News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Do you ever think about how if the Incas like 500 years ago were able to turn the Andes Mountains into an agrarian paradise with terrace farming, that it should definitely be possible to do in the humble hills of Appalachia with a bunch of unemployed miners who have excavation experience and who literally know how to drive bulldozers?
Firstly: the soil is poor. Lots of issue with soil runoff, and it's not viable to irrigate basically at all.
Secondly: they don't want to.
I think people forget how much mining paid for a while, even if the cost was the miner's lives. It's like the oil workers in the Dakotas, they like that work for the pay.
The only way you could agriculturalize that region would be having a mid to large agribusiness come in and industrialize it, which makes no sense because it's cheaper and easier everywhere else.
They're orphaned by geography. The tunnels helped but nowhere near enough.
The irony is terrace farming is in large part a strategy that is designed to literally improve the quality of soil and reduce erosion.
True, but it isn't cheap, the effort costs more than you'd save in labor.
Couple that with the nightmarish logistics (lived there, it takes 4-6 hours to get in and out of the mountains over tiny roads not meant for trucks, that's a lot of refrigeration), and the region just isn't good for much economically.
I definitely don’t want to make it sound like it would be easy or anything. But I definitely think it should be a lot easier than what the Incas did when you consider what they had available to them and that it’s basically some of the rockiest, most rugged terrain on the entire planet. And also keep in mind too that the altitudes are so high that their growing season wasn’t even very long either! Pretty much the only thing that Inca had going for them that made their life any easier was volcanic soil. In basically every respect Appalachia has a 100+ times advantage over them so again I’m just saying that I have confidence that we really should be able to do this if we put our minds to it.
As for nightmarish logistics, that’s actually kind of another reason to do this in the first place because people live there right now and it’s very expensive to get food into all of these very isolated communities. It would be a very empowering thing if a small little hollow that spends a ton of money on food because of the nightmare logistics could just grow its own legumes and grains right there (and I also just want to point out that grains and legumes don’t require refrigeration either after you dry them.)
I also want to address something you said about an agricultural business having to do this. Yes, that is true, but only if we literally do not think that we have some kind of moral responsibility to remediate the destruction of the coal industry in Appalachia. Otherwise, the way I see it: if we have a social problem, we as a society have to find a solution otherwise, it will make everything worse for everyone, even the ones directly experiencing the problem. In solving problems usually will cost us something. So the effort costing us more than the labor involved doesn’t necessarily seem like a problem to me. And in fact, when you really think about it, wouldn’t it be actually insane if it was possible to actually solve the destruction wrought by the coal industry without having to spend more than we would save?
And one last thing I would like to address other things you’ve kind of mentioned in general about like the people they’re not wanting to and stuff. You have to understand that Appalachia was literally like one of the greatest strongholds of labor politics in the history of the United States and a lot of the reason why it became like that was because of ambitious New Deal-style economic projects just like this one. and we’re literally having a conversation on an article talking about strategies for how the Democrats can appeal to voters in places like Appalachia. I just don’t really see a good reason to think that if you give basically any group of economically exhausted people something to believe in that made sense, even if it’s a long shot, why we should expect them to respond any differently this time around.
So, you have excellent points.
Here si where so much of that falls down:
This is worse in the south, but Appalachia had it too: any federal or external program is seen by the ruling elite as a cash cow that they rightfully deserve, and often they genuinely believe that by taking the money they are protecting their community from being bribed into dependence on outsiders.
That's an odd rationalization, but it's what I've seen in many rural areas.
What you need is a true grassroots movement, and that article suggested as much, I'm just skeptical because you're asking them to go against a decent chunk of what they consider heritage, as the Virginia lowlands were the rich tobacco farmers that originally mistreated the Appalachians and lead to their oppositional identity.