Meanwhile, the War on Farmers Continues, if only Because Repression is Existential for the Blob

State broadcaster NRK notes that 'every day, one farmer throws in the towel'

Unbeknownst to many in the juste milieu, there’s a war going on. A war vs. what I perceive ‘normal’ life under the conditions of so-called market-capitalism, or whatever is left of it. Norwegian state broadcaster NRK is actually having a good week with many interesting and (relatively) well-researched pieces, and after the one on excess mortality among young people, here’s another one, this time on farmers.

Farmers throwing in the towel, to be precise. Since farmers are kinda the last potentially self-sufficient people—think of the yeoman freeholder of yore—this tiny segment of the overall population is the proverbial canary in the coal mine with respect to the continued possibilities of freedom and liberty in ‘the West’.

Translation, emphases, and bottom lines mine.

---

Tor Must Borrow 10m [c. US$ 1m] to Stay in Business: He Would Rather Give Up

By Espen Sandmo, NRK, 4/5 March 2024 [source]

A great many farmers have to shell out large sums to adapt. That is why more people now choose to refuse to continue.

Caption: ‘Quits now: dairy farmer Tor Årsandøy in Høylandet stands in the more than 40-year-old barn at Brembu with around 30 spots. He cannot afford to build a new barn, and so he closes down the business.’

[Tor Årsandøy] I am 53 years old, and I have no one who says they want to take over the farm. If I am to convert the barn from stall to outdoor operation, I will probably have to invest close to NOK 10 million [c. US$ 1m]. When you have other debts in addition, it is completely out of the question.

Norwegian agriculture is facing a major transformation when all stall barns are to be converted to open-farm barns over the next ten years.

In recent years, more than one Norwegian farm has been shut down every single day. In 2022 there were 37,682 farms in Norway, and that is almost 400 fewer than in 2021.

Giving up on Høylandet

And from 2012 to 2022, the decline in the number of Norwegian farms was almost 16%, according to figures from Statistics Norway.

Dairy farmer Tor Årsandøy on Høylandet in Trøndelag is one of many who give up. And he is not alone in giving up. Only in Høylandet are more people thinking of doing the same:

Yes, there are probably around eight dairy farms left. I don't think many of them will invest in brand new barns. It is sad for agriculture, and sad for a village like Høylandet, where many people make a living from agriculture.

Worrying Developments

The Norwegian Farmers’ Association is also concerned about the development. Not just because the farmers have to switch from stall barns to open barns by 2034.

‘It is of course good for animal welfare to change operations. It will also make everyday work for the farmer easier. But we are worried about the economics of it’, says leader of the farmers' association, Bjørn Gimming.

Almost 4,000 Norwegian barns are still so-called stall barns. The requirement is therefore a conversion to open-barn operation. This means that the cows can walk freely around the barn. A requirement that the Storting [Norway’s parliament] already adopted in 2004, but which has been postponed several times. Now it must happen by 2034.

When a report on the costs related to this was drawn up a few years ago, a sum of around NOK 18 to 22 billion [divide by 10 to arrive at approx. US$ costs] was estimated in total in Norway. With increased interest rates [now over 5%], and costs in general going up, that sum is probably even higher today, says Gimming [no shit analysis].

Good in the Long Run

Nevertheless, the Norwegian Farmers' Union believes that the restructuring will be good for Norwegian agriculture in the long term.

‘We see that consumers want Norwegian milk and Norwegian food. Now we have to put in place better profitability in agriculture, so that more people will invest’, says Bjørn Gimming [ahem: in principle, yes, but that Mr. Gimming apparently doesn’t know anything about economics—if food prices were to increase, this will reduce everyman’s discretionary spending capabilities, and in our consumption-driven economies, this will lead to a never-ending crisis, or, more probable, a depression].

The latest agricultural settlements have given Norwegian farmers a financial boost. But nowhere near enough, says the farmer in Høylandet, Tor Årsandøy:

Unfortunately, I don't have very high expectations for this year's settlement either. We are still far behind many other groups. This is a job where you have to be in the barn every Sunday morning. Those who come after us don’t want to have it that way. That's why I give up.

Demanding Financial Situation

Agriculture Minister Geir Pollestad (Sp) does not consider the closures of Norwegian farms happening at record speed an overall problem [good for him /sarcasm]. But he sees the challenges many face.

Precisely the demanding economic situation in agriculture is the reason why we will present both a new base of figures and an escalation plan for income this spring.

The last two agricultural settlements have been record-breaking. The large increase in subsidies has been necessary. The government's goal is to continue investing in Norwegian food production [two things: I live on a farm, and I haven’t seen any of that money; also, the problem here is a self-reinforcing fallacy: if there’s a problem because of gov’t regulation, throw taxpayer money after it; if this isn’t enough, rinse and repeat—see the problem?]

But the Minister of Agriculture does not believe that it is only the economy that will determine whether Norwegian youth will invest in agriculture in the future.

‘It is not just a strengthened economy alone that is needed to get young people to take over. An improvement in the welfare schemes and a better reputation are other factors I would like to point out’, emphasises Pollestad.

---

Bottom Lines

Gov’t intervention beyond certain common-sensical levels, is the problem. The situation described herein is clear: 2004, new regulations were passed but their implementation was deferred until 2034. Associated costs were one reason, the other being a massive shock to the food supply.

There’s hardly a worse time to force this now, with interest rates at over 5% right now (they were practically .5-1% less than two years ago), huge insecurity as regards future rate hikes (the last increase occurred less than a month ago), and the general unwillingness of most people to return to even pre-’pandemic’ levels of work.

Even ‘before Covid’, Norwegians were among the people who worked the least hours per week/month/year. Things have not improved since, and will, arguably, go from bad to worse in short order if the gov’t insists on forcing these rules.

I look around my neighbours, here’s a little anecdote about how FUBAR the situation is:

We moved to the countryside in summer 2022 and virtually everyone here raises sheep. The product—sheep meat—is sold to meat processors at a fixed rate determined in Oslo (sure, it depends on the quality, but prices are set centrally).

Due to the explosion of prices for, well, everything in 2023, all my sheep-farming neighbours drastically increased their flocks to cover the anticipated higher costs of everything with anticipated higher sales.

Under anything even remotely resembling market-based conditions—remember, ‘market’ is a short-hand term for ‘information about prices’—the huge increase in ‘supply’ (sheep meat) did not lead to any decrease in the price.

If anything, food prices went up significantly—by which is meant, according to official numbers by Statistics Norway—a whopping 8.7% (from Jan. 2023 to Jan. 2024).

We may thus deduce that decades of massive gov’t-led and EU/EEC-induced over-regulation has all but destroyed the last vestiges of ‘normal’ market functions. Prices are set centrally while whatever happens ‘downstream’—as so sadly described above—is ‘outsourced’ to individuals.

Remember, it’s ‘Destructive Creation’, not ‘Creative Destruction’

While I’m not sure ‘shock therapy’ like in the 1980s in New Zealand (which more or less overnight ended agricultural subsidies, which caused a huge problem for the sector that once looked suspiciously like Norway’s today) is the only solution, it does look like the most promising one to me.

Make no mistakes, ending subsidies will drive many farms into (formal) bankruptcy, thus depressing farm prices while driving up food prices—in the short run.

In the medium-term, this situation will clear out the ‘deadwood’ (I’m sorry, but those farms that depend entirely on subsidies are ‘walking dead’ business entities anyways) and make it affordable for newcomers who pioneer innovative avenues that the current system of subsidies for certain items prevents.

Virtually all ‘farmers’ in western countries—the hallmark here being massive ‘farm subsidies’, which overwhelmingly go to Big Ag anyways—are both over-specialised and dependent on a small, if not singular, ‘cash crop’ (which, for all intents and purposes, incl. sheep-only farmers, dairy-farmers only, poultry-farmers only, etc.).

The incentive structure of agricultural subsidies is preventing change, depressing individuals, and blocking innovation. It has to change, and it will, if only because all human-constructed systems inevitably collapse under their own weight, with the nuclear family possibly being the one exception.

Until then, though, inertia will keep the current system going. The blobs in D.C. and Brussels consist of people who are similarly mis-incentivised and are highly successful under the current parameters. They cannot change, even if they wanted to, because their livelihoods depend on ‘them’ (politicians, lobbyists, regulators, journalists) not changing.

At the same time, every indebted farmer (person) is a debt-slave, and as long as farmers are similarly, if for different reasons, mis-incentivised to take out more debt to continue under the pre-dominant paradigm, nothing will change.

What About the ‘Farmers’ Protests’? They are Existential for the Blob

We may note, in passing, that these problems are eminently structural, especially in the EU/EEC (but also in the US, on which see Richard Manning’s wonderful 2005 book Against the Grain), for he who says ‘agricultural subsidies’ must always remember: West Germany’s assent to the ‘Common Agricultural Policy’ in the 1980s was the price demanded by the French gov’t for the creation of the EU.

In the final analysis, then, the EU/EEC cannot change course here because doing so would destroy the entire system.

In this sense, Marx was kinda correct in pointing out the obvious: ‘the base’ (farmers) are determining ‘the super-structure’ (blob), but not in the ideologically misleading and evidently wrong manner he espoused (the ‘proletarian revolution’ never arose as free-market systems generated way more prosperity, viz. Herbert Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man).

The ‘Farmers’ Protest’ are, therefore, an existential crisis for the EU/EEC leadership (sic), and thus for the entirety of the Western ruling oligarchy.

We may thus expect the war on farmers to continue with even harsher means and on much worse terms.

I’ve made my choice—what about yours?