Who Says Small is Better?

Who Says Small is Better? When I clicked on the ice cream maker, Ben & Jerry's web site it was not the selection of sweets that made me a bit nauseous, rather it was the anti-"anything but small" farming rhetoric that made my stomach turn. You see, Ben & Jerry's demonize corporate and industrial farming, which under their flawed characterization equates to any type of farming that is not small sustainable and organic. Of course, the Brothers Grim is entitled to post their opinions, but they should expect backlash from the agriculture community for being two-faced. It is beyond my comprehension why Ben & Jerry's continues to attack large farming operations when they sold-out their company for millions in 2000 to the multi-national corporation, Unilever. Ben & Jerry's anti- production agriculture tirades are tiresome especially considering that they are the low man on Unilevers 900-plus brand totem pole that includes signature companies, like Bestfoods, Slim Fast, Wish Bone, Birds Eye, Knorr and Dove (to name a few of their many holdings) all dependant on production agriculture. On Ben & Jerry's web site, I learned that "industrial agriculture may be extremely efficient at delivering cheap food to supermarket shelves, but it can be pretty inefficient at lots of other things." (citing synthetic fertilizers and pesticides among their list of evils) Well, conveniently for Ben and Jerry industrial agriculture has been efficient at making Unilever universal. I find it fascinating that the popular "sustainable small farm movement" intent on gaining local control of agriculture and fueled by groups like Farm Aide and Iowa's Citizens for Community Improvement, has made great inroads with corporate America. Dovetailing with sustainability has become the mantra of corporate PR campaigns thus, these farm activist groups receive financial support from organizations as diverse as the Ford Foundation, Standard Oil and EBay. Starbucks recently ran a full-page ad in the New York Times promoting the fact that "small coffee farms don't grow small coffee"; (of course, this begs the question of what large coffee plantations don't grow, large coffee?) The copy concluded that many (not all) of Starbucks high quality beans come from small farmer co-ops and insinuated that by purchasing "big coffee" from small farms Starbucks is fostering sustainable practices. This could very well be true, yet I wonder if I am the only one who sees the hypocrisy of this huge corporation tooting their horn over the cause of the small farmer while showing no mercy for the thousands of small coffee shop or bakery owners who have been putout of business by Starbucks. Yes, farming is a life style, but for many of us so is entrepreneurship. Where are the safety nets or corporate donations for the small business owners that lack the competence, skill, vitality or luck to stay afloat? Apparently remaining "small and local" was not an attractive option for either Ben and Jerry's or Starbuck stockholders so why vilify the aggressive farmer who is blessed with the marketing and agronomy skills to grow his /her operation. In the end, while these new small sustainable farms have become the darling of Madison Avenue and the culturally elite, they lack a track record. Sustainability by definition means to carry on, maintain, and keep going. What then of third and fourth generation farming families, many now corporations, have proven that they can "sustain" the populace by abundantly producing more than we consume decade after decade. I believe that regardless of whether the farming operation is large, small, organic or traditional, each contributes immensely to the health and welfare of our citizens. In a nation that prides itself on diversity, it is time that agricultural elitist's (and you know who you are) get off your high horse!