Fascist Climate Craziness: Biden Wants To Pay Farmers Not to Farm To Curb Emissions

P. Gardner Goldsmith | May 5, 2021
Font Size

One of my first published pieces on political-economics was a story called “Plum Deal” that appeared in “The Freeman,” circa 2002.

It focused on the fact that the Bush administration was preparing to pay plum growers to intentionally not grow plums. Because there was a “glut” of plums, and because the Bush administration cared not a whit about economics or the U.S. Constitution, they were prepared to prop up plum prices by reducing supply, and by literally handing out cash for every plum tree that was plucked from the soil.

That kind of central planning teaches two dark lessons.

First, it harms consumers, who not only have their taxes fed to plum growers, but also lose cash to the higher prices created by the lower supply – which has a ripple effect in other areas, because those consumers cannot save or spend that cash in other areas.

Second, the immoral “policy” is a variant of fascist cronyism, which seems to have been a running theme in the U..S since the 1920s, and the “wonderful” days of the Federal Radio Commission, which for five years blocked the start of television in order to protect radio station owners from TV competition.

So it’s not necessarily a party-connected pathology, this fascistic move to prop up prices by paying growers not to grow. But it’s certainly immoral, fascistic, and idiotic.

All of which are terms that befit virtually every one of the Biden administration’s policies, and perfectly describe the latest farm mess he wants to promote.

As H. Claire Brown writes for The Counter:

The Biden administration announced on Wednesday that it would expand a program that pays farmers to leave land fallow, part of a broader, government-wide effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030. The new initiative will incentivize farmers to take land out of production by raising rental rates and incentive payments.

Ah yes, the echoes of nonsense past, rebounding off our lives and wallets, and redounding with the familiar atonality of Bush’s plum deal and FDR’s “Agricultural Adjustment Act” the latter of which is noted in Episode Nine of the MRC’s free online learning program, College Unbound, as an example of American fascism.

Related: John Kerry's Family Uses Private Jet For Vacation While He 'Fights Climate Change'

And this time, the unconstitutional price-hiking payoffs are cloaked in “climate change” rhetoric that also hides a big, long-term UN-style agenda of land-capture and the reorganization of living-space all over the world.

The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) was created in 1985 to incentivize landowners to leave some of their marginal land unplanted, a plan meant to protect the environment by reducing agricultural runoff into streams and rivers, preserving wildlife habitats, and preventing erosion. Today, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) ‘rents’ about 21 million acres of farmland from landowners, typically for 10 years at a time—a tiny fraction of the total land farmed nationwide. In recent years, the number of acres enrolled in CRP has fallen, possibly because USDA’s rental payments have not been competitive with the open market, Chuck Abbott reported for FERN News.

But that “rental” still has a harsh upward effect on the open market prices of the remaining land and the produce that repeatedly can be grown on the acreage it offers.

The new announcement is a bid to incentivize farmers to enroll 4 million more acres of land in the program to total 25 million acres, the current program limit. ‘Sometimes the best solutions are right in front of you,’ said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in a press release.

What would Vilsack know about “solutions,” or even the so-called “problem” – the “climate problem” repeatedly having been shown as an unjustified fear based on manipulated data

It’s very easy to claim one has “solutions” to nonexistent “problems” when one is spending other peoples’ money and handing it out to people who might return the favor with political support down the line. As noted in College Unbound, Roosevelt’s Agricultural Act handed out cash to farmers to destroy crops such as cotton. The farmers often pocketed the government-bestowed cash without giving much to the field workers.

And prices were made artificially higher than they needed to be, all while Depression-Era Americans struggled to buy clothes and food.


And this ties into the grand one-worlder plan called Agenda 2030. This UN-pushed policy grab-bag also is known as “The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” – “sustainable” being defined not by the market system and individuals in it, but by political interests – and it seeks to reorganize the world landscape, concentrating people in centrally-planned urban and suburban “hubs,” and selecting only a favored few interests to build or farm.

Curiously, and this might be something new to Mr. Vilsack, the US Constitution doesn’t grant the feds the fascist power to plan how we utilize land. It doesn’t give the feds the power to “rent” land, or even “own” land save for Washington, DC, territories, and land used for military garrisons.

So this move to pull four million acres out of use is not only not “a solution”, there isn’t a “problem” except in the minds of politicians like Biden, Vilsack, and their ilk.

The problem is their conceit to tell others how to live, to take their cash, and make their lives more expensive.

Given the fact that “Plum Deal” was published nearly 20 years ago, and that Roosevelt’s AAA was forced on Americans nearly 90 years ago, one might be wise to count on this central-control mindset to live on – even as thousands of acres of agriculture are destroyed.

Related: Inconvenient: Global Temps Lower Now Than When Gore Received Nobel Prize