Ye Who Reap Shall Also Sow

The problem of supplying the population of this country with food has become an extremely important one, because of the exigencies of war-time industrial production. Available shipping space is limited and has to be shared between armament materials and normal imports. To-day armaments receive priority. Imports of raw materials for manufacture and re-export take second place. As reported in the Daily Herald, March 6th, 1940 : “We are not free to concentrate all our strength in making munitions, because we must devote some part of our industrial resources, an increasing part, to the making of goods which will pay for the material out of which these munitions can in turn be made.” Consequently the amount of shipping space available for imports of food is considerably restricted compared with pre-war days.

Prior to the war enormous quantities, by far the greater part in fact, of Britain’s foodstuffs were imported : meat from the Argentine and New Zealand, wheat from the U.S.A. and Canada, butter from New Zealand, bacon and eggs from Denmark, tea from India, sugar from various countries, and so on.

By what process has this country arrived at a condition wherein so much of its foodstuff has to be imported ?

From the fifteenth to the nineteenth century Britain was transformed from a predominantly feudal agricultural country to the capitalist industrial power we know to-day.

With the growth of capitalism, and its inescapable need to make profit, there came the drive to find markets abroad for its products. Hence the growth of the British Empire and the colonisation of virgin lands abroad. In these lands which capitalism colonised it established itself as the economic mode of production.

The capitalists of Britain did not export goods to the Colonies and other lands for philanthropic reasons. The goods were produced to be sold at a profit, and, in order to obtain the money to pay for these goods, the buyers in other countries themselves had to produce and export commodities.

What happened in the “new,” countries? Was not wheat produced in North America, wool, meat and butter in the Antipodes? Did not the “Roast Beef of Old England” proceed to come from South America? Of course!

In the colonial and foreign countries it proved cheaper to produce certain commodities owing to the fact that not only was cheap labour power available, but the quantity of labour required to produce a commodity was less, owing to natural conditions, e.g., the great fertility and advantageous climate of the American wheatlands and the natural rich grassland and wide ranges of Argentina. Competition followed later between the individual capitalists in each respective country, causing improvements in the technical mode of production and thereby further lowering the values of the commodities.

With the development of Britain as a manufacturing country and the rise of various other countries as producers of agricultural goods, British agriculture entered its decline. It could not compete with the imports of cheap foreign produce.

Urging British workers to “Buy British and buy the best” could not stop the decline. Members of the working class, always forced to work for wages which suffice to buy little more than the bare necessities of life, could not do other than purchase them in the cheapest market, hoping to eke out the contents of their meagre wage packets, so that a small portion might be left to enjoy what to them were luxuries.

Sufficient has been said to demonstrate that the decline of agriculture in Britain followed and a necessary complement to the rise of British capitalist industry. Now let us consider the situation, during the present war and the hopes and fears of the farming community.

In its endeavours to provide an adequate supply of food, the Government, working through the various County War Agricultural Committees, has ordered the ploughing and cultivation of millions of acres of land which has lain idle for many years because under normal peace-time conditions it was not profitable to work it. The farmers may well ask if this is the dawn of a new day for agriculture, a sign of better times ahead. Agricultural wage-labourers may wonder if their jobs are going to be more secure and more remunerative than they have ever known. These are the questions that arise in view of the feverish activity displayed in the countryside.

An answer is provided in the following extracts from a book on economics entitled “Elements of Economics,” by S. Evelyn Thomas, B.Com. (Land.), (1932): —

“During the Napoleonic wars the shortage of foreign supplies of corn and the duties on imported corn forced up prices in this country, and led cultivators to resort to inferior land.”
“The return of peace in 1815, however, was followed by a decline in prices, and, in spite of the protection of the Corn Laws, agriculture suffered from acute depression.”
“The period of depression continued until the fifties and sixties, when the Crimean War, the American Civil War, and the Franco-Prussian War caused a reduction in the world’s supply of foodstuffs, thus forcing up prices and benefiting the British farmer, in particular, as imports into this country naturally declined.”
“The period of peace which followed in the seventies was accompanied by a recurrence of depressed conditions in British agriculture. Extensive wheat supplies from the prairies of the United States and of Canada were opened up owing to the improvements in transport and the building of railways. Such imports of corn led to lower prices, and lower prices forced out of cultivation the inferior areas.”
“The depressed conditions continued until the ‘Great War, during which British agriculture enjoyed a short period of great prosperity.”
“The close of the war and the inflow of foreign produce was followed by the conditions of depression.” (Italics ours.)

Capitalism has a persistent habit of holding out hopes to those who suffer at its hands. A typical statement——”Every effort to restore agricultural prosperity is being made by the central and local authorities and by other interested parties”—follows on the above quotations.

This statement is intoned like the promises by “our leaders” to-day of social security after the present war. Is there not a parallel between the periodic war-time prosperity and post-war depressions of agriculture and the war-time prosperity of industry and post-war conditions ?

Consider these quotations : —

“He (Mr. R. S. Hudson, Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department, now Minister of Agriculture) was announcing a plan for the complete reorganisation of British industry, so that a tremendous drive to capture world markets can be made.”—(Daily Herald, March 6th, 1940. Italics ours.)

“With European markets closed to them and faced with shipping difficulties, colonial producers have large stocks on their hands. Good progress has been made with plans to find alternative markets and to make arrangements for large scale storage.”— (Daily Telegraph, October l0th, 1940. Italics ours.)

“Planning for a New Britain: Agriculture: — Price control, marketing and general improvement of the agricultural industry will be framed. Trade : —Systems of control will be devised for exports and imports to allow the fullest possible expansion of world trade.”—(Daily Telegraph, January 7th, 1941. Italics ours.)

Observe the obvious centradictions contained in these statements and envisage the position of the capitalist class if and when it attempts to fulfil its plans.

Socialists are not concerned with maintaining the prosperity of capitalist agriculture. We realise that if there is prosperity from the ruling class viewpoint the workers do not necessarily enjoy a higher standard of living whilst such prosperity lasts. Despite all the wishful thinking and fanciful plans oi those who are interested, British agriculture is doomed to a post-war depression.

In “The Conditions of Economic Progress,” Mr. Colin Clark (of the Bureau of Industry, Brisbane) says: “No science has passed its apprenticeship until it is able to describe with confidence and accuracy the future consequences which will follow from present causes.”

Scientific Socialism has passed its apprenticeship. Our investigation of the agricultural problem in this country prompts us to state with confidence that capitalist agriculture holds no hope for the agricultural worker.

A. V. S.

Leave a Reply