The Philosophy Of The Farmer: How Intimacy With Food Production Breeds Social And Political Conservatism (Op-Ed)

My fellow Patriots,

There is an interesting relationship between those who produce food, whether commercially or to feed their own families, and being socially and politically conservative.

Yes, you heard me right, conservatism is not just a product of a blue collar job or hard work, but with an understanding that without food nothing else matters because most people will be dead within forty days of not eating. When a person's entire purpose of living is to gather, grow, or hunt for food to feed themselves and their family, they want no regulations that will prevent them from their purpose, because no food equals death. When the purpose for life is to survive, traditional marriage between a man and a women is a necessity and any deviation means that the bloodline will not survive and that daily labor will be more difficult because there are no offspring to assist with the daily tasks necessary to survive.

The principle of freedom from government interference when it comes to food production and survival is not one that people had to deal with in the past nearly as much as they do today. Historically, laws had been passed in which people could stake their claim on land and had a certain number of years to produce a good yield of crop and if they did, the land would officially be their own for a reduced price compared to if they did not produce yields of crop. One such example was a law passed for the Michigan Territory that allowed people to receive the land they claimed for free if they improved upon the law; whether by farming or the building of structures. Similar laws were passed for territories such as the Illinois Territory, Ohio Territory, Oregon Territory, and others. Minimal-regulation laws such as the ones previously mentioned, which gave people the opportunity to own their own land and work the land as they saw fit with the only requirement of showing that the land was being worked, help prosper social and political conservatism because hard work is required. People were not receiving free handouts from the government, but instead were required to labor hard to provide for themselves and their family to prove they were not going to be reliant upon the government to provide for their livelihood.

When looking at farmers today, there are many costly government regulations that range from 0.3 percent to 6.8 percent of the total cost of farm operations, just when it comes to dealing with food. According to a United State Department of Agriculture (USDA) report from 2018 the smaller the farm, the higher percentage the regulations cost; making it harder for farmers to get by. There are not just food regulations that cost farmers lots of money annually, the government also requires farmers to have insurance just like any business. Farmers also have to pay property taxes, which especially for small farmers is difficult, because they do not have the same income as mega-industrial farms. Income tax is also a major factor into the costs farmers have to pay today to the government. With all of these regulatory costs that farmers have to pay to the government, farmers are forced to abide by the government's orders, such as destroying crops to fix food prices, if they want to receive the subsidies that they need to be able to function. 

So I've discussed why farmers understand the purpose of small, limited government so they can run their operations as they need to, to be able to make money to provide for themselves and their families. The last big point to see is the historical voting trends to see if the trends show an increasing vote towards progressive policies as America moved away from an agricultural society towards a industrial society. Some points about progressivism that I am factoring in, is a push for gender egalitarianism in terms of economic value and role in society, as well as expanding the power of the government and expanding voting rights from their traditional place in just land owners to include other people. Racial egalitarianism is not a factor because the Bible, which is the basis for American philosophy and rule of law, only discusses the different roles of men and women and places man above woman, not placing one race above another.

The first action in America showing a strong progressive push for gender egalitarianism is Jackson, Mississippi where the first state law was passed that allowed women to own property. In 1842, Rhode Island, expanded their state charter to allow for those who did not own property to vote. In 1848, the Declaration of Sentiments is signed calling for equal rights for men and women; though it is important to note that the declaration did not call for equal responsibilities. In 1869, one of the first acts is passed in the women's suffrage movement. I'm not going to name every progressive trend in America, because that would take forever, the purpose is to show that these progressive trends were starting to happen around 1842 and they have only advanced in frequency, boldness, and magnitude thus becoming mainstream starting in the early 1900s and only expanding until the present day and into the future, with no signs of stopping.

Now to make the connection from agrarianism to industrialization, the industrialization of America began around 1820 as people started slowly to move into cities for labor. In colonial America, about 90 percent of Americans lived on farms. If you look at the chart below, you can see data from the US Census Bureau that shows the change from rural, agrarian living to urban, industrial living. This shift matches up with the expansion of progressivism in America.

Year	Urban	Rural
1800	6%	94%
1810	7%	93%
1820	7%	93%
1830	9%	91%
1840	11%	89%
1850	15%	85%
1860	20%	80%
1870	26%	74%
1880	28%	72%
1890	35%	65%
1900	40%	60%
1910	46%	54%
1920	51%	49%
1930	56%	44%
1940	57%	43%
1950	60%	40%
1960	63%	37%
1970	74%	26%
1980	74%	26%
1990	75%	25%

When looking at farming compared to industrialization, there is a single factor that is at the root that causes conservatism or progressivism, and that factor is entitlement. When a person has to work to grow, gather, and hunt for food and water, the most basic necessities, they understand that they are not entitled to anything; that it a battle against evil, destructive forces which they had to fight against to receive the fruits of their labor. A farmer has to fight against getting too much rain and getting too little, getting too much sun and getting too little, the soil getting too much heat and getting too little, against storms, weeds, and pests which seek to destroy their crop. It is the battle against a fallen nature, through which they recognize God, of which is usually the God of the Bible, at least in America. As for the industrial world, even if they had to work hard to earn money and are not subject to feeling entitled to receiving free food, they are much more often than not, entitled to having access to a grocery store that is always stocked with the food they want. The industrial world does not have to experience the battle against a fallen nature, which is the reality of nature, to obtain the two most basic necessities: food and water. It is entitlement that drives the progressive movement; entitlement that a person has the right to be equitable with everyone else, no matter if they worked hard for it or did nothing; or the right to be who you want to be without regards to the laws of nature and nature's God. It is the narcissistic idea of entitlement which was brought about by removing, through industrialization, a person's need to fight to for their two most basic necessities, food and water, which has lead to the progressive movement. The conservative movement is the inverse; by not feeling entitled to even the most basic necessities of survival a person understands the basic value of that which makes live easier without removing that fight for food and water. For example, heterosexual relationships lead to many children; faith in God leads towards His aid in fighting against a fallen nature; and natural, God-ordained hierarchies ensure that pride, which is one passage to entitlement, is contained so not to cause animosity among people towards each other.

It is when comparing the increase in urbanization, which is directly linked with industrialization, and the increase in progressivism that one can see that industrialization leads to progressivism. When people are not having to work hard everyday to grow or hunt food to feed their families, they become blind to "the laws of nature and nature's God" as Thomas Jefferson said. Such laws being there are only two genders (Genesis 1:27), men are physically stronger than women (1 Peter 3:7), and that God has set men as the head of the household (1 Corinthians 11:3). As discussed in the first paragraph, traditional marriage and lots of children are essential to farm life, the reasons for which having been discussed throughout this article, whereas they are less essential to industrial life. It is because of that claim that I can say, without a doubt in my mind, that social and therefore political conservatism is directly linked to farming and the understanding of "the laws of nature and nature's God" of which is paramount to the suppression of entitlement, with entitlement being the single root force behind the progressive movement.