The sacrificing of Irish farmers by de-nationalised apparatchiks looking to slow the decline of EU relevance and scrape back some geostrategic influence is disgraceful — and dangerous
In a world characterized by increasing geopolitical instability, environmental challenges, and the fragility of global supply chains, nations must prioritize food sovereignty and the protection of local agricultural industries. Agriculture is not merely an economic sector; it is the backbone of societal resilience, cultural identity, and national security. The consequences of prioritizing short-term economic gains over long-term stability in food production could be catastrophic, as history has repeatedly shown.
The growing trend of trade agreements that undervalue local agricultural systems in favor of cheaper imports poses serious risks. While globalization can bring economic benefits, it often comes at the cost of displacing domestic farmers, degrading local ecosystems, and making nations vulnerable to external shocks. Recent disruptions to global supply chains, whether from pandemics, wars, or natural disasters, have highlighted the dangers of overreliance on imported goods, particularly in critical sectors like food and energy.
Moreover, farming is about more than just feeding populations; it is a key driver of rural economies and a custodian of cultural traditions that bind communities together. Allowing these systems to erode not only jeopardizes national security but also risks losing the unique identities and knowledge systems tied to agriculture.
Policymakers must recognize the strategic importance of maintaining robust local food systems. Investments in sustainable and regenerative agricultural practices, alongside policies that support domestic farmers, are essential for ensuring that nations remain resilient in the face of future crises. Global trade should be approached with a focus on fairness and sustainability, ensuring that economic integration does not come at the cost of self-reliance and food security. In a world of growing uncertainties, safeguarding the ability to produce food locally is not just wise—it is indispensable.
This was a powerful article with which I wholly agree. The EU’s policy of hand outs and subsidies was a poison pill only encouraging greater dependence at an enormous cost. Having grown up on a small farm in Staffordshire (now defunct because not economically viable) I have witnessed the erosion of a village community- local shops and businesses all closed, massive supermarkets and soulless industrial estates replacing beautiful countryside. When you give up your national sovereignty to a supranational entity whose representatives you have no power to evict - as Tony Benn famously warned- you are at their mercy. The English and the Irish should be doing everything in their power to protect and promote farming at home. Furthermore such climate hypocrisy to be shipping beef and fruit etc from bloody South America…
Many would fold in the morning without the propping up from government/Brussles
Many have become lazy and just sell small
Plots of land to the children of neighbours for outrageous sums
That’s not to lack empathy for their struggles, some are real. Anecdotally I’m hearing of endless struggles to survive and farmer suicide seemingly is through the roof.
But to cram things as “big bad EU” would be leaving out critical realities
There are quite a % of Irish farmers making serious money from selling to Far East and elsewhere through niche products
We are overly dependant on outside support on multiple levels
American Pharma and Tech are huge tax payers
EU keeps farming and fishing alive
We have a dreadfully small creativity and entrepreneurial population due to the brown envelope/nanny state approach of the never ending corrupt centrist government
But we’d be a 3rd world country over night were the ya is to really pull industry home
The characterization of Trump’s mandate needs to be evaluated in the context of Anerica’s electoral system — Trump achieved a victory of a magnitude not seen by a Republican candidate since Bush the Younger’s reelection in the wake of 9-11.
In a world characterized by increasing geopolitical instability, environmental challenges, and the fragility of global supply chains, nations must prioritize food sovereignty and the protection of local agricultural industries. Agriculture is not merely an economic sector; it is the backbone of societal resilience, cultural identity, and national security. The consequences of prioritizing short-term economic gains over long-term stability in food production could be catastrophic, as history has repeatedly shown.
The growing trend of trade agreements that undervalue local agricultural systems in favor of cheaper imports poses serious risks. While globalization can bring economic benefits, it often comes at the cost of displacing domestic farmers, degrading local ecosystems, and making nations vulnerable to external shocks. Recent disruptions to global supply chains, whether from pandemics, wars, or natural disasters, have highlighted the dangers of overreliance on imported goods, particularly in critical sectors like food and energy.
Moreover, farming is about more than just feeding populations; it is a key driver of rural economies and a custodian of cultural traditions that bind communities together. Allowing these systems to erode not only jeopardizes national security but also risks losing the unique identities and knowledge systems tied to agriculture.
Policymakers must recognize the strategic importance of maintaining robust local food systems. Investments in sustainable and regenerative agricultural practices, alongside policies that support domestic farmers, are essential for ensuring that nations remain resilient in the face of future crises. Global trade should be approached with a focus on fairness and sustainability, ensuring that economic integration does not come at the cost of self-reliance and food security. In a world of growing uncertainties, safeguarding the ability to produce food locally is not just wise—it is indispensable.
This was a powerful article with which I wholly agree. The EU’s policy of hand outs and subsidies was a poison pill only encouraging greater dependence at an enormous cost. Having grown up on a small farm in Staffordshire (now defunct because not economically viable) I have witnessed the erosion of a village community- local shops and businesses all closed, massive supermarkets and soulless industrial estates replacing beautiful countryside. When you give up your national sovereignty to a supranational entity whose representatives you have no power to evict - as Tony Benn famously warned- you are at their mercy. The English and the Irish should be doing everything in their power to protect and promote farming at home. Furthermore such climate hypocrisy to be shipping beef and fruit etc from bloody South America…
Irish farmers are incredibly subsidised by the EU
Many would fold in the morning without the propping up from government/Brussles
Many have become lazy and just sell small
Plots of land to the children of neighbours for outrageous sums
That’s not to lack empathy for their struggles, some are real. Anecdotally I’m hearing of endless struggles to survive and farmer suicide seemingly is through the roof.
But to cram things as “big bad EU” would be leaving out critical realities
There are quite a % of Irish farmers making serious money from selling to Far East and elsewhere through niche products
We are overly dependant on outside support on multiple levels
American Pharma and Tech are huge tax payers
EU keeps farming and fishing alive
We have a dreadfully small creativity and entrepreneurial population due to the brown envelope/nanny state approach of the never ending corrupt centrist government
But we’d be a 3rd world country over night were the ya is to really pull industry home
In many ways we are already a 2ns world country
To claim that Donald Trump won a "massive popular mandate" in the U.S. presidential election is maintaining. He won a plurality in the popular vote but fell just short of a majority. (See, e.g., https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ELECTION/RESULTS/zjpqnemxwvx/.)
The characterization of Trump’s mandate needs to be evaluated in the context of Anerica’s electoral system — Trump achieved a victory of a magnitude not seen by a Republican candidate since Bush the Younger’s reelection in the wake of 9-11.