THE FAMILY FARM IN THE POST-WORLD WAR II ERA: INDUSTRIALIZATION, THE COLD WAR AND POLITICAL SYMBOL A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by RYAN STOCKWELL Dr. Catherine Rymph, Dissertation Supervisor AUGUST 2008 © Copyright by Ryan Stockwell 2008 All Rights Reserved The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled THE FAMILY FARM IN THE POST-WORLD WAR II ERA: INDUSTRIALIZATION, THE COLD WAR AND POLITICAL SYMBOL presented by Ryan Stockwell, a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Professor Catherine Rymph Professor Pamela Riney-Kehrberg Professor Carol Anderson Professor Robert M. Collins Professor Beth Barham ………………………….to Stephanie. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The research and writing of a dissertation, for the most part a solitary endeavor, nonetheless is the result of dedication, guidance, and contributions of many whom deserve acknowledgement. The Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Library both provided generous research grants to explore their collections. The Department of History at the University of Missouri provided a fellowship, freeing me from teaching duties and allowing me to focus on writing. All of these funds are greatly appreciated. I would like to thank all of the members of my dissertation committee for taking the time to read and engage this work, pushing me in my argument, dissertation structure and writing. Dr. Carol Anderson, on top of being an excellent friend and mentor, showed me how to draw connections between seemingly distant foreign policy actions and domestic issues. Dr. Robert Collins and Dr. Beth Barham provided helpful commentary on the final draft. Dr. Pamela Riney-Kehrberg not only graciously joined the committee to alleviate an emergency situation, but pushed me to more completely develop my argument. Finally, to Dr. Catherine Rymph I offer a sincere thank you for providing overarching guidance to me not only on this project, but throughout my doctoral studies by selflessly stepping in after the death of Dr. Mary Neth. Thank you. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ ii ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... iv Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 2. THE FARM TECHNOLOGY REVOLUTION .....................................................22 3. MIGRATION, SCHOOL CONSOLIDATION, RURAL SOCIAL CHANGE AND THE COST-PRICE SQUEEZE: CONFRONTING THE PROBLEMS OF THE POST-WAR TECHNOLOGY REVOLUTION………………………………73 4. “AS AMERICAN AS BARN-RAISINGS AND HOT DOGS”………………...125 5. “AN AMERICAN EXPORT OF HOPE:” AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN THE TRUMAN YEARS…………………………………………………………..167 6. FARM POLICY DURING THE EISENHOWER YEARS…………………….217 7. 1962: STATE REAPPORTIONMENT, THE COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE NATIONAL FARMERS ORGANIZATION…………………………………………………………...267 8. CONCLUSION: AMERICANS NOSTALGIC FOR THE RURAL PAST……309 APPENDIX 1. TABLE OF FARM POPULATION, FARM NUNBERS, FARM SIZE .............319 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................320 VITA ................................................................................................................................351 iii THE FAMILY FARM IN THE POST-WORLD WAR II ERA: INDUSTRIALIZATION, THE COLD WAR AND POLITICAL SYMBOL Ryan Stockwell Dr. Catherine Rymph, Dissertation Supervisor ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the particular path of technological change after World War II, how farm people adjusted to that change in their work and identity, as well as the policy implications of the numerous ramifications of the 20th century farm technology revolution. The rapid farm population decline that began with World War II continued to the end of the 20th century. This farm population loss combined with growing commodity surpluses, a Cold War atmosphere, and the transformation of farms into modern businesses to create tensions within federal farm policy that had for decades pursued the unified goals of improved farm living, increased production and technological adoption. “The farm problem,” as it became known, highlighted the popular concern that farming was changing too quickly and would result in the extinction of the family farm, an ideal based on the agrarian myth but shaped by modern concerns of the growth of corporate farming and the international presence of collective farming in the Soviet Union. Under such conditions, tensions arose within farm policy between the older values and new concerns for the continuation of the family farm. These tensions often resulted in jumbled and contradictory federal farm policy that failed to stem the loss of smaller farms or the implementation of more technology. iv The Family Farm in the Post-World War II Era: Industrialization, the Cold War and Political Symbol Located along Interstate-72, in the gently rolling farmland of western Illinois, stands a weathered sign announcing to passersby the commodity prices farmers received at the time compared to prices sought by farmers. Voicing complaint with not only farm prices, but the many farm policies that determined the condition and situation of millions of farm families, the sign, now in obvious disrepair and surrounded by tall grass and brush, stands as a symbol of what became of so many of farmers struggling with low income due to narrowing profit margins. This sign indicates a problem experienced by so many farmers in the post-world War II period, namely low income compared to costs. It does not, however, explain how this problem developed or tell of the many factors that provide the context, notably the rapid technological changes in agriculture in the period after the Second World War. Yet, by calling for higher prices the sign directly protested U.S. farm policy in the post-World War II era, which for a variety of complicated and often contradictory reasons could and would do little to alleviate farmers’ problems. In many ways, the sign stands as a crude historical monument to the condition of post-war American agriculture, the farm policies implemented and the values that provided the basis for farm policy. Moreover, the sign indicates the language of farm protest that developed in light of the countless changes in American agriculture during the time of its fastest and largest revolution that had shaken agriculture and all of its participants to the 1 core. The post-World War II period proved to be a transformative time for American farmers when technological changes in farm production tools led to monumental developments in agricultural policy, political rhetoric, and farmer mentality. Within each of these developments, the family farm became a concept that invoked powerful meaning that, in the end, has had lasting historical significance. Before the U.S. became involved in World War II, farm population totaled over 30.5 million and represented 23 percent of the total population, a minority, but still considerable portion of the population.1 Farming was still the largest occupation. An overwhelming majority of farmers throughout the Midwest and South lived in conditions reminiscent of the 19th century. Less than 36 percent of rural residents enjoyed the convenience of electricity in their homes; the same could be said of running water.2 Most rural children received at best an 8th grade education in one-room schools despite the early efforts of reformers in the Country Life Movement, a movement which failed in its attempt to bring rural America into the 20th century and up to speed with urban America. A majority of farmers had basic, and often suspect, mud roads as their only physical connection to urban areas. For the most part, the radio (if the farm had electricity or battery power) offered the only connection to the outside world. Overwhelmingly, farming in most regions of the nation still consisted of many small-scale enterprises, limited by the labor and capital of farmers. Animals provided the main source of power, even, ironically, into the threshold of the atomic age and despite the invention of the gasoline powered tractor in the 1920s. 1 R. Douglas Hurt, Problems of Plenty: The American Farmer in the Twentieth Century (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2002), 120. 2 Lowry Nelson, American Farm Life (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1954), 36. 2 World War II, however, marked the beginning of several revolutions that ultimately reshaped rural America, especially farming. Between 1945 and the 1960s, farming experienced a technological revolution that irreversibly and completely altered food production. Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, tractors quickly replaced mules and horses; so quickly, in fact, that the USDA census of agriculture stopped counting draft animals in 1959 there were so few to count. Scientific advancements in seeds, animal genetics, fertilizers and agricultural chemicals that were developed in the 1930s or during World War II became widely accepted and implemented by farmers who finally had the necessary capital, but also because they had particular forces in the post-war period pushing them to do