Do we agree that we dislike the Monsanto type farming systems?

95 posts / 0 new

I happened to check out Prison Planet and found this article and comments http://www.prisonplanet.com/5-million-farmers-sue-monsanto-for-7-7-billion.html The comments I found to be quite similar to what I'd find on a liberal site. The typical anti Monsanto talking points as well as support for small farms, organic, farmers markets, seed freedom, etc. Is this something conservatives and liberals actually agree on or am I missing something.

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm

Comments

Today on RSN: Monsanto Loses $2 Billion Judgment to Brazilian Farmers

April this year, a judge in the southern Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul, ruled in favor of the farmers and ordered Monsanto to return royalties paid since 2004 or a minimum of $2 billion. The ruling said that the business practices of seed multinational Monsanto violate the rules of the Brazilian Cultivars Act (No. 9.456/97).

Monsanto has appealed against the order and a federal court ruling on the case is now expected by 2014.

Karolina's picture
Karolina
Joined:
Nov. 3, 2011 7:45 pm

Monsanto is one of the most dangerous corporation in the world.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/natural-home-living/is-monsanto-the-worlds-most-evil-corporation.aspx

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am

The fight against Monsanto is raging all over the world. As an example, Poland and Franch have just banned Monsanto's MON810 GMO corn that produces its own built-in Bt insecticide in every kernel. Do you want to eat or drink insecticide in your food? Demand labeling for GMO content!

Bt built-in insecticides are being linked to the decline of the honey bees. You may not know it, but if there are NO MORE honey bees the food we eat will not get pollinated and will cease to exist and the world will starve.

Else where in Eurpore - Belgium, Great Britian, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Ireland and Slovakia have successfully blocked an effort by the Danish EU presidency to allow expanded cultivation of GM crops. However, in America Monsanto has a strangle hold on farmers. Over 95% of corn and soybean grown in the United States are GMO crops.

Monsanto is polluting our ground water with it's herbicide glyphosate (Roundup). Glyphosate is showing up in urine samples of urban residential dwellers. Glyphosate residue last 25+ years in the soil. This chemical in particular is leading to intestinal problems in children and adults, it is killing off natural stomach flora.

Monsanto like all the other corporations are harvesting our natural resources and killing our planet.

Stop eating GMO food products; demand food labeling for GMO content; and stop buying Monsanto's products.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

Jan, " However, in America Monsanto has a strangle hold on farmers. Over 95% of corn and soybean grown in the United States are GMO crops."

That's because Monsanto has a stranglehold on government through the FDA. More corporate/government collusion at taxpayer expense AND lives!!!

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am
Quote camaroman:

Jan, " However, in America Monsanto has a strangle hold on farmers. Over 95% of corn and soybean grown in the United States are GMO crops."

That's because Monsanto has a stranglehold on government through the FDA. More corporate/government collusion at taxpayer expense AND lives!!!

Couldn't agree more. Monsanto is owned by big pharma (I'll look that up if you want) who is behind most of the corruption we are now seeing.

Monsanto and big pharma..... another case of the corporate takeover of our government..... Fascism in action.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

No need, I have researched and read and watched documentories, on Link TV, about Monsanto. They and the FDA and big pharma have a vitual revolving door between officers of the corporations and department heads in the FDA. It is disgusting.

Another evil collusion Monsanto is pulling of is their BGH (bovine growth harmone that 90aa% of all dairy milk contains with no long term studies on the affects on young children. And they are suing a group of dairymen that have labeled their milk as BGH free, because there is no rule or law that they have to say it is IN milk.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am
Quote camaroman:

No need, I have researched and read and watched documentories, on Link TV, about Monsanto. They and the FDA and big pharma have a vitual revolving door between officers of the corporations and department heads in the FDA. It is disgusting.

Another evil collusion Monsanto is pulling of is their BGH (bovine growth harmone that 90aa% of all dairy milk contains with no long term studies on the affects on young children. And they are suing a group of dairymen that have labeled their milk as BGH free, because there is no rule or law that they have to say it is IN milk.

Your best defense about the milk is to buy ORGANIC. However with the introduction of GM alfalfa, that may not last.

The truth is there have been NO LONG TERM STUDIES done on ANY GMO seed. Monsanto has made the US the big experiment with GMO. And it is interesting that the rise in obesity began just a short time after the introduction of GMO foods.

However, the biggest problem is the use of glyphosate (Roundup) and the new information that is coming out by Dr. Don Huber about the residual effects of this chemical. You may remember that Dr. Huber wrote a letter to Secretary Vilsak about a new pathogen that he and another doctor are researching. Their studies are showing that this pathogen is cause sponsaneous abortions in livestock and possibly in humans, as well as, other problems. Very worrying.

Not to get off on such a negative note...... remember to Stop eating GMO food products; demand food labeling for GMO content; and stop buying Monsanto's products

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

And to think, their GMO corn and soybeans are roundup resistant!!! :-O

1997: Monsanto spins off its industrial chemical and fiber divisions into Solutia Inc. This transfers the financial liability related to the production and contamination with PCBs at the Illinois and Alabama plants. This is why corporations should not have the same legal protections a a person. A person does not enjoy limitied liability nor have the ability to simply change it's name and shift financial resposiblities for wrongdoing to a shell company with no assets to go after. It is disgusting.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am

EdBourgeois - I have been afraid to ask the question you asked. It's been on my mind for a long, long time! Because I'm afraid that indeed... many people here do in fact want the Federal Government to be in charge of the ENTIRE food production process.

I am SO glad that someone else asked this question.

I truly believe that if "I" had been the one to ask it... the HATRED and ANGER would've reared it's ugly head. Look up "Plato's Cave" as my example and reason for feeling the way that I do.

I am so far, pleasantly surprised that the folks here do want independent farming.

I want independent farming.

So, if people want independent farming... maybe they'd be open for more independent ideals.

Or am I asking too much now?

Fletcher Christian's picture
Fletcher Christian
Joined:
Feb. 15, 2012 12:49 pm

I think it is a question of what does humanity choose ,to a highly evolved being putting chemicals into the ground which are then taken up by the plants would be akin to suicide ,not a wise choice if you view the body as a magnificent creation and is made to last a lot longer than we currently experience.

So long- term loss is an out come of short -term profit ,but what profit is there when the quality of the lives of the very people who own or work for the corporation are being irrevocably damaged.

As we are part of nature doing nothing to harm the planet would i assume be the logical answer but what do i know i,am only a CHILD but a child of the universe.

namaste

humanitys team's picture
humanitys team
Joined:
Dec. 24, 2010 4:53 am

FC. What do you think about the Land Grant system and Extension? That was designed to work at the state/local level with sharing between states with similar farming issues? I do think USDA in Washington is bloated as well as easily corrupted.

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm

Did you know that the Secretary of Ag Vilsak once worked for Monsanto?

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

That's because corporations have usurped personhood rights for themselves, but possess no moral or ethical standards only the short term for profit motive. When you combine that with their ability to collude with government, they can do virtually as they please, even if it is harmful to the environment and humans. Then turn around and lie, and because of corporations limited liability and their ability to spin off harmful and damaging products to a different corporation, formed out of thin air, avoid any liabilities.

There is only one way to reclaim democracy and make our government one of, by and for the people. We must make support of a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood a campaign issue in 2012 and beyond.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am
Quote camaroman:

That's because corporations have usurped personhood rights for themselves, but possess no moral or ethical standards only the short term for profit motive. When you combine that with their ability to collude with government, they can do virtually as they please, even if it is harmful to the environment and humans. Then turn around and lie, and because of corporations limited liability and their ability to spin off harmful and damaging products to a different corporation, formed out of thin air, avoid any liabilities.

There is only one way to reclaim democracy and make our government one of, by and for the people. We must make support of a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood a campaign issue in 2012 and beyond.

Well stated!

I would add this..... unless we change the corporate structure they will find ways to circumvent the regulations and rules put into place. It took them 40 years to get around FDR's rules, next time it will be much quicker.

Change the corporate structure so that 8-12 people (executives and boards) don't have the say over thousands of people's lives. Like in Germany, at the very least, elected workers need to be on the boards. In a better situation workers, who have a larger investment in their communities, would direct how things are run.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

Why should the interests of the few superceed that of the many ,when does humanity begin to take responsibility for the highest good of all and use its collective Will to change course .

No one seems to have the WIll .And thus it will always be,so long as no one sees another,s plight as his own.The entire planet faces a crisis of consciousness ,we must decide whether we simply care for each other.

We love members of our own family but we do not consider ourself part of the human family ,and so the problems of the human family are not our own.

The solutions to humanity,s continuing problems are oneness,we must decide that we are all one and go from there ,apply this message to our daily lives in a practical matter and then humanity will begin to take off.

We can proceed from oneness in everything that we do building a new society of humans .

In our governance

In our economics

In our spirituality

In our ecology

In the education of our offspring,in everything that we put in place in our society.

This is not a new teaching but it is the only solution that would work to create a world we all say we wish to live in.

Life will not work if we attempt to co-create it apart the insistent belief that we are separate is tearing at the very fabric of life itself,we are life experiencing life but we cannot-experience it abundantly ,joyously,fruitfully,or harmoniously if we will not recognise and accept what we are.This is clearly observable all around us .

We are all one with each other and with the source and we are forever united.

Namaste

humanitys team's picture
humanitys team
Joined:
Dec. 24, 2010 4:53 am

Another very dangerous and costly to the taxpayers corporation is Archer Daniel Midland.

"The Archer Daniels Midland Corporation (ADM) has been the most prominent recipient of corporate welfare in recent U.S. history. ADM and its chairman Dwayne Andreas have lavishly fertilized both political parties with millions of dollars in handouts and in return have reaped billion-dollar windfalls from taxpayers and consumers. Thanks to federal protection of the domestic sugar industry, ethanol subsidies, subsidized grain exports, and various other programs, ADM has cost the American economy billions of dollars since 1980 and has indirectly cost Americans tens of billions of dollars in higher prices and higher taxes over that same period. At least 43 percent of ADM's annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM's corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10, and every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs taxpayers $30."

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html

This is from the article and for all you liberal/progressives that rail against the evils of the "free market", think again. The is no such thing as a free market when the corproate/ government collusion can pull shit like this off on the American taxpayer!!!

"Andreas recently told a reporter for Mother Jones, "There isn't one grain of anything in the world that is sold in a free market. Not one! The only place you see a free market is in the speeches of politicians. People who are not in the Midwest do not understand that this is a socialist country."(2) Andreas's comment about "no free markets" is like the old joke about the son who murdered his parents and then asked for the court's mercy because he was an orphan. ADM champions political control over markets and then invokes that control as an excuse for its continued political manipulation. Andreas has exerted his influence in Washington to ensure that the U.S. form of "socialism" resembles 1930s' Italian corporate statism: the government plunders the citizenry for the benefit of politically connected corporations."

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am

carmaro..... You are right about the big agri business making so much money.

Most folks don't realize that the average farmer only makes $50 profit per acre of corn or soybeans..... that's right $50 per acre, and that's in a good year. With record corn and soybean prices this seems to fly in the face of logic, but that number is correct. Take that number and for a farmer to make $50,000 he has to farm 1,000 acres (I know you did the math in your head!)

Whenever the price of corn or soybeans increases (I'm using these crops as the example because the US exports millions of metric tons of both soy beans and corn each year) the cost of their inputs (fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, equipment, etc.) as well as crop insurance increases. A Combine necessary to harvest corn, soybeans, or wheat cost in excess of $100,000 and that's for last year's model.

Farming is a big mixed bag. Farmers do need substidies because farming is such a big gamble. The first year we lived here in Iowa a huge hail storm came through and literally over 250,000 acres of corn were distroyed within 20 minutes. If farmers did not carry crop insurance and get some government help, they would have been wiped out for good. Farmers run on such a small margin that each year's crop is important to continue farming. We need farmers because they produce our food, and we as a country need to make sure that farmers can stay in business. However, the big agri businesses are sucking money out of the industry right and left making America's farmers not more than sharecroppers.

Another problem that has cropped (pardon the pun!) is the rampet Wall Street speculation in crop futures. This speculation has driven up the price of corn and soybeans to record highs. Good for Wall Street bad for consumers and developing countries who now cannot afford to feed their people. You as a consumer have been impacted by higher beef, pork, chicken and dairy prices. Corn prices will probably fall this year (average corn in the 1990's was $1.40 a bushel, today it is over $6 a bushel), but soybeans will be at an all time high of $14+ a bushel. The rampet speculation needs to reined in to stablize food prices.

America wants cheap food. That's one big reason why farm prices are subsidized. If prices were allowed to float free you wouldn't be able to afford to eat at such cheap prices and large corporate farming would capture the industry driving out family farms thus dominating the market and driving up prices even more. Another corporate monoply would be born.

Okay I'll get off the farm soapbox for now. Hope you've gotten some interesting information about the farmers who bring you the food you eat.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

Do you know what the UN's Agenda 21 is? Talk abouit big brother encroachment!!! We need to flood that web site with negative comments about this.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/agenda-21-update-family-farms-are-under-attack/

I wonder whatever happened on this?

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am
Quote camaroman:

Do you know what the UN's Agenda 21 is? Talk abouit big brother encroachment!!! We need to flood that web site with negative comments about this.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/agenda-21-update-family-farms-are-under-attack/

I wonder whatever happened on this?

Well, you tweaked my courosity about Agenda 21 and I pulled up the UN site about it and began to read. It appears to be (only ready 6 or 7 pages) to be a plan for developing and underdeveloped countries to cope with climate change and future economic development. I did click on the Blaze story and see maybe why you're concerned.

What are your concerns about this development plan?

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

I am not a fan of the US hating UN. I think we should withdraw from the UN, quit funding them billions, and kick them out of this country. Agenda 21 is about controlling the worlds resources and development, even in the US.

http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/index.html

Their site, IMO, is nothing but propaganda.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am

The reasons the UN votes against us when and where it can is that we run those corporations you find dangerous. We run interference, that is. We help them cheat, steal, cover for their lies and extract fraudulent gains from victims around the world. We collude with powers inside those countries to screw others. They have to shuck and jive, smile and be polite at our formal occasions, but when they are free to do what they really feel like doing, don't expect more of that "yassa Massa" crap.

It is not surprising that the UN has been infected by the Industrial Food Globalist forces. That it can resist or counter them is what we can hope for while we deal with our own national responsibilities. It is still possible for the UN to be a vehicle for appropriate and locally owned and designed development. We do have to get over the idea that uniting the world in a web of united infrastructure comes with a control mechanism. An interactive and mutualist globalism would not pit macro against micro or see leveraged competition as the mechanism for comparative advantage and trade.

Contrary to rigel's amazing/amusing Credo on Capitalism posted elsewhere, capitalism has been particularly bad at feeding the world. Speculation on food drives up prices for those at the bottom who cannot afford basics like bread. Fears of bankruptcy force farmers to destroy crops while people starve. Even when nothing goes wrong, the commodification of food works against a healthy and affordable diet. Shelf-life becomes the most important factor in the product, and mass production and distribution drives down quality while it drives out local production/consumer systems.

I want to invite cons to join Slow Food and deal the simple need for food to be "farm to hunger" rather than priced to turn anyone away from the table. This is essentially about "family values" as in who is not in the human family and who cannot eat with us. Who do you exclude at the level of your own soul? Who is not "one of us" as a human being? And don't worry, we just put it positively in our witness to "that all may eat."

Joining Slow Food does not mean having to adopt anything ideological, but it is an affirmation of the humanity of eating together and sharing around the table. It is not a bourgeoise boutique "farmer's market" foodie gathering of the effete. It leads to Community Gardens and lots of events where we learn about sustainable and affordable good eating. Good food is not that expensive, and the rest of the beast is a great place to find bargains. So is seasonal and local. Real food is healthy and when you are eating to enjoy and share you don't binge.

I think all the political and economic lessons of anti-Corporate show up at the ground level of food and human community. But they have human faces and/or tasty surprises to offer. All the things I hear conservatives talk about in private business initiative and risk abounds in farmers who care and people who are getting our food security and access issues worked out in our communities. And nothing is more threatening than the messin' around with nature like Monsanto in both the fields and the courts.

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm

You and I may be concerned about the un-necessary, politically caused hunger in the world. Just wait until the Soroses and Monsanto's get their way with the private property killing Aganda 21.

Agenda 21 is a two-decade old, grand plan for global ’Sustainable Development,’ brought to you from the United Nations. George H.W. Bush (and 177 other world leaders) agreed to it back in 1992, and in 1995, Bill Clinton signed Executive Order #12858, creating a Presidential Council on ‘Sustainable Development.’ This effectively pushed the UN plan into America’s large, churning government machine without the need for any review or discussion by Congress or the American people.

‘Sustainable Development’ sounds like a nice idea, right? It sounds nice, until you scratch the surface and find that Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development are really cloaked plans to impose the tenets of Social Justice/Socialism on the world.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-the-soros-sponsored-agenda-21-a-hidden-plan-for-world-government-yes-only-it-is-not-hidden/

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am

I thought that conservatives wanted to stop giving out foreign aid. This project would make it possible for under and developing countries to become food and economically independent. What's wrong with that?

You can quote from the blaze article, but read what the UN project is about for yourself and then make your own judgment about it, don't believe folks that have their own agendas.

The world is in a BIG mess and with the climatic changes that are already happening at least the UN is trying to get a little bit ahead of the problem. We may not think we will starve here in the US, but those under and developing countries will suffer more than you can image. Why shouldn't they begin to plan and take action to literally save the lives of millions of men, women and children?

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

Jan, "You can quote from the blaze article, but read what the UN project is about for yourself and then make your own judgment about it, don't believe folks that have their own agendas."

The UN is a tool for those that have their own agenda.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am
Quote camaroman:

Jan, "You can quote from the blaze article, but read what the UN project is about for yourself and then make your own judgment about it, don't believe folks that have their own agendas."

The UN is a tool for those that have their own agenda.

I guess we will just have to disgree on this one. Thanks.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

Camaroman, as I said above, the UN is not immune to corporate penetration or manipulation, but it is also able to express some resistance and dissent to the imperial agenda being rammed up the ass of people and/or shot into the arms of corrupt leaders. It can make indigenous and artisanal part of the UN endorsed approach. Or, at the very least, it can allow those being screwed to say something about it in an arena where that is not supposed to be OK.

"Sustainability" is a mild piece of scientific talk, not an inspiring vision of a Green World. It ought to be the most neutral of terms for those who claim the title of "conservativism." Of course we should be cautious about our big ideas and mindful of tradition and values. Isn't it the Liberals who you accuse of being willing to burn everything down in a utopian fantasy that a new world can be created by human effort and will? The problem with "sustainabilty" is not that it is utopian. It cannot be. The problem is that it is not sexy.

I have no doubt that some of the efforts aimed at dealing with "sustainability" have all the flaws of central command and control, top-down design and implementation. All the corporate models are variations on this design. Controlling what happens on the ground from above is what "management" is all about in corporate thinking. Instead of decentralized artisanal approaches to environmental integrity, corporate will drop it down from above. It will be balanced against profits instead of essential and desirable.

Remember "jobs and the environment" as if they were a choice. To have the short-term value of "jobs" we were willing to risk the end of human life on earth. I know, but even if it was a long-shot theory instead of the broad consensus, the pay off odds were terrible.

Harmony and balance with nature is not a recipe for autsterity. The end of the Age of Greed is not the loss of anything worth regret, much less grief. We will not go back to the Stone Age or just forget all that has been learned by science. The moral neutrality of technology is still there even if we have to be more aware of its seductions and appeals to our weaknesses. How we play with this fire is our new staging of Prometheus.

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm

German American Centralized Agriculture, ADM, DuPont and Monsanto are TOXIC to Human Life enterprises.

leighmf's picture
leighmf
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Well stated drc2.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

But as you said "central command and control, top down design and implementation", that is the problem we have now and to expand and centralize power even more is a mistake, IMO. I would like to see a much weaker centralized and bureauractized federal government with states having more control , especially of the purse strings. Taking the money out of and their ability to create limitless amounts out of thin air would be a start.

You can damn well bet that Monsanto, ADM, Dupont, et al will be involved and take whatever steps they can to protect their power and influence. How corporations are viewed and used by politicians and how politicians view and use corporations must be eliminated. How is the million dollar question.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am

Again... I am SO glad that this topic has been brought up!

EdBourgoise - A "Grant" is a LOAN. A "Grant" eventually, has to be paid back. So I would suppose that it's a way to make people think that our representatives have taken a break from special interests and decided to "represent" us. It looks "nice" on paper. Sounds good in a speech.

It does NOT, however... stop the corporation from taking over an independent farm. See the documentary, "David versus Monsanto" to see what really happens when cross contamination happens. Just because the farm was helped along by a "GRANT" doesn't stop the spores from cross contaminating the crops.

I am also pleased that EVERYONE that has chose to speak on this topic appears to agree that the Monsanto/Government co-op is NOT the way we want things to be done.

I don't think that EVERYONE that is a "regular" here (on this message board) does agree with us.

I've said this before, I'll say it now. The SILENCE is deafening!

This "should" be one of the most obvious "YES" answers there can be. But... look around... there are some OBVIOUS people NOT commenting on this.

Now, I don't comment on every topic. Some, don't peak my interests. Some, I don't feel that I am qualified to comment on because of my lack of knowledge on the subject.

I LOVE the way this topic was brought up! It's done in a VERY inviting way from someone who hasn't challenged the "usual" crew to their propaganda techniques. So when the "usual" crew isn't commenting on such a simple, yet clear "line in the sand stance"... it should make you skeptical of "WHY" they say some of the things they say.

I'd LOVE to be wrong on this... but I don't think that I am. They are probably trying to get "clearance" from their paymasters to comment on this topic. You know how "RED TAPE" is... the easiest things seem to take forever!

If the usual cast of clowns don't chime in on this topic... I'm going to wip out the ole' MAX CADY!!! I'll do it! Don't make me!

Thanks again for bringing this topic up. There's a couple more that I am waiting on... I LOVE FREE SPEECH!

Fletcher Christian's picture
Fletcher Christian
Joined:
Feb. 15, 2012 12:49 pm

Fletcher, " See the documentary, "David versus Monsanto" to see what really happens when cross contamination happens. Just because the farm was helped along by a "GRANT" doesn't stop the spores from cross contaminating the crops."

Monsanto would like to own and control Mother Nature. HA!!! It would also like to control the production of food around the world.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am

I find that most people have no clue about how farming works, and don't really care. They just want the grocery shelves to be filled with cheap food, and to be able to order a big variety of flavors at the restaurant.

Can't blame them...... this is actually a very complex topic.

And if they really agreed they would have to stop using Roundup on their yards...... and that would make weekends way too labor intensive.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

I may be missing something, but if Monsanto is suing farmer Brown because Monsanto's special GMO crap cross pollinated with farmer Brown's crops, can't farmer Brown counter sue for them polluting his fields?

The progressive position has always favored democratization of land, and food production.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Quote Phaedrus76:I may be missing something, but if Monsanto is suing farmer Brown because Monsanto's special GMO crap cross pollinated with farmer Brown's crops, can't farmer Brown counter sue for them polluting his fields? The progressive position has always favored democratization of land, and food production.

Farmers in Europe have won against Monsanto in this type of suit, but it has been an extremely long and costly process. Good news that Poland has just banned GMO corn.

In Canada Monsanto struggled against Percy Schmeiser for literally years with Schmeiser barely coming out on top with more of a moral victory than anything.

Brazilian soybean farmers are currently battling Monsanto and just might win.

Farmers are fighting the "good battle," however, they are definitely going up against the biggest badest corporation you can imagine. At stake is world food security.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm

Been really busy but really appreciate the comments, fascinating. The original question was a bit of a set-up but with good intensions. As I often wonder why we must find a way to disagree even when we agree. I've been working on alternative farming practices and systems for over 40 years.

Jan in Iowa, I had the pleasure of meeting the elder of Thompson farm back in the mid-90s. Enjoyed our chat very much but he must of passed since.

I'll try to post something more substantial soon.

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm
Quote EdBourgeois:

I've been working on alternative farming practices and systems for over 40 years.

Are you an agronomist? What type of practices and systems?

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm
Quote jan in iowa:
Quote EdBourgeois:

I've been working on alternative farming practices and systems for over 40 years.

Are you an agronomist? What type of practices and systems?

Didn't grow up on a farm, but had a tiny bit of land to work as a kid. Started in registered livestock. Showed at north american and nationals a couple times, even won a couple classes. Was part of setting up one of the early rotational grass fed farm in the 70s, 1500 acre farm in VA. with 800 sheep 200 beef and several other farms on east coast. Early land trusts,worked on a Kellogg grant in early 90s for what became their early model of a buylocal org., 4-H, ag in the classroom board, forever fighter for reform of Land grant/extension, soil microbial life based farming systems, even recently organic sustainable coffee growing systems,and etc. When I could have gone to college the only thing being taught anywhere was industrial ag. In my show and production sale travels around the country as a teen I learned about the train wreck everything in ag was headed for from many wise old farmers I met. So went self taught from there. As you know, nature is the best teacher when it comes to farming.

I've met some really great farmers over the years in Iowa. Lots of memories.

But pretty bummed out after listening to some of rio+20 speeches today.

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm

Ues cause you shouldn't be able topattern life not to mention a host of environmental reasons.

CollegeConservative's picture
CollegeConservative
Joined:
May. 4, 2012 2:22 pm
Quote Phaedrus76:I may be missing something, but if Monsanto is suing farmer Brown because Monsanto's special GMO crap cross pollinated with farmer Brown's crops, can't farmer Brown counter sue for them polluting his fields? .

maybe you're missing that all too often money is able to buy a verdict as easily as an election

MEJ's picture
MEJ
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I have a little morefaith in our system

CollegeConservative's picture
CollegeConservative
Joined:
May. 4, 2012 2:22 pm

MEJ is right. At the least, money can trump anothers ability to outlast in a lawsuit. There again, a big corporation like Monsanto, with an army of paid mouthpieces, er lawyers, that can file a mountian of briefs and motions.

camaroman's picture
camaroman
Joined:
May. 9, 2012 11:30 am
Quote EdBourgeois:

Didn't grow up on a farm, but had a tiny bit of land to work as a kid. Started in registered livestock. Showed at north american and nationals a couple times, even won a couple classes. Was part of setting up one of the early rotational grass fed farm in the 70s, 1500 acre farm in VA. with 800 sheep 200 beef and several other farms on east coast. Early land trusts,worked on a Kellogg grant in early 90s for what became their early model of a buylocal org., 4-H, ag in the classroom board, forever fighter for reform of Land grant/extension, soil microbial life based farming systems, even recently organic sustainable coffee growing systems,and etc. When I could have gone to college the only thing being taught anywhere was industrial ag. In my show and production sale travels around the country as a teen I learned about the train wreck everything in ag was headed for from many wise old farmers I met. So went self taught from there. As you know, nature is the best teacher when it comes to farming.

I've met some really great farmers over the years in Iowa. Lots of memories.

But pretty bummed out after listening to some of rio+20 speeches today.

My husband is an agronimist working with a company that promots biological farming methods. Dr. Don Huber and Dr. Arden Andersen along with Dr. Dan Skow, Jeffery Smith and others are speakers/friends at the company's seminars. The work/products are based off Dr. Carey Reams research.... very fascinating stuff. I'm a horticulturalist by trade, but of course that's not all. Nice to come across another "ag" person!

Glad you started this thread..... Folks have no real clue about farming and, of course, Monsanto, truly the devil incarnate.

delete jan in iowa
Joined:
Feb. 6, 2011 12:16 pm
Quote camaroman:

Do you know what the UN's Agenda 21 is? Talk abouit big brother encroachment!!! We need to flood that web site with negative comments about this.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/agenda-21-update-family-farms-are-under-attack/

I wonder whatever happened on this?

Yeah it's pretty scary stuff. It is still rather alive in concept. Heard mention of it again in the Rio+20 speeches. USAID as well as many of the now global orgs B&L Gates foundation, WWF, Sierra Cub etc. have been corrupted by big money interests support

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm
Quote Fletcher Christian:

Again... I am SO glad that this topic has been brought up!

EdBourgoise - A "Grant" is a LOAN. A "Grant" eventually, has to be paid back. So I would suppose that it's a way to make people think that our representatives have taken a break from special interests and decided to "represent" us. It looks "nice" on paper. Sounds good in a speech.

It does NOT, however... stop the corporation from taking over an independent farm. See the documentary, "David versus Monsanto" to see what really happens when cross contamination happens. Just because the farm was helped along by a "GRANT" doesn't stop the spores from cross contaminating the crops.

Somehow we must have more research done on organic living soils based farming systems. There's only so much that can be done by farmers. At a certain point possibilities need to be lab and trials tested before they can go mainstream. Huge corporations can fund their research through the huge volume they deal with. Small farms can't. This was why the Land Grant college system and extension was developed. One in each state with only the basic core being funded by the feds. Then each state and local gov. along with public interest support was to be provide for specific projects that would have overall benefits. But more recently the public oversight became lax and huge corporate interests took over these core facilities. When Monsanto can give a million to endow a chair or help with other campus needs it becomes very tempting for these schools to get behind them. The original way was for these schools to identify needs or opportunities through Extension field agents then develop the case where x dollars would overall return more dollars/benefits. I think it was a well designed system but if the public doesn't care about food and farming it becomes ripe for corruption. It also makes sense at the teaching level to have these ag. schools in each state as farming is so different from state to state.

We need a major shift in our basic farming concepts. Mother nature has been telling us this for many years. Chemicals that kill the benefits of soil nutrient rejuvenation by microbial soil life, monoculture weed and pest issues, soil loss, huge input costs, ever lessening of crop and genetic diversity. depleted farm communities and on and on.

For many years farms have pretty much been owned by farmers. The natural risks of farming were just too much for the food industries or investors to want to get involved. Food industries could just basically control these farmers by contracts and being the only game in town. But more and more land grabs are happening around the world and in the US. Often by foreign entities. Africa has been a major victim of this.

While farmers still do control much of the farmland we must offer them an alternative soon. They may have gotten used to farming monoculture's but it's not working that well for them and they can only see it getting harder.

The future will need to be more integrated crop based with rotations to control weeds, pests and rejuvenate soils. Limiting the needs for excessive amounts of chemicals and fertilizers. Lessening the need for GMO resistance in the seeds too. Allowing for a safer and more organic based system. A farm will rotate crops and even add a period of graze over several year cycles. More local/regional processing will add value to these more diverse crops and grass grazed livestock. This will also reinvigorate farming communities and provide many jobs. The infrastructure will be a good opportunity for sound local and regional investment. Between the Land Grant and organized local farmers appropriate systems can be worked out that specifically fit each area. Opportunities for new technologies will also emerge. Some of the young small farmers I know have been creating some interesting new implements.

So can we still have cheap food? I say yes. But one must consider that our food now is not really as cheap as it seems. If we really added in the hidden costs of the present system I guarantee we will end up far ahead.

We need to stop spending so much time and money fighting the likes of Monsanto. They can't go organic, they are a chemical corp. Our efforts and money/support needs to be towards creating alternatives. We need to start looking beyond the tiny local farms and farmers markets and look to making a larger impact on larger amounts of our overall production. This is not dependant on USDA or Washington. We can do this at the individual. local, state and regional levels. Otherwise we will be fed like feed lot cattle and our health and environment and our human connection to real foods will be lost.

This is a really nice primer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtl09VZiSU

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm

I don't want to steer the topic off (because it's such a great topic) and I don't think that I am...

Budweiser acts in VERY much the same way as Monsanto.

BEER is really just "liquid bread". That "liquid bread" has to be farmed.

1 out of every 2 beers sold in America is a Budweiser (iBrew) product.

Anytime someone brings up the so-called "fact" that we have a "free market capitalism" system in America, I eventually will bring up the Budweiser argument.

If our "free market capitalism" rewards the BEST and BRIGHTEST... then by default, BUDWEISER is the BEST beer. Clearly... it is NOT! Not even close!

They've become the overwhelming leader because they are the most corrupt. They bribe, intimidate and deceive better than anyone else.

Henry Kissenger's, "FOOD AS A WEAPON" proposal was a massive eye opener for me. If anyone "doubts" the type of people that are in key positions of power and influence... it's folks like Kissenger who have the greatest impacts on our daily lives. It's not "DISTRACTION"/"DIVISIVE"/"WEDGE" issues like gay marriage or steroids in baseball.

Thanks again for the topic. There is SO little that separates the interests of the average American. We have to be daily propagandized to act the way we do. The average American is a good person and will act accordingly. But we're emotional beings that will have "knee jerk" reactions. It's time that we get passed these knee jerk reactions and be open to the larger "TRUTHS".

-------------------------------

Speaking of PROPAGANDA... Did anyone notice how long/quickly it took for one of the "puppets" to crawl out from under his rock after I mentioned it was odd that "they" weren't around for this topic? The older I get, the better of a listener I've become. People "tell" you what they "really" think and who they "really" are. All you have to do is listen.

Could someone explain "democratization of land" for me? It sounds nice. I'm "guessing" that "democratization" is a simple substitution of GOVERNMENT for CORPORATION. So CORPORATE farming is BAD... GOVERNMENT farming is GOOD. Am I right/wrong/close?

Because what I believe "WE" have been talking about on this thread is that "WE" want individuals to grow food within reasonable government safety guidelines. I'm "guessing" that the "democratization of land" is NOT what the rest of "US" are proposing at all.

Please... please... please "clarify" this for us. (This should be AWESOME!)

Cue the music! "Everybody knows"... Prepare to be made dizzy from the SPIN!

C'mon! You can do it. Remember... this is AMERIKA, where you have "freedom of speech"! Don't be shy. Speak plainly and clearly in a language that everyone can easily understand and state your position that you are for the "democratization of land".

How can we have a free flowing exchange of ideas if one person in the dialogue is hiding an agenda? So pretty please, with sugar on top, explain the "democratization of land" for the rest of the class.

This is gonna be good! Buckle up! It's gonna get "bumpy".

Fletcher Christian's picture
Fletcher Christian
Joined:
Feb. 15, 2012 12:49 pm

Ed, what do you think of the latest farm bill under consideration? (keep the expletives down, if you can)

Here's one article on the subject: http://civileats.com/2012/06/22/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-a-senate-f...

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Zenzoe:

Ed, what do you think of the latest farm bill under consideration? (keep the expletives down, if you can)

Here's one article on the subject: http://civileats.com/2012/06/22/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-a-senate-f...

I don't pay much attention to the farm bill. The big guys always get what they need and the little guys get a crumb at best. I attended the Agricultural Outlook Forum in DC in 2000. It was an awakening to just how powerful the good old boy ag. structure is. I find little sense in all the fighting needed to determine the size of that crumb. If the money spent fighting was just put to supporting research in organics and alternative systems we'd end up far ahead IMO. The success of good alternatives so far has had little to do with the farm bill.

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm

EdBourgeois - It really is that obvious, isn't it?

After being born in Gary, IN I was raised in the neighboring farm lands. I've since moved back.

HALF of my friends in school were farmers. My dad worked at the Steel Mill. I worked on a blueberry farm for a friend one summer. I wasn't much of a farmer. We had our own "personal" farm in the back yard. My dad grew EVERYTHING at one time or another! Strawberries to Corn to Sun Flowers to Peanuts... you name it, he grew it.

I kind of put those memories aside until I saw the 2 Monsanto agriculture documentaries. "David V. Monsanto" and "The World According To Monsanto". While I'm plugging movies, "The Corporation" scared me into the action that I am doing right now. "The Corporation" gets deep into the Monsanto V. Fox13 case down in Florida. That was the case where the news suddenly wasn't "the news" anymore... it's now, just another show. Like reruns of "My Two Dads" and "Cop Rock".

I have since been out of touch with most of my high school friends. I often wonder how they are doing in todays world and what effects does our SCIENCE industry complex is having on them. I fear that it's not good.

On a side note... if you EVER need someone to scream some expletives for you... I'm your guy! You seem a lot nicer than I am.

If Phaedrus76 ever gets back from his talking points meeting with his handlers and responds to EXACTLY what "democratization of the land" means... then you'll see why someone needs the patients of "JOB" to deal with the misinformation and high school debate club techniques that his ilk bring to the table.

Thanks again for bringing this topic up. (OK, now read my mind and come up with a couple more! Because if "I" bring them up... people will dismiss them for no reason! I'm kidding... kinda... yeah, I'm kidding.)

Fletcher Christian's picture
Fletcher Christian
Joined:
Feb. 15, 2012 12:49 pm
Quote EdBourgeois:

Somehow we must have more research done on organic living soils based farming systems.

The first question I'm inclined to ask is: are you who are I think correctly concerned about the effects of industrial agriculture on our soils and ultimately on the entire planet, interested in maintaining the current vertically integrated food delivery system or are you ready to consider some very dramatic design changes to go with new ways of farming?

My concern is this, I grew up on a family farm in the fifties, my father was a Rodale "food nut" as they used to call organics-oriented people back then, and we tried to be organic in all our farming techniques. I know from practice that organic methods are much more labor intensive when applied to large enough harvests to make a 250 acre farm (our farm size) pay for itself. This was before organics became a national concept and we were trying to compete with rapidly increasing yields resulting from hybrids and their high inputs of petro chemicals to make crops grow faster and more productively while keeping their vast monocultures from the damages of intrusive weeds and pests.

Furthermore, I don't perceive any way to simply plug organics into a techno industrial agriculture system that's reduced the number of specially skilled and knowledgeable human beings involved from about 31% of the labor force in 1910 to about 1 to 2% today. So we are also talking about a labor force issue on a national scale, along with complementary social changes.

We actually already have lots of information about how to do organics. We also recognize that changing our agriculture system is a national systemic cultural issue, and it's going to involve moving a fair number of people to a way of life quite different than the one now designed through about a hundred fifty years corporate techno-industrial organization that's utterly tranformed the nation's skill set. This is mind boggling to imagine when you think about people and their general resistance to changing their world views.

Here's just one example I know of, and one I myself am involved with:

Permaculture Design Principles.

The other issue is that it actually may be a real survival issue in the very near future.

Here's a couple illustratons of a basic issue that I cannot see how any one can eliminate from this topic. Yet, it has been eliminated pretty carefully by the corporate system and its manufacture of consent through its corporate-owned media that simply does not bring to everyone's attention (note that part of the manufacture of consent model is a systematic elimination of relevant news topics that don't fit the corporate economic agenda):

Peak Everything: Waking Up to the Century of Declines

The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality

In Chapter Two -- titled 'Fifty Million Farmers' -- of Peak Everything Heinberg lists the worrisome trends that we face in the impending declines that may result in future famines, not just around the globe, but right here in the U.S.:

Quote Richard Heinberg:

The second factor potentially leading to famine is a shortage of farmers. Much of the success of industrial agriculture lies in its labor efficiency: far less human work is required to produce a given amount of food today than was the case decades ago (the actual fraction, comparing the year 2000 with 1900, is about one seventh). But that very success implies a growing vulnerability. We don’t need as many farmers, as a percentage of the population, as we used to; so, throughout the past century, most farming families — including hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions that would have preferred to maintain their rural, self-sufficient way of life — were forced to move to cities and find jobs. Today so few people farm that vital knowledge of how to farm is disappearing. The average age of American farmers is over 55 and approaching 60. The proportion of principal farm operators younger than 35 has dropped from 15.9 percent in 1982 to 5.8 percent in 2002. Of all the dismal statistics I know, these are surely among the most frightening. Who will be growing our food 20 years from now? With less oil and gas available, we will need far more knowledge and muscle power devoted to food production, and thus far more people on the farm, than we have currently.

Heinberg, Richard (2010-10-12). Peak Everything: Waking Up to the Century of Declines (p. 49). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

We are undoubtedly talking about a social transformation here that is much greater in scope than a mere technological switcheroo of organic techniques for current mass industrial techniques.

Here is what Heinberg envisions as the scope of this project:

Quote Richard Heinberg:

I believe we must and can de-industrialize agriculture. The general outline of what I mean by de-industrialization is simple enough: a radical reduction of fossil fuel inputs to agriculture, accompanied by an increase in labor inputs and a reduction of transport, with production being devoted primarily to local consumption.

Once again, fossil fuel depletion almost ensures that this will happen. But at the same time, it is fairly obvious that if we don’t plan for de-industrialization, the result could be catastrophic. It’s worth taking a moment to think about how events might unfold if the process occurs without intelligent management, driven simply by oil and gas depletion.

Facing high fuel prices, family farms would declare bankruptcy in record numbers. Older farmers (the majority, in other words) would probably choose simply to retire, whether they could afford to or not. However, giant corporate farms would also confront rising costs — which they would pass along to consumers by way of dramatically higher food prices.

Yields would begin to decline — in fits and starts — as weather anomalies and water shortages affected one crop after another.

Meanwhile, people in the cities would also feel the effects of skyrocketing energy prices. Entire industries would falter, precipitating a general economic collapse. Massive unemployment would lead to unprecedented levels of homelessness and hunger.

Many people would leave cities looking for places to live where they could grow some food. Yet they might find all of the available land already owned by banks or the government. Without experience of farming, even those who succeeded in gaining access to acreage would fail to produce much food and would ruin large tracts of land in the process.

Eventually these problems would sort themselves out; people and social systems would adapt — but probably not before an immense human and environmental tragedy had ensued.

I wish I could say that this forecast is exaggerated for effect. Yet the actual events could be far more violent and disruptive than it is possible to suggest in so short a summary.

Heinberg, Richard (2010-10-12). Peak Everything: Waking Up to the Century of Declines (pp. 55-56). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 7:50 am
Quote .ren:
Quote EdBourgeois:

Somehow we must have more research done on organic living soils based farming systems.

The first question I'm inclined to ask is: are you who are I think correctly concerned about the effects of industrial agriculture on our soils and ultimately on the entire planet, interested in maintaining the current vertically integrated food delivery system or are you ready to consider some very dramatic design changes to go with new ways of farming?

"very dramatic design changes to go with new ways of farming"

yes

And I think when it finally gets momentum it will be some exciting times. It can help with many of our present woes. Just the very simple start that has happened in the past few years has had a very positive effect on people. Non-farm kids are being attracted to farming again. They are both seeing and experiencing the problems with the present food and farming industries. It's really high on their list of priorities. They are now demanding the opportunities to study and develop new farming and food system alternatives at the higher edu. level. The students at our state university have been setting up some gardens on what were the lawns in front of the dining commons. Trying out some permaculture concepts in the design of the gardens. They received a national award for their efforts and are about to host an international conference to spread this kind of activity. Believe me the new generation of young farmers are definitely thinking outside the box.

What's most interesting talking with these youngins is their frustrations with the older generations extreme focus on complaining about the present system and extreme lack of focus on what they are trying to do in creating various alternatives. That has been my biggest frustration too. Why continue to spend so much time and money beating on a system that we now know has terminal flaws. While putting so little beyond just buying a bumper sticker and buying from a farmers market to really get something more substantial accomplished that they now realize is absolutely neccesary and time is being wasted.

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm

Currently Chatting

Green World Rising

In two previous videos narrated by Leonard DiCaprio and available over at GreenWorldRising.org, we’ve seen the dangers that global warming and climate change present for our planet and the human race.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system