Many farmers have concluded that they have basic ownership rights of the grain that they produce and that the Canadian Wheat Board violates these fundamental property rights.
Other producers feel convinced that they can only be successful under single-desk selling. It satisfies their marketing wants and they claim it as their fundamental right.
They also insist that single-desk selling is only possible if all producers are under the monopoly discipline. They claim harm to the value of their crops by independent sellers.
Are these both legitimate rights? Should the majority view prevail and is a vote the proper resolution? What are the merits and implications of these opposing points of view?
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
The significant difference in the two points of view is that in the first instance the individual claims property rights and in the second case the individual claims property value rights. Simply put, it is thus the difference between protecting property and protecting the price of property.
The implications are very different. To protect property requires defence; to protect the price of property requires aggression.
Self-defence of person and property has always been well understood and accepted. Prices however, are subjective and depend upon what others are willing to pay.
Therefore protecting prices requires the initiation of some form of coercion or control against other individuals. In many instances, such as the Canadian Wheat Board, the government is the instrument of this aggression. …
Protection of its citizens and their property is a legitimate use of government force. Initiating violence against citizens to satisfy the marketing demands or property prices of others is not.
Neither does majority support make it legitimate. A vote on such issues is simply not appropriate. Thus it is not surprising that Agriculture Minister Ralph Goodale has attempted to deflect this debate away from ideology. Collectivists always resort to basing their arguments on “the common good.”
Still, we are indeed fortunate. After all, in Canada, it is only wheat! This same philosophy in countries such as Russia, China, and Germany is responsible for millions upon millions of lives sacrificed, starved and slaughtered into submission, in pursuit of “the common good.”
– John Husband,
Wawota, Sask.
