Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:08:13.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘The Troublesome Word of Crisis’: Discourse on the Agricultural Crisis of the 1930s in the Belgian Parliament

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2018

LAURA ESKENS
LAURA ESKENS*
Affiliation:
KU Leuven, Interfaculty Centre for Agrarian [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The concept of a ‘crisis’ was omnipresent in the period of economic depression in the 1930s. What is more, the agricultural crisis was part of a never previously experienced despair in Europe and the whole of the Western world. Historians have extensively researched the crisis in agriculture, however, without reflecting on the consequences of the use of the concept and the discourse related to it. In this article – inspired by refreshing historical research on parliamentary practices – I investigate the language and figures of speech used in the Belgian Parliament to frame the agricultural question in a particular way. The case of Belgium is unique because farmers’ associations were well represented in parliament, in spite of the declining importance of agriculture in the active population and national economy. Since 1840 onwards, Belgian governments had embraced free trade and pursued an economic policy with little or no trade obstructions, dictated by the interests of the export industry. The depression of the 1930s urged a re-evaluation of the relationship between the state and the economy, which extended to agriculture. The Belgian free trade tradition – already exceptionally abandoned during and immediately after the Great War to cope with food scarcity – seemed to crumble during the interwar period as farmers’ associations asked for protectionist measures from 1929 onwards. This article contributes to our understanding of this paradigm shift from free trade towards agricultural protectionism. Furthermore, it gives an insight into the complexity of the interest groups campaigning for agricultural protectionism and using specific metaphors and discourse to influence politics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Rural History , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , October 2018 , pp. 237 - 257
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. Minutes of Parliamentary meetings of the Chamber of Representatives (MPC), 4th March 1930, Brutsaert, p. 811: ‘ik weet . . . dat dit woord u ook niet bevalt. Gij hoort liever in plaats van dat onbehagelijk en weinig verkwikkelijk woord “crisis”, spreken van een moeilijk tijdperk, van zoo een soort ongeweerte dat de hemel tijdelijk verduistert en morgen zal opklaren.’

2. But contradicted by Federico, G., ‘Not guilty? Agriculture in the 1920s and the Great Depression’, Journal of Economic History, 65 (2005), 971–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Federico, G., Feeding the World: An Economic History of Agriculture, 1800–2000 (Princeton, 2005), p. 192Google Scholar.

3. For instance with regard to the food crisis of the 1840s: Van Dijck, M., De wetenschap van de wetgever: De klassieke politieke economie en het Belgische landbouwbeleid, 1830–1884 (Leuven, 2008), p. 20Google Scholar.

4. Schön, D., ‘Generative Metaphor: A Perspective on Problem-setting in Social Policy’, in Ortony, A., ed., Methaphor and Thought (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 137, 148, 150–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., Metaphors We Live By (Chicago, 2003), pp. 3–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6. Other much debated issues during this period, such as social legislation for farmers and farm labourers and land lease legislation will not be addressed in depth in this article.

7. Matheve, N., Tentakels van de macht: elite en elitenetwerken in en rond de Belgische tussenoorlogse regeringen 1918–1940 (Heule, 2017), p. 79Google Scholar.

8. Gerard, E., ‘De binnenlandse politiek’, in Van den Wijngaert, M., Buyst, E., Gerard, E., Luyten, D. and Vandeweyer, L., België, een land in crisis, 1913–1950 (Antwerp, 2006), pp. 89–96Google Scholar.

9. See <www.plenum.be>. Despite the errors in the search – the OCR isn't flawless for old, printed documents – the search engine can be used to identify some trends. I searched for the concepts ‘crise agricole’ and ‘landbouwcrisis’ (‘agricultural crisis’ in French and Dutch). Synonyms were not taken into account in this brief search.

10. Blomme, J., The Economic Development of Belgian Agriculture 1880–1980: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis (Leuven, 1993), pp. 277–82Google Scholar.

11. Bieleman, J., Geschiedenis van de landbouw in Nederland, 1500–1950: Veranderingen en verscheidenheid (Boom, 1992), p. 211Google Scholar.

12. In 1933, the Belgian negative trade balance for agricultural products fluctuated around 35 per cent. In terms of consumption, at that time the country had to import around c. 65 per cent of its needs from arable farming (for bread grain it was even 77 per cent), 13 per cent of its needs from horticulture and 4 per cent from livestock farming. Blomme, Economic Development, pp. 277–82; Puhle, H. J., ‘Lords and Peasants in the Kaiserreich’, in Möller, R. G., ed., Peasants in Modern Germany: Recent Studies in Agricultural History (Boston, 1986), p. 83Google Scholar.

13. Blomme, Economic Development, p. 260; Segers, Y. and Van Molle, L., Leven van het land: Boeren in België, 1750–2000 (Leuven, 2004), pp. 55–6Google Scholar.

14. Van Molle, L., Katholieken en landbouw, landbouwpolitiek in België 1884 tot 1914 (Leuven, 1989), pp. 245–51Google Scholar; Van Molle, L., Ieder voor allen: de Belgische Boerenbond 1890–1990 (Leuven, 1990), p. 366Google Scholar; Mommens, T. E., ‘Politics under Influence? The Case of Belgian Agriculture during the Green Pool Negotiations’, in Griffiths, R. and Girvin, B., eds, The Green Pool and the Origins of the Common Agricultural Policy (London, 1995), pp. 182–5Google Scholar.

15. Van Molle, Ieder voor allen, pp. 163, 208, 366; Mommens, ‘Politics under Influence?’, pp. 182–5.

16. Documentation and Research Center on Religion, Culture and Society (KADOC), Belgische Boerenbond, Centraal Comité voor Land- en Tuinbouwbelangen van de Boerenbond (CCLT), 994, Eerste Jaarverslag Centraal Politiek Comité van Boeren en Tuinders (CPC), 1938.

17. Between 1929 and 1939 the number of MPs in the Chamber involved in agricultural discussions varied from 27 to 30 MPs out of a total of 187 (until 1936) and 202 MPs (from 1936 onwards). Based on my own calculations. Van Molle, P., Het Belgisch Parlement. 1894–1972 (Antwerp, 1972)Google Scholar; K. Desmecht, ‘Reacties op de landbouwcrisis van 1929–1935: Geschiedenis van het Belgische landbouwprotectionisme’ (unpublished Master's thesis, Leuven, 1987), pp. 57–8.

18. Van Molle, Katholieken en landbouw, pp. 47–80.

19. Bluche, L. and Patel, K. K., ‘Der Europäer als Bauer: Das Motiv der baürlichen Familienbetriebs in Westeuropa nach 1945’, in Bluche, L., Lipphardt, V. and Patel, K. K., eds, Der Europäer – ein Konstrukt: Wisssensbestände, Diskurse, Praktiken (Göttingen, 2009), pp. 138–40Google Scholar.

20. Swinnen, J., ‘The growth of agricultural protection in Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries’, The World Economy, 32 (2009), 2524–5; Federico, Feeding the World, pp. 215–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21. Swinnen, ‘The growth’, 1501, 1511; Vanthemsche, G., ‘De economische actie van de Belgische staat tijdens de crisis van de jaren 1930’, in Van der Wee, H. and Blomme, J., eds, The Economic Development of Belgium since 1870 (Cheltenham, 1997), pp. 340–1Google Scholar.

22. Swinnen, ‘The growth’, 1501, 1511; Vanthemsche, ‘De economische actie’, pp. 340–1.

23. Federico, G., ‘Natura non Fecit Saltus: the 1930s as the Discontinuity in the History of European Agriculture’, in Brassley, P., Van Molle, L. and Segers, Y., eds, War, Food and Agriculture (New York, 2012), p. 27Google Scholar; Swinnen, ‘The growth’, 1513. For the figures of Liepmann, see Tracy, M., Agriculture in Western Europe (New York, 1964), p. 121Google Scholar.

24. Van Dijck, De wetenschap, pp. 397, 399–403; Van Molle, Katholieken en landbouw, pp. 352–3.

25. Swinnen, ‘The growth’, 1513.

26. Van Molle, Ieder voor allen, p. 233.

27. Trentmann, F., Free Trade Nation: Commerce, Consumption, and Civil Society in Modern Britain (Oxford, 2008), pp. 2–7Google Scholar; De Rooy, P., A Tiny Spot on the Earth: the Political Culture of the Netherlands in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (Amsterdam, 2015), pp. 197–9Google Scholar; Van Dijck, De wetenschap, pp. 401–02.

28. Ribi Forclaz, A., ‘A new target for international social reform: the International Labour Organization and working and living conditions in the inter-war years’, Contemporary European History, 20 (2011), 321–3Google Scholar.

29. See, for example, te Velde, H., Sprekende politiek: Redenaars en hun publiek in de parlementaire gouden eeuw (Amsterdam, 2015)Google Scholar; Beyen, M. and Te Velde, H., ‘Passion and Reason: Modern Parliaments in the Low Countries’, in Ihalainen, P., Ilie, C. and Palonen, K., eds, Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparitive History of a European Concept (New York, 2016), pp. 81–96Google Scholar; Josephine Hoegaerts launched a new research project on the sound of parliamentary speech; see Vocal Articulations of Parliamentary Identity and Empire (ERC starting grant), 1918–2023.

30. Ilie, C., ‘Identity Co-construction in Parliamentary Discourse Practices’, in Ilie, C., ed., European Parliaments under Scrutiny: Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture (Amsterdam, 2010), pp. 60–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31. Beyen and Te Velde, ‘Passion and Reason’, pp. 84–5.

32. Ibid., pp. 81–96; Beyen, M., ‘Linguistic Syncretism as a Marker of Ethnic Purity? Jeroom Leuridan on Language Developments among Flemish Soldiers during the First World War’, in Walker, J., ed., Languages and the First World War: Communicating in a Transnational War (London, 2016), pp. 226–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lauwers, K., ‘“Vous n’êtes pas un collègue flamand?”: Identiteitsvorming tijdens de Belgische Kamerdebatten over “talen in bestuurszaken” in 1932’, Belgisch Tijdschrift voor Nieuwste Geschiedenis (BTNG), 1 (2014), 10–43Google Scholar; Deferme, J., ‘Van burgerlijke afstandelijkheid naar volkse betrokkenheid: De politieke cultuur van enkele socialistische mijnwerkers in het Belgische parlement, 1894–1914’, Brood en Rozen, 9 (2004), 11–29Google Scholar.

33. Mazower, M., Dark Continent: Europe's Twentieth Century (London, 1999), pp. 106–17Google Scholar.

34. Ritter, H., The Dictionary of Concepts in History: Reference Sources for the Social Sciences and Humanities (New York, 1986), p. 82Google Scholar.

35. Beyen, M., ‘Een representatiecrisis: Politieke en culturele breuklijnen in Vlaanderen tijdens de “lange jaren dertig”’, in Lensen, J., Stynen, L. and T'Sjoen, Y., eds, De stekelige jaren: Literatuur en politiek in Vlaanderen, 1929–1944 (Leuven, 2014), p. 14Google Scholar.

36. Starn, R., ‘Historians and crisis’, Past and Present, 52 (1971), 11–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37. Gerard, E., De schaduw van het Interbellum: België van euforie tot crisis 1918–1939 (Tielt, 2017), pp. 12Google Scholar, 166–89, 197–200.

38. Blomme, Economic Development, pp. 272–5.

39. Ritter, The Dictionary, p. 79.

40. Van Dale, Groot Woordenboek der Nederlandsche taal, 6th edn (Leiden, 1924), reference ‘crisis’; Larousse classique illustré (Paris, 1925), reference ‘crise’.

41. MPC, 21st January 1930, Chalmet, p. 305; Housiaux, pp. 1107–08.

42. Van Dale, reference ‘crisis’; Larousse, reference ‘crise’.

43. Starn, ‘Historians and crisis’, 10–11.

44. Federico, ‘Natura’, pp. 21–2; Federico, Feeding the World, p. 194; Clavin, P., The Great Depression in Europe, 1929–1939 (New York, 2000), p. 80Google Scholar.

45. Blomme, Economic Development, pp. 209–10.

46. Report of the Agricultural Commission of the Senate (ACS), Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1928, 10th January 1928, p. 3.

47. Report of the Agricultural Commission of the Chamber of Representatives (ACC), Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1928, 29th March 1928, p. 5; Blomme, Economic Development, p. 209.

48. MPC, 4th March 1930, p. 815.

49. MPC, 19th December 1928, Wauters, p. 337.

50. Landbouw, Algemeene telling van 31 december 1929: Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken (Brussels, 1937), pp. 14–15, 74–5, 104–05.

51. In March 1929 four MPs of the conservative wing of the Catholic Party (some linked to the UPA), one MP of the Catholic Party of the Belgian Boerenbond, three Socialists, one Liberal and one MP of the Front Party addressed the sugar beet question. They all originated from a sugar beet region.

52. Van Molle, Ieder voor allen, p. 210.

53. MPC, 20th March 1929, Merget, p. 1173: ‘Mais, si c'est une faute de pratiquer une politique d'autruche, de fermer les yeux à la lumière, c'en est une autre d'exagérer l’étendue du mal. Envisagée dans son ensemble, l'agriculture enregistre des résultats satisfaisants.’

54. MPC, 20th March 1929, Beckers, p. 1185.

55. Report of the ACS, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1930, 15th January 1930, Mullie, p. 2: ‘Voor tal van personen in de meest verschillende middens, leek de landbouw tot deze laatste tijden bijzonder voorspoedig. Deze voorspoed was meer schijn dan werkelijkheid. . . . thans is deze illusie niet meer mogelijk. De Belgische landbouw, in zijn geheel beschouwd, is beslist en zonder twijfel in het crisistijdperk getreden.’

56. MPC, 21st March 1930, Housiaux, pp. 1107–08.

57. MPC, 27th March 1930, Chalmet, pp. 1166–7.

58. Report of the ACS, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1930, 15th January 1930, p. 2.

59. MPC, 21st January 1930, Maenhaut, Masson, p. 300; Chatriot, A. and Lynch, E., ‘Introduction’, in Chatriot, A., Leblanc, E., Lynch, E., eds, Organiser les marchés agricoles: Le temps des fondateurs (Paris, 2012), p. 22Google Scholar; Tracy, Agriculture, p. 177.

60. Blomme, Economic Development, pp. 209–15, 282.

61. MPC, 10th April 1930, Merget, pp. 1393–4.

62. MPC, 10th April 1930, Merget, p. 1394: ‘ . . . pour répondre à l'attaque qui nous est faite artificiellement par nos voisins.’

63. MPC, 21st January 1930, Baels, pp. 300–01.

64. De Rooy, P., Ons stipje op de wereldkaart: de politieke cultuur van Nederland in de negentiende en twintigste eeuw (Amsterdam, 2014), p. 209Google Scholar.

65. MPC, 21st January 1930, Masson, p. 302.

66. MPC, 21st January 1930, de Liedekerke, p. 305.

67. De Rooy, Ons stipje, p. 209.

68. MPC, 21st January 1930, pp. 300–06; MPC, 2nd April 1930, Van den Eynde, pp. 1239–40; MPC, 21st March 1930, de Kerchove d'Exaerde, p. 1106.

69. MPC, 10th March 1931, Desmedt, p. 943; MPC, 3rd July 1931, de Kerchove d'Exaerde, p. 2046.

70. Ibid.

71. Report of the ACS, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1932, 11th February 1932, pp. 4–5; Report of the ACS, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1933, 15th March 1933, p. 7.

72. MPC, 2nd December 1931, Van Dievoet, p. 180: ‘Le remède à la crise n'est pas entre les mains d'un gouvernement.’

73. Van Kalken, F. and Bartier, J., eds, Paul Hymans: Memoires (Brussels, 1958), pp. 608–09Google Scholar, 616, 646–9.

74. MPC, 21st January 1930, de Liedekerke, p. 305; MPC, 2nd April 1930, Van den Eynde, pp. 1239–40.

75. Report of the ACC, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1930, 29th March 1928, Van den Eynde, p. 17.

76. MPC, 26th November 1931, Van den Eynde, p. 124.

77. MPC, 21st March 1930, Sandront, pp. 1108–12.

78. Royal Decree of 20th January 1930, Licences d'importation: froment et farine; MPC, 21st January 1930, Baels, p. 300.

79. MPC, 21st January 1930, Baels, p. 300: ‘Nous devons nous armer à notre tour, car nous avons des armes à notre disposition.’

80. Law of 20th June 1930: Import, Export and Transit of Goods: ‘Lorsque dans des circonstances extraordinaires et anormales, les intérêts vitaux du pays sont en péril . . . . en ce qui concerne les marchandises qui, par suite de mesures prises à l’étranger par les pouvoirs publics, bénéficient, à l'exportation, d'avantages tels que l'action normale de la concurrence sur le marché belge s'en trouve essentiellement vicée.’

81. Ibid.: ‘Notre agriculture ne songe pas à élever des barrières douanières. Mais elle proteste contre la concurrence anormale, factice, artificielle.’

82. MPC, 21st January 1930, Baels, p. 300.

83. Report of the ACC, Bill on the adjustment of the table of the Law of 8th May 1924 concerning import duties, 18th December 1929. With much criticism of Socialist MPs: MPC, 10th April 1930, Colleaux, Periquet, Mathieu, Bologne, pp. 1392–3, 1394–5.

84. Among the abstainers, there were several senators of the Christian Labour Movement. Also an independent senator – not linked to any party – but representing the UPA abstained. Minutes of Parliamentary Meetings of the Senate, 16th April 1930, Tschjoffen, p. 913.

85. Law of 12th March 1931: Import Duties on Oats, Oatmeal and Oat Groats.

86. Law of 18th March 1932: Adjustment of Custom Duties, Excise Duties and Consumer Duties.

87. MPC, 2nd December 1931, Mathieu, p. 183: ‘M. Van Dievoet nous a convaincu de la réalité de la crise. Mais il a tenté de faire croire que cette crise résultait de la furie protectionniste des autres pays. A la vérité, ce n'est qu'une nouvelle maladie; le remède proposé ignore l’état général du malade.’

88. MPC, 2nd December 1931, Mathieu, p. 183.

89. Bill of 3rd March 1932, Revision of the Civil Code: Tenancy and the Creation of Tenant Commissions, introduced by Chalmet; Bill of 18th March 1932, Revision of Leases, introduced by Mathieu, Brunet, Chalmet, de Rasquinet, Gelders, Doms.

90. Bill of 2nd June 1932: Temporary Arrangement of the Troubles in Tenancy because of Abnormal Price Reductions, introduced by de Liedekerke; Bill of 5th July 1932: Temporary Reduction of Some Leases, introduced by Van Dievoet.

91. MPC, 3rd December 1931, de Kerchove d'Exaerde, p. 208.

92. MPC, 15th March 1938, Pierlot, p. 1031.

93. MPC, 15th February 1934, Van den Eynde, p. 1031. ‘Tegenover ons staan ook menschen die meenen dat de crisis, dat de moeilijkheden blijven voorduren ten gevolge van de maatregelen die getroffen werden ten voordeele van den landbouw.’

94. MPC, 20th February 1935, Blavier, p. 475.

95. MPC, 15th February 1934, Van den Eynde, p. 1033, De Vleeschauwer, p. 1044.

96. MPC, 20th February 1935, Maes, p. 504.

97. MPC, 20th February 1935, Van den Eynde, p. 509, De Vleeschauwer, p. 511, De Vleeschauwer, Maes, Van den Eynde en Blavier, p. 512.

98. MPC, 20th March 1938, de Kerchove d'Exaerde, p. 1214. ‘Er heerscht een groote mistevredenheid, die als een smeulend vuurtje voortloopt, en tot een uitbarsting kan komen.’

99. T. E. Mommens, ‘Politieke, institutionele en economische componenten in de ontwikkeling van de Belgische zuivelsector tijdens het Interbellum’ (unpublished Master's thesis, Leuven, 1985), pp. 93–122.

100. Van Molle, Ieder voor allen, p. 271.

101. Blomme, Economic Development, pp. 269–70.

102. Kwanten, G., August-Edmond de Schryver, 1898–1991: politieke biografie van een gentleman-staatsman (Leuven, 2001), p. 152Google Scholar; Vanthemsche, ‘De economische actie’, pp. 344–5;Minutes of the Council of Ministers, 12th April 1935, De Schryver, p. 386.

103. Van Molle, Ieder voor allen, p. 239.

104. MPC, 16th July 1936, De Backer, p. 328.

105. MPC, 2nd June 1937, Pierlot, p. 1629.

106. Report of the ACC, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1937, 7th November 1936, Van den Eynde, p. 1.

107. Ibid.

108. Report of the ACC, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1934, 1st February 1934, Merget, p. 12.

109. Report of the ACS, Budget of the Ministry of Agriculture of 1934, 1st January 1934, p. 1.

110. MPC, 12th April 1935, Van den Eynde, p. 980, Sandront, p. 994; MPC, 29th March 1938, Lefebvre, p. 1884.

111. From July 1932 to January 1935 (with an interruption in the course of 1934), there was namely one Department for Agriculture and for the ‘Middle Class’ of self-employed craftsmen and retailers. From May 1938 to January 1939 there was a combined Ministry of Economics, Middle Class and Agriculture. See Bourgeois, P., Devolder, C., Devolder, C. and Guinand, M., Het Ministerie van Landbouw (1884–1990), vol. 1: Organisatiestructuur van de centrale administratie en adviesorganen (Brussels, 1994), pp. 89Google Scholar, 97; MPC, 12th April 1935, Leuridan, p. 992.

112. De Rooy, Ons stipje, p. 210; K. K. Patel, ‘The paradox of planning: German agricultural policy in a European perspective, 1920s to 1970s’, Past & Present, 212 (2011), pp. 241, 247; A. Chatriot, la politique du blé: crises et regulation d'un marché dans la France de l'entre-deux-guerres (Paris, 2016).

113. Bluche and Patel, ‘Der Europäer’, pp. 140–1.