Global Trade's Violent Roots: Ragnarök Revisited
By Chris Smaje
TL;DR: Global trade’s violent origins are often ignored, urging a return to local, self-sufficient living exemplified by the farmer-householder.
- Global trade has violent, exploitative historical roots.
- Modern economies obscure past and ongoing exploitation.
- Localization fosters self-sufficiency and resilience.
- Farmer-householder model promotes sustainable living.
- Re-evaluate societal priorities towards self-reliance.
Why it matters: Understanding the historical context of global trade reveals hidden costs and encourages more resilient local systems.
Do this next: Research local food systems and consider supporting community-supported agriculture (CSA) programs.
Recommended for: Anyone interested in the historical critique of global trade and practical steps towards local self-sufficiency.
The article explores the historical underpinnings of globalized trade, arguing that its violent origins and ongoing implications are often deliberately obscured. It suggests that a significant amount of effort has been invested in forgetting the historical realities that shaped the modern economic system. The author proposes an alternative perspective, advocating for a return to a localized, self-sufficient model of living, exemplified by the settled farmer-householder.
The core argument posits that the current global trade system, often presented as "free," is built upon a foundation of historical violence and exploitation. This violence, the article implies, is not merely a relic of the past but continues to manifest in various forms within the contemporary global economy. The author contends that by overlooking or actively forgetting these historical realities, societies are prevented from fully understanding the true costs and consequences of their current economic structures.
Instead of perpetuating this amnesia, the article encourages a re-evaluation of societal priorities. It champions the role of the local farmer-householder as a model for sustainable living and livelihood. This figure, deeply connected to the land and capable of producing their own sustenance, represents a stark contrast to the dependencies inherent in a globalized trade system. The author highlights that even historical figures like the Vikings, often associated with raiding and expansion, also included a significant number of settled farmers, suggesting that this localized approach is not a novel concept but one with historical precedent.
The emphasis on the "settled local farmer-householder" is not merely about agricultural production. It encompasses a broader philosophy of self-reliance, community integration, and a direct relationship with the environment. This model implies a reduction in reliance on distant supply chains and a greater emphasis on local resilience. By knowing how to "produce their own livelihood from the land," individuals and communities can mitigate the vulnerabilities associated with global economic fluctuations and disruptions.
The article implicitly critiques the notion of progress often associated with globalized trade, suggesting that it has come at a significant cost, both historically and in the present day. It challenges readers to reconsider what constitutes a truly prosperous and sustainable way of life. The call to embrace the role of the farmer-householder is therefore not just an economic proposition but a cultural and philosophical one, urging a shift in values towards localism, self-sufficiency, and a deeper connection to the natural world. This perspective offers a counter-narrative to the dominant globalized paradigm, advocating for a more grounded and resilient future.