Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
A Cultural Case for Capitalism: Part 7 of 12 — What have the capitalists ever done for Wendell Berry!
A Cultural Case for Capitalism: Part 7 of 12 — What have the capitalists ever done for Wendell Berry!
Jan 1, 2026 10:17 PM

[Part 1 is here].

In Monty Python’s Life of Brian, the ring leader of a little band of first-century Jewish rebels asks, “What have the Romans ever done for us?” He’s sure the answer is absolutely nothing, but one of the rebels meekly pipes up with “The Aqueduct.” A moment later another rebel squeaks, “And the sanitation.” Then another, “The Roads.”

The ringleader grudgingly grants all of this and then tries to wrench the meeting back on track. “But apart from the sanitation, the aqueduct and the roads—” Before he can even finish the sentence, others–warming to the brainstorming challenge–begin chiming in: “Irrigation?” “Medicine?” “Education?”

The list could work just as well, and in some instances, more easily, for the British Empire. The scene also works as a metaphor for neo-agrarian essayist Wendell Berry and his relationship to capitalism and the U.S. Tobacco Trust that dominated the cigarette industry at the turn of the previous century.

Picture Berry gathering together a little knot of agrarian Distributist rebels on the back stoop of his Kentucky farm and rousing them with the purely rhetorical question, “What have the capitalists and big tobacco ever done for us?!”

The answer, I would suggest, is quite a bit.

Here’s Berry painting the picture, as he sees it, in a 2012 lecture for the National Endowment for the Humanities. The farmer in the story is Berry’s grandfather; the time, 1907:

He came home that evening, as my father later would put it, “without a dime.” After the crop had paid its transportation to market and mission on its sale, there was nothing left. Thus began my father’s lifelong advocacy, later my brother’s and my own, and now my daughter’s and my son’s, for small farmers and for land-conserving economies.

The economic hardship of my family and of many others, a century ago, was caused by a monopoly, the American Tobacco Company, which had eliminated petitors and thus was able to reduce as it pleased the prices it paid to farmers. The American Tobacco Company was the work of James B. Duke of Durham, North Carolina, and New York City, who, disregarding any other consideration, followed a capitalist logic to absolute control of his industry and, incidentally, of the economic fate of thousands of families such as my own.

Thus does Berry take plex economic story and reduce it to melodramatic caricature, with the Tobacco Trust in the role of the cartoon villain. (Keep in mind, Berry isn’t vilifying the Tobacco Trust for selling health-injuring cigarettes to people. Berry’s family was part of that industry. He’s vilifying it for following a profit-driven “capitalist logic” that supposedly brutalized Kentucky farmers.) One could write an entire book on the important things Berry’s description ignores, but we can consider a few key elements briefly.

First, entrepreneur James B. Duke was instrumental in expanding and popularizing the use of the cigarette rolling machine, invented by James Bonsack and first used in the 1880s. Thanks to Duke aggressively expanding this new technology in his pursuit of an affordable smoking product for mon man, tobacco use in the United States increased rapidly in the 1880s and 1890s, allowing for the rapid expansion of U.S. tobacco farming.

Those family farms in Kentucky and elsewhere that jumped into tobacco to take advantage of the boom did so of their own choosing, attracted by the market opportunities generated by the growing national demand for tobacco. But as with many booms, the rush into the industry soon caught up with rising demand.

Then, in the early years of the new century, the federal and state governments began clamping down on cigarette production and sales, encouraged in their efforts by cigar manufacturers threatened by the rise of inexpensive cigarettes.

So, first farmers flooded into tobacco farming to take advantage of the boom, and then the government clamped down on the cigarette industry.

What role did bination play in the tobacco supply abruptly outstripping demand and lowering the market price? Berry doesn’t appear to consider these factors. He simply blames the Tobacco Trust, ignoring these factors as well the reality that it was precisely Duke, the Tobacco Trust, and their “capitalist logic” of lowering costs to expand markets that raised the demand for tobacco crops in the first place.

Berry might have used his NEH lecture to point out plex set of factors for the poor price his grandfather got for his tobacco crop in 1907. He might even have mentioned the words “progressivism” and “cronyism,” asking his listeners to consider what role cigar makers played in lobbying Progressive era politicians to protect the cigar market from the upstart and more economical machine-rolled cigarette? But pointing up the negative roles of Progressivism, cronyism and the leviathan state in an NEH lecture funded by the leviathan federal government isn’t something you see very often.

At the time Berry’s grandfather came home empty-handed, he and other Kentucky tobacco farmers might have taken the poor price for their tobacco crop as a signal that there was an oversupply of tobacco in the U.S. market, that the tobacco boom was on hold, and that it was time to focus more of their farming efforts elsewhere.

They might also have reasonably concluded that the dip in demand had been caused by government efforts to ban cigarette sales. Perhaps some did, but the Berry family was among those who responded by blaming the Tobacco Trust and joining efforts to demand “fair” prices for their tobacco.

The result was a Kentucky tobacco farming cartel, the Dark Tobacco District Planter’s Protective Association (DTDPPA). These Kentucky “Night Riders” started by pressuring farmers outside the cartel not to sell to the Tobacco Trust, and eventually resorted to violence. Keep in mind, too, that this violent activism was in defense of the right to be paid an above-market price for a product already suspected of being bad for one’s health.

[Note: This is part of a serialized presentation of my chapter from a ing collection of essays exploring various Christian critiques of capitalism, published by the Institute for Faith, Work & Economics.]

[Part 8 is here.]

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on Mark 13:5-13   (Read Mark 13:5-13)   Our Lord Jesus, in reply to the disciples' question, does not so much satisfy their curiosity as direct their consciences. When many are deceived, we should thereby be awakened to look to ourselves. And the disciples of Christ, if it be not their own fault, may enjoy holy security...
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on John 6:28-35   (Read John 6:28-35)   Constant exercise of faith in Christ, is the most important and difficult part of the obedience required from us, as sinners seeking salvation. When by his grace we are enabled to live a life of faith in the Son of God, holy tempers follow, and acceptable services may be...
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on Daniel 6:1-5   (Read Daniel 6:1-5)   We notice to the glory of God, that though Daniel was now very old, yet he was able for business, and had continued faithful to his religion. It is for the glory of God, when those who profess religion, conduct themselves so that their most watchful enemies may find...
Verse of the Day
  1 Corinthians 15:57 In-Context   55 Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?Hosea 13:14   56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.   57 But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.   58 Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing...
Verse of the Day
  Matthew 6:5-6 In-Context   3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing,   4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.   5 And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love...
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on Jonah 2:1-9   (Read Jonah 2:1-9)   Observe when Jonah prayed. When he was in trouble, under the tokens of God's displeasure against him for sin: when we are in affliction we must pray. Being kept alive by miracle, he prayed. A sense of God's good-will to us, notwithstanding our offences, opens the lips in prayer,...
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on 2 Corinthians 3:12-18   (Read 2 Corinthians 3:12-18)   It is the duty of the ministers of the gospel to use great plainness, or clearness, of speech. The Old Testament believers had only cloudy and passing glimpses of that glorious Saviour, and unbelievers looked no further than to the outward institution. But the great precepts of...
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on Luke 6:1-5   (Read Luke 6:1-5)   Christ justifies his disciples in a work of necessity for themselves on the sabbath day, and that was plucking the ears of corn when they were hungry. But we must take heed that we mistake not this liberty for leave to commit sin. Christ will have us to know...
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on 2 Thessalonians 3:1-5   (Read 2 Thessalonians 3:1-5)   Those who are far apart still may meet together at the throne of grace; and those not able to do or receive any other kindness, may in this way do and receive real and very great kindness. Enemies to the preaching of the gospel, and persecutors of...
Verse of the Day
  Commentary on Today's Verse   Commentary on James 3:13-18   (Read James 3:13-18)   These verses show the difference between men's pretending to be wise, and their being really so. He who thinks well, or he who talks well, is not wise in the sense of the Scripture, if he does not live and act well. True wisdom may be know by the...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved