Why do American farmers love pushing the big red "destroy me" button

[Angst]

I imagine then-Senator Obama's comments in 2008 let an awfully large cat out of the bag, for some of the folks this topic seems to be addressed at:

On the Defensive, Obama Calls His Words Ill-Chosen (Published 2008)

Senator Barack Obama fought back against accusations from his rivals that he misunderstands small-town values.

www.nytimes.com

Such sentiments by Obama had to have come from somewhere.
That those of his party don't tend to look down on certain demographics of their political opponents simply is not true.

was his claim wrong?

like, really.

because nothing in this thread has pointed to farmer voting behavior being anything but spite politics.

i also don't think it's innately "looking down" on people to say they make a bad judgment. this self-consideration that one cannot be scraped by any bad association of behavior... it's ridiculous. it's like my neighbour does a bad skateboard crash into the dockside, i ask why he was skateboarding the docks to begin with, and he goes furious and says i called him a lower state of being.

i am allowed to point out stupid behavior without this supposedly presupposing an essentialist judgment about a person. ie you're not lower than me because i call out poor judgment. but you're so afraid of looking weak.

 

[Zardnaar]

was his claim wrong?

like, really.

because nothing in this thread has pointed to farmer voting behavior being anything but spite politics.

i also don't think it's innately "looking down" on people to say they make a bad judgment. this self-consideration that one cannot be scraped by any bad association of behavior... it's ridiculous. it's like my neighbour does a bad skateboard crash into the dockside, i ask why he was skateboarding the docks to begin with, and he goes furious and says i called him a lower state of being.

i am allowed to point out stupid behavior without this supposedly presupposing an essentialist judgment about a person. ie you're not lower than me because i call out poor judgment. but you're so afraid of looking weak.

Its not about right or wrong but emotion. Hilary's deplorable comment as well.

A lot of the left is out of touch. They think theyre right but they don't realize a lot of things are subjective. Not objective.

This is not an endorsement of rural Americas views. Rural anywhere really.

 

[amadeus]

how does this figure into them destroying their livelihoods?

"i have a rational reason to grow food for my country, so i'm going to vote for the party who makes that impossible"?

I can’t answer because I don’t believe that this has been established.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

coherent vision is indeed not really something dems do well.

however.

the whole exchange (and list of examples provided to edward) basically read like this

Also, Republicans offer an even less coherent vision. Their “vision” is whatever the hell the mad emperor wakes up to. The Dems quite literally have a policy platform with an entire section dedicated to rural America. The Republicans don’t even release one anymore.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Its not about right or wrong but emotion. Hilary's deplorable comment as well.

A lot of the left is out of touch. They think theyre right but they don't realize a lot of things are subjective. Not objective.

This is not an endorsement of rural Americas views. Rural anywhere really.

Obama’s full ‘guns and religion’ speech was literally about how both parties have abandoned rural America to outsourcing and corporatization, and that their towns and public resources have been hollowed out by spending cuts, and that it leaves them with little choice but to cling to guns and religion. It wasn’t a judgement. Now, should he have known that single line would have been blasted everywhere? Probably. But he was basically offering a nationwide mea culpa to rural America in that speech and saying they deserve the same support as anyone does.

 

[Angst]

I can’t answer because I don’t believe that this has been established.

... i don't understand what you mean

Its not about right or wrong but emotion. Hilary's deplorable comment as well.

A lot of the left is out of touch. They think theyre right but they don't realize a lot of things are subjective. Not objective.

This is not an endorsement of rural Americas views. Rural anywhere really.

so there is no material reason for the voting behavior for the rural? nevermind anyone else in question. again, my point of this thread is not to establish superiority over them.

 

[soundjata]

Farmers are like everyone else. They seldom act "rationally" of "logically".
That's why "in spite of" is a good answer.

I think many of us agree with the equation: American voters + American presidential election system = Garbage government.

The electorate is not a problem. The electorate is people.

The system is very flawed on the other hand.
Universal suffrage (especially the American version of it) does not function at all the way it claims. It is old, obsolete and rotten with corruption.
I'm sorry for those in power atop democracies and autocracies but we need a new form of social contract that reduces pain (@Angst ) and decadence (@r16 )

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

the whole exchange (and list of examples provided to edward) basically read like this

true but an underlying point maybe even Monty Python didn't get was that the Judeans didn't ask for that stuff; the Roman Empire built it because they could.

Similarly I think the question could be posed when trying to assist farmers in whatever way: do they want it versus do they need it? Subtle, but it is a difference.

was his claim wrong?

like, really.

I don't think it won too many converts, I can tell you that much...

Obama muddled it, but his claims seems to be that small-towners have formed a political identity around gun ownership and religious sentiment, that wouldn't've been necessary had they...I don't know...just been less poor (?). I don't think these characteristics are somehow endemic to poverty. Something like opioid addiction would be, however. That is one behavior that's inherently destructive.

 

[danjuno]

...I don't know...just been less poor (?).

Angst literally just explained to you what Obama was trying to get at, pay attention.

 

[r16]

another translation has been found but it is clear it will have no effect on the subject .

 

[Angst]

true but an underlying point maybe even Monty Python didn't get was that the Judeans didn't ask for that stuff; the Roman Empire built it because they could.

Similarly I think the question could be posed when trying to assist farmers in whatever way: do they want it versus do they need it? Subtle, but it is a difference.

subsidies, antitrust, cheap exports, access to migrant labour are all core farmer political wishes, and it's on the table (and often active policy) from the democrats. farmers are currently trying to pressure republicans to give them all of that; all are policies republicans hate. there's a lot of fanfare about it. town hall gatherings, think pieces, callin' dem representatives, etc, etc, but they are calling the people unwilling to help them while they vote away the help they're given by the party willing to help them. all while being, and i will stress again, core farmer political wishes. they specifically want that material reality, but refuse to vote for the party that give them that, push to give them that, and prevent the other party from taking it away. they vote for the party that takes it away. consistently. and then they go on the news and whine about the debt.

I don't think it won too many converts, I can tell you that much...

we're not talking rhetorical efficiency.

Obama muddled it, but his claims seems to be that small-towners have formed a political identity around gun ownership and religious sentiment, that wouldn't've been necessary had they...I don't know...just been less poor (?). I don't think these characteristics are somehow endemic to poverty. Something like opioid addiction would be, however. That is one behavior that's inherently destructive.

that's not at all his point

 

[Cutlass]

Farming is an inherently conservative occupation.

The starting mentality of people who thrive as farmers tends toward favoring stability, the tried-and-true, passing traditions forward, etc. more than toward change, development, progress, novelty.

Your work is to do the same thing every year. New techniques can help marginally but generally not transformatively.

Farmers tend to live in small, culturally homogenous communities, and can be extremely cautious, even frightened, about people who are different in any way. So the cosmopolitanism that is characteristic of a more liberal mindset is foreign if not repellant to them.

Their work is really, really hard, demanding work, so they have little tolerance for accommodating the needs of people who they don't see working that hard.

That's not really true re: new techniques. While it's largely in the past now, the past 200 years has changed farming in such fundamental ways that an American Revolution era farmer wouldn't know where to begin on a modern farm.

 

[Arwon]

For four straight years in Michigan, there was a state fund for free mental health treatment for farmers. Farmers have a suicide rate almost 4 times higher than the state average. After Republicans retook the state house, that funding was cut from the state budget.

Is that "farmers" as in the owners of agricultural property, or as in agricultural labourers who do the work? Because those would be very different policies.

I often get the impression when people in western countries talk about "farmers" what they actually mean is a type of small and medium business owner, not labourers.

(And we all know how terrible and especially anti-labour the politics of the average small business person are)

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

That's not really true re: new techniques. While it's largely in the past now, the past 200 years has changed farming in such fundamental ways that an American Revolution era farmer wouldn't know where to begin on a modern farm.

The major technological leaps are typically going to benefit agriculture first. iirc in the late 1990s, farmers were some of the first in the civilian market to get on board with GPS because they wanted their crops taking up every square inch of their property allowable that the technology could map.
More recently there's also been a push for "right to repair" when it comes to farmers fixing their own equipment without taking it to the dealer (ex. John Deere).** This will inevitably spill over into consumer electronics at large. (Beware, Tesla Inc.!)

So I think it's at least a libertarian-leaning culture, wanting to try new things. But the thing of it is--and I think what's missing from the discussion here--is that voters within that profession aren't always going to be preoccupied with their own jobs, and advancing their own bottom line first. Nor should they be expected to. They are going to get caught up in cultural battles just the same as anyone else. They are going to be concerned over the shape of their country, even if it might come at the expense on missing out on some initiative that'd give them more money.

**in fairness to the Dems, this item is included in their platform that was mentioned before:

The Democratic Party Platform, 2024

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

 

[Angst]

So I think it's at least a libertarian-leaning culture, wanting to try new things. But the thing of it is--and I think what's missing from the discussion here--is that voters within that profession aren't always going to be preoccupied with their own jobs, and advancing their own bottom line first. Nor should they be expected to. They are going to get caught up in cultural battles just the same as anyone else. They are going to be concerned over the shape of their country, even if it might come at the expense on missing out on some initiative that'd give them more money.

actually, it's been brought up a few times. i think it's primarily me who wants a material reason. it's the spite and grievance thing surfacing again. the flowery concerned and cultural battle phrasing you're doing here carries a whole lotta weight abstracting concrete views of what push their behavior; also the phrasing "give them more money" makes the behavior look more rational than "make them less broke" or "have their towns not implode into rot and rubble". if you want to go full farmer hero of a libertarian spirit, there's bind here, in that a personal sacrifice is romantic, but the one done here is one of madness. i'd talk about how libertarian these cultural battles really are, too, but i know it's all just bait.

these cultural battles are kind of past my concern, anyways. the thing is that i want to be an ally to the plight of the farmer. but i literally can't take their material situation seriously if they keep voting like this. i just can't. it's just a big fat small violin. these are their own material values, they define them to be good, and then keep destroying their own livinghood by their own logic of good organization. deliberately, willingly, awarely. stop burning your own house down, i say, and they can be taken seriously.

edit i should add that the voting behavior in denmark at least makes sense. they vote for the same appx political wing, which is fully concerned with making sure farming is as economically sustainable as possible. this is part of the big urban snootiness thing. there are other real issues there (you can't grow wheat underwater), but at least their politics of spite aren't as pronounced - yet. the danish right has been very invested in how the right does it in the us, and small parties have shown up capitalizing on the supposed rural-urban divide.

 

[amadeus]

... i don't understand what you mean

The part to which you were replying was this question: has it been demonstrated that farm income is actually being adversely affected by Republican policy? I haven’t seen any evidence to support this is true.

There are a couple of follow-up questions I would add: first, if there is as close as we can get to casual link between party and farm income, how much income potential should farmers vote for/against before you consider their reasons valid? Suppose they are voting this way because their issue is something like abortion, gun control, some issue that isn’t directly related to farm policy.

Second, what other constituencies are expected to be homo economicus and vote based exclusively on maximizing their income? If farmers are voting against their own interest economically, I would have to assume that some other groups are doing so as well.

 

[Angst]

The part to which you were replying was this question: has it been demonstrated that farm income is actually being adversely affected by Republican policy? I haven’t seen any evidence to support this is true.

imma just cut you off here; they themselves claim it is.

for the rest, yes, everyone in this thread is making the case that they're voting against their own interests because of spite.

 

[EnglishEdward]

imma just cut you off here; they themselves claim it is.

Source ?

for the rest, yes, everyone in this thread is making the case that they're voting against their own interests because of spite.

I am not sure I am.

 

[r16]

wikipedia limits my "creativity" . That what ı understand from a given subject can be influenced by things ı have no prior knowledge . Like there have been wikipedia pages ı know they are 'ing liars and so on but can't know everything .

so when interpreting the poem thing ı fancy it is late 70s . Where the Turkish Workers Party thing calls for Democratic action and defines the radicals preferring that armed struggle thing as gauchiste . Until/before 7 members are killed by a team of almost racists who will later be involved in shooting the Roman Catholic Polish Anticommunist Pope under Communist Bulgarian secret service orders because like Communism is a sickness that has to be banished from this world . There is still this romance , helping the villagers to break their feodal yoke and vote accordingly to change the fate of the country . The poet then counting so many reasons why the villagers like must be treated a la Pol Pot because they would resist the glorious revolution when it happened and the right people , the Leftists ı mean took charge of the country . Rural areas are so nice and beautiful ... only when without the pestilence of rural people .

uh , uh . Yeah , ı remember this . That ı had previously looked for it on the web and my brain must have rejected the reality ...

because it is published in a newspaper in 1994 ... February 27th to be exact . Demirel , the President at the time faxes the newspaper , saying the poem is complex with many things and it is like the poet "must" be ironic and thrashing those who see the villagers and farmers of the country as an impediment on the "road of civilization" , the modernization of the country . Though if the poem was taken as it sounded on the surface , it would be offensive to villagers .

when Demirel was Santa Süleyman , running in the elections with the whole range of Right Wing dirty tricks , those villagers were his most important constituency . A villager himself , the only time he didn't got a full 100% of the vote in his own village was when his neighbours estimated a 90 year old woman poor of sight had marked the wrong box on the ballot . He met the poet sometimes later in some sort of a gala and advised him to be interested in things other than villagers .

wikipedia says he was an low level official for a while in agriculture himself . First hand experience there . He says he didn't want uncultured people define his fate and that of the country , he doesn't like people who pray to money , he was attacking feudalism and traditions with negative attributes . Irony , man , irony !

beware of using irony ...

demirel faxed on the Third of March . March 27th was an election day , mayors and stuff .



the first one was Santa Süleyman's own running against Santa Turgut's . Both centre right before they were crushed into insignificance by stuff in a few years time . The third one is the Islamists . Fourth is centre left , custom designed to take the Kurdish vote . Fifth is Ecevit right there . Almost racists and yeah , today's main opposition party .

yeah , Demirel was a succesful politician , knowing the limits , observing the trends . In Atatürk's time the poet would have earned a nice round of falaka . Spite is a very powerful thing . The villagers do not read newspapers . Their sons and daughters in the city for university do . (Like in the previous millenia ; nobody reads these days)

more to the point this is the time Congregation gives up hiding . The demise of the Soviet Union has created new opportunities for them , they are acting as missionaires in Central Asia in the name of the CIA , they can argue they are more important than the Republic Military that won't fight for America . They should be ALLOWED to take over the country . No , that 9 points are not due to one single poem , but , hey , things add up over time . Like Kılıçtaroğlu of CHP ran an impressive campaign , made the PM not win the Presidency in the first vote of the last election . He was doing so well that he stepped on a prayer rug in some house with his shoes on . Said he wasn't aware , he didn't know , he didn't see . All lies .

we are not talking about all farmers . We are speaking about some who do hate the rest of humanity or something . About some who are pushed around as opinion leaders by the people who control the narrative .

don't know if people around here have ever heard of the idea that the European festivals do originate in Sumeria , a set amount of time being wild in a very dull year . Back in the day the Sumerian villagers would be having the womenfolk of their rulers . Be the best sh.t your owner owns and you can be like them in this latrine called the world . The echo chamber had a lot of referrals to the idea that headcovers or burkas or whatever were invented for that day in Sumeria to stop the villagers growing too big out of their boots in case the boots were invented by then , by identifying which noble woman they were having and claiming a familiarity . Yeah , must have convinced all those women who were taking turban as the single proof of virtue in these last few decades .

not all . Just some . Aided by those who control the narrative . Hate , spite , feeling of satisfaction when everything fails for everyone . But you feel satisfied ...

mess with my Star Wars and you get Trump . Piss me off enough and your ziggurats get trampled under the feet of my AT-ATs but you won't be giving up . This is like the oldest conspiracy or something ...

 

[Angst]

Source ?

first thing that came to mind was the news coverage video that was the camel so to say for this thread. it is poignant (bunch of farmer interviews and notes on the crisis in question from the perspective of these republican voters) but A) it was dmca'd by john deere lmao and B) like it's like asking if socdems like taxes

https://www.farmaid.org/blog/what-tariffs-mean-for-american-farmers/ ; who implemented the tariffs again, after the whole soybean thing that already happened during the first administration, that farmers hated, and they voted for him again, and he did it again
https://www.fb.org/market-intel/three-reasons-why-farmers-need-economic-aid and watch any farmer town hall on youtube, also, who destroyed SNAP
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-deportation-plan-effects-undocumented-farmers/ this was a whole farce where trump ended up giving up his own policy, that farmers voted for, except they didn't want it, so they voted for it to happen and then pushed pressure and hoped he caved, and he eventually did after ruining quite a few businesses

idk can someone else do it

farmers vote for republican policy and then push to have it destroyed after the fact

I am not sure I am.

your appeal was greater cultural battles for the nation, i believe? spite is a fine shorthand. you may not find it to be, if so, sure, it's semantics

like you don't really respect a direct answer anyways, as we saw in this thread with the whole monty python routine; it's why your "source?" here is ridiculous as you were presented numerous points during the thread, but you seem to think here i have opened a weakness and therefore an opportunity for you to finally mark doubt. it's all rhetoric to you.

i don't think you actually want to help the farmers. i think you see this as a rhetorical opportunity to weaponize them to outgun someone.

regardless. you are free to give a material reason. how does voting reps materially help them in their own material goals