OT: Nostradamus on Bush (rural US,etc.)
adam at adamgottschalk.net
Fri Dec 29 15:39:00 EST 2000
in article 90195A759slopadelicshandysued at 22.214.171.124, Doctor Slop at
sloppyfun at shandytown.org wrote on 12/29/00 9:34 AM:
> larryc at teleport.com (Larry Caldwell) wrote in
> <MPG.14b3dff1ddc7686098ad6e at news.teleport.com>:
>> Rural America had no choice in the matter. The Clinton legacy is a long
>> string of intolerable betrayals of rural America, promising tourism jobs
>> to replace timber and agriculture jobs and then closing access to vast
>> tracts of land so that tourists won't come.
> Aw, poor oppressed rural America! You ought to take a gander at the NY
> Times for this past Sunday. They had an article on the VAST amounts that
> American farmers are sucking from the Federal tit. One town in Montana has
> 5000 people, and the funds they get for farming there--or for NOT farming--
> are over 5 million dollars. And these are the same fuckers who scream
> about welfare queens and vote Republican. It's tough to be rich, eh?
BTW, more than 75% of the US is _urban_. Larry talks as if we still live in
some idyllic "agrarian nation". Bull. It is another simple fact that less
than 1.9% of the population calls themselves "farmer" on the census; only a
tiny fraction of those who are rural are farmers--and you can't blame
Clinton for that. Rural poverty does _not_ stem from the policies of one
(democratic) regime. It stems primarily from capitalization and
concentration in agriculture that started with the introduction of tractors
back in the 1890s. It's the result of agribusiness and the displacement of
"rural" people from ag without any "compensating advantage" that was
promised ages ago.
As far as "closing access to vast tracts of land" goes, have you ever heard
of existence value? It is a very real value that can be calculated to some
rough extent. If you look at the above statistics re: demographics, it is
clear that most Americans (i.e., the urban ones) believe there is great
value simply in knowing that wilderness and inaccessible "environment"
exists. (And our children and their children will definitely thank us for
recognizing that value). Rural America can't rely on tourism to survive.
There is too much at stake for that. Rather, the regeneration of
labor-intensive, small-scale, sustainable industry (for ex., selective
logging by (now murdered) companies like Pacific Lumber as opposed to
clearcutting by multinationals) is the answer.
Answers cannot come from the top down. And it's a waste of time to try to
remove power from the top. The answers to the problems of rural America (and
inner-city America) lie right there within it, not handed down from some
bureaucrats. Promises of ag jobs will _never_ come to fruition if
agribusiness is allowed to continue on its course of concentration and
capitalization (now with the travesty of GMOs to ruin us all). What's needed
is radical new plans stemming from the local level for small-scale
"industry" of all kinds, like CSA farms, etc.
More information about the Ag-forst