.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;} <body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar/6573457?origin\x3dhttp://thegreatglobalistblog.blogspot.com', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

the gre atg lob ali stb log

the great globalist blog
"The problem [...] is that people were sick and hungry not because of global shortages but because of wars and dictators." Peter Pringle, Food Inc.
"For it is the soldier's disposition to offer an obstinate resistance when surrounded, to fight hard when he cannot help himself, and to obey promptly when he has fallen into danger." --Sun Tsu
If this Discourse appear too long to be read at once, it may be divided into six Parts: and, in the first, will be found various considerations touching the Sciences; in the second, the principal rules of the Method which the Author has discovered, in the third, certain of the rules of Morals which he has deduced from this Method; in the fourth, the reasonings by which he establishes the existence of God and of the Human Soul, which are the foundations of his Metaphysic; in the fifth, the order of the Physical questions which he has investigated, and, in particular, the explication of the motion of the heart and of some other difficulties pertaining to

Blogs of Note

News

Politico

Education

Career

23.2.05 [ GE Food is a Question of Resource Management ] 3 comments

3 Comments:

I'm going to have to take a biocentric stance on this and say no way to the genetically engineered crops. One could push for sustainability, taking a cozy seat right in between intrinsic value and anthropocentric traditional welfare, but like you said, the moderate is exempt from discussion. As much as sustainability makes sense, it seems impossible. Living in the good ol US of A is a prime place to witness consumerism at its worse. We're getting to be as decadent as the Romans. If only we had castrated people or implemented the regulated breeding plan I suggested...we wouldn't have to struggle so much to sustain the population and its tardo demands.
Blogger Cynthia, at 1:06 AM 


The most potent criticism I have come across so far (from people much wiser than myself) has been aligned with your view, Cynthia.

We are not dependent upon genetic engineering for sustainable, profitable agricultural output. And, the dominance of congloomerate corporations (for instance, Monsanto) in the GE market merely furthers the economic inequality gap.

That is, a total ban on GE, while not hindering our ability to consume, will also benefit smaller agriculural entities.

And, if we are to remember anything from our textbooks, we should recall that greater numbers (of smaller magnitudes) makes for good unregulated economies.

Though, we can still be decadent; we just will have to enjoy local decedence (oranges in California, wheat in Alberta, etc).

Also, your government may not have implemented castration or regulated breeding, but mine has (1960s: people deemed 'retarted' had their testicles removed by the government).

Cheers, though I still look for solid acedemic references in suport of this argument.
Blogger Mike, at 12:39 PM 


no kidding...retarded testicles removed at the hands of the Canadian government. that's friggin' awesome.

touche on the local decadence. do we really have to have EVERY type of crop. i mean c'mon. cheers to that. i hope you do find that solid academic support, i'd also like to see it.
Blogger Cynthia, at 5:15 PM 


Post a Comment

The title of this post is a lie. Support of genetically engineered crops should be a question of resource management, where the pros of effecient agriculture production are weighed against the cons of diminished biodiversity (or even a moral question with respect to humankind's role in the sculpting of life from clay). But, it is not a question of resource management; it is a question of extreme right-wing ideology (from super-environmentalism to super-corporatism). As always, the moderate is exempt from the discussion.

I have no links for this topic yet; I'm still pouring through page after freaking page of partisan propaganda--on both sides, as usual. The most frustrating component of doing research on anything of a remotely political nature is the absence of fact, or the absence of anyone even pretending to be concerned by fact.

I think I should have been a natural, rather than social, scientist.

3 comments

CC | Blogger | Code