{Running in the SEN 8/23/13}
The variety of stuff from our field that was ripe at the same time one day last week. (Also got a few turnips and a peach later.)
Our culture talks a lot about “independence,” “individualism,” “boot-strapping,” and “freedom,” but has an awful lot of features that impede all of those things, most of them tied to money, debt and consumption.
The variety of stuff from our field that was ripe at the same time one day last week. (Also got a few turnips and a peach later.)
Our culture talks a lot about “independence,” “individualism,” “boot-strapping,” and “freedom,” but has an awful lot of features that impede all of those things, most of them tied to money, debt and consumption.
At the same time, it tends to dismiss
or ignore people who decide not to play by “the rules” and
actually seek some form of self-sufficiency. The exception is if
someone can commercialize it. Take agriculture as an example: state
law creates protections for commercial farming but doesn't (as far as
I can tell) clearly do so for the common-sense right of people to
raise food for themselves.
If that's not the true basis of
independence, I don't know what would be. With energy, ecological and
economic issues being what they are today, we need more people doing
that, pretty much anywhere possible, from porch boxes to rooftops to
single-acre plots to more traditional farms.
As anybody reading my column knows, I'm
not exactly a conservative. But in this regard, I'm glad to see I am,
since true conservatism and true conservation overlap heavily when we
ignore the capitalist knuckleheads trying to dominate our culture.
When I did a Google search to find some
good historical info on the fact our nation's founders were generally
proud to be farmers, one of the first sites that turned up started
with this observation: “Our founders were farmers: they provided
for themselves through hard, honest physical labor. The dissolution
of our society began when our ties to the land were ruptured.”
That comes from the Intellectual
Conservative website, a column by J. Harris titled “Agriculture and
Freedom: An Inseparable Bond.” While I disagree with some of his
(or her?) details, this statement is certainly true: “The notion
that frail individuals need Big Brother in order to survive would
never have crossed a true farmer’s mind, and would surely have
turned his strong stomach. (I speak not of agri-business, by
the way—not here or anywhere else; most of what passes for farming
today is just another species of statist boondoggle.)”
Absolutely – giant factory farming
exists only because of laws and huge subsidies crafted to favor
politicians' friends at the expense of actual farmers. The evidence
shows something like 80 percent of such subsidies go to a tiny
handful of already-rich “farmers,” while more than 60 percent of
family farms get nothing, being too small and/or not
well-connected-enough to even be seen by Washington.
Actually, though, that's not a bad
thing; we all know people who support themselves and help their
community thrive “under the radar” in plain sight. But it takes
the symbiosis of community and individual – just as collectivism
taken to extremes can destroy personal initiative, individualism
taken to extremes can undermine community well-being, and thus
ultimately destroy the individual. It goes both ways: The community
needs to foster self-sufficiency and make it legally easy, favoring
local producers over long-distance ones, and otherwise planting seeds
for a 21st century agricultural renaissance in preference
to 20th century development. The individuals need to
prioritize feeding their community at the expense of growing for
export or for sale as a commodity to big business.
Such an arrangement probably isn't as
profitable in the short term, but it's far more likely to last,
especially if we as a community come up with ways to share some of
the start-up costs (for example, by creating a tool- and
skill-sharing library and encouraging young people to learn
agricultural skills).
That's one reason I'm starting this blog to share ideas and start a conversation about these things that a
one-way column really can't do too well. Going forward, this column
will be mirrored there, with a bunch of other things (not all of them
farm related), even though I won't be a staff writer anymore. It'll
mean a chance to do something that's been growing in me for a long
time: a need to focus more energy on self-sufficiency and deeper
community involvement the “observer” status of a reporter doesn't
really allow.
Going into something like this, I know
Maureen and I are lucky in some key ways – several people we know
are willing to share their experience (thanks Dick, Cal and others),
she has an agroecology degree and we own our home outright, with no
other significant debt. We've been expanding our garden for a couple
of years, but have a lot more space to play with and aim to gradually
transition toward a mostly-perennial system.
Even though it's definitely a step into
the uncertain in some respects – who knows what the weather will do
and we're not independently wealthy – it's long overdue. We also
feel it's likely to be necessary as the economic, climatic and
political games play out over the next several years. Our world is
changing in ways for which our present culture does not give us the
tools to adapt, since it continues to create dependence on far-flung,
faceless entities and slogans rather than interdependence with
people we actually know, the land we live on, and the other species
sharing it with us.
The former leads to slavery. The
latter, to genuine independence. I don't claim to know the route's
potholes and curves any more certainly than you do, but I hope you'll
join me on the journey.
No comments:
Post a Comment