I do, I was raised in it. Corporate farming will surely cease in a collapse scenario. Without a means of distribution or consumption at scale to support infrastructure they would be among the first to go. Not to mention so easily overthrown in a violent uprising. High production monocropping is of no value in an actual agrarian society. I would expect fallow fields for a few years, followed by a cooperative structure to steward the abandoned properties, subdivided back into thriving family farms by the 5 year mark.
You assume that there would be an infrastructure collapse to the point where the energy economy cannot sustain post-Borlaug farming.
That won't happen unless the disruption happens so instantly that the energy sector doesn't have time to backslide to Victorian era technologies that could sustain it (like bringing back coal gasification for example).
You don't get the yeoman farmer back unless the entire energy sector is an instant smoking crater. And even that will only be temporary.
Then we have a semantic issue. You introduced collapse; I now think you meant slowly deflate. I have no horse in that race. If it became clear that this was the trajectory, I would sympathize with the accelerationists and redpin aquafers, nuclear powered facilities, dams, and grid tied energy production as barriers to progress.
Id settle for societal collapse. Participation isn’t prerequisite to suffering. You seem to envision an equatorial or sub saharran scenario. A collapse of western society would be of such novelty, prognosticating is almost pointless. Id be more apt to imagine escape from new york than the killing fields.
You're not thinking big enough. If it actually came to war or societal collapse, it would be the cities (the uniparty globalist left) versus everyone else. Cities are quite easy to cut off and starve. Shut down transportation and trucking, and the left will starve and collapse in a matter of weeks. The uniparty doesn't have enough forces to control the cities and fight a war. Once the demand is gone, and transportation into cities is gone, there will be much less demand for factory farming.
Furthermore, once the censorship is lifted, the magnitude and number of evils committed against us will become apparent, and most people will realize how bad factory farming is. Glyphosate, and other herbicides and pesticides, sprayed on damn near everything, which ends up in our foods and is killing us. It's also killing off the bee population. Animals cramped together and often don't see sunlight, eating unnatural grain diets, being injected with hormones and antibiotics to keep them alive, which all negatively affects their meat, eggs, milk, and fats, and is also killing us. Growing soy and other trash GMO crops, purely from government subsidies, which is also hurting us.
Factory farming is propped up purely based on government funding and censorship of the negative aspects of it. Living as naturally as we can, as close as we can in accordance with nature is almost universally the best route.
Factory farming is propped up purely based on government funding and censorship of the negative aspects of it
No, it became the norm post-Borlaug because its efficient as fuck.
If the cities vanished, right now, 75% of the population vanished and food demand dropped accordingly, do I believe that rural farming would go back to yeoman farmer America?
No, I don't.
Oh, you'll see SOME reductions of the extremes. Fewer feedlots, fewer high density hog enclosures. But will farmers stop using glyphosate? No. Fuck no. No chance, as long as the energy industry is there to produce it.
Why? Because it's efficient. Spraying isn't free. They're not doing it because they feel pressured by demand to do it. They're doing it because if they don't their yields drop. In other words it costs less to buy spray then the drop in yield would cost them if they didn't spray. It's a completely cold economic assessment, cost of spray vs cost of lost yield.
THAT WON'T CHANGE.
At least not without a total collapse in the energy sector. Or a precipitous drop in demand and prices such that it's no longer economical to spray.
A good sized CME, like we may get this cycle, would do it. Big enough, and both electronics and electricity are historical.
We don't have many factories that can operate without electricity, so it would be "a while" before replacement parts would be produced. Wire itself could be destroyed in a big one. Meanwhile, most 'food comes from stores' people are starving to death.
I do, I was raised in it. Corporate farming will surely cease in a collapse scenario. Without a means of distribution or consumption at scale to support infrastructure they would be among the first to go. Not to mention so easily overthrown in a violent uprising. High production monocropping is of no value in an actual agrarian society. I would expect fallow fields for a few years, followed by a cooperative structure to steward the abandoned properties, subdivided back into thriving family farms by the 5 year mark.
You won't get a disruption of that magnitude without either a meteorite hit or a yellowstone eruption.
Yellowstone will never erupt. Its a pyroclastic impossibility. A modern civil war involving hundreds of millions of humans is infinitely more likely.
You missed my point entirely.
You assume that there would be an infrastructure collapse to the point where the energy economy cannot sustain post-Borlaug farming.
That won't happen unless the disruption happens so instantly that the energy sector doesn't have time to backslide to Victorian era technologies that could sustain it (like bringing back coal gasification for example).
You don't get the yeoman farmer back unless the entire energy sector is an instant smoking crater. And even that will only be temporary.
Then we have a semantic issue. You introduced collapse; I now think you meant slowly deflate. I have no horse in that race. If it became clear that this was the trajectory, I would sympathize with the accelerationists and redpin aquafers, nuclear powered facilities, dams, and grid tied energy production as barriers to progress.
Id settle for societal collapse. Participation isn’t prerequisite to suffering. You seem to envision an equatorial or sub saharran scenario. A collapse of western society would be of such novelty, prognosticating is almost pointless. Id be more apt to imagine escape from new york than the killing fields.
You're not thinking big enough. If it actually came to war or societal collapse, it would be the cities (the uniparty globalist left) versus everyone else. Cities are quite easy to cut off and starve. Shut down transportation and trucking, and the left will starve and collapse in a matter of weeks. The uniparty doesn't have enough forces to control the cities and fight a war. Once the demand is gone, and transportation into cities is gone, there will be much less demand for factory farming.
Furthermore, once the censorship is lifted, the magnitude and number of evils committed against us will become apparent, and most people will realize how bad factory farming is. Glyphosate, and other herbicides and pesticides, sprayed on damn near everything, which ends up in our foods and is killing us. It's also killing off the bee population. Animals cramped together and often don't see sunlight, eating unnatural grain diets, being injected with hormones and antibiotics to keep them alive, which all negatively affects their meat, eggs, milk, and fats, and is also killing us. Growing soy and other trash GMO crops, purely from government subsidies, which is also hurting us.
Factory farming is propped up purely based on government funding and censorship of the negative aspects of it. Living as naturally as we can, as close as we can in accordance with nature is almost universally the best route.
No, it became the norm post-Borlaug because its efficient as fuck.
If the cities vanished, right now, 75% of the population vanished and food demand dropped accordingly, do I believe that rural farming would go back to yeoman farmer America?
No, I don't.
Oh, you'll see SOME reductions of the extremes. Fewer feedlots, fewer high density hog enclosures. But will farmers stop using glyphosate? No. Fuck no. No chance, as long as the energy industry is there to produce it.
Why? Because it's efficient. Spraying isn't free. They're not doing it because they feel pressured by demand to do it. They're doing it because if they don't their yields drop. In other words it costs less to buy spray then the drop in yield would cost them if they didn't spray. It's a completely cold economic assessment, cost of spray vs cost of lost yield.
THAT WON'T CHANGE.
At least not without a total collapse in the energy sector. Or a precipitous drop in demand and prices such that it's no longer economical to spray.
A good sized CME, like we may get this cycle, would do it. Big enough, and both electronics and electricity are historical.
We don't have many factories that can operate without electricity, so it would be "a while" before replacement parts would be produced. Wire itself could be destroyed in a big one. Meanwhile, most 'food comes from stores' people are starving to death.