This review examines three recent books that address the relationship between neoliberalism and agribusiness, on the one hand, and the demise of smallholder farming, traditional diets and the rise of diet‐related chronic illness, on the other. The first, by Timothy Wise, adopts what may be characterized as an ‘agrarian populist’ stance, constructing a universal binary between trans‐nationalizing agribusiness and a unified family farm sector. Protagonists from the latter are seen to embody the future, using agroecology to feed the world sustainably in a time of climate crisis. This is not a consistently propeasant stance, however; Wise seems rather to advocate a ‘farmer road’ to national capitalist development. The other two books, by Alyshia Galvez and Gerardo Otero, cover quite similar ground to one another, looking explicitly at the rise of neoliberalism, the decline of traditional farming and diets and the rise of processed food‐related diseases. Unlike ‘agrarian populists’, both authors privilege the state and ‘class struggle’ (sensu lato) in analysing the dynamics of neoliberalism, free trade agreements and food policies. Normatively, both see the state as pivotal in generating policies centred around smaller scale farming and the production of nutritious food for all. For Otero, like Wise, these policies seem to be tied to a form of national developmentalism as an escape route from neoliberalism. For Galvez, the future is less clear‐cut—although by inclination ‘propeasant’, she does not exclude elements of national developmentalism in envisioning a postneoliberal world.

中文翻译：

---

从新自由主义到民族发展主义？关于粮食和农业的新neolberal未来的有争议的农业假想

这篇评论研究了三本新书，它们一方面探讨了新自由主义与农业综合企业之间的关系，另一方面探讨了小农耕种的消亡，传统饮食以及与饮食相关的慢性病的上升。第一个是蒂莫西·怀斯（Timothy Wise）采取的“农业民粹主义”立场，在跨国农业综合企业和统一家庭农业部门之间建立了一个普遍的二元体系。后者的主人公被视为体现未来的未来，在气候危机时期，利用农业生态学可持续地养活世界。但是，这不是始终一致的立场。智者似乎宁愿提倡通往民族资本主义发展的“农民之路”。另外两本书分别由Alyshia Galvez和Gerardo Otero撰写，涵盖了彼此相似的地方，明确地看新自由主义的兴起，传统农业和饮食的衰落以及与加工食品有关的疾病的兴起。与“农业民粹主义者”不同，两位作者都对国家和“阶级斗争”给予特权（sensu lato）来分析新自由主义，自由贸易协定和粮食政策的动态。从规范上讲，双方都认为国家在制定以小规模农业和全民营养食品为中心的政策方面至关重要。对于奥特罗来说，像怀斯一样，这些政策似乎与一种民族发展主义息息相关，是逃避新自由主义的途径。对于加尔维斯而言，未来的路途不那么清晰-尽管倾向于“农民”，但她在设想后新世界时并未排除民族发展主义的因素。