The more I've thought about this, the arguments you're coming up against are actually true in America. A lot of farmers are tenants, but tenants to a corporation that run it like a fast food franchise. One of the nations largest chicken producers operates like this, dictating layout, feeds, feed basins, lighting - all autonomy removed from the farmer who actually continues to shoulder a lot of the risk as the franchise is sold to them as a private business.

I think that part of the problem is present with other debates, the talking points originated from and are mainly applicable to America. Mega farms and large influencial producers are very much an issue there. American farming standards, practices, culture and subsidies are radically different to the rest of the world and the social activists are heavily insulated against their own country's rural culture.

As a dairy farmer, I think big dairy does exist. Not in the farmers but in the processors and middlemen. They screw us all the time.

*As a Socialist* what I find fascinating about this cognitive dissonance some people seem to experience when it comes to the core concept of Socialism, is that the definition is “Worker ownership of the Means of production”, so at what stage in the family farm, is the farmer not the worker? When the farmer owns the land and tools that they use to produce goods, that is a direct relationship between the worker and the capital. The farmer is not exploiting the labour of others, they ARE the worker, and this is, of course, fundamentally true of all self-employed people. Yet some people seem to think that it means that anyone owning anything makes you a Capitalist, but this is fundamentally not true. It just proves how truly tokenistic some peoples view of Capitalism and Socialism is. They don’t wish to engage critically or thoughtfully with the subject, they just want to label what they don’t like Capitalist and pretend like they have in any meaningful way added to the conversation.

Week 4 of petitioning to have the sheep called "Raid Shadow Legends" for the flock and individual names of: Hello Fresh Keeps Manscaped Surf Shark Athletic Greens Ridge Wallet Sometimes I wonder if the comments get read. I will be waiting for a week to petition again. I bet they have just been taken to market and made into ready meals already.

Capitalists using anticapitalist language shouldn't be a surprise to anticapitalists, but I don't see an end to it.

Thank you for your work here. Detachment from how our society actually gets its raw materials and food is mind boggling.

People that know a little bit about a topic have a tendency to speak over-confidently about said topic, and are often the loudest voices. I myself hold anti-capitalist sentiments but I definitely think that there are a few factors interacting for the genre of anti-capitalists you mention throughout your video to come to the conclusions that they reach. I’m not going to list all of the ones I think could be at play, but I think a really important one is the separation of the majority of the population from nature. In my opinion, this allows room for a fantasy of what nature “should” be to take root that is very different to the actual reality of it. Also, another factor I’ve noticed is how the ideas behind a case for moral veganism infiltrate other ideologies to more and less successful degrees. I do think most people think farms are necessary and identify the need for the distance from farm to plate to be as minimal as possible (see: domestic food production), but these aren’t the loudest voices.

There are a lot of people in Britain that have some rather strange ideas about food. Just look at the rise in people who sincerely believe that milled and ground wheat is a dangerous poison. Or that using and milk and wool are examples of animal cruelty. We need to recognise the fact that farmers provide value to our country, our society, and to our environment far beyond the mere production of food. Farmers are the stewards of millions of acres of open countryside. Farmers manage the way rainfall is absorbed into our acquifers and flows into our waterways. Farmers maintain hedges and waste grounds that provide habitat for trillions of insects, birds, reptiles, and mammals. And farmers maintain vast areas of beautiful countryside that is enjoyed pretty much free-of-charge by walkers, by tourists, and by anyone else who ventures a few hundred meters outside of a town.

YT randomly recommended this to me (possibly from Clarkson's Farm videos). Really enjoyed it. Thanks for sharing.

I think to your point on conflating farmers and middlemen or producers into one homogeneous whole a correct assessment from your vantage point. But, and big but, just because you are not conflated it doesn’t mean that the producers don’t conflate you into their image for their benefit. Industry does use pastoral family farms as a pr shield. A great example of this is the tobacco industry in the United States during the middle part of the 20 century. There’s a great book called The Cigarette: a political history by Sarah Milo that extensively goes into this. She basically argues that by corporations taking on an identification with these farmers corporations can seem connected with values that most people can identify as generally good/ideal, being a family farmer who makes his business by the hard work he puts in the field, versus the aggressive marketing and coercive tactics sole bent on profit that is maybe more in alignment with there actual interests. In essence corporations can use your lifestyle without your consent, which I think is why this conflation happens.

I see what you are getting at some extent, but disagree on some points. A lot of the "anti-capitalist sentiment" you are describing seems, to me, *is* aimed at the large-scale companies - those that keep animals locked up in cages barely bigger than the animals themselves. I've not personally seen people blaming a small family with a couple of fields for the whole slew of crises we are all currently facing. If meat and dairy farms are not a "capitalist endeavour", why are the animals that reside within referred to as "livestock"? Literally *living stock*. That's about as capitalist as it gets! When an animal is lost due to whatever reason (natural causes, culling etc.) it's counted as a loss on the balance sheet. Farmers do, of course need to make a living, so they have to be a part of the capitalist system in some degree. Whether it's the right way to go doing this with other creature's lives is another debate entirely. The point of plant-based alternative milks is to reduce both environmental impact and also animal suffering. Your argument of Oatly not shipping in powdered form is somewhat disingenuous: even in liquid form the environmental impact is less. Furthermore, why in that case is dairy milk not powdered? Why is any edible product not powdered? On dairy milk is also not being as healthy as everyone likes to think: of course it isn't. Mammals aren't supposed to be drinking a cocktail of hormones and fat from their mothers after infantile age, let alone that of another species. Is it no wonder that 2/3 of the global population are lactose "intolerant"? Which in itself is loaded wording from the dairy industry as if to say that not being able to digest lactose as an adult is some sort of negative/defective ailment. Ribena (or any other soft drink, thankfully) is not something that is suggested by the companies producing it that you should "drink a glass a day".

I have to admit that your videos make me glad to be an old man, and I feel for you younger people that are going to have to live through the consequences of this insanity. We have generations that assume that peace and prosperity are the natural order of human existence and have not the slightest concept of the sacrifices it's taken to provide that for them. I strongly suspect that reality is about to come rolling down the tracks and collide with their illusions in the near future, it's going to be ugly.

The "omnivores dilemma", a book that provides a critique of agricultural practice that gives farming a bad name. There is never any balance in the way issues are presented. Thank you for your informative videos. I live on a small acreage, which has provided my family with milk, lamb, and beef, and we are facing increased rates and land tax bills to force us to move into the ever increasing suburban spawl.

I AM A FARMER, I AM A CAPITALIST! My farming system is full 360 degree farming, with overlapping enterprises. I am dairy, but production just isn’t that important. It’s just a way to generate some cash flow from my dams, who carry embryo’s from blue ribbon beef genetics. The sources of my beef genetics also generates revenue through marketing of semen and embryo’s to off farm buyers. My beef cattle and lamb provide fertility through manure and the pruning of vegetation. Not easily accessible areas and wooded areas are full of pigs, the sanitation and fly control comes from poultry production, which in turn results in another product to sell. I don’t grow a lot of the same crops everyone else does. I use epigenetics and seed saving. I also have partners, it would all be way too much for one family. All my poultry and eggs are produced through owner operators. We farm within a circle that goes out in a 50 mile radius of the home farm. It’s not small! All those areas, a total of 400 acres, that our equipment is too big for, is used for delicate, artesian hand farmed products, produced by partners who are owners of those enterprises. I’m not offering just beef, pork poultry and water fowl for my customers, their are over 600 products because all my partners bring other goods to offer. They have a base line almost guarantee of revenue, yet they can and do expand in to other markets and systems. But I get a piece of all of it, and that piece is more than equal to what I’d get if it was all in house. I have nothing “in” a crop. Every enterprise marks up the value of its contribution to the farm and a profit or loss is recorded at every level. The over all yield of any of them is not considered exception, but the way they compliment each other makes it work. They are considerably higher in quality and nutritional value. But they are also not for the average WalMart shopper. But with recent surges in inflation, and our own growing efficiency, these price points are getting much closer to meeting in the middle.

You make some really good points, but I think when arguing against a general opinion like that you always run into the problem of straw-man arguments. I think most of the anti-capitalist critique is either directed at mega farms, large dairy factories or even the large food conglomerates like Nestle. A lot of the debate is probably full of imprecise terminology, which leads to small family farms feeling attacked when they really aren't the main focus. And of course there are also some people who go overboard with their critique and actually attack everyone. On top of that the anti-capitalist critique can get muddled with arguments on emission or arguments on nutrition. Which makes the debate even more messy. I feel like debating those specific points is more fruitful than broad arguments about like these. And just on the point of nutritional value: I don't think quoting a recommendation to the British government during the second world war or post war era is very relevant. Most people in developed countries today don't struggle to get their required calories, macro-nutrients or also most micro-nutrients in their diet. They probably just want a low-emission, tasty liquid to put in their coffee. Again, depends on who you are talking to...

Capitalism puts a price on natural materials, not farmers, Shepards, and traditional hunter gatherers. This was documented during contact between Indigenous Americans and Colonialists, where furs became commodities, decimating food ways and causing conflict between villages. Bribery and capitalism is a tool for alienation, and doing the work of growing food is one of the ways you can de-alienate yourself from nature. Murray Bookchin had a better view of ecology, foodways, and organic community structures than Marx, and his influence carries on in Northern Syria being defended by the YPG/YPJ. I like your observations about middle men and processors as well, because that is really where the profit incentive arises. Independent cattle farms near me offer grass fed and finished beef at a lower price than the equivalent at the grocers. In America, most meat farms are not independent, they are contracted by Tyson, Smithfield, or even McCormick. This is why a large contingent of leftists in America are plant based and most survive on dry beans, or homemade seitan and tofu. It's much cheaper if you don't support large corporations; but you also have to take more personal responsibility for your food, and ends up tasting better because of it. Side note, Oatly is a scam, just blend overnight oats with water and you now have oatmilk, you're welcome.

Big pharma is pharmaceutical industry... Big agriculture hasn't ever landed in UK or EU "really," we have more "medium large" agriculture compared to other continents... Except UK farmland is now actually being bought up to potentially become a somewhat closer to American, Canadian, Australian, Brazilian ect scale operations. Depending on how our priorities as a non EU member continue to pan out of course.

This young man is a new Leneen

Instead of attacking easy fringe ideas with the most out of left field examples why not focus on the actual critisisms most experts or oponents hold? For example instead of this whole weird Oatly story where they just hate farmers "working the land" and being colonists which im sure there is 1 person somewhere in the UK who believes it, you could have also adressed the actual arguments most experts and proponents make. Im guessing the top 3 reasons those people like plant based milk is 1) less resource intensive and uses less land than conventional milk. 2) less animal cruelty involved (some would say that seperating babies from birth, a lifelong feeding of inflaming and stomach upsetting food and breeding unhealthy frames/bodies for high production of milk etc is cruelty, and of course the ending of that life in a cramped trailer heading towards an abatoir). and 3) lactose intolerance. I put 0 effort in this topic and I guarantee these 3 issues are why most Oatly consumers prefer it over regular milk, not some weird colonial argument.

New upload 🎉🎉🎉❤

The minor little problem with methane as a GHG is that it is measured in dry air. Water vapors absorption spectrum overlaps that of CH4, making any level of methane insignificant. Vegans and greens will ignore that, having other motivations.

I think the reason media outlets don't publish articles talking about Ribena is because the conception that Ribena is healthy didn't persist in the general culture. Milk might've stayed the same as a product, but that doesn't mean our scientific knowledge on it hasn't developed since the 1940s. I think these points are very interesting but it hasn't changed my mind on two main broad conceptions. That milk isn't really all that good for you, and that it produces more CO2 than other products of the same or greater nutritional value. I'm not particularly pro or anti capitalist I should add. I don't have any ideological opposition to privately owned business and I don't have any great love for it either.

you should name your channel Soil-cialism... Love your videos. Hello from Costa Rica

Stumbled across your channel tangentially. Your angle is a breath of fresh air.

My new favourite channel. You only ever loose me on the climate stuff, Listen to John r Christy University Huntsville Alabama. He built the Best temperature record available today along with Roy Spencer. It quite the eye opener!

9:41 - I haven’t read that article, but the line about “use synthetic alternatives” points directly at buying stuff from the oil industry, right? I’m pretty conflicted on all this, living in a rural area all my life. We’ve got major problems in the food system - those in the “middle men” part are the ones using pastoral culture as their image, while treading on farmers and consumers alike. The pressure they put on farmers point to more intensive practices as a way to survive under that pressure. For the most part, farmers in this country rightly see themselves as stewards of the land, aligned with nature. We do have issues with overgrazing/wild species loss as a whole in the UK (some of that is from overpopulation of deer, some from sheep farming that’s been going on for centuries) as well as intensive fertiliser use contributing to issues in our waterways (alongside the untreated sewage issues from urban stuff) but I don’t see farmers as the problem. We will always need food supply & we need stewardship of the countryside.

Lots of ideas and arguments here that could have their own seperate discussions (or videos ;) loving the topics you cover though. The Milo Rossi of agriculture, food and farming.

I would love to see you and Leave Curious do a collab

2:49 'most anti-capitalist critiques of the food system are not aimed at these massive companies, but rather, farmers, the producers, and their representative bodies' source? You just making things up now?

not sure if you've mentioned this in another video but could you do a breakdown of all your expenses and profits related to farming, since you talk a lot about farmers not being motivated by profit. but considering farming companies do make profit and people used to make profit on farms surely there is some force sapping away your hard earned money.

Why do they never go after the megacorps? Because their masters don't tell them to. They are genuinely unthinking automata that only believe what they're told to believe; they give zero thought to what they believe means or why they should hold that position. They don't actually care, they just want to feel good rather than do good because doing good requires caring about the impact of your actions. That's why they'll target the little guy and try to ruin them, but the worst they'll do to nestle is use a hashtag.

5:05 I mean, wolves are extinct in England bc of shepherds and ranchers and pastoral farming was a factor (not the only) in the massive deforestation, less than 5% of Englands forests remain and grazing animals is one of the biggest challenges in re-forestation. So even if processors/retailers make more money out of it today (maybe always) your "pastoral culture" is still violent and terrible for the environment.

Incredibly interesting videos. Just found out about this channel and will be watching others with time! Keep it up! 👍

Whilst farming may not be particularly profitable, farmers in general farm with the profit motive. Tenant farmers must in the long run make a profit or have other income to pay for their loss making farming businesses. Owner occupiers can sell land to stay in business. You could perhaps look at farming in New Zealand, which has operated in a free market for some decades now, and where farmers do appear to make profits.

Great video Oli!

The Big Farma one got me 😂

In short rural industry is the Problem, not rural living, and their forced addiction to each other is the problem.

Farm gate prices are actually quite good. Dairy farmers have been making huge profits since the Brexit vote. They peaked at 50p, they were making 10p per litre.

Why do people farm sheep? If wool is uneconomical and lamb isn't consumed in large enough quantities why are sheeps farmed? Even if we accept your premise that farmers aren't capitalists that is largely irrelevant because the end result is the same. There is tons of land dedicated to sheep even though its entirely uneconomical. Arguably the original point of greenwashing wool still stands because even though currently wool is unprofitable if the greenwashing was successful presumably the price would have increased providing a monetary benefit for sheep farmers. But again ignoring that why is tons of land dedicated to sheep farming if wool is currently unprofitable(not in demand)?

I don't know where this channel came from, or that I'd have as much interest in the capitalistic manipulation of farmers and low scale producers, but I am pleased that I feel a little more in touch with my guilt of buying from large scale grocers.

I appreciated this video, I found your perspective interesting and don't think you are a shill for the industry. So let me start with the parts I agree with you on: I have no love for big business, and think the increasing concentration of ownership away from small landholders is sad. That said, I think you are (inadvertendly) straw-manning some of the arguments that are made by most critics. As you mention - when people talk about Big Dairy, they are talking about the powerful and coordinated lobbying groups that are taking action now to try to hold back the uptake of plant milks. The intentions of these historical people who set it up is more of an interesting tidbit, rather than something that proves the intention/impact today. At the end of the day, it is inarguable that the overall the environmental impact of dairy milk is significantly higher than that of plant milks (across land use, GHG and freshwater use)(Source: Our World In Data). More importantly, and this may be harder for you to be able to connect with, people don't like the idea that a sentient, feeling being has to be exploited and killed in order to take her milk. And before you object - what happens to the male calves? What happens to the female calves? What happens after a few years of the mother cow's life when she is no longer producing as efficiently? Try not to fall into the trope that “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

good video, as always, but i do have a couple thoughts first of all, there are different type of farming, some of which are colonial in nature. for example, palm oil plantations in Indonesia. giant swathes of rain forest are cleared, and replaced with endless palm oil mono cultures. there is no traditional relationship with the land in this instance, these are large companies, producing a commodity cheaply, and destroying nature in the process. these plantations are worked by wage worker, who are underpaid and overworked, and are at times not treated better than slaves. the mistake that these activists make, is extending that critique to all farmers, and farms. it's definitely not accurate, to say that all farming is like this. but, at the same time, i think it's important to engage with this critique, instead of dismissing it. another things is that lobbies do not only, have the public's best interest in mind. it's more nuanced than, "big milk want you to drink more milk" but not actually much more nuanced than that. at least in the sense, that there is an outside interest, trying to influence consumers for selfish reasons. even if a desire to benefit the public plays a role, there are other factors at play also. amongst these factors, are the interests of farmers/processes, and if it's a government campaign, the economy. just because a doctor thinks milk is good for people, doesn't mean that the people funding the campaign have the same altruistic outlook. especially, because even kind hearted people can change their mind, if their paycheck depends on it. for example, the the "joris driepinter" campaign, in the Netherlands, encouraging dutch children to drink 3 pints of milk per day, (no really). the fact remains, that this campaign, to only happened after industrial policy had created an oversupply of milk. government policy had created oversupply, and the decision was make to make consumers eat it, literally. another example is, that in the eighties, there was a big push to get people away from saturated fats, and towards more sugar, and trans fats. the results of this was much higher obesity and heart disease. just because doctors think something, doesn't mean they're right. the problem with this whole scheme, is that it in the long term undermines trust in government, industry, and yes farmers. even if a campaigns is meant to benefit the public, trying to influence people like this, without their consent makes people uncomfortable. this is where oatly comes in, making anti propaganda, propaganda, which is of course, still propaganda. but, if you want to criticize oatly, then you must be critical of other interests, trying manipulate consumer behavior also. the truth is, that in all these cases, the benefit of the public, is only a part of the equation, and the outcomes have not always been benign. imo, criticizing one over the other means taking sides in a culture war instead of criticizing a system. i felt like you did that, despite you saying you didn't want to. the thing that really doesn't help is that some capitalists use farmers as an pr tool, to make their shitty products seem rural and natural. i distinctly remember seeing MacDonalds ads, with farmers in them, talking about how ethical MacDonalds (tm) hamburgers are. in reality, of course these farmers where just under contract from MacDonalds, and were asked if a crew could come and film them for half a day. some of them might not even have been farmers for all i know. but because of things like this, city people see farmers as in league, with the capitalists that in reality, exploit them. people are right to question and criticize these images, even if they shouldn't use this to critique rural life. as an aside, the reason that some of these government policies use capitalists incentives, is because they assume farmers are already capitalists. this is incorrect of course, but ironically, the end result is that farmers get turned into capitalists, that the policy implied. it reminds me a lot of against the grain by James c Scott, which talks about how governments shape the world, in order to make it more like how they imagine it is. anyways, those are my 2 cents, i hope it's at least interesting.

Small-scale farming is philantrophic endeavor, imo

70 likes in 800 views holy Great content btw. Very much enjoyed your explanation.

Pretty sure both capitalists and anti capitalists would claim that monopolies and regulatory capture are bad. You can also call for the end of the oil industry without also garroting the workers in that industry. No one is claiming we don't need farmers.

2:23 you describing syndicalism or Corporatism. Corporatism is a political system of interest representation and policymaking whereby corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, business, scientific, or guild associations, come together on and negotiate contracts or policy (collective bargaining) on the basis of their common interests.[1][2][3] The term is derived from the Latin corpus, or "body". That's not capitalism. This is such a major problem that marxist use the insult capitalist to anyone they hate. SDP and communist party split in germany. The SDP was the party made by marx btw. Well guess what the first insult they went to was the "SDP are capitalist". It just gets tossed around and used incorrectly. 6:33 so I would take what any socialist has to say at face value. They are hypocrites. A fundamental philosophy of there's is dialects fancy word for meaning contradictions. They embrace the contradiction. Even they can't read their own work. For example Das Kapital. Is full of nonsense that nobody can understand and it's written that way on purpose as the Hegelian and Kant philosophy. This is why they come out vague gibberish. It means nothing to them all they want is power over you.

small farmers are attacked not only in literature, but a lot from politic angle.. see the last years changes in legal stuff.. need to register chicks, need to do more and more administration and reporting.. It is to monopolize in the end also the producer, to have the whole food chain in the big corps hands.

1:31 Okay you may not know this but I see an issue right here. In the UK prices are regulated by our price commissars. Farmers should be the price makers in a capitalist system. What your describing is not private ownership. It sounds like state controlled aka command economies. And let me guess you have regulation on food. But I would love to see if you went on the mises website read the books and learned capitalism. Would you still be able to say this is capitalism? Retail is highly regulated and given goverment tax payer money to regulate its prices. Even toilet paper that should have risen in price was regulated during covid. They couldn't increase the price of toilet paper for demand and limited supply and this led to shortages.

Does Ed Winters consider himself an anti-capitalist? I don't think so. And that is an intrisic incoherence in his discourse. But it makes your argument a strawman one. Same goes with your reported statement at the university, we were not here to hear the full argument, and seeing your tendency to oversimplification and exageration, how can we trust your depiction of it? Same goes even for the vox article, which does not mention the UK once, and talks primarily about australia and US production system... Your presentation is immensely biased, the article says : "When you can, shop your closet - buying nothing is your best bet", "If you need something new, buy secondhand", "Buy something brand new as a last resort, but be sure to do your research". Does Oatly push an anti-capitalist agenda, even in discourse only? No! They never claim to be anti capitalist! It is just another greenwashed company talking about individual responsibility and ethical consumption! In a capitalist system! They are not as you say : "establishing themselves a anti-capitalists". You are simply lying. The fact that you found a communist telling you oatly isn't a problem while big dairy is, is not representative of anything even if you happen to be telling the truth this time, because once again, we were not here to witness the actual conversation! You talk about disingenuity for oatly, and I'm like yeah, that's greenwashing for you, nothing new, but then you say that big dairy companies are not engaging in such practice, that is just funny really! In 2022, the dairy products industry in the United States invested about 3.4 billion dollars in advertising. Oatly invested 100 milliions worldwide (that is huge but not comparable). Quorn is like 40 millions. As a communist, I wish for an agrarian reform that would socialize formerly privately owned land and other means of production of the agro industry to give the power back to the people over their agriculture. Democratically choosing what we want to consume and how we wish to produce said consumptions. As a vegan, I would push this production to be as animal exploitation free as possible. That is as simple as that.

A technological solution would be better than a political one. If small scale, computer-controlled processing could make the farmer's goods into finished products right on the farm, maybe there would be a profit in British Farming in the future. Time to buy a resin printer and a box of Arduinos.

Yea in the past milk was very good but for most people now milk isn't really necessary just extra calories and saturated fat.

It doesn't matter how much money they make or profit, what matters is that farming is destroying the planet as it is. Yes Urban Farms would be better they just cost more and aren't done for that reason. Rural living should be an living option not tied to the industry there in harsh dependence.

at roughly 1:40 you say that food today is so plentiful and cheap because of this system (powerfull middlemen setting prices for producers and consumers). there is no argument or evidence brought up for this and i think that this is painting a wrong picture. I‘m not saying the system has no influence but to me the biggest contributor is the technological advancement in the farming industry and the increased productivity (with regards to man power) it achieved. I refuse to accept claims that this technological innovation was only possible due to that capitalist system.

Really nice video. Enjoyed it. Good balanced and informative commentary/analysis. just subbed.

You made £800 in profits last year?! Blyme, that means you are eligible for food pantry support. Where you may have the verry peppers and onions you've grown handed out to you.

It's very difficult to argue against complete insanity, but you do a good job. Human civilization was built on the agricultural revolution, 6000 BC, ish, late neolithic times. But perhaps we don't need food anymore, or not food from the land, just from factories. I wonder where the factories get their raw materials? Other factories perhaps? Or perhaps from zero carbon crops, that don't depend on photosynthesis of carbon dioxide?

19:35 are there still companies trying to push ribena as a healthy drink?

Hasan would agree 👍❤

Most food in uk supermarkets is ultra processed. Look at how obese the customers are.

Have you considered that they just don’t like that you kill animals when there’s an alternative? Animal ag lobby groups are real, and the political impossibility of ending animal ag subsidies for a pointless and cruel industry proves it, despite the vast majority of consumers being against factory farming

Google the economic term "Regulatory Capture" and this entire video is defenseless.

Farms don't run on money? Come on man.

I really apreciate what you are doing here. Mostly because i really apreciate the countryside, homesteading and agriculture. But...i think the fight it over! You gave up, like many many others. If i were in your shoes i would probably do the same. Just bank the incentives to "rewild" , do some business selling the views to urban people, and just enjoy. Urban people are now so disconnect to nature that, althou they are super educated, they would understand what you are saying. If they would, they wouldnt agree. Nowdays the eco religion trade the father sky by mother earth, and again (back 3000 years) they are afraid of the skies, the wind, the sun.. the natural elements. And they are willing to do sacrificies (and impose them on others) to achive salvation. Nothing changed. Just names, rotating in cycles...better go with the flow. When there s a real shortage of food you will have a few sheep, trees and veggies. They will died blamming the "evil" man...dont be the evil man. Enjoy the view. Even if you need to do it in a bit of melancolic way. Because something beautiful is being lost.

Instead of debunking the points you keep offuscating the argument. first you detatch the "small mom and pop farmer" from "the industry" and then in other points in the video when its convenient you all of a sudden lump it all together so you can make the original argument being made seem unreasonable or factually incorrect. Why not skip all the games and just lay a case for why those critising the industry (according to you any critisism of industry is now also an attack on capitalism which makes that side seem like old communist hippies instead of concerned experts in a field)

Co-op movement? Still has a place

Oatly aren't doing so well these days.

How do you milk oats? Goats yes.

Colonialism like capitalism has significant benefits to all involved with some downside.