In my lifetime, the Earth has undergone profound changes. Internet and communications technologies connect the world in profound ways. Capitalism has spread to every corner of the globe, and the debate about how the economy should be run is more or less moot. Media penetrates our existence, shapes our thoughts and actions, and reforms the world through the image and sound. China, India, and other parts of the once developing world now have middle classes clamoring for 401k packages, suburban neighborhoods, cars, and cash, and while the specifics differ, the modern project dominates throughout the globe and democracy is an expectation if not a reality. Growth, capital, urbanization, democratization, all processes intertwined with the unique state of human affairs at the dawn of the 21st century.
And, agriculture, as a way of life, fades to the backdrop where wage labor economies emerge, as they are globally. Still, human necessity dictates some form of agriculture to meet the basic needs of the Earth's seven billion odd people. The move from agrarian lifestyles to wage labor economies had mixed effects. While many entered into the market to produce food for export, they adopted the industrial model for agriculture, still far more were displaced by food production and landed in shanty towns, impoverished, skirting the growing urban areas across the globe. Now, many paint a picture of an idyllic agrarianism to replace the failed model of industrial agriculture, that model which displaced traditional farmers and fed the mass society model of development, a model since overtaken by the information society. This idyllic agrarianism is nothing more that a reactionary response to a crisis of food, couched in the romantic belief that small family farms surrounding small hamlets and villages were are more democratic and peaceful ideal. Regardless, no one lives in small hamlets and villages or these will slowly be displaces by the megalopolis of the future. The future food system must be urban, integrated in city planning and oriented towards urban-centered markets. From the agrarian romanticism, comes the notion of small holder production but under the auspices of a regional governance that protects the space of agriculture, to privilege those spaces as necessary, if not optimally profitable, land uses. Supported monetarily by a reformed subsidy system and protected by regional policies, cities that protect agriculture can truly be "foodtopias," without the unfortunate ideal of returning to the past. The food movement must move its narrative out of a romanticized past to engage concretely with the development of the future food system.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, but there is an "urban farm mentality" that reeks of elitism. While I applaud the young who are working in this field and doing the hard work that needs to be done, I get a sense that there is a tendency to look down upon others, especially older others, when they do not completely grasp the concept. Even when they do grasp the concept, one gets the feeling that these young community workers have a mistrust of the older who might try to understand and become involved. I would like to point out that this occurs mainly among children of white middle and upper-middle class people; children who have grown to feel that their predecessors have completely screwed things up. Perhaps that's true, but it wasn't done, initially, at least, on purpose. Capitalism with greed tends to ruin everything it touches. Remember, all this technology started in an effort to actually feed the world. Check out: http://www.fas.usda.gov/icd/borlaug/Borlaug.asp
ReplyDelete