you don't need to go that far or call anyone a kulak to realize that the small farmer working his land and the farmer hiring dozens of migrant laborers to do it for him aren't equivalent, nor is the guy who owns 5 farms and works none of them a farmer at all in any meaningful way.
Much like any sector, agriculture has lots of different class arrangements that are possible within it, and the bourgeois media purposely muddies the waters by calling everyone from the owners of agricultural conglomerates down to the individual yeoman farmer, simply "farmers"
it's the same with "family owned" businesses, it's meant to imply a certain wholesomeness, but it could be an immediate family actually making the product, or it could be a megacorporation like johnson and johnson, the label is meaningless because it refers to who owns the capital not who's doing the labor
hiring dozens of migrant laborers to do it for him
Or "adopting" dozens of orphans and putting them up in a dorm building and "homeschooling" them, but really they're slave labor for your $40 million ranch.
Great example are the farms in GB that are hyper exploiting migrants right now. TrashFuture have done two excellent episodes on the abuse and cover-ups recently, featuring the journalist of this piece:
purposely muddies the waters by calling everyone from the owners of agricultural conglomerates down to the individual yeoman farmer, simply "farmers"
It's one of a few industries in the imperial core where the class exploitation of the workers should be just as apparent to the workers as it was to those working inside a factory. The system of words built around it blinds people to it.
OWNERS OR WORKERS MOTHER FUCKER?!
you don't need to go that far or call anyone a kulak to realize that the small farmer working his land and the farmer hiring dozens of migrant laborers to do it for him aren't equivalent, nor is the guy who owns 5 farms and works none of them a farmer at all in any meaningful way.
Much like any sector, agriculture has lots of different class arrangements that are possible within it, and the bourgeois media purposely muddies the waters by calling everyone from the owners of agricultural conglomerates down to the individual yeoman farmer, simply "farmers"
it's the same with "family owned" businesses, it's meant to imply a certain wholesomeness, but it could be an immediate family actually making the product, or it could be a megacorporation like johnson and johnson, the label is meaningless because it refers to who owns the capital not who's doing the labor
Or "adopting" dozens of orphans and putting them up in a dorm building and "homeschooling" them, but really they're slave labor for your $40 million ranch.
Great example are the farms in GB that are hyper exploiting migrants right now. TrashFuture have done two excellent episodes on the abuse and cover-ups recently, featuring the journalist of this piece:
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2023-10-22/all-that-is-missing-is-a-whip-home-office-ignored-migrant-worker-abuses-on-farms
It's one of a few industries in the imperial core where the class exploitation of the workers should be just as apparent to the workers as it was to those working inside a factory. The system of words built around it blinds people to it.