it is very disappointing to hear so-called self-identified socialists advocating for an increase in anarchy in the production of food. that's the kind of nonsense you expect to hear from a conservative like elizabeth warren.

a socialist would understand that encouraging competition in food production could only harm the society's food security, leading farmers to undercut each either by increasing or decreasing production in order to hurt each other and drive each other out of business, thereby negatively affecting consumers and benefiting the banking class. i understand that there were some ignorant farmers that took this position roughly one hundred years ago, but i also understand that it was partly responsible for the devastating corporatization that took hold in the prairies preceding the dust bowl, and led to bankers on the coasts buying up the farms. competition is harmful to everybody except the rentier class and always leads to consolidation - and this is economics 101 in 2019. this is a foolish policy that will harm farmers and consumers and help bankers and the elite.

socialists understand that the way forward in food production must be to end competition between farmers by creating unions and co-operatives that help them work together in determining how much they plant and which markets they target. these unions and co-operatives would also lead to profit sharing. farmers should be in business together, not competing against each other.

in the existing world economy, the family farm is an absurdity. any policy designed to protect the family farm will merely isolate the farmer that lives on it, making it easier for the banks to step in in the long run. the way to push out agribusiness is not through increasing alienation, but through increasing co-operation. as mentioned previously: the choice that farmers have is between allowing the banks to come in and create an outside monopoly, or working together to create their own monopolies.

competition is over. deal with it.