The Black Farmer's Settlement: Liquidating Racial Grievances Into "Corporate Welfare"

As I was monitoring "Obama's Rolex Martin Watch" on TVOne today clear evidence of "self chumming" for Democratic unity was shown.

Roland Martin's job is to tee up indictments against "the enemies of Black people" (in truth the enemies of progressives and Democrats) and get his panel to respond with outrage.   Only the woman in church who speaks in tongues at the appropriate time in the pastor's sermon has better quartz timing than does Deborah Mathis and her outrage at something that the (evil, racist) conservatives have done.  This should serve as further proof hat no thinking Black person should even think about voting for any Republican.

Today's Self-Chumming Was "Black Farmer's Settlement" Flavored

I won't go through the facts of the case but suffice it to say - by skipping over the factual details of the case it appears that those who oppose this (now) $1,200 million payout are straight up Klansmen who are glad that Blacks where put out of farming as the government denied their 'corporate welfare' and 'farm subsidy' payments.  Of course the panel on the show would ordinarily be opposed to both forms of government transfer payments to private commercial interests.  Of course this time those private commercial interests are Black.  This is the game changer.

The key tactic used by certain supporters is to gloss over the facts and the timeline of this saga.  Notice here with "The Advocate' how you are misled to believe that the present $1.25B is the only funds that have been considered.  (No hint that this is the second round, beyond the original agreement)

Key points to highlight:

• Any Black farmer who was farming between 1983 and 1997 and were denied for a loan or grant qualified without having to prove that RACISM was the reason. 
• This is the second round of payments.  In the first round   paid out more than $1B
• Claimants were given 180 days after the consent degree was signed to file their paperwork for the money.  After a lawsuit a judge gave one year extension to anyone who could prove a justified reason as to why they did not make the original window that was greed upon by the Black Farmers Association
• The original case with Timothy Pigford considered 2,000 farmers.  This grew to 22,505 once the money started flowing
•  With the door closed on the LEGAL settlement and about 70,000 people looking to file a claim, the Black Farmers Association returned to the POLITICAL domain as they lobbied Congress to allocate more funds and a new round of payouts beyond what they originally agreed upon
• US Rep Autur Davis admitted placing a lowball estimate of $100M in the budget authorization for 2010 as he feared that a more accurate number would have it cut out of the budget, even in the Democratic controlled congress.  (So much for this being a pure 'Civil Rights' issue).  After clearing that hurdle the real cost of $1,250 million was returned as the cost estimate

Today here is where we stand.
If you dare point out the facts of this saga, seeing it as a payout scheme rather than a heart felt attempt to provide (what did Roland Martin say today?)  "Social Justice" - then you stand against Black people's interests.

The claim is that the grants and loans sought by these Black farmers that were denied IS the reason why there are today so few Black farmers.

What Are The Rejection Rates By The Farm Services Agency For All Farmers

Background

Federal involvement in farm credit is guided by the government´s mission to assist under-served sectors of the farm economy experiencing difficulty in gaining access to borrowing funds through the regular lending channels. These borrowers include small, beginning farmers considered as high risk borrowers by commercial lenders due to their inadequate business track records and inferior net worth positions. Moreover, the federal credit program is also designed to accommodate borrowers who have been subjected to racial, ethnic or gender prejudice by other lenders.

Today, one avenue the federal government uses to provide credit to farmers is through the Farm Service Agency (FSA) operating under the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which implements direct and guaranteed loan programs as temporary sources of credit for farm businesses. The target of the agency is to accommodate high-risk farm borrowers with direct loans and eventually graduate them to the guaranteed lending program. Once this is achieved, FSA expects these borrowers to successfully satisfy the guaranteed loan provisions and seek credit from conventional agricultural lenders (FmHA-USDA, 1988).

This passage above from the University of Florida indicates that the FSA was established to be a lender of last resort to those who were high risk borrowers due to the points listed above or who have faced discrimination by traditional lenders.  In the case of Pigfort vs Glickman it is the FSA itself that is accused of racism in its last resort lending practices.

I would like to see an independent investigative agency inspect the loan/grant rejection rate of traditional banks and the government run FSA in order to establish a baseline for how these aggrieved Black farmers stand in relation to their industry-mates.  While it appears that all agree that "racism" is existence in the industry - some people's viewpoint lends to the believe that the existence of ANY racism is cause to believe that it is always the prevailing force which rendered a particular outcome.

Of course when it comes to politics and the "politics of race" careful analysis is often the first to get discarded for ideological expediency.

Shirley Sherrod And The New Communities Cooperative Of Southwest Georgia
The Wikipedia link for "Pigford and Glickman" pointed to a reference to the farming cooperative owned by Charles and Shirley Sherrod.   It seems that their discrimination lawsuit against the US Dept of Ag. netted them a cool $13 million.  The largest of them all.

I recall receiving an article from the leftwing Counter Punch web site in which a person that was formerly involved with the New Communities Cooperative told of a different version of Shirley Sherrod than the role of the victim of Andrew Brietbart that she is portrayed as.

Counter Punch: The Other Side of Shirley Sherrod By Ron Wilkins (former SNCC member)

The Victims Industrial Complex And Capitalism

In my analysis this entire episode provides the Race Industry an opportunity to create a litmus test on one's support of Black people.

With farming being an implicitly risky venture subject to the whims of the environment and the acumen of the farmer - the federal government's previous insertion of itself into the industry and its choice to allow certain racist actions created a liability for the government.

In the mind of the Racism Chasers they have successfully convinced themselves that the failure of the business operations of these Black farmers should be transferred from consideration of what "water, wind and earth hath destroyed" over to being the fault of the government and its policies.  Since it is alleged that the hep provided by this government source was dispensed in an unfair and racist manner then it is the GOVERNMENT who is liable for this failure and thus should be made to pay.

Think of the thousands of farmers in Mexico, Laos, Ghana and Zimbabwe that have no such government overlay to turn to for the application of such a liability.

• The Black farmer who was denied federal "corporate welfare" due to racism and his farm failed
• The Black farmer who was approved for federal "corporate welfare" or a bank loan and his farm failed - the bank now having foreclosed upon his land and equipment used as collateral
• The White farmer who was denied federal "corporate welfare" absent racism but because of some other material fact and his farm failed 
• The White farmer who was approved for federal "corporate welfare" ora bank loan and his farm failed - the bank now having foreclosed upon his land and equipment used as collateral

 In ALL of these scenarios the overriding issue at hand is that the farmer's #1 obligation is to PRODUCE FARM GOODS and sell them on the market profitably OR HE GOES OUT OF BUSINESS.   The debate over government intervention and the racial machinations related to is is a secondary point.   IF all of these people engaged in an enterprise that was doomed to fail (ie: attempting to  grow citrus in Milwaukee) - regardless of the federal support - this enterprise will fail.

There are two sets of capitalists in our nation:

1. The Wall Street / Military Industrial Complex that relies upon International  Imperialism and Trade 
2. The Quasi-Socialist Domestic Economic Hitmen that rely on the notions of "Social Justice" to push forth their economic freedom suppression policies

BOTH have the equal history of raiding the federal treasury for their own purposes.  BOTH are equal capitalists.

The wise stewards of the financial interests of this nation would seek to protect the store house from both of them.

The claim of RACISM does not provide to them the blank check that they hope to create with their INDICTMENT.

In the rest of the world where unfairness must simply be accepted as "it is what it is" - the race industry in America knows that with the presence of a system that now cares about what THEY THINK - they are able to convert this concern into currency.

• The White farmer who was approved for