This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
ILL FARES THE LAND
ILL FARES THE LAND
THE FAMINE PLANNED FOR AMERICA
DAN P. VAN GORDER INTRODUCTION BY TOM ANDERSON
WESTERN ISLANDS PUBLISHERS BOSTON LOS ANGELES
CONTENTS Introduction vii-xii Foreword xiii-xiv Ill Fares the Land 1 The Overproduction Hoax 8 Shifting the Scenery 21 High Placed Half Truths 27 Rigging the Records 36 Clearing the Atmosphere 43 The Saga of the Spud 49 The Mystery of Circular No. 296 57 Our Once Booming Cattle Industry 64 Wheat—Whither and How? 70 The Wirt Tragedy 80 Too Much Uncle Sam 85 The Farmer Pays the Price 93 Tariffs and Farming 99 Government and Farming 110 National Self-sufficiency 119 Technology and Farming 125 Labor Unions and Farming 132 Farmers and "The Farm Problem" 143 An American Answer to the "Farm Problem" 154 Appalachia Revisited 163 The Colquitt Plan 174 The Forest and the Free Press 182 Return to the Land 187 The Appalling Question 198 About the Author 204 Appendix 205 Index 237
One: Two: Three: Four: Five: Six: Seven: Eight: Nine: Ten: Eleven: Twelve: Thirteen: Fourteen: Fifteen: Sixteen: Seventeen: Eighteen: Nineteen: Twenty: Twenty-one: Twenty-two: Twenty-three: Twenty-four: Twenty-five:
When an article entitled "Planned Famine" appeared in the June 20, 1966 issue of the DAN SMOOT REPORT many people paled. Many were unbelieving. Everybody wanted more facts. A question went out to author, Dan P. Van Gorder, asking whether he could write a book on the subject. He could, and did, in short order. Was it possible that, behind the beguiling propaganda about overproduction surpluses, was a hoax and that actually we were underproducing; that, in an increasingly hostile world, we were setting ourselves up for acute food shortage? The answers are in this volume. This intriguing book is only for people directly concerned with agriculture and foreign policy in other words, a book for every taxpaying, responsible citizen. It is a crime story. This book, as no other agriculture book has done, solves the crime and tells where the bodies are hidden. It is required reading for farmers and taxpayers who want to know the truth about that fantastic fraud called the "farm problem." For there is no real farm problem and there hasn't been for years except the problem deliberately manufactured and perpetuated by the pinks, punks and collectivists in the United States Department of Agriculture, Department of State, and elsewhere. As Dan P. Van Gorder shows, we face a possible food crisis in America. We also face possible insolvency and surrender. Why? Because it was and is planned that way, not only in the USDA and State, but also in Commerce, Defense and other departments of our government, as a combination of dogooders, Socialists and Communists try to level us down and merge us into a One-World Socialist state under the Communist and liberal-cannibal club commonly known as the United Nations. While the author dwells at some length on the Communist cell in the Department of Agriculture during the Roosevelt
And so do all good citizens. an antiinflation program and a foreign aid program which release the farmer from his cost-price squeeze. For almost 40 years the bureaucrats farming the farmers and milking the taxpayers have multiplied VIII . animals. he does not attempt to prove that any Communists are still there. has done more to help Communism succeed than have all the non Communist nations of the world combined. For whatever reasons. The American government. people. The farmer needs a balanced budget—not more billions spent on socializing the country. and restraint of trade not unionization of farming. By their fruits not by their cards ye shall know them. And what is more important than whether any carry Communist cards. and know-how to the enemy on credit. Of course no farm program can solve the "farm problem" unless that program is accompanied by a free economy program a tax program. chemicals. planned poverty and calculated treason which menaces the future of our nation and the freedom of the world. not artificially higher prices for his government subsidized production. more markets not fewer: and he needs less government—not more.era. The farmer needs lower prices for the things he buys. our leaders have delivered our machinery. equipment." The trouble with the farm record is. Results outrank motives. to paraphrase another favorite cliché: Records don't lie. The author shows how agricultural bureaucrats have used statistics like a drunk uses a lamp-post: for support instead of illumination. The present farm program is a program of socialistic stupidity. What is important is not how many collectivists or dupes there are. Al Smith used to say: "Let's look at the record. The farmer needs the right to produce not more curbs on his production. monopoly. Nor does he need to. The expensive "farm problem" was made in Washington by cheap politicians. For almost 40 years our agricultural programs have wound their tortuous and expedient paths along a road as crooked as a Teamsters Union boss. is whether they help Communists achieve their goals. improve his competitive position and broaden his markets. For without this big statistical lie the American people would not sit still for the great farm fraud. The farmer needs less non-farmer subsidies not more farmer subsidies. but liars do record. but who and where they are. The farmer needs an end to union racketeering. for the past forty years.
If the public did understand and reading this book would go a long way toward accomplishing that there would be a bunch of congressmen plowed under. That's right. Naturally. just because our government has spent more on "the farm program" since 1932 than on anything else except Defense. The fewer the chicks the bigger the government brooder. As the author conclusively proves." But the poor little farmer got virtually none of it. hundreds of millions of the taxpayers' dollars have been given to rich absentee landlords who cultivate nothing but the ASC (Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service) offices. the only real surplus is a surplus of government workers. The fewer the farmers there are to serve.while the number of farmers has dropped. even if they could find some publisher who would print it. Soon there may be more people in the USDA farming the farmers than there are people farming the land. For when the government gravy bowl runneth over. Already and we've seen only the beginning unless there is a tremendous reversal in our headlong rush to collectivism the government spends more on agriculture. per farmer. "The public just doesn't understand. than most farmers make from farming." declaim the agricultural politicians. the bureaucrats have all the spoons and the poor little farmers have only forks. bemoaning the fact that agriculture has become a whipping boy. most people mistakenly assume that. Most people who know the truth wouldn't tell it. It has been like the case of the nearsighted poultry scientist who tried to cross a rooster with a rooster: all he got was two cross roosters. Billions of dollars have been stolen from the American taxpayer "to help the poor little farmer. But. I believe it is safe to say that our government has given more help to the enemies of the United States than to our own bottom-fringe farmers the poor little farmers. the more money and people it takes to do it. government interference and government lying. As the author IX . Farming is now a business for those who produce the products and a way of life for the phonies who farm the farmers. The farmers particularly the little ones who needed help most have received crumbs from the table. the farmers have gotten the benefits. The American public has never been allowed to view the real issues of the "farm problem" in their proper perspective.
noted Cornell agricultural economist. during which so-called surpluses have been almost chronic. the wherewithal. fools. The Arkansas farmer is only one of many who have been openly and covertly punished for exercising traditional American freedom. caused phony "over production" and "surplus. while pouring our agricultural "surpluses" into the potholes of the world. thus rebuilding "surpluses" and retaining the problem. Under our foreign dumping program. As Dr. fatheads and half-brights running our government have seen to it that our farmers are forced to produce for the government instead of for the market. as surpluses have been reduced. heavily fined. They have given. This would have happened had agriculture been free. a modest 2 per cent increase in livestock could have eaten up all the surpluses. bribed and rat-holed more than 120 billion dollars worth of goods and goodies into 99 so-called countries since 1945. An Arkansas farmer who defied the federal farm agents and "over-planted" has been dispossessed." But if agriculture had been free. sold for "soft currency/' boondoggled. several hundred thousand government bureaucrats would have had to go to work—or join the Poor Corps.points out. our lying bureaucrats. have slyly encouraged importation of huge amounts of many of those same "in-surplus" commodities. Harrell DeGraff. Price supports and controls have dried up markets. the enemy enslaved 40 per cent of the world's people and 25 per cent of the land mass and now asks: "What have you done for us lately?" It is a fair question to ask: "If Russia has accomplished so X . The Socialists. price supports and imports have been increased. and the right-toproduce to friend and enemy worldwide. lent. has said: "Over the past 35 years. In this country we have been plagued by agricultural "surpluses" because a fraudulent federal bureaucracy needed an excuse to keep the inmate in a straitjacket. While we exported the know-how." and lowered farm income by an estimated 2 billion dollars a year. While we spent billions the enemy spent peanuts. and has had his farm confiscated and sold for auction to satisfy the claims against him while that same government buys some of the same commodities from our Communist enemies. like a madman slopping a million hogs with the seed corn of future generations.
Some may feel incredulous at the author's amazing statistical reporting and projection which he says indicate a threatened XI . Thus Big Business. generators. of course.much by giving away so little. our government actually pays a bounty on doves for the enemy. Ours is the only nation in recorded history whose leaders deliberately and continuously trade to lose. There is seemingly no bag limit on doves for Moscow my fine feathered friends and it's open season year round. Red China and other enemies. Mistakes. only. part practical vote-buying politics. regimentation and controls have supplanted supply and demand. how come we have accomplished so little by giving away so much?" We don't give money. while Caesar-Bird pours our (not his) birdseed and suet. The present United States Government plans to buy the world." What we should be most afraid of is not Russia but the traitors in Washington who are helping Russia. Part conspiracy. escalating the "War on Hunger" as he tries to establish in Vietnam a position of strength from which to surrender. milk and honey into the bottomless bellies of the world. metals. But some politicians have never made a mistake in our favor. Where does One-World Socialism end and treason begin? The author warns us of an American famine. part mistakes. In fact. our leaders created a dynamic new export: doves to Moscow. Big Unions and corporate farmers (who produce most of our so-called surpluses) have pressured Congress quietly to continue the fantastic foreign aid giveaway in order to perpetuate their own subsidies. food machinery. medicine and raw materials. Our leaders Democrat and Republican have tried to bribe and buy the world with handouts. Thus. are not treason. bribing our farmers to produce wheat for government storage bins to be given to Russia. We give motors. Ours is the only nation whose leaders could have done what they've done for thirty years without being tried for treason. We are not competitive in world markets any more because government bureaucracy. trucks. clothing. either as a substitute for a foreign policy or in order to make the world safe for Communism. The Communists plan to own it. our bureaucratic bounty hunters build up Russia "so she will no longer be afraid of us. and treason is not a mistake. which could conceivably corner the world wheat market. To compensate for our loss of chicken markets to the Common Market. factories.
famine in America. Price control is people control. And people control is the goal of The Great Society. But no honest and knowledgeable person will deny that whether we face re-established "surpluses" or famine. There will be continued production controls and price controls. TOM ANDERSON Nashville. Tennessee XII . the collectivists running us have no intention of setting the farmer free.
. fine and jail sentence . They are cited verbatim from federal statutes passed by Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States after March 4. shall be guilty of perjury.. XIII ." "." ". Fair Deal. will keep predominantly in mind that an attic-to-cellar housecleaning in Washington is urgently necessary but that it must start.. of suppressed truth about our food resources.000 or by imprisonment for not more than two years or both." ". not along the Potomac. It ranges from New Deal. . Why? The answers to this monumental question are the theme of this book. Good Neighbor. shall upon conviction thereof be punished . shall forfeit to the United States ." ". arsonists. shall be punished by a fine of not more than $5.. of deceptive half-facts from high places in government.. 1933 to punish men and women who produce our nation's food for nothing more harmful than just farming as they want to farm. fine of not more than $1. of public brainwashing never before equaled among a free people. but now. ." ". It is a sordid story of falsified and juggled farm statistics. . of 33 years of legislative and administrative willingness to sacrifice our agrarian vigor in a selfish quest for power and continuation in office...FOREWORD "..000 or by imprisonment for not exceeding six months or both. .. but in the voting booth. . shall be subject to a penalty of 50 percentum." These are not quoted from penal codes to punish highwaymen. ." ". as well as farmer.. that our national survival is at stake.. not at some vague future date.. of malfeasance skirting the thin borderline of treason. Square Deal and New Frontier to the present Great Society phantasm. It is written with the hope that every reader and urban consumer.. underworld criminals or other felons preying on organized society..
Understand that we are NOT saying that a famine is inevitable. The records show that the "overproduction" propaganda depicting huge "surpluses" presents a false picture of the state of U. Maryland XIV . When forests are tinder dry fire wardens say be careful be aware of the danger. this amounts to national suicide. In a world that is gravitating toward centralized Socialist dictatorships and that is increasingly hostile to individual freedoms and free enterprise." "drought. What we are saying in this book is be aware the conditions for famine have been set up. whether hot or cold. Responsible citizens. S. We are not prophets or gods. It is not necessary to prove anything more. In the end the public must judge the case. production of food to fall to a dangerous low and to rely on foreign imports to make up the difference is to set up the conditions for famine and imperil national survival in the event of war. On this basis alone we could rest our case that the United States has set itself in famine conditions. We have provided the statistics showing that our domestic supply of food is tragically short of providing national self-sustaining supplies in case of national or world crisis: we have provided a line of reasoning to produce this conclusion and we have expressed opinions.Such words as "fire. The dividing lines are clear. exclusively." and "famine" can carry connotations of panicky thinking. VAN GORDER Takoma Park. Official United States Department of Agriculture and Department of Commerce records have been used. But there is more. agriculture and of our domestic supply of food." "flood. S. They show that we are relying to a dangerous degree on foreign imports of foodstuffs. or in case of internal economic crisis and civil strife." "plague. use such words carefully and for good reason. DAN P. therefore. Our thesis is clear and readily understood: to permit our U.
you had been sure they would not "cooperate.Chapter One ILL FARES THE LAND Ill fares the land to hastening ills a prey. Your tears are bitter.S.000 acres on your own. worked hard to add another 2. Providence heightened 1 . a California grape farm. You are told that you will be the assistant manager. but somehow you know that you will not. Above all. a Minnesota cheese factory. It was a nice home you'd modernized and beautified it fit for a district manager. Your county agricultural agent. You think of the image of America that you had carried in your mind of a strong America. You inherited 1. Apparently they hadn't really and truly realized what had been happening all along. You had thought of most of the legislators and government men as fine people. determinedly carrying on a "cold war" against the Communists which it not only intended to win. You own an Oklahoma grazing range. What a great guy! And you were right. You had been sure your leaders would not surrender without a fight." Swift pictures pass through your troubled. jumbled mind. a Georgia peach orchard. Where wealth accumulates and men decay. but would win. Oliver Goldsmith (1728-1774) YOU ARE the owner of a 150-acre dairy farm in Vermont and it is about to be merged with a number of neighboring farms in the Lenin Valley Dairy Commune. Army truck which is flying the UN flag you watch the commissar showing the new communal farms district manager to the door of your former home. a Mississippi Delta Cotton plantation and you are signing over this property to the People's Natural Growers Bureau which had announced that these tracts will now be given over to the local poor. a Washington apple orchard. As you leave in the back of a former U.000 acres of wheat land in South Dakota. You struggle to recreate the mental picture of a land flowing with providential bounty.
a strong. Massive doses of vitamins will set it right again. you've been struck dumb by the sudden and "inexplicable" nature of their deaths. well-dressed men in the United States Department of Agriculture. and there was another good taste spruce gum where giant timber tumbled into Oregon rivers. economic collapse. 2) The sickness is Socialism administered and planned that way by finelooking. one who speaks in figures and facts. This is true because the death which has been planned for the nation can be anticipated. so sweetly savored then. is it unavoidable. New Jersey. For the great. and the sickness which is intended to bring the death has been injected intentionally into its veins and can be countered with the antitoxin of common sense and realistic action. civil strife and famine. and as an American citizen: 1) The death that has been planned for us is made up of many things: financial chaos. market bound.Impossible? Not at all! For almost all of the machinery necessary for such a transition to Socialism has already been set up and is in motion. But the sickness is curable. recognized ahead of time. the miles of South Dakota wheat lands and the majestic march of combines gathering plenteous harvest from the land. But the approaching death is not inexplicable. and elsewhere in government 2 .. All that went before is gone. nor. Texas and California. It is sick with a fatal disease. stalks its people. the Alabama cotton fields. You have seen strong men walking and working one moment and the next moment seen them dead. because the body is basically strong. Bounteous! Once again you see the New England dairy herds you'd visited once on a summer vacation one of those rare ones.. husky. Sick unto death. Now you are part of a convoy. Other trucks have joined in procession. Yes. Hat in hand by the grave of their splendid manhood. . you try to remember the taste of Cape Cod cranberries and Maine blueberries. basically healthy body of America is sick. Drastic surgery will remove the cancerous tumors planted in the healthy body.the technology and ingenuity of the American man. let me speak first as an agricultural statistician. in the belief of this writer... Such a sudden death walks the land in America today. God-gifted! In your mind you walk the endless rows of market gardens in Florida. famine. healthy land and it had been! The rumble of truck tires on an old railroad crossing wakes you. So.
One-Worlders." It is far from coincidental that the notorious Communist Alger Hiss started his slimy career in policy-making positions of government in this same unit. It was devised. For the whole agricultural overproduction theme song sung to us since 1933 is a hoax. It is a lie told to hide the work of men who have set up the conditions for famine. not to help the farmer. No accident is the fact that the 1933 Agricultural Adjustment Act took form in the same unit of the United States Department of Agriculture where the first known Communist cell was formed among government employees the infamous "Ware cell. in the nineteen-thirties Socialists and Communists wrote basic farm legislation which is still in force its effect multiplied by further laws. If. since 1933. but by a small group dominated by trained agents of Communist infiltration. theoreticians. Bureaucrats. Facts and true figures don't lie. have the Socialist planners. not by loyal defenders of constitutional government. Just so carefully and ingeniously. Many readers will be surprised at my use of the word "famine" in connection with the United States. its socializing effect compounded in the meantime and if there have been Communists operating in the nation's capital. then the facts can be published. we can name the Communists and expose their Socialist theories. a career that was to lead him to President Roosevelt's elbow at Yalta. Sick men. If there are facts to prove that the conditions for famine have been set up. and Communists. It is a plain and simple unmitigated lie. There onehalf of the earth and more than one-fourth of its inhabitants were handed as a gift to the world's most 3 . concealed the true facts about our food production and consumption. The overproduction hoax was originated. Socialists . .and American life. Famine? In this country? Where we have so much production that we have to build grain elevators by the thousands to store the "surplus"? Where we have so much pork we have to pay men not to raise hogs? Where we have so much food of all kinds we can't even give it away fast enough and we can't even afford to give away all that we should give away? The trouble is none of this squares with the facts. . Utopian dreamers. but to weld the chains of slavery on him as the initial step in the socialization of the entire American economy.
. with Churchill's acquiescence. writes: Almost the entire membership identified as belonging to the first Ware cell came out of the Harvard Law School: 4 . The biographies of these ungrateful reprobates are written on thousands of pages of congressional investigations of subversive conspiracies which had been designed to undermine and destroy the long-established and splendid American way of life. Peek. Treasury. in his admirable THE WEB OF SUBVERSION. Who were these ardent admirers of godless Communism into whose hands the New Deal entrusted our nation's food resources? No inquiring citizen need remain in doubt. Roosevelt. To them Russia was the promised land and the sooner the United States became like Russia. Tugwell.and the Iron Curtain was welded in place through the heart of Europe. He had written the now famous poem heralding a Socialist America: I am sick of the nation's stenches. For the Communist experience in other lands had shown that rural people were the hardest to subdue. to recognized leadership. Wallace. I am sick of the propertied czars. the better for everyone. George N. I shall roll up my sleeves and make America over. economic adviser to Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. Of this make-America-over clique in Secretary Wallace's official family. wrote: "They admired everything Russian. first administrator of the Agricultural Adjustment Act. And to bring the deception to date. beginning with agriculture. Labor. White-House-dominated Congress under the guise of halting farm bankruptcies. and other departments of the government and even in President Roosevelt's advisory staff.. later discovered to exist in the State." It was from the minds and motives of these men that the idea of centralized control over farming fruited into federal legislation. They were the most self-reliant and freedom-loving portion of the population. the plan to socialize America. our present farm regulatory laws and related administrative policies are only an expansion and extension of the original plan. page 67. . One can believe anything if one can believe that a mere accident brought Rexford G. I have gathered my tools and my charts. James Burnham. did this. My plans are fashioned and practical. I have dreamed my great dream of their passing. was pressured through an apathetic.
Lee Pressman. Nathan Witt. We may follow briefly the careers of these Communists whom Mr. And as each cell member advanced. After Ware was killed in an automobile accident in 1935. Today the nerve fibers of this first Communist cell in the Federal Government influence and shape many parts of our domestic and foreign policies. cell members never remained stationary. gave saddle to so many nightriders and produced our galloping Socialism. Through his hiring and his supervision of hundreds of regional offices. on January 24. the international association which ultimately played a powerful role in handing 700 million Chinese over to World Communism. 1950. John Abt. It is mentioned even in hearings related to the Institute of Pacific Relations. Collins.Alger Hiss. to Senate Committee on Labor. and Henry H. Let's beat the dead horses that have foaled so many ghost-ridden ponies. then to the Justice Department and on to the State Department. Abt married his widow (Jessica Smith). and to the Justice Department as Assistant Attorney General. following Harold Ware and Nathan Witt. his influence was nearly unlimited in the vital field of organized labor. they moved to higher and higher places of policy-making and authority in government. but he decided many labor-management disputes. Communist Alger Hiss moved from his initial post in the Agricultural Adjustment Administration to a special Senate committee investigating the munitions industry. Like a weaver's shuttle. Communist John Abt rose from the Ware cell to the Works Progress Administration. There his crimes against the government missed treason by a hair's breadth and he was finally. his name darts in and out of testimony before many sessions of congressional investigations. Communist Nathan Witt became Secretary of the National Labor Relations Board where he not only controlled the appointments of all board employees. According to Moscow directives. He was the third leader of the original cell. Harry Dexter White and Lauchlin Currie were teachers as well as students at Harvard.. sentenced to federal prison. 5 . Communist Lee Pressman advanced to the post of General Counsel of the Works Progress Administration. Jr. Burnham names. he pulled others up by recommendations and appointive authority. Original members of the Ware cell soon spread out to other government departments and bureaus and particularly to civilian roles in congressional committees.
Collins. Historians will likely never be able to completely unsnarl the threads of his influences for evil in world affairs.. Moreover. Jr.editor of the Communist propaganda magazine. Communist Henry H. whose progressive social ideas I espoused and worked for. Whittaker Chambers later testified. and he. his patriotic New England family background. It was White's words that were incorporated into the State Department's final ultimatum to Japan as a prelude to Pearl Harbor. His name is associated with the Department of Agriculture chiefly because he was both a student and teacher at Harvard and intimately known by all members of the Ware coterie. "I decline to answer that question on the grounds that my answer might tend to incriminate me. As subsequent events were to indicate." he explained. "Are you a member of the Communist Party?" Collins suddenly forgot the family tree and replied. Henry H. Harry Dexter White probably inflicted deeper wounds in our national security and played a more direct and nefarious role in subversive villainy than any other apostate in the New Deal. according to his own testimony before a Senate investigating committee. rising to the rank of major. the effects of those influences are almost endless. was my personal friend. It is apparent that he was selected as a Moscow agent to operate in the less suspect areas outside the party and cell lines." Apparently no congressional investigation has ever unearthed any concrete evidence that Harry Dexter White was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party or an active member of any underground cell. was the aristocrat of the cell. When the committee attorney interrupted the patriotic recital by asking. SOVIET RUSSIA TODAY. The so-called Morganthau Plan for unconditional surrender of Germany and for the industrial dismemberment of that nation after World War II was actually the Harry Dexter White Plan. had served two years in the European theater of World War II." He boasted of his English ancestry. Perhaps more worldchanging documents passed through his hands to Moscow than through the hands of all 6 . Jr." Yet. including the fact that one of his forebears was aide to George Washington. "began under President Roosevelt. himself. "The treasurer of the Ware apparatus. and scion of a Philadelphia manufacturing family. "My public career. He was assistant to Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morganthau.. Collins. Princeton and Harvard.
are and will be attributable largely to the treason of Harry Dexter White and Lauchlin Currie. Communist Lauchlin Currie is considered along with the active members of the Department of Agriculture cell." It is well within the realm of sound conjecture to say that the deaths of every American soldier on Asian soil since that of Captain John Birch. He was intimately associated with them from classroom to high government seats of power. Early. along with the probable thousands yet to be sacrificed on that vast continent. on China." Senator Ferguson: "Did this information come out of the White House?" Miss Bentley: "Yes. with an office in the White House (actually in the White House overflow offices in the next door old State Department building). Pausing only to recommend further reading (see appendixes). former Communist Elizabeth Bentley put her finger on Greenburg. . a Communist from Cambridge University (England). we move on. For our main concern is with what these conspirators did. The full story of Harry Dexter White will never be told—he died from a heart attack. he was selected by President Roosevelt as a member of his advisory staff. of the famous [Dies] Special Committee on Un-American Activities. He was a member of the Communist Silvermaster cell." It would take a special volume to detail the activities of the aforementioned Communists and friends of Roosevelt. In her testimony before the Senate investigating committee. "I do not believe in Communism any more than you do but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. it was mostly on the Far East. Roosevelt had these two members of the administration in mind when he said to Congressman Martin Dies. as his assistant. several of the best friends I have got are Communists.other renegades in President Roosevelt's entire regime. President Franklin D. The following is quoted from her testimony: Senator Ferguson: "Did Greenburg ever deliver any papers to you?" Miss Bentley: "Yes. Greenburg used White House stationery. or was murdered. 7 . Evidently. 1948. on August 31. he delivered information via Mildred Price to me . Currie appointed Michael Greenburg. .
. newspapers and many farm publications as well. Ely former Governor of Massachusetts THE WHOLE overproduction theme of the last 30 years. the more we will have. intrigue and betrayal federal farm control was born. Little wonder that George N. . is its original and perpetuated purpose. And so we begin to see how it could be that United States agriculture is sick unto death—even while the great body of our agriculture and our nation is basically strong. It has led to all manner of fantastic panaceas." That. . Just so effective has been the chorus of voices singing it and the symphony pieces playing it from the stage of Department of Agriculture publications. a hoax? This is extremely hard to accept until we look at the figures. read on! Chapter Two THE OVERPRODUCTION HOAX Overproduction has been held out to the American people as one of our greatest enemies . see how men bent on the enslavement of free America might wish to be so sure of subduing us as to set up the conditions for famine. . paid to permit their products to be removed from the market while these products were being replaced by foreign imports! Unless 8 . farmers paid not to produce these products. warehouses. It underlies the modern delusion that the less we produce and the more we spend. Impressive! Meat and wheat and milk production had to be curtailed. if you seek the facts. emergency plastic storage units.From this sordid drama of duplicity. by facts and figures that American farmers were.. Amazing! That is. in fact. Unless one could show. . unless it were all based upon a lie. imposture. Peek could later write: "The AAA (Agricultural Adjustment Act) became a means of buying the farmer's birthright. Joseph B. So. and of slick magazines. Unless one could show that American and foreign markets really could have consumed our production. by a stroke of evil genius. All of the stage props were supplied and at huge cost to the taxpayer in "surplus crop" storage granaries.
But let's take a close look at the facts and see what. 29 years later. . still garbed in its original and deceptive frills of "democratic process" is not only with us. Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. passed by Congress and signed into law by President Franklin D. really. like the rest of us. has been going on from the thirties down to this very hour. the country was at the mercy and whim of the weather? With the life of America hanging by tenuous threads of trade and weather. is staffed mainly by highly patriotic American men and women. Section 13 provides: This title shall cease to be in effect whenever the President finds and proclaims that the national emergency in relation to agriculture has been ended. are highly susceptible to confidence and trust in the nation's leaders and to loyalty to the group and to department heads. In his 1933 annual report. page 21. and far more restrictive and costly than in the beginning. The promise that this was a "temporary measure" flowed out over the nation in an assuring stream from Washington. it is broader. ". originated in the upper echelons and based upon premises then known only to a select few. was an "emergency measure. would accept the government's story. They. to make America dependent upon foreign trade. like most Americans. Wallace had written. like the United States Government as a whole. and hence vulnerable. 1933. and is." Yet. Yet. granaries and warehouses are bursting. today. would not the Socialists then be in a vastly stronger position in their campaign to bring us to heel? The United States Department of Agriculture." presented and promised only as a legislative stopgap to tide American farmers through a period of worldwide economic crises. It illustrates the chain-reaction process begun once government gains a foothold on personal liberty. Roosevelt on May 20.it could be shown that the obvious plan was. more than 33 years later. Government rarely gives up. . And to guarantee the people that the New President and Congress were faithfully adhering to constitutional limitations. deeper. President Kennedy. in his State of the 9 . without a determined struggle. the nation's first venture into federal farm regulation. the powers it has gained. What if America were placed at the mercy of foreign trade? What if America's production and reserves drastically reduced. farm control by federal law and administrative edict. the "promise" was written into the Agricultural Adjustment Act itself. They. The Agricultural Adjustment Act.
In an address at Pittsburgh. stripped of political fact-dodging. He declared: Since 1950 our agricultural output per man-hour has actually doubled! Without new and realistic measures.." 10 ." The trouble is. in his annual farm message to Congress. December 6. page 6. as lies multiply it becomes harder for the deceivers to keep their lies consistent. He was telling them that the more than 20 billion tax dollars paid out to induce farmers to reduce acreages had not only been wasted but had resulted in an actual increase of 20 per cent in crop acreages! To the nation's housewives he was saying." And 32 years later. while President Kennedy may not have known it. 1936. President Johnson flashed the warning signal that we have 50 million more acres in crops than are required "to produce all the food and fiber that we can consume plus all we can export. Wilson. "The 20 to 30 per cent more you have been paying for farm-produced food since 1933 as the result of the government's scarcity scheme to increase farm income can now be charged off as a noble experiment that went sour and didn't work out the way New Deal planners said it would. January 11. President Johnson was telling Congress that 32 years of government efforts to control farming has failed abysmally. had said: "Close students estimate that of the six million farmers that we have today. Secretary Wallace had written: "We have at least 40 million too many acres of plow land in crops. The web of lies grows and entangles the weavers. February 4. M. it will some day swamp our farmers and our taxpayers in a national scandal or a farm depression. Pa. 1962. it was all lies. And. warned that the overproduction "problem" was infinitely greater.Union message to Congress. in effect. approximately two million of them are not actually needed in agriculture. 1965." In substance. Under Secretary of Agriculture. But I promise you your government is determined to continue faithfully along the same unworkable course. If 29 years of government efforts and an overall cost to the American farmer and consumer perhaps exceeding 250 billion dollars have not cured our agrarian ills. In the previously mentioned report. why has not some official come forward with the sound suggestion to get a new doctor? The reason is that the whole overproduction theme was a hoax in the first place. L.
reports that farm income for 1964 was only 3. With their continued cooperation we will do all in our power to end the piling up of huge surpluses. if we were so burdened with agricultural surpluses? According to the Economic Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. published by the United States Department of Agriculture. If the English language has not lost its function." According to these two opinions. page 55. October 31. This paragraph deserves rereading in the light of the over-propagandized promises by New Deal spokesmen in 1933 that federal farm control was instituted solely to increase the farmer's income. FARM INCOME SITUATION." Yet 30 years later. Kermit Gordon. Therefore. "Of course we will continue our efforts in behalf of the farmers of America. but it has actually aggravated the farmer's economic ills. we will need only one farmer when we celebrate our 200th anniversary of independence in 1976! But that one culprit. . our farm income in 1929 was 9. 30 years apart.4 per cent of the national total. stated that no more than one million farmers are needed "to produce our domestic food requirements and supply exports. published quarterly by the United States Department of Agriculture. in the March 15. Yet.In an article appearing in January. 1966 issue of FOREIGN AGRICULTURE. armed with the marvels of science and technology. ." How come? How so. is this alarming but unpublicized admission by other information media: "The United States is the world's second largest agricultural importer. "without new and realistic measures" we will be facing genocide under avalanches of "burdensome surpluses. of the Budget Bureau. Roosevelt had declared. President Franklin D. after an overall cost to the American people cautiously placed at 250 billion dollars since the farm control fiasco was launched 33 years ago. 1966. issue of July. 1936. 11 .2 per cent of the national total income. 1965. the number of farmers needed on the nation's farms has diminished by three million. if Mr. will be producing so much more food and fiber than we can consume and sell abroad that. in President Kennedy's words. . page 6. Gordon's estimate is sound. how can any other conclusion be reached than this: federal farm control has not only failed to do what its proponents said it would." Speaking at New York.
10 pounds of dry skim-milk. impel or frighten the public into acceptance of the paradox that the second largest food importing nation in the world is so seriously menaced by surplus food that billions of dollars must be poured out annually to abate or delay the awful inundation. not me. magazines. This book is written partly to expose the lie.How can facts be sifted from cruel fictions in these clashing "paradoxes"? Is it possible for the Great American Pantry to be running over and empty at the same time? Why is the Federal Government spending between five billion and eight billion tax dollars a year to conquer the ogre of excessive food production when we rank second only to the United Kingdom as the world's largest importer of farm commodities? How can we be both overproducing and importing the same commodities at the same time? The answer is. 2 gallons of concentrated orange juice. The reason is not something good for the United States. we can't. unsalable. price-depressing surpluses. Federal regulation of agriculture is predicated on the surplus production concept. It helps the enemy not the farmer. Not honestly. And this is the reason that the overproduction hoax has not been exposed editors and publishers 12 . Dishonestly. But we are.000-pound beef steers. Fortunately. no member of Congress and certainly no heads or reporters of our informational media newspapers. 5 pounds of pork sausage. cajole. and 3 head of 1. Why hasn't the lie been exposed by the press? Simply because the USDA statistics have been accepted at face value. unneeded. radio and television can add together 1 gallon of peanut oil. All relevant facts necessary to clarify once and for all the status of our food resources are concentrated in this one issue. Of course. as one should be able to accept them. it is merely varied and vast. is big and strong enough to sweep back the tide of unwanted. not you. For more than three decades the people of the United States have passively accepted the thesis that our farmers are producing more food than we can sell abroad and consume at home! The thesis that only a strong and centralized government. 8 pounds of cornstarch. Every conceivable statistical device except the truth has been employed to induce. the task of taking a factual inventory of past and present food supplies is neither difficult nor complex. and the reason for the lie. armed with tax dollars.
282.177. Government Printing Office or on file at most public libraries! The first revealing light in a quest for facts about our national food resources is found on page 646 of STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED STATES for 1939.have been asked to look to the Agricultural Bureaus for verification of statistics. Again.699. Or perhaps this should be stated in plainer and more alarming words: We lost. The Department compiles month-to-month and year-to-year totals of all farm production. This fact has seldom.000 $ 2.417. The public has easy access to both of these groups of statistics in annual issues of AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS. for the first time in our history. But no one has bothered to analyze the statistics. chiefly through the Crop Reporting Division. Both are for sale by the U. our farms. How can "statistics" lie? By simply being set down incorrectly. But no one has bothered to compare and contrast the figures of the one department with the other: the Department of Commerce with the Department of Agriculture. been seen in print. inclusive. if ever. published by the United States Department of Agriculture and the annual volume of STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED STATES. foreign trade in farm commodities is recorded by the United States Department of Commerce.S. self-sufficiency in farm commodities eleven years before the overproduction theory was written into federal legislation to curtail our farm output! Our farm ledger's foreign trade for 1922 to 1932.561. failed to produce enough food to supply export demands and meet domestic requirements. These show that we are enjoying a perpetual Christmas and to date there is no record of anyone every trying to kill Santa Claus! The trouble is the "statistics" can be made to lie. reads: Total farm imports Total farm exports Import excess $19.000 13 . These totals are verified or corrected by decennial census returns and by numerous inter-censal reports. By being invented. 1922.384. The source of inventory data is the United States Department of Agriculture. It is this: In the fiscal year beginning July 1. for the first time.000 17. By being changed where they may have been correct.
589. Davis before the latter left for a tour of Europe to study economic conditions there. we may deduce the following: if we had not exported a single 14 .000 tons Domestic disappearance 1. .000 tons Exported 00085. .000. how much fruited from political exploitation or from administrative and legislative ignorance cannot be judged." Three examples out of scores of others available will be cited: In his book.504. According to the foregoing statistical summary of farm production. 1936. in a letter dated March 10. production and foreign trade for farm commodities are: Produced 1. did not cause our farm debacle. to Chester A." How much of this propaganda about our dependence on foreign markets for farm commodity sales after World War I was sincere or deliberately false.000. inclusive. does not show up in government records until 1925. But one truth looms conclusively above the welter of theory and sophistry—declining exports.000 tons Domestic supply Imported 1. This conclusion is and has been inescapable.This deficit production. placed the American farmer in a desperate plight.000 tons 00110. said: "Farmers . Stedman.614. Secretary Wallace wrote: "Consequent post-war deflation was accompanied by the loss of our foreign markets. while they aggravated our agrarian ills from 1918 to 1932. speaking before the annual convention of the American Political Science Association in Chicago. exports and imports for the years 1925 to 1932. Assistant Administrator of the Agricultural Adjustment Act. when computed by volume and by calendar years. for the eight years from 1925 to 1932.000. Thus." Alfred B. wrote: "The shrinkage of these [European] markets following the World War and particularly following the enactment of the Smoot-Hawley tariff in 1930. NEW FRONTIERS.000 tons New Deal orators shouted from the housetops throughout their orgy of propaganda to fasten the shackles of regimentation on our farmers—"loss of export markets after the 1918 Armistice left American agriculture under crushing surpluses. 1934.000.000. December 27." President Roosevelt. page 143. were caught unaware by the loss of export markets.
. They "explained" that a preponderance of farm imports consisted of coffee. California.pound of farm commodities during those eight years.000 tons of dairy products computed as whole milk. speaking before the American Farm Bureau Federation at Pasadena.000 tons of sheep and lamb skins.000 tons of beef. 850. 15 . loudly sought to minimize the seriousness of increasing farm imports and our mounting dependence on foreign farms. Prominent among the inedible import items during this period.400. December 9." It is interesting to examine some of the "babassu" nuts included in the 110 million tons of farm commodities we imported during the eight years before farm control by federal law and bureaucracy went into effect. and 877.000 tons of flax. did not bring prosperity to American farmers but was accompanied by smaller shares in the national income. Included were: 4.000 tons of cereal crops. .000 tons of molasses. not included in the total cited above. 30. Nevertheless. 218. All of these could have been produced on American farms.000 tons of eggs. were 890.000 tons of tobacco leaf. 1936. or 60 per cent could have been and should have been produced on American farms by American farmers. pork and mutton. . Jokingly he said. 46. 10. 1.000 tons of wool. And then I realized what was missing.000 tons of cattle and calf hides.500.667.000 tons of potatoes. tea. and 31. 4. domestic consumption would still have totaled 25 million tons above production. 374. 276.000 tons of onions. 516. In other words. The air is no longer filled with cries about farmers being ruined by imports of babassu nuts. we conclude that the regaining of those "lost markets" after World War II.000 tons of dry field beans. spices and related exotic crops which could not be grown on temperate zone farms called complementary imports.100.000 tons of sugar. then as now. Secretary Wallace ridiculed the idea that farm imports posed any significant problems. we had underproduction rather than overproduction! Further. 310.000 tons of cotton. The fact that we greatly increased importations of food merely substantiates my charge that the maladies had been wrongly diagnosed and the prescription was a nostrum instead of a remedy. "The other day it occurred to me that somehow things are different than they were a few weeks ago or even a year ago. It was just not so. Over 66 million tons of this total.290. Defenders of the overproduction theory in the nineteen-thirties.
New Deal enthusiasts. Likewise they must have been keenly aware that the public at large must first be "sold" on the overproduction hoax. and hoped for the best. Excessive production did show up after 1918 in two main crops cotton and wheat. 1933. alert unit. Each farmer went his way. They almost at once inflated it to dimensions of a national monster and warned a public already fearful that unless something was done at once. maladjustments in farming. seized on the surplus concept which. like Topsy. but it left the farmer prey to socialistic schemes when hard times came. It is difficult to imagine Congress passing the original Agricultural Adjustment Act with its punitive provisions and its numerous infringements on individual liberties had American farmers been organized at the time into a workable. Obviously these young proponents of a super-state knew that the complex problems of agriculture were but remotely related to export markets. "just growed" in the late twenties. with only 16 . coordinated crop planning. In such overproduction as there was. farmers of the nineteen-thirties needed a new definition of "babassu" nuts! Against this background of fact the question stands out challengingly: In the face of our agricultural imports why was the overproduction theory accepted as the foundation for government farm control? Under the Hoover Administration. This complete individualism has meant unfortunate things for the economic realm of agriculture. they launched a coordinated campaign of brainwashing so gigantic and all-embracing that even members of Congress. Immediately. like similar ills in all manufacturing industries. produced what he pleased. sold what he could. So. Farmers were not organized into units of consultation to permit voluntary.Truly. some of which the farmer has corrected through voluntary association. the trouble was attributable largely to declining domestic demands. began to take their toll as nations settled back after a global conflict. else their entire scheme would collapse and their true designs stand exposed. not only would agriculture be bankrupt but it would carry over all other business structures with it into ruin. as we shall discuss more fully in the strange story about AGRICULTURAL CIRCULAR 296. particularly in the Department of Agriculture and the State Department. But the stage was set for March 4.
a great surplus in excess of domestic requirements. stated in a radio address. Wheat. the intended permanence of farm regimentation plans is seen in such utterances of high government officials until the outbreak of World War II. "The experiences of the twenties and thirties taught us that it is necessary to be able to put the brakes on farm production. farm prices declined and production control programs became a necessity. 1938. While wheat production was increasing 120 per cent. the only honest. Economic Adviser to Secretary Wallace." H. is an excellent example. November 21. fell under the juggernaut. said in a speech. Iowa. "See! Just as I've been telling you wheat production has increased more than 120 per cent since 1900"! The full truth is found in the omission. Agricultural Adjustment Act Administrator.a few exceptions. in an address at Des Moines. And the misleading and misinforming practice continues in the nineteen-sixties. For example.327.. that crop of perpetual farm control propaganda." Against the factual backdrop of mounting agricultural imports how could this overproduction propaganda prove so convincing? The answer is as simple as grade school arithmetic and stands out like a Pikes Peak in the middle of Kansas. The over-production proponent points to these statistics and shouts exultantly. our agriculture today is producing. under average weather conditions. factual way to measure a nation's food supply is to consider the number of persons depending on it. said. February 18. 1934. Tolley. the make-America-over clique carried their banner up and down the land "our farmers have lost their foreign markets"! Of course. February 8. 1938. 1.000 bushels of wheat.000 bushels.000. In other words. R. In an administration specializing in catchy slogans. It is this: Our food resources were not measured in terms of supplies per capita of total population. the ruse pointed to but one remedy rigid production control by the Federal Government. "From 1926 . Mordecai Ezekial. in 1965. our total population was increasing 157 per cent. The wheat truth is 17 . on surplus supplies piled up." Secretary of State Cordell Hull. "Despite all the stress and strain of the past eight years..000. Then and thereafter it was taken for granted. And the temporary or emergency provision written into the law was soon forgotten as the Socialists had all along intended to do in their eagerness to extend and tighten the shackles. In 1900 our farms produced 599.
5 per cent. that the State Department employed this same statistical gimmick reporting by totals rather than by per capita ratios as a shield for lowering our long established tariff walls and for leaving our farmers exposed to imports from low wage countries all over the world.190** Oats 360 318** Rye 13 15 18 .359 1.this: production per capita in 1900 was 473 pounds. there is no record of any government official ever speaking or writing about the per capita domestic supply of our food. It is this portion which the individual citizen can take home. government officials. Instead of claiming a 120 per cent increase. This stark fact represents but a tiny part of the deceptive practice of dealing in totals instead of per capita averages. A per capita analysis of our domestic supply of food in two comparative periods 1920 to 1924 and 1925 to 1932. if they want to keep the public truthfully informed should have reported a decrease of 13. The actual supply can be measured only by what is left from total production after exports are deducted the domestic supply. lay it out figuratively on his dining table and candidly and accurately say. in the all the 33 years since the overproduction hoax moved to the center of the stage. Herein was one of the main camouflages behind which the export bogey gained refuge in 1933. (Asterisks indicate decreases. shows that our per capita domestic supply of all farm produced food decreased between the 1920-1924 period and the 19251932 period. It is both interesting and significant. "This is my share"! Yet. Now let's apply the honest domestic supply per capita measuring stick to major basic crops and farm products which the Roosevelt-Wallace-Tugwell triumvirate carefully omitted when they were pressuring farm control through a cowed and frightened Congress in 1933. in 1965 only 409 pounds. as we shall see later. divided by the number of persons eating from it.) 1920-1924 (Ibs) 1925-1932 (Ibs) Beef 70 62** Pork 74 73** All Red Meet 148 143** Lard 13 13 Wheat 296 340 Corn 1.
508 3.. as of January 1. President Roosevelt named George N.000 milk cows and heifers would be necessary to bring the cattle situation back into balance.000.000 of total population. WHY QUIT OUR OWN? describing the circumstances under which 19 . our increasing population took up the slack and actually decreased. past and present. He resigned the post in frustration and disgust a year later.Rice 11 12 Barley 57 89 All cereals 1. In 1936. Peek Administrator of the Agricultural Adjustment Act. It is another revealing light on the entire overproduction morass. constructive friends of the American farmer.778** Apples 68 58** Peaches 19 21 Potatoes 201 176** All foods 3. with population of July 1: Year All Cattle Milk Cows Hogs Sheep 1880 864 234 884 928 1900 785 217 671 632 1920 661 202 565 383 1930 496 187 453 419 1965 549 90 273 137 The question returns therefore: why was the overproduction hoax devised and employed? Why is it continued to date? The answer contains and explains both motive and method. George Peek wrote a book. page 181. In 1933. that ".460** The truth? Instead of so-called declining exports contributing to economycrushing "burdensome surpluses" of food. a man of great ability and unchallenged honesty and integrity. Davis. collaborating with Samuel Crowther of THE SATURDAY EVENING POST. in his 1935 annual report. the true domestic supply.000.891 1.000 to 7. particularly when we remember Secretary Wallace's historical pig-killing crusade and the suggestion from Chester A. For many years Peek had been recognized as one of the outstanding. elimination of from 6.. to apply the per capita measuring stick to our livestock industry. in most cases." Here is a summary of the number of animals per 1. Agricultural Adjustment Act Administrator.
commerce. has never been recognized. the better for everyone. 20 .. taken from his diary: The major policies of agriculture and foreign trade are in charge of men who have never earned their livings in industry. We have quoted Peek. ." It is today as it was in the hectic nineteen-thirties. . Just as they could see little wrong with Russia. Peek then inserts this brief sentence. . they could see little good in the United States. To them Russia was the promised land and the sooner the United States became like Russia. Readers should make a mental note of the last eighteen words in this amazing statement for their significance in a later analysis of President Johnson's Great Society program.our first farm regulatory legislation came into existence. selected as the first guinea pig? Again Peek answers from his diary: They are talking social revolution and they have the idea that it is the mission of the Roosevelt Administration to turn us into some kind of a socialistic state. Here is the startling context of his words. But one more question surges to the fore: why was farming. . They are long on theories but short on simple arithmetic. They deeply admired everything Russian. transportation or manufacturing. earlier. much less investigated by an aroused Congress. Presenting facts to them is a sheer waste of time. considered or publicized. in part. They think the place to start is with the farmers because it is the farmers who in other countries have formed the chief obstacle to Socialism.. finance or farming. again worth repeating. into his story: "The AAA became a means of buying the farmer's birthright as a preliminary to breaking down the whole individualistic system of the country. These words run like a bright red thread throughout the entire fabric of the government's steady and stealthy march toward welfarestatism since the spring of 1933. written from direct experience by a man whose veracity was unimpeachable. and the leading characters in the tragio-farce. For a while the notion was popular among a certain set that relief work should be pushed forward with the intent of driving the whole country on relief and thus making the capitalistic system commit suicide. difficult to ferret out a clear explanation for the fact that this short sentence. instead of banking.
William Wirt." It is outside the scope of this survey to bring to the bar of public judgment the men responsible for past and present machinations in forging the irons of regimentation on the men and women who feed us. has no need of any other faculty than the ape-like one of imitation. Not long in the sad story of man's enslavements. the formulation and later administration of farm control legislation and related administration policies were created or summarily carried out by men whose aims and motives took little or no cognizance of the next eleven words in our Constitution's preamble: "and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. This freedom had shone forth for scarcely more than 150 years. But unfortunately. mission of the Roosevelt Administration to turn us into some kind of a socialistic state. John Stuart Mill LIKE MOST crises affecting an entire nation. It would seem to have been in the finest tradition of our constitutional history to "promote the general welfare. A case can be made for the thesis that it was necessary and wise for the Federal Government to provide financial aid in the early nineteen-thirties to relieve farm distress and especially to halt the tidal wave of foreclosures sweeping thousands of farmers into bankruptcy. They were intent on blighting with collectivism a people so briefly free from the tyranny of the super-state." had it been done in a manner intended to preserve freedom. Chapter Three SHIFTING THE SCENERY He who lets the world or his own portion of it choose his plan of life for him. But it is extremely pertinent and daily becoming more timely to examine the ideologies of the planners. the 1929 depression struck hardest at the weakest segment of our economy —agriculture.The reader is asked to file away in his mind the words "." They show up later as a strange corroboration in the story of the personal persecution and the professional crucifixion of Dr. as subsequent events proved. . But let us sketch more fully the background of world conditions 21 . .
blissfully optimistic in our politically encouraged delusion that international giveaways were equivalent to normal dollar trade. With the Armistice in late 1918 the United States suddenly found itself a creditor instead of a debtor nation. Russia was reorganizing on a ruthless Marxist plan following a foundation shattering revolution. Chiefly through the insistence of President Wilson. high-salaried officials in seats of power. it was said. grotesquely ballooned by charity totals. loaded with punitive reparations her people could not pay. Czarina and their children. These soon developed into jealous. clothing and credit to Europe's millions of needy. was sinking into depths of intolerable inflation. unable to find peace-time employment. had been murdered in a cellar in Ekaterinburg. Royalty was on the run and at long last the world had been made "safe for democracy. as now. Vast armies had been disbanded. The Czar. negotiators at Versailles had agreed to carve the Danubian region of eastern Europe into small ethnical nations.in the late nineteen-twenties when Congress and administrative officials turned serious attention to our rapidly worsening ills. Millions of men and women were turned out of war industries. Germany. They had learned the bitter lesson of having to depend on foreign sources for food through a long and border-closing war. We Americans lived then. Throughout the early nineteen-twenties the United States contributed food. pointed to foreign trade statistics. as we have been living since 1945." Ill fared many lands! Hunger on Apocalyptic horses rode rampant on the winds of man-made chaos. The last of the long line of Austrian Hapsburgs had fled into exile late at night from a back door of the Schoenbrunn Palace. The former Kaiser was chopping wood in Holland. The vast expanse of Magog was seething with a strange mixture of Marxism and anarchy from which God had been banished. in a fool's commercial paradise. Then. They puffed pouter pigeon breasts and boasted of our 22 . bickering minorities at whose borders international trade encountered barriers. The problem was aggravated by new and varying currencies. Most European countries that formerly were our best customers for farm products were mired in serious economic bogs and almost all Europeans were endeavoring to become self-sustaining in agriculture.
then. Had Congress then employed a little simple addition. But even more important. Why? First. is explained by the later legislative myopia of 1933 and its chronic continuance to the present. But he could neither recognize nor analyze his foreign trade dilemmas. time ran out on it before it could begin to function. The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1929. Such a system. He knew it if only from the fact that he no longer had the expanding market outlets of the 1914-1918 war years and the fabulous give-away era that followed. He knew they existed somewhere beyond his horizon. there can be no substitute for a farmer-owned. Here it warrants only a passing observation. like many a great nation. is needed more in the nineteen-sixties than it was even in 1929 and it will be needed as long as the principle of free enterprise survives. the American farmer felt keenly the limitations of his longpracticed individualism. The depression struck the same year the act was passed.phenomenal prosperity. In rebuilding a sound and prosperous farming industry and a vigorous rural society. will fade into its twilight days. It was to build farmer independence of export markets and to bring farmers into direct contact with domestic consumers. 1929. under the Hoover Administration and the Federal Farm Board named to administer its operation was centered around a vital and long-existing need. The failure. is the fact that Congress had accepted the erroneous and untenable theory of agricultural overproduction! This was to be the basis for an otherwise sound cooperative marketing structure. if free and voluntary. as viewed from the vantage point of the nineteen-sixties. Without it. farmer-managed. 23 . a prosperity certain to continue in perpetuity! When the worldwide hurricane of economic recession hit our shores in October. We failed to measure our national food resources in relation to our rapidly increasing urban population! In chasing the overproduction mirage in 1929. During the same period our farm population had actually declined. Congress failed to consider the fact that between 1900 and 1929 our total population had increased 60 per cent while our urban or non-farm population was mounting by 103 per cent. America. The Federal Farm Board failed. direct farm-to-consumer cooperative marketing system. This was to be achieved through a nationwide cooperative marketing system. In a later chapter the important subject of cooperative marketing will be discussed more fully.
Cooperative marketing never got off the ground. in fact. fashioned after the more humane. pork from 78 to 75 pounds. instead of seeking advice from "farm experts" in the colleges and other inexperienced economists and professors of Sociology. Professor Rex Tugwell: "I will roll up my sleeves and make America over. highly successful in their respective careers. not for his working knowledge of the farm and its complex problems but for his party loyalty and service. Hyde. potatoes from 204 to 163 pounds. They seemed capable." Historians may someday cite this as the first modern-day demonstration of the Republican Party's long record of me-tooism. chorusing the punch line from the college poem of their recognized leader. conscientious.704 pounds. Secretary of Agriculture Arthur M. But unfortunately the men on the Federal Farm Board were not commissioned to diagnose the malady or prescribe the remedy. honesty and devotion to the American way of life. fruits from 226 to 136 pounds. No whisper of adverse criticism was ever attached to their integrity. mutton from 7 to 6 pounds. an echo of the Democratic Party platform of 1928: "There is need of supplementary legislation for control and handling of agricultural surpluses. Thus the scenery was shifted into place for the entrance of the ridiculous but determined totalitarians and collectivists. and 24 . He issued the ill-conceived order: "Curtailment of production is the only logical remedy. all cereals from 2. a sincere official. The Federal Farm Board was composed of nine outstanding business and professional men.585 to only 1. progressive Marxian-Lenin pattern! Even if it meant the humane extermination of many millions of Americans—like the extermination of Ukrainian peasants. had been named to his important post in the Hoover Cabinet." The America of 1789 to 1932 had been a colossal and abysmal failure! It must be made over.subtraction and division. and not without practical acquaintance with the difficult tasks they were called on to perform. who trooped to Washington in the spring of 1933." This was. they were given a prearranged and hopeless job: dosing the patient with the nostrum of farm curtailment which Congress had unwisely concocted. they would have discovered that our domestic supply (production less exports) of beef per capita had declined from 78 pounds in 1900 to 57 pounds in 1929.
" But why have the people's representatives in one Congress after another since the late nineteen-twenties passively accepted the agricultural overproduction ruse? This long delayed question uncovers one of the nerve centers of our entire farm control fiasco. Instead. For example. It is largely on the practical advice of these men that the related legislation is finally written. It is government in the hands of those who are "sick of the propertied czars. Regardless of their mental brilliance. Columbia. drips and oozes in farm subsidies. for some impractical purpose and inexplicable reason. Congress. Many are 25 . when banking legislation is in the formative stage or important amendments to banking laws are planned. That is what welfare statism is. Harvard. everyday problems of farming. business and social leaders and authorities in their respective fields. Princeton and other universities. But. does Congress call in practical farmers for information and guidance? Not by any means. In formulating new legislation or amending existing laws. when legislation pertaining to agriculture is in the making. and the presence of Socialists there. And let no one who reads these lines delude himself into the false conclusion that the "make-America-over" advocates are less firmly entrenched in places of power in Washington today than they were in 1933. urban-thinking and know little or nothing about the down to earth. revealing the weakness or willing cooperation of many in our national legislature. and then the resulting legislation seldom resembles their advice. Congress has long followed the sound and commendable practice of seeking advice and counsel from experienced professional. sincerity. congressional committees call in the heads of banking and investment houses for consultation. and devotion to the national well-being. urban-trained.. usually universities in the East. The wisdom and merits of this method of lawmaking are reflected in many ways. places first and lasting dependence on the opinions and recommendations of economists from Yale. Only on rare occasion are the views of such farm organizations as the Federal Farm Bureau and the National Grange sought. all fruiting from the original Rooseveltian inaugural declaration of March 4. these men are urban-bred.. handouts and payoffs .Chinese peasants which ushered in the "worker's paradise" in these countries. price supports." This foreign illness drops from their every pore. 1933 that "the government owes every man a living.
if any. economically and spiritually.obvious Socialists. the closer the government skirts the brink of national bankruptcy the sounder our financial foundations become. the only real revolution in history. both clearly identified in Webster's definition of the former as "a system of government founded on book learning. In the minds of those who retain even a faint trace of the oldfashioned virtues of industry and thrift by which this nation grew. Their knowledge of farm realities has been gained from textbooks written by other inexperienced economists before them. one cannot visualize. None of them has ever pulled on a pair of cold gum boots on a winter morning and by lantern light waded through barnyard slush and cattle manure to feed livestock. Pedantocracy and bureaucracy are Siamese twins. Few. it was solely on this foundation that the first Agricultural Adjustment Act was erected. It has never worked. It was largely with this type of "farm expert" advice that the original overproduction concept was born in the nineteen-twenties. crime-ridden cities more and more American youth. The American Revolution. for following the Socialist Pied Pipers and the pedantry. a nation stronger socially. overpopulated. of those who have originated and shaped our farm control policies for the last 40 years. They cannot conceive of fourteen to eighteen hours of slavish labor a day in harvest time or the heartbreaking discouragement when tornadoes or drought sweep away months or years of planning and toil. financially and morally. It is outmoded. From this source comes the present intolerable philosophy that the more we spend the more we prosper." And not among the least of evils of Pedantocracy is this easily verified truth: that in almost all cases our policymaking and administrative-directing pedants 26 . We have paid dearly." Readers interested in pursuing this particular theory may wish to read Henry Hazlitt's FAILURE OF THE NEW ECONOMICS (see appendix). This folly underlies every major concept of President Johnson's Great Society fantasy. Without the abdication of reason. the deeper we sink into debt the richer we are. It is the Keynesian theory of "spend yourself out of debt. through this monstrous plan. Johnson's "Great Society" is based upon the primitive idea of slave-state regimentation. and especially in the last two to three decades. eclipsed in human values the ignorance of slave state welfarism. know much more than at which end a cow is milked. The "Great Society" will inevitably crowd into our already over-built.
99 would cost $2. Once bureaucracy gains a toehold in government its rate of multiplication is never restricted for reasons of economy but solely by the scarcity of office space available. To please the fools and puzzle all the wise. more destructive to human progress. The eggheads who have been determining farm policy for these several decades—and whose counterparts have the Department of Agriculture and most of the policy-making levels of the United States Government in a stranglehold— come in many kinds: scrambled eggheads. Senator William E. In 1930 the cost of operating this branch of government was 178 million dollars. Prophetically.500.68 per capita in 1960.45 per capita of total population in 1930 to $31. prosecutor and defense recognize that an out-and-out lie usually defeats itself and eventually 27 . It has been estimated that if a refrigerator manufacturer operated his entire business by government bureaucracy standards. but dashed and brewed with lies. housewives would be paying between $5 and $6 a dozen for eggs. than a bureaucracy. fried eggheads. or. a refrigerator retailing at $189. There is no need to look further than the Department of Agriculture for convincing evidence of how costly bureaucracy can become. poached eggheads and soft-boiled eggheads. Judge. when measured more fairly. but so far God in His infinite mercy has not permitted it to curse the human family.lean far to the left of center in their political and ideological thinking. Chapter Four HIGH PLACED HALF TRUTHS Some truth there was.7 billion dollars. in 1960 5. from $1. jury. John Dryden A HALF TRUTH is often the most harmful and despicable form of duplicity. Borah said back in the nineteen-thirties: It may be possible to devise some form of government more deadening to human initiative. And if farmers geared their production to the typical government bureau tempo. more burdensome to the people.
But a half-lie. and with such destructive effect upon our national well-being as they were through the nineteenthirties. 2) General public tolerance and legislative apathy." in which case they should have been charged with malfeasance. the ease with which lies are told and false impressions permitted. in which case they should have been removed from office for the sake of effective government. In few other periods in our political and economic history have half-truths been employed so brazenly. At an early stage they concocted the overproduction theory which endures and shapes our 28 . three related factors must be considered: 1) Official callousness in regard to truth. 3) The consummate skill of the subversives and collaborators. Regardless which view is accepted the result was the forging of the chains of regimentation on the farmer. but it is enough to have brought United States Socialism out of the creeping to the walking and running stage. may live on and on by gaining refuge behind the fraction of veracity it uses as a shield. with so much convincing effrontery. But one can scarcely place too much emphasis on the fact that the same tactics of misrepresentation are employed today for the same purposes and with the same insidious motives for which they were conceived and used in 1933—to withhold the truth from the American people about their food resources. Obviously some officials then became participants in the ruse from lack of knowledge. and to do this in concert with a plan to Sovietize American agriculture.crumbles under the impact of truth. Peek described as "Russian admirers. and were perhaps not fully aware of the totalitarian aims camouflaged behind the patronizing welfare front. But all New Deal officials who played major or minor roles in this imposture must be catalogued at one of two extremes: 1) They were grossly careless and incompetent. or 2) They consciously supported the subversive plans of the clique of collectivists in the United States Department of Agriculture whom George N. How many high government officials lend their weight whether knowingly or unknowingly contributing to our demise cannot now be determined. The subersives worked not only to alter the entire concept of representative government. others because they had been crowded politically into compromising corners. Half truths gave apparent respectability to the spurious overproduction theory.
that the entire scheme would collapse if they did not as summarily control lettuce. "My friends. When President Franklin D. cotton. And the final step will inevitably be the victim's most precious right—the prerogative to work and worship as he pleases. he did not tell the American people. The government that controls wheat acreages cannot. travel and speech not further delude ourselves that the government that controls our food supply will long be restrained from telling us where to work and what kind of a god we may worship or worse. eggs and milk. carrots and radishes at the bottom. he talked about the "emergency" we faced. Let us who have so long tasted the sweet fruits of personal freedom of occupation. No would-be tyrant ever informs his unsuspecting subjects in advance of their approaching enslavement. This is the history of regimentation. that we may not worship at all. if it is to make its sinister plans succeed. In the creeping Socialism launched in 1933 there was no stopping place One-third or one-half way down the spiral. Roosevelt signed the Agricultural Adjustment Act into law in May. The collectivist planners of the New Deal very well knew. 29 . I am today fastening the first fetters of complete totalitarianism around your necks. in the nineteen-thirties. 1933. It remains the tactic by which the brainwashing continues. One of the most remarkable official statements to come out of Washington and the first outright admission that the government did not intend to limit its agricultural control policies to wheat. stop short of entire farm control. The "democratic process" would be employed. but it also appears in fruits and in vegetables and in livestock products such as meat. by which the campaign of brainwashing was launched. It was a "temporary crisis" which the requested legislation was certain to bridge. in 1933. the surplus problem appears in the great surplus crops. when they started with government control over wheat." This is the master key which unlocks the door to the Great Society's plan for the farmer." Instead. and tobacco.national thinking to the present hour on the subject of agriculture. and still remains the tactic usually in the dangerous form of half truths. cotton and tobacco. is found on page 23 of Secretary Wallace's annual report for 1938: "Mainly. Let us examine more closely the first of these factors because it was.
000 tons of sugar while importing 62. For anyone who still thinks government farm control is necessary. published by the United States Department of Agriculture. barley.000 tons—one pound of exported sugar for every 888 pounds imported.000 tons. Wallace refers to production totals.To an anonymous retired physician in Vienna. Staple Crops. In light of the fact that sugar beets can be grown in every state in the Union and commercially in all our leading farm states." —wheat. Sugar.585 pounds in 1900 and dropped to 1.692 pounds in 1938.252. after Hitler's Anschluss and subsequent subjugation of Austria. rye. according to a statistical table on page 543 of AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS for 1965. Inexplicable and ridiculous as it may sound. buckwheat and rice—was 2.535. practical and workable. carefully avoiding the only true and honest device— per capita production. Our domestic supply per capita of the "great staple crops. 1960-1964. including those in 30 . as throughout the 33 year heyday of the "burdensome surplus" hoax. wise." Against this background. Even with the sugar-producing facilities enlarged we have in these five years exported only 22.600 tons and imported 20. the per capita domestic supply: production less exports—in relation to numbers of people. Between 1919 and 1938 we had exported 2. No one will consider this distinction hairsplitting if he simply pauses to think that these numbers of people have to be fed. it is informative to turn to our sugar ledger for 1960 to 1964. or better. a total of $230. it is difficult to understand why from 1919 to 1938 we imported 28 pounds of sugar for every pound we exported. instead. He will find the facts hairraising. the Federal Government has paid to American sugar beet growers for the five years. the year about which the Secretary was writing. Here. separating the truth from the lie.255.000. goes the credit for describing the process of despotism: "Every tyrant starts his bloody climb to the throne by beating his breast and declaring his heartrending concern for the social or economic underdog. it is easy to analyze Secretary Wallace's great concern for the farmers and for the "surpluses" showing up in fruits. On page 542 is a list of payments to sugarcane growers.126. oats. vegetables and animal products. In the same period our domestic supply of potatoes had dropped from 204 pounds per capita to 164 pounds. corn. Let's consider the items in the order he listed them.
000 for the 1960-1964 period—a grand total for five years amounting to $407. first let us listen to a calmer voice. Moving on to Secretary Wallace's implied need for reducing vegetable and fruit production. For the years 1928 to 1938 our import excess of these meats amounted to 665 million pounds. published by the United States Department of Agriculture. Fruits. the United States suffered an import excess over beef exports totaling 1.334.000 tons of fresh fruits while importing 24. Between 1919 and 1938. page 143. According to STATISTICAL BULLETIN No. pork. It is an important sidelight on the claim that we have too many farmers.139.000 tons. is a statistical review of our fresh fruit production and foreign trade. under date of June. According to a table on page 94 of STATISTICAL BULLETIN No. In other words we imported two dozen eggs for every one dozen we exported. but to persuade the farmer not to produce and hence to keep the heavy hand of government control over the sugar farmer. as well as meats. In a later chapter we shall look more closely into our loss of selfsufficiency in beef. mutton and lamb) did not show up until 1928. We exported 530 million tons of fresh vegetables while importing 2. totaling $177. Here is opened a door into a realm of government wrecking. Eggs. we exported 746.000 tons. eggs and dairy products the half truth paradox continues. Was this money spent to increase sugar production? No.700. the period for which Secretary Wallace claimed surplus production. 1918.5 million tons.205 million tons. Before examining the landscape. 364. veal. Meats. Vegetables. Between 1919 and 1938 we exported 10.000 acres of sugar beets to produce the sugar we import in the average year.917. But our loss of self-sufficiency in all red meats (beef. American poultrymen sold 366 million dozen of eggs abroad between 1919 and 1938 while importing 733 million dozen. speaking before the National Milk and Dairy Exposition on May 23. Dairy Products. On page 123 of the government bulletin last mentioned. 31 . experimentation and misrepresentation so vast and disastrous that it defies description. that it would require an additional 1. going back to pre-World War I years.589. 364.000.000 tons of dry field beans between 1919 and 1938 but imported 817. Herbert Hoover said.Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. 1965. quite the opposite.
has developed a total dependence upon cattle for the rearing of its young. But he continued in office and was rewarded with the vice-presidency of the United States. Was he ignorant of the truth? Then he should have been discharged by President Roosevelt for incompetence.The human race . according to STATISTICAL BULLETIN No." The whole truth? According to government records we had on our farms on January 1. This meant a reduction of approximately 25 per cent in cow numbers at a time when about 250.000 of our total population. if we had not exported a single pound of dairy products between 1924 and 1938. he should have been impeached. In the light of our growing dependence on foreign farms for dairy products after World War I. The deception lies in the fact that while our total number of cows was increasing 170 per cent between 32 . our dairy exports from 1924 to 1938 amounted to as much as 6. Secretary Wallace wrote in his 1933 annual report. it becomes more difficult to reconcile the hard facts with the idiocy of Chester A.757 million pounds (as whole milk) compared with imports of 13. Therefore. for the total loss of dairy produce means the ultimate extinction of the people. Davis." But the half truth hiding the huge lie continued to grow and flourish.000.000 to 7. The government did not begin keeping accurate records of dairy production until 1924. . Peek wrote of the coterie that authored our first farm control legislation that "presenting facts to them is a sheer waste of time. "The number of milk cows on farms in the United States reached an all-time peak in January 1933. Again. Secretary Wallace's claims of surplus production in 1938 must be measured only from 1924. our domestic consumption would have exceeded domestic production by more than 7 billion pounds. . But he continued to direct our vital agricultural destiny.000 of population. 1933.981 million pounds. 364. that the elimination of 6. 207 milk cows for every 1. page 98.000 additional cows would have been required to render us self-sustaining in dairy products. The actual peak was reached 53 years earlier when we had 251 cows per 1. No greater catastrophe can happen to a people than the loss of its dairy herds. page 41.000 cows and heifers was necessary. Was Secretary Wallace deliberately deceiving the American people about their dairy supplies? If so.000. It is little wonder that George N. In terms of the full truth. mentioned in the second chapter.
October 10. 1965. slightly more than 25 per cent of our people lived on the land. President Roosevelt declared: "In 1932. Secretary Wallace wrote: "Since 1900 the trend in total meat production (beef. out of scores of others." The whole truth? In 1900 production of these meats averaged 184 pounds per capita. 1965. page 3." The whole truth? On the date to which the President referred. veal. as compared with 35 per cent in 1910. That the President was fully aware of this dangerous downward 33 . mutton and lamb) has been upward. published by the United States Department of Agriculture. 54 per cent in 1880 and 58 per cent in 1870. pork. is a current example of part truth about our cattle industry: "The number of cattle and calves on farms rose to a record 107. our total population was increasing 220 per cent! To bring this subterfuge up to date. in 1939 only 141 pounds. as compared with only 552 head January 1.2 million head on January 1. the full truth is neatly avoided by dealing in grand totals instead of per capita shares. 41 per cent in 1890. 1936. Here again." The whole truth? It is necessary to go back 77 years to find the record number of cattle and calves on American farms—970 head for every 1. 1965 issue of LIVESTOCK AND MEAT SITUATION. From earliest New Deal days to this very day persists a tendency to avoid references to the tremendous increase in urban population and our dwindling farm population. and down to the present as illustrated above. America's farm population was the greatest in our history. In his 1939 annual report. is here cited. Speaking at Omaha.1870 and 1933. Wallace's "upward" claims for red meats took no cognizance of the more important fact that while production was mounting in total pounds by 33 per cent the number of persons eating out of the supply had increased over 40 per cent. as throughout the New Deal years. our total population was increasing more than 200 per cent. One early example. in the March. While these deceptions in reference to our nation's food resources are extremely misleading it is in the area of farm and urban populations that misinformation proved and is proving most glaring and the brainwashing more intensified. Nebraska. Here again the key to the misrepresentation is found in the fact that while our cattle numbers were increasing over 100 per cent between 1888 and 1965.000 of total population.
Not one single reference has ever been heard about the 94 to 6 distribution of our population! Why? The truth if known widely enough would prove an obstacle in our governmental march toward Socialism. it's urban renewal) . Thirty-three years of skillful avoidance of the facts about our top-heavy urban population structure and the reduction of rural numbers brings us to July 1. is illustrated in Secretary Wallace's famous (or infamous) pig-killing campaign. Of course. 6. pork prices rose sharply.188. Despite the fact that the number of hogs on our farms had been declining steadily from an all-time peak of 970 per 1. Every phase of this propaganda is keyed to the luring of more youth from the land.247 brood sows soon to farrow had been slain— much of the total made into fertilizer and inedible grease. But excessive urbanization and the robbing of our people of a self-sustaining national agriculture placing the nation at the mercy of foreign trade in a rapidly socializing. farm population: less than 6 per cent! The perils of our farm population decline are more fully considered in a later chapter on urbanization.000 of total population in 1872 to only 475 in 1932. Here it is pertinent only to call attention to recent White House pronouncements to promote the Great Society program. to all but the willfully blind. as reason and the basic intent of the Agricultural Adjustment Act suggest. With the creation of a new Cabinet post to take care of urban affairs. When the conflict ended and Secretary Wallace hung up his sword.trend in our farm population cannot be doubted. 34 .717 little pigs and 223. communizing world. That the present administration's crusade of half truths as well as that of the New Deal occasionally reach hilarious heights in spite of their serious implications and end-effects. Is it industrialization which we protest in this downward of farm population? Certainly not. Secretary Wallace buckled on his official armor in 1933 and set his face resolutely to do battle against the porcine hosts which threatened our nation. comes a flood of sentimental propaganda about the urgency and moral obligations for spending untold billions of tax dollars for slum clearance (please pardon us. This will become obvious to all who have not shut their eyes to truth. Similarly it cannot be doubted that he stressed this half truth to bolster the agricultural overproduction hoax. 1966 and the payday of our folly—urban population: 94 plus per cent.
Housewives' complaints culminated in boycott action in New York City. To counteract this unexpected outburst, Secretary Wallace took to radio on the Farm and Home Hour in Chicago, November 12, 1935 to quell the complainants. His was a strange and seriocomic explanation: "It is common belief that pork is high today because the little pigs were killed in 1933. As a matter of fact, there is more pork now and the price is lower because these pigs were killed two years ago." One can speculate by this elastic type of logic that had Secretary Wallace slain 12,377,434 pigs in 1933 instead of only 6,188,717, we would have had twice as much pork in 1935 and the price would have been a half lower. When a Midwest county seat editor referred to the Wallacian pork reasoning as "hogwash," the editorial spurred a reader to submit the following: ,
Burn up your wheat and send the bags to mill; Put on your roller skates and coast up hill. In arcs is distance measured, not straight lines; All candy dealers own marshmallow mines. Most cowboys purchase saddles made of chamois; Rich Eskimos build igloos in Miami. A tunnel really should be called a fill; Columbus sank the Maine on Bunker Hill. In Greenland artichokes grow on palmettos; Adolph's a common name for boys from Ghettos. If some fair day you have a sudden notion To take a railroad trip across the ocean, Just buy a one-way ticket to Nebraska And stop and plant bananas in Alaska. Don't be upset by something Henry said, But set your house afire and go to bed.
Another half truth appeared in a news release from the Department of Agriculture, dated May 4, 1941, on page 4 of the Clip Sheet, written by R. M. Evans, Assistant Secretary of Agriculture. Said he, "If the United States ground and baked all its wheat next year [into bread], we'd have more than 1,900 loaves for every family in the United States— and the average family eats about 300 loaves a year." What Evans was actually saying may be compared to a hypothetical press release from the office of a high official in steel manufacturing to the effect: If all the steel made in the United States next year were made into carpet tacks, there would be enough tacks to build a dike six feet high 35
from Podunk to Bombay with enough tacks left over to fill a coal scuttle for every man, woman and child in Acapulco. Silly? Certainly. But to such extremes did New Deal officials go in order to continue and broaden the bureaucratic powers of farm regimentation even in 1941. That the dark clouds of another world war were billowing above the American horizon mattered little. But to Secretary of Agriculture Orville Freeman must be awarded the brass ring for concentrating, in his contribution to this merry-go-round, more absurdity than is usually expected from a defender of the "burdensome surplus" hocuspocus. During the six years, 1958 to 1963, inclusive, we exported 803 million pounds of beef while importing 8,438 million pounds—giving us undisputed place as the leading beef importing nation in the world. Writing in the June 29, 1964 issue of FOREIGN AGRICULTURE, page 11, Secretary Freeman said: "Beef is in surplus supply in the United States and meets the basic requirements of P.L. 480 eligibility." P.L. 480 is the law authorizing the President to distribute our imaginary surplus foods around the habitable globe to any nation that qualifies by prominently displaying at all times "Yankee Go Home" signs. What is the true impact of Secretary Freeman's statement? It may rightly be paraphrased this way: "Because we have suffered an import balance of beef over the last six years amounting to more than 3,817,000 tons, we now have a surplus so great that we must give it away." Incomprehensible as this sub-absurdity is, the failure of Congress and our informational media to challenge Secretary Freeman's statistical buffoonery, goes beyond credibility into alarm for our national security.
RIGGING THE RECORDS
-we could know where we are and whither we are tending, we would better know what to do and how to do it. Abraham Lincoln. A LONG line of silent men and women shivered in the biting wind of a winter evening before the doors of a charitable 36
institution in the nation's capital. To the east of them the floodlighted dome of the capitol building stood resplendent but mellow against the dark sky. These miserable human beings were waiting for their meager daily handouts of food. It was 1933. To the south across the broad mall in brilliantly lighted offices of the Department of Agriculture, scurrying clerks on the night shift were settling to their tasks of addressing letters to the nation's farmers. Each letter contained a check drawn against the federal treasury, payment for cotton plowed under, corn and wheat not planted, pigs killed before they were old enough to produce pork, brood sows slain before they bore their progeny, beef cattle shot and buried in gullies, fruit trees pulled out by their roots by tractors and burned, potatoes doused with dye to render them inedible and piled high in fields to rot. Had an unknowing stranger inquired from one of the honest supervising officials the reason for this feverish activity of night work in a government department, he would have been told, "We are rushing checks out to farmers to pay them for the surplus food destroyed and to induce them to grow less so all those hungry people you see over there across the mall won't starve to death." What change in official mentality made this insanity possible? What change in the American mentality would permit it? Idle men. Unproductive acres. Ragged hungry women and children. Cotton plowed under. Farm less so we'll have more to eat. Undernourished, anemic human beings—the curse of surplus crops! Squalor and abundance, penury and plenty— all synonyms. Famine born from productivity. Sit down and wait until prosperity overtakes you. Borrow instead of produce. If you want more milk, kill every tenth cow. It was out of this plethora of fact and falsity, truth and treachery that the first Agricultural Adjustment Act emerged and moved to Capitol Hill, there to receive legislative approval after almost no study and only a brief and formal discussion. And, although Congress truly traveled a rough road through the tumult and shouting of that hectic spring, yet the passing years have revealed few reasons to commend the legislators of 1933. History, if future historians ever free themselves from the counterfeit aura of hero-worship politically patterned around the President, will hold that lamentable Congress
responsible for loosening on this nation forces of evil unprecedented among a free people. The legislative stigma for approving our first farm control law is, however, slightly mitigated by the fact that the Department of Agriculture furnished Congress farm production statistics smelling to high heaven of deliberate, arbitrary falsification to lend credence to a bogus theory. This story has never been told before. It is not hearsay or political rumor. The records speak for themselves. Among the most important duties of the United States Department of Agriculture is the work of gathering, compiling, and maintaining records of all farm production. Totals obtained at the end of each year are, of course, largely estimates, but like estimates of total population made by the Census Bureau, those available for farm production are usually so nearly correct that they can become parts of the permanent records with only minor corrections, chiefly to conform to the decennial census returns. If accurate records are possible why aren't they utilized? Here is something else: when corrections are necessary, they usually apply only to the previous year and rarely back beyond that date. For example, after the 1960 census it was found necessary to correct potato production totals for 1958 and 1959, but only by a few thousand bushels. This is the overall manner by which accepted farm production totals have been compiled and the permanent records entrusted to the keeping of the Department of Agriculture. But sometime soon after March 4, 1933, something unprecedented happened to these long-standing, long-accepted records —the totals of crops and livestock numbers were revised." And suspiciously strange, the "revision" added approximately 2 billion tons of food and feed to bolster the claims of overproduction. The one exception, the crop, production totals for which were not "revised," was the only crop generally conceded and definitely known to have been overproduced for several years —cotton. No one at the time or since has been able to shed any light on why all previous administrations, back to soon after the Civil War when record keeping began, made "mistakes" in all other crop totals but were right on the dot with cotton. Add the fact that cotton was the one recognized overproduced crop from 1920 to 1933 and the mystery deepens. Chester A. Davis, then Administrator of the Agricultural Adjustment Act writing on pages 56 to 59, of his 1934 annual 38
report released March 26 of that year, offers an explanation for wheat totals "revision," but his explanation confuses more than it clarifies. He sets forth that wheat production totals had been found erroneous because: 1) fence rows and highways in such wheat states as Kansas had not previously been deducted from wheat acreages; 2) land seeded to wheat for one or two years and then turned back to fallow had been recorded as having been continued in wheat; 3) land prepared for wheat and not seeded had been included in computations of wheat grown. Of course, the flimsiness of these explanations out-flimsy the absurdities they were intended to clear up. Davis opened the door to a host of insistent questions: How could the Kansas fence rows thesis warrant the "revision" of egg production in a manner that added two billion dozen? It couldn't . . . but such a records revision could boost the overproduction theory. What relation did the Kansas fence rows thesis have to an increase in milk production, over old records, by 32 billion pounds? If Kansas fence rows justified "revision" of wheat production totals, why were production figures for potatoes, sweet potatoes, apples, peaches, cherries, snap beans, celery and green peppers similarly changed? It is true that the overproduction mirage glittered brighter and more lustrous across the desert of deceit. Why did all these "errors" remain undetected through the years and await the New Deal for correction? Before looking further into this far reaching "change" in our vital farming records, it is helpful to furnish an example the better to understand how the alterations bolstered overproduction claims statistically. Any of the major crops serves this purpose. Here we use corn. Totals listed as old records are cited from Agricultural Yearbooks published before the New Deal took over; those headed New Deal Claims are, of course, cited from Agricultural Yearbooks and annual copies of AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS, published beginning in 1936. CORN PRODUCTION (bushels) Old Records New Deal Revision Claims Increase 2,305,196,000 2,223,123,000 2,853,183,000 2,798,367,000 2,574,602,000 2,546,972,000 39
Year 1924 1925 1926
Revision Decrease 82,073,000 54,816,000 27,630,000
515.180.959 million tons. To grasp the full adroitness of this "revision." reductions were made in the nineteen-twenties.101.000 2.000 1932 .000 tons—a lead pencil boosting of overproduction claims in nine years amounting to 1.000 The alteration made only minor changes in hog numbers.292 million tons. The overall results are astonishing. minor in hogs. reduce corn production by 294.665. and increase production for 1930.307. inclusive.000 1924 .000 2. sheep and milk cows.535. Likewise.000 1921 . the increase from 1929 to 1932.000 2.000 1929 .386.417.000 19." imagine a rectangular plot of level ground.059.045.000 08.714.000 2.677.000 61. production for the two or three years up to 1932 was increased.000 2.119. If soil to a depth of six inches is removed from the right hand half and spread evenly over the left hand half.101. For the thirty-eight crops for which comparative figures are available.591.641. amounts to 1.634.665.616.000 1923 .000.621.306.747. New Deal increases in sheep over old records were as follows: 1920 .449.000 1928 .108.516.000 1930 .000 1927 .000 Production totals.000 2. varying as to years but always made lower than the old accepted totals. the decrease from old records in the 1924 to 1929 period. but like the sheep total "revision" was progressively upward.100.000 2.742.927. according to "revised" figures.137. 40 .9220.127.116.112.575.082.000 2. over a nine year period. Thus the New Deal "hill" became higher. to 667.075.930.000 2.332. but considerable in totals of all cattle.908.000 20.000 49. In "revising" livestock numbers there was no scooping soil here and piling it up there—it was a straight process of increase.567.080.130. inclusive. 1931 and 1932 by 51.000 1925 .000 bushels from 1924 to 1929. the latter section will be twelve inches higher than the other.000 2.1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 2.000 1926 . Throughout the farm production record "revision.622.000 22.000 bushels in favor of overproduction claims.132.489.000 1931 .000 bushels—thereby adding an apparent 346.151.000 1922 .000 2.
043.000 60.000 3. yet.122.000 0.not beginning.000 65.436.000 1925 63.000 1932 .714.000 0.000 1921 68.000 1928 .000 1926 59. however.000 1922 28.000 1929 .000 1931 .no change 1926 .000 1932 62.000 1931 .000 0.384.977.29.003.110.115.000 58. magnified by the fact that beef imports had been increasing year after year.102.20.75.000 0.373.795. as follows: 1920 .818.104.22.168.000 65.000 63.253.528.000 0.730.633.000 68.000 It was in the AH Cattle classification that the livestock "revision" took on its most serious dimensions. In both instances the significance lies in the existence of alterations and not in the total pounds of mutton and pork added to our national meat supplies by the changes.000 1928 .000 67.000 1923 .000 1927 .000 63.000 1927 57. Because of this fact.000 1922 .000 58. like sheep and hogs.877. until 1926.132.000 1925 .081.832.000 1927 .000 0.599.656.000 1929 57. the "revision" was upward.273.39.030.000 41 .178.16.546.701.164.000 1930 .43.663. The New Deal increases in hog numbers over old records were: 1926 .402.000 0.000 0.92.000 1928 56.000 1930 .000 0.999.000 0.801.000 57.000 1923 67.421. Year Old Records New Deal New Deal Claims Increase 1920 70.000 While cow numbers did not show a considerable increase.000 1931 60.322.987.325.000 1924 65.650.621.075.996.258.000 61. both old records and New Deal claims are cited.400.000 1924 .576.99.000 2.244.000 68.101.000 1930 59.000 1.000 70.000 1929 .000 1921 .
in order to pressure through Congress a measure that lacks the truth necessary for adoption on its own merits. There are four paramount. 4) To lift 195 million Americans'. apparently satisfied with the political crumbs that fell to them from the table of the victors.It is not known whether Congress knew about this overall "revision" of farm production totals and livestock numbers when it approved the 1933 Agricultural Adjustment Act because no one outside the Department of Agriculture has ever learned exactly when the alterations were made. to inform them that they are living in a fool’s slaphappy paradise—on the brink of famine. and inescapable. of course. But after 1936 the changes were called to the attention of numerous individual members of Congress and. The entire matter was called to the attention of the Republican National Committee before the 1936 and 1940 conventions but the Republican Party had already decided to string along with the New Deal farm philosophy. for extending the Great Society over the entire earth). reasons: 1) To settle once and for all this question—were the changes in our longaccepted farm production records justified? 2) To restore public confidence in the accuracy of vital government records and the integrity of elected and appointed officials in whose care such records are entrusted. all legislative and administrative officials had access to the data. They showed up in government records first in the 1936 annual issue of AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS and also in the Agricultural Yearbook of that year. either downward or upward. Congress had no excuse to claim lack of information when they approved subsequent farm control legislation after the original measure was thrown out by the Supreme Court. doubts about whether they have a sufficiency of basic foods (not to mention a surplus. But the urgent need for a thorough congressional investigation of the surreptitious affair is needed far more today than it was in the late nineteenthirties. 42 . 3) To serve as a deterrent to future officials who might be tempted to "revise" or "falsify" farm records. Therefore.
after more than three decades the once spindly sapling has developed into a well-anchored tree. Entirely aside from the dollar's comparative purchasing value in each case.Chapter Six CLEARING THE ATMOSPHERE Fraud generally lights a candle for justice to get a look at it. Sincere readers will ask them in order to gain the full measure of truth. Instead. for the sake of clarity as well as of accuracy. we have emphasized pounds. To illustrate. we imported 900. Anonymous IN THEIR intense economic distress in 1933 the American people wanted to believe the agricultural overproduction theory. a pound of beef weighed 16 ounces in 1900 and still weighed 16 ounces in 1965! The frightening truth is that our beef imports in the middle nineteen-sixties are more than one thousand times those at the turn of the century. comparisons in value except in government spending and some areas of trade where volume is not applicable. entrenched bureaucrats whose jobs depend on perpetuating the surplus food ruse will seek to divert public opinion and concern into inconsequential bypaths. The author is fully aware that this mandrake growth cannot be uprooted quietly nor soon nor easily. This national pride supplied a favorable hothouse in which the "make-America-over" contingent in the Department of Agriculture knew they could propagate their ruse. so far as practicable.000. Discussion of a subject so vast and complex. is certain to give rise to many questions. Now. When comparing farm imports of 1900. There will be screams of pain on all sides. Since colonial times they had enjoyed the comforting sense of self-sufficiency in major food commodities.000 pounds in 1965. with imports of 1965. We have avoided. let's anticipate some of the more pertinent questions. 43 . for example. Therefore.000 pounds of beef in 1900 and 942. with every angle enmeshed in ideological and political controversy and the entire proposition clouded by socialistic confusion. Question. why not take into consideration the cheaper dollar of recent years? Answer.
These figures are cited from TECHNICAL BULLETIN No.Question. As we observe elsewhere in this study. Question. hogs in 1878. we exported 2. Whether the 1966 steer dresses out at more beef than its 1888 relative is a pathetically irrelevant question in the light of the greater truth that in the 18 years. or nineteen-sixties. But it must be stressed over and over—our farm production glories were not attained in the nineteen-forties.000 tons of beef while importing only 3. corn in 1897. Is it fair to compare hogs per capita (.900 in 1878 and .620. had it not been for the productive advantages gained through farm technology after World War I. But is it not true. But improved breeding since the late eighteen-hundreds has greatly increased meat production per hog. Here are a few examples for which comparative records are available: The number of cattle per capita reached an all-time peak in 1888. 1882 to 1899. oats in 1915. peaches in 1900. when comparing the number of cattle per capita of total population before 1900 with the number today. The dressed weight of the average steer of 75 years ago. wheat in 1891. scourging famine might well have swept the nation before Pearl Harbor. rye in 1872.261 in 44 . Our peak in butter production occurred in 1896. wool in 1885. buckwheat in 1877.000 tons (dressed weight) that came in as live cattle. not including more than 1. And this is grandly true. The spurious overproduction theory was "sold" to the American people mainly on the basis of one argument: modern technology (increased know-how and improved machines) had given farmers prodigious production powers.000 tons. when compared with the weight of the average animal of today is inconsequential against the alarming truth that before 1912 we were the world's largest beef exporting nation and today we lead the world in beef imports and the hard fact that we are hence not self-sustaining. apples in 1896.800 tons.780. milk cows in 1870. issued in March. potatoes in 1895. cotton in 1911. They are found in the past.900. 1941 by the United States Department of Agriculture. sweet potatoes in 1882. sheep in 1883. we exported only 406. 764. But in a comparable 18 year period. that the great strides in cattle breeding through the years are ignored? Does not the steer today dress out at considerably more beef than its "scrawny" counterpart did 80 years ago? Answer. 1948 to 1965. nineteen-fifties.000 tons of beef while importing 6.
Americans are consuming only about 300 pounds of dairy products per capita today (in terms of whole milk). of the benefits have trickled down to the farmer. but few. very few. Moreover. the 1964 cow produced 7. Does not the modern milk cow produce many hundreds of pounds more milk than did her in-bred.1966) without considering weight and quality improvements in the meantime? Answer.568. This reflects one of the outstanding contributions of technology to American farming. The average hog reaches federal inspection slaughter today at approximately 240 pounds live weight. Despite these improvements. the greatest corn growing country in the world is on an import basis for pork! What the 1878 hog weighed in comparison with its 1966 cousin has no relation whatever to the deplorable and dangerous truth that we have lost self-sufficiency in pork. we are eating less than 7 pounds of butter per capita in 1966 in comparison with 17. According to the United States Department of Agriculture. technology or any other escape argument. milking machines.880 pounds of milk. In fewer words. type. in comparison with slightly above 800 pounds in 1909 and perhaps well over 800 pounds in 1900. we would be evading the full truth if we failed to link this trend with the fact that we suffered our first import balance of pork in 1953 and that since then we have imported more pork every year than we exported. Pork and corn are interchangeable. 1882 to 1899. perhaps double the rate of the 1900 cow. To equalize pork production in the nineteen-sixties with that in the eighteen-hundreds would require the admission that the 1878 animal went to slaughter weighing no more than 60 pounds.000 tons of pork in the 18 years. The drastic decline in hog numbers per capita of total population cannot be absorbed in quality. 45 . in 1964 only 47 percent. little more than tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum in the light of the momentous fact that American farmers exported 5. compared with only 733.000 tons in the comparable period. of course. Question. 1948 to 1965. Realistically. hard-surfaced highways. emaciated relative back in the nineteenth century? Answer. weight. This is. Modern refrigeration. vastly improved feeding practices—all of these factors have enhanced our dairy industry. In 1900 the United States produced 66 per cent of the world's corn. Accurate dairy production records are not available for the years before 1924—only the number of cows and a few dairy manufacturing statistics.9 pounds in 1909.
It is reasonable to assume that Americans turned to butter substitutes for economic reasons and not through preference. Let's turn our reasoning around and see if something else might have happened to encourage the rise in margarine consumption. It has occurred in innumerable other foods and goods—find a substitute because of high costs. farmers received only 44 cents out of every dollar the consumer spent for dairy products in 1965. In condemnation of mounting imports in relation to lower tariffs. union scale truck drivers. They declared up and down the land that tariffs were the sole cause of war and that free trade would usher in everlasting universal peace and eradicate every semblance of war and international discord from the earth. because of climbing production costs. He resents the army of high-salaried officials in the dairy processing industry. mounting wholesale. We have talked to hundreds of them. History and 46 . We were manufacturing and consuming margarines back in the late eighteen-eighties. And he well knows the dairy business at the production end cannot long survive with this increasing array of profit-absorbers between him and the consumer. He wants a larger share of the consumer's dollar. He is clearly aware that relief must be sought in the area of distribution channels. Perhaps the Hull-Sayre approach in 1933 and 1934 offered the only novel excuse. In fact. jobber and retail labor rates. 1966 issue of MARKETING AND TRANSPORTATION SITUATION. The remaining 56 cents was absorbed between the farm gate and the consumer's kitchen. There have been few new arguments in favor of free trade since the Constitutional Convention. With scores of New England and Middle West dairy farmers going out of business every month. The dairy farmers do not want government hand-outs.Yet. According to the February. Butter substitutes are not new on the American scene. this is a typical American practice. Question. it is erroneous to jump to the conclusion that margarine is responsible for this decline in butter consumption. published by the Department of Agriculture. a matter discussed at length in a later chapter. it is an urgent matter for American consumers to realize the seriousness of the situation. how is it possible for farmers and manufacturers to increase and maintain exports without increasing imports? Is not foreign trade a two-way proposition? Answer. He knows he cannot get this as long as milk distribution remains solely in the hands of middle-man interests.
S." Is the American farmer getting a fair two-way representation at our tariff negotiating conferences? As one looks back over more than 30 years of tariff bargaining and notes the sacrifices our farmers have paid before the altar of One-Worldism. "The average duty on U. The New Deal's Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act and our entire experience in two-way trade negotiations since 1933 have been a continuing record of betrayal of the American farmer. Is not the increased use of rayon and acetates responsible for many ills in our wool and cotton industries? Answer. In 1964. including Iron Curtain countries? Secretary Freeman confesses (although he reports the fact with evident pride) that.000. non-agricultural imports. but these imports represent the wool from more than 18 million sheep—a direct blow against farmers who could and should have raised these sheep! How many bales of cotton have been replaced by synthetic fiber loses much of its statistical vigor in the light of a recent report from the United States Department of Commerce to the effect that importations of cotton textiles in 1966 will soar to a new record of 1.000 pounds of raw wool. we imported 140 million pounds of canned hams. as 47 . our 1965 imports of woolen textiles were equivalent to 156. according to the Department of Agriculture. This is not a rash charge. it rouses the suspicion that the "drive-every-body-onto-relief" idea is still active in State Department thinkingQuestion.S. as cited elsewhere in this book. Secretary of 'Agriculture Orville Freeman.Hitler took care of that one. Certainly man-made fibers are reducing the demand for wool and cotton. to jump to the conclusion that synthetic fibers justify government control over cotton growing and sheep raising and that the only remedy is to subsidize these two segments of farming is specious and impracticable. for example. Are our tariff negotiators negotiating for the American farmer or are they still pursuing the One-World mirage of a big happy family of nations. Not only did these imports throw thousands of textile mill workers out of jobs. it has been thoroughly admitted by a member of the Johnson Cabinet.75 billion square yards. says the American farmer has less protection against foreign imports of farm commodities than do farmers of any other major nation. agricultural imports is lower than that imposed on U. For example. But again. of which 27 per cent came from behind the Iron Curtain. The problem lies elsewhere.
3 billion dollar payments deficit. and our rapidly depleting gold reserves. He added that the deficit represented by our textile-apparel imports accounted for more than half of our 1.31 billion square yards in 1965 and 735 million square yards in 1959. the sacred cow of free trade remains immune! Congress and the President should supply America with straight-from-theshoulder answers to the following questions: If the drastic lowering of tariffs since 1933 was done to promote world peace. Here are three serious problems wrapped up in one administrative package—our weakening wool industry. it is incredible that our rapidly increasing importations of cotton and wool manufacturers remain unmentioned. where is the peace? If more than 30 years of failure has not demonstrated the futility of this theory. what is that rationale? How can the American farmer be helped if our imports cause unemployment among workers who constitute his most dependable customers? Is it a sound government policy to subsidize cotton growers while cotton textile imports rise to new heights? Why are increasing farm and industrial importations not reckoned among the causes of the drainage from our gold reserves? Was Secretary of Commerce Connor in error when he said our textileapparel imports accounted for more than one-half our deficit in international payments? 48 . According to THE NEW YORK TIMES of August 14. Conner has urged American textile manufacturers to increase their exports in order to counteract the evils of mounting imports on our troublesome balance-of-payments crisis. Secretary of Commerce John T. 1966.compared with 1. Yet. This is a startling statement. our cotton growing muddle. Coming from a Cabinet member it takes on additional importance—our importations of manufactured textiles account for more than half of the international deficit in payments! If President Johnson and his economic advisers are as concerned about our diminishing gold reserves as press reports indicate they are. how much longer will be required before it is abandoned? If free trade is based on some other rationale.
Colton. This. Charles C. That this infamous act. but to determine in advance how large a dose of creeping. was signed into law by President Roosevelt on August 27. the oft heard "My Friends" salutations had sufficiently mesmerized the nation so that the planned surgery could proceed safely without additional anesthesia. Peek's judgment of its 49 . 1936 does not in any manner minimize the seriousness of the measure or lessen the importance of this analysis. Secretary Wallace's statement about surplus production even among minor crops and eggs and dairy products. are usually concealed. It was intended to test the extent of regimentation the public would accept rather than the degree it would bear. 1935. It better reveals motives camouflaged deep within the New Deal's entire farm control program and substantiates George N. among which was the Potato Control Act.Chapter Seven THE SAGA OF THE SPUD The true motives of our actions. to change the figure of speech. On August 20. 1935. not to find out what they should do. obviously was one of these. Therefore. but the gilded and hollow pretext is pompously placed in front for show. crawling Socialism the American people would swallow without suspecting they were being dosed. or. given a tranquilizer. Congress approved several administration proposed amendments to the original Agricultural Adjustment Act. discussed in the previous chapter. the "make-America-over" contingent found it advisable to send up an occasional trial balloon. to become effective December 1 of the same year. was nullified when the Supreme Court declared the AAA processing tax unconstitutional in January. it was evident that proponents of complete collectivism were carefully probing their way. like the real pipes of an organ. before it could be applied to the next year's potato crop. THROUGHOUT the early years of the New Deal. The rarely publicized Potato Control Act of 1935 had already demonstrated that the American people were ripe for the Marxian harvest. along with the accompanying amendments.
that is. that regulations have "been carried out under the democratic process.authors. .000 bushels of potatoes to be divided among growers at quotas set by state and county boards. from grower to refiner. An appointive Cabinet member setting farm labor wages! Yet. Four main steps describe it: 1) It set a total allotment of 226." To this day it remains a blot against the entire sugar industry. this one directly traceable to President Roosevelt's desk. 1937.. that they "admired everything Russian . . can find scant basis for their hero-worship leniency. The major difference between it and other crop control provisions then in effect was found in the new and extreme means by which it was to be enforced or rather in the penalties it imposed.500.. There is nothing controversial or ambiguous about the 1935 potato control legislation. was the arbitrary wage-fixing provision of the 1937 Sugar Control Act. If President Roosevelt did not know the full viciousness of the Potato Control Act and the subversive and freedom-destroying intents of its proponents." And let it be said here without qualification that latter-day apologists for New Deal blunders and audacity. who claim that President Roosevelt was not aware of the true aims of that Wallace-Tugwell-Ezekial coterie. It sought specifically to control by federal law the sale of all potatoes in the United States. The legislation was approved September 1. although limply. 1937. Its most radical encroachment on human liberty was included in the provision authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to set wages of workers in sugar beet and cane fields as one of the conditions for the farmer's participation in the government's acreage control payment program. Another and even more flagrant trespass into our free enterprise system. On March 1. his defenders are simple crediting him with official idiocy. 50 . that submission to this malignant loot of constitutional liberty was mute and timorous. Its phraseology left nothing in doubt It was the most distinctly socialistic of all the New Deal's trial balloons. the President sent a special message to Congress. on page 132 of his 1940 annual report. proposing a new sugar quota law to supplant the Jones-Costigan Act of 1934. . Secretary Wallace explains. 2) Individual farmers were permitted to market tax free part or their entire quota. To them Russia was the Promised Land and the sooner the United States became like Russia the better for everyone.
a startling similarity between this law and a law which provoked an early event in our history known as the Boston Tea Party and with a spate of British abuses which produced the Declaration of Independence. contrary to what the USD A reported publicly we had exported 2. To this day it remains a legislative illegitimate." one is encouraged to think that. No member of Congress since 1935 has ever pointed proudly to the Potato Control Act and informed his constituents.000 tons while importing 4. Secretary Wallace was later quoted as having disclaimed responsibility for its enactment." produces a startling revelation.858. Only in 6 of those 33 years did our exports exceed imports. similar results. For the past 31 years Washington inquiries have failed to find a hint as to its authorship. an unacknowledged illegal child brought forth in murky halls and dank inner sanctums of the "planned economy. that's what I did for you!" No official keeps among his cherished mementos the pen with which President Roosevelt signed this iniquitous measure into law. next from the point of view of the consumer's welfare." Note the two words—"first offense.971. . Now comes the clincher—any American farmer who sold unstamped potatoes in excess of his growing allotment or any American housewife who bought such unstamped potatoes would be subject to a "fine for the first offense.000 tons of potatoes in three decades before the New Deal. In other words. accomplished peacefully. The 33 year story of potatoes from 1900 to 1932. will follow today. even after they were "revised. the truth is that we suffered unnecessary imports of 2.3) Any potatoes sold in excess of the quota must bear a government issued stamp at the rate of three-fourths of a cent per pound (or 45 cents a bushel or 75 cents per hundred weight). show that. There is of course. A careful examination of the records of the United States Department of Agriculture. Reading the Declaration's recital of complaints against George III "For imposing taxes on us without consent . once the American people are properly informed." Now let's examine the entire potato situation to date. first from the farmer's standpoint. inclusive. . With the New Deal came the law that would not only have thrown American housewives and farmers into jail for violating it but would 51 . "See.113.000 tons." They carry but one meaning for the second and later violations: jail sentences would be imposed in addition to fines.
" If the New Deal had left the English language with any power to convey meaning. When considering the effect of these imports on American farmers. all of which are made from potatoes and none of which the government includes in potato imports. Why worry about a little misrepresentation like 4 million tons of potatoes? Because it was dishonest. The difference is no statistical error. and dried potatoes. A lone motive is hinted at in a statement made by John B. Mr. statistical survey preceded or accompanied this law on its unprotested way through Congress. Hutson said it. most of them purposefully designed to keep the American people in ignorance about their food resources. Director of the Agricultural Adjustment Act. dextrin made from potatoes. potato flour. The Roosevelt Administration is using the un-American Potato Control Act as a trial balloon and if we get by with this. in an address at Boston. we intend in the future. Remember." No factual.000 tons which careful sleuthing reveals. against the 4.. telling his Boston audience. to stabilize both production and prices to the benefit of both the grower and the consumer.. Hutson was in effect. that is unless the intention was to harm the farmer and imperil the food supply of the American people by making them dependent upon precarious foreign trade. to clamp fines and jail sentences on both the consumers and the growers in order to give the government complete control over the nation's food supply.000 tons. but he did permit the public to peek through a crack of the door at government purposes: "The program is part of a general plan . The true potato import picture is revealed when we add potato starch.have further increased our dependence on foreign lands for a basic food crop.971. there is no reason at all for the government to separate these figures. Hutson. November 4. 1935. He judiciously avoided any references to the summary penalties the law imposed.810. Because it came at a time when regimentation conspirators were fashioning a law to throw farmers and housewives into jail for failing to bow before the sacred cow of "burdensome surpluses. The government records made public show a total importation between 1900 and 1932 of only 2. It is another of the numerous examples of deceptive bookkeeping by government agencies. The Potato Control Act was "part of a general plan." Not the least evidence that this legislation cloaked more sinister aims is found in the fact that in its origin and passage 52 .
There is another problem. The farmer's reply must be to catch the pig. this means that the American potato grower could not possibly compete in the European market. shrubbery and flower beds the frightened animal plunges frantically. with Happy close behind. and roast it. which was a normal potato year for American farmers. In one of his exploits. He plows through it—cutlery. Happy's clutching fingers no more than an inch or two from the slippery porker's tail. But the eagerness with which the architects of regimentation in the Department of Agriculture and the free trade idealists in the State Department were chasing their ideologies can be compared with the behavior of an early comic strip character—Happy Hooligan. for an average of 227 bushels per acre. dishes and food flying in all directions.-000 bushels at an average acre yield of 329 bushels—over 66 per cent above our average! In practical terms.835. The 1965 yield was the highest on record—344 bushels. In a later chapter this obstacle to export will be considered with reference to our export wheat. chasing the mirage of overproduction. The three highest yielding European countries grew over 400.000. and underproduction. especially when we consider lower production costs in Europe. Then they must clear away the trail of wreckage. Through fences. But Happy catches the pig! Cynical government officials regard farmers as Happy Hooligans.000 bushels of potatoes at acre yields ranging from 203 bushels in Sweden to 339 bushels in Belgium.000 bushels at the rate of 198 bushels per acre. government pressure on farmers to use more and more commercial fertilizers. It does not enter Happy's one-track mind to go around the table.no mention was made of the real problems our potato growers had been encountering: unprofitably low yields. Finally the pig darts in at an open dining room door. twelve European potato growing nations produced a total of 2. The pig plunges under a fully set dinner table toward an open door on the opposite side of the room.700. But the climb over the last 40 years has been made almost solely by 53 . It is true that our acre yields of potatoes have been gradually brought up close to those of our world competitors. Floating around in the potato wreckage are the two problems already mentioned. Happy is chasing a runaway pig. Taking the then-representative year of 1929. United States growers produced a crop of 357.800.
phosphoric acid and potash. the former must be condemned when we consider the benefit of both consumer and grower. As late as the beginning of the present century.use of more and more commercial fertilizer and certified seed. The latter is commendable. What the actual loss in nutrients. vitamins and minerals the potato consumer suffers from this craze for high yields at the sacrifice of quality must remain a matter for conjecture.000 pounds per acre. not only exterminating such soilbuilding creatures as earthworms but destroying natural soil bacteria on which normal soil functions depend." cannot be questioned. That officials in the Department of Agriculture and the farmer himself must divide the responsibility is obvious. One experiment station in 1927 reported that test plots indicated that potatoes responded profitably to applications as high as 2. 54 . The United States Department of Agriculture and Food and Drug Administration remain mute to overtures that they make a scientific test to determine the nutritional difference between food grown by natural methods and those by the artificial dosings with chemical fertilizers. heavy applications of commercial fertilize are sterilizing the soil. What penalties are consumers paying for this desertion of natural fertility for the bright-horizon realm of artificial fertilization? Studies made in California three years ago indicated that heavy chemical fertilizer applications have reduced the potato's specific gravity approximately 20 per cent in the last 10 to 15 years. usually called "technology. What penalties are American farmers paying for following this advice? According to numerous independent studies that are considered free from pressures exerted by large chemical fertilizer manufacturers. In terms of retail value. That eventual soil sterility will result from this modern fetish. (Specific gravity is the relation of solid matter to moisture). farmers were using only light applications of chemical fertilizers and many depended entirely on livestock manures to supplement natural soil fertility. Of course yields rose—30 per cent from 1900 to 1929 but over 170 per cent since 1930. By the early nineteen-twenties federal and state agricultural authorities began urging growers to boost the potato yields via greatly increased applications of "complete" fertilizers—nitrogen. this means the housewife gets less actual potato and more water for her money the more chemical fertilizer the grower applies.
Ordinary white varieties are showing up in supermarkets artificially dyed. Many potato growers have discovered that red varieties. Wherever potatoes have been grown they have been called the "poor man's" food. The County Agricultural Agent. are refusing to purchase dyed tubers. It is the Department of Agriculture. such as the Seneca. Likewise a recent study made by the Economic Research Service of the United States Department 55 . but actually they are a large part of the nation's diet. Many. the urban housewife's complaints about machine wounds and the darkening of potato tissues are lost somewhere in the ever-increasing numbers of middlemen between her and the farm gate. from mansion to hovel.especially in relation to potato quality. This not only reflects the potato's nutritional worth and comparative ease of culture. bring higher prices. The foolish practice of dyeing potatoes particularly sweet potatoes. Often the wound renders as much as half the tuber unusable. also defeats the end it seeks to attain. Yet potato production in the United States has declined from 205 pounds per capita of total population in 1900 to 143 pounds in 1965. Housewives find water in which potatoes are washed turning decidedly red. Several soil authorities suspect that the darkening results largely from overuse of chemical fertilizers to increase yields. If she lodges her objections with the supermarket manager. can stop the foolish and perhaps dangerous dyeing practice. it indicates that potato prices usually offer the shopping housewife her "best food buy" at her local retail store. last week or today show from 90 to 99 per cent of the individual tubers damaged by harvest machine wounds. working through state extension facilities that recommends excessive use of commercial fertilizers. In recent years blackened tissues of potatoes are among frequent complaints of purchasers. Inspection of potatoes in grocery bins last year. to whom would he report? Where does the responsibility for our potato troubles rest? Directly at the door of the United States Department of Agriculture. As we shall see later in discussing the role of farm produce marketing. if authorized by state and federal agricultural departments. The Department of Agriculture has ample research facilities to determine once and for all the nutrient destroying effects of over-fertilization.
42 pounds (weight at the farm) the grower received 35. plus palatability. Second. Since 1933 we have imported over 160 million bushels of potatoes. Tuber harvesting wounds are driving housewives to substitute foods. Why? With potatoes. wholesale.7 cents for it. through the effective Extension machinery they can encourage small farmers near the larger urban centers. the farmer received only 38 per cent of what the housewife paid the retailer. For the 10. and therefore suffers minimum handling losses.of Agriculture indicated potato consumption as food decreased from 198 pounds per capita in 1910 to 100 pounds in 1963. 57. And the increasing distances from grower to consumer are exacting tolls in consumption both via nutritutional value and price. Roughly. That the penalties for overemphasis on mass production are catching up with the American commercial potato grower can no longer be ignored. for a crop that is not highly perishable. jobber and retail costs. as with most other unprocessed food crops among fruits and vegetables. yet are not included in potato imports. But government foreign trade records reported only 90 million bushels. The remaining 70 million bushels came in as potato starch. (b) nutritional value. the question logically arises: What can the Department of Agriculture do to help both the potato grower and the potato consumer? First. dried potatoes and dextrin. particularly 56 . Third. But let's note the effects of retail prices on this trend. Department spokesmen can cease their twaddle about the marvels of technology and inform the American people that in only 4 of the last 18 years have our farms produced enough potatoes to supply export demands and meet domestic requirements. (c) nutritional value in relation to consumer costs. three main factors influence the rise or decline in per capita consumption rates—(a) visible or external quality. Because this survey is pointed chiefly toward the Federal Government.8 cents. potato flour. it can adopt a policy of telling the entire truth about our potato situation. The deteriorating effects of over-fertilization are both palatably and nutritionally known. she paid (average through the year) 93. The remainder. they can tell them we are under producing. Since 1960 these processed products have represented 60 per cent of our potato imports.9 cents. When the urban housewife in 1965 purchased a ten pound bag of potatoes. was made up in transportation.
296 Truth is always consistent with itself and needs nothing to help it. boggled at assuming mutually exclusive. and stop trying to sell the American people the fraudulent theory that farm income can best be increased by making farm commodities scarce. without any additional legislation they can encourage formation of more voluntary. 57 . The USDA has not.in the East. an obvious ruse. Peek were stricken from the record. the other by higher cost. contradictory positions. Fourth. to gain bureaucratic control rather than to truly aid the farmer. to increase potato production and take off the consumer's back the cost of intolerably long haulage. It is evident this theory is employed. And yet governments keep interfering and employing the scarcity theory. EVEN IF all the statistical evidence here cited were ignored and the testimony of such unimpeachable witnesses as George N. in the other. Chapter Eight THE MYSTERY OF CIRCULAR NO. the simple but factual story of would be enough. It is enough to say that. and increased consumption to still greater production—and everybody benefits. we have a foolish theory and. Government interference with the law of supply and demand penalizes both the grower and the consumer—the one by decreased demand. It is a generally accepted principle of sound economics that lower consumer prices lead to increased consumption. aimed directly at gaining for the grower a larger share of the customer's potato dollar. nor. One wonders how the government can talk both "scarcity" and "overproduction" at the same time. in 33 years. free local and/or small group potato cooperative marketing associations. Fifth and last they can turn to established and long-tested principles by abandoning the outmoded Marxist theory that agriculture should be controlled. Archbishop John Tillotson. at adopting policies that they assume the average person will pass over as too "complex" to understand. and unneeded middlemen. in the one case.
296 was authorized sometime in the Hoover Administration. This was no ordinary assignment. The important time factor is—It was not printed until the summer or autumn of 1933. as subsequent events proved. we would be facing a serious underproduction problem. In this instance it not only convicts the unnamed perpetrators but it exposes the maliciousness of the theory behind their chicanery. Then the writing. done by Hazel K. Hazel Stiebling and Medora Ward declared in substance: "Under consumption is our problem—If our people were eating all the food they need and the food required to keep them at a safe nutritional level. Arthur M. Against this tide of deceptive theory and this ill wind of political thinking. Then the manuscript was then turned over to the U. Government Printing Office. AGRICULTURAL CIRCULAR No. There was still an interest in disseminating facts. Congress was considering something which later became the legislation setting up the Federal Farm Board. and. Seldom indeed is proof so complete and conclusive encountered that it skirts rumor. 58 . even in Hoover's day. It came at a time when there were already powerful forces working for a Socialist agriculture. That copies were distributed to the Library of Congress.S. already taken embryonic form. Secretary of Agriculture had issued his decree that overproduction was the ailment and curtailment was the remedy. It was released by the Printing Office in December. opinion. of the Bureau of Home Economics of the United States Department of Agriculture. Ward. this assertion makes very interesting reading! The time factor is important in getting a clear conception of the amazing role this publication played. and by Medora M." Considering the fact that the overproduction thesis was already being advanced.enough to substantiate the charge that sinister and un-American purposes motivated the intentions and actions of the authors of farm control. In publishing truth. the necessary research apparently was completed in late 1931 or early 1932. Hyde. First came long and painstaking research. senior food economist. it was a task that required courage and professional sincerity. The overproduction hoax had. 1933. The publication having been authorized in the Hoover Administration. after the New Deal had gotten its overproduction hoax running on all cylinders. assistant food economist. or suspicion of fact and brings us directly to the truth. Stiebling.
November 4." Then followed a general analysis of government efforts to "legislate prosperity" for agriculture. 59 . carefully analyzed by different classes of population. then senior Senator from Iowa. it is quite obvious." said the Senator. they have never heard. "indeed. Senator Lester J. members of Congress and other government officials can be safely assumed by the routine followed in the release of all other bulletins. was the first character on the stage. in Washington. it is one of the most important documents ever issued by the Government. Representing years of patient research. pamphlets and circulars of general interest. G. they do not of themselves remove the cause or effect recovery. let me cite to you two other studies which reach quite different conclusions regarding this problem. He contrasted the Roosevelt-Wallace machinations with constructive agricultural recovery. 296.all public libraries. "Perhaps I am old-fashioned. Dickenson. I am classified by the Administration as one of those belonging to the horse and buggy age. "For here is set forth. "As against the ideas expounded in Secretary Wallace's AMERICA MUST CHOOSE. the future food requirements of the nation. But no one yet has been able to explain to me how a full dinner pail for the worker is to be provided under a program of scarcity and high prices. All this resembles what H. Both these authorities reach the conclusion that the real problem of agriculture today is not overproduction but under consumption. Then the Senator lit the fuse which ignited the New Deal's hurried action to cover up their "blunder" in publishing the factual CIRCULAR No. Wallace and Tugwell took office but of which. on "Agriculture and Its Future. Mount Vernon. just six months after Messrs. 1935. "Artificial restoratives and blood transfusions may bridge over a crisis in a serious illness. 1933. The other is the Department of Agriculture's own CIRCULAR No. One is called AMERICA'S CAPACITY TO CONSUME and is issued by the impartial." Senator Dickenson prefaced the main theme of his address with a statement that unfortunately was lost in the more spectacular revelations that were to follow. In an address at the Cornell Forum Conference at. Wells has described most aptly as an attempt to raise the temperature by boiling the thermometer. scientific organization known as the Brookings Institution. In the frenetic drama that followed. Said he. Iowa. 296 published in November.
"When these quantities are multiplied by 125. . the entire food production of the United States failed to meet the needs of this moderate cost diet by over twenty billion pounds and exceeded the nation's minimum requirements by only thirty billion pounds! "If this was the condition at a time when there was little industrial unemployment. In the face of this appalling situation . mind you. such is the fact— a fact which certainly cannot be reconciled with a program of curtailment. of 959 pounds. . calling for a per capita food supply of 1. . does placing farm production under further restrictions appear to be the course of wisdom and common sense?" No New Deal official ever answered the Senator's pertinent question. And it was. we should be faced with almost a famine in many important foodstuffs. . 1934 issue of CONSUMER . There were more urgent matters to take care of —CIRCULAR No. for the average person who works. the food required for the American people each year reaches truly amazing proportions. 2) one of minimum cost. but we are not producing enough to supply that adequate amount fully . were these normal needs supplied.233 pounds of food. "Outlined in the Department's CIRCULAR are three diets: 1) one of moderate cost. GUIDE then published by the Agricultural Adjustment Administration in conjunction with the Bureau of Home Economics and Bureau of Labor Statistics.655 pounds annually. to get all the milk we would 60 . But the important part of these computations is that.000. requiring 1. then what must it be today after six years of depression? The problem now is no longer one of more under consumption but of actual and serious undernourishment for literally millions of our citizens.."We are so accustomed to thinking of America as a land of plenty that it is difficult to believe that half the people live below a minimum dietary standard. 296 must be suppressed. needed for life itself. and that. necessary for health.000 persons [Editor's note: 1933 population] . 3) an emergency diet. for even a prosperous year like 1928. In the February. a bit of condemning truth slipped out: We are not only consuming less milk than would be best for us. Yet. Up to that time there had been in all the numerous publications and press releases of the New Deal but one slip up in the plan to hide the truth about our serious underproduction of food..
" Another month of silence and a telephone call to the Chief Librarian in the Department of Agriculture encountered a sixteen word reply to the question. Government Printing Office. . 296 at the Government Printing Office bore no fruit until access to the publication files indicated it had been "recalled for revision. One of the players was on key! This revelation clashed with Chester A. the first evidence that a hurried campaign of suppression was under way was the sudden "unavailability" of the publication at the Library of Congress. "." 61 . "we are unable to learn why the revision is taking so long. Davis's proposal to "eliminate 6.000 cows and heifers." Because no more than three to four weeks are required normally for this type of procedure.S. 296 was too scientific in nature so we have reissued it as FARMER'S BULLETIN 1757. Government Printing Office retains the type forms and as soon as the first "run" of such a publication is exhausted the forms are put back on the presses and another printing made. "What has become of CIRCULAR No. the U. It was apparent that Senator Dickenson's address was the first inkling that New Deal officials had had of the existence of CIRCULAR No.000." It is not necessary to stress the fact that no blunder like that ever occurred again. don't ever tell the people the truth about their food supply again!" But let's continue with CIRCULAR No.need to put everyone on an adequate diet at moderate cost. 296—Here it is: CIRCULAR No. Evidently word was passed around to this effect: "For heaven's sake. a wait of almost two months brought forth the admission. 296! Also. the dairy industry has more production capacity than the market requires.. By the time the government's food restriction machinery began functioning in high gear in 1934.." It ran counter to Secretary Wallace's judgment as his 1934 report indicated on page 49. "we have no idea what has become of it. "not on shelf.S. 296. . It will have to develop means of controlling the supply." Similar efforts to learn the status of CIRCULAR No. Requisitions for it were returned marked. This was a discordant note in the overproduction symphony. inquiry made to library officials elicited the information. . 15. we would need 15 million more cows than we now have." When this continued for several weeks.500 copies of the CIRCULAR had come from the presses of the U.000 to 7. According to routine practice.000.
then is a problem every home-maker has to solve. 296 at the Senator's office within an hour or the whole affair will be aired on the Senate floor tomorrow morning. the messenger will wait. 296 had not been forgotten by the unnamed individuals in the Department of Agriculture into whose hands rested the obvious task of protecting the overproduction hoax. If you can return it soon. [Another conference]. A letter to the Government Printing 62 . eh—no—not exactly. No." Secretary: "Well. 296. We are sending you a copy by messenger at once. There was not even a slight intimation that a moderate diet for our people would require more food than our farms were producing." Two years later one of Senator Dickenson's office secretaries called the Department of Agriculture and asked if it were possible to obtain a copy of the original CIRCULAR No." Secretary: "Is that your policy with all publications?" Bureau Chief: "Well." During the next few years bits of additional proof accumulated that CIRCULAR No. we cannot allow it to leave our office?" Secretary: "Why?" Bureau Chief: "That is our policy. in fact. the new title was "Diets to Fit the Family Income. Instead of the original title. The new bulletin contained no inference that America was suffering from under consumption." Bureau Chief: "Just a moment. a synopsis of the entire publication— "How to select food wisely." The second paragraph on the first page was.When a copy of FARMER'S BULLETIN 1757 was purchased at the sales office of the Government Printing Office the entire ruse was obvious. we cannot permit it to leave the office. the following conversation took place: Secretary: "Do you have a copy of CIRCULAR No. After the call was shifted several times from one bureau chief to another. I am sorry." Secretary: "Why then does it apply to this particular publication?" Bureau Chief: "Can you wait a minute? [Obviously a conference]. I am sorry. 296 on file?" Bureau Chief: "Yes. please." Secretary: "Will you send a copy to Senator Dickenson's office?" Bureau Chief: "No. here is the situation—Either you have a copy of CIRCULAR No.
by getting a letter in reply over the signature of a bureau head. 296. 2) Two printings. asked six question about the publication: 1) When was CIRCULAR No. 1757? The eventual replies to these questions stand out as something new under the Washington Government sun: 1) the Government Printer to whom the letter was addressed did not answer it.Office dated November 26. it was not answered by a personal or departmental letter—the original letter was returned and the answers were scribbled in numerical order [in pencil] on a page torn from a desk calendar. 1933. 1757 published before CIRCULAR No. B. 2) he turned the letter over to the Department of Agriculture for reply— an unprecedented procedure.500 copies. 296 was withdrawn? 6) What was the date of first printing of F. 296 originally released? 2) How many printings were made? 3) Total copies of all printings? 4) When was it withdrawn from publication? 5) Was F. Later the secretary of a special House of Representatives committee informed this writer that inquiries had shown 63 . 4) June 5. 1945. 5) again unprecedented in government policy—the person who wrote the answers did not sign his name or affix his initials. B. The penciled notations were: 1) December. 3) contrary to all rules of letter answering by government departments. 1936. The original plan behind the inquiries to the Government Printer was predicated on the logical assumption that he would not shoulder the responsibility of handling this political "hot potato" but would do just what he did—turn it over to the Department of Agriculture. pressure could have been brought to bear to force him to reveal the source of the original order to suppress CIRCULAR No. The anonymous reply indicated the scheme had been anticipated. 3) 10. the Department of Agriculture did not answer until January 11. Thus. 5) No. 1935—free stock exhausted. 6) September. 1757 published later. 4) and perhaps for the first time in history. B. although he had all the requested information in his office files and although he continually answers similar questions about other government publications. 1946. F.
that copies of this revealing publication had somehow been removed from all public libraries except from a library in a small city in western New York State. Why?
OUR ONCE BOOMING CATTLE INDUSTRY
ONE OF the strange anomalies in the agricultural history of the United States has been, and is, the public lethargy and official unconcern about the steady decline in our once booming cattle industry. That we have skidded from world leader among beef exporting nations to first place as the world's greatest beef importer in less than seven decades has scarcely caused a ripple in our pleasant and popular delusion of "more than plenty." No long periods of drought or ravaging disease drove this prosperous business from American farms of the Middle West and Far West to the Argentine pampas and to the ranches of South Africa and Australia. On the contrary, the demise of adequate beef production was the direct result of our national farm and foreign policies. What is alarming is that this fatal development has remained unrecognized behind smokescreens of political expediency, governmental blundering, a blind emphasis on urban expansion, and behind it all that "general plan" which lends itself so well to Communist purposes. In the closing years of the last century, the American people made a momentous decision—they chose to become an industrialized nation while letting la healthy agriculture slip from their grasp. This of course, was not a sudden expression of public resolve promised in party platform or proclaimed in statements of legislative or administrative policy. But rather it emerged slowly near the close of our colonization era, the consequence of a trend dimly evidenced since the close of the Civil War, a course along which we, like most nations of western Europe, were unwittingly traveling on the first promising spring-tide swells of the approaching machine age. The first railroad had reached Chicago in 1853. Two years later, St. Louis became the farthest west terminus of the distance-eating iron horse. But they were only temporary pauses in the rising clamor for more and more miles of rail lines. 64
Reports of immeasurable riches in the sands of California drew bands of steel onward and gave volume to the staccato of hammering spikes which even four years of war could not silence. With the completion of the first transcontinental railroad in 1867, the Far West was at last opened up for settlement. Homesteaders from the crowded East, along with immigrants from the Old World, swarmed across the already prosperous farm lands of the Mississippi and Ohio valleys to drive our western boundary to the shores of the Pacific and form the world's mightiest agricultural empire. Exports of American manufacturers and agricultural products mounted rapidly after Lee's surrender, actually tripling in value in the 15 years before 1881. Most of this trade was with the United Kingdom in the form of meat. This sudden upsurge in foreign demands for our goods and our farm produce is explained chiefly in the light of three main facts: 1) Following Napoleon's defeat in 1815, Europe enjoyed what was for Europe an era of comparative freedom from war for the remainder of the century. 2) The United States, as the result of the Civil War, had become a heavy debtor nation and agricultural commodities were our main form of international payment. 3) From the fertile virgin grazing lands and farms of our new agricultural domain, grains and meats moved with efficient dispatch to European customers, commanding choice markets because of their high qualities. Thus, between 1867 and 1891 our exports in general amounted to more than three billion dollars, of which over 77 per cent consisted of farm commodities. But the stage props were moving into place for the great shift. The Civil War had ravaged southern agriculture while northern industrial activities increased on the demands of the conflict. Between 1860 and 1880 the amount of capital invested in eastern manufacturing tripled while the value of manufactured goods rose from two billion to five billion dollars. During this same twenty-year period, while our population increased 60 per cent, the number of factory jobs mounted by more than 200 per cent. It is more than a historical coincidence that between 1880 and 1890 steam power first exceeded water power in total units in this country and that the 1890 census showed for the first time that the value of manufactures outranked the value of farm production. We had ceased to be preponderantly agricultural. Manufacturing was moving away from the tidewater 65
power sites of the Atlantic seaboard and, on clouds of steam, was spreading westward along lines of cheap water traffic and interlacing railroads. In 1870 over 52 per cent of all employed persons were engaged in farming. By 1890 the percentage had declined to 38 per cent. Non-farm exports rose from $79,400,000 in 1870 to $210,500,000 in 1890, a gain of more than 165 per cent in two decades. Of course, foreign export credit could not absorb our greatly accelerated industrial output and continue to accept our previously normal flow of farm products. In this competitive struggle between city and country, between urban industry and agriculture, beef was the first commodity sacrificed on what was later to become the insatiable altar of urbanization. The inevitable calamity struck quickly. In 1904 our beef exports exceeded beef imports by 790 million pounds; in 1912 we suffered our first import balance of beef—the first victim in our gradual descent to dependence on foreign farms for a large array of farm commodities. Europe, bursting into the conflagration of World War I halted our beef decline until 1922, when again we sagged back into import balances. The Roosevelt-Wallace kill-and-plow-under crusade hastened the debacle and in the six year period from 1934 to 1939 beef imports increased over 250 per cent. At the same time, obviously part of the same plan, the State Department, having taken the constitutional duty of tariff control from a supine Congress, had put the final touches on the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. Duties on live cattle imports were reduced between 35 and 40 per cent, effective January 1, 1936. The penalty our already ailing cattle industry paid for the Good Neighbor balderdash is seen in the fact that we imported 2,755,000 head of live cattle from Canada and Mexico during the next five years, in comparison with only 725,000 head in the previous five years. Thus it was Canadian and Mexican cattle raisers that enjoyed the first free dish of New Deal pudding from the soon-to-expand global cuisine of the Hull-Sayre kitchen. Today, 30 years later, the penalty our cattle industry is paying for the brotherhood-of-man dreams in the New Deal scheme to banish war from the earth, can be read on every can of corned beef sold in every store in the United States— "Packed in Argentina," or "Packed in Uruguay." How do high government officials feel today about the fact that we lead the world in beef imports? 66
The answer is found in the August, 1958 issue of FOREIGN AGRICULTURE, page 6. There the trite gimmicks employed to minimize the tragedy are: first, the old import percentage of total production ledgermain; next the would-make-atrain-from-here-to-there artifice, employed by every con man since Cain clobbered Abel. Let's look at the latter first. The article says, If all the beef and veal produced in this country last year  were loaded into refrigerator cars, it would make a train long enough to reach from San Francisco to Boston —a distance of 3,270 miles. A train loaded with last year's imports [beef and veal] would hardly cover the 125 miles from Philadelphia to Washington. In this effusion of excuses is a table, shown below, indicating that our beef imports in 1957 constituted only 3.8 per cent of our total production. Here is an example of official sophistry in its most ridiculous form of deception. An apt comparison is this hypothetical scene: A husband, wife and two small children are talking with the captain of a small yacht. The engineer rushes up excitedly and reports a hole in the hull near the keel. "How big is it?" the captain asks. "About 10 inches square," the engineer answers. The captain smiles selfassuredly and dismisses the report, "We needn't worry; that's only so-an-so per cent of the entire hull surface!" What other logic can be deduced from the table accompanying the 1958 article as follows: "Imports of cattle, beef and veal seem very small when compared with United States production." Imports Production Year Million Million Imports as per cent Average Lbs Lbs. Of Production 1949-53 459 11,241 4.2 1954 261 14,610 1.8 1955 315 15,147 2.1 1956 247 16,094 1.5 1957 597 15,739 3.8 Then follows one of those demonstrations of bizarre reasoning [or lack of reasoning] so prolifically common in almost all the vapid excuses emanating from the Department of Agriculture since production control and free trade joined unholy hands in 1933 to destroy the farm's foundation and 67
make the farmer a supine ward of centralized government. It merits several readings to grasp the full absurdity and stupidity of it: "U.S. agriculture stands to gain from these imports. U.S. trade in cattle and beef provides foreign countries with money to buy U.S. farm commodities." Perhaps somewhere, sometime a government spokesman, crowded into a political or ideological corner and compelled to defend an untenable proposition, has resorted to more preposterous and grotesque explanations, but to date it has not been recorded. But instances of official evasions in relation to beef imports, like Tennyson's brook, runs on and on. Because beef imports continued to rise sharply after 1957, more than doubling in the next seven years, Congress finally awakened and passed a precautionary measure in 1964, stipulating quotas on beef imports if and when the President deemed such restraints necessary. Earlier in the year the Department of Agriculture took notice of the situation and carried an article in FOREIGN AGRICULTURE, February 17, 1964, page 7, summarizing an address delivered by Roland B. Renne, Assistant Secretary of Agriculture for International Affairs, at Memphis, Tennessee, January 28, 1964. Here, typical of all defenders of the agricultural overproduction theory and proponents of One Worldism since 1933, Renne carefully and skillfully avoids discussion of the basic problems and more important facets of our beef situation. He does not mention that our beef imports since 1900-1904 have increased from less than one-half pound per capita to 8 pounds in 1960-1964. Great stress is laid on the vast increase in production of all red meats, yet strangely missing from the analysis is the fact that red meat production averaged 181 pounds per capita in 1900-1904 and only 167 pounds in 1960-1964. But the more serious implications lie in the modern assumption that the opening of our ports to imports is a moral duty the United States owes to every other nation in the world. Note: Beef prices in the United States are currently being influenced by beef imports. The Department of Agriculture recognizes this situation and is moving to do something about it. The main approach has been our negotiation with the leading suppliers—Australia and New Zeeland—to obtain voluntary agreement from them to limit their exports to the United States . . .
. . how does a representative from the State Department or an "expert" from the Department of Agriculture gain the power to enervate our vital cattle industry? Is our Good Neighbor policy a 50-50 proposition? Let Renne answer: The great rise in our beef imports has been encouraged by the increase in import restrictions in other major markets." Why should any foreign nation be "assured" the right to export beef into the United States and thereby add to the economic distress of American farmers? In the light of our Constitution. ." But Roland Renne offers no hint that Congress should. "Other nations that have access to our markets under the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade." Other nations have certain rights to our markets! Why rights? Rights can be guaranteed only within one nation. Instead. goes to foreign governments and in substance says. (better known as GATT) have certain rights just as we have such rights of access to other markets for the sale of our products . For a fact." Roland Renne says that under GATT "the exporter is assured a market for a specified amount of his product. with hat respectfully in hand. Today the United States is the only major beef market without any quantitative restrictions and with a very nominal fixed import duty. unless one is setting up a world government. Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution says: "To regulate commerce with foreign nations. the Department of Agriculture "is moving to do something about it. place a suitable barrier at our ports against excess and harmful imports of beef from Australia and New Zealand. under its constitutionally delegated powers. quit exporting so much beef to the United States?" "The basic principle of market-sharing is sound. They stood firm." What is that something? Uncle Sam. please. What has become of the farmer spirit that moved them to stand at the Concord bridge and say "thus far and no farther"—even if it meant war. "Won't you. And then was fired the "shot heard round the world. the One-World philosophy has dominated every administration since 1933. That is. Let's break this confession of failure in past and present international trade agreements down into language that cannot 69 ." says Renne. .Stipulated among the powers of Congress. .
What can be done to resuscitate our cattle industry? 1) Congress should rescue its constitutional duty to regulate international trade from the un-American and socialistic hands into which that duty has fallen.be twisted into anything but the simple and unavoidable truth. It means that Uncle Sam has become so gullible in trade negotiations that countries with an exportable surplus of beef can find no other market unprotected so they dump their beef into the United States. . could and should be put into permanent pastures to graze the cattle. 2) An adequate tariff wall should be erected at once to reduce not only the importations of dressed and processed beef but also live cattle. freely. 5) Take government out of farming and farming out of government. So long as the important policies of production and foreign trade remain in the hands of those who have wrecked our cattle industry. Oh. This can be done on the sound basis that our cattle industry grew under such protection and it is logical that it will recover by the same process. 4) Millions of acres of rolling and hill land now suffering severe soil losses from erosion because they are used for crops. diagnosis without therapy is useless. 3) It has been estimated that a 2 per cent increase in cattle numbers since 1930 would have consumed more grain and forage than American farms have produced in excess of exports and domestic consumption. not only to restore selfsufficiency in beef production but to reduce our heavy importations of cattle hides and leather. particularly wheat. Chapter Ten WHEAT-WHITHER AND HOW? Men are never so likely to settle a question rightly as when they discuss it'. yes! Under GATT these nations "have certain access rights"! Again. been a 70 national wheat dilemma has. Thomas B. not a recovery. it is futile to expect anything but a worsening. Macauley. SINCE THE middle nineteen-twenties our according to government propaganda.
House of Mirrors—whichever direction we turn for a way out we encounter deceptive reflections. too much sophistry—as illustrated in the example cited earlier. In his February. of "baking all our wheat into bread. As mentioned in an earlier chapter." With more political courage the President could have added with a large degree of justification that all phases of the government's farm regulatory policies rightfully belong under the category of "federal interference. but overproduction is not one of them. we are turning to the most costly of all liniments—giving our wheat away. in all honesty. others minimized so far below their true dimensions that they have long ago lost their significance. "A problem cannot be solved unless it is first understood. to ask the question—What. several problems to solve in our longstanding wheat puzzle. how can our wheat dilemma be resolved? Henry Wallace the elder. and wiser. 1960 message to Congress on the wheat situation. is our wheat problem? Government spokesmen." This simple truism applies with particular emphasis to our past and present difficulties." have one stock answer—overproduction. ills that have never been rightly diagnosed. after more than 30 years of costly governmentadministered nostrums to cure our chronic wheat ills. one wonders why the situation is no worse than it is. President Eisenhower diagnosed the trouble as "largely due to federal interference. Secretary of Agriculture said in his 1923 annual report. what should or could the government do? What role should the farmer play? What is the consumer's responsibility? In fewer words. still lumping all our complex agrarian ills into one heterogeneous bundle and calling them "the farm problem. With politics and politicians in the picture."—these have long muddied the water instead of clearing it. several billion dollars past the time. There are. in fact. Now. Too much academic experimentation. too much inexperienced theorizing. It is long past the time. some magnified into frightening economic hobgoblins. That this latest governmental foolishness is done under the flamboyantly silly slogan of "Food For Peace" does not mitigate the asininity or solve the socalled wheat problem." But why have government efforts to control wheat production failed or fallen so far short of legislative and administrative aims and promises? In lieu of our expensive and futile wheat control experiments since 1933. when our national wheat 71 .
These fall into four categories: 1) Americans are eating more fruit and vegetables and utilizing other cereals. the planned result of government control. But what about our mounting wheat exports? Are they not higher now than at any time in our history? It is true that volume exports of wheat are more than three times higher than the 1900-1904 level. our consumption of rice has doubled in the last 50 years. 409 pounds in 1965. we shall have come close to the heart of the entire wheat problem. For example. On the more factual scale of domestic supply (production less exports) our true wheat status can be weighed—368 pounds per capita from 1900 to 1904. So much fright propaganda has flowed out over the nation through the years about the farm-crushing carry-over of wheat that the average citizen may reasonably conclude that unless the farmer's wheat bin is entirely empty at year's end he is heading straight into bankruptcy. 3) Home baking. formerly a major outlet for wheat. When reasons for this decline in wheat consumption are found. it is a product of the spend-yourself-out-of-debt policy dominating Washington thinking. To find the major truths about our wheat problems it is necessary to go to the dining table. based on the scarcity principle. the rate is now somewhere between 160 and 165 pounds. Production averaged 473 pounds per capita in 1900. has all but vanished from the American scene." That sizable carry-overs of wheat on the farm have ceased to be wise and commendable assets and become dangerous liabilities is not found in the practical farmer's philosophy. the ogre-like dimensions dwindle considerably. 173 pounds from 1960 to 1964. 4) Labor costs in transportation and throughout the commercial baking industry (a major factor in determining bread prices) have risen steadily since World War Land even more rapidly over the last 15 years.production and foreign trade in wheat are measured in terms of per capita of total population. In 1900-1904 Americans consumed as food 305 pounds of wheat per capita each year. Relegated into obscurity in the new planned economy is the adage long quoted by farmers—"Good as wheat in the bin. 2) Higher bread prices. have discouraged maximum wheat consumption as food. and our per capita 72 . Only by measuring wheat in total bushels produced can the overproductionists find something to shout about.
produced a total of 1. as follows: Title I.5000.000 000$1. The totals are not easy to determine.000 0020. based on three important reasons: 1) most European countries.200.000 bushels of wheat at an average yield of 36 73 . There are at least six channels through which Food For Peace flows out over the world : sales for foreign currencies under P." Back in the former period. wheat exports were based on actual sales. 480. the "sales.027. remain conjectural. a part of this last cited factor. 3) closely related. Title II. since the end of World War II the total of wheat exports include all wheat and flour given away under various forms of donations and general giveaway practices. formerly our best wheat customers. 2) our wheat enters world trade channels handicapped by per bushel growing costs far above those of our major competitors. in fact.000 0110. As an example. are striving to become self-sufficient in wheat. long-term supply and dollar credit (title IV).500. but here the trick lies in. donations and barter (title III). Donations (Title III) Barter (Title III) Title IV. even if the European Common Market offers no additional barriers.144. How much. famine and other emergency relief (title II). most of our prospective European customers and competitors enjoy acre yields of wheat ranging from 40 to 100 per cent above our average yields. 1964.300.800.000 Increased dollar sales of wheat abroad in the next few years. All of these flow through the agency for International Development programs. L. of these so-called exports will ever come back in the form of actual payments must.660.000 0062. and the like. On page 600 of AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS for 1965 is an interesting and informative statistical table showing the value of wheat and flour sent abroad for the fiscal year ending June 30. are extremely unlikely. at least for the present.000 001.200. highways.foreign sales of wheat have moved up from 129 pounds per capita in 1900-1904 to 222 pounds in 1960-1964.000 0049. Development Total $784. if any.100. fourteen countries in western Europe in 1963. meaning that the currency is spent in the recipient country to build bridges. and this was a normal year.
74 . the friable top soil is left exposed until spring and suffers severely from surface or sheet erosion.000 to 150. Much of this wheat is produced at per bushel costs so far above parity levels set by the government that there are no conceivable means by which the grower can avoid financial loss. As every farmer knows. If it were possible to compute the value of soils lost from hill and steeply rolling land planted to wheat. why do farmers continue to grow wheat year after year and decade after decade where loss is certain before the crop is seeded? The answer is found in the fact that few hill wheat growers keep accurate production cost records. bushels of wheat are grown annually in this country on land unsuited for the crop. if hill-grown wheat costs are so high. if not all of them.000. much less discussed in Washington since the days when Secretary Wallace's granaries began "bursting. almost all wheat grown on hill farms in the eastern half of the United States is winter wheat. By the nature of its culture. Too.000.000." Wheat has been. most. They know they have a few bushels to sell in addition to what they need for food and feed. seeded in early autumn. receive an annual check from the federal treasury for the wheat they do not grow. And most of them advance the argument that they need the straw for livestock bedding and mulching. the total cost would be so prohibitively high that no price juggling ever conceived by the government could justify its production. Reasons for this are simple but highly important.bushels per acre while the United States produced its 1. What penalties have we paid and are we paying from continued growing of wheat on hill farms? From 100. For lack of a protective ground cover. a competitor's yield advantage of 10 more bushels per acre is a formidable marketing obstacle to overcome. But.000. it finds no profitable or practical place on hill or steeply rolling land.142. Now. Second. Millions of acres of once excellent hill farm land in the United States have been ruined or badly damaged by soil losses and gullying from winter wheat fields. They do not know they are losing money with wheat. costs of growing wheat on hill farms are higher because labor-saving machinery is less efficient. Yet a great deal of hill country is sown to wheat. First. to the basic problem—a problem never mentioned. is and always will be a level land crop.000 bushels at an average of only 26 bushels per acre.
Congress and administrative leaders go into a huddle and call in several "shoe experts" from Harvard. It is not long until the shelves of the nation's shoe stores are jammed with "surplus" shoes. Most of these operate in illsuited buildings. In their pedantic analysis of the situation they never think to look into the high-cost factor of shoes produced by the new. What has the government done in the past and what is it doing now to correct this serious evil? To answer this question and at the same time untangle the maze of impractical theories that turn our entire farm control program into a costly farce. Princeton and other universities—not actually shoe experts. every other phase of our national wheat problem will remain secondary. Few of these neo-manufacturers keep cost records. and supervised by men who know little or nothing about shoe making. They draw no line between shoes made by these impractical manufacturers and the low-cost. but professors of economics and sociology—and these soon render a blanket verdict— overproduction. Until this high-cost hill land wheat acreage is taken out of production. so they do not know they are selling their product at a loss. It would. Instead of all shoe manufacturers getting their heads together. town and village in the United States local businessmen start small shoe manufacturing plants. and solving their own problem.And here it cannot be over-stressed that it is this group of hill farmers who annually produce what government farm "experts" carelessly call "surplus" wheat. Naturally. equipped with antiquated machinery. in fact. politicians urge all shoe manufactures to demand from their paternalistic-minded government financial relief directly from the federal treasury—the taxpayer's pocket. Yale. it is necessary to consider an imaginary comparison to reflect fully the absurdities of continuing farm control from Washington. inexperienced manufacturers. Under the seductive assurance 75 . high quality shoes placed on the market by efficient. Let us suppose that in every city. experienced manufacturers. Losses of materials from leaking roofs and flooding basements often exceed the value of all shoes manufactured. they appeal to Washington for help. be "surplus" if only 'ten bushels were grown. in keeping with the popular trend. efficient and inefficient alike. most of them bearing manufacturing costs so high no buyers can be found for them.
To impart a dainty scent of democracy to the gun-in-the-back process. members of Congress who vote larger appropriations year after year to "stabilize the shoe industry" and then go back to their constituents and seek reelection with the argument. making his low-grade shoes. are arbitrarily fined and many lose their homes. but because the government buys up millions of pairs of surplus shoes and stores them in high-rent buildings. "See what I've done for you!" Unfortunately few voters have the courage to reply truthfully.that "the government owes every man a living. plus thousands of wide-ranging inspectors sent out over the nation to enforce the government's regulations. " 76 . Who foots the bill for this impractical. Violators." Congress passes the National Shoe Recovery Act. the American citizen is compelled to pay more than twice the price otherwise he would pay for shoes in a free and competitive market. low-cost manufacturer's output is restricted to comply with the national quota. instead of being forced out of his business because of poor business practice is rewarded by his government to continue in it. the inexperienced manufacturer.000. So. until the government takes over completely). and last. the government permits all shoe manufacturers to vote on whether they are willing to accept a monthly or yearly check from the public purse for the shoes they do not make. fourth. automobiles and bank accounts via government seizure. the Socialists intent on bringing the nation to heel. Who benefits from this preposterous comedy of errors? Chiefly five minority groups: Above all.000 people. And note this fact—the inefficient. Not only is the individual shoe wearer taxed to pay the costs of vast and overlapping shoe control bureaus in Washington. he. An annual shoe quota is established. gives shoes to school children and even utilizes surplus shoes to drive back the forces of Communism in the Fiji Islands and Antarctica. inexperienced. In their train come second. while the experienced. by the way. as an economic necessity he buys fewer shoes and thus the nation surplus shoe ailment is aggravated by the remedy the government prescribes to cure it. (temporarily. high-cost shoe manufacturer continues in business. thousands of little bureaucrats who find remunerative jobs in the ever-expanding Shoe Administration. third. the progressive manufacturer because he is paid for shoes he does not make. socialistic interference in private industry? Every one of our 195.
In 1914 Congress passed the Smith-Lever Act. . Particularly in short consumption are fresh fruits and vegetables—foods needed to supply certain vitamins which are lost by long haulage and storage between grower and consumer. a County Agricultural Agent is employed in each county. . without further legislation or costs to taxpayers. Most of these can and should be grown by hill and rolling land farmers near to town and city markets. ". in cooperation with the various states. ably trained in all matters of practical farming." Turning from this hypothetical comparison to reality. what can and should Be done to bring stability to our vast wheat industry? To answer this constructively it is necessary to go back a half century. as it sets forth. This excellent law was enacted. even on steep slopes. can. the County Agricultural Agent can prove to each farmer conclusively that he might be far better off to allow the land to lie fallow. Americans. beneficial pieces of legislation ever enacted to build a strong and prosperous farming industry. One of the main reasons why so many Americans are subsisting at diet levels below the minimum for health safety is that fruits and vegetables available at town and city markets have been grown several hundred and even thousands of miles 77 . He can accomplish this formidable task simply by convincing hill farmers in his county. . Despite our national boasting about enjoying the world's highest standard of diet. according to dependable nutritionists." Under this act. But land idleness is not by any means necessary. But what could these hill and sloping land farmers grow in the place of wheat? First. solve our national wheat problem. one of the most far-reaching.All you've done for me is to load me with higher taxes in order to compel me to pay doubly high prices for my shoes. This man. men he is well acquainted with and whom he calls by their first names. a qualified graduate from a state agricultural college. At least he would be reducing erosion losses. fall far short of a well balanced diet. in order to aid in diffusing among the people of the United States useful and practical information relating to agriculture and home economics . if permitted by the federal and state governments which employ him. . that they are losing money with wheat and by helping and advising them in adopting profitable substitute cropping plans to fit each particular farm and farmer.
000 sheep. this would mean over 14. a case (32 quarts) of raspberries. That we grow only two pounds of strawberries per capita now is inexcusable because our domestic market would absorb ten times that production if produced within short trucking distance from consumers. apples and apricots are ideal crops for hill land. At the rate of three units to an acre of permanent pasture.000. waiting for the local grower who has vision. blackberries. The need and potential demands are there in nearby urban centers. or boysenberries every summer if these were made available in local produce markets or sold directly to the home at reasonable prices. Philadelphia. That hill farms should be producing most. A spot survey conducted a few years ago in Boston. their culture permitting full soil protection. But even at this late date millions of acres should be restored to forests. formerly in forests. For this folly America has paid and is still paying dearly in irrecoverable top soil. Cattle raising is well suited for hill land. first emphasis should be placed on fruits and vegetables. but even more to round out a sound source of revenue production. New York City. Much of our sloping land. not solely to take the place of wheat. Sheep grazing is a recognized and profitable hill farm industry. pears.000 acres of hill farmland turned to soil-protecting use. some Casper Milquetoast might rise to ask— why not feed it to cattle to reduce our present excessively high beef imports? To produce the wool we imported last year would have required an additional 43. While Congress and administrative officials are scratching their collective heads to find means of reducing our alleged stockpiles of feed grains. Pittsburgh and Cleveland turned up the interesting information that housewives would buy. reduced rainfall and recurrent damaging floods.000. dewberries. if not all of the 1. These are now rare luxury crops in urban markets. peaches. Strawberries have been a hill land crop for decades in many parts of the world.5 million cords of pulpwood and the more than 2 78 . cherries. These so-called bramble fruits. Baltimore. In planning crops for hill farmers. on an average. The growing of timber as an annual revenue crop has been widely and profitably proven.away and the produce has lost much of its goodness and nutrients en route. Washington. should never have been cleared. along with strawberries.
is but a part. The referendum did not make a dent in the "Daddy-knows-best" attitude of entrenched bureaucracy. 1963. plus vastly expanded timber growing. with wise government encouragement through County Agricultural Agents. 79 .000 urban persons to the land! Is such a shifting of population which is so great in scope a desirable or advisable thing? The Great Society image-builders answer with a resounding and perpetual NO. 1934. in the face of a campaign of coercion and even of untruths from Washington." He cannot. of a broader and urgently needed rebalancing of agriculture from which greater and more permanent benefits would accrue to the nation. "The farmer should throw off his fetters. . It is fine to be idealists—but we need living idealists. all aiming toward ultimate national self-reliance in basic foods and forestry products. wool. even a minor part. fruit and vegetable production.' but 'Factoryward ho!' is the slogan we must adopt and put into practice . . even spectacular project is needed—a massive migration of country-loving people to the land! A program to increase beef. demand something—a reverse migration. he overwhelmingly rejected the administration's new supply and management program. our farms could be producing at least two billion dollars worth of the forestry products we now buy from foreign farms every year. would require the return of at least 15. We all have to do this job together—a complete overhaul. Secretary Wallace's Economic Adviser. speaking at the University of Virginia. For. But was federal control removed as the wheat farmer emphatically requested? The question is answered by present wheat acreage regulation and price controls. Unless there is a return to the land we will remain at the mercy of foreign trade. echo these words: "Not 'back to the farm. a huge. Basic national self-reliance is a must. socializing world.million tons of wood pulp we import annually is not debatable." Common sense and national survival in a rapidly communizing. The removal of wheat from hill farms. It is conservatively estimated that.000. And from Mordecai Ezekial. Let's not make the mistake of saying. as here proposed. July 13. The only time since 1933 when his government afforded him an opportunity to express his will was in the nationwide wheat referendum in May. Then. not dead ones.
with the individual no more than an expendable cog in the machinery of an all-powerful state. Krupp ownership was meaningless. with so-called private ownership permitted temporarily and solely to give a deceptive touch of democracy to the power grab. Machiavelli TO COMPREHEND more clearly how a small group of young socialist-minded lawyers. not in the aims. The farmer 80 . This was the philosophy behind farm control. told where and to whom to sell it. armed revolution. most of them under sponsorship of the then Professor Felix Frankfurter at Harvard. twentieth century Americans witnessed an important shift in the tactics. assassination. but should know how to follow evil courses if he must. Scarcely aware of the change. why worry about the insignificant matter of ownership? Krupp could be the biggest steel empire in the world. set the price. Of course. could gain initial working room in the Department of Agriculture and in less than three months force the radical Agricultural Adjustment Act through Congress. Intrigue. we must remember that socialistic thinking had penetrated the USDA long before. Hitler and Mussolini used the Keynesian method. of international Socialism. If government actually controls every phase of the economy. plus a wider spread of the tentacles of government interference. The Keynesian philosophy holds to the principle of complete government control. The "new look" is generally attributed to John Maynard Keynes. It remains the dominant principle in farm regimentation.Chapter Eleven THE WIRT TRAGEDY He (the head of government) ought not to quit good courses if he can help it." As we have learned to our sorrow over the last tragic fifty years. requires a knowledge of their particular brand of Socialism. British Fabian Socialist. The difference between Keynesian and Marxist Socialism is chiefly in what the former calls "outward appearance. Marxist Socialism advocates complete government ownership of a nation's economy. but if Hitler ordered them what to make. and mass murders are the means to Marxist domination. and even established worker wages.
81 . and the Keynesian philosophy. down to this minute.is permitted to own his farm. on May 20. rich and poor. 2) The appeal to "politics and passions" has dominated every branch of our federal government and every phase of its work until this hour . rice. "My friends. black and white." And this is exactly what has been occurring year after year. and peanuts. founder of Fabian Socialism: "When my new theory has been duly assimilated and mixed with politics. steadily revealing the official promotion of class warfare—the classic stratagem of Communists. The American giant would have to be entwined in Lilliputian threads. would ever employ the harsh methods characteristic of Marxism. Soon after his "new wrinkle" of Socialism was devised and before he published his famous THE GENERAL THEORY OF EMPLOYMENT. equipment and livestock—a dispensation offered as nothing more than a tranquilizer to keep him in a contented and unsuspecting mood. Control wheat and cotton for a start. But Keynes at no time ever ruled out bloodshed as an instrument of gaining domination. feelings and passions. . brought on in one fell swoop. this nation will no longer be a republic called the United States but shall by proclamation thereafter be known as the United Soviet States of America. But herein lies the insidiousness of Keynesian Socialism. This is exactly what is meant by "creeping Socialism." It had to be done another way. too ingrained in the American character. George Bernard Shaw. with President Roosevelt going on the radio and saying. of all shades of religious and political beliefs: 1) We have been living under Keynesian Socialism for the past 33 years. I can't predict what the upshot will be in its effects on action and affairs. INTEREST AND MONEY." Two hard facts must be faced by all American citizens. . then quietly nudge in tobacco. The world seldom thinks that Fabian Socialism. One cannot imagine the American people accepting Marxist Socialism in 1933. For freedom. had built a mighty and unconquerable nation the Soviets could not hope to conquer in war. eager to support with his vote the administration that is daily welding more and sturdier shackles around him and his industry. he wrote his friend. include hogs and corn later. the stealth ness of its encroachment. since the Roosevelt Administration moved into power in 1933. 1933.
a summer home and other real estate. For several years he had been superintendent of the Gary. Chester Bowles and at least a score more of spokesmen for the New Deal." The tragic story of Dr. labor against employer. a man of progressive stature whose school system was a model of its day. which. Walter Reuther. standing out in startling prominence are utterances always adroitly spoken. Fabian economist. to set black against white. suggested that persons who "plague and disrupt the orderly processes of production and distribution" in what he describes as the "new regime" of Socialism. Catholic against Protestant.As one rereads in this light the speeches of Henry Wallace. It should be observed 82 . Harry Truman. New Frontier and now the Great Society. THE NEW DEAL. educational and social fabric. Mordecai Ezekial. Dr. a highly respected gentleman and educator. there were five other guests present— four government employes and the Washington representative of the Soviet newspaper agency. Occasionally. the mercurial Harold Ickes would burst out in a diatribe against "malefactors of great wealth." It is a dangerous game of self-deception to beguile ourselves with the assumption that violence characterizes only the Marxian brand of Socialism and is not employed by Fabian followers and their Keynesian offspring. in his book. Rex Tugwell. Franklin D. Throughout the northern Indiana community where he and his family lived. At the time of his ill-starred visit to the nation's capital. Stuart Chase. According to his later testimony before a congressional investigating committee. he owned a residence in Gary. Gentile against Jew. Wirt was invited to attend a private dinner in nearby Virginia on a Sunday afternoon at the home of an employee of the Department of Education. Eleanor Roosevelt. of course. Wirt was in Washington in early September of 1933 to attend a meeting of school administrators. While in Washington Dr. Roosevelt. and that the traditional kind could easily follow. he was considered a valued addition to the financial. Fair Deal. if necessary. despite its title was published in 1931. Wirt indicates that the eager defenders of the Rooseveltian type of Keynesianism had other types of "firing squads" than the old-fashioned wall-and-rifle type. Scores of reputable citizens have since attested to his integrity and intelligence. Harold Ickes. rural against urban. poor against rich. Indiana schools. should be punished by the "firing squad. Tass. William A.
3) Discredit business and entice labor. He quoted their words verbatim: "We believe that we have Mr.that the inclusion of the Tass representative indicated that the other four guests and the hostess were not ordinary government employees. Astonished by what he heard discussed at this dinner." 6) Compel newspapers and magazines to favorably support their crusade through the medium of advertising—take away advertising by propaganda. would be thwarted for the purpose of prolonging public destitution and distress. They declared they could make publishers "beg for mercy. stressed six main goals in the collectivist program he had heard discussed: 1) Economic recovery. 2) Force everybody onto government relief (note the resemblance here to George N. mere bureau clerks and nonofficial underlings. under oath. then assistant to Henry Wallace. then in evidence over the nation. When these men ignored his report. Peek's judgment three years later). Wirt reported the dinner guests were unanimous in their praise for Professor Rexford G. management. educators and farmers to join in the program. Wirt's testimony before the committee. Roosevelt is only the Kerensky of this revolution. he must follow his money with control and management. Jefferson and Lincoln and build the new America on the ruins. We all think Mr. Dr. 4) To gain these ends. and looked to him for leadership. Dr." In his testimony. 5) By careful propaganda break down our financial structure and then push the Federal Government into the role of lending. he mailed it to several leading newspapers." It is an interesting facet to the farm control side of this picture to note that Dr. based on the fact that "when Uncle Sam becomes our financier. Wirt wrote a general summary of it and presented it to several government officials. 83 . Wirt related that he had asked at the dinner how these collectivists intended to bring about these aims. This led to the congressional investigation in which the dinner conversation in all its lurid details became public. Dr. Tugwell. We believe that we can keep him there until we are able to replace him with a Stalin. destroy the America of Washington. Roosevelt in the middle of a swift stream and that the current is so strong that he cannot turn back or escape from it.
a wild publicity seeker. a foe of progress." 84 . Wirt was pictured as an unreliable Red-baiter. a man belonging to the lunatic fringe. not to assist Dr. Dr. we control the avenues of influence. Democrat of Missouri. Real estate loans were called in. Wirt was not allowed to have his counsel cross-examine witnesses nor was he called in rebuttal after they had presented their well-staged denials. It is a significant sequel to this story that the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in a hearing staged in 1952 to investigate Communist infiltrations listed the hostess at the Virginia dinner Dr. Properties were sold for taxes." The collectivists had put their massive propaganda machine into gear. Wirt attended as a "Communist agent since her employment by the government in 1919. Wirt had conscientiously tried to warn against the enemies entrenched inside the New Deal.Also they considered Secretary Wallace a dependable aide to their cause. That the investigation was a cruel and shameful farce is borne out by a later statement by Congressman John O'Conner of New York. He said. Henry Ford (the first) furnished Dr. Dr. Tragically. but as a fanatical individual whose testimony must by any means be discredited. Wirt died a few years later in poverty. He and his wife and son and daughter soon faced financial straits. Dr. Wirt had already testified that the dinner guests had boasted. Even before the congressional investigation opened it was evident that Dr. "We are on the inside. Wirt counsel in the person of former Senator James Reed. not in the role of a useful citizen offering Congress vital evidence of real and present danger to our nation. and Mrs. Bank examiners were turned loose on him. Wirt had been placed by New Deal propaganda. disgraced by the government Dr. recognized as one of America's outstanding lawyers. Wirt the results? Any newspaper reporter in Washington could have written in the details of the committee's findings a week before the hearings began. Wirt before the committee but to protect him from the committee. I use the word 'well-staged' advisedly because it is a well-known fact that they met and rehearsed their denials of what they had told Dr. Dr.
moved into the State Department and wrote the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. and of family dynasties perpetuated in power that the quality of government deteriorates and costs of government 85 . heading the staff of an influential newspaper chain." as an overall concept. Equally true. Lenin. however." he said." "Why don't you use it?" he was asked. that a group of collectivists had not only taken over the Department of Agriculture and written the Triple-A. It is when officials begin to dream of power. is an intangible and immaterial thing. county and other lines and setting up a Commissar over each division. Chapter Twelve TOO MUCH UNCLE SAM We shall cause the United States to spend itself into destruction. He walked over and took a bulky folder from the file. erasing state. is far more powerful today. in 1924 WOODROW WILSON once said. "In there is all the substantiation one needs to realize that what Dr." Although it is true "government. "The power that crushed Dr. one of the most highly respected and reputable newspapermen in Washington. "No man ever saw a government. In there. of party continuation of power. he said is conclusive evidence that what Dr. yet its visible manifestations are not only tangible but can be unbearable. government is highly beneficial. Wirt six years ago. dividing the United States into eleven districts or regions. but I never saw the Government of the United States. I live in the midst of the Government of the United States.During the 1940 presidential campaign. but they had made Henry Wallace their prisoner. Wirt reported was true—that the same group as early as mid-summer of 1933 had maps already drawn. is the fact that where wisely and sparingly administered. And it's not by any means a rumor that the same group seized on Cordell Hull's free-trade fanaticism. Wirt told Congress and the American people was true. took this writer into his file room and pointed to the top drawer of a standard filing cabinet.
We have given our politicians too much of it. 'to saddle our children with debts for present day needs from which we receive the benefits. Power in the hands of politicians has given America a bad case of excessive government.. .' the Governor said. and continues to pile up deficits.271. The visible evidence is all around us—and in the area of government "nothing exceeds like excess. 1932. .. Pa.. . 86 . 1932. 1931 issue of THE AMERICAN AGRICULTURALIST. Candidate Roosevelt said. and absolute power corrupts. The regime convicted itself. 'It is unfair." The root of that power is money. like a spendthrift. We also convict ourselves! Let's review a few forgotten and overlooked fiscal facts since Candidate Roosevelt spoke those commendable words at Pittsburgh on October 19. extends its taking to the limits of the people to pay. reporting a speech of Governor Roosevelt at a New York State Fair dinner: Governor Roosevelt . publisher Henry Morganthau. Speaking at Pittsburgh. said that we must not only stabilize money but we must stabilize our minds.452. October 19. In the first three years of the New Deal. He emphasized the need of a pay-asyou-go policy. later to become Secretary of the Treasury.. if it (the government). we the people who foot the bill for government's excesses remain apathetic to its evils.' It is not the primary purpose of this brief review of excessive government to convict the Roosevelt regime of rushing recklessly into the very dangers the candidate warned against.417. through 122-years and under twenty-four different Presidents! The total from George Washington to William Howard Taft was $22. 1934 and 1935 was $22. with government as well as individuals . Let's project our financial course into the immediate future.000. federal spending amounted to approximately as much as it cost to operate the government from 1789 to 1911. In the September 19.rise. Politicians seem usually to say one thing and do another.882. wrote editorially. throws discretion to the winds.000. But rather we wish to point out that because government is an invisible force. is willing to make no sacrifice at all in spending. absolutely. it is on the road to bankruptcy. And the oft quoted maxim on power can scarcely be read and heard too much: Power corrupts. total for 1933.790.
continued to rise. The Commodity Credit Corporation is scheduled for 2.000 office buildings constituting approximately 60.000 Other property assets 0027. federal assets included: Military property and supplies $178. but if the past is prologue. 1967 will be above 175 billion dollars and by 1969 the cost of operating the sprawling activities of the Federal Government will soar above the 200 billion dollar level.000. Pertinent also is the Budget Bureau audit of what the Federal Government "owns. dams.000 acres of office space. But according to the "cash" budget the total would run around 135 billion dollars. This phenomenal trend makes the United States Government the biggest landlord and property owner in the world—over 760 million acres of land in the fifty states and 427. 0050.000.000 Government loans outstanding 0053. the Budget Bureau estimates that federal expenditures for the fiscal year ending June 30. 87 . 1966.600. for the fiscal year ended June 30.700." As of June 30. for example.000 Total $358.800. At this rate of climb.000.000 Cash (gold and silver) 0029.200.000 The Budget Bureau indicates that the total value of government holdings has increased more than 50 per cent in the last thirteen years.000. is scheduled to receive 765 million dollars from the next year's budget.000. if experience means anything.2 billion dollars but will likely pay out nearer 6 billion dollars.000. the Department will end up with a huge deficit. government spending.300. For example.000 Non-defense buildings.000 Land in public domain 0019. reaches a total of 592 billion dollars. as shown in the "regular" budget.000. while President Johnson was turning out White House lights as an example of how to economize. 1965. But the actual spending was expected to be above 163 billion dollars! The hard facts provide a frightening escalation to the explosive truth.000. not only because of the Vietnam war.The Johnson four year budget 1963-1966 according to the United States Budget Bureau. In the complex bookkeeping of Washington even an experienced accountant and statistician has a powerful urge to throw up his hands in desperation and flee. per year! Thus. The Post Office Department. etc. We are spending ourselves to death. government spending was expected to total 106 billion dollars.800.
Virginia. reviewed and finally filed. many re-done. kitchenette and two baths. Today it is almost completed and already occupied by Congressmen—total cost. are filed in cabinets. All these forms must be filled out. read. It was true. Someone has described it as "early Rameses and middle Mussolini. including such government activities as the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Intermediate Credit Banks. there are 25 million cubic feet of government records in Washington offices and makeshift depositories in nearby Maryland and Virginia. From valuable documents in the National Archives to waterfront warehouses in Alexandria. around 140 million dollars. Filing clerks. If the Ford tractor division or U. whether necessary or not. From an architectural standpoint it is a monstrosity. seeking to learn why government spending has increased more than 20. corrected.000 per cent since 1900. there is the so-called "annexed" budget. it is estimated that 40 billion pieces of government paper occupy filing cabinets. but nothing would be done about it. to date. When an interested citizens group or an individual. practiced this brand of office extravagance. Most records. The Government Printing Office turns out approximately 21-4 billion forms a year for federal agencies. where small surpluses or equally small deficits may occur. 88 . Steel Corporation. A few hundred feet southwest of the Capitol building in Washington stands the new Sam Rayburn House Office Building.Then. All government forms. are numbered like the sands. however heroic as individuals. many of them never seen by human eyes again. According to the General Services Administration. for example. President Johnson's insistence in 1965 that an annual savings to the taxpayer of more than 5 million dollars a year could be made by declaring a moratorium on the purchase of more filing cabinets was a safe one. verified. the visible evidence of government recklessness and irresponsibility is overwhelming.77 per cubic foot in downtown office buildings. the cost of doing business would be prohibitive. Costs run from as little as 28 cents per cubic foot a year in the latter type of storage space to $3. are made out in triplicate and even more numerous forms." From plush offices with bar. In 1955 Congress appropriated 5 million dollars for this structure. Among many unseen money-hogs of government spending are such strange and diverse items as filing cabinets.S.
775. "On to Washington" has become in effect our national slogan." But as reckless as tax spending is in government. A few years ago an eastern businessman was called to the bedside of his dying father in a mid-west village. Inquiry revealed that in every county in the state (two or more in the more populous counties). strange to say. The spending habit has spread to state and local governments—a phase of unwarranted waste often overlooked because the national extravaganza is more conspicuous. But roughly one-third of all government spending occurs in state capitals and county seats. The architect for the Sam Rayburn House Office Building was J. "J. irremovably attached to the source of public pabulum. he thereafter considers it one of his inalienable rights to continue there. Excessive government causes most of our agricultural. with car furnished. The next morning after his fathers death. industrial and social ills.000 civilian employees in all branches of government in 1964. it can be hilarious. 1.000 in local units of government. But according to the STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED STATES.413. and once a person is firmly settled in a government chair as an employee. Stewart served one term in Congress back in the nineteen-thirties. a state employee showed up at the funeral parlor to verify the death. to 89 . George Stewart is NOT an architect." The Senator could have added truthfully. At state and local levels. Yet.vast swimming pools. was an employee. once described Stewart as the "most expensive. job creating to care for "deserving" political friends often takes on the nature of high art. George Stewart. Senator Paul Douglas. it is not by any means confined to the federal level. employed by the government and housed in the Capitol building with a large staff of assistants.736. But the expanding evil has become chronic. of Illinois. and occasionally becomes so ludicrous that taken alone. most wasteful. the Constitution of the United States and the constitutions of the various states make no mention of government being instituted among men to provide jobs. gymnasiums (separate gymnasiums for Congresswomen). most incompetent man we could possibly employee.500. of the 9.000. legislators ride on electric cars through a 700 foot tunnel to the Capitol building—latest estimated cost $7.000 were employed in state governments and 5.
And "logrolling" occurs in state legislatures too. Most elected officials. It fruits from the desire of the lawmaker to be able to go back to his constituents and say. This fear leads to one of the most grievous wastes of tax money in Congress and state legislatures. If the Israelites had named a committee or appointed a commission to talk to Pharaoh about their enslavement instead of delegating Moses. usually near the session's end when every legislator wants to hurry home "to mend his political fences.report what each physician had already reported—that the dead man was actually and officially dead. State commissions sprout up under every conceivable excuse. the Congressman from Podunk agrees to vote for Bunko's dredging in return for support for his post office appropriation. despite the fact that commissions seldom accomplish the purpose for which they are created. much of it worse than wasted." the total runs into hundreds of millions of dollars. It is commonly called pork-barrel legislation. This. not on so 90 . they would still be in Egypt. "What can the individual citizen do to stop it?" Seldom can a question be answered more conclusively and with greater finality. not a committee or a commission. they become permanent by the simple process of failing to complete their task. Few are the ailments that permit the prescription of a cure more certain. "See what I did for you!" The Congressman from Podunk wants to get an appropriation for a new post office—always an excellent vote-getting gimmick. The church trustees had voted to present a petition of protest to the town council. the minister objected strenuously. When this financial farce is multiplied several hundred times at every session of Congress. from town hall to the White House are concerned about being reelected. In actual working. When the trustees suggested that the minister name a committee to write the petition and present it to the town fathers. So. someone asks. A southern Baptist minister illustrated the point a few years ago. The Congressman from Bunko County seeks an appropriation to dredge Mudhole Creek for a similar reason." Almost invariably whenever the subject of mounting taxes is discussed. It is not that Podunk needs a new post office or that the dredging of Mudhole Creek will open up a new and important artery of traffic. Almost all of them are temporary but rare indeed is the instance when a temporary commission ends. "No.
" 91 . tell him firmly. The method can be applied successfully in sending men and women to state legislatures. Socialism and slavery. The report declares. And don't forget. garbed as public welfare. In a sort of confidential voice." The power of the ballot box is great. U. "An affluent society needs and can afford collective social welfare programs which benefit large segments. be halted? The size of the task increases daily. the sheriff. All candidates for office. of politicians graft and the like. for example. KEY TO THE GREAT SOCIETY. . He visits a farmer who has a large contingent of clannish relatives.S. from the loftiest to the lowliest elective position in capitals and town halls are men and women who are asking for a job. At the county level. They are seeking from their employer or prospective employer temporary work. if you fail to live up to this promise. Every employer has the right—and should exercise it—to inform the applicant what kind of work he will do and how he will do it. says Ellen Winston." The Remedy? The next time a candidate for Congress asks for your support. That power is effective when choosing or refusing a new governor or reelecting the present one. But the problem is not merely one of excessive government. Ellen Winston. entitled SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. Commissioner of Welfare. he says. The problem is what it leads to. or even its total population . Welfare programs that include only the poor are not by any means sufficient. and burdensome. "We're thinking of adding another deputy at the beginning of the year—I've a notion the county commissioners can be talked into naming Sam to the job. I'll never support you again. It can be invoked to fill offices in the county courthouse.great a scale as in Washington but just as upsetting to the citizens. in the end. is seeking reelection. The inroads of welfare statism to date are but a fraction of those which entrenched bureaucrats have on their Washington drawing boards. Can creeping Socialism. . just before leaving as he shakes hands with the farmer. 1966. This is not a rumor or a surmise. "I'll vote and work for you on one condition—if you agree to help reduce government spending by one-half. spells out plans for the future in a report issued in July.
whether he lives in a mansion or a shanty. . Peek reported that the Ware cell crowd in the United States Department of Agriculture in 1933 were planning to push relief forward "with the intent of driving the whole country on relief and thus making the capitalistic system commit suicide... labor and amusements." In other words. There is but one place where taxes can be reduced—in the voting booth. they will be happy.. . George N. In fact. And there is this to keep in mind—excessive government with its astronomical cost is not only an insane course for a nation of free men to follow. we must be taxed in our meats and drinks. "• 92 . but it plays directly into the hands of the Socialist and Communist forces entrenched within our government and encircling our nation placed there for the planned demise of individual freedom. Thomas Jefferson wrote: To preserve our independence we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. necessities and comforts. If we can prevent the Government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them.Does this sound familiar? Yes. from township constable to the occupant of the White House.. the tax burden falls the heavier on the latter. There is but one method—support only the candidate who pledges to curtail excessive government rooted in excessive spending. For the benefit of the rare person who is able to say. . in our labors and our amusements. state and local —is the patriotic duty of every citizen. put even the wealthy class under bureaucratic charity and thereby fasten voting booth control over everybody. The immediate and continued reduction of taxes through drastic reductions in government spending—national. "Oh. If we run into such debts. Ellen Winston calls her total welfare state "preventive welfare. . it makes no difference to me—I don't pay taxes!" emphasis is placed on the six items by which taxes are paid—meats and drinks. . in our necessities and our comforts.
too much efficiency." What. Hence. Peek." This problem could not be underproduction because that could be solved easily and simply by stepping up farm output." but the farmer must be assured. Next. "They [the Socialist revolutionaries in the Department of Agriculture] think the place to start is with the farmers because it is the farmers who in other countries have formed the chief obstacle to Socialism. the overproduction hoax. It must be done by the Fabian socialistic approach—allow the farmer to think he was still the owner. bureaucratic control. subsidize with government cash (tax dollars) those remaining on the land. centralized. not only with the frequently emphasized "democratic process. The plotters knew well that this could not be done in America by the Marxian process—direct and open government seizure of the land and its complex operations. Certain words gain vigor by repetition. this is to benefit the entire country. it meant to start bringing them under complete. the free-enterprise operator of his industry. the hue and cry that the nation was menaced by too much food—too many farmers. The people themselves are its only safe depositories. who detected and exposed the initial ruse of the socialistic design to bore into and eventually destroy our American way of life. allembracing. It had to be overproduction. persuading them to produce less. 93 . Peek wrote." But first. The entire scheme must be gilded. The remedy? Reduce the number of farmers by the only way possible— attract "surplus" farm families into urban life. Thomas Jefferson LET US constantly remind ourselves of the Socialist stratagem mentioned early in this book—as stressed by George N.Chapter Thirteen THE FARMER PAYS THE PRICE Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. "this is solely to help you across a economic rough place. the director. did it mean to "start with the farmers"? First and foremost. not merely in cotton and wheat but in all food and fiber. there must be a "problem. first administrator of the Agricultural Adjustment Act. then.
gold. human-managed acre of farm land on which meat and dairy animals graze. livestock and growing or 94 . silver and all other metals and minerals. is barred from both routes of financial escape—he neither sets the price of what he sells nor the cost of what he buys. the farmer's financial burden must be made heavier and heavier by an insidious. vegetables. equipment. Hence. The wealth of coal. The farmer. the farmer's major taxable assets are visible— his land. a physician's taxes if increased can be added to his fee or charge.Idle land and idle farmers would be paid for by the food consuming public who. may base his wage demands on the cost of living—in which taxes are a major item. It would be difficult for the farmer to find a route of escape. that an acre of productive land is the only inexhaustible source of wealth. and forestry products grow can be truly considered potentially inexhaustible—and therefore the permanent source of taxable wealth. Only a self-renewing. the machinery already in working operation—increased taxation. the farmer and landowner have been a chief target of the taxing power. likewise the lawyer. however. buildings. Again. But there was another phase of the Socialist plan. Even the manual worker. fibers. cereal crops. especially those belonging to unions. at the same time. a twofold phase that must be kept carefully disguised—farmers remaining on the land must not be permitted a way to escape from the collectivist trap and they must be kept in a condition of increasing dependence on government payments as a source of revenue. In other words. for example. Heavy taxes would be part of the plan to control the farmer. "What are you charging?" He is the end man on the tax-passing totem pole. well camouflaged method." Tax-passing is the simple expedient whereby. dentist and all other professionals who deal in services. difficult to refute. for his position in the economic system denies him the escape of "tax-passing. on which fruits. the schemers knew well that the channel to this end was already open. Moreover. oil and natural gas under the ground. are eventually exhaustible. He enters the market place and asks. "What are you paying?" He turns to the merchant and inquires. would be compelled to buy their food at vastly increased prices. The merchant can add his taxes to the price of what he sells and occasionally deduct them from the cost of what he buys. There has long been a theory.
. $95. tax-sold farms. There is not an unemployed man. and hence. . If labor union leaders are blindly but insistently forcing inflation by taking advantage of official connivance and cowardice in Washington. there is not a struggling farmer. uttered the memorable words he was soon to "forget" after the Washington collectivists maneuvered him ‘into the middle of a stream’: Taxes are paid in the sweat of every man who labors because they are a burden on production and can be paid only by production.40 per unit of farm population in 1920.43 in 1965. nevertheless place profits before national survival. business men and those in professional life. . . . 1932. The remedy lies in two directions.harvested crops. if many manufacturers. None of these is on the tax-free list. found in July 1966 issue of FARM INCOME SITUATION published by the Department of Agriculture (FIS-203). $39. Secretary of Agriculture Arthur M. . October 19. in hordes of hungry tramping the streets and seeking jobs in vain. . Candidate Roosevelt. As far back as 1931 came warnings against this burden on agriculture.90 in 1950. Taxes on farm real estate and personal farm property averaged $17. and $155. they are reflected in idle factories. Are the farmer's taxes "excessive"? He has suffered an increase of 800 per cent in per capita farm taxes in 45 years! This would seem incredible under a representative form of government. . If excessive. In his annual report of that year. a publication issued quarterly. 2) revision of the prevailing system of taxation so that more revenue will be derived from sources other than general property. Pa. whose interest in this subject is not direct and vital. in his address at Pittsburgh. He cannot lock them in his safe-deposit vault when the assessor makes his rounds. 1) more effective control of expenditures.94 in 1960. Hyde wrote: The farmer's acute tax problem results from a rapidly In-increasing public expenditure met by a system of taxation that places most of the burden on real estate and tangible personal property. if politicians are willing to barter away our liberties for another term in office—they must live with the fact that they are driving our farmers into an impoverished peasantry. except for two things: 95 . necessarily interested in profits. . Let them consider this frightening and shameful fact.
Russia need not risk her program. and 2) the predatory nature of almost all men when subjected to the temptations of political power.1) the quickness and ease with which voters confer all responsibility on their representatives. when did they lose their influence and might? What caused them to relinquish their grasp on government officials? What was the date of their retirement from the Washington scene? As we examine the socialistic weapon of take-over by confiscatory taxes. How much more entrenched and powerful they are today. The reasoning is so simple that our so-called statesmen have for three decades stumbled blindly over it. The collectivists were sufficiently entrenched and powerful in the nineteenthirties to establish the Keynesian Socialist operating theory. Wirt testified in the nineteen-thirties? The evidence that the collectivists of 1933 are succeeding with their original plans to destroy free enterprise and make everybody a ward of the Federal Government is manifest all around us. "° Why do farmers. how many more of their destructive theories have been written into law! If they could make President Roosevelt their supine prisoner in the spring of 1933 and force him at once to repudiate the promises in his Pittsburgh speech. and with another major war looming or already in progress. The ballot box remedy is free and leads to freedom! Is the gradual piling-up of tax burdens part of the "force-everyone-ontogovernment-relief" program to which George N. we must ask ourselves: Has International Communism ever threatened the United States with—"We intend to crush you with the power of our arms"? Quite the opposite. Lenin stated plainly and almost every Communist action since the Bolshevist revolution in Russia in 1917 has indicated that the Communist strategy is—Make America spend itself into destruction. year after year. submit to this creeping disease of dispossession when they need not? The corrective power lies in the individual voter's hands. Even with two major wars sandwiched into the last 50 years. 96 . in an all-out war of arms. with a continuous cold war throughout much of this period. with all its inherent weaknesses. Peek and Dr. the gradual encroachment of confiscatory taxation is appalling. can we afford to assume they are less powerful today in the Johnson Administration? If they are.
to be titled significantly THE SWARMING OF THE SLAVS. eventually win without firing a shot or losing a soldier. if we Americans continue our cheerful cooperation. seer. having learned the philosophy of disaster. He detailed the coming struggle between Japan and the United States and placed his prophetic pencil on Pearl Harbor and Lingayen Gulf as the points of Japan's initial strike. she can. a man who loved America with an uncompromising devotion. He died in 1912 at the age of thirty-six. Finally. He had an outline of a third book ready at the time of his death. Africa and Europe (and perhaps America) beneath her march to world dominion. They even close their eyes to the possibility that Russia ever entertained ideas of world conquest. Why has every administration since 1933 ignored this truth? Why. Lea described her eventual march to world domination and the methods by which she would reach her goal. To Russia. THE VALOR OF IGNORANCE and THE DAY OF THE SAXON. He wrote world history in advance! At a time when Russia was struggling for recovery and even survival after her defeat at the hands of Japan in 1905. are we rushing into national insolvency? The answers may be numerous and complex but one facet is simple— officials who mold and administer our policies adamantly refuse to heed Russian history.a war she cannot of a certainty win. The pertinent observation of this remarkable man here is the emphasis he placed on Russia's ability to gain its objectives in spite of defeat. both primarily analyses of war. For. With Russia crushed by her defeat in 1905 at the hands of Japan. in the face of this danger. Lea described Russia's rise to grind all Asia. 97 . His name was Homer Lea. Homer Lea wrote only two books. Is such optimism sound —or safe? Let's turn back to a remarkable and long over-looked historian. a war she would probably lose. military strategist. in the light of this threat. Before 1912 he predicted both World War I and II. They hope Russia is changing or has abandoned her plans for world domination. by other than military methods. He wrote. he ringed on the World's map the specific locations where decisive battles of World War III will be fought—Russia and her satellites aligned victoriously against the United States and England.
" / In his description of Russia's seemingly "irresistible" march to world control. When we try to analyze the strength and working plans of 98 . timeless. great or small. So imperceptible is the terrible imperturbable grind of its way that we do not perceive its progress until it has passed a given point. . He missed it by five days. for while Santiago de Cuba did not fall until nearly three weeks after the declaration of war. In its extension it has moved onward with elemental propulsion. actually it was twenty-six days after the landing at Lingayen Gulf. this calm and dreadful certitude. It moves on. the dissolution of China only precedes the expulsion of Saxon power from Asia and the western Pacific. that even terrified Napoleon when the breath of it chilled into cinders his highway of flames. In the wreck of India is to be found the Golgotha of the Saxon. a series if she is victorious. The expansion of Russia in its intensity never ceases." ". its movement is only apparent by periods of time. \ Of the first World War Lea predicted. he said: The conquest of these islands will be less of an undertaking than was the seizure of Cuba by the United States.there comes no final defeat." Or about India: Its loss means primarily that there has been made in the circle of British dominance a gap so vast that all the blood and fire and iron of the Saxon race cannot again bring together its broken ends . And then there was Lea's remarkable prediction of the betrayal of China when our representatives there reported that the Communist movement was "only agrarian reformers. Writing in 1911 about Japan's conquest of the Philippines. unhurried growth of nature. Lea's words are awesome in the light of subsequent events: In the development of the Russian Empire man has more nearly approached those characteristics that mark the measured.. it pushes the debris that impedes its way. . still 30 years in the future. Like a glacier. What it does not erode it forces on in front until into some crevasse. It was this glacial. The tides that recede from one shore recede only to break upon another. it erodes. What it does not crush.. measured movement. . "One War if England is destroyed. . . the city of Manila will be forced to surrender in less than three weeks.
so we might anticipate—and effectively war against—the Communists by learning from those who understand the Communists by taking them at their word—not in what they tell us in propaganda. or dredging Mudhole Creek. it has been the ruthless exemplification of a predetermined plan." it is enlightening to turn back fifty-four years to Lea's description in THE DAY OF THE SAXON of its methods through centuries: The expansion of Russia. Chapter Fourteen TARIFFS AND FARMING Peace is such a precious jewel that I would give anything for it but truth. Instead of being the result of an aggregate of fortunate expedients. has never been erratic nor dependent upon fortuitous circumstances. free college tuitions. Matthew Henry.Communism to "cause the United States of America to spend itself into destruction. there would be little solace in the fact that the outlay was for a Sam Rayburn House Office Buildings. putting out cold war brush fires with American blood or wasting our wealth in slum clearance. Medicare or rent subsidies? After the bankruptcy arrives. SELDOM IN our history have two departments of the government worked together so harmoniously in a time of national stress as did the United States Department of Agriculture and 99 . farm subsidies. Just as we might have anticipated and planned for the Hitler's rampage by reading MEIN KAMPF. on Lenin's desk in 1916! It is indeed difficult to understand why any thinking citizen today can doubt that Russia is pursuing other than the Lenin formula to force the United States into insolvency. unlike that of most great empires. An American newspaper representative saw a well-thumbed copy of THE DAY OF THE SAXON. with the Communist take over that must surely accompany it. but in their serious writing. How else than in this light can be explained why White House fiscal policy-directing is in the hands of men dedicated to the Keynesian principle of spend-yourself-into-prosperity? Why should we quibble whether that insolvency is brought on by strewing our food resources over the entire world.
the State Department in 1933. And what is more astonishing, they were tackling a task from angles so diverse that under normal circumstances they could have been expected to create violent clashes of ideologies or policies instead of unanimity of action. The collectivists in the Department of Agriculture, under outward excuses of eliminating mountains of surplus food and fiber, were, in fact, working toward the same end as the collectivists in the State Department—undermine agriculture as the first step into Socialism. The State Department had the more attractive banner. While agricultural overproduc-tionists marched under banners no more alluring than "We are starving to death under too much beef and pork and bread," the State Department showed up on the parade grounds under the emblem, "We have the key to the eradication of war and the ushering in of the long-awaited brotherhood of man." Theirs was a holy cause. Socialism was their breastplate. The childlike trust of Americans was their shield. The tariff was the sword. In any discussion of the roles the tariff plays in agricultural well being it is possible to start with an historical fact—it was behind protective tariff walls that American farming grew to the mightiest industry the world has ever seen. Too, it was from the strength thus impounded that farming and industry twice in a half century rescued Europe from tyranny. The intelligent self-interest of the United States has been in the best self-interest of the rest of the world. If tariffs are the forces of evil that One-World advocates claim they are, to what dimensions would have American farming advanced from 1880 to 1929 under free world trade? We cannot know—but we can know that they would have been much less impressive. To be sure, many of the nation's staunchest conservatives, free men and those who have been typified as libertarians are "free traders"—pursuing the principle of freedom to its "logical conclusions". Free trade may be the ideal. But we must also live with the real. Free trade with Communist/ Socialist countries will hardly help to preserve the United States. Again, free trade with low-wage countries can completely ruin American industry before it can tool up to compete. And what hurts American industry hurts the American wage earner. Our oncestrong house becomes a house of cards—and the whole economy, along with agriculture is disrupted.
If the international trade barriers "forge the thunderbolts of war," as State Department spokesmen shouted up and down the land from 1933 to 1939, why were the years between our Civil War and 1929—the era of high tariffs—less darkened by conflict than perhaps any other comparable period in the world's history? If the dove of peace builds her nest and rears her sparse progeny only where balmy breezes of free trade blow, why have the years since the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act and our general erasure of tariffs been so beset by wars and rumors of wars, both hot and cold, that the world has been in a constant state of war since Hitler sent his hordes into Poland in 1939? If the lowering of tariffs brings peace, why does the United States have troops stationed in more than 45 countries around the globe and why is Communism festering, only 90 miles from the Florida coast, in a country that enjoyed more free trade privileges with us than any other nation? While freedom loving men must still study the possibilities of free trade, we must still consider how, under existing world circumstances, a "freer" trade is being used by the Socialists to undermine United States agriculture. It is interesting to examine the backdrop against which this freer trade began. Cordell Hull and his assistant, Francis B. Sayre were, it is generally admitted, sincere advocates of the theory that all wars are caused by tariff barriers. Of course, this is not a new theory. It was prevalent even before the Constitutional Convention met. But soon after March 4, 1933 it was wheeled out of the State Department morgue, dusted off, revived with the pulmotor of collectivism, and resoundingly re-christened "The Good Neighbor Policy." At once, like President Johnson's present "Food For Peace" artifice, it soon outgrew its swaddling clothes and became a worldwide endeavor. If hemispherical "good neighborliness" brought in prospective votes to help insure a second term in the White House, then perhaps dousing all mankind in the saccharine buncombe would likely help to bring on precedent-breaking third and fourth terms. In a speech before the United States Chamber of Commerce, April 30, 1936, Secretary Hull echoed Professor Sayre's reiterated opinion: "[The Trade Agreements program] is the only sound foundation for world peace." Note the word only. After his resignation from his position as the head of the
Agricultural Adjustment Administration, George N. Peek wrote about the principal leaders in the free trade crusade. Of Secretary Hull: [he] is a very worthy gentleman. . . . Like most of his generation in the South, he grew up in the tradition of free trade. To him low tariffs are in the nature of a religion. He does not consider those who disagree with him and who ask for facts as being merely wrong. He believes they are heretics. Of Professor Sayre: He is a doctrinaire who believes in the brotherhood of man which is somehow to be brought about through the League of Nations and international free trade. If you do not agree with him, he thinks your motives must be bad because his are good. Of Secretary Wallace: "Messrs. Hull and Sayre represented the internationalist viewpoints within the Administration just as the TugwellFrankfurter coterie, with Felix Frankfurter on the sidelines, represented the collectivist viewpoint. A collectivist believes in a planned economy. This requires a nationalist state and is directly opposed to internationalism. Secretary Wallace is, I am informed, the only human being who ever succeeded in being both a collectivist and an internationalist at the same time. He wrote a book, AMERICA MUST CHOOSE, which no doubt explained to his own satisfaction how anyone can go in opposite directions at the same time." The Trade Agreements Act, or rather its development into an instrument of worldwide strategy, was administered by the Committee for Reciprocity Information, headed by Professor Henry F. Grady, who came into the State Department as a special adviser to Secretary Hull on the same day the act was approved by Congress, June 12, 1934. This date is worth noting because it marks the tragic surrender by Congress of its constitutional duty "to regulate trade with foreign countries." Of this committee Peek Wrote: The making of the agreements was entirely in the control of one kind of mind—the academic. And so it is not surprising that these men never came to grips with realities and thought that theories could be made to rule the world. They all held that, if only our tariffs were lowered in just the right way, imports would come in and these imports would give foreign nations the purchasing power to buy our goods. Then Peek adds a provocative thought: "Had the kind of 102
internationalists who made these trade agreements been in office a hundred years ago, the United States would now be a colony. . . ." The thinking of the men who built our loudly acclaimed Trade Agreements structure was incomprehensible—if we consider national survival and plain common sense. This thinking in the Department of Agriculture is suggested by a fact George N. Peek stresses: All through the discussions ran the thought that American prices were above world prices and ought to be reduced. That is part of the internationalist creed—a world scale of prices. They did not mention that this also involves a world scale of wages. While they were thus discussing the desirability of lowering prices, the NRA and AAA were trying to raise prices. The impractical reasoning’s of the committee that fashioned the Trade Agreements program met the approval of Secretary Hull and through him the administration. In a speech he delivered later before the National Farm Institute at Des Moines, Iowa, February 19, 1938. The Trade Agreements policy is an indispensable part of our broad and comprehensive program not only to promote in our country stable and sustained prosperity but also to assure for our nation a condition of durable peace, Durable peace? Four years later American boys were dying around the globe! Five months after Secretary Hull spoke at Des Moines about durable peace, Professor Sayre repeated the theme at the University of Virginia, July 7, 1938: "The Trade Agreements program . . . means building secure foundations for peace." Neville Chamberlin met with Adolph Hitler at Munich less than three months later! Peek sums up the general results of the Trade Agreements Committee's work in a manner that later gave his opinions a prophetic tint. "The making of the agreements went on utterly without regard to facts or protests. Our internationalists sowed the seeds and foreign nations are now reaping the harvest." Were he summarizing today the evils that have since fruited from this world-embracing extension of the Good Neighbor Policy, he could add factually that the American farmer has paid a large portion of its cost in lost markets; and unnumbered factory workers are living on government relief because cheaper foreign made products long ago threw them out of 103
jobs. Both farmers and factory workers have suffered. The facts are found on page 292 of AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS for 1936 and in later reports of our foreign trade. Here it stands: Agricultural imports for For Non-farm imports for For 1933 1965 1933 1965 $00611,688,000 $ 4,100,000,000 $00556,188,000 $14,500,000,000
Thus, in 33 years of Reciprocal Trade Agreements operation, abetted by a steady, relentless drive by government officials to lower our tariffs further and further, farm imports have increased 580 per cent and non-farm imports by more than 2,000 per cent. Or measured in the more meaningful scale: farm imports have risen from $4.90 per capita of total population in 1933 to $21.00 in 1965; non-farm imports from $4.40 per capita in 1933 to $74.60 in 1965. Just one example of what this means in terms of factory jobs—we imported 16,400,000 pairs of footwear in 1933 184,000,000 pairs in 1964. Would an impartial congressional investigation reveal that the original Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act was pressured into law to throw more American shoe workers out of jobs in order to "put everybody on relief"? Is there any likelihood of such an investigation being made? Not in the absence of a massive protest via the ballot box. Again, the answer is in the voter's hands. A solemn warning against the entire Reciprocal Trade Agreements program was voiced by George Peek in 1936: It is now an acknowledged fact that Secretary Hull and his associates in the State Department, aided by Secretary Wallace, and with the implied approval of the President, are using the Trade Agreements Act to break down the American protective system and involve the country in the affairs of the world—to do precisely what all our great statesmen, from George Washington down, have steadily fought against. . . . The act was passed primarily to dispose of agricultural surpluses and to help domestic unemployment. But once the internationalists got into the saddle, they found that trading was too commercial and sordid for their minds, and so gradually they fastened the act to an internationalist program for world peace and sought to use it to strike down the barriers of trade everywhere 104
Secretary Freeman said: The United States has steadily been reducing its tariff rate on dutiable agricultural imports for 30 years. is indicated in a speech by Professor Grady. As a result of extending these reductions to virtually all countries. 1935. so it seems. page 3. we shall have lowered our tariffs on a great many items where the case for lowering is justified. can be brought to date by two official statements. happy family. what the proponents of unilateral tariff reduction desire. Our soldier and sailor dead call to us across the years to make our lives effective in building constructively for peace.. issue of September 23. he said. Yet. succeeded on their evil course. one by Secretary of Agriculture Orville Freeman. . .. aided under camouflage by the eager collectivists who furnished the motive power for the crusade. That this opinion was well-founded and that the State Department hastened to take over powers delegated by the Constitution solely to Congress. at Riverside. Writing in FOREIGN AGRICULTURE. but we will do it more carefully and more scientifically than is possible by legislative action." the candidate said in 1932. in a memorial address at Arlington National Cemetery. 1963. That the entire tariff-destroying undertaking had President Roosevelt's approval can be seen by his complete about-face from his campaign promises in 1932 and his official actions and utterances later.and to make the whole world into one great. . "It is absurd to talk about lowering tariffs on farm products. November 11. The extent to which the One-World advocates. by word and deed we are giving example to the world by removing or lowering barriers which impede friendly intercourse. When we shall have gone the rounds of most of the important countries of the world. reducing in each case the duties on commodities of which it is the principal source. we will obtain. . . We have already lowered many rates. California. . in 1934: Our objective is the general amelioration of the world situation. . What Professor Grady was actually telling the American people in 1934 was this: The Trade Agreements Committee can do a better job of handling world trade than can Congress to which the Constitution mistakenly delegated the duty. the other by the late President Kennedy. beginning 105 .
even further reductions (are) in prospect through reciprocal negotiations under the Trade Expansion Act. ".S. The average tariff rate on dutiable agricultural imports was brought down from 88 per cent in 1932 to 10 per cent by 1959. Here the United States farmer is at the bottom of the protection totem pole. "The farmers of the United States carry out their production operations with far less protection from competitive imports than do farmers of practically all other countries. But this is not the end. the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. Germany 93 Canada 41 Austria 91 United Kingdom 37 Denmark 87 United States 26 Greece 82 Had Secretary Freeman desired to admit to American farmers in plain language what three decades of worldwide Good 106 . . with slight reductions since 1959 and even further reductions in prospect through reciprocal negotiations under the Trade Expansion Act.with the enactment of the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act in the 1930's. were designed primarily to benefit the farmer. The last sentence in this quotation warrants more than a superficial reading because it strips considerable camouflage from the original excuses advanced for the adoption of the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. . non-agricultural imports. 30 years later.S." Freeman bravely pulled the curtain further aside even further in the same article. with an increase of more than 500 per cent in farm commodity imports. the Secretary of Agriculture casually confesses that tariffs have been lowered more through the years on farm commodities than on non-farm products. Portugal 100 Netherlands 79 New Zealand 100 Japan 76 Norway 97 Belgium 76 Switzerland 94 Italy 63 France 94 Australia 41 W. Up and down the land propagandists for the New Deal heralded the claim that the Good Neighbor Policy and its offspring. The average duty on U. Yet. agricultural imports is lower than that imposed on U." Accompanying the article is a table showing the percentage of agricultural imports that is protected by tariffs.
even more clearly than before. my friends. it is almost frightening to consider how government actions dovetail into the original plan.' was this. saying to Congress in this message comprised a fourfold manifesto: 1) Lower tariffs. he would have written: "What President Roosevelt actually meant in 1933 when he said. . 2) Lower tariffs will force many farmers off their farms because through 30 years of Reciprocal Trade Agreements operation farm imports are less protected in the United States than in any other major farming nation. 'Rest assured. in substance. ." Here the same thread of "get-everybody-on-relief" shows through the fabric. The President then coined a phrase for this new magnanimous move to absorb the farmers bankrupted by increased farm imports. 3) Lower tariffs will certainly drive many manufacturing plants into bankruptcy because history amply proves that 107 . What President Kennedy was actually. but then follows one of the most astonishing utterances ever to come from the White House: I am also recommending as an essential part of the new trade program that companies. President Kennedy urged in behalf of his proposed Trade Expansion Act that Congress grant him "authority to reduce existing tariffs by 50 per cent in reciprocal negotiations. January 25. we will do all we can to help the farmer . 'Of course. as I propose to effectuate them in continued negotiations. In a special message to Congress. permanently.Neighborliness had done to them." This is alarming enough for its own implications.' " Remembering George Peek's words that the authors of the Agricultural Adjustment Act were merely using the farmer as their first guinea pig in their drive to Russianize our entire economy by driving everybody onto relief. 1962. will throw American factory workers out of jobs. farmers and workers who suffer damages from increased foreign-import competition be assisted in their efforts to adjust to that competition. The phrase: "trade-adjustment assistance. and for manufacturers whose businesses were destroyed by cheap-labor goods brought in from foreign countries. we shall do all we can to put every farmer in the United States on relief and in so doing destroy the foundations of our once great farming industry. for workers thrown out of jobs by our expensive and expanding good neighborliness.
now wearing apparel and other articles made from cotton are so thoroughly mixed in with other textile manufactures that it is impossible to gain even an estimate of the total.320. the year before the reign of confusion was inaugurated in the Department of Commerce.000 0514.000 0052. formerly furniture was listed under wood and wood manufacturers. (c) financial aid to take care of the additional farmers we intend to force to the wall. sandwiched in between flashlights and billfolds.000 003. (b) aid through tax benefits to businessmen whose industries are destroyed by this unwise and un-American folly. the following listing of manufacturing imports of 1933 must be compared with those of 1963.000 1963 $302. The bad effects—under existing world circumstances—of lower and lower tariffs are not imaginary nor are they echoes of the long-traduced policy of high protection walls.000 001.000 0137.562.457.478.000 001. In the revised method it is found far back in the listing.000 0102.000 009.American industry cannot survive in competition with low-wage countries without protection.237. IMPORTS. It is interesting to study a list of "before and after" examples.547. pedantic confusion is piled on confusion. Therefore.000 010. But.000 017. Here's the reason: Since the first foreign trade records were formulated in the United States Department of Commerce.062. in the 1963 annual issue of FT 125.0771.518. the groupings had been logical and simple.659.000 016.000 00.732.000 0425. For example. U.139.000 0308.600.940.000 0150.447.717.541.832.000 009.033.000 0081.000 006. I ask Congress to grant me authority to (a) provide relief allowances and more unemployment insurance to the wage earners who will be victims of free trade.000 108 .S.000 077.997. 4) Therefore. At this point it is necessary to explain why so many statistical comparisons do not include figures for 1964 and 1965.000 0089.876.538.000 0078.445. Cotton Manufactures Wool Manufactures Footwear Leather Paper Glass & Products Clay & Products Farm Machinery Autos & Parts Industrial Chemicals Electrical Equipment Coal Tar Chemicals 1933 $32.786.000 0783. Formerly a grade school child could consult the handy index and turn to cotton manufacture imports and easily add up the total.
at last find a permanent refuge in the Ark of Free Trade? Let's do a little historical reviewing to determine if "tariffs forge the thunderbolts of war"? Did German armies march into the Low Countries in 1913 to batter down tariff walls? Did Hitler repeat the aggression 27 years later to ameliorate unfair tariff discrimination? Did the Austrian house painter launch his Anschluss against his former homeland because Austria had erected high tariff walls against Germany? Did he send his juggernaut into Czechoslovakia to procure food barred from Germany by unjust tariffs? Was his rape of Poland.000 0075. In the mad striving for self-sufficiency and in the growing armed strength the seeds were sown for World War II.Photographic Goods Soap & Toiletries 002. it is interesting to look for the dove of peace. England and the United States enter World War II to attack or defend free trade or high tariffs? Were Japan's "thunderbolts of war" loosed at Pearl Harbor because the United States was imposing trade barriers against her? The answer to all of these is. Did she.245. was issued by the United States Department of Agriculture through what was then called the Interbureau Committee on PostWar Programs.184. 1944. under a dateline of August." Yet. after decades of fitful struggles for bare survival. and with Congress continuing year after year to continue this shameful sham. entitled INTERNATIONAL TRADE.000 002. a 16 page brochure.000 With New Deal assurances that the Reciprocal Trade Agreements would forever remove the causes of war.195. 109 . "no. Denmark and Norway predicated on the removal of trade barriers? Did Hitler join unholy hands with Russia and later send his legions deep into the Soviet Union for reasons even remotely related to tariffs or trade restrictions? Did France.782.000 0014. On page 15 begins an analysis of causes that had led to World War II: The desire for self-sufficiency resulted in nations with inadequate resources coveting or seizing neighboring territory from other nations.
Under other world circumstances there is a case for "free" trade—but in a world where the Communist nations multiply daily and where worldwide famine threatens. whom if his son ask bread." Those who for years could hear the fluttering of wings in our Reciprocal Trade Agreements program and those who favor its continuation and further lowering of tariffs. should be reminded that Russia was the recipient of approximately 12 billion dollars worth of free food and equipment after she joined with England and the United States against Hitler. Few murders are committed for commercial reasons. war is nothing more than wholesale murder. Chapter Fifteen GOVERNMENT AND FARMING Or what man is there of you. The teacher who said. The idealistic proposition that free trade contributes to international concord is as hollow as the trite phrase—"a war to end war.Apparently satisfied with their non-historical history. THE ORIGINAL intent of Congress when the Department of Agriculture was established at the close of the Civil War and accorded Cabinet status. little mention is found of trade restrictions as causes of armed conflict and nothing regarding free trade as its preventive. by such authorities as Thucydides. logistics and strategies. the fundamental realities call for sensible self-interest in trade policies. "There shall be wars and rumors of war. that our bearded friend in Cuba received more and greater concessions under the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act than any other nation. Machiavelli. the authors sum up their opinions with the same old free trade foolishness: "High levels of world trade contribute to peace and prosperity." In the world's outstanding analyses of war—its causes. Clausewitz and Homer Lea. will he give him a stone? Matthew 8:9. We learn from history that we do not learn from history." did not qualify his prophecy by appending—"unless nations adopt free trade. was that it should serve as a 110 ." In it is found no place for the factor of inherent human viciousness.
more and better food and until the nineteen-twenties in the safety that comes from as selfsustaining national agriculture. No other step in restoring American agriculture to soundness and economic health can take precedence over this—restoration to the farmer of his inherent right to operate his business as he desires. but to enslave him as a prelude to the 111 . but for their fidelity to the Executive branch of government and the party hi power. Farm control was started. touched every farmer in the nation. not to help the farmer.national clearing house for research and dissemination of practical information to farmers. It was tragic that the Department of Agriculture became a focal gathering point for the young collectivists in 1933 and that the department thereafter has borne the major role in defending their indefensible policies of general regimentation. passage of the SmithLever Act in 1914 not only broadened the usefulness of the Department of Agriculture but it brought government and farmer closer together—brought facilities and means of research to the local man who could put them to use. The very title of his book on this subject CROSSFIRE which tells of his running battle with the administration. As mentioned in the previous chapter about wheat. more than others. through the County Agricultural Agent. explain why that particular Cabinet post is so frequently filled by men chosen. This law welded federal and state aims into a workable unit and. Ezra Taft Benson while powerless to effect the changes and the restoration of freedoms he would have liked was the outstanding exception. is indicative of this. The benefits gained over the intervening century have not only accrued to agriculture. both positively and negatively. two questions provide the framework for restoring to farming its lost vigor: 1) What services should the Federal Government offer the farmer? 2) What is the government doing that is handicapping and hamstringing agriculture? Here are some of the answers: 1) Take the government out of farming and farming out of the government. To appraise objectively the Federal Government's responsibilities to American agriculture. but to all the people in terms of national strength. These factors. not for their practical knowledge of farming and its multiplied problems nor for their ability to carry out the department's original purpose.
The collectivists who pushed this nation into the sink-hole of 112 .socialization of our entire economy. if not all. Until this is done. twisted statistics and planned deception illustrate the urgency for lifting the Department of Agriculture out of the foul depths of political horse trading and the introduction of ideologies foreign to our shores. like everything else which is based on falsehood. So long as the Secretary of Agriculture remains little more than a Charlie McCarthy for the White House. have skated to the brink of famine. Also by removing from the backs of producers and consumers the heavy financial burden of supporting the unwieldy and cumbersome bureaucracy that is annually expanding into an intolerable octopus. executive and legislative alike. The Federal Government and the people have no more sacred patriotic duty to present the future generations than the duty to repudiate this sordid chapter in our history and fully restore the full spirit and practice of free enterprise to our farmers. named almost invariably for "services rendered" at the party's nominating convention. Farm control. unaware of their danger. A widespread and severe drought through the Middle West at such a time would have brought on the catastrophe. chosen by farmers and answerable to them for every detail of his administration. That we are the only nation on earth that has never been blighted by famine is no assurance of our continued immunity. the nation's vital food resources will continue to be a political football. has no place in any phase of a government of. Most. With a man at its head. Only a people kept fully acquainted with the truth about their food supply can make safeguards against such a contingency. it is inconceivable that the debacle of 1933 could have occurred. intrigue and destructive and disruptive designs. subject to recall by referendum by the same power that elects him. There have been times since we lost a self-sustaining level in foods production in the middle nineteen-twenties that the American people. every responsible official. by and for the people. Surely the 1933-1966 era of withheld facts. the economic hardships from such a shift back to normalcy would be absorbed by vastly increased consumer demands resulting from the elimination of the present "pegged" prices. 2) Remove the Department of Agriculture from the Cabinet and elect its directing head by farmer vote. will bear the onus of malfeasance.
let me expand on this example of government prejudice and blindness as a means of illustrating what the USDA could do through research and informational services—in keeping with the department's original purpose. developed the modern organic method of plant growing. The USDA remains silent on all the activity in this field and its potentials. copying the processes in nature. Sir Albert Howard. plus production and domestic consumption data compiled and published by the statistical board should be made available to each farmer annually. Sir Albert divided several head of beef cattle in two equal groups. the other group was fed with grain and roughage grown on soils treated with regular commercial (chemical) fertilizer. One was fed grain and roughage grown on soils whose fertility was maintained only by applications of livestock manures and decayed vegetation. 3) Provide a six-man. eminent English experimenter in agricultural research. The former. to supplement the returns made by the Crop Reporting Division. Early in this century. Such additional precautions as Congress deems advisable should be taken to prevent a repetition of the "revisions" earlier discussed in this study.totalitarianism could not have gained entrance to the department. Since organic farming happens to be an enthusiasm of this particular writer. fed on organically produced grain and roughage remained immune to the disease. utilizing existing facilities of our present reliable Crop Reporting Division. production and livestock numbers every five years. audit and publish farm production statistics and other related data. Foreign trade in commodities. 4) Authorize County Agricultural Agents to conduct a census survey of farm acreage. this to be done under supervision of State Extension facilities. halfway between decennial censuses. the second group contracted it. nonpartisan board to compile. One of his early experiments furnished the basis on which this school of thought and practice is rapidly expanding. 113 . much less have taken over control. Then the highly contagious hoof-and-mouth disease was introduced into both groups. By far the greatest and most beneficial services the government can render farmers lies in the informational and educational channels. 5) Foreign trade reporting. One of the stigmas which might be removed is that which impedes knowledge of the "controversial" theory and practice of organic gardening and farming.
retired from the College of Agriculture at Missouri State University and recognized as a world authority on soils. Yet. Alexis Carrel said. Herein the weight of evidence is not by any means on the side of chemical fertilizer lobbyists. the theory is spreading. fruit and butter. it is the government's duty to acquaint farmers with the fact and not continue to recommend more and more fertilizers. With continued circulation of such books as Rachel Carson's SILENT SPRING. . William Albrecht. One of the fastest growing magazines in the United States is a leader in promoting this new concept. The government can greatly help agriculture by leading accurate and lobby-free research in these matters. consumer fears will certainly take the form of reduced fruit and vegetable consumption. Dr. Farmers and gardeners are specializing in organically grown crops. milk. If organic culture reduces the need for poisonous applications of fungicides and insecticides. . by increasing the abundance of crops without replacing all the exhausted elements of the soil. Mass production has modified the composition of wheat. Several years ago the late Dr. Chemical fertilizers. individual officials in the Department of Agriculture scoff at the idea. have indirectly contributed to change in the nutritive value of cereal grams and of vegetables. Despite its access to almost unlimited research facilities. . the scientific arm of the Department of Agriculture should substantiate the claim and let farmers and gardeners know. as reputable independent researchers charge they do. the government has done little to disprove or substantiate the organic farming and gardening theory. Thousands of persons are shunning foods grown with chemical fertilizers and reporting benefits to health from organic foods. If chemical fertilizers are sterilizing our soils. eggs. Testifying before a congressional committee a few years ago.Later experiments showed that plants grown in organically maintained soils suffered less from common plant diseases and predacious insects than did plants grown on chemically fertilized soils. said that experiments conducted at the Missouri Station demonstrated that predacious insects will not eat spinach grown on soils nourished by natural organic matter. In most instances. while closely adjacent rows grown with chemical fertilizers 114 .
It recommends white flour despite the fact that the removal of hull (bran) and coating (middlings) leaves little but starch. many reputable physicians and scientists believe at least part of the rise in cancer and heart ailments results from this suspected source. Supermarkets stress the fact that they sell "aged beef. while sending the valuable vitamins and minerals into hog and cattle feeds. By holding the dressed carcass for a certain period at temperatures higher than safety warrants.could be protected from destruction only by applications of poisons. It was the Department of Agriculture that devised during World War II the trick of "enriching" white flour with synthetic vitamins instead of leaving in the original nutrients nature places in the grain. Use of poisons on food crops mounts year after year. This is really the first step in decay. The consumer is never informed by the government that "aged" beef is actually partly decayed beef. The phenomenal rise in the use of chemical fertilizers from 72 pounds per capita of total population in 1900 to 327 pounds in 1964 is another fruit of government recommendations. Question marks should be removed as far as possible from these controversial issues. caused mainly by advice sent out to farmers. Certainly nobody can maintain there are no dangers in consuming foods coated with deadly poisons as well as with lethal chemicals absorbed into their tissues. with greater benefits to everybody as in determining the accuracy of this claim." This aging process was developed by the Department of Agriculture. while on the other side of the matter. 115 . In few areas could the Department of Agriculture render so valuable a service to both farmer and consumer. The Bureau of Home Economics makes no mention that the gas ripened tomatoes found in grocery bins are not ripe but green—green as any other halfgrown tomato. the enzymatic action causes lean tissues to become more tender. gardeners and orchardists by the government. Weed control by soil-sterilizing chemicals instead of by traditional methods is another potential danger to animal and human health for which government advice is almost wholly responsible. The consumer is led to believe that this scientific process guarantees better and more nutritious meat. The Bureau of Home Economics in the Department of Agriculture fails to mention that white rice has been denuded of its vital health promoting and protecting vitamins and minerals in the polishing processes.
All these factors will. this is the commodity we would first miss most if war (whether hot war. A visit to a supermarket reveals that housewives are not to be fooled forever. harm the farmer instead of helping him. But it would indeed seem strange coincidence that. Conversation with them indicates they are becoming more and more fearful of chemical dangers lurking in and on fresh fruits and vegetables. They are asking questions. For example. With continued dyeing of citrus fruits in the face of widespread rumors that the dyes may be related to cancer. they are reading labels. This may partly explain the fact that Americans consumed twenty fewer pounds of fresh vegetables per capita in 1963 than they did in 1945. despite the blessings from faster transportation and modern refrigeration. This ratio of decline is not occurring in countries where citrus dyeing is prohibited by law. meat reaches the American 116 . Here. the government holds the key to several important channels for improvement. If there is a liaison between Department of Agriculture officials and powerful chemical and fertilizer interests. the responsibility lies at the door of Congress. in the long run. A similar trend is reflected in consumption of fresh fruit— a decline of fifteen pounds per capita since 1945. in view of the widespread fear that increased use of poisons on foods and latent dangers in increased applications of chemical fertilizers the Department at no time suggests restraint. With meat the weakest link in our agricultural chain. the consumption of these popular fruits has dropped from a high of sixty-eight pounds per capita in 1944 to twenty-two pounds in 1963. That the Federal Government must bear the blame for the fact that we lead the world in beef imports is not even open to debate. In the realm of helping farmers adjust cropping plans to reduce our national dependence on foreign farms for basic foods. the Department of Agriculture can return to roles for which it was created. but the government's continued adherence to the surplus food delusion has aggravated the dilemma it originally lacked the capability to recognize. Instead it stresses the need and worth of more and more fungicides. Not only was the campaign of cattle destruction in the nineteen-thirties directed by Department of Agricultural officials. pesticides and chemical plant foods. cold war or internal civil war) closed the ports through which our increasingly heavy imports of beef and pork come from foreign farms.
promoted and encouraged by the Department of Agriculture and permitted by order of or neglect through the Federal Food and Drug Administration. Sodium sulphite. It was a scarlet red. preservatives. From meat packing plants to meet refrigerators and display counters in supermarkets. tampered with and loaded with more potential carcinogens (cancer producing properties) than any other food. The customer 117 . All steps of meat processing are recommended. an occasional antibiotic wash to prolong the meat's escape from putrefaction. We have tended to think in recent years of radioactive fallout on pastures and feed crops as the major danger in contamination of meats but overlook more direct methods of poisoning.dining table more doctored. not yet covered with the ordinary plastic sheet. To read feed advertisements and labels on commercial feed bags sounds like a lecture in a college laboratory—little like livestock feeding. Often grazing areas and roughage crops are contaminated by weed-killing chemicals. dyes. without technical or scientific knowledge of safety limitations in the handling and application of poisons. This awakening was dramatically demonstrated recently in a supermarket where a housewife was intending to buy hamburger. from pasture field to retail counters. and in the case of turkeys and poultry. From before its birth a meat animal or un-hatched chick is directly or indirectly nourished on artificial sex hormones. When she could not find a suitable tray in the display case. is a prominent ingredient in laundry detergents. for example. decay inhibitors and a veritable storm of chemical applications continue—sodium nitrate. the use of these lethal chemicals is in the hands of persons without training. boric acid. contaminated. He brought out a "fresh" tray full. sodium benzoate and sodium sulphite. Often pastures on which milk and meat animals graze are coated with virulent insecticides from airplanes sent out by the government to spray forests or to combat fire ants and mosquitoes. antibiotics and chemically impregnated grain mixtures. And what is even more alarming. The detrimental effects these continued and mounting hazards on human health will eventually have on our already crippled livestock industry must await the nationwide consumer revolt already taking shape. But the government imbued chemical parade is barely starting. As it nears slaughtering age it is subjected to a final round of tranquilizers and more dosings with antibiotics and injections. she rang for the man in charge. All these are poisons.
Few. The trouble has been traced to "junk" eggs used in the drying process. the consumer should not be forced to employ a technician to accompany the housewife to the food store. Among the most important function of government is to safeguard the welfare of both.glanced at it and said. Not only are dried egg products cheaper but they are handier to store and use. Agricultural authorities. In recent weeks health authorities have become aroused over an outbreak of so-called salmonella poisonings. a restraining hand must be held up in warning and advice between the farmer and the consumer of his products. egg yolks and egg whites. These are eggs the poultryman should. The end result is that urban consumers are becoming more suspicious and consumer health more imperiled. Many years ago federal government technicians developed the method of drying whole eggs. if any. several deaths resulting and widespread sickness of near-fatal scope. noodles and related products. the blame lies with the Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Division which recommend and permit this reckless gambling with the nation's health. The same is true in plants manufacturing such foods as macaroni. adding the necessary chemicals to guarantee the products against decay during long periods of storage and waiting on retail shelves until the unaware buyer came along. wherever eggs are necessary in food processing. in fact." The farmer can in no manner be held responsible for such breaks of faith with the consumer. They are cracked eggs. from Washington down to the County Agent. 118 . The farmer is not and cannot become a chemist. "I'd be afraid to eat that. Then too. for the future of his business as well as for the consumer's safety. Another example in which the farmer must bear at least part of the responsibility for betrayal of the consumer is with eggs. In this age of chemical madness and test-tube rashness. bakeries to day use whole eggs. It can be observed that all these technological "improvements" are primarily aimed at mass production goals—grow' em bigger and faster. throw away. there is the possibility that the organisms may be entering the product during or after the processing. cannot be allowed to forget that in any business the welfare of the consumer must be considered or the business will ultimately pay the penalty. you've just sprayed it with nitrate of potassium. The dangerous organism enters through the break in the eggshell.
The place: the United States Department of Agriculture. Samuel Johnson. with our imports of farm commodities carrying us nearer the leadership among food importing nations. evil and in bad taste—even in food and clothing. at a time crucial to the United States for revamping its agriculture.Chapter Sixteen NATIONAL SELF-SUFFICIENCY Prosperity's right hand is industry. Denmark. With the flames of war at last under partial control but not extinguished. free trade became a greater fetish and lowering food production turned into an all-embracing crusade. Czechoslovakia. Scarcity a stimulant! Debt a badge of progress! To stand proud as the flag goes by is an admission of selfish nationalism. with Russia rising to menace the world. there was no ear to listen to truth. The State Department's role: to move toward the same goal but under the guise of world peace. no means of carrying a plea to the people about the urgency to regain our agricultural self-sufficiency. into Austria. Poland. 1933. welfare and safety into a glorious world state from which peace and plenty will forever flow like a river! It is not difficult to determine when and where this consummate folly originated. The actual motive: to turn the United States into a Socialist state similar to the Soviet Union. Thus. Countdown time for sending up the first trial balloon by the collectivists was March 4. Even after Hitler's armed might began to roll down the highways of Europe. The stated motive: to lift American farmers from the bog of overproduction. the Low Countries. DEEPLY PLANTED in the American consciousness today is the dangerous delusion that national self-sufficiency is selfish. It is our duty to God and man to merge America's interests. Self-sufficiency is an evil from which every intelligent citizen should flee or against which he should stand and fight unflinchingly! Abundance held a curse from which we should be rescued. Norway and France. Americans lolled in the happy illusion of more-than-plenty. and her left hand is frugality. 119 .
or will they be retrained for other pursuits? If the theories of our "farm experts" from Harvard. this definition must inevitably lead to all the trappers and fishermen being removed from the Mississippi delta region and the north woods. house them in homes built where slums have been cleared. Again. thousands of farm people will be shifted from the hill sections of southern Ohio. Where will paternalistic Uncle Sam place them? Will the Great Society look after the polar bears remaining after the Eskimos have been transported to some snowcovered Elysium? If this definition is applied to Indian reservations the Great Society must send the reservation Indians to some Happy Hunting Ground tucked away in a Red Man's Shangri-la we common folks have never been permitted to enter. provide them food via free school lunches and food stamps. and finally give them all a free college education—the bills paid by tax dollars. The rush toward both goals was accelerated by their characteristic dogmatic definition of a submarginal farm. Notice those ten words carefully and stress the word—commercially. Indiana and Illinois. in the all-embracing scope of the Great Society. They were urging greater and greater reductions in food production. pay their rents by rent subsidies. they declared. Will the Great Society neglect the Indian there as the government generally has neglected him over the last hundred years? Also. it means the removal of all Eskimos. plus those 120 . Will the Great Society move them to better trapping and fishing regions. Such a farm was. protect their health under Medicare. But this "solution" opens several questions.Blithe young urban doctrinaires were directing our agricultural destiny from Washington's plush bureaus and error was on the throne. And for good measure they threw in the operator of such a farm as a submarginal farmer. more and more reductions in our already emaciated farm population. If this pedantic definition of a sub marginal farm is applied to Alaska. Yale and Princeton are followed through. any farm that cannot be operated commercially at a profit. where will the Great Society relocate them? With natural acquisition of young workers in urban life. from the Ozark Mountains of Missouri and Arkansas and from vast areas of northeast New York State and New England. the major solution of the submarginal farm problem is simple—force them into our already overcrowded towns and cities. Of course.
eroded and exhausted that its operator cannot raise on it enough food to feed himself and family is at the same time producing so much food that he stands guilty in the court of our "farm experts" of increasing our gigantic supply of surplus food. A small flock of hens keeps the family supplied with eggs and enough left over to "trade" for salt. pear. a farm so run-down. build a dam. sugar. But the New Deal. Stock the submarginal streams with fish. say the urban planners. More hydroelectric plants are needed for bigger cities in the future. more rural play room is needed. denuded. Therefore. A few backyard or hill orchard apple. He keeps two milk cows and sells their calves to the local butcher. he grows a vegetable garden to furnish the family fresh vegetables in season and with enough to can and dry for use over winter. with an additional few bushels to sell in the spring when potato prices are higher. say Army Engineers. as any farmer knows. Square Deal and the Great Society have known and still know the answer to the pertinent question—what should be done with all these submarginal acres? Turn them into federal parks for recreation purposes. plum and cherry trees meet the family needs for fruit. In other words. In late October will be seen conical mounds of potatoes buried for feeding the family the year round. Turn this land into more and bigger Tennessee Valley Authority. proposes wild life officials. proponents of government-own-everything insist. Two or three hogs supply the family with year-round meat. argue sociologists. will the government's retraining program absorb the additional sub-marginal farmer? Just how elastic will the Great Society become? But even sillier is the claim of the Department of Agriculture that these submarginal farms are contributing to the "burdensome surplus" of food still menacing the nation. the "farm experts" do not realize what a submarginal farm is. A row of blackberries and raspberries along the garden fence augments the fruit 121 . Fair Deal. urges the Secretary of Interior. Wherever there is a flowing stream. Yet. how can they offer a practical solution to the problem? If the submarginal farmer is industrious and thrifty. As union labor work weeks are shortened. plus an occasional tank of gasoline for the family car. spices and other non-farm items.displaced by automation and increasing manufactured imports.
know more of the quiet and serenity of normal living. healthful and satisfying. selfsustaining farmer and his family the Great Society would tear from the land and force into the grime and crime of overcrowded urban life or "adopt" as a ward of an all-knowing welfare state. with an occasional sale in nearby village. pedantic definition of submarginal farms. 2) the fallacy that submarginal farmers and their families are not happy with their way of life. that a man receives this freedom from God. 3) the supreme fallacy of ignoring the issue of freedom. when in actuality most of them find it pleasant. Annual cash sales from such an industriously worked farm may be only $200 to $500 a year and often less. It is this independent.supply. This is the "poor farmer" for whom city newspaper reporters. an assumption which runs counter to every historical concept of the origin and growth of American agriculture. above all. that men are "endowed by their Creator. but the family income is boosted by part-time work in nearby mills and factories and seasonal jobs on surrounding nonmarginal farms. eat better and more nourishing food than all the weepers for his downtrodden estate ever heard about. soul-searing currents of modern commercial life. magazine writers and TV panelists shed copious tears of pity. thrifty. three flagrant fallacies are unavoidable: 1) the fallacy of measuring farming solely by the yardstick of commercial production. enjoy more of the healthful freedom God intended all to enjoy. Every enduring segment of our complex economy is based on the unvoiced and unrecognized principle that somewhere in our social and business empire must be a place where a relatively large number of our citizenry may find a niche where they may live out their unostentatious spans without burdening the state or interfering with the hurried. This farm fails by a wide margin to escape the academic definition of what constitutes a submarginal farm. noisy. town or city markets. whirlwinds of rebellion will sweep this land. he and his family breathe fresher air. In analyzing the government planners' impractical. This definition completely bypasses the fact that in a free country a man ought to be free to farm and live as he chooses. and. When the self-sustaining farm is no more. This is a representative of a self-sustenance farm. Yet. industrious. Without it society would crumple." 122 . It is the keystone of our nation's might.
identified with miracle-working machines and commercial sales running from $10. knowing they will never accumulate material wealth.000 to $150. Let's consider . highly mechanized business. among which are life. Why our government pedants cannot realize this fact is puzzling. Is not this same goal the aim of a large percentage of city families—often running a rat-race to "make ends meet"? This logically leads to the second point—the merits and noncommercial rewards of self-sustenance farming. but this has not eliminated the small self-sustenance farmer who plans his crops and measures his efforts to come out even —nothing more.these fallacies. Deeply planted in the agrarian bloodstream of this nation is a fact that Washington's urban-thinking planners cannot comprehend: Farming is not solely a way to make a living. liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Only the route to huge urban housing projects where crime multiplies." No small part of this concept has resulted from urban informational media. Of course. Why are the planners 123 . There has grown up in this country in recent years. men and women who might believe you if you told them that cows get their milk from milkweed and that pods of honey-locust trees are green beans. He has become "big business.000 or more annually. Those that prefer to choose another life are often interested in country life. not in any manner measured in dollars and cents. They cannot understand why thousands of American families consider farming an ideal way of life—exhilarating and soul-satisfying. In their minds they see the farmer pushing buttons and starting wheels that remove most of the traditional labor from his tasks. By stumbling past simple truth the planners ignore the fact that many city dwellers. Yet with words such as "slums" and "ghettos" and "undesirable" they smear vast areas of urban life that are merely poorer sections and not true slums at all. But this route is not open to them. chiefly among urban people. there has been a tremendous trend toward bigger farms and more commercialization over the last three or four decades.with inalienable rights. are satisfied to stay there from birth to death. briefly. These are the submarginal city people. because they prefer city life with its paved streets and close associations. an unrealistic idea that farming is a vast. one by one. it is a way of life—the farm is a place to live.
the friendly call of quail from their meadow realms. Is it not within the range of 124 . spices and. "Self-sufficiency is impossible. lambs playing on green spring pastures. And not among the least of potential advantages in developing our own sources of coffee would be the fact that coffee requires much hand labor. the twilight sleigh bell song of peepers.interested in moving people only in one direction. the taste of new garden peas cooked within an hour of their vines." argues the free trade enthusiast. coffee. "if the United States becomes self-sufficient in food and fiber. ripe pears nodding in the autumn sun.. Test trees several years ago produced eight to ten pounds of coffee beans per tree. "But. . Is it sacrilegious to propose that many persons now on relief roles and those who in the future will be recipients of government relief could be utilized in growing and harvesting the coffee we now import? Early in the nineteenth century enterprising Georgia farmers demonstrated than an excellent brand of tea could be grown in the southern part of that state.. . "What about tea. that means the return to isolationism. only from country to city? And the submarginal city family would be no less costly for the welfare state to support on the land than the submarginal farm family will be after they are moved into the urban community." shout protesting One-World advocates. rubber. These often are experienced more abundantly and are often more deeply appreciated on a submarginal farm than on the farm whose owner banks huge revenues." Nothing of the sort. A stronger United States is a greater anchor. the incomparable goodness of a peach cobbler made from fruit direct from the tree. busy bees gathering man's only predigested food from flowers. What plant breeders could accomplish with this favorable start can scarcely be imagined. a mother hen leading her downy brood across the barn lot. a surer source of help to other nations. Indeed. ." It may come as a surprise to many readers to know that there are over two million acres of land in Texas suitable for growing coffee. the tang of apple butter bubbling in an outdoor kettle. . wild strawberries peeking from green coverts. they might even grow some of their food! It is easy to forget in the stress of modern life that there are almost innumerable products on the "submarginal" farm which bear no price tags—a sun that rises unescorted by smoke and soot.
Even if we rule out the tropical acres which we have brought into the union of these United States and the potentials of our insular territories. Our rubber requirements can be fully supplied by synthetic rubber made from domestically grown crops. Research has shown that even the lowly goldenrod is a potential and perhaps practical source of rubber. plant-breeding experiments should make possible the development of several varieties of spices which could be grown here and which are now considered only tropical and exotic. What the vast facilities of government research could accomplish in freeing us from dependence on foreign nations for crops and products which we now import staggers the imagination. "It is long past time for us to consider American survival first. We import more than 150 million pounds of spices a year. His whole village was choked with the 125 . legislative or administrative.reason that many other areas in the United States offer similar opportunities to grow our tea imports? World War II demonstrated what American ingenuity can do to make us independent of foreign sources when emergencies arise. has the courage to come forth and declare. Apparently no government official. My study in this area leads me to conclude that this could be reduced by more than two-thirds with research. But the spirit of One-Worldism that dominates Washington policies and free trade idealism that fashions almost all our foreign policies are throttling every effort of research needed to bridge these chasms." Chapter Seventeen TECHNOLOGY AND FARMING ho is this that darkeneth counsel by -words •without knowledge? Job 38:2. Let's put our wealth and know-how to work to render this nation entirely free from supine dependence on foreign sources for the essential crops and products we now import. almost wholly with government assistance in plant breeding. "IN AN old story a boy had a magic porridge mill that he could not stop.
Following the names and official positions of the committee members is a list of eighty-four names constituting subcommittees cooperating in the survey—all officials of varying rank and prominence in the department. like the boy's village. It was published in August. it IS the book. Two inconspicuous facts about this book are keys to its importance—the date of its publication and the personnel of its authorship group. This book represented the unanimous views of all the departments. but a push-button enterprise from which science and invention have eliminated almost everything but the joy of living." That no word of disagreement or censure was ever heard from the White House or Capitol Hill further indicated that 126 . They were voicing.gruel. tea. not the opinions of a few isolated officials. It was prepared by a twenty-five man group that called themselves The Interbureau Committee on Technology. Our farms had fallen short by 17 million tons of producing enough food and feed to supply export markets and satisfy domestic demands. entitled TECHNOLOGY ON THE FARM. when for the previous six years we had suffered an import balance of more than 17 million tons of basic foods and feeds which should and could have been grown on our own farms. Next. 1940. advanced processes and better animals. not complementary products like coffee." This quotation is not from Grimm's Fairy Tales. often a relentless and reluctant nature. long-hour. The Department of Agriculture believed that science and invention had so greatly increased the farmer's powers of production that. Howard R. the authors were the official heads of all the bureaus and branches of the department. Here it should be stressed that these imports were supplemental. Aesop's Fables or other children books. Tolley. all departmental heads." This one sentence not only serves to introduce the book. Chief of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. All that follows is but a repetition of the argument that farming is no longer a laborious. the nation would be "choked with the gruel. in fact. 1940. spices and other exotic crops and products. The situation he faced resembles the problems we get from new machines. It is the opening paragraph of a 224 page book issued by the United States Department of Agriculture in August. improved plants. sets the theme of the study in a somewhat effusive foreword: "It would be useless for us to try to curb this march of technology. tedious battle of man against nature.
welcomed this already inflated "technological" concept and the parade began. also that the executive as well as the legislative arm of government was ignorant of the startling truth that the United States had suffered an import balance of over 17 million tons for the previous six years. the period between 1933 and the outbreak of World War II may well be called the "mimeograph era. To fully appreciate the marvelous advance of technology and to separate truth from distortion in the steady advance in agriculture it would be necessary to go back to the first hoe or other rude tool to aid man in tilling the soil.both the President and Congress held a like view about the role of technology in farming. officials facing the task of defending the untenable overproduction theory. that more farmers every year were dipping into the chalice of science and invention and bringing out a never-ending string of productive miracles—machines that performed wonders. Almost daily. to the unknown individual who saved seed from the more vigorous plants for his next year's sowings or perhaps to the alert herder who chose the superior animals to breed. plus modern 127 ." "marvels of food-producing science." "incredible hybrid plants." with no minor part of the outpourings devoted to praise of agricultural technology—the twentieth century idol-ogre. at some fluctuating date after 1920 there arose in this country." "technology doubles yields. Every practice that enabled the earliest to the latest farmer to increase his production or to obtain higher quality products was technology. What wonders technology has brought! And yet. Although history will not record the fact." "laborsaving machines." and scores of similar phrases to be uttered with humble awe before the sacred cow of science and invention. until Pearl Harbor turned American thinking to more realistic matters. plants of such phenomenal strains that not only two blades grew where one grew before but vast multiplications of harvests were inundating us. What is the truth? The theory that improved plants and animals. perhaps in an urban-trained mind. the idea that farming was fast becoming an automatic job. By the time the New Deal arrived. propaganda releases from the Department of Agriculture and the State Department teemed with such expressions as "mechanical efficiency of farmers. Soon enough urban writers were adding to the paeans about technology on the farm.
The farmer knows a heavy rain would damage the valuable hay but decides to gamble against the likelihood of rain. or the milk is run through a separator. The two go with tractor-driven cultivators to an adjoining field of corn and travel back and forth along the long rows until the sun is close to the hills. But as every experienced farmer knows. milking." and let's follow him through a typical farm day in mid-June. Then the farmer and helper must repeat most of the barn and feed lot labors of the morning—feeding. The alarm clock arouses him at 4 A. humming "Happy Days Are Here Again. a process called "stripping.machines. Not all farmers use milking machines and even those who do must complete the job by hand. 128 . stacked or otherwise under cover before the storm breaks. and the cans are set on a platform beside the highway where the city milk truck will later pick them up. A broken fence is repaired. technology has not eliminated hard work and long hours from farming operations. the day's labor is but partly done. the hay is "put up. ten gallon cans.M. the noon meal is hurriedly eaten and the two men start frantic efforts to get the hay baled. He goes to the barn where he finds the hired man already cleaning stables and mangers and feeding cattle. then rush to a field of alfalfa with tractor-drawn mowers. By noon the broad field of forage is cut and wilting in the hot sun. While he dresses hurriedly he turns on the radio and learns from the local station that it might rain in late afternoon. Let's erase the prevailing mental picture of a happy farmer in sporty clothes strolling in leisure through his lush fields. Whole milk is put into freshly scalded. have vastly increased farm production contains so much sound and irrefutable truth that the public has failed to detect the misleading falsifications hidden in and behind it. the skim milk fed to hogs and the cream placed in the refrigerator room. hogs and sheep." After breakfast the farmer and hired man wash all milking utensils.M. perhaps doctor a sick hog or calf. An electric circuit in the refrigeration room is fixed." However. cleaning utensils. Udders are washed and fifteen cows milked. Fortunately the clouds veer off and by 4 P. Poultry lights have come on automatically an hour early and hens are eating grain and mash which was placed in their feeders after they went to roost the previous evening. Because a few ominous-looking clouds are rising along the western horizon. gather vegetables for home use that day. turn the cows out to pasture.
No "fringe benefits" accrued during that long day. to observe Sunday closing laws. This farm day began at 4 A. maybe an oversight in creation's hurried activities (or evolution) that hogs refuse stubbornly to go on a diet from Friday afternoon until Monday morning. And they must be milked. And. they eat. and ended when darkness came on after 8 P. The National Labor Relations Board never heard of his 16 hour day. They demand milking on Saturdays and Sundays on the same hour basis as on the other five days. the asparagus bed weeded. Within an hour it is bedtime because tomorrow the alarm clock will ring at 4 A. This is not an exaggerated or over-drawn picture of a day on an average American farm in summer. for some strange quirk of inherited tendencies.The lawn is mowed. The hired man did not pull a union contract from his pocket when his eight hours were up at noon. and apparently wholly lacking a spirit of patriotism they require milking twice a day on New Year's. worked without time-and-a-half for overtime. cows must be milked in December and January just as they are in June and July. the Fourth of July.M. drink and pursue the normal tenor of their ways on Sunday as they do from Monday to Saturday. Hens apparently cannot be bred. even by the most advanced processes of hybridization. His vacation with pay remained among the never-thought-of things. perhaps plain bovine stubbornness. and at last the evening meal is eaten long after darkness has put an end to outdoor activities. but these have barely touched the edges in lessening the amount of labor. And.M. No "shop steward" came around to plead his cause.M. Also. but on a 12 to 14 hour day. cows do not take weekend vacations. a paid holiday on each worker's birthday. not on a union day of 8 hours. Washington's birthday. Like their porcine neighbors. raspberries picked for next-day canning. Certainly improved machines have expedited the day's schedule. attention should remember the inescapable hand labor both men performed. all who sing praises for the wonderful laborsaving machines technology has given the farmer. and believe it or not— on Labor Day. Magazines and Sunday supplements occasionally carry pictures and glowing accounts of long troughs and mechanical 129 . Walter Reuther's latest demand. may greatly increase the farmer's record keeping—but it would bring gales of laughter even from the American farm worker himself. It is probably from some trick nature played.
The intended inference is that farmers no longer have to fork silage down chutes. hay from mows nor shovel grain from bins.000 workers in 1941. To accord to technology the place it deserves before and during World War II. improved livestock. the average farm worker (operator and hired help) produced 26. just as fences are repaired. Only one thing is out of focus in this picture—it does not represent American farming. machinery oiled and mended. fruit harvested. hoping to 130 .561. it is a statistical fact. America would have gone into World War II with a total annual food and feed production of 275 billion pounds instead of 445 billion pounds.000 pounds a year rate. The true and indispensable role that technology has played on American farms through the year has never been mentioned —the truth would have exposed the fraud and deception of the whole overproduction hoax. moving forage and grain to long rows of sleek beef cattle. that livestock feeding has become an automatic.platforms. which the farmer calls chores. and more practical know-how through more than four decades. eggs gathered. This is not an opinion. Close to 99 per cent of feeding is done by hand. Americans should recall the long queues of housewives in front of grocery and meat stores. as compared with 13. stopping to inspect farms on both sides of the highway on his 3.000 mile haunt and he will find only a handful of such marvels of mechanical cattle feeding. the people of the United States would have known the horrors of recurrent famines since the end of World War I! Conservatively estimated. vegetable gardens tended and hundreds of other tasks. due to heavier ravages of diseases and predacious insects. stables cleaned and kept sanitary. Without the great gains technology has contributed. Without the increased production fruiting from better strains of plants. push-button task.669. An inquiring person may pick up the National Highway at the Atlantic City and follow it through the heart of our far-flung agricultural empire to San Francisco. like horizontal escalators.000 pounds of all farm commodities annually during the five years before 1914. performed.000 workers in 1910-1914. Here's the pinch: If the 10. this rate would probably have declined somewhat later. modernized machines. Such a lopping off of basic farm commodities in addition to the import excess of more than 20 billion pounds we suffered that year would have brought famine dangerously near. had produced at the 26.
cream.699. he would have had a scant 800 pounds. Again. onions and many other vegetables and fruits. Thus. if these 6. as would have occurred at the 1910-1914 pre-technology rate of production. America would have found itself helpless before its enemies. Next. technology had made the difference between famine and "enough" (if we include imports).000 in 1941. unless common sense takes precedence over political aspirations and the government's continued policy of luring more and more young and old from the land into urban life. page 56. lard.000 as compared with 10. soils may be sterilized beyond repair and consumers would revolt against the further impairment of nutritional values in foods. meat. from which the numbers of farm workers here employed are cited. total workers had dwindled further in 1964 to only 6. milk. our farm population will soon sink to impotent depths. In surveying potential food requirements for the years immediately ahead." The overproduction thesis is a fraud. Had those inadequate supplies been reduced by approximately 170 billion pounds. As discussed earlier here. And it should be noted that this is not all food. the evils of this practice are already overtaking the benefits. issue of August.110. two probable factors should be considered. acre yields of most major crops have been greatly boosted since 1920 by increased applications of commercial fertilizers. First. the figures are frightening. The war would have been lost the day it started. In fact. At the pre-World War I rate of production. instead of a per capita production of 3.000 workers had produced at the 1910-1914 rate per worker. but it has not made the difference between "enough" and "too much. it includes inedible animal greases.500 pounds for the individual American to bring home to his dining table. when viewed in the light of our mounting dependence on imported 131 . cheese. 1965.110. the essentials—butter. roughages and inedible vegetable oils. According to the USDA's FARM INCOME SITUATION. When these totals are brought down to per capita shares.obtain. both fresh and canned. and unless farmers drastically reduce fertilizer applications in the near future. our total food and feed production in 1964 would have been 158 billion pounds instead of the actual total of 670 billion pounds.
thrift and particularly about the importance of industry. our farmers have already lost their battle." The prevalent dogma that work is an antiquated and insufferable 132 . the government still maintains the foolish boy is "choking his village with gruel. Unknown Chinese Philosopher NUMEROUS AMERICANS who attended grade or upgraded schools before the McGuffey Readers disappeared from our curricula remember the lessons those remarkable books taught about truthfulness. any sane person could rely upon foreign trade for the nation's food requirement is fatally unrealistic. Perhaps we who still recall those simple stories and poems about homely virtues magnify them against the many countering and nullifying ideas of the twentieth century. the leaves fall and the branches break away and the tree dies. without heavy imports. emphasis was placed on the dignity of work or by a parallel warning against the evils of indolence. manufacturing and commerce are its branches and its life. Despite the blessings technology has brought to American agriculture and its immense contribution in keeping nationwide famine from our shores." Chapter Eighteen LABOR UNIONS AND FARMING The well-being of a people is like a tree. plus our officially declared intention to deplete further our dwindling food resources by worldwide giveaways. if the roots are injured. in this hostile world when Communists begin to talk about the encirclement of capitalism by Communist countries. politely called "leisure time. In retrospect it seems that on almost every page. We display great naiveté in our widely accepted and expanding philosophy of the advantages of idleness. Yet.farm products. survive with only 6 per cent of its people living on and working our farms is unbelievable. directly or by fable and allegory. That. no advances foreseen for the near future can repair the damages which the New Deal inflicted through its overproduction ruses and the evils the Great Society is already bringing to the land. agriculture is its roots. That the United States can.
4) expand the federal program of training youth and older unemployed in new job skills. of organized crime." What's wrong with the "made" work idea? Is it not the 133 . justifying governmental action and organized labor's joint efforts to bring about its eventual eradication. This foolish philosophy has risen with or fruited from the social and economic dislocations following the World War I. It should be remembered. is a worm-eaten fruit of the present generation." a shortsighted scheme based largely on the assumption that technology was fast liberating man from the duty and responsibility of hard work and that the slack represented in unemployment must be taken up by a six-fold foolish policy: 1) shorten the industrial work week and work day. and World War II era that has given us music without harmony. This advocacy of departure from the demonstrated principles of sound economics is based almost entirely on the early New Deal policy of "spread-thework. Let us consider these ideas especially as they shape and direct the thinking and policies of organized labor in relation to American farming and farmers. highway building and every other conceivable scope of "made" work. that increased idleness contributes to enhanced well-being. that shorter hours of toil mean a deeper moral and spiritual solidarity on which to build the citizenry of tomorrow. Let's examine more closely this modern concept that less work results in greater happiness. longer vacations (with pay. of unprecedented hedonism. that "made" work is governmentcontrolled work and dovetails into the collectivistic plan of "driving everybody onto relief and thereby forcing the capitalistic system to commit suicide. and the paradoxical sacrifice of priceless liberties on the altar of so-called democracy. Certainly it could not have been tolerated by the men and women who hewed this nation from a wilderness and lifted it from a few struggling coastal settlements to a place of world leadership— a job accomplished in a little more than two centuries. 6) increase government expenditures for urban renewal (slum clearance). 2) grant industrial workers more annual holidays with pay. religion without God—a period of revolt against restraint. art without resemblance. 3) widen other "fringe benefits" in the area of more unemployment insurance and retirement pensions. of course). 5) broaden social security into an all-enfolding range of cradle-to-the-grave paternalism.evil. however. education without knowledge. family life without discipline.
higher fringe benefits. government purchasing and storing of so-called surplus foods. The blindness of this line of unreason lies in the fallacy that the employer pays the increase. the sicker the patient becomes. Throughout the ages. however. Reduced food production. no principle of economics has been more clearly demonstrated than that of increasing consumption by lowering prices. As mentioned earlier. Either or both inevitably results in greater unemployment and inflation. and all other related policies and practices constitute the fabricated "scarcity" program to compel consumers to pay higher prices. double the required labor force? Is there any other way to solve the unemployment problem whether it is caused by industrial layoffs. unmistakably plain is the moral law: "Six days shalt thou labor. be they steel rails or nutmeg graters. either by doles or welfare state encroachments. Second. is false. Industry and all other employers of labor must of necessity adopt one or both of two courses: charge consumers more for the products labor makes. it seems that man cannot cease his efforts to ignore or set aside immutable economic and moral law. longer vacations. and never will. All these seek one goal.government's duty to put idle men to raking leaves in periods of business recession? Would not a 4 hour day. this line of reasoning that the Federal Government must step into the picture and absorb the unemployed. earlier retirement age. burgeoning evils. the farmer enjoyed 9. to make the supply of labor scarcer and thereby force the employer to pay higher wages. The same "scarcity" principle applies to labor—shorter work weeks.5 per cent of our national income in 1929 and only 3. more holidays. The bigger the doses.4 per cent in 1964. automation or population explosions? First. The government's farm program proves the point in reverse. instead of an 8 hour day in industry. which to date has been the main practice. as already shown.'* 134 . shorter work days. This assumption. never has. Here. greater retirement pensions. The end result has been reduced consumption not higher farm income. He does not. The additional cost is passed on to the consumer of his products. or devise more automation to lower production costs—a process now coming into wider use. presupposes that the United States is more than self-sufficient in food and fiber and needs no more farmers on the land.
you must toil for it. History is largely a record of man's efforts. if food. . nullified this mandate within a single generation? Have twentieth century ideologies annulled a law that has stood irrevocable for five millennia? Can an age that voices the opinion that "God is Dead. vigor and economic well-being of our farm population are paramount to all other phases of our national effort. Therefore. it is axiomatic that the strength." Yet. inventors —pushing back frontiers of geography. the aims of both government and organized labor should encompass at least three major safeguards for agriculture: 135 . have incontrovertibly aimed toward one goal—less work. scientists. Where does a sound and permanently constructive course lie. these come from the soil and are produced by farmers. toil is the law. more leisure. you must toll for it. Part of the punishment of imprisonment is the enforced idleness it imposes. in a nation like continental United States." Humbolt said: "Work is as much a necessity as eating and sleeping. not a wish to idle. and if pleasure. not to escape from work. This is seen in the ambition of explorers. whether explicitly declared or not. but to avoid inaction. located entirely in the temperate zone and extending as far north as the 49th parallel. With but inconsequential exceptions. the policies of organized labor in recent years and the policies of government in relation to both labor and industry. soldiers of fortune. The importance of these three requisites to a people increases in direct ratio to distances north or south of the equator.Have so-called modern inventions and scientific progress. more indolence." violate with impunity a law so ancient and so durable? Inherent in human nature is the urge to work. This is demonstrated in prisons. pioneers. especially as organized labor's programs and practices relate to agriculture? Civilized man has only three necessities—food. Therefore. you must toil for it. Ruskin wrote: "K you want knowledge. . shelter and clothing. . Nothing else should take precedence over this fact. mind and space. Labor is therefore a duty from which no man living is exempt without forfeiting Ms right to his daily bread.
2) Help insure at all times an adequate supply of capable and intelligent labor for the maintenance of farm operations at the peak of profitable productivity.1) Encourage complete economic equality for farmers with other industrial. In one well-known 136 . As labor union's might has grown at the ballot box. causing surgeons to perform emergency operations by makeshift lights and patients in respirators to be endangered. Large city populations have stood helpless as food sources have been strangled. halting the flow of raw materials and manufactures to and from essential industries. Citizens of vast urban areas have been denied their rights to read newspapers. often to defend featherbedding practices forcing railroads to employ nonworking workers responsible for weakening our vital transportation facilities. Moreover. It is more than a coincidence that the glacier-like descent of the United States into the Ice Age of collectivism has occurred at the same rate as the decline of agriculture. Strikers have closed plants on whose products our national defense depends. In recent years we have seen union-approved strikes deny hospitals electric current. business and social groups. 3) Permit the farmer a place of preeminence in national legislation and administrative policies to eliminate disadvantages commonly suffered by minority groups—freedom from political neglect and political exploitation. with callous disregard for the public welfare. Small unions have closed large manufacturing plants and idled thousands of workers in nothing more than trivial jurisdictional squabbles. Costly tie-ups by unions have idled vast railroad systems. Dock workers have closed ports to shipping 'and endangered the health and impaired the comfort of millions of people. the worker's strike weapon has been wielded frequently and insufferably. seats and unseats officials. How dangerously far the Federal Government and organized labor have failed in maintaining these safeguards for agriculture and how grievously officials of both major political parties have erred can be measured accurately by comparing the farmer's status today with that of labor unions. Union goons have stopped milk trucks on highways and poured milk into the gutters. At the same time the labor union movement has fattened financially and numerically until today in many states it makes or breaks politicians. the farmer's share in our national income has decreased as organized labor's power has mounted. The results are startling.
Immediately." "Jail 'em. official neutrality and inaction is an automatic gesture to "guarantee the constitutional liberty of the strikers. Why are these crimes against private industry." "It's un-American." The explanation of hands off in one case and prompt and brave action in the other is found at the ballot box. have occurred and continue to occur for lack of official courage in town and city governments. That a President of the United States will sit mute and action less while the greatest city in the country is paralyzed by a strike ordered and carried on in defiance of law. When the striking group belongs to a nationwide organization whose voters number in the millions. often equivalent to sabotage and insurrection. is a demonstration of official cowardice so repugnant that well-meaning citizens begin to doubt the efficacy of representative government.." "Communists are back of this.instance a newspaperman who reported such abuses was blinded for life by an acid-thrower. The WALL STREET JOURNAL came near to expressing public opinion after the newspaper guild strike in 1965: If union leaders are incapable of demonstrating a greater degree of maturity." "This is carrying the right to strike too far.. These abuses. in state capitals. the public and even against national safety permitted? Why should unions be permitted to enjoy a status denied all other segments of our population? Why is one power-crazed individual allowed to disrupt the lives and endanger the well-being and health of millions through the privilege to call an unwanted strike? Every thinking adult knows the answer." It challenges the imagination to think of Congress enacting a law. would be a crime against the public welfare.. of the right to strike." "This is against national safety. it may be necessary to consider legal redefinition ." "There ought to be a law . regardless of the justification of their action. on Capitol Hill in Washington and particularly in the White House. It is interesting to contemplate the promptness and patriotic vigor which responsible officials would exert if all the farmers in the United States were to go on a strike. its well-being and even its safety constantly menaced by heedless wreckers. For farmers to strike and take away the feed bag. which would impose upon 137 .. every official from township constable to the White House would be shouting: "Public welfare is jeopardized. even before the effects of the walkout were felt. and the President signing it. Certainly no society is required to have its interest.
extremely naive. Section 313 of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act. without ambiguity or hairsplitting. That such legislative and administrative temerity is increasing instead of diminishing the prevalence of strikes is seen in a labor report issued in 1965. More and more pressure mounts up to force Congress to grant industrial labor a shorter work week. Cows will have to be milked on a 12 to 14 hour day basis in 1996 as they are in 1966. The United States led the world with seventy-four days lost per 100 workers. The amount of necessary seven day week work will not be eliminated by science. Congress and both the executive and judicial branches of government know—but ignore—the fact that labor unions are investing vast sums from their financial backlogs to elect "friends of labor" to important state and federal offices. The farmer cannot compete in the labor market against the five day week and 8 hour day. Time will not bridge the gap. as well as any corporation.7 billion dollars in 1964. According to a report issued by the United State Department of Labor. Fringe payments have increased more than 122 per cent in the past ten years— from 22. Union power is steadily strengthening its defense and attack. "Fringe" demands are fast becoming a holocaust. in the light of realities. "to make a contribution or expenditure in connection with any [federal] election.429 million dollars—923 million from dues and 506 million from investments.5 billion dollars in 1955 to 56. Including highly industrialized countries. says it is a federal offense for any labor organization. unions had a total income in 1960 of 1." An interesting and informative sidelight on the role labor plays in the farmer's income is seen in a study made by the 138 . The agriculturalist must accept what's left when he hires help. the major inequalities resulting from gradually increasing numbers and powers in the labor movement and the dwindling importance attached to farmers in our mushrooming non-farm growth. The disparities existing between labor unions and farmers are numerous.organized labor the stringent penalties provided in the original Agricultural Adjustment Act and the punishments it imposed on the men and women who produce our food. Sweden and the Netherlands showed the lowest time loss from strikes —one day a year per 100 employees. The assumption that these large sums are intended solely for union members' benefits is. Yet. The public is aware.
averaging $2.ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE of the Department of Agriculture. In 1965 the average family food purchase amounted to $1. craft and professional labor leaders wage an incessant struggle year after year to force living costs higher and higher.041. up 3 per cent from the previous year and more than doubled since before World War II. Seldom if ever has the farmer seen the powerful lobbying and propaganda agencies of union labor arrayed on his side in vital national issues. industry and all other segments of society have long ago been discharged. Few intelligent persons would or could challenge the statement that the farmer's responsibilities to labor. with the spread from farm gate to the consumer's dining table absorbing the remaining $632.02. No union ukase ever decries the widening chasm between labor and farmer incomes. including all processed food products. Rural life always has been cheaper and less wasteful. processing. and what are they planning to do in the future to lift the American farmer to the same social and economic levels organized labor enjoys. what are they doing now. On the other hand. that juvenile delinquency lays a heavier burden on society. The history of union labor is one of extreme group selfishness. published quarterly. Costs of government in rural life are lower than in city life.70. It is in towns and cities that the rate of crime is higher. According to the February. By the very nature of his business he is never in arrears. 1966 issue the farmer received in 1965 only 39 cents from every dollar the consumer paid for farm-produced foods.72 of which the farmer received $409. The study is made on the basis of what is called the "market basket. It should be observed that almost every step of this costly food trip—transportation. It has never been the farmer who contributes to the evils of inflation. wholesale.30 an hour in 1965. industrial. The last union member in the line is the checker at the supermarket. What is the farmer's debt to organized labor? What does organized labor owe the farmer? What have union leaders done in the past. that health standards are lower and death rate higher. At no union labor convention has ever a word of admonition been heard against the dangers in continued wage advances. jobber. When he looks out over the great army of nonproductive workers fastened on the 139 . and retail—enriched the unionized workers." built around what the average family spends annually for such foods.
000 a year and while skilled workers in the automotive industry draw $5 an hour and the skilled farm worker only $1. One group masquerading in this fashion is the National Farmers' Union. has been mentioned in several hearings of the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Senate Internal Sub-Committee. he finds labor union officials not only apathetic to his marketing handicaps but. There is something seriously out of joint when the average net farm income is around $3.10 an hour. the rational and reasonable remedy. It is not suggested he is a card-carrying Communist. They will start and follow through with a campaign to give the farmer more than 37 to 39 cents from the consumer's dollar. aggravating the ills of distribution. at almost every step. food costs would soar to heights so prohibitive not even a wealthy consumer could afford to pay them. if he received time-and-a-half for overtime as all labor now receives. They are not authentic farmer unions but alien ideological groups imposing organization from the outside on such tractable farmers as they can find. They will alter their present and contemplated course to widen further the wage chasm between factory and farm. and if he were paid double time as union officials are seeking. The name of James G.arteries of distribution between the farm and the consumer of his produce. as the average bricklayer receives.041. His advocacy of a government gift of $5000 to every efficient farm family identifies his ideological philosophy. head of the strong Farmers' Union. lies not in organizing farm workers but in a calm and constructive balancing of farm and union rates wages and income. if the farm hired man received more than $40 for an 8 hour day's work.70 which is added to the "market basket" costing the consumer $1. Patton. The remedy.72 which yields the farmer only $409. But he has endorsed directly and indirectly the programs and aims of several Communist-front movements. The solution lies not in organizing farm labor. The National Farm Organization agitates for boycotting as a direct weapon to force 140 . Another so-called farmer union.02. Leftist and Communist infiltration and tactics are present in certain farmer unions. If labor leaders want to help the American farmer. they will actively wade into the problem of the $632.800 a year while the long-haul truck driver makes as much as $15. As previously mentioned by inference.
" In 1963 the Nebraska legislature passed a law. jobbers and retailers to sign price contracts with farmers. In neither have there been marked indications of socialistic leanings. state and federal government costs. 4) Cancel the unworkable principle now dominant in labor-leader thinking that the accruement of employables 141 . This group is well described by their versified motto: "In NFO there is no doubt. 3) Abandon further plans to shorten workweeks and workdays by realizing that the industry which supplies man with food cannot much longer survive even under the existing disparities of working conditions between farm and industrial labor. There is a broad and potentially fruitful area of mutual interests where farmers. Where this fails they advocate and perpetrate violence. Communist infiltration or destructive goon tactics. not to increase the paternalism program to which the government is so loyally wedded. 3) Scourging from the government and particularly from the State Department those who think it is outmoded and selfish to place American interests first. known as the Right To Market Law. when individual farmers refuse to join their campaigns. Theirs are records of high ideals and able defense of traditional Americanism. These groups are now. to curb the acts of the NFO. as from their beginnings. they practice the old Night-Rider terrorism of arson. 2) Work to curtail the spread of welfare statism. Both will be immeasurably rewarded by: 1) A drastic lowering of local. farm organizations and labor unions may find mutually helpful benefits. representative of farm organizations at their best. Quite another story are the National Farm Bureau and the National Grange. From labor's standpoint there are urgent areas for union officials to alter their thinking and programs: 1) Disavow further advocacy of government "made" work to reduce unemployment—this is the collectivist's favorite trick.wholesalers. we get a contract or go all out. assault and threat. 4) A thorough reappraisal of the concept that it is the moral duty of the United States to feed and police the world. 2) Cessation of the continued breakdown of tariff protection against products of cheap labor countries.
Those who point to the present computer craze occasionally 142 . 4) Accept increasing unemployment as an unavoidable penalty we must pay for technology and prepare to take care of the swelling army of jobless in perpetuity by doles. financed by American capital and manned by American workers to underdeveloped lands. not only to produce the food. dampen the American business44man's enthusiasm for risking both his business and his capital abroad. unemployment insurance. An obstacle here is that most foreign wage rates are so much lower than in the United States that the displaced American worker can stay at home and enjoy a bigger income from loafing under social security. Surely.reaching work age. Our late experiences in Cuba and in lesser degree in other Latin American countries. retirement pay and other fringe benefits than he can earn by labor abroad. This is exactly what the small coterie of collectivists in the Department of Agriculture and State Department planned in 1933. It is as foreign to the American way of life as it is impractical. can be absorbed by shorter and shorter hours in industry. none of them acceptable. Likewise four alternatives must be considered. This in actualities is but an extension and broadening of our present give-away follies. 3) Move American industries. study the practical solution—return these men and women to the land. They prefer at least partial ownership in brought-in industries and also the employment of their own idle. Instead. fiber and forestry products we now import but to the only sound and permanent means of selfsupport in lieu of an all-embracing welfare state. all of them detrimental to American well-being and progress: 1) Continue emphasis on expansions of industry by subsidizing sale of manufactures to underdeveloped countries. America deserves a fate less destructive and deplorable than complete submergence in socialistic bureaucracy. Most foreign countries oppose this idea. plus those displaced by automation. Here other obstacles are encountered. 2) Export American workers to Europe and other nations where labor shortages exist. unless the destiny that sets the limits of men and nations is closing its book against this land. The idea is an unthinkable surrender. pensions and all the other charity gimmicks in the totalitarian catalog of Socialism. It means sending more and more political misfits wandering around over the earth looking for rat holes down which to pour our resources.
who was the father of the New Deal Secretary. Some one has aptly said. Only the crawfish can make progress by going backward. Holland. by shorter hours and higher wages. Chapter Nineteen FARMERS AND "THE FARM PROBLEM" God gives every bird its food. thrift and mutual cooperation on which this nation was erected. SECRETARY of Agriculture Henry C. both in and out of government. "Theories are not so bad. in 143 . The first and most important step is to face frankly and consider conscientiously the present enervation of agriculture and the selfish. From the same philosophy that declared. but by a return to the sound sense and bedrock principles of honesty. the place is at the ballot box. government-dominating heights to which the organized labor movement has grown in the last three decades. unlimited encouragement from the fact that there are thousands of. This impractical. Josiah G. and social ills will not be cured by less work and more leisure. suggestion finds no support among persons who know how this nation has grown to its present stature. men and women with vision and courage who are available and who are fully qualified to fill high government offices to repair the restrictions throttling agriculture and to curb the excesses into which power-mad union labor leaders have directed their membership." Organized labor. and learn her ways. but the pesky things often overflow their channels and mud under a lot of facts. if it is to continue to serve this nation. "Six days shalt thou labor. commercial. If it applies to the material it must include the mind. but He does not throw it into the nest. It means not a stationary status quo but a retrogression. thou sluggard. the time is now." came another bit of practical advice—"Go to the ant. Wallace. Americans can gain. however. must start soon to uncover the facts that irresponsible theorists have mudded under. Wallace the younger. Again. if not impossible." Our industrial.advance the proposition that by some governmental process a check be placed against further mechanical improvements that contribute to unemployment.
one of his annual reports during the Coolidge Administration. Climate. This and similar advice is little short of heresy in these days when the philosophy of "the government owes every man a living" dominates our national thinking and actions. latitude and longitude." The major fallacy shoring up all government plans to "help" agriculture is implicit in the bureaucrats' three-word phrase— "The Farm Problem. It brings to the forefront the most important question an American farmer. it is perfectly clear that the success of the individual farmer will depend on his own efforts. even at this late date. rainfall and soil types differ with geography. but under present conditions it must be work with the head as well as with the hands. However. Previous crops. We must consider a New England clay hill farm and the level black loam of northern Illinois and Iowa. But the advice was then. Theoretically it is impossible to find two adjoining farms with identical soils and therefore with similar problems. cultural practices. when farmers are paid for what they do not produce and many urbanites are faithfully rewarded for continued indolence. That he must work hard goes without saying. is now and always will be sound advice from a wise official in an era less cluttered by pedantic theories and foreign ideologies. drainage and many other related factors. can ask himself— what can I do to improve my own farming industry as a unit of the national well-being? First. a West Virginia mountainside apple orchard and an irrigated lettuce farm in California. that is what there will be if the collectivists get their way. No two farming regions in the United States are alike. particularly fertility and organic matter content. it is necessary to recognize the problem experienced by one figure in a famous biblical narrative—"there is so much rubbish that we are not able to build the wall. a semitropical orange grove in Florida and a North Dakota wheat farm where winter temperatures drop to fifty degrees below zero. this is only a part of the story." This phrase suggests that there is one big farm and one big problem. 144 . True. render contiguous fields as different as a South Carolina cotton field is different from an Indiana corn field and rarely are soil conditions uniform over one field. a New Jersey vegetable farm and a desert cattle range in the Far West. wrote: Whatever may or may not be done by the government.
with emphasis on permanent pastures to raise the sheep and beef cattle the nation should now be raising." Above all we must remember that self-reliant American enterprise. Hill and even sloping land should be kept in forests or "strip farmed" to reduce runoff. Then over all this spread a mantle of climate ranging from aridity to humid valleys. know-how and guts are able to cope with these varying conditions. and one can begin to grasp the absurdities of "The Farm Problem. That the desert follows close behind the arrival of what we sometimes call civilization is seen throughout man's total span of history. exposed to the eroding action of rain and wind. The laws of running water show that the slower surface water moves across exposed soil the fewer particles it carries away and the larger particles it leaves behind. As already mentioned. Soil Erosion. 145 . diminishing rainfall is another penalty man pays for forest destruction. ingenuity. Herein is demonstrated the profound wisdom and progress when the SmithLever Act was passed placing a technically trained man in each county to advise the farmers in a localized area not to control him. he clears off the virgin forests and leaves the soil. Further divide this mighty empire into more than three million units called farms and over each of these units place a man differing from all other farmers in temperament. First. and must be informational and educational in nature. It points out the practical fact that almost all the aid federal and state governments can render the individual farmer must and should be funneled through the County Agricultural Agent. only. all-year warmth to Artic frigidity. hill farmers should stress the growing of crops that will better protect the soil. crops and products if left free to do so. and ability and ambitions. While it is seldom admitted. education. Tree and bush fruits to sell in local markets should replace corn and wheat on hill farms.These illustrate a few of the innumerable and changing aspects of geography and geology that furnish the ingredients of that mammoth and varied enterprise known as American agriculture. mellow and friable. training. inheritance. Against this background are set eight general spheres of action and channels of planning and operation by which the individual farmer may help himself and thereby contribute progress to the entire industry.
When the boys assume the mortgage On the land that's had our toil. it causes the farmer to "put all his eggs in one basket. maintain fruit trees or raise chickens and hogs to supplement the family food supply. Perhaps nowhere else in the world has a nation paid a heavier cost for the curse of one-crop farming than in the United States. The words of an anonymous poem tells. leave behind us Farms that have not washed away. but it invariably leads to more reliance on chemical fertilizers and an eventual semisterilization of the land. Not only does this practice exhaust a particular group of soil nutrients. Then too. The farmer who grows a particular crop because his father and grandfather did before him is addicted to the habit of one-cropism as surely as though nothing else was produced on his acres. Seldom do one-crop farmers grow vegetable gardens. Crop planning should be based on four major points of emphasis: (a) crops should be rotated to avoid exhaustion of a particular group of natural nutrients. the market and without talking it over with his County Agricultural Agent." with the certainty that he must throw himself on the charity of taxpayers and rely on the government granting him loans from the federal treasury to continue in his ill-conceived folly. (d) they should be planned in the light of available labor and the most efficient use of machines in planting. but where's the soil?' One-crop Farming. with wry humor and mimicry a tragic story: Countless worn-out fields remind us We should build our land to stay. cultivating and harvesting. (b) they should be selected to supply the family's needs and fit into domestic and export market demands.Whenever farmers see muddy brooks and creeks flowing from a farming region they may know assuredly that rivers are carrying irretrievable soil. priceless soil. into the world's oceans. 146 . No farmer should ever plan his crops without consulting his neighbors. In the south tobacco and cotton impoverished millions of acres in the post-Civil War years. (c) they should hold soil losses to the minimum. They'll not have to ask the question— 'Here's the farm. Yet this error is not confined to tobacco and cotton farmers. And departing.
Baltimore. A large percentage of Christmas trees sold throughout the United States are shipped in from Canada. Timber and other forest products are farm revenue crops. A recent survey of the health stores in Washington. fruits and vegetables is increasing. even in the plastics age. if carefully planned. such as black walnut. The local grower thus gains a price advantage through lower shipping costs. Their merits include the advantage of utilizing farm labor for their harvest at a time of year when the work does not interfere with other crops.Forestry. dogwood and persimmon. will provide a substantial annual income and domestic demands are stable year after year. D. Philadelphia and New York showed that supplies of fresh organically grown foods are falling far short of demands. It is well within the range of probability that the farmer who plans ahead and has his farm ready to grow organic foods for roadside and local marketing within the next five years will be skimming the cream from an industry certain to play a prominent role in farming and gardening in the future. Often careful forest management requires the removal of defective or crowding trees which can be turned into revenue as pulpwood. Government could greatly aid in reforestation by allowing tax abatements on forest. Farmers already acquainted with the simple processes are astonished to find how easy it is to maintain soil fertility without the use of artificial (chemical) fertilizers and how much crop costs are reduced when nature supplies the nutrients. Several independent soil scientists are testing the merits of organic farming in reducing soil erosion..C. it is pertinent to stress that the idea is spreading rapidly and the number of purchasers of organically grown grains. railroad ties and sometimes into fence posts and lumber. year after year. It is erroneous to think of forest culture as a task requiring 75 to 100 years or more. remain indispensable. Christmas tree growing. Tree farming is often the only way to utilize steep land where permanent pasture is difficult to maintain. Early reports indicate 147 . Without going further into scientific phases of the subject. Certain woods. This is not food faddism. As discussed earlier. organic farming consists of growing crops without the use of chemical fertilizers. it is a coming industry. mine timbers. Organic Farming. An eastern apple grower reports that he could sell several times the apples grown by organic method that his orchard is now producing.
say defenders of the organic method. For four decades theorists have insisted the American farmer must depend on foreign markets for disposal of his surpluses. For the farmer to adjust his production to fuller utilization of the domestic market would require careful choice of crops and animal products to fit into consumer demands and preferences. As long as the government's worldwide give-away program continues. only to find them. reason will continue. as long as the government stresses more and more exports to relieve our balance of international payment ills while studiously avoiding even a mention of mounting imports which increase the outward flow of gold. and hickory nuts. Also. so vulnerable in the clash between the Socialist and capitalist systems. This emphasis has eclipsed the sounder truth that the most profitable and enduring market is at home." Edward Bok told of the man who futily spent his life searching the earth for diamond mines. this is the way nature originally built the soil and the way nature intends the soil should be protected and its fertility maintained. hazelnuts. The farmer must wait but a few years to harvest profitable crops while the increase in land Values begins as soon as the trees are planted. After all. often within trucking distance of the farm gate. black walnut and shellbark hickory trees belong among our finest timbers. is not put to use producing black walnuts. in his own backyard. carefully equalized balancing of population distribution and production in order to free American agriculture as well as American industry from dependence on unstable. A northerner driving past neat pecan orchards in South Carolina and Georgia can wonder why more idle farmland. in favor of national suicide.that organically maintained soils may not only reduce surface runoff but at the same time and by the same process absorb more rainfall and thus raise the water table. And. tree nut culture permits full use of the land at the same time for grazing! A foreigner visiting in this country a few years ago and tasting his first black walnut. the entire export and domestic market picture will remain distorted. In his delightful lecture. Home Markets. "Acres of Diamonds. swift-changing foreign outlets of their products. Herein is one of the major reasons why organized labor should give precedence in its plans to join with farmers in developing a well-rounded. in his old age. pronounced it the finest flavored 148 . especially throughout the north and east. In addition to their crops of delectable and nourishing nuts.
corn. harvesting and distribution costs are lower than any other vegetable. The molasses cane. He provided ample parking space and attractive display counters under a projecting roof. Yet. He began with two major crops—strawberries and sorghum cane (for molasses). Rhubarb is almost totally immune to diseases and insect ravages. The man or woman who has not tasted a delicious rhubarb pie or cobbler has been gastronomically cheated. requiring less hand labor in relation to production. rhubarb is outstanding. The baking industry is using increasing quantities year after year. At first he planned to advertise over the local radio and in the county seat newspaper but later found no publicity other than pleased customers was necessary. A few years ago he realized that one of the most easily accessible markets in the United States was passing in front of his home every day and night. had for years farmed according to habit—a few cows. These two particular crops were chosen to utilize available labor. Fifty years ago dense clumps of rhubarb should be seen along every home garden fence. Hazelnuts (filberts) are grown commercially in Washington and Oregon on a profitable scale. That nut-raising could become a part of the plan for production for the domestic market is both possible and practicable. If sold in local markets. hogs for home meat. For strawberry picking he obtained men and women from two nearby villages. the urban housewife seldom finds rhubarb in market bins and when it is found.nut in the world. It requires a minimum of care and continues highly productive for almost a human lifetime. His strawberry industry thrived and year after year he expanded his acreage until the number of available pickers limited further increases. Selecting the rare instead of the common for examples of crops farmers may profitably adopt. augmented by high school students. wheat and potatoes for home use and limited marketing. It produces the largest tonnage per acre of all known crops. It is one of the most healthful of all food crops. Customers came from towns and cities forty to seventy-five miles away to buy the fruit by the 149 . the stalks are wilted from long shipments and otherwise low in quality. An Ohio Valley farmer living along Route 60. He revamped his entire farm schedule to take advantage of the passing potential customers. came to harvest in late September and the same adult labor engaged for strawberry picking obtained for the cane.
Having been interested in poultry raising since boyhood but knowing nothing about it. "The sight of pickers in the fields meant freshness. There are. With the help of his County Agricultural Agent he studied the subject carefully and as he later described his experience. No other advertising was necessary. he said. with soaring taxes. He added to the long list of American farmers who have profitably demonstrated that domestic marketing opportunities have barely touched the edges of possibilities." His molasses industry likewise thrived. To ignore this principle would be to somehow 150 . When this man. He never had to transport a single berry to market. The molasses was canned hot in half-gallon and gallon containers. was ordered by his physician to abandon the classroom and "get out into the country. Why include poultry among the rarer farm activities." The technical information suggested. meant fair dealing. he wrote to federal and state agricultural departments and procured all the literature they had on the subject.crate. one of our most highly commercial activities? This story of a Midwest high school teacher answers the question and opens yet another door for the alert farmer who prefers to "make it on his own" instead of leaning on taxpayers via the federal treasury. Equipment for evaporating the cane sap was set up near the highway where scores of passing motorists who had never seen or tasted sorghum molasses could easily see and smell. The farmer prospered until urban sprawl overtook his farm and until land prices. Customer inquiries led to the inclusion of blackberries. "separated the wheat from the chaff. then in his middle fifties. dewberries and raspberries to his fruit industry." he fortunately had a small inherited farm toward which to turn." He discarded this on the basis that natural eggs are fertile eggs. "produce only infertile eggs for marketing—eggs from hens having no contact with roosters. unnumbered locations scattered across this broad land where others may similarly capitalize on the American appetite to turn an ordinary hit-or-miss farm schedule into a pleasant and lucrative business. the market came to him! When asked to what he attributed his remarkable sales. justified or forced his retirement. Poultry. thereby extending the harvest and revenue season into late July. that I sold the berries at a price that represented the reduction of what would have been haulage costs had I sold them in town.
government advice said. With distribution costs thereby eliminated. both permanent grasses and special plots of alfalfa and other nitrogen-gathering crops." he adopted a marketing method not mentioned in the books—when eggs were gathered from the nests he stamped the day and hour on each egg. the accurate total impossible to calculate. It is estimated that predacious insects and plant diseases are taking a toll from American agriculture. (c) grain and mash feeds entirely free from chemicals. he discarded by reasoning that poultry should have access to natural sunshine and green forage. "Keep layers in confinement to obtain maximum egg production.reduce the egg's natural goodness and impair its nutritional worth. (b) natural fertility. ranging from two billion to five billion dollars a year. This all-important truth is more fully discussed in a later chapter on cooperative marketing. Here was demonstrated an important principle of farm marketing that has all but disappeared under the tide of mass production techniques that have blighted much of large-scale farming in recent years—losing sight of the consumer. Next." He provided ample pasturage for his hens. Of salient importance is the question: Why have destructive insects increased so rapidly in species and numbers in the last half century? And from the farmer's and gardener's viewpoint 151 . He marketed his first eggs five days a week directly to preferred customers. a more vital factor must be included—the dangers to human and animal health from the widespread use of poisons to combat the perils. Raised woven wire floors and other recommended structural designs to reduce disease and parasitic dangers were adopted. too. Within two months his customers came to him instead of him having to take his product to them. Insects. after his hens were "set up in business. He later explained. he gave the buyer the benefit and undersold urban dealers handling inferior eggs. He purchased "spot" announcements on the local radio. running water and plenty of shade in hot weather. "Customer satisfaction and customer health entered into every step of my planning. emphasizing three factors: (a) dated freshness." This. Then. As previously discussed. His argument was that mass production at least partially defeated its own ends by producing eggs of less nutritional value and inferior palatability.
Three general avenues for better control of insect enemies are open for exploration and probable use: (a) birdlife must be increased and protected. Similar means to protect grapes by the "bagging" process have been in use many years. What has modern man done or failed to do that now accounts for the threatening and costly hordes of pests on every side? It is beyond question that he has destroyed the balance nature provided. There is no substitute. but here nevertheless. He has emphasized mass production and lost quality. Returning to natural processes. how were insects kept under control in 1600 or in 1800? No new genera or species have come into the scene of creation since those dates. In lieu of natural plant nutrients he has brought in synthetic chemicals. the plant of today is a weaker. not as numerous. Two practical facts in insect control must now be faced with intelligence and courage. Wider travel and related wider distribution of products have let down gates to insects that were localized until a few decades ago.the preeminent question is: what can be done to curtail the ravages? The modern world is a distance-shrinking world. 2) other defense and attack methods must be devised. less resisting structure. Like man himself. 152 . They were on earth then as now. The airplane perhaps has contributed more to the wider distribution of insects than any other factor. There are numerous ways. Instead of birdlife to feed on insects he has substituted laboratory products. 1) consumer health cannot longer be imperiled by use of extremely dangerous poisons placed by governmental recommendations in inexperienced hands. to protect fruits and vegetables from insect ravages beside coating them with lethal poisons. Quarantines are losing their effectiveness and in many instances are not worth the expense of maintaining them. (c) non-dangerous weapons must be turned against these enemies. and ingenuity will devise others. Within recent months a New York farmer announced that he has successfully defeated the apple codling moth (apple worm) by enclosing apples in a plastic protecting shield placed over the fruit before the moth deposited its egg. Birds were nature's balancing agency thousands of years ago and one who thinks he can circumvent or set aside this truth with impunity is deluding himself as is the modern society that follows his theory. (b) more and more independent tests are showing that less use of synthetic (chemical) fertilizers give plants greater resistance to insects.
for example. facts shown in every comparative study ever conducted. regional and national campaign to restore birdlife. One year when cicadas (locusts) ravaged the region. in addition to a sizable strip adjoining his property. It has been the absence of such emphasis since before the turn of the century that has sent millions of rural boys and girls from the land into urban life. provided nests.Let every farmer and gardener know assuredly that when he offers consumers "poison-free" produce he will find not only an instantly widening market but consumers eagerly willing to pay higher prices. town and village officials to coat street trees with poisons. This authenticated example has been repeated in various scopes all over the world. This applies to other bird species in numerous Other ways. controlled bird-enemies. Complete cessation of government shade tree and forest airplane spraying is the first step. One visitor reported that the audible music was more than worth the expense and labor. the baron's forests and orchards. recounted in Rachael Carson's SILENT SPRING. Many years ago in Germany a landed baron who loved birds (excepting birds of prey) for their natural rather than their commercial worth. social and commercial benefits of proper emphasis on making rural life more attractive. When the robins eat the insects that feed on such foliage they are killed on a wholesale scale. In a later chapter. and promoted practices to restore birdlife over his vast estate. No greater contribution to insect control can be made by every farmer and orchardist and gardener than a well-planned local. less crime-ridden and richer in those factors of spirit and mind than current urban life. Community Life. Farm society has failed to preach this gospel. such as hawks. The Colquitt Plan is told the remarkable story of a southern community with vision that for over 40 years has enjoyed the spiritual. Comedians of stage and television have popularly dwarfed 153 . is duplicated wherever the public permits city. defoliating vast stretches of the countryside. That the dignity of agrarian living must be brought back to the American consciousness cannot be challenged. The widespread killing of robins. It is a national tragedy compounded by ignorance and our present mad emphasis on modern chemistry. His birds had repaid him in full for the care and protection he had provided. were green and normal. The truth must be recaptured that farm life is healthier. This is already being demonstrated in small and isolated cases throughout the United States.
and the farmer must provide them. One "solution" that has been offered from' time to time is the "cooperative. hardly offer an American answer. the stay and strength of the nation in time of war and its guiding and controlling spirit in the time of peace. Theodore Roosevelt WHAT IS the solution to the so-called "farm problem"? The farmer is going to insist. as they are presently set up and operated." The full life is the rural life. These are set up on ideological bases foreign to the free enterprise idea. who will be in the future. it seems. unrealistic mouthings making the man who feeds the world the butt of ridicule in comparison with the city person pictured as the urbane and sophisticated apogee of culture and refinement. politics and business. as in the past. One of the most advantageous places to start is in the building of a more attractive social structure to hold the cream of rural youth on the land.the beauties and desirability of rural life by their easy. craft and professional groupings. or secure for him an enforced advantage over other national trade. At the same time the solution must not grant the farmer favored treatment from government. on an improved economic circumstance completely free of government subsidy and control." But many cooperatives. and rightfully should insist. He must provide them by earning his rightful place in the realms of labor. We need a new set of definitions. In doing this it is not necessary to ape the artificialities of city living—its vulgar dances and discordant music— but to stress the enduring truths inherent in the psalmist's declaration—"I will look unto the hills from whence my strength cometh. Every segment of the population can stand to be "kidded" but jokes run too uniformly against country and for city life. Chapter Twenty AN AMERICAN ANSWER TO THE "FARM PROBLEM" We need the development of men in the open country. When you say "cooperative" to many an 154 .
in the present circumstances of distribution. here and there. middlemen. what route of escape from his economic imprisonment can he take? The route or escape must involve changing the circumstances. We must consider the intelligent self-interest of those cooperatives which are set up as legitimate businesses. One obvious route then is for farmers to establish their own distributing systems.independent-minded American he thinks immediately of tax concessions and subsidies and grants awarded to these groups giving them an unfair advantage over the self-reliant. is helpless to improve his economic position. Most farmers suffer from the expensive distribution Establishment. and if. Certain consumer cooperatives. If a coalition of free men allying themselves with the farmer. They thrive on government coddling alien to the free enterprise. especially. But our distaste for some forms of cooperatives must not blind us to the necessity of cooperation. have made a beginning. setting themselves up on a business-like basis on the free enterprise principle. Through the tax-exempt cooperative the taxpaying businessman is being asked to finance the destruction of free enterprise. and held in place by price controls. which do not deny the profit motive and which compete with other enterprises on a fair business basis. The consumer suffers. They compete with retail tradesmen but bear none of the tax burden which makes their business environment possible. a group of processors. grocery and produce suppliers who secure 62 cents out of every food dollar spent by the consumer. self-supporting and taxpaying business. They pool 155 . But the farmer without a means of cutting distribution costs. the opportunity must be created for the farmers to improve their economic position without government handouts. he is unable to effect either the handling or price of his products. private property and freedom principles. land bank payments. A great problem which the farmer faces arises from the cost of distribution. price supports. Hence in business crises he is likely to accept government subsidies. are to begin throwing off the reins of Socialism. How shall this be done? If the farmer is not able to increase his prices at the farm gate. and the like. of course. Small groups of farmers. are known to have been conceived and to be operated on socialistic principles.
their resources. With but a few minor exceptions beyond refrigeration and faster transportation. it is indefensible and lays an unnecessary financial burden on all members of society. "There's not a sound potato in that bin. Competition by farmer groups with the present middleman system of distribution can supply an answer—an American answer. "What can I do about it?" he asked. Grant. and he always casts the deciding vote. discussed earlier in this study. The consumer is the select partner of both the producer and the distributor. T. touched the heart of the producer-consumer relationship several years ago: In proportion to its ability to adjust itself to the consumer's needs and wishes shall business in America prosper. "I've found that some of these damages affect half the potato. "To whom could he complain?" he countered. The farmer relinquishes control over his products at the farm gate and from there to the consumer's dining table they are handled by interests not concerned with either the consumer or the producer." she pointed. visibly impaired by harvesting machines. take their produce to market. high cost system. the attendant is an employee 156 . Unless he is counted in on the dividends and then* division. The urgency for a general and revolutionary remodeling of our entire distribution system was demonstrated recently by a conversation overheard between a shopping housewife and the manager of a modern supermarket. purchase trucks. "I don't know. A motorist drives into a modern filling station to purchase a tank-full of gasoline. The brief colloquy had laid bare one of the more serious problems affecting American farming—the un-bridged chasm between producer and consumer. Why don't you stop that?" Obviously the manager had never faced that question before. W. "Neither do I. compete successfully with the middleman. there won't be any dividends for long. In this case." she answered. This is sound business. The method is not only antiquated. The customer had summoned the manager to complain about damaged potatoes on display. set up processing plants. "Take it up with the man over you. distribution of farm produce has changed little since feudal days in Europe." he agreed. founder of the chain store system that bears his name." she confessed.
One company owns and operate the oil wells. is as foreign to the American way of life as the former English practice of imprisonment for debt. the tank trucks that bring the product from the refinery to the station and the tank cars that brought the crude oil from the wells to the refinery.5 per cent in 1965.9 cents. either directly or by concealed legal subterfuge. We have no trouble in deciding which is the most efficient system.6 cents.5 per cent in 1929 to 3. Almost all farmers suffer the penalties of selling their products through the second of these two marketing systems. the gasoline is purchased by independent wholesalers and jobbers. Finally the independent retailer on the street corner buys it. It is little wonder that the farmer in 1965 received on a national average only a slight fraction above one cent for the beets in a No.6 cents! Or that the farmer received for the corn in a 12 ounce package of cornflakes only 2. Now. Another buys the crude oil at the well and hauls or pipes it to the refinery. And between these interests the product is hauled by Jimmy Hoffa's union truck drivers. That the distribution cost is now taking between 61 and 62 cents out of every dollar the consumer spends for farm-produced foods is intolerable so that our 33 year old farm control fiasco adds insult to injury. From the earth to the motorist's automobile tank the line of control is unbroken. the same company owns and operates the refinery and owns the oil wells and the leases where they are located. That the government way has worse than failed is seen in the already cited decline in the farmer's share of the total national income from 9. the consumer paying 28. In fact. 303 can for which the consumer paid 16. And it is redundant to carry the comparison further through all its independent controls and tortuous channels. picture this unified and efficient business operated (as is sometimes the case) by the system under which farming is carried on and farm distribution is conducted. which is owned by still another independent company. except to say that the farmers start much farther down the economic ladder than the oil company. The farmer must choose between only two ways to increase farm income— continue the indefensible method the government has followed since 1933 by compelling the consumer to pay more for farm-produced foods—or—use his ingenuity and enterprise to effect better and less costly distribution of his produce. 157 . After the oil is refined into its several products. Government price-fixing.of the oil company that owns and operates the retail business.
the following table is cited from FARM-RETAIL SPREADS FOR FOOD PRODUCTS.6 8.6 2.8 15. 21-2 can of peaches for which the consumer paid 158 .76.71.8 7.8 42.2 17.8 10.2 3.8 5. To enable both consumers and farmers to know the food items in which the spread occurs most seriously and the varying rates of spread.7 4.8 13.0 4.37.6 29.1 Lemons 21.5 Cookies 51. published by the United States Department of Agriculture: Retail Price Farmer's Farm-Retail Per Pound Share Spread (Cents) (Cents) (Cents) Sugar 12.6 Tomatoes (fr) 33.2 22.6 Grapefruit (ea) 15.3 11.1 5.5 10.2 8.4 30. Bakery and processed cereal products which cost the consumer $159.0 Potatoes 7.47.8 Milk (qt) Store 23.6 4.8 15. farm-toconsumer cooperative marketing system which would conceivably permit consumer and producer to share the 60 to 62 cents now absorbed from each consumer dollar by in between interests.2 Spinach 28.3 General meat products costing the consumer $280.2 11.5 Carrots 14.0 Lettuce 24. returned to the farmer $32.4 10.3 2. 26. for 1964. A No. farmer-managed.0 Milk (qt) Del.7 4.5 Celery 15.2 Onions 11.8 Apples 17.3 15.9 3.4 11.1 5.64.5 22.The other alternative is a farmer-owned.7 12.4 16.2 43.7 3.8 8.9 10.8 8.4 35.2 46.9 Navy Beans 16.2 Beef (choice) 77.27. returned to the farmer $134. thereby representing a farm retail spread of $145.8 Cucumbers 23.0 Cabbage 10. leaving a distribution spread of $127.7 6.8 4.0 White Bread 20.8 Cheese 73.4 Pork 56.4 26.
This.7 cents. Instead of protecting stored grains by dangerous chemical fumigants. their superb jams. It can be seen here that the more processing the farm crop passes through the smaller the farmer grosses from the original sale. cereal products with an ever-increasing number of processed items. they have greatly improved methods of sanitation. In a northern state is a large farm. The regional affiliation necessary to eliminate 159 . many local farm marketing groups are financed by their members. They have not only demonstrated that commercial food processing methods can be duplicated. He knows that farmers not only can manage and operate food processing plants profitably and successfully but can operate them with spotless cleanliness and a degree of sanitation beyond the law's strictest requirements. Without more than meager experience at the start. The proof lies in the eating. with a farm retail spread of 16. theirs is believed to be the only refrigerated grain storage in the world. with a farm retail spread of 28. yielded the farmer 4. But what about the financing? First.4 cents to the farmer. They have adopted and demonstrated practices to permit the growing of all food crops without commercial (chemical) fertilizers and insecticidal and fungicidal poisons. including many other farms.6 cents. and now. Canned corn showed a consumer cost of 19. 303 can. returning only 2.5 cents.33. brings up the inevitable question whenever and wherever farm-to-consumer distribution is discussed: How could farmers have a share in the highly technical business of food processing and distribution.0 cents for a No. The business was started several years ago by a young man and his wife who had the vision of building and operating a commercial food growing and processing business where organic farming and unquestionable sanitation would be the foundation. and not to forget their peanut butter without additives (all peanuts). growing larger year after year. soon erases from his mind all doubts. they have grown until today they ship their products over many states—fresh fruits and vegetables. Anyone who has eaten their dried fruits and vegetables. Almost all steps in canning and drying foods have been improved over methods employed in the most advanced processing plants in the United States and elsewhere. jellies and fruit butters.2 cents.
.present farm distribution evils would actually be a unified coalescing of all localized production and marketing groups. government control goes with it. joined by more neighbors. no more awful more and more destructive calamity could befall farmer marketing systems than the blight of bureaucracy and its ever-present and adroitly camouflaged perils of collectivism. the land had many years before been taken over for delinquent taxes and most of it was owned by unidentified land companies. The second inevitable question that arises from discussions of a farm-toconsumer food distribution systems is: How could such a nationwide organization acquire present independent processing plants without resorting to confiscation? Throughout the many years of discussion by farm groups an eventual modicum of control of their products from farm to consumer. towns and cities. legislators will write in a clear-cut provision to insure a government hands off policy. Several families from coal mining regions in an adjacent state. In a hilly and abandoned section. built modest dwellings and started small fruit growing on the cleared off hills—mostly improved blackberries and raspberries. within Model-T transportation distances. they found their 160 . free enterprise marketing groups. it is to be fervently hoped that farm groups have long ago learned the tragic lesson that Keynesian Socialism teaches—where government money goes. They found ready customers for their vine-toconsumer produce and continued to expand their plantings as market demands increased. Surely. On this point of financing. If Congress ever awakens to its true and full responsibilities to agriculture and if additional legislation is needed to permit farmers to operate a marketing system. methods and success of a small local cooperative in a Midwestern state illustrates the point at the same time that it demonstrates the necessity of farmer-owned. Existing plants and all their complex facilities would be purchased fairly and legitimately. The history of the origin. in the light of experience. They marketed their crops in nearby villages. no shade of forceout or confiscation thought has ever entered in groups with which this writer is familiar. displaced by automation. In a few years. It was typical of what was called "charcoal land" on the western slopes of the Alleghenies where primitive charcoal furnace operations had led to the cutting off of virgin hardwood timber and the land was then grown to thick underbrush. migrated to this idle land.
These markets were established to the north of the growers in order to gain the higher pre-season berry prices prevailing there. What could and must be done as the first major step toward developing a public demand for renovating our fifteenth century distribution system? Foremost is the urgent necessity of reestablishing in the national consciousness the indelible image that farming is and always will be our most important industry. Next and closely related to the first is the importance of awakening urban people to the stern truth that unless agriculture is recognized as the industry in which man reaches his highest plane of development. that all others are secondary and dependent on the prosperity and well-being of the farmer. Also. All media of information must discard the "hey rube" concept of farmers and farming and rediscover the preeminence of agriculture in every remote phase of our national economy. Initiative and competition provide the impetus for improved services. He took the problem up with State Extension officials and soon was worked out a practical solution for the production-distribution dilemma. The growers formed a cooperative organization with the aid of county and state facilities. all society will go down in the wreckage of their blind neglect. Public opinion must demand and Congress obliged to adopt a policy of conducting referenda among rural people to determine farm sentiment in all legislation and administrative 161 .berry production in excess of local consumption and appealed to their County Agricultural Agent. organized labor leaders must reassess their selfish group aims and policies. it is to be assumed that wholesalers and retailers would have seen the handwriting on the wall and others competed by developing better and more economical marketing methods or come forward with propositions to sell their bypassed industries and facilities to the farmer group. There need be no imitation or thought of confiscation as farmer-owned marketing here and there takes the place of present antiquated methods. Had the farmer cooperative carried their operations further and completed the total bridge to the consumer. They purchased small trucks. pooled their production and began selling their fruit in markets (wholesale) opened by state extension marketing aides. stand beside the farmer to declare a coordinating program based on the eternal truth defined above —farming is and always will be our most important industry.
and then obliged to see that the results of referenda are needed. By the same process the presence of "farmer minds" on governmental boards and commissions—instead of egghead collectivist minds—must be granted in all cases and considerations which touch the interests of agriculture. stopped by laws in which the farmer has a direct voice. But the farmer has important pending duties as well as the public and government. tariffs. He must talk cooperatives wherever he goes—businesslike and profit-making cooperatives in the American tradition—by which he will free himself from present government chains. The farmer is compelled to bear the financial brunt of all long and costly labor strikes because in the end he must pay an undue portion in taxes and in disrupted and impaired markets. Among the numerous examples of the government's complete indifference to the ignoring of farmer opinion and interest is the present advocacy of dumping our nation's dwindling food supplies around the world in the name of peace and doing so without consulting the men and women who produced the food. 162 .policies even remotely related to agriculture. The farmer has been the dupe and unwitting guinea pig of a carefully planned collectivist conspiracy. beginning in 1933 and continuing to this hour. he must now rouse 1 himself and his neighbors to the stark realization that the collectivists—the Socialists and Communists who want to sovietize America—decided to begin with him. foreign trade. This gross injustice must be stopped. currency. the farmer's viewpoints must be represented in all state and national matters involving. or even remotely connected with taxes. In all the official twaddle about the strike of transportation unions that paralyzed New York in 1965 there was no hint of what it cost agriculture. to destroy free enterprise. He must place friends of agriculture in local. state and federal offices. because in every country the farmers have been hardest to subdue. In the same general realm. and general international affairs. transportation. banking. Above all.
particularly in the urban press. APPALACHIA. Unfortunately. his emaciated wife stands timidly in the door. Lean. The President and First Lady are seated on the sagging front porch of a dilapidated plank cabin. This is the "typical" home and the "typical" family carefully selected for the President and First Lady to visit on their trip into Appalachia! This.Chapter Twenty-One APPALACHIA REVISITED The first requisite of a good citizen in this Republic of ours is that he shall be able and willing to pull his weight. bony foxhounds doze in the sun of a grassless yard. He worked on daily newspapers there. The distorted picture of Appalachia conveyed by press. He covered most of it for a national wire service. has quite suddenly lost its historical and geographical role as a proper noun. 192 million Americans were told in 1964. A torn section of faded quilt protrudes through a broken windowpane. He was born and raised in Appalachia. Scraggly timber on the mountainside crowds down to within a few yards of house. This picture results mainly from careless and "liberal" slanting of the news. the American people see Appalachia against the following composite and misleading background. ignorance. hunger. and with the witch's brew of political propaganda and ideological expediency. industrious citizens who live in this vast region. is Appalachia! But the author knows better. Theodore Roosevelt. television 163 . Behind the lean-to kitchen. vilifying the millions of fine. extending down through the eastern heartland of the nation. The husband leans awkwardly against the rickety porch post. social unrest and economic misery. it has become a synonym for idleness. He is personally acquainted with many of its people. There are few square miles of its vast territory he has not traveled. patched garments of varying sizes flap on a cotton clothesline stretched from a dead tree stub to a corner of the family privy. Barefoot children gape at the grinding cameras.
"The elephant is like a wall. Of course annual incomes of many families in this region are far below the national average. have not only remained unanswered. Have the American people been fully and truthfully informed by press. have not even been raised. serves to illustrate how newspaper representatives have neglected to report the facts in Appalachia. An old McGuffey Reader story tells of the three blind men of Hindustan describing an elephant. winding and steep . and above all by politicians who promise an easier life in return for votes." The third grasped the trunk and declared "You are both wrong. The article from which these quotations are cited would have been laughable had it not grotesquely misinformed millions who 164 . questions which to date. . we should demand factual answers. onethousandth part of the land area of Appalachia. urban-thinking "experts" and soft-speaking lying officials to lump the social and economic ills of this great region under one blanket diagnosis and pour out billions of tax dollars for socialistic medications smelling like the paternalistic salves of the welfare state. coal dust settles over everything. Of course there are poverty and unemployment in the coal regions in parts of Pennsylvania. both in and out of Congress. but what is more significant.and other information media. Before the public staggers blindly further along this one-way detour into welfare statism. where they exist." Another ran his hand along the animal's side and said. he is like a rope. Of course automation has taken over the jobs of thousands of bituminous and anthracite miners. from scores. downto-earth answers. One example. are narrow. . Yet Americans should not delude themselves by permitting urban-trained. One felt the elephant's leg and said." This story aptly describes the reporters who have spread the lie of Appalachia. to a few pertinent questions about Appalachia. In the summer of 1964 an eastern city newspaper carried libelous descriptions of Appalachia like these: "Roads." The truth? These descriptions apply to perhaps less than a one. television and government about social and economic conditions in Appalachia? No. no more represents the true Appalachia than a "ratinfested" tenement depicts the real Harlem or a South Side alley portrays the true Chicago. "The elephant is like a tree. West Virginia and sections of the eight other states which the voluble advocates of the planned economy loosely designate as Appalachia.
According to STATISTICAL ABSTRACT coal car loadings dropped from 8. computed in forty-six cities. The basic wealth of this region originally came from timber.have never traveled along the hundreds of miles of broad. Is automation the major cause of job losses in Appalachia's coal mines? According to the 1964 report of President Johnson's Appalachian Regional Commission.535. Is coal mining the chief industry in Appalachia? No. have carefully avoided the question—why is bituminous consumption declining? Obviously this omission leads us to reasons other than automation as the major cause of unemployment among miners in Appalachia. like many before and after him.429. bituminous production decreased 19 per cent. The writer of that article.000 tons in 1950 to 380. At the peak of this industry during World War II. Welfare state enthusiasts. both in tonnage and numbers of workers. but agriculture and manufacturing moved in after the eighteen-nineties to constitute the real wealth and stability.000 in 1945 to 5. coal mining employment declined 59 per cent in Appalachia between 1950 and 1960. The same source of data shows that while our total population was increasing 17 per cent between 1950 and 1960. followed by coal mining where coal was easily accessible. 2) Total coal consumption declined from 454. 3) Retail prices of bituminous. through neat and attractive villages and towns in the beautiful hills and mountains of Appalachia. smooth highways.296. or from 516 million tons to 416 million tons.000 tons in 1960. The following four facts shed some light on the matter: 1) Weekly wages in all manufacturing in the United States rose 68 per cent between 1950 and 1963.000 in 1963— a decline of more than 33 per cent.202.3 million fine residents of Appalachia. coal mining wages rose 80 per cent in the same period. 165 . It is a popular misconception and also a chief foundation stone under our billions-for-poverty eradication crusade that unemployment among coal miners results directly and solely from automation. commercial coal mining accounted for probably one per cent of Appalachia's total land area and far less of its total employment. it is not now and never was. This theory is thoroughly punctured by facts. labeled at least 95 per cent of the 15. who pretend to see the ogre of automation behind every bush.
mountain folks and valley dwellers. he dined in fancy restaurants of large cities and shared the sparse fare of lean-to kitchens. salt and a few yards of calico for making shirts and other wearing apparel. He was entertained in one-room shacks and in homes fit for royalty. talking with bankers. 1964— an increase of more than 63 per cent. the decline in bituminous consumption. none yielded so rich a harvest of truth about Appalachia as the retracing of the sixteen miles between his boyhood home on a hill farm into X-town. industrial workers and both rural and urban unemployed. farmers. A large percentage of farmers in X-county around the turn of the century were subsistence farmers. The head of a large eastern plumbing concern says.89 in March. and the switching of so many home owners from coal to gas or oil should have nothing to do with unemployment in Appalachia. "Most home owners say that John L. even a few years before and until the late nineteen-fifties much of our work consisted of changing residence heating furnaces from coal to oil or gas. he said." It would indeed be a remarkable lack of cause and effect if the rise in miner wages. the county seat. All of them sold a few vegetables. small businessmen." When asked the reason. 166 . In all these varied experiences. many handling less than $100 in actual cash during a typical year.95 a ton in 1946 to $17.rose from $10. Lewis either calls his miners out on a strike in late fall or threatens to do so. merchants. In the summer of 1964 the author made an 850 mile automobile trip throughout Appalachia. The barter economy had prevailed in many communities before the mass production era began. most housewives "traded" eggs and butter at the village grocery or general store for sugar. the rise in coal prices to consumers. He slept in cabin attics and in some of the finest hotels to be found anywhere on this continent. "In 1950. What is the status of agriculture in the general Appalachian region? Here the truth lies visible on the surface and penetrates to the heart of almost all the major problems—another vital fact carefully avoided by all the "expert" analyses of the social and economic ills affecting this great and beautiful region. The American people have been told only part of the truth about unemployment in Appalachia. and they can't afford any longer to depend on coal for heating their homes. 4) The shift in heating fuel from coal to oil or gas has been a major one.
tomatoes. Few of the farms consisted of more than four or five acres of tillable land suitable for their preferred type of intensive farming. Toys were homemade. Education was obtained in an upgraded school where pupil age ranged from six to eighteen. Early in the eighteen-hundreds the valley leading out of the county seat was settled by German immigrants who preferred the topography because it was similar to the region from which they had come. strawberries. currants. Is this German-grown? Is this from X-valley? To expand their meager acreages these thrifty farmers terraced steep hills with stone walls. lettuce. over what was known as "The Divide. blackberries 167 . The age of chemistry still lay out of sight beyond the horizon. salt pork from home-raised hogs—this was major fare. By the late eighteen and early nineteen-hundreds their numbers had greatly increased and third and fourth generations were prospering there. built after the fashion of those one sees in northern France and the Rhine Valley. green peas. quinces. sweet potatoes. Long rows of hotbeds and cold frames lengthened their normal growing seasons from early spring to late autumn and early winter. at others they widened out into farms with level acreage. celery. The life blood of the region was visible along the sixteen miles into X-town." then down another winding valley into X-town.Life moved along placidly with no luxuries and only the bare necessities. breakfast biscuits from a few acres of wheat grown solely for this purpose. radishes and cucumbers. the rest was kept in productive timber or used for grazing. On these leveled "shelves" they grew prodigious crops of grapes. At places these valleys were narrow. Games were simple but wholesome. Corn bread from farm-grown grain. snap beans. a turnpike following a winding valley up to its head. Their gardens were truly agricultural miracles— carrots. green onions. peaches. the county seat. lima beans. gooseberries. cabbage. turnips. Two-horse express wagon loads of produce from these gardens moved once a week and often two or three times a week into X-town's farmers market on the central square and into independent grocery stores. Food consisted almost solely of farm-raised fruits and vegetables. Only in the few homes of well-to-do farmers did the children ever taste a banana other than the single specimen found in the Christmas stocking. The finest of all compliments to freshness and nutritional value was found in questions housewives asked.
the same rolling hills are there." Retracing the trip in 1964 was a painful and saddening experience. neon signs. Peeking through the undergrowth are seen sections of the stone walls those thrifty pioneers built to increase their limited acres. One manager said he doubted if a single pound of X-county beef and pork was sold in X-town. In the meat sections are seen hams imported from Poland and Denmark or shipped in from Chicago. all of which found ready buyers in X-town. piled high with farm produce." The neat. and small two-to-four room cottages and numerous real estate signs. But. An octogenarian retired banker told the author a few years ago. Yet. Many bought "mash" from the large distillery in X-town and brought it home in barrels for feeding to hogs which they slaughtered in cool weather and sold fresh to X-town meat shops. As one drove past their farmsteads in early winter. filling stations. chiefly from the South. The highway demonstrates urban sprawl in its most disgusting form—bawdy roadhouses. in all the campaign oratory. Omaha and other Midwestern packing houses. especially after dark when young folks are heading for their favorite road-house. the widened and hard-surfaced highway now is jammed with automobiles. in all the sentimental babble about spreading the blessings of well-being throughout Appalachia. "Fine building sites for sale." Most of the families living in the small cottages are on relief. state and federal. where bacon. no word is ever uttered about raising cattle on these suitable hills to produce the beef we now import or the sheep to produce the wool we buy every year from foreign farms. hams and shoulders were being "cured" for sale year round. thrifty farms and gardens have been swallowed up in this strange thing we call "Progress. smoke could be seen seeping from under the roofs of the small windowless building known as a smokehouse. No farm "expert" from Washington ever visits X-valley to propose the restoration of those busy little German farms for production of fruits and vegetables X-town residents would prefer. the same stretches of winding valleys— idle. 168 . Today no locally grown fruits and vegetables are sold in X-town's supermarkets." "Luxury home sites for Tomorrow. Where formerly express wagons moved toward X-town. brush grown. Managers explain that all fresh produce is trucked in. "Everyone of those 'Dutch' farmers put money in the bank every week in the year.and raspberries.
the damage cannot be measured solely in terms of lost jobs. furniture factory. several commercial greenhouses and smaller industries common to a thriving county seat rounded out X-town's business and industrial structure. with an interurban electric line to a neighboring county seat. Local businessmen insist the factories closed because X-town gained the unfavorable reputation of a "labor trouble town" after organizers came in and forced the factories to become "closed shops. railroad repair shops and yards. shoe imports into the United States increased from 1. crippling strikes. four banks. three railroads. It is generally accepted as an industrial truism that when an urban community like X-town loses the manufacturing plants around which it grew and prospered. blast 169 . The railroad moved most of its shop and yard repair work to another terminal point. Automation subsequently reduced jobs in the steel mill.874. the buildings standing empty and ghost-like. In addition there were three brick-making plants in X-town and six more in a twenty-mile radius. and all but one of the brick plants ceased operation.000 skilled and clerical workers and selling their products on four continents. all employing about 6. X-town was prospering from three large shoe factories and their dependent shoelace. costly. three facts to contend with: first.000 pairs in 1923 to 138. the loss was in no manner related to coal mining because no coal was ever commercially mined within forty miles of X-town. Union sympathizers claim that X-town shoe factories paid "starvation wages" before the workers were organized. paper box. third. coke plant. The town and its environs were serviced by fourteen miles of electric railway. wooden heel and shoe last plants.942. a furniture factory.Why is unemployment in Appalachia high? Why is the economic life in some of its towns stagnated? At the end of World War I. blast furnace. second. automation was not among the causes of X-town losing its important shoe industries. two grain and feed mills. But. the feed and grain mills. There are here. After X-town's shoe factories closed their doors (one moved to another city).000 pairs in 1963." There were long. in 1964? The shoe factories and their allied industries were gone. Lateral effects are usually more or less permanently paralyzing. three slaughter houses that bought most of their animals from X-county farms. and perhaps most important. A large steel mill.
Retraining is not a cure—it is merely postponing the evil. These factors as they relate to X-town's present plight are not cited as examples of overall causes of general unemployment in Appalachia." "What would you do if you were in the President's place?" 170 . crime and amorality into which American youth are sinking? Discussion of these and related matters with an unemployed former shoe worker in X-town indicated that sound thinking has not vanished from the rankand-file of our citizenry. articulate man in his upper fifties. it is a more permanent reduction of unemployed we now have. whose formal education was terminated at the state university at the end of his junior year during the 1929 depression. Can the Federal Government claim that a per capita increase of over 20 per cent in value of farm imports since 1933 is unrelated to the disappearance of those tidy. prosperous farms in X-valley? Can highly publicized social up lifters any longer ignore the impact of urban idleness and suburban roadhouses on our rapidly mounting juvenile crime crises? Will the planting of tulips and petunias along the X-valley highway cure the economic cancers that have eaten away its farm industry and now threatens Xcounty's boys and girls? Shall we American voters permit government concern for the welfare of boys and girls in Timbuktu or Ghana to overshadow our responsibility to our own youth—to whom we must look for tomorrow's leaders? Shall the crocodile tears shed for foreign idle blur our vision of the widespread drug addiction. Today X-town does not even have a public bus service. but rather to stress the vital fact that forces other than automation are gnawing into the foundations of our national economic and social structure.furnace and coke plant. what new trade or skill can you suggest that is not already over-manned or will not be overtaken by automation in the next few years? It is not new skills in other trades we need. He was an intelligent. not only because there are fewer workers to ride but because the town's population is gradually decreasing year after year—10 per cent between 1950 and 1960. "Mister. his immediate answer showed he had already thought seriously about the matter. The electric railway passed out of existence before this means of transportation began to vanish elsewhere. When asked how he would like to be trained free by the government in a new trade.
window-smashing. First you must realize that coal mining is like hemophilia." "Are you in favor of government relief to take care of urban idle?" we asked him.He had a ready answer and it made good sense. no matter how you dress it up. but. especially the more ambitious. Many of them are trapped and can see no way to escape. government relief is necessary in many cases. I'm a union man and I think unions are necessary. it seems to me just plain." A small town banker in a town mainly dependent on coal mining said. I think we have but two doors open—put everybody on relief or put them out on the land and let them grow their own food. "There are many causes for this mess we are in." He was thoughtful for a moment and then added. . "Government charity. are moving out and trying to improve their lots. This is what drove our shoe factories out of business. "No. but the government. I believe I'm idle today because of free trade. "Next. Yes. but where it is 171 . all governments. will not reduce unemployment—it will merely encourage idleness. I am living on relief but I'm accepting it not because I believe it is a government obligation to feed me and my wife but because I think it's the government's fault that I'm not working and self-sustaining. It is a chain that is difficult to break but mainly the trouble is a fatalistic surrender." "Why do you think the government is to blame for your being out of a job?" "First. The occupation has been handed down from father to son. ordinary sense that the government's handing out relief checks instead of getting at the roots of unemployment will no more cure the trouble than pulling a man's tooth will mend a broken leg." "What do you think is the cure?" "Mister. If I were President I'd restore jobs to thousands of American shoe workers who've lost their jobs solely by increased imports of shoes. that allow unions to resort to gang tactics must bear the economic evils that follow. such as was practiced here—rock-throwing. I could have gone to other shoe making towns had the government over the last several years not opened the doors and let in shoes made in many other countries where wages are lower than ours. others. I'm not. it's inherited. "I admit labor trouble was the main reason why the shoe factories closed here. it was the government in Washington that is responsible for labor unions growing to the place where their leaders advocate unlawful violence.
There was no need to discuss the "damn bug" subject further. Me and my wife haint. Granted that automation has thrown many of these men out of jobs." We stopped at a small unpainted cottage outside the coal region and talked with a man perhaps in his late thirties. I'd say it was laziness." At another plank cabin the young husband said. "Look. "If the night club operators here in the city and those who put in twelve to sixteen hours out of every twentyfour in those dirty roadhouses you see on the highways in a twenty to thirty mile radius would put in the same time and energy on a farm or in a productive industry. "I tried to a few years back but the damn bugs ate everything up." A small town grocer was less lenient in his views. Everything about the farmstead testified to thrift and labor. I am 172 . "I have discovered that I can get a bigger share from the consumer's dollar with dairy products. we would have less crime and more prosperity. we asked. "Why don't you grow a little vegetable garden?" He answered bitterly. In a city that is slowly working its way out of its business slump by bringing in several new industries. why shouldn't we take whatever we can get?" Seeing two white silos beside a large barn about a quarter of a mile back from a highway. Pop. Soon a twelve or thirteen year old boy came round the corner with a rifle in his arms and holding a dead robin. fruit. "If I was to wrap my opinion into one word. his wife and two children were living on relief." the father patted him on the shoulder. the leading merchant said. No.motivated for political advantages it certainly will aggravate the disease it is supposed to cure." While we were talking a rifle shot rang out in the rear of the house." he shouted proudly. "Some folks say we ought to be ashamed to live on relief. and so forth." Seeing no garden. "I got him with one shot!" "That's good shootin' son. "I worked at a filling station in town till business got so bad they didn't need me any longer. He had been without work for almost two years and he. I feel this way about it— all the big rich fellows cheat the government. we drove in and talked with the owner. but it's not automation that is keeping them from growing small gardens or having a few chickens and a cow. so I am sticking with cows and do only a bit in sideline farming to balance things out—potatoes.
But I am certainly not in favor of encouraging continued idleness in the name of charity. And there's bushels of wild blackberries and huckleberries goin' to waste back there in the hills. even at our age. My wife cans from fifty to seventy-five quarts of tomatoes from that garden every summer. but peace and contentment seeped from every nook and cranny of the premises. "Of all the tommyrot I ever heard. he fairly exploded. One cow's grazin' up there on the mountain. When we mentioned that President Johnson defined a poor family as one having an income of less than $3.not opposed to government relief as a temporary measure where unemployed are caught in a helpless squeeze. We raise two hogs to furnish us meat and some to give to the neighbors.000 a year. can and dry.' " We drove up a hard-surfaced highway and then turned up a road leading toward the crest of the mountain ridge. his aged wife was working with her flowers in the small front yard. We grow all the potatoes we need and even sell a few. "There's enough idle land back in this region to take care of every unemployed person within fifty miles of where we are standing. It was nothing but a typical mountain cabin. I would relieve their immediate physical needs and then remind them of what my father used to tell me when I was a small boy—'Remember that God gives you a good sound boat and a sturdy pair of oars. "What would you do for the unemployed in Appalachia if you had the authority and the means?" "First. Then evidently he thought about the President's definition of a poor family. "Tommyrot—tommyrot! My income for the past 173 . a garden which me and my wife tends. A white-haired man sat in a hickory rocker on the front porch. that's it! Right down there you passed." In front of a neat red-brick church in a small town we asked the elderly minister.:" He waved his hand in one direction toward where the valley narrowed and in the other where it widened out to a mile or more across between rising hills. as you drove up. But it will not occur as long as politicians in Washington are capitalizing on human misery. I've got six hives of bees in back of the yard for all the honey we can eat. I trade enough garden stuff every summer to get our year's supply of wood cut and ricked back there aginst the fence. We grow snap beans to eat fresh. but you've got to do the rowing.
It later became known 174 . "I certainly don't. but still in the region of Appalachia. I got up. Several years ago two men drove up in front of the house. 'Do you buzzards see that front gate? If both of you are not through it in thirty seconds. eastern newspapers carried a press account of a county in Georgia where businessmen and farmers had devised a coordinated plan that. I have a son buried in France. My grandfather is buried at Vicksburg. took large charts from their leather cases and began motioning around over the farm. Down in the western foothills where Appalachia begins to spread out into what eventually becomes the nation's so-called breadbasket. 'You'll have to let that twelve acres you had in corn last year lie idle or put it into pasture and you must—' I didn't let him go on any further. Ralph Waldo Emerson. ON OCTOBER 30. we visited a valley farmer who grows vegetables and small fruits. walked to the front door and opened it. even in the depths of the depression was causing farm life and business in the county seat to thrive and expand. they introduced themselves as government representatives of the Department of Agriculture. one of them unfolded a chart and started explaining. When they knocked at the door. A full moon mellowed a panorama of unforgettable beauty and serenity.' They left under their own power and have never come back. no bastard from Washington is going to tell me on my own farm what to do." Chapter Twenty-Two THE COLQUITT PLAN Nothing is rich but the inexhaustible -wealth of nature. 1930. marketing them by truck in two county seat towns equidistant from his farm. "Do you get any checks from the government for complying with acreage limits?" we asked. "After we were seated." Characteristic mountain hospitality led to our staying all night with this remarkable man and wife. After supper we sat in homemade rockers on the roofless front porch overlooking folds of lower mountains and hills below us.twenty-five years haint been that much and we've never gone hungry or naked either. I'll throw you through.
with the nation bowed in economic sackcloth and ashes. prospered. the 1930 newspaper story stood out like a green oasis in a desert. The plan was accepted unanimously.widely as the Colquitt Plan. mysteriously. In the gloom of the depression. much less adopting the model which Georgia was proving workable even in one of the most trying times the modern business world had ever encountered. Since pre-Civil War days it followed a two-crop farming system. 175 . Unfortunately. many Colquitt farmers found themselves unable to meet their obligations. When world and domestic prices of these crops were high. He was to plan a group of crops." selling off more plant nutrients than were returned in organic matter. Livestock always a desirable contributor to soil fertility. like all one-crop farming regions.659 and an area of 529 square miles. was a negligible industry in the county. stagnating Moultrie's commercial life. the story was lost and farm recovery was soon to be directed in less practical channels by men incapable of weighing. It has a population of 30. Colquitt County is in south Georgia. continuing American success story in years of the welfare state. Colquitt farmers and business in Moultrie. in South Georgia. Colquitt County's soils paid dearly for decades of "soil mining. This county is Colquitt. one county away from the Florida line. when demands were sluggish and prices low. The bankers said the farmers must adopt a program which met with their approval in order to obtain financial assistance. Four factors operated as follows: County Agricultural Agent. named after the county in which a near miracle was succeeding. Georgia [it said] has a county where farmers would not know there had been a depression if they had not read about it in the newspapers. A mass meeting was held at the county court house where businessmen and farmers heard the details discussed. cotton and tobacco. And. farmers were unable to pay their bills or buy more than necessary supplies. the county seat. The press story sketched background details: After the World War and [the] drop in cotton prices. little has been heard of this great. diversified to suit soil and weather conditions and within the practical scope of the other three factors. but made a condition to which the farmers agreed. But. Bankers agreed to renew the farmers' notes.
corn in the cribs. Business. hay and oats and velvet beans in plenty. sorghum and millet crops are making ready for markets. sorghum cane. watermelons or other approved specialized crops Cotton Cultivated pasture (for hogs) Permanent pasture Milk cows Brood sows Laying hens (purebred) Beef cattle if pasture is available 10 acres 3 acres 2 acres 4 acres 8 acres 5 acres 2 acres 3 to 5 acres 2 or 3 2 50 The extra acreage above the 30 unit plan would be absorbed in "follow" crops. The banks are doing an excellent business. a substantial increase over last year. He was to accept and follow through with the County Agricultural Agent's recommendations. sweet potatoes. chickens and eggs to ship. followed by peavine hay Sweet potatoes. butter and cream to sell. millet and home garden Tobacco Spanish peanuts.Farmer. Business and professional men in Moultrie were to develop and provide markets for the county's farm production. The 1930 press story concluded with the statement. Banker. The railroads have actually employed more men. He was to furnish financial backing to enable the farmer to adopt and continue the new cropping and livestock plan. as well as peanuts to sell. Cropping plans were built around a 30 acre unit as follows: Corn. velvet beans and runner peanuts Oats. The city and its civic organizations adopted the slogan: An everyday cash market for the products of the farm. beef cattle for the local packing house. The plan was launched in 1924. cane. "Colquitt farmers have meat in the smokehouse. money in the bank. The mills are 176 . Anyone acquainted with the resistance of many farmers to breaking away from one-crop farming finds double amazement at this plan's success from the start. Bankers say that no business houses cut salaries and no men have been laid off. sugar cane. peanuts for the hogs to eat.
There is not a farm in the county but uses the plan and the farmer who does not have more or less poultry. 177 .000 inhabitants. 1936. it is well to note that this report refers to the spring of 1936! The next paragraph of the banker's letter is even more amazing: "The livestock industry is expanding rapidly. Moultrie. The letter continued: "Notwithstanding the fact of our diversification.. a town of 10. 1930! Inquiry made to a Moultrie banker in May. twelve years after the Colquitt Plan was started. AH of them grow their own supplies of food—vegetables. we have paid the county's farmers an annual disbursement as follows .running full time and there is no unemployment problem in Moultrie. six years of which included the 1929 depression. Starting with 1929. And." the banker's list was impressive. communities lacking in cooperation between farmer and county seat businessmen and urban regard for the welfare of local farmers." But Colquitt's farmers gained lateral benefits from diversification— improved soil fertility resulting in higher yields. has become one of the leading markets in the southeast for farm products. we are producing more cotton and tobacco than we did previously to adopting this plan." To those who have seen the long trail of evils following one-crop farming. meat and bread. it is a heartening experience to read the imposing list of cash farm products sold in Moultrie every year from 1929 to 1936.." Again." It is significant to remember that this Associated Press dispatch was dated October 30. The banker prefaced the list with this statement: "As a result of the Colquitt Plan. the fact that crops for livestock grow twelve months in the year down here offers exceptional promises for livestock raising. eggs. brought this reply: "We are very happy to be able to tell you that as the years have gone by the Colquitt Plan of diversification of farm crops has grown with each succeeding year since its adoption. sweet and white potatoes. We have a two million dollar packing plant in Moultrie and within 28 miles of us in another county another company has erected a packing plant. syrup and truck crops to sell every month in the year is an exception. that being accounted for by better acre yields resulting from increased fertilization and intensified methods. as you doubtless know. dairy products.
000 0. The Colquitt saga represents county seat banking at its best—banking by farseeing men.00100. climbing to astonishing success through a period of nationwide depression.000 Again. functioning for the benefit of the entire county.000.000115.000 00.00050. working plan put into operation by serious.000 001.000 0. But how has the Colquitt Plan fared through the New Deal.000 00. It is common sense in the ascendancy. Fair Deal.0876.000 0.0020.000 00. note that this total represents average sales per year from 1929 to 1936! Colquitt is small in comparison with counties in most of our Midwestern states. practical business.Livestock Cotton & Cottonseed Tobacco Peanuts Watermelons Dairy Products Truck Crops Poultry & Eggs Corn Sweet Potatoes Fuel Wood Ribbon Cane Syrup Pecans Hay Total $ 6.700.00275.00055.340.000 00. Peek describes from the hodgepodge of propositions advanced in the spring of 1933 for solving our "burdensome farm surplus" problem: Invite all the major nations to send their navies to all United States ports. simple.000 0.0080.000 $10. Here is a common sense. Square Deal and all the other "deals" that have moved across the national scene since its vigorous beginning? 178 . It demonstrates what experienced men and women can accomplish when theory is absent and practicality is on the throne.0020.00264. place it on these thousands of ships and then let them distribute the food to every port in the world to feed the poor!" Great among the factors which helped the Colquitt Plan work was the wise banking cooperation.00065. professional and other urban interests. Compare the Colquitt Plan to the plan offered by an unnamed brain truster whom George N.000 0.0040.000 0. It would require 147 Colquitt Counties to equal the area of Nebraska.000 00. there gather all the surplus food from all over the land.000 .
" The Chamber's name had changed.447.614.821.00 00.0467.00 048.. but the expansion over the 1936 totals can be seen from the following for 1963: Livestock Dairying Peanuts Corn 0$4. manager of the MoultrieColquitt County Chamber of Commerce.00 0.165.605. L.022. not the major farm products for which Moultrie furnished a cash market in 1965: Snap Beans Pole Beans Cabbage Runner Beans Tomatoes Squash Cucumbers Potatoes Peas Others Total $30. 1966.25 001. Many worthwhile projects have resulted from this important division of the Chamber.00 002. A.00 003.067. Grimmett.193.360.50 011.25 058.75 001.25 00. The working cooperation between farmers and businessmen is good. "In 1963 the Moultrie-Colquitt County Chamber of Commerce organized an Agriculture Division to better cope with the problems of promoting agriculture. Farmers in the Chamber of commerce! But the added note in Manager Grimmett's letter puts the frosting on their cake of accomplishments: "The enclosed statistics should give you sufficient data to show that agriculture in Colquitt County is strong.126.1. Now it was the Moultrie-Colquitt County Chamber of Commerce.00 179 .Did the bedrock principles survive against the impractical fantasies of government policies? In a letter dated May 10. writes: "Colquitt County's program of development has continued at a steady pace with new programs and new concepts being tried each year.352.161.531.0400.780.910.00 Totals for all farm commodities sold under the Colquitt Plan were not available for 1965.00 $187." The list includes only the minor. due to the interest and planning that has gone into the various improvement programs.00 016.128.00 016.586.
141. (b) strive to have all calves in county average 400 pounds in 205 days.00 Among the items that stand out in this list. (b) guard against bogus salesmen.000 acres.985. strokes. (a) light signs on highways welcoming people to Moultrie and Colquitt County. (d) expand educational programs concerning cancer. (a) greater aid in behalf of emotionally disturbed and mentally retarded in Colquitt County. But if Colquitt County's gains over the years are computed only in dollars and cents. Colquitt has adopted a five year plan. (e) 180 .00 004. (c) get more steep. pine seedlings and wildlife food—4. (c) organize classes on basic nutrition for low income groups.738. Safety and Nutrition." with only a few general interest aims cited under each: "1) Soil.00 $25.00 0. (d) establish cooperative freezer plant. purebred bull.00937. (c) expand home and county beautification program. (e) grow more brown-top millet for wildlife. Forest and Wildlife Conservation. cash return to farmers from their forests merits special emphasis. "5) Health. "4) Rural Development. Here are the "problems. It illustrates the importance of timber as an annual cash farm crop.134. Water. the demonstration loses the greatest value it holds for farmers everywhere. (b) promote use of dolomitic limestone. (d) all hogs be vaccinated against cholera.000. (b) stress program for eye tests for glaucoma and for diabetic tests.087." actually six goals. "3) Crop Production and Marketing. 1966-1971. (c) use only certified seeds.00 002.Tobacco Produce Cotton Forestry Miscellaneous Estimated total 006. each broken down into numerous specified aims. The intangibles far outweigh those that can be seen and handled.100. pasture. "2) Livestock Production and Marketing. tuberculosis.000. (a) more grassed waterways—seventy-five miles of terraces. divided into what they designate as "problems. (e) sell more corn through livestock. (a) have purebred beef cattle on all farms. (d) more controlled burning and observation of fire laws.000. (a) higher crop yields per acre plus higher crop quality: (b) test all soils for trace element deficiency. heart and polio. erosive and wet land planted to hay. (f) increase milk production per cow.875. (c) every cattle raiser own a quality.00 001.947.
(b) add driver-training to the curriculum of all high schools. It is the local market. (h) extend county garbage collection through newspaper and by radio. Mason Knox's poem: It ain't the individual. But the everlasting teamwork Of every bloomin' soul. (f) promote family togetherness. academic emphasis on foreign markets. (d) widen youth participation in home and church affairs and stress farm beautification." 4) Cooperative planning and action among urban business and professional men is as necessary and as permanently beneficial as it is among farmers. "6) Youth. along with consumers.intensify program to eradicate rabies among wild and domestic animals." Several facts of transcendent importance stand out in the progress Moultrie and Colquitt County citizens are making to restore dignity to farming and prosperity to all segments of their society. (c) expand educational program to reduce school dropouts by reaching parents. (f) demonstration courses to improve fruit and vegetable quality grown for home use. 3) The farmers broke away from destructive one-crop system and once and for all abandoned the hoary habit of "grandfather-did-it-and-so-do-I. They went to work to help themselves. In the words of J. 181 . (h) more rural and urban youth participation in programs of youth centers. (g) promote farm and home safety through adult and youth programs. 2) The business and professional men of Moultrie. (a) emphasize highway safety through educational channels. 5) Despite three decades of blind. facts applicable to every region of the United States. (e) work to get National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance as part of every school's daily schedule. the people of Moultrie and Colquitt County proved a time-tested truism: that the diamonds are in your own back yard—the greatest potential market on earth lies within a few miles of the Farm gate. broke down the traditional farm-city barrier and realized that neither farmer nor city man could live isolated from the other but both must work together. (g) encourage youth to take advantage of religious training offered in local communities. 1) The farmers of Colquitt County did not sit back supinely and gaze hopefully toward Washington for help. Nor the army as a whole.
both methods and accomplishments have thoroughly exploded the Federal Government's entire. 7) Throughout the forty-two years of its successful operation.' " Something else again is the song in the hearts of the young men and women of Colquitt County and the vision and patriotic zeal. Home Demonstration Agent and Vocational Agricultural Teacher are training boys and girls to become intelligent farmers and lovers of the farm instead of bringing them up to seek some other line of endeavor in life. Chapter Twenty-three THE FOREST AND THE FREE PRESS The preservation of a free press is utterly dependent on a free economy." Then follows a sentence that should be painted across our national skies in letters of flame: "They are going out from our schools to revolutionize the farming industry. All the means are at hand." How pathetically and stupidly feeble sounds the voice of the economic crackpot and collectivist with his cry: "Not 'back to the land' but 'factoryward ho. Instead. unworkable and farmenervating control program. guaranteed in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution—freedom of the press. these remarkable folk turned to the importance of keeping rural youth on the land instead of carelessly allowing them to drift into the moral and spiritual dry-rot of urban existence. to make it not only profitable.6) And above all. Raymond Moley. the Colquitt Plan has at no time taken policy-shaping cognizance of the untenable overproduction theory. reveals the major goal toward which they aimed at that time. but pleasant. But the way is short. AT FIRST glance it may seem a long distance from the farm woodlot to the destruction of one of man's most precious liberties. All that re182 . "Our County Agricultural Agent. How a free press may be summarily road-blocked has recently been demonstrated. A letter from the Moultrie Chamber of Commerce back in 1938. Today's progress proves the wisdom of twenty-eight years ago.
The reason newsprint was rationed is explained by our foreign trade records. Charges were frequently made that the Roosevelt Administration was discriminating against newspapers not favorable to the regime. the President sent a special message to Congress.600. soybeans and other crops held by the government under price control arrangements. When the aluminum industry announced its intention to raise aluminum prices. not to be confused with the government-held stocks of wheat. The aluminum situation in 1965 is a potent example. stated that many farm belt congressmen feared the President might use stockpiled food in the same manner he used government-held aluminum the previous year. 1966.000 tons. whether resulting from underproduction 183 .760. scarcity. Quie. of Minnesota. Not only did the President hold the power to greatly curtail any newspaper he desired. On May 23. at the outbreak of World War I we had become dependent on foreign nations for all forestry products and particularly for pulpwood.mains for Americans to lose this inestimable blessing is a man in the White House who might find it attractive and advantageous to his political ambitions to issue the order. Americans have seen the "power of scarcity" used by the White House to regulate and dominate private business. having not been scheduled for a committee hearing. with Congress passively handing more and more legislative functions over to the executive branch of government. For many years we had been producing less newsprint than we consumed. sold enough on the open market for force prices down.000 tons of newsprint a year while producing only 910. Our newsprint imports averaged 2. President Johnson merely dipped into the national stockpile. Congress had given the President extraordinary executive emergency powers. In fact. In other words. an Associated Press item announced that the proposal was not likely to be considered. we consumed over 3. Since 1960. The power to ration is the power to destroy. On February 10. wood pulp and newsprint. From 1940 to 1944. he could have forced such publishers to cease publication. accumulated as a military measure.000 tons a year during this period. 1966. Among these were broad leeway’s in rationing scarce military and nonmilitary materials. proposing the establishment of a national stockpile of food. Representative Albert H. Newsprint was one of the latter. corn. During World War II. But two examples need be cited.
and when the Roosevelt Administration began wrecking our tariff walls in 1934. especially in food. (c) decline of farm population. To the last cited factor it is necessary to add that a nation which is selfsustaining. for in that case we might stand still. since 1960 over $5. It is the proudest that man can enjoy. (d) government stockpiling. is far less likely to fall prey to total government domination. At the beginning of the century we imported only about 7 cents' worth of pulpwood. whether by: (a) reduced crop acreages. it not only takes away the true light." Junius (pen name of a nineteenth century English political writer): "Let it be impressed upon your minds. That power is ours. but it sprang from the people.or government stockpiling. (g) withholding the truth about imports. This logically brings us back to the farm woodlot and its indispensable role in maintaining a free press. Colton: "An enslaved press is doubly fatal. and with an immortal instinct it has always worked for the people. When agriculture ceased in 1926 to produce enough food to supply export demands and meet domestic requirements. again. It was not granted by monarchs. (e) worldwide giveaways of food. it is powerful. but it sets up a false one that decoys us to our destruction. it matters little or nothing who owns a business if the government holds absolute control. Government control is Socialism. three unchallenged witnesses to testify to the merits of a free press: Benjamin Disraeli: "The press is not only free. that the liberty of the press is the palladium of all the civil. political and religious rights. if not the deliberately planned. let it be instilled into your children. the American people lost their most vital shield against encroaching Socialism. the deceptiveness of Keynesian Socialism is exposed. it was not gained for us by aristocracies. In end result it matters not a whit by what means the scarcity comes. wood pulp and newsprint per capita of total population. opens a vast avenue through which a totalitarian minded government may control and eventually destroy freedom and private industry. It is the importing peoples who are most vulnerable to Socialism. (b) killing pigs. But first let's call. Back of every phase of the "scarcity" principle lurks the potential." Since 1960 we have been producing in the United States only 32 to 35 per cent of the paper on which our newspapers are printed. (f) tearing down tariff walls. out of the past. Here.40 worth 184 . danger of total collectivism." Caleb C.
C. We want progress. D. including all services. The greatest contribution farmers can make in protecting a free press in the years ahead. nor the dictatorship of ignorance. And I am proud to salute you as fellow revolutionaries. The need for employing more workers in forestry was discussed over twenty-five years ago. Garver. 1941. Full development of the forests could raise this figure to more than six million persons.. We want it both at home and abroad—and we aim to get it. in Washington. is estimated to have furnished directly and indirectly an equivalent of year-long jobs for almost four million persons. But the political skeptic or the habitual conformist might ask. attained the same end by barring imports." In 1941 we imported 258 million dollars worth of forestry products. so today the cause of America is a revolutionary cause. If we could have employed two million additional forestry workers in 1941. not to mention several other closely related products of the forest. what must be the potential now? If we were growing today the forestry products we are importing from foreign lands. an increase of 680 per cent. in 1964 1. wood pulp and newsprint. even in time of so-called peace. December 19. This huge dependence on foreign sources for the materials needed for a free press means that if total war closed our ports to these importations or if that an arbitrary government. August 4. "We want change. of the Department of Agriculture. 1965 by President Johnson: "As it was 189 years ago. freedom of the press would be destroyed.".912 million. This means an approximate trebling of production of pulpwood. Addressing the fortieth annual meeting of the Society of American Foresters. This is not a new suggestion. nor the oppression of Mas and prejudice and bigotry. "Neither you nor I are willing to accept the tyranny of poverty. besides exercising their wisdom at the ballot box. . Raymond D. nor the despotism of ill health. what would be the benefits in terms of reducing government relief to millions of able-bodied idle piled up in urban life? Why was this solution not advanced as the cure 185 . said: "In 1936 the forest resource.per capita. "Why all the fright? There's no danger of any President interfering with the press!" Without comment the following is quoted from a speech to students on the south lawn of the White House. is to make the United States self-sustaining in pulpwood.
The forest is then. firewood. 1913 was the last year when we had an export balance in forestry products. The U. baskets made from the produce of adjacent forests are sold beside the highways. 186 . Expansion of forests naturally increases wild life. In FOREIGN AGRICULTURE. The need and opportunity for more forest production are mounting decade after decade. skis and many other sporting goods. Americans cannot accept for granted that our press will long be free. after all.for some of Appalachia's ills? And for some of the nation's ills? Why is Congress afraid to face this question? Why in all the purile sentimentalities about the Great Society is not this latent great potential factor mentioned? The farm woodlot should be considered as an important source of annual revenue. Among the score or more of wood items now sold from farm forests and providing jobs in handicrafts are salad bowls and trays. signs. issue of October. Turning to the years immediately ahead. block flooring. Importations averaged only 83 cents per capita in 1913. Osier products from farm grown willows is another popular item. sub headed. Americans today could be emerging into the light of a self-sustaining production of these valuable products. "Once a net exporter of timber products. In the southern Appalachian highlands. $10 in 1964. was an historic article about forestry." we can say this—had no more than 10 per cent of the money wasted on farm control since 1933 been wisely and constructively invested in rebuilding our forestry industry. toys. 1961. fruit and vegetable crates. mallets. the United States is now the world's largest importer. as well as opening the path to freedom. Most states provide free or lowcost tree seedlings. According to foreign trade records.S. Many species of timber reach marketable size in a few years. curios." Turning back to that always futile realm of "it-might-have-been. canoe paddles. rustic furniture. Government is fully aware of this growing dependence on foreign lands for these important products. published by the Department of Agriculture. farmers face the opportunity to greatly improve their economic conditions and at the same time build a fortress around our long-cherished freedom of the press by starting a program of growing the pulpwood needed to safeguard this liberty. especially those grown for harvest as pulpwood. So long as our economy remains in chains. County Agricultural Agents and State Extension facilities provide farmers with technical assistance and advice. very close to freedom of the press.
agricultural nation and turning to urban industrialization. would now be a town of 150. relegating farming to a secondary place in the economy. can never be supplied. The era of urbanization had begun.Chapter Twenty-four RETURN TO THE LAND! Princes and lords may flourish or may fade. The true gauge by which to measure urban expansion after the Civil War is found in the drift of rural people into city life. A breath can make them. America came to a fork in their highway in the years between the. The greatest impetus to this drift was perhaps added when the steam engine liberated industry from locations along the eastern seaboard where water power was available and turned it westward along navigable rivers and railroads. After 1900 electric power greatly widened the geographical areas available for factory sites and we began measuring national strength by the number of smokestacks and miles of railroad. From 1870 to 1890 our total population increased 97 per cent while our non-farm population increased 178 per cent. Industrial cities were born and small towns rapidly grew into metropolitan centers.000 to 200.000 population. their country's pride. When once destroyed. Oliver Goldsmith. It is estimated that New York City. In that period the net loss of farm 187 . as a breath has made. America was ultimately to learn the lesson—but not to profit from it—that urban populations could not have increased so spectacularly without acquiring large additions of rural people. Unaware of the consequences. end of the Civil War and 1890. What this change cost rural society is indicated by examining the 18801889 decade. had it depended for growth solely by its own excess of births over deaths since 1790. The decennial census of 1890 showed for the first time in our history that more people lived in towns and cities than on the land. But a bold peasantry. AS WE have seen earlier in this discussion when considering the long decline of our cattle industry. our forebears made a choice between remaining a preponderantly rural.
600. population authority of the Department of Agriculture. The study covered the ten years from 1920 to 1929.700. E. Dr.500 to raise a child to the age of fifteen years—food. inclusive.000 a year. Baker estimated that 68 per cent of persons leaving the farm in that decade were under thirty-five years of age— at or approaching the maximum of their economic and social" worth. 1966. each 1920-1929 migrant from the land represented a financial loss to rural society of approximately $4. A recent estimate for raising a child to the age of eighteen years has been placed by a prominent economic writer at $23. 72 million persons have moved from the land into urban life since 1930 while 50 million have moved from cities to farms. O. (b) value of estate and other assets carried with him. But an even more frightening view of our change from a once preponderantly rural to a top-heavy urban people is seen in the percentage column. inclusive. The worth of a migrant from the land into urban life. Baker. Dr. The heaviest drift total for any ten-year period in our history occurred between 1947 and 1956—a total loss of 7. there was a small fraction more than 94 per cent of our people living in towns and cities and a small fraction less than 6 per cent living on and working our farms.000. but their social values as well. set forth a reasonably sound yardstick for this measurement. Baker. The story from 1930 is little different. 1870 to 1929. Thus.000 a year. According to the Census Bureau. (c) the gross costs of raising him to the time of his migration. Each carried with him in the form of tangible property. transferred estates and other assets an average of $2.000 for an annual average of 760. in the sixty years. on July 1. Striking a compromise between these extremes to 188 . medical service. should be judged by: (a) his age.population into urban life averaged 670. the question frequently rises: Is it possible to weigh urban growth and rural decline in financial terms? In an interesting and informational survey in 1935. according to Dr. We had a fifty-fifty balance between farm and city in 1885.000. From 1890 to 1929 the loss averaged 510. clothing. education and incidentals. Because materialistic civilizations sooner or later measure not only their economic worth in dollars and cents. Based on pre-depression estimates. representing a net farm loss of 22 million. it cost $2. Therefore.200. rural society contributed a net total of 31 million persons to urban expansion.
That it costs an individual or a family more to live near the center of a big city than on a farm is often superficially attributed to the greater comforts and added "pleasures" of city living. jobbers and retailers who fasten on between 189 .000 people. morally and physically wasteful. The larger the city the farther its people must look for food.offset the inroads of inflation. But the overall costs are far greater. educated couples have fewer children than couples with average education. But a more factual appraisal is that city life is a wasteful life. but greater among wealthy than in other economic groups. 4) Rural life is a struggle of man against nature. The farther food is transported. regimented Welfare State. not only in material things but spiritually. Inevitably into the computer of our national well-being must be fed data to include the following. our net loss of 22 million persons from the land from 1929 to 1960 reaches the incomprehensible sum of more than 304 billion dollars drained from the land in 30 years. will likewise be chargeable solely against our farmers. Politicians never market their graft . free medicine and free rent. the ultimate materialistic prison house of the human spirit. Political corruption is almost exclusively a city product. urban life of man against man—an intangible that cannot be measured. Also. and the bigger the city the greater and more costly and degrading political graft becomes. It has risen almost in exact ratio as our urban population has increased. And let the voluble propagandists for President Johnson's Great Society know assuredly that any further drains of people from the land. lured by promises of idleness. 2) Deaths from common diseases are higher in cities than in rural areas. This is not a generalized total to be charged against the whole of society. it is a bill agriculture and agriculture alone has paid. a costly toll reflected in mounting government costs.at cut rates. This toll is exacted from governmental efficiency. 1) Crime rates are not only higher in urban than in rural regions but the larger the city the greater the number of crimes per 100. 3) Childless marriages are not only more numerous in urban than in rural life. the larger the number of wholesalers. Our annual crime bill is now nearing or exceeding 20 billion dollars a year. 5) The loss of our free nation to the Leviathan.
to housing conditions or poverty. President Johnson told Congress in 1965 that "every major river system is now polluted. as often claimed. Now the amount is doubled.000 pounds of fish commercially in 1956 and less than 500 pounds seven years later.855. according to many pollution authorities. juvenile delinquency. The National Academy of Science recently released a report indicating that the average person threw away two and one-fourth pounds of refuse a day in 1920. homicides. It is difficult to avoid the deduction that there is a relationship between this fact and the comparable rate of urban growth in the same period. with over 90 per cent of our population crowded into towns and cities. Paul E. suicides. In many urban centers people are drinking water. 158 persons out of every 100. Millions of Americans are drinking and bathing in water contaminated by sewage from other millions living farther up stream." Evidence is found in the fact that Lake Erie produced 6. drug addiction. and therefore. "may be beyond the point of no return. the rate was 357 per 100. Cities are polluting almost all supplies of water. illegitimate births. As urban populations increase the per capita production of refuse rises. The rate (not the number) of divorces has tripled since 1900.000. (And not incidentally) the farther food is shipped. In 1904. air pollution expert. It is estimated that the cost of cleaning up our rivers and lakes will exceed 50 billion dollars. the lower its nutrient value. tuberculosis." Lake Erie and the southern end of Lake Michigan. insanity.that has been used two and three times before. and petty crimes are not only prevalent at higher rates in cities than in rural areas but the rate increases in proportion to the city's size and is higher toward the denser centers of cities. Alcoholism. In 1958. the higher food costs. when 38 per cent of our total population lived on farms. Wilkins. told a Washington audience in 1965 that rubber eroded from automobile tires into microscopic particles have been picked up by airplanes 190 . prostitution.000 were confined in mental institutions. The story of river and lake pollution touches human life in every part of the nation as city populations mount. Alcoholism is directly related to density of population and not.producer and consumer. The air may prove to be an even worse source of pollution.
He said these fragments "punch holes in human lungs." At the bottom of the debit page of all evils charged against crowded and still spreading cities. Wilkins warned. Second. the might of the Federal Government is thrown behind the theory of "surplus farm production" so unanimously that its overall policies now. Even our dictionaries abet the trend— "urbane" is defined as polite. Fluorides that can etch glass and eat paint from houses and automobiles are released from a Florida phosphate plant and destroy crops in surrounding fields. Much of stage. concentrated and smeared on the back of a mouse "produce tumors every time" he said. 191 . it is more than a fifty-fifty chance that you will die from lung or associated diseases. screen. television and radio entertainment today is produced by men and women whose words and actions indicate they think the Hudson River bounds the United States on the west." A large power plant. courteous.eight miles above the ground. Complex hydrocarbons from automobile fumes. The mental paralysis that holds urban people captive under the delusion that theirs is the "better and fuller life" is chronic and constantly aggravated by the original causes. can release 200 tons of toxic sulphur dioxide every day into the air human beings must breathe. "If you live in a metropolitan area and are over fifty years of age. citizens may ask a sobering and complex question: Has our rapid and drastic change from a strong rural to a top-heavy urban society brought us better health? Less insanity? More sobriety? Fewer crimes? A deeper spiritual life? Higher morality? Closer family unity? Better citizenship? More efficient and cleaner local government? Attempts to raise warning signals against the further piling up of human beings in poverty-blighted and crime-ridden cities seem to fall on deaf ears for two main reasons. highly competitive city life is far more than a gregarious concentration of people for business and social convenience—it is a state of mind. crowded. he told his hearers. First. encourage a further and sustained city ward drift. refined. deliberately or blindly. "Rural" quite easily and obviously becomes the antonym. "How you gonna keep 'em down on the farm" dominates much of the alleged humor voiced by comedians.
automation is turning employables out of jobs faster than new jobs develop. shall these young men and women face no brighter future than becoming wards of our welfare state or absorption into perpetual WPA's and other forms of government "made" work—all paid for by a shrinking number of productive people and taxpayers? 3) Idleness. today's migrant fifty years from now will likely be living in a cramped fourth-floor room on a shabby side street. No additional arguments should be needed to arouse the American people to angry action against further swelling our already bloated urban population than the percentages already mentioned as of July 1. perhaps the only underlying cause of juvenile delinquency. Over one million new citizens reach employable 'age every year. It is. if judged by a large percentage of farm boys and girls who turned to city life immediately before and after World War I and World War II.Ask a young man or young woman who has recently migrated into city life why he or she left the farm. healthier and happier. Americans may well ask themselves. Most rural youth who turn to urban careers with great hopes of wealth in the end find they have barely stayed even in the economic rat race. skimping out a hand-to-mouth existence on social security and old age pension. and under the stimulant of new and more dangerous forms of drug addiction. with lower tariffs displacing more and more workers with cheap-labor imports. social security. Must taxpayers through higher prices for necessities continue ad infinitum to bear the burden in more retirement pay. and the answer is: "I couldn't make any money there. They could have reached a better end on the farm. according to impartial crime observers. Despite efforts in recent months to minimize its effects. carrying countless city boys and girls beyond the brink of rehabilitation. shall we spend billions on slum 192 . unemployment insurance and other "fringe" benefits? 2) Employables. idleness is the major cause or urban crime. At least five critical problems fruiting from years of excessive urbanization demand immediate public emphasis and necessary congressional action: 1) Industrial automation. developing into a frightening menace to society's physical safety." Yet. 1966—6 per cent on the land and over 94 per cent in towns and cities. In the face of increasing automation. The new Cabinet Post of Secretary of Urban Affairs should open up excellent opportunity for reversing the trend. As every city law enforcing officer knows.
not buildings? You can't get the people out of the slums unless you get the slums out of the people. paper. on whom a nation of more than 200 million people must depend for food in the next generation. barely beyond childhood. but of a government's embarkation on a course directly opposite. As emphasized throughout this study. The return of 15 to 18 million urban people to the land is a practical and urgent "must. The people of the United States no longer live in a land of plenty where our food supply is dependably ample. sugar and several fruits and vegetables. are. Today an eighteen year old boy. The Colquitt County example is incontrovertible. Late in World War II this lesson was dramatically demonstrated on a main avenue in Washington. we are now dependent on foreign nations for many essential agricultural non-food products. makes a million dollars a year from record sales of a song that lacks both lyrics and music. even for a few weeks ahead. D. hides and numerous forestry products besides such important foods as beef.clearance without recognizing that slums primarily are people. regardless of how difficult the diagnosis may be. plus a percentage in motion picture earnings. Or a girl. especially considering the obstacles it hurdled in its early years—the obstacles not only of a worldwide depression. A large crowd of curious filled the sidewalk and overflowed into the street in front of a jewelry store display window where a single small onion rested on a square of black velvet. power and money that that implies. where the cure is so specific and plain. simply because she has a well-formed body and a pretty face." We do not suggest that 193 .500.C. The same display of a pound of butter or sugar or any of several other vegetables would have drawn the same attention. fired with an irresistible urge to seek city careers? 5) Reduced food supply. before they finish grade school. 4) Distorted values. Is it difficult to understand why farm boys and girls. with neither a singing voice nor a knowledge of music. signs a contract to make one movie a year at a salary of $1. with all of the prestige.000. such as wool. with no acting ability or stage experience. Does Congress have the courage to pull the political curtain aside and let the American people see and know the truth about our food resources? Few are the ills. Both the first and second world wars demonstrated that our farms cannot supply us with basic commodities. We urgently need a true scale of values.
. We cannot get the government out of this socialistic program unless we get the Socialism out of the government.thousands of inexperienced city families be cast ruthlessly on farms like stranded mariners on a desert island. It is! But America has always been stirred and inspired by large undertaking full of daring. 194 . We stress the importance of enabling the return of persons with farm experience and others who may choose the path to rural living. We cannot bring about this return to the land as long as the government is spending warehouses and grain elevators full of dollars to buy people off the land. welfarize them. 2) Curtail the arrogance of labor union leaders and their dominance of local. Having proposed one of the solutions to our crisis in food— namely to restore proper balance between urban and rural populations—we must envision in what practical ways this might be brought about when the tune comes. 3) Cut our bankrupting national crime bill by at least 40 per cent by relieving the population pressure in crowded towns and cities. state and federal governments by reestablishing competition with a strong and virile rural people. vision and hard work. The return of 15 million people to the land sounds like an enormous project. Besides relieving our present supine dependence on imported farm commodities other goals to be set up include: 1) Take millions off relief and start them in the dignified business of growing their own food. How shall it be brought about? A huge obstacle confronts us immediately. The problem of how to get Socialism out of the U.S. government is not the prime purpose of this study although. To encourage many of our citizens to take the path to rural living 1) We would remind the American people of the importance of agriculture to the survival and health of every civilization in history. make them wards of the state. 5) Destroy excuses for the enslaving welfare state that is now insidiously fastening its tentacles into every phase of our national life. to urbanize. via the route of our food crisis we have given many of the reasons for which it must be done.. 4) Reduce government costs drastically by eliminating the excessive and overlapping bureaus now fattening on theories that claim to cure ills that do not exist.
This vast settlement of people on the land would provide a "new frontier" with ageless meaning and significance. and sneer of cold command. A famous dramatization of the fate which awaits us is found in a poem from a more glorious day in English literature. hold up outstanding examples of success in rural community living such as that in Colquitt County. 3) We would. Tell that its sculptor well those passions read Which yet survive. Large amounts of the types of lands enumerated could be made available commercially or opened up to settlement under the historic Homestead Act which. What is the alternative to a wise and careful balancing of our present top-heavy urban population structure? The answer is dug from desert sands. Near them. but which are now being accumulated in excessive number and extent. And wrinkled lip. Georgia. I met a traveler from an old antique land Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desert. 4) We would open up practical means for the resettlement and restoration of idle lands.2) We would factually portray for Americans the values. on the sand. absentee owners or being gobbled up in unreasonable amounts for reservations. a shattered visage lies. advantages and rewards of country living. Half sunk. In "Ozymandias" Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822) writes. Besides the idle lands noted are lands taken for taxes by local government as well as lands owned by people who work in the city and would really prefer to live there. in the best tradition of frontier America first opened up our country to development. whose frown. now owned by land companies. king of kings: Look on my works. stamped on these lifeless things. Round the decay Of that colossal wreck. preserves and parks—acquisition for recreation and conservation which are good considerations in themselves. ye Mighty. left in the wreckage of numerous great nations before us. and despair!" Nothing beside remains. The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed: And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias. boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away. 195 .
which gradually came to form the governing class of the Empire. "An epoch of rapid increase of wealth. . even the poorest. theatres. . of frequent. . was acquired a taste for the luxuries of civilization. Prosperity and luxury increased in every nation. . particularly the comparable status of urban and farming populations. . methods of agriculture were perfected. They distributed grain. villas. The barbarian west became civilized and bought the manufactures of the ancient and industrial cities of the east. rivaling each other in splendor and wealth. to embellish them and to make them more comfortable. strove to enlarge them. minerals were searched for. baths and aqueducts.History is very much a record of mighty empires collapsed in total extinction. close and varied commercial and intellectual intercourse between the most distant peoples began. Perhaps in all the annals of man's success in building impregnable political and social structures and then seeing them disintegrate into ashes. These new industries and agricultural enterprises gave rise to a prosperous middle class and to provincial aristocracies. a warning against further urban expansion at the expense of rural well-being. of lucky enterprises. even the most barbarous. "The Empire covered itself with cities great and small. new industries and new branches of commerce were opened up. . . The late Guglielmo Ferrero. excessive urbanization. They endowed public services and assumed the roles of pious founders. . eminent Italian historian and sociologist tells about it in his short but admirable ANCIENT ROME AND MODERN AMERICA published in 1914. And in every class. and into these 196 . temples. Everywhere fresh lands were brought under cultivation. . in fact. migrated to the cities. none is so grippingly tragic as that of the Roman Empire. . were a clear warning rather than an academic speculation. oil. amusements and money. They built palaces. His findings. "In the first and second centuries every rich family spent part of its possessions on the embellishment of the cities. as the fascinating book indicates. . He wrote: "The disease which killed the Roman Empire was. Just before World War I. Ferrero visited the United States and made an extensive study of social and economic conditions. not always because they were overrun by stronger neighbors but frequently because stronger peoples ravaged them after they had dissipated their own strength. .
vagabonds. especially in the light of our domestic policies over the years since 1933. which were the glory and splendor of the Empire. and with it the Empire itself. and one day the Empire awoke to find its cities were swarming with beggars. it attracted the peasantry. The numbers and requirements of modern populations increased. just as the cities became fairer. In these cities.. of roads. of forgotten tongues. to carry through the construction of magnificent monuments. to adorn and enrich ever more the cities. a ruin of shattered monuments. The greatest of all the works of Rome. of peoples relapsed into barbarism. received its death blow. urging them to satisfy these requirements. But in the fields. With each succeeding generation the impulse towards the cities became stronger. "The agriculture of the Empire. masons. and trained for official posts and for liberal professions. the cities and their increasing luxuries. at the expense of depopulating the countryside where nobody was willing to live. The state and wealthy classes were inundated with requests. "In order to feed. which slowly and tenaciously thrust out its tentacles into that cemetery of a past civilization and entwined the giant bones of Rome.—in fact. the empire founded by her in Europe . schools were opened in which the youth of the middle class were taught eloquence. of perished arts. lay a vast ruin. the expenditures of the urban civilization." 197 .— agriculture was little by little ground down by ever-increasing burdens. and from that moment the latter began to be depopulated and sterilized by the cities. amuse and clothe crowded city populations. The position of the peasant in the solitude of the depopulated countryside became ever more sad and gloomy. singers. of laws thrown to the four winds. bigger. the whole tribe of the artisans of pleasure and of luxury. prayers and threats. swallowed up in the primeval forest. "Little by little. there was a dearth of peasants to cultivate the land. which were expected to feed all these men who had crowded into the cities to work or to idle. fuller of amusements and festivals. It should be "must" reading for every member of Congress. the village artisans and the yeomanry. The impulse toward the cities increased. outdistanced the fertility of the countryside. . villages and cities razed from the face of the earth. literature and philosophy." The final paragraph should be read again and again. to provide work for the industries and the arts of the cities. . idlers.cities.
let's send fifty ship loads of grain to Cathay—it will win us their eternal friendship. 33 per cent of our people lived on the land. of the restoration of constitutional government to this God-favored republic. Ferrero read these portents on our horizon in 1914. would increased importations of foods and manufactures have solved the Empire's economic and social ills? Imagine a Roman senator of the second century proposing. by lethargy and inaction. It is their prerogative as a citizens to make of it a glorious saga. when Rome's streets were crowded with the hungry and idle. "Fellow senators.900 years ago! Chapter Twenty-five THE APPALLING QUESTION The greatest glory of a free-born people is to transmit that freedom to their children. The responsibility is almost immeasurable.When Dr. Rome owes every man a living"? No. saying. "My friends. What would be his opinion of America's well-being today with less than 6 per cent on the farm? When the peasants and artisans began crowding into Rome's towns and cities to beg or idle. William Havard THE LAST chapter of this book cannot be completed by the author—that grave task falls to the readers." Would rent subsidies or free hospitalization have cured Rome's last illness or even postponed her tragic end? Would slum beautification in cities and towns have decreased the rush of people from the farms into Rome's overcrowded urban life? Where indeed did Rome's loss of population balance begin except at that point when the cities with their luxuries and palaces and baths became more attractive than the countryside? One can imagine the popular reaction. the Great Society concept is not new. to permit the finale of this story to become the greatest tragedy the world has ever known. imagine Nero. if a Roman brain truster had stood in the Forum and declared: " 'Not back to the farm' but 'factoryward ho!' must be our slogan"? Or. The course is plain. or. fiddle under his arm. it was given a thorough testing 1. 198 .
an enemy whose plans for world conquest were completed. no phase of her advance is so insignificant as to be considered unimportant. It is indeed a strange commentary on the thinking of recent White House occupants and State Department officials that they expect us to believe the Communists when they talk peaceful co-existence expect us not to believe the Communists when they tell us they intend to bury us. If we of the last half of the twentieth century are to learn anything from history and to perpetuate our way of life. In their forward thrust Soviet Communists do not distinguish between truth and falsehood. and announced. extortionists. like his four predecessors since 1933. The idea of peaceful co-existence with international thieves. President Johnson. the truth-obscuring formalities of journalistic niceness and compromising conformism must be shelved. we must learn this: We are engaged against an enemy entrenched deeply within our governmental structure and rapidly gathering its forces without. terrorists and murderers reveals a truly tragic lack of realism. No step in the Communist march toward the enslavement of the world is unimportant. To place even a superficial dependence on this twisted hope is to admit an abysmal ignorance of history. Washington is glibly furnishing guidelines and guideposts for nearly every channel of thought and action except the channels to truth. long ago. And because our national survival is in serious jeopardy. For submitting is dishonorable and infinitely worse to bear. Let's just be factual.We live in an unfortunate age of burgeoning domestic and world crises. no undertaking too large to terrify us into abject submission. knows beyond question that Russia is not mellowing in her aims and machinations. must be guided away from the perils. The socialization of American farming is as much a part of Russia's blueprint to rule the world as was Stalin's winning chess moves at Teheran. We dare not. Americans who recognize the dangers and seek a way through and around them. persuaded to preserve the established safeguards. Since the reign of Peter the Great there has not been and never can be a niche in Russia's international schemes for peaceful co-existence. against oppressive government. Yalta and Potsdam. not to mention morality and high purpose. 199 . Let's not be nice about it. and a total lack of realistic self-interest. We must understand where we are and where we are heading.
is no longer interested in returning to a life of sobriety. bears the unmistakable trademark of the traitors who wrote our first farm control legislation and made Secretary of State Cordell Hull their prisoner.At the center of the Communist conspiracy was hatched an ingenious ruse: persuade Americans to combat the spread of world Communism by strewing our fast-diminishing food supplies around the globe. "We should pay more attention to deficits in education. This unrealistic. indefensible fiscal asininity could not have originated in the minds of men who love America. "I'm all right. If such a course is suggested to him. The drive to force our nation into dependence upon foreign-grown food and foreign-made goods could not have been the work of those who cherish and seek to protect our national well-being. The luring of the American farmer from the land and the throwing of American factory workers out of jobs at a time when unemployment was rampant. there's nothing wrong with me!" He is concerned only about how to obtain another drink. in a speech in Arizona in early 1966. We are not losing the battle against inflation— it has already been lost. It was an integral part of a plan. They are. Inflation. unworkable. along the widening highway to national insolvency they are pointing out diverting scenery. inseparable. poverty. Vice President Humphrey declared. The compulsive alcoholic who has gradually sunken lower and lower until he has reached the gutter. But instead. he straightens his rags and defends his low estate with." 200 . So gradually and insidiously has the Federal Government been maneuvered toward bankruptcy that raising the debt limit has become a perennial congressional ritual. Our retreat toward the Waterloo of calamitous currency devaluation began when President Roosevelt surrendered to the powerful proponents of the Keynesian theory and sold the nation this idea: that the deeper into debt a nation plunges the more prosperous the nation becomes. Let's review the two. in fact. discrimination and health rather than deficits in dollars. For example. Lenin's threat to force the United States to spend itself into bankruptcy holds the only key needed to discover the methods and disclose the goals. and by squandering our inheritance and wealth in riotous giving and living. No longer do officials risk the comparing of bread and automobile prices of the nineteen-twenties with those of the nineteen-sixties.
Since the days when the far-seeing architects of this republic laid its foundations. Favored with individual freedom and collective plenty. we must also recognize that a truly Great Society looks beyond its own borders." he orated. Self-satisfied.000 pounds per capita. The warning against imminent famine in this survey is based. we have blindly elected and trusted our officials. not on political or economic theories. Famine. whose Keynesian adherence has kept White House doors open to him for many years. But this tells only the milder part of the trend. in his budget message to Congress. lulled into a sense of false security. . The alternatives are clear: 201 . No more than a smattering of grade school arithmetic is needed to calculate the end. but on statistical facts. its rider weighing out food on scales of scarcity at prices few can pay. our food production has declined more than 700 pounds per capita since the end of World War I. greatly added to the Vice President's diverting scenery— ". The freedom. .President Johnson. told a meeting of the Joint Economic Committee in Washington. We have neglected to see the approaching third horse. We have accepted facile phrases and pacifying slogans as substitutes for truth. Under the blight of government regimentation and bureaucratic interference. fair-haired economic adviser of New Deal days. Keyserling. living in a fool's paradise. February 1966. We are the only major nation that can truthfully make this claim. our domestic supply of food (production minus exports and foreign donations) has decreased in the same period by approximately 1. January 24. we have long ago forgotten that the apocalyptic picture consists of four horses and four riders. even if we do not take into consideration that our nearness to nationwide hunger and the riots and bloody rebellions that will surely accompany that calamity now hangs on the fragile thread of weather and on the disposition of the collectivists. 1966. The small caliber of Keyserling's thinking and the vapidity of his theories are better demonstrated in his complaint that the Johnson administration is (of all things!) unfair to labor. that the government is not spending enough on anti-poverty and other Great Society programs. God's mercy has barred from these shores the awful specter of famine." Leon H. Largely because of our irresponsible and indefensible global giveaways since World War II. health and prosperity of all mankind are its proper concern. "The guideposts have been stacked to feed the fat and starve the lean.
Thus the collectivists in that Communist inspired organization hope to drain United States strength further and bring this country nearer to the abyss. R. but in end-effect to further aggravate the crisis. Those who insist that the United States feed and clothe the rest of the world at any cost will see that we shall soon not 202 . The United Nations." is halted at once. Unless the government's deliberate dissipation of our deficient food resources behind the palpably deceptive excuse of "containing world Communism. it has propagandized for birth control. cleverly playing on traditional American good will and inclination has forecast a world famine. Unless American voters rise in determined wrath to stop the unrestrained squandering of tax money by cowardly legislators and power-mad administrative officials. told the Rome session. Sen. Our long immunity to famine has now become our major handicap. bankruptcy and famine will arrive arm in arm and sooner than we might think. "The world is on the threshold of the worst famine in its history. predicted that unless food production is stepped up immediately. Swedish Socialist economist. food production will decline more rapidly in the next few years. Dr. B." What has the government of the United States produced to help cure the food shortage ills of the world? First." The dispatch reported that it was a general consensus of opinion at the Rome meeting that "there is no longer time to rely on long-range solutions. the road to famine will be drastically shortened. "A future historian may place the beginning of the hunger crisis at a point already past. secretly and deceptively—a consciously planned food shortage! Second. Under a Rome dateline of July 17." Director General of the FAO.Unless American farmers are liberated at once from their present government-welded chains. released to plan and operate in a free and unfettered economy. 1966." Gunnar Myrdal. While many other nations are seriously and concertedly seeking means to head off the steady encroachment of world hunger. the Associated Press reported that the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization warned. not to replenish our depleted national pantry. "famines and civil disorders will take a heavy toll of human life. For famine is the last thing we would expect or suspect. our Congress continues to appropriate billions of tax dollars.
in a land that has enjoyed the bounty of Providence and grown up with the plenty of harvest time. Roosevelt." Yet it need not be that way. We have pride in our land. The biblical dictum "Where there is no vision a people perish" need not become an epitaph for America. There is yet time to remember that pride and to fulfill that vision. "We planned it that way. awakens to find its currency worthless. its government insolvent. blind in her boasted vigor. Is it any wonder that some naive and lost Americans. we have a vision. We shall be spent and barren. Then the heirs of Lenin's godless legacy would reap the harvest implicit in the words of Franklin D. 203 . are now asking the appalling question—Shall we have liberty or socialist tyranny?—Shall we enjoy the produce of the "fruited plains" or shall we watch our children starve to death? The wily designer of bolshevism very well knew that the day on which America. Communism would take over without spending a ruble or firing a shot. and its people starving.be able to assist the rest of the world at all.
Gettysburg (Pa. Dan P. This was sold chiefly to countryseat type newspapers. Van Gorder picks up—where it was left off—the courage needed for bold and revolutionary statement.) Herald-Dispatch. settled in New York state before the Revolutionary War. He also ghost-wrote two autobiographies. truth.) Times and other dailies of the middle East. he has compiled what a special committee of Congress once designated the most complete. rural school. An overly modest descendant of the fiery Tom Paine. honesty. Van Gorder began a syndicated daily newspaper feature from Washington.ABOUT THE AUTHOR Born on a denuded hill farm in southern Ohio. led him into newspaper work. and one novel. Olean (N. Moreover. and respect for the dignity of personal industry and labor. Van Gorder obtained his basic education in what he still considers the finest and most effective educational system ever developed on this or any other continent—the upgraded.C. well-rounded file of farm statistics in existence.Y. the author terminated this feature to gain more time for personal research in agricultural statistics to expose what by that time had become the obvious hoax of the entire agricultural overproduction theory.) Times. plus an urge to write. He is convinced that the United States cannot long survive with 94 per cent of its people piled up in crime-ridden. entitled Things of The Soil. Va. A round on Midwestern dailies. After 25 years. Sandusky (Ohio) Register. northern South and Midwest. gained him more experience than wealth.) Morning Herald. The McGuffey Reader influences absorbed there still mold and direct his social and political thinking—producing thrift. 204 . (What else but revolutionary is his advocated return of 18 million people to the land!) After high school and two years in college. one-room. politically-herded urban life and is dedicating his remaining years and efforts to remove from Washington every man who lends his mind and efforts to further dissipate our once-virile agrarian society. covering 16 years. In 1929. such as the Hagerstown (Md. one biography. The paternal side of the family is Holland Dutch stock. His last stint was on the city desk of the Huntington (W. economic necessity. Since 1954 he has been speech-writing. On the maternal side. D. unpopular as it may be. Tom Paine was his grandmother's great uncle. mainly for members of Congress.
Brochure of the U. March 15. (Published annually. U. Brookings Institute.S.S. year of publication unknown..S. Statistical Abstract of the United States.APPENDIX Source Books Used For This Study Agricultural Circular 296. U. Department of Agriculture. U. Department of Agriculture. Department of Agriculture. U. September 23. Department of Agriculture. U. 1963. Technology on the Farm. D. then weekly) International Trade. Department of Agriculture. U. (Published annually. U. August 1958. U.) Statistical Bulletin 364. Department of Agriculture.S. 1964.S.) 205 . 1966. 1931 issue. U.S.S. U. 1939. since 1936. 1965. 1939. Government Printing Office.S. June 29. Department of Agriculture. Annual Report of the Secretary of Agriculture. 1940. Farm Income Situation. March 10.S. Washington.) Farm-Retail Spreads for Food Production. 1931. (Published quarterly. Foreign Agriculture.) Roosevelt Letter to Chester A. Home Economics Division of the U.) Agricultural Statistics. 1938. No. 1965. Farmer's Bulletin. Issued annually. Department of Agriculture. (Suppressed. Davis). 1940. Davis' annual report as administrator). Department of Agriculture. 1966. America's Capacity to Consume. 1757. Editorial from The American Agriculturist.S.S. (Chester A. Department of Agriculture. United States Imports F T 125.C. Davis. September 19. U. (Published quarterly. (Published monthly in 1958. Annual Report of Agricultural Adjustment Administration for 1934.S. Live Stock and Meat Situation. 1936 by Mr. Department of Agriculture.S. 1963. 1933. published by Henry Morganthau. Department of Agriculture. U. 1936 (radio talk March 19.S. Department of Commerce. 1964. July. Press Release of the Department of Agriculture. 1944.
down. fiber for clothing and shelter (textiles and wood products)— and —for newsprint. production of food and fiber. thus improving the domestic supply picture.Note on Graphs and Statistics Sociologists have established the things needed for human survival as three: food. They are exciting. Graphs also can be exciting—and frightening. What is happening in our country with reference to its ability to provide these three or four essentials to survival? One picture is worth a thousand words. dairy cows. Graphs based upon numbers of beef cattle. in clear form. bushels and tons of meat or produce. informative. down.S. In reading certain graphs based upon pounds. another of the necessities. For the sake of modern society and freedom we ought now to add one more necessity: information. Freedom and freedom of the press are indispensable concomitants. Some allowance must for the effect of technology in increasing yields. revealing. lamb. Graphs are pictures. what is happening to our per capita food and fiber production—going down. Food for physical sustenance. The motto of the State of New Hampshire "Live free or die" suggests that newsprint and paper products for publishing are.S. up—and. We want to eat— but we want to eat in freedom. mutton and wool. the information conveyed on our domestic supply of food and fiber (production less exports) is precise. clothing and shelter. hogs. Here. However. Hence we report in this book on U. and sheep revealing the dangerous decline in per capita numbers of these animals do not provide an exact indication of the domestic supply of beef. these increases 206 . dairy products. up. are the "pictures" of what is happening to U. pork. population— going up. in the context of this study.
miss by a wide margin making up for the difference between domestic supply and domestic needs (national self-sustaining quantities). 207 . That we produce a great deal more food and fiber today than yesterday means nothing at all if we actually produce much less considering the number of people for which the economy must provide. Per capita statistics tell us how much we are producing with reference to the number of people who must be fed and clothed and sheltered. Remember that the meaningful index to food and fiber production is per capita.
170. 191 American farming. Jr. Rachel (Silent Spring) 114. 140. Moultrie. 1. 148 Carrel. 4. 144 Collins. 64.. 45 Cotton. 44. 81. President Calvin. 5. Captain John. 73 Communism. 165. 201 Appalachia. O. 16. viii. ix-xi. vii. 79. 145 Benson. 152. 24. E. 153. 143 Barter economy. 59 Budget Bureau. 124 Colquitt plan. 196 Apocalyptic horses. 6 Common Market.. 188 Balance of payments. 39. 29. Stewart. 174-182. U.. xi. Whittaker. 20. 42. 101. Henry H. 165. Dr.115 Bureau of Labor Statistics. 199-203 Connor. 38. 48. 3. 29.93 237 . 77 Ancient Rome and Modern America (Ferrero). Edward. 5 Acres of Diamonds (Bok). 9.. 145. 153. 3. 141. 137. 172 Baker. 27 Bowles. 44. Alex. 60. 148 AAA (Agricultural Adjustment Administration). 26. 6 Chase. 29 Brookings Institute. 47. 48 Conservation. 172 Bok. 98. William E. 111 Bentley. John. 87 Bureaucracy. 148 Borah. Chester. 35. 8. 60 Burnham. 82 Circular No. 48 Ballot box. 174-182 Chambers. 41. 64-70.. 81. xi. 201 Coal mining. Elizabeth. 43. 177 Cereals. 163-174 Automation. 144. 92 Bureau of Home Economics. 190. 27. 35. 134. 81 Climate. 132. x.91. 76. 4 Capitalism. 85. 180 Constitution. 114 Carson. 296 58-64 Class warfare. Ezra Taft. 29. 4-7. 69 Cooperative marketing. 145.S.General Index Abt. Communist. 7 Birch. 110. 32. 133. 57. 19. 195 Coolidge. 115. 7 Birdlife. 23 ASC (Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service) ix Air pollution. 174-182 Corn. 138 Agricultural Marketing Act. 166 Beef. 132. 171 Coffee. 102. 142. 79.. John T. 193. 6. 3. 44. 24. James. 154-162 Cooperative planning. 23. 15. 94 Chamber of Commerce. 160. 82 Brainwashing. 60. 37. 153 Cattle. 34. 78. 21. 44. Dr. 84.
70. 184 Distribution. 94." 82 Food and Drug Administration. 80. 145. 29. 29. x.61 DeGraff. Mordecai. 153. 152 Fines and Punishments. 17-19. 118. 124. 79. 7 Ferrero. 160 (Hazlitt). 196-198 Fertilizers. 46. 72. 50 Farm population. 128. 148. Dwight D. 79 Forestry. 80 Farm exports. 151 Eisenhower. 60. 59. xiv. 130. revolution in.147. 51 "Firing squads. 150. 79. 53.. 82. 111. 160 GATT (General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade). 111-113 Freeman. 113. 29. 102 Free press. 68. 118 "Food for Peace. 57. 23. 82 Fabian Socialism. 70 Germany. 35 Exotic crops. 72 Farm imports.. 29. 32. 3. 145. 6. 42. Ford. 25. Orville. 142 Foreign trade. 67. 110 Freedom to farm. 32. 142 Food. Senator. 169 Giveaways.201-203 Farm Bureau. 31. Felix. xiii. 31. 85. 14. 17.. 48. 129 Farm workers. 46 Davis. Henry. x Democratic Party.. 61 Dies. Dr. Sen. 101. 84 Foreign aid. 39. 100. 131 Farmers and bankers. 7 Diet. 120 Famine. 58 "Fellow revolutionaries. 24. 39. Martin. Prof. 5. 109.147.County Agricultural Agent. 130.45.43. 142 Currie. Pres. 30. 201 238 . 176 businessmen. 167. 106 Fruits. 110. 13-16. 73. 24 Dickenson. 18. Guglielmo. Harrell. 131. 182-186 Farming. Lauchlin. 104 Farm income. Chester A. 67. 161. 101. 79.117. 182-186 Frankfurter. 93. 50. 79. 77-78. 143-154 Farm work. 81. 38. Lester B. 17. 65. 70 Domestic supply. 19. M. 71 Evans.175 Crime. 182-186 Free trade. 34. 26 Fair Deal. 47. 113-118. 77 Disraeli." 71. 44. xi. 182 Federal Farm Board. 70. 58-64. 13. 22. xiii. 44. R. 24. 73. 1. 19. 54. 131 Farm problem. 105. 30. 2. 6 Dairy and dairy products. 8. 78. 182-186 Forestry and free press. 25. 69. Benjamin. 36. 194 Cuba.155-158 Domestic consumption.33. 150. 125 Ezekial. 176 and Chamber of Commerce. 179 Farming and free press. 31. 69. 33. 72 Eggs. 31. 94. 52. 41 Farm control. 80. per capita. 12-15. 140. 11 Farm labor. 22." 185 Ferguson. 46-48. 77. 116.
National. Henry. 110 Manufactured exports. 150 Morganthau. xi. 79.. T. 132. Pres. 5 Iron Curtain. 194 Laziness. 22. 24. 173. 29. 70. 57. 4. 96. 164 National Farm Organization.5. James.. 5 Kennedy. 132. Adolf. Sec'y. 26. 41. 129 239 . 145 Hiss. 128 Molasses. 95 Ickes. 105 Grange. Thomas. 3 Hitler. 96. Hubert. 120 Hazlitt. 43. 35. 57. 44. xiii. 93 Meat.171. 80.Gold drainage. 75 Government spending. 41. bankruptcy of. 97. 66. 6 Moultrie Chamber of Commerce. 81. 80. 94.. Kermit. John B. 52. Alger. 74. Henry. 97-99. 26 Hill land. Pres. 45.79.. 170 Justice Department. 82. 45. 94. 31. 34. 4-6. xi. 9. 184 Government. V-pres. 10. Secretary Cordell. 79. 102. Special Committee. Lyndon B. 25 Grant. 185. 33. 66. 101. 82.61. 10. 46. 156 Great Society. 29. 37. 203 Inflation. W. 201 Juvenile delinquency. 16. 103. 200 Insects. 98. 132-143. 58. 162. 140. 86 Morganthau Plan. 34.198 Greenburg. 85-92 Government interference. 88. 192 Lea. John F. 79 Government control. 23. 120-122. 9. 19. Pres. 32. 42.71. 94 Milk. 7.141 National Farmers' Union. 152 Institute of Pacific Relations. xiii. 81 Home markets. 17. 140 National Labor Relations Board.174-182 Myrdal. 49. 148 Hoover. excessive. 189. 157 Hogs. 48. 165. 31. 134. forerunner).101. 107 Keynesian socialism.201 Hutson. 149. 81.. 81. 92 Johnson. 65 Marxism. 29. 52 Hyde.27. 86.. 60 Milk cows. 7 Harvard Law School. 32. cost of. 109. 80. 10. Harold. 6.83. 101. 4. 86-89 Grady. 194 Government. 44. Michael. 91. 24. ix. 11 Government bureaucracy. 79 Harvard University. Henry F. 85. Herbert. 172. 200. 45. Arthur M. 160 Labor unions. 48 Good Neighbor Policy. 151. 140 Hull. 119 Hoffa. 70. 19. 11. 106 Gordon. 202 McGuffey Reader. 163. Humphrey. 47 Japan. 70. 80. 189. 169. 199. 69.. 183. 82 Infanticide. 58 House Committee on Un-American Activities (Dies. 78. Homer. 109 Jefferson. 141. Gunnar. 84.
15.. 133 New Frontier. 93. 4. Eleanor. 119-125. 86. 47. 104. 19. George Bernard. 37. 79. 4. ("politics and passion"). 97. 159 Overproduction. 4. Franklin D. 3. xiii. 38. 81. xiv. 125 Rural life.109. 96. 28. 85. 6 Production cost. 11. 14. 39. 175 One Worldism. 84. 124. Rep. 82. 113. 105. 66. 13. James G. vii. James. 130 "Ozymandias. 29. 146. 49. 42 Return to the Land!. 10.57. 141 Roosevelt. xi. 75-76. 49. 98 Reed. 121. 28. 25. 73 Publishing. 10. 145 Shelley. 49. 107. Percy Bysshe. 133. 82 Roosevelt. 195 Shoes. 93. 7. 19. 119-125." 195 Paternalism. 101. 148. 140 Shaw. 119. 168 Potato Control Act. 151 Presidency (family dynasties). 171-173. Francis B. 115-118. 8. 150.171 Senate Internal Security Subcommittee. 14. 110 Record "Revisions. 66. 17. 59. 140 Peek. 23. 99. 147.. 28. 199 Sayre. 148. 34. 82 Non-farm exports. 75 Public Law 480. 20. 60. 66 Nut growing. 19. 183.50-52. 84 One-crop farming. 114. 153. 134 Self-reliance. 71. 139. 25. 74. 29. 84 Relief. 58. 78. 34. 79. 75-77. 39. 24. John. 194 Republican Party. 33. 47. 83. 35 Planned economy. 3. Lee. 21. 92. 83." 38-42 Red China. 14. 5 Price spreads. 9. 81. 157-159 Princeton University. 11. Sen. 34. 92. x. xi.New Deal. 69. 82. 171 Silent Spring (Rachel Carson). 47. 49-57 Poultry. xi. 70. John. 85. 44. 3. 40. 18. 102 Scarcity program. 34. 169. 96. George N. 82. 109. 58. vii. 106. 36. 47. 102. 153 Silvermaster cell. 102-104 Pig-killing crusade. 154 Ruskin. 22. 84. 81 Right to Market Law. 83. 35. 45. 40.100. 141 Patton. 40. 4. 72. 96. 187-198 Reuther. 6. 43. 125. 124. 86. 59. xiii. 50. 50. 141 Organic farming. 49-57 Potatoes. 7 240 . 148 Self-sufficiency. 127.. 24. 72. 20. 81 Sheep. 182-186 Pulpwood 79. 18. 82 Reciprocal Trade. 101. 185 Rice. 135 Russia. 44. 42. 151-153 Pork.86 Pressman. Mrs. Walter. 5. 129 Revolutionaries. 149 O'Connor. 24. 33. 203 Rubber. 66..29. 26. 152 Racial unrest. 51 Poisons. 182-186 Quarantines.
183 World War II. 32. 69. (The elder Wallace). 89 Stiebling. 133. 79. 165. 50. Pres. 79. 71. 72. 127. Nathan.. 94. 147 Soviet America. 102 Under consumption. 29. 73. 50 Supreme Court. 50. 25. 47. 6. 60 Underproductions. 81. 29. 15. Medora M. 92. 96. 183 Strikes. 175. Henry A. 97.Smith-Lever Act. 4 Welfare state. 123. 50. 48. 91. 82. 186 Wilson. 17. xiv. 126 Truman. 79 Work. 29. 35. 59. 39. 143 War. Hazel K. 203 Square Deal. 10. 97. 125-132 Textiles. Rexford G. 29. 66. 22. 123. 136. 182-186 Wool. 139. 142. Woodrow. 194. 2. vi. 74. 81. 130. 145. imports. Harry. 23. 6. 79 White. 60. 181 241 . 19 Wildlife. Dan. 34. 3. 83 Statistics. vii Socialism. 24. 121. 109. 79. 5. 148. 38-42. 120 Stalin. 199-203 Soil erosion. 81 Tolley. 29. 165. 66. 46.. 9. 29. 77. 25. 20. 66 Vegetables. 14. 202 Urban population. 116 Wallace. 47. 58 Stockpiling. 133-135. 83. 80. 35. Harry Dexter. 136 life. 31. 125. 48 Tobacco. 82 Tugwell. 49. 47. 20. 58. 91-94. 16. 70. 82-85. 70-79. 11. 201 World War III. 18.. vii. M. 194 Wheat. 190. 59. 49 Surpluses. 184.. 47. L. 178 Tariffs. 51. 183. 15. 10 Wilson. 138. 75. 93 Wheat referendum. vii. 18. 17. 54. 22 Wirt. 4. 80-85. Dr. 124 Technology. 15. 143. 17. 28. 110 Ward. 111. 100. 129. 130^ 133. 124 Sugar. 66. 52. 1. 187-198 expansion. 28. William. 7 Why Quit Our Own (Peek). 58 Ware cell. 79. 97 Youth. 64. 58. 25. 82. 4. 141 Taxes. 78. xiii. 34. 79. 162. 145 Smoot. 143 Wallace. R. 170. 193. 76. 44. 21. 34. 61. 37.. 169. 5 Wood pulp. 104. H. 191 Web of Subversion. 96 Witt. 46. 82. 20. 173 World War I. Henry C. 99-110.. 92-95. 128. 92 Water pollution. 169 Sub-marginal. 126 United Nations. 120 Tea. 101.
Back Cover .
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.