Well done! Some economic geographers (Dick Walker comes to mind) are fond of challenging this fetishization of scale by saying that there is no difference between small and large farms (under capitalism). Which gets liberals upset pretty quickly, haha, but is also its own kind of polemic...Of course, DW has a much more sophisticated understanding of agricultural dynamics than this, but it seems that is the rhetorical strategy he finds most useful. Anyway, this piece does a great job of pointing to the problematic moral grounds that Berry and the current liberal food movement rely on - nice work! Also, I haven't read much of Berry's writing in a while but have heard folks praise his evolution in thought...have you noticed any positive changes there?
I have. I think his later writings are significantly more sophisticated on questions of race, for example. That said, the essay *freezes* Berry to the extent that I'm really only interested in the Berry of *Unsettling* and not really interested in Berry the actual, dynamic, and complicated thinker. I'm also honest about that in the essay. I know Berry has gone back to revise and complicate some of the excesses of his early work, but none of his later work has the circulation or impact of the early stuff and I'm more interested in Berry's footprint than I am in parsing the "truth" of his beliefs, if that makes sense.
Awesome! I agree with you. Though Benson and Butz appear prominently in work, I just sidestepped the whole quote affair because I never saw the quote in the primary sources and because I had plenty other juicy quotes to use.
This shows your wisdom and good sense. Given how many other shady things Benson *actually said,* it's seems comical that he would be vilified for the one thing he didn't say.
Well done! Some economic geographers (Dick Walker comes to mind) are fond of challenging this fetishization of scale by saying that there is no difference between small and large farms (under capitalism). Which gets liberals upset pretty quickly, haha, but is also its own kind of polemic...Of course, DW has a much more sophisticated understanding of agricultural dynamics than this, but it seems that is the rhetorical strategy he finds most useful. Anyway, this piece does a great job of pointing to the problematic moral grounds that Berry and the current liberal food movement rely on - nice work! Also, I haven't read much of Berry's writing in a while but have heard folks praise his evolution in thought...have you noticed any positive changes there?
I have. I think his later writings are significantly more sophisticated on questions of race, for example. That said, the essay *freezes* Berry to the extent that I'm really only interested in the Berry of *Unsettling* and not really interested in Berry the actual, dynamic, and complicated thinker. I'm also honest about that in the essay. I know Berry has gone back to revise and complicate some of the excesses of his early work, but none of his later work has the circulation or impact of the early stuff and I'm more interested in Berry's footprint than I am in parsing the "truth" of his beliefs, if that makes sense.
Awesome! I agree with you. Though Benson and Butz appear prominently in work, I just sidestepped the whole quote affair because I never saw the quote in the primary sources and because I had plenty other juicy quotes to use.
This shows your wisdom and good sense. Given how many other shady things Benson *actually said,* it's seems comical that he would be vilified for the one thing he didn't say.