Listening to Mogel's arguments, there are almost too many ironies to enumerate. On the one hand these folks vigorously push for endless exponential population growth and decry any caution or concern to that end and yet seem oblivious to the fact that growth in population means that farming will have to be pursued on a massive scale which is not conducive to small farmers or local food and economically is bound to destroy it.
As mentioned, capitalism results in the kind of monopolies
Mogel decries. Like many Libertarians he cries foul when these companies reach
monopoly status and begin to control the market itself. And yet capitalism
demands that investors receive the priority – it's an ethical issue for them.
Profits come first as does efficiency. If a CEO puts a principle first and that
leads to smaller profits not only will investors leave he will be condemned for
his unethical behaviour. This happened years ago with Costco when the CEO insisted
on higher wages which despite the better employee productivity and loyalty was
condemned because it ate into profits and shareholders received smaller
dividends.
Mogel wants an unregulated food market. Regular listeners to
Arnzen will know that one of his primary sponsors (and this is to his shame) is
the ambulance chaser and extortionist Dan Buttafuoco esquire. Mogel doesn't
seem to understand that when someone eats at his restaurant or purchases his
meat and their little Timmy is vomiting blood, they're going to call
Buttafuoco's 1-800-NOW-HURT and he's going to come after them and shake them
down like the parasite he is.
And so when the salient industries are sued and more
importantly when their insurance companies have to pay out huge settlements
that pay for Buttafuoco's new kitchen remodel (and Arnzen's show), then they're
going to demand regulation. As usual a multi-layered and multi-faceted problem
is cast Libertarian-style in childish terms. This also explains the popularity
of people like Dinesh D'Souza and Dennis Prager and his popular but reductionist,
tainted, and frankly buffoonish videos.
In fact the insurance industry far more than the government
pushes for this regulation. Almost every consumer product we buy in the United
States has the Underwriter's Laboratory (UL) stamp somewhere on it and the same
is true in the realms of the automobile industry and certainly the FDA.
There are so many factors at work here and yet once again,
many of these institutions and interests that play their part in creating the
larger problem are supported and sometimes earnestly championed by the
Evangelical community. It is thoroughly schizophrenic.
It is easy enough to establish and conclude that Mogel
doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to society and the relevant
issues at stake when it comes to this discussion. And as mentioned he has no
Scripture but at best a philosophy-driven framework that also rests on
questionable assumptions. The realities of industrial society are ignored as
are the realities of the nuclear age. There is no natural any more. This is not
to say that I by way of contrast endorse processed and artificial foods, let
alone GMO products. By no means. I'm not endorsing anything but rather
rejecting their claims about so-called natural foods or Mogel's claim that he's
raising foods 'the way God designed it'. Really? How does he know that? Does he
not believe in the curse? Has he even studied the broad strokes of the history
of food? The reality is most Dominionists actually have a rather paltry
understanding of this point and seem to embrace something akin to a Pelagian
attitude regarding nature and the supposedly innocent and neutral power of the
markets and the like – as opposed to the Total Depravity taught by the Augustinian-Reformed
tradition.
Natural in today's context means fallen. I always chuckle
when I hear pro-life advocates argue 'from conception to natural death'. What
is natural death? I know what they mean but death is not natural and often what
they consider natural death is certainly not natural. These are complicated
issues that defy juvenile sloganeering. In many of these hot button areas we
see political agents manipulating their audience through means of
sleight-of-hand, smoke and mirrors, and stupid mantras.
And there are other issues that I'm not sure Mogel is aware
of or grasps. Subsidies can play a part in helping small farms and yet in
principle this is in defiance of the free market. On another level massive
industrial farming can (due to economies of scale) use the same subsidies to
beat the small farmer. There's no real hope of competition when these
industrial farms (Wal-mart style) can sell their goods cheaper than you can
grow them.
Take away the subsidies many libertarians will argue. Fine, but
when we have $10 cans of green beans and additional problems born of that shock
inflation – what then?
The shock they argue is due to government intervention. It
never should have happened to begin with. Well if it didn't, you'd find even
more small farms out of business as in a pure market context they would be
priced out and destroyed decades ago.
And there's yet another consideration – national security. As
a Christian this doesn't particularly motivate me but strategic thinkers ask
whether they want the nation to be food independent or like Britain in the
nineteenth century and reach a point in which for the economy and industry to grow
and keep growing, available means of food production will not be sufficient.
Britain decided to rely on imports and built its navy to protect its interests
and to make sure they could never be blockaded.
Some in the United States would rather the country keep
producing sufficient amounts of food even if that means subsidies than to rely
on imports. In defiance of the market they want to support domestic farming.
It's but another case that demonstrates the market is not an end in itself and
never operates in a pure environment. This is where so many of the ivory-tower
thinkers of Libertarian capitalism go wrong. Relying on paper models they live
in a fantasy world of their own making and as such ignore reality.
These are complicated issues and Mogel 'helps' the discussion
by citing the Department of Agriculture's budget which fails to take these
larger considerations into account let alone the fact that the department's
budget includes things like food stamps. The figures quoted by Mogel are
irrelevant. Apparently he's never really looked into it – he just thought the
numbers comparison to be impressive.
The entire discussion was ridiculous, unhelpful and even
harmful as more and more Christians are getting pulled into this kind of
thinking and pouring all their energy into it. I know of several Christians who
spend all their time researching such issues and obsess over 'raw milk',
organic farming and survivalism but don't know the Scriptures and at best have
a very basic and rather deficient understanding of doctrine. Some of these
folks have completely lost their way and I would argue are in danger of
apostasy.
We have a garden. I like natural foods. I love nature and dislike the industrialisation of farming – probably far more than someone like Mogel. I live in rural area and don't want to live in the city. But I won't fall for the kind of lame arguments being proffered on this show. There's nothing Biblical being proposed and they need to be rebuked for making these claims. What is being offered is worldliness and syncretism fed by false doctrinal assumption.