At least here in Germany, the farmers, who are typically rather well off, and are subsidized with 30-70% of their total income, are protesting that there are attempts to roll back subsidies and reduce other privileges - like exemption of tax on vehicles, and on fossil fuels.
The tall tale of “unattainable environmental standards” is told to cover up the truth that farming is responsible for a significant contribution to global warming, but farmers do not want to be affected by measures to cut emissions, they simply do not want to do their fair share.
These “protests” are being supported and often organized by far-right activists. One example is Anthony Lee (AfD), a vocal denier of climate change who has been agitating against environmental regulation for farmers for years, who regularly boasts that his Grandfather was part of the Waffen-SS, and who is telling farmers the government wants to take away their land and build housing for refugees there
We’ve had a lot of news coverage about that shit for months now here, I’m curious why that particular and reductive framing shows up here now. The Guardian has a way more nuanced article about the topic.
Especially fucked up in this context is that these “protesters” are not showing up in large numbers, but they are bringing their machines, making the protest look much more impressive than it actually is. And they are regularly breaking the law, but not much is done by authorities. The irony should not be lost that farmers themselves were very vocal about hitting the Last Generation with the full force of the law for doing the very same things: blocking roads (just for a more noble cause, farmers are in there for their money). But opposed to the protests of the Last Generation, farmers blocking roads has already caused several accidents here in Germany.
It’s a pity he doesn’t say which regulation he’s taking about, so that we can easily check if this is actually the case.
Farmers are much like everyone else: It is not a given that each farmer with a vocal opinion has necessarily read - and understood - all regulations that affect them. My expectation of a journalist interviewing a farmer is that they actually get some context.
Framing this as a conflict between government and nature with innocent farmers caught in the middle is cute. However the narrative that about an abundance of bureaucracy where things used to be so simple, as well as the narrative about EU imposing regulation are well known populist and nationalist tropes. And farmers are not innocent bystanders, most of them did fuck all to preserve the nature they are claim to be so dependent on, if there wasn’t a direct financial incentive (through subsidies) for it.
Now if farmers were protesting that subsidies are distributed equally to farms of all sizes, and this puts undue pressure on the small farms, or that it is easier for large farms to negotiate fair prices for their products or adhere to regulation, we might even start a real dialog here. But that is not what this is about. It’s about keeping subsidies and privileges, and doing nothing in return, especially not their fair share to mitigate the effects of climate change.
