by, "What is be­ to put money making first. The nor­ amounts to a reversion, a throwback, ing done to counteract it?" mal person is not that. Once the basic to the feudalism from which our Euro­ The second question is answered eas­ needs for living are met, every human pean ancestors escaped to the "Colo­ ily: almost nothing. In fact, institutions being seeks to pursue his or her aspira­ nies. " Europe's feudalism was agrarian; that might be expected to offer a de­ tions for a good life, which extend to that now emerging is industrial. fense are often allied with the take­ not only family and community, but Our reshaped economy will remain over. This is true of some colleges of also to the opportunities and satisfac­ productive enough to bear its enormous agriculture; of cooperatives, as in co­ tion value involved in making a living. managerial and merchandising costs. operative credit; and even, on occa­ Why are we losing our traditional But except for the corps of managers, a sion, of the USDA. proprietary agriculture in which the privileged group, the corporate structure I am one of the few agricultural farmer is both worker and risk-taking will be dwarfing to the human spirit. In economists who defend traditional mar­ investor/manager, and who connects much of agriculture the man or woman ket-oriented agriculture and regret its with agribusiness suppliers and outlets on the land or in the feedlot, whether demise. I have written and spoken on not subserviently but via buying and employed or contractually integrated, the subject for thirty-five years. I have selling? My first response is that the will not be an imaginative innovator, also predicted that it will not survive, reasons usually advanced are unconvinc­ but a faithful follower of written instruc­ primarily for the reason that the people ing. Our agriculture has not failed to tions. It is likely that many of the wage who have most at stake are divided supply consumers with an abundance workers will be migrants. among themselves and essentially im­ of good food. Our farmers have not In a summary word, my argument potent. been slouches in adopting the latest in support of traditional proprietary This column is a personal testament. technology. Maybe we should ask agriculture is itself a question. In the The issue is entangled in terminol­ whether farmers have been delinquent business structure now emerging we will ogy. The Structural disintegration of in protecting soil and water. They aren't still be well fed . But in the disposses­ agriculture now underway is commonly as innocent as they like to claim, but sion-the lowering of status-of our referred to as its "industrialization." The mega-hog farms surely are no better; highly educated cadre of responsible term is a clever coinage. It exploits the and biotech soybeans, immune to her­ farmers, and in being enveloped in cor­ favorable image attached to industrial bicides, can readily lead to more porate bureaucracy, what is gained? [II technology. But it is a deceitful term, groundwater pollution. because the issues that hold so much Proprietary farmers are being dis­ Harold F. Breimyer is professor and extension economist emeritus at the University of Mis­ meaning have less to do with the me­ placed for one reason above all others: souri, Columbia. chanics of production than with how they do not fit into the corporate busi­ human beings fit into the system. How ness pattern that is taking over an ever-