ARTICLE: “Out of Africa: Cotton and Cash,” by G. Pascal Zachary, New York Times, 14 January 2007, p. BU1.

ARTICLE: “Myth of the Small Farmer: Federal subsidies have turned agricultural operations into big businesses,” by Gilbert M. Gaul, Sarah Cohen and Dan Morgan, Washington Post, 22-28 January 2007, p. 11.

First story is a neat one about how some American cotton traders are hedging their bets on ag subsidies by establishing market ties with African growers, who, as I noted in a previous post, actually grow their crops cheaper than we do in the U.S., it’s just that our government takes enough off our farmers’ output to effectively undercut Africa’s growers, keeping them poor.

The American traders in this story naturally take advantage of that fact, paying undermarket prices for the African cotton they scoop up.

This is protectionism of the worst sort: America and Africa in a neck-and-neck race to be the world’s largest cotton producer. Why we’re pursuing this title in this day and age, screwing over Africa in the process, is beyond me, especially when the mythical small American farmer (dream on, Willie Nelson) has long since passed from the scene.

Most disappeared in the 1970s, when the big agribusinesses started moving onto the scene. Most of the farm kids who rode the bus to school in 1st grade when I attended grade school (1968) were city kids by the time we entered high school in 1976.

My Mom will tell you today that only two types of people buy local farms: Amish and outsiders looking for second homes (especially for hunting).

Today, large and very large farms make up less about 10% of the number of farms. Small and medium represent only about 25%. So-called “hobby farms” account for over two-thirds. The government rather cynically defines any farm as one with $1k in production. By doing so, it maintains the myth of the small farmer in sheer percentage numbers. Overall, the hobby farms account for a tiny fraction of U.S. production.

The big farms and agribiz joints, while just 10% of the total number, generate 60% of the production. They also get over half of the subsidies.

We spent $15 billion on ag subsidies in income support or price guarantees. Even with Bush’s “huge” plus up of aid to Africa, that number remains significantly smaller.

Cotton still enslaves, it would seem, and the U.S. Government still plays a rather creepy role in perpetuating that economic disenfranchisement.

And yet we’re so fast to condemn the mercantilist strategies of Chinese trade in Africa, amazingly enough. They’re just stingy, while we seem closer to rip-off artists on this one--and anti-market at that.

If Africans can grow cheaper than Americans, then they should reap the benefits of that status. Denying that outcome is just cheating, plain and simple.