this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2026
108 points (100.0% liked)

news

24824 readers
695 users here now

Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:

We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.

Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:

The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.

  1. Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

  2. Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.

  3. Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.

  4. Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.

  5. Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.

  6. Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.

  7. American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.

  8. Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.

  9. AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LeeeroooyJeeenkiiins@hexbear.net 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

No, you people just don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Under your definition literally any crop grown and sold is a cash crop, but that isn't true. You're the ones offering a muddier, useless definition, defining literally any crop ever sold as a cash crop. Rice isn't a fucking cash crop. If you've ever heard it being defined as a cash crop, you're being fucking lied to. It's a staple food produced primarily to fucking feed people, and it doesn't just magically stop being that just because you produce an extra pound of it and sell that shit to someone else. The commodification and sale of a fucking crop is not what makes it a fucking cash crop!

I have literally never my fucking life heard "Cash crops" to refer to anything other than shit like tobacco, cotton, corn for biofuel, etc., you people are just straight up fucked to death wrong here.

What's really fucking ironic is lol I'm pretty sure that this exact thing, American wheat sold for imperialist purposes, is intended to force reliance on american food imports so that other countries have to have comparatively higher proportions of cash crops instead, feeding the west raw materials while increasing precarity for the developing world

You know why they're in greater precarity? Because they're GROWING CASH CROPS, and the U.S. can TURN OFF ITS EXPORTS, which matter BECAUSE THEY'RE EXPORTING STAPLE FOODS AND NOT FUCKING CASH CROPS

Stop fucking bothering me over shit you're this wrong about

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Find a single source using your definition and not mine/ours.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago

I literally have the high ground and I'm prepared to cut off your legs as you flip around trying to say "I DON'T NEED TO SOURCE IT, YOU SOURCE IT" and then I spam you with every dictionary, article, Wikipedia article. Leaving you to smoulder and moulder in this thread.

[–] LeeeroooyJeeenkiiins@hexbear.net 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No thanks i'll just block you

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Cash crops are agricultural products that are grown for the purpose of sale and profit. These crops are typically grown on a large scale, using advanced farming techniques and machinery to maximize yields and profits. Examples of cash crops include cotton, tobacco, coffee, tea, sugarcane, and cocoa.

https://anthropologyreview.org/anthropology-glossary-of-terms/cash-crops-grown-for-sale/

a crop that is grown mainly to be sold, rather than used by the people who grew it or those living in the area it is grown in

Compare: subsistence crop

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cash-crop

A cash crop, also called profit crop, is an agricultural crop which is grown to sell for profit. It is typically purchased by parties separate from a farm. The term is used to differentiate a marketed crop from a staple crop ("subsistence crop") in subsistence agriculture, which is one fed to the producer's own livestock or grown as food for the producer's family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_crop

[–] Satanic_Mills@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Try feeding your entire family, let alone an entire society on cotton, tobacco, coffee, tea, sugarcane, and cocoa.

There is an obvious difference between wheat, even if grown for sale, and crops like indigo.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Find a source using your made-up definition. If you want to make a new term for it go ahead, but do not pretend it's what cash crop means and has meant forever.

[–] Satanic_Mills@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Corn and wheat, famously so profitable the government pays no subsidies for farmers to grow them at all.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Satanic_Mills@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago

Referent to my other point - the US government subsidises it's own unprofitable wheat farmers, who dump their excess on the global market in return for cash crops grown by Kenyan farmers (encouraged by the IMF demanding elimination of domestic Kenyan subsidies), fostering dependence on Western markets.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago

Still waiting for an actual source here.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The leverage on farmers to produce surplus for cash payment is the problem, not that "non-food crops" is somehow more exploitative than food crops. In India, had they grown wheat instead of cotton they still would have starved because the taxes levied on them by the british government would have forced them to sell it off anyway.

[–] Satanic_Mills@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

not that "non-food crops" is somehow more exploitative than food crops.

Food dependency is intimately linked with sovereignty, a state that cannot feed itself except by exporting cash crops to Western states is in a materially different position to once that focuses on food sovereignty.

The IMF knows this, so should we.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

they're still food dependant no matter what they're growing

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

it's literally a cash crop to the farmer if they're making money from the us gov't subsidies. i think people here think "cash crop" is an intrinsic quality of the item and not a social relation, as per Marx et al.

[–] Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Just catching up but I wanted to chime in that I agree with you on this one. Or at least, my exposure to the term in the past matches yours.

It's certainly not useful in modern industrial agriculture where every crop is being sold for market. Wikipedia says the term is used to differentiates from a "staple crop" i.e. what a farmer grows to eat for themselves. But staple crop redirects to "staple food" all of which are grown as ~~commodities~~ cash crops so it's an inconsistent mess.

I think our schools just taught us wrong.

Thank you abracadaniel, i think ive acted belligerently enough about this that i don't deserve vindication but i do appreciate your opinion and agreement

I really wanted to post something like "chat, help, I've been trying to subsist on all my tobacco and cotton but i can't, do you think it might have anything to do with any sort of intrinsic quality of these crops, like, that I might need to trade them for cash or other necessities, like they're some sort of... cash... crop?" post but i also really don't wanna keep arguing about it