Alternatively, Pratt (2009, 156) argued that the concept and others from political economy should not be applied in a blanket manner to AFNs but that instead we should understand forms of agrifood resistance “in terms of their own values and priorities, rather than using a terminology that assumes that they are profit-maximizing individuals who struggle to compete successfully.” He argued that using the concepts of self-exploitation and subsidies from one part of someone's life to another risks naturalizing and universalizing the rationality of maximizing monetary returns and that “they do not always reveal anything of value” (Pratt 2009, 172). Marxists have noted this point as well: “There is … a great deal that goes on in society that is not directly related to the circulation of capital, and we should therefore resist the temptation to reduce everything to these simple Marxian categories” (Harvey 1999, 20). Although I agree that AFNs should be assessed on their own terms, we must also see that they exist within a broader capitalist political economy and that most engage directly in some form of commodity exchange and therefore remain subject to many of capital's logics, even if they attempt to counter or ignore them. When CSA farmers engage in self-exploitation, it is a “both/and” situation at the interface between different rationalities: one both fulfills one's (potentially noncapitalist) goals and does not receive appropriate economic return on one's activities from the exchange, as dictated by the broader political economy.
Alternatively, Pratt (2009, 156) argued that the concept and others from political economy should not be applied in a blanket manner to AFNs but that instead we should understand forms of agrifood resistance “in terms of their own values and priorities, rather than using a terminology that assumes that they are profit-maximizing individuals who struggle to compete successfully.” He argued that using the concepts of self-exploitation and subsidies from one part of someone's life to another risks naturalizing and universalizing the rationality of maximizing monetary returns and that “they do not always reveal anything of value” (Pratt 2009, 172). Marxists have noted this point as well: “There is … a great deal that goes on in society that is not directly related to the circulation of capital, and we should therefore resist the temptation to reduce everything to these simple Marxian categories” (Harvey 1999, 20). Although I agree that AFNs should be assessed on their own terms, we must also see that they exist within a broader capitalist political economy and that most engage directly in some form of commodity exchange and therefore remain subject to many of capital's logics, even if they attempt to counter or ignore them. When CSA farmers engage in self-exploitation, it is a “both/and” situation at the interface between different rationalities: one both fulfills one's (potentially noncapitalist) goals and does not receive appropriate economic return on one's activities from the exchange, as dictated by the broader political economy.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..