The History of the Large, Agrarian Country of Romania

Modern day farming has transformed from the farming process of last century. Instead of farmers producing for their families, farmers are now similar to input/output managers supplying massive manufacturers that feed the country.

By the late 1800s, America was transitioning from an economy based on agriculture to one based on industry. Although this transformation made the United Stated richer and more powerful than it had ever been before, it caused farmers to face numerous problems to which they found themselves unable to successfully overcome. Even though many farmers moved into the industrial workforce, the ones who wished to continue agricultural work faced problems such as overproduction and tariff policies. Also, the farmers lost their political power due to the decreased focus on agriculture.

Moreover, peasant realised feeding themselves is more important than buying insignificant consumer goods. So, they held grain for themselves and the grain export seems to have been abandoned. A system scale of individual peasant farming under the NEP couldn’t support plans for industrialisation and the Communists were out of favour for this plan and so, the current NEP policy needs to be replaced by a more vigorous and rapid one.

This is why they decreed that they would hand over the control of the land to the peasants, state collective farms.

As the capitalists continued their corruption, “the wealthy class became wealthier; but the poorer class became more dependant. The gulf between the employed and the employer was growing wider” (Document A). Similarly, many actions performed by these capitalists, contributed to the sorrowful lives of many farmers, who were struggling to survive.

Moreover, the author manages to expand on the subject of politics and how it affects the development of the growing agricultural industry in America. By asserting that the government has shaped

As the nation industrialized, farmer’s work became overshadowed by the newly industrialized economy. Farmers believed they should receive enough money to produce crops and provide for their family (Study.com). Monopolies threatened farmers abilities to get their

In fact a prime elaboration of community rests on the example Iowa farmers challenging market prices together. For instance, “Farmers in Bucks County, PA, organized, and potato farmers in Long Island raised the price of potatoes… This banding together of farmers for mutual protection is going on everywhere [PA]” (Vorse, “Rebellion in the Cornbelt). Another example of farmer elaboration explains the form of survival as “The Milk Producers’ Association joined forces with the farmer’s Holiday” (Vorse, “Rebellion in the Cornbelt). Furthermore a child provides the detail of physical survival consisting off of self-reliant farming stating, “Every fall my parents would make tunnels of dirt and plant cabbage and vegetables…We would then dig them out…and cook them” (Anonymous).

Adding to the deplorable oppression borne by the proletariat during the Five Year Plans, Stalin introduced a collectivisation campaign which not only sparked a persecution of kulaks, but also induced a widespread famine. The Stalin government’s compulsory agricultural policy was largely a failure with regard to its goals. Beginning in 1929, all farms were to be collectivised, with the aim of improving agricultural output and hence, industrialisation. The USSR’s initial system of farming was inefficient, but the introduction of fertilisation and tractors modernised agricultural techniques, increasing the nation’s capacity for production, supporting Historian Jamieson’s statement. However, the policy was catastrophic due to the mass movement of peasant resistance that saw farmers defiantly burning crops and slaughtering livestock, regarding the campaign as a violation of their freedom. By 1933, agricultural production fell dramatically; grain by 17 million tonnes and cows and pigs by a total of 23 million, to below what it was in 1913 (Downey, 1989, p. 19). This

The government did not rely completely on these economic policies to keep their people on the farms.

     Agriculture has changed dramatically, especially since the end of World War II. Food and fibre productivity rose due to new technologies, mechanization, increased chemical use, specialization and government policies that favoured maximizing production. These changes allowed fewer farmers with reduced labour demands to produce the majority of the food and fibre.

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), is the most complex example of common policy in the European Union. Introduced from 1958 to 1968 and still in existence today, it has brought controversy, dispute and political tension within the EU and with the rest of the world. It is also a remarkable example of the movement toward the unknown realm of integration in Europe. However, subsequent reforms have been slow in arrival and have not always achieved the success expected of them. With the new difficulty of enlargement, challenges will require yet more reform of the CAP. The changing situations and context of the policy will be considered in terms of its effectiveness, as will the reforms of

The socialistic economic policy along with low productivity of agriculture reduced our percapita income.It was only during the early nineties ,that the

In this unit’s text, we learned about modernization of society and how agriculture permitted nomadic hunt-and-gather groups to become stabilized and centralized in one location. The text and supporting video clips introduced both positive and negative anthropological effects of the rise of agriculture. Three positive outcomes include stabilization, improved nutrition, and food surplus. For each of these positive instances, there is an alternate and negative impact as well: habitat destruction, feast and famine cycles, and health concerns. This essay will briefly expound on each positive outcome and its counterpart, and will relate the sustainable agrarian achievements of the people of the Gamo Highlands to these effects.

Predictably, the most advanced farming was found in the North. In the South, the deforestation of the last century had all but drained the soil of its fertility, and share-croppers living below the Rome level had difficulty providing themselves with even the bare necessities. Most of all, the system was not conducive to change: the mass of people were too poor to invest in their own lands and landlords had no incentive to provide it. The further South one looked, the bleaker the picture became: there, landless labourers were at the mercy of the whims of landowners without scruples. Most of these peasants lived in mud huts with their own animals, and ate a diet consisting mainly of poor bread and polenta.