Industry Mythologies
We Feed You: Introducing Industry Mythologies
Spend any time in an agricultural space, and you will be peppered with a narrative that can be summed up as “we feed you.” From America Needs Farmer’s stickers to “Agvocates” extolling how the nation’s backbone rests with its farmers and ranchers, a core tenet of identity among those in the agriculture industry is that the nation is utterly dependent on us and thus beholden to our needs.
Of course, there is a core truth here. Agriculture is vital to the human experiment and a strong agricultural sector makes the United States a strong nation. Culturally, we’ve tied much of our national identity into the yeoman farmer, and boy, do our politicians love cosplaying as one. While we could not survive without an agricultural sector, that doesn’t mean that every bushel of output is being put into food. Which calls into question the idea of “we feed you.”
The widest planted crop in the country is corn, and corn farmers are keen to use the we feed you narrative. This is a place where the narrative and reality don’t fully agree. As you can see in the chart below, (a generous) 9% of corn produced is directly used to create food. Another large chunk is used to produce animal feed, which eventually produces food in a very inefficient manner. This adds up to 48% of production actually going to feed people. The other 52% goes into a plethora of non-food uses, such as wasteful ethanol production (which is a terrible fuel source that is only viable with government support). A sliver of exports does feed people, but a sizable portion of that use is for industrial, not food, related purposes.
While other crops fare better, such as small grains or vegetables, with more of the calories going to feed people directly, it is clear a significant portion of agricultural production in this country does not go towards food. Unfortunately, the accurate narrative of “a portion of our work feeds you” doesn’t hit quite as hard as “we feed you,” so the inaccurate version becomes the industry’s dogma.
This myth, rooted in truth but exaggerated by various actors, is used towards specific ends. The idea that if a single acre is taken out of production, it is a direct threat to food security is the logical conclusion of this myth. But by promoting this myth, agribusiness can advocate for policies to further maximize production, like subsidies or lower environmental regulation. Even though, since the 1920s, the most distinct problem in US agriculture is persistent overproduction, and the goal of every commodity sector is to find as many markets as possible to push their perpetual excess into. We will still be well-fed if we grow less corn, but our policies don’t reflect that because of the mythology the industry has created and perpetuated.
The Role of Myth
Industry myths are not simply propaganda, though they do serve that function. Myths are about narrative-making and organizing power relations within sectors of the economy. They can influence how the general public and policymakers view an activity as well as a way to regulate actors within the sector, be it investors, management, or labor.
Externally oriented myths are designed to advance the industry's goal in a public arena, such as among consumers or government regulators. The fossil fuel industry is a master of this. Even though suitable carbon-free energy sources are available, they have crafted a narrative promulgated by both direct employees and recruited academic and media personalities to advance the notion that fossil energy is still necessary for “energy independence” or “grid stability.” This is despite the fact that renewable energy sources can accomplish both goals with the right infrastructure.
Internally oriented myths are more about keeping individuals in line by creating narratives of persecution or blaming others for issues within the industry. A great paper goes into a case of this process in the Northern California forestry industry. At the time, a company called PALCO took over the logging sector in Redwood country. They quashed unions, cut wages, and ended pensions. Most importantly, they dropped their predecessor's more sustainable harvest practices, which would have ensured the industry would be viable into the far future. One would expect this undermining of the region’s economic base would be met with anger at the company. However, a local environmental movement saved the company from the ire of their employees. Environmentalists hoping to preserve old-growth forests and endangered owl habitats were blamed for the falling fortunes of the county. Even though mills had been shut down before any land was preserved. The loggers and communities took up this story, dawning anti-environmentalist shirts and yellow ribbons, a symbol of PALCO. Myth was used to reorient workers' anger rightfully placed at the company against environmentalists, to the detriment of the community's future.
I believe mythology is an appropriate term above marketing or propaganda because it’s not always a top-down program or about advancing goals of direct economic interest. The Canadian trucker protest from a few years ago illustrates this beautifully. The industry’s outcry against COVID restrictions was not orchestrated or directed by a central powerbroker. It was a grassroots expression of anger. Truckers developed an inflated sense of importance. Instead of simply recognizing themselves as an important node in national shipping, they constructed a narrative that they are THE core of the nation. Because they provide an essential service, their political demands, only thinly related to trucking, should be met even though they constitute a tiny portion of the electorate. The trucker protest was a cry of “We’re here, we matter. And because we deliver your goods, you will listen to us no matter what.” Industry myths cause the legitimately important to believe they are exceptional.
This inflated sense of importance and entitlement came from a bottoms-up developed mythology that placed the truckers at the nation's center. Developed through Facebook groups and on CB Radio channels, flamed by reactionary media and a fraught political moment. This myth that merged occupational tribalism with political identity unleashed a movement that brought Canada’s largest cities to a standstill. All because an internal mythology that inflated the importance of Canada’s truckers became supercharged.
The harm of industry myths
Narratives and stories are important. When I was a teen looking for my path in life, the message of “we feed the world” genuinely inspired me and galvanized me to pursue the career path I am on today. These messages of why we do what we do professionally are sources of inspiration for individuals and organizations. Telling ourselves stories of our mission and how we will achieve it should not be demonized on its face.
There are instances where the industry myth largely overlaps with reality. Doctors, for example, follow through on their industry promise to save lives and hold themselves on a broad level to that standard. Even if there are times when the myth is used to shield themselves from opposition, such as the American Medical Association supporting dubious policies restricting the number of doctors entering the profession, at its core, the reality and the story are aligned 95% of the time. On the flip side are industries that provide nearly no value to society but are convinced they are a cornerstone to national functioning or are in some way the future of the economy. Multi-level marketing schemes and cryptocurrency fall squarely into this bucket, where a mythology of wealth and success is created to sell an outright scam.
And that’s where narrative goes wrong. When all sense of perspective is lost to an exaggerated reality. When “we are an important source of calories to the world’s hungry, even if a large amount of our output goes to non-food purposes,” becomes “we feed the world.” Such inflated truths or outright lies push harmful agendas, be they from the bottom up or the top down. When a story leaves the plain of observable reality, when it becomes dogma, actually talking about the accuracy of that story becomes impossible.
Ultimately, transparency and the truth matter. Within our sectors, organizations, and fields we need to maintain a grounded sense of our role in wider society. I feel that agroforestry, the field I currently work in, is important to agriculture's future but will not single-handedly solve the sector’s problems. The other component of this is understanding that everyone’s job and industry is actually quite important. Farmers are not special; they rely on powerplant workers, grocery store clerks, lawyers, and doctors as much as those individuals rely on farmers. Ultimately, we’re all in this together. The idea that some of us are inherently more valuable by virtue of our profession, and thus deserve special treatment, is the myth at the root of this and the one that most needs to die.
What I’m reading, watching, and listening to
I'm About To Lose Control And I Think: I recently came across an old special of one of Britain’s funniest comedians, Joe Lycett, in all his camp, snarky glory.
Garden Tomb vs. Holy Sepulchre: A fascinating video about how holy sites, despite their lack of archaeological or historical connection to an event, are created by religious communities.
Experiencing Japan's Most Uncomfortable Yet Mysterious Rides: A very calming video of a guy just riding different pieces of infrastructure and amusement park rides.