Where Capitalism Meets Feudalism

For those of you who don’t know, Feudalism is a term used to describe the political system during the Medieval Age and since coining of the term in 1614, has been applied to multiple different societies throughout history. Feudalism is a system defined by three major parts, lords, vassals and fiefs. For accuracy, I refer to wikipedia:

The structure of feudalism can be seen in how these three elements fit together. A lord was a noble who owned land, a vassal was a person who was granted possession of the land by the lord, and the land was known as a fief. In exchange for the fief, the vassal would provide military service to the lord. The obligations and relations between lord, vassal and fief form the basis of feudalism

Keep this definition in mind as I (attempt) to dissect an article published by the NY Times earlier today, June 5th.

Food is becoming a hot topic on wall-street, and among investors world-wide. The population of the earth is growing, the cost of food is increasing and the capability of getting food to this population is decreasing as transportation costs increase and select regions world-wide become more and more unstable. Being a commodity that is necessary for human life, this change in how the food system works is an important topic to address, consider and discuss. Below are some select snippets I would like you to read specifically, taken from NY Time’s article entitled “Food is Gold, so BIllions Invested in Farming.” Please, if you have time, read the article and draw your own conclusions.

(I have taken the following out of order, and for a good reason.)

When crop prices are climbing, holding inventory for future sale can yield higher profits than selling to meet current demand, for example. Or if prices diverge in different parts of the world, inventory can be shipped to the more profitable market.

So when demand for crops flies through the roof, which it is already beginning to do, who is going to be at an advantage? Certainly not the exploited majority of the world. If, let’s say, markets were locally configured, and our green-thumbs weren’t chopped off by our upbringing in the ’supermarket generation,’ we could easily supply ourselves with food. This goes without saying, but many people forget this, and is another topic entirely.

But the long-term implications are less clear. Some traditional players in the farm economy, and others who study and shape agriculture policy, say they are concerned these newcomers will focus on profits above all else, and not share the industry’s commitment to farming through good times and bad.

Hmmm … that concerns me a bit, does it concern you?. The wise old men (industry experts) are saying, “Don’t Trust them!” but regardless, the ones with money resume their plot for world domination, prepare their propaganda and laugh as the sheep continue to jack-off into their socks. (excuse my vulgarity)

These new bets by big investors could bolster food production at a time when the world needs more of it.

The rationalization doesn’t really do it for me, considering the track record of money hungry corporations, I doubt this transition would result in the increase of food distribution. The ‘ability to feed the world’ is what sold free-trade, but we still burn tons of wheat and kill thousands of pigs, all of which goes to waste, and it is done simply to keep the market from inflating. To assume this of an entity who’s primary goal is to profit and maintain control of a market is idiotic. This new system may keep the wealthy and the financially enslaved fed. However, for those who would prefer to maintain their humanity and freedom, it looks like there may not be any other choice but to either go jihad or to go cannibal like knights during the crusade. (re: immortal technique)

Grain elevators, especially, could give these investors new ways to make money, because they can buy or sell the actual bushels of corn or soybeans…

So by owning these grain elevators, these investors would essentially be gate-keepers in not so many words. Some of the “big dogs” who are participating in this farmland and grain-elevator frenzy are investment companies such as AIG and BlackRock Fund Group. Again, I ask you to do some research, draw your own conclusions. Would small farmers be allowed to distribute through these? Or would we be completely reliant on the production, success and vision of this market/society-shaping idea. Also, notice how the focus of these implied statements are not about feeding people and making the world a better place, but about profit and maintaining control of a necessary commodity to human life. We aren’t talking bandwidth, roses or children’s toys here, we are talking food.

With the word of this news some interesting and somewhat frightening questions float to the surface.

• What impact will this have on society at large?
• Would it even be possible to regulate this sort of activity?
• How will family farms handle this change in industry?
• Where does Monsanto and the Privatization of Seeds fall into this picture?
• Is this the beginnings of a new Feudal Age? Where the Lords are corporations (legally immortal humans), the Vassals are people such as your employer and the fief is your old Slumburb, foreclosed, and then bought off and bulldozed for use as farmland. (…only speculation)

This post is riddled with my own opinions. I would love it if I were wrong about this, so please, share your thoughts, opinions, answer the questions listed above or create your own. Keep in mind that everything at this moment is speculation.

Are we entering a Feudal Age?

Related posts

• The Shock Doctrine (5)
• Simpsons Cast Inks Deal: 20th Season is a Go (0)
• Jaguar Wide Receiver Matt Jones Arrested for Possesion of Cocaine (0)
• Budapest’s Soviet Statues Party Again (0)
• Bling h20 - water for people who drive a Bentley (1)