It is in the interest of any nation to promote programs that ensure a stable supply of food for its population. The vagaries of weather, global economic and market forces, politics, war, pandemics, energy and transportation issues, etc. demand a stabilizing counterforce. Thus we have social programs from the federal level directed to help those involved in agriculture. Most of these federally-funded social programs for agriculture appear in the form of a “Farm Bill” which is typically renewed every five to six years by Congress.
Given this reality, it was disturbing and astonishing for me to see a local farmer the other day wearing a shirt with the message: “SOCIAL- ISM DISTANCING” (making a cute little play on the pandemic.) The idea being promoted, of course, is that social programs currently being advocated by Democrats in Congress are “socialism” or, just a step away from the dreaded “communism”.
Farmers should be the last to complain because they get a dizzying array of financial help from the federal government. At least some of that is justifiable. Government subsidizes such things as crop and livestock prices, disaster relief, preservation of the quality of agriculture land and forests, below-market grazing permits on federal land, programs to promote foreign sales of farm goods, crop insurance, rural development, agricultural research, transition to renewable energy, alcohol production as a gasoline additive, animal health, specialty crops, etc. etc.
But, the idea that there may be tax-dollars used for financial assistance to others (and even to themselves) for child care so parents can go back to work, medical leave for people during illness, expanded access to medical care, pre-Kindergarten school, and money to rebuild bridges, community water systems, streets, roads, highways, tunnels, renewable energy systems, etc. is regarded by many people already receiving federal assistance as ugly “socialism”.
The irony, or course, is that the history of agriculture in the West began with The Homestead Act of 1862 which provided - free - 160 acres of federal land to anyone who agreed to farm it. Along with that came federally-maintained stagecoach trading routes, the cavalry to protect people migrating to the west to farm, federal forts for protection and trade, and the elimination of bison by federal sharpshooters in favor of private cattle production The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 regulated grazing and protected land against “Dust Bowl” conditions created by farmers.
There was also the establishment of federal dams and canals for farm irrigation and electrification of those dams by the Rural Electrification Administration so farms could have electricity. Many farmers currently receive hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to NOT grow crops, but let the land fallow. I know some of them.
I think we all need to be more aware of the tangible social benefits of distributing our tax dollars to a wide range of needs within our society and not impugn the practice of doing so and disparage it with such terms as “socialism”as is currently being done.
The kind of “socialism” that is really destructive is the current practice of subsidizing the oil, gas, and coal industry, “big pharma”, weapons manufacturers and the war machine, and letting super-rich people and corporations get away without paying taxes or stay in existence (“too big to fail”) despite horrid financial behavior on their part. That is truly the “socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest of us” that we can complain about and should work to change. Meanwhile, we need to have a better understanding of the needs of each other and respect them.
David Lenderts
Alamosa, Colorado
