Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
ment in the war took workers away from manufacturing, and this was also
true in agriculture—perhaps even more so. Therefore, the impact of the
war appeared to plunge California agriculture into a farm labor crisis, but
the problems growers faced in this period were actually rooted in the
ongoing history of labor confl ict within the state's farm industry. Although
the war appeared to temporarily dispel confl ict as the country pulled
together for the war effort, the meaning of the farm labor crisis in Califor-
nia and opinions on how to deal with it remained contested, showing a
great deal of continuity with prewar labor confl icts. These discourses, in
turn, shaped the structure of California's farm labor system in the two
decades following the end of World War II.
Through these different visions and experiences of farm labor before,
during, and after the war, I show how discourses about the rationality or
irrationality of repair strategies are deployed in times of social change, and
how actors construct the meaning of a crisis itself to emphasize the need
for certain forms and levels of repair. Throughout this chapter I emphasize
the role of the state for understanding how the farm industry maintained
a system of production despite threats to its stability. Growers received a
great deal of help from the state in their struggle to control farm labor. A
large literature on the history of farm labor in California has emphasized
growers' access to political support (through grower-friendly legislation
and court decisions), fi nancial resources (through banks and other organi-
zations with a fi nancial interest in the farm industry's profi tability), and
violence (through police intimidation).
1
Much less has been written,
however, about the state's intervention beyond legislation, the courts, and
the police, such as the role that organizations like Cooperative Extension
played in confl icts over farm labor.
2
Local yet extensive, the network of
farm advisors throughout California and the United States provided a
reserve of expertise that could be deployed when needed (Mukerji 1989).
Although farm advisors' primary charge was to develop new and improved
production practices, the war years highlight the fl exibility of Cooperative
Extension as an institution of repair. Among numerous wartime respon-
sibilities, advisors in California became, essentially, labor contractors
under the so-called Mexican National Program (later the Bracero Program),
3
which imported Mexican citizens to work in U.S. farm fi elds on a seasonal
basis. These new responsibilities made advisors' mission more clear in
some ways, less clear in others. The emphasis on increased agricultural
