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

95 posts / 0 new

Comments

Quote EdBourgeois:

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.

That's encouraging.

We are working with kids from this program who come here to learn permaculture and other ideas we have going.

WWOOF World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms

Most of us realize the political system is beyond repair and we have to take care of plans for the future ourselves. It's really too late to argue with idiots.

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

I don't know if this interests any of you: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/06/201261653814554844.html

After accepting the resignation of his Interior Minister and his Chief of Police, Lugo has been forced out of office by the very forces who benefited from the slaughter of the rebels.

Campaigners for land rights say the land was distributed during the 35-year dictatorship of Alfredo Stroessner, when allies of his regime were rewarded with vast tracts of prime farmland in the landlocked nation of six million people.

The transition from oilseed to soybean production and ranching ("large scale agriculture") means that large landholders are reluctant to give up their property while "peasants" want legal ownership of this same land they have been farming for generations.

nimblecivet's picture
nimblecivet
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote .ren:

Most of us realize the political system is beyond repair and we have to take care of plans for the future ourselves. It's really too late to argue with idiots.

We really don't need them.

Looks like you have a nice program going. I'll check it out more.

Have had a couple good chats with Curt Ellis of King Corn film and now his Food Corps project that is offering some good experiences for young folks. http://foodcorps.org/

We have a good committed Ag in the Classroom group in our state that I've been involved with for many years

http://www.aginclassroom.org/

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

Nasty farmland grabs of all types happening around the globe. While shunning small groups from common lands. A huge rise in just the last 2 years. The forecast of future food vs demand is getting big time money players into the game. And of course they have the you know who corporations right there to set up a complete production system for them.

This 50+min. video sums up the new global food production attitude, scary

a story from Ethiopia

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU1-PpxqeZc&feature=related

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

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.)

Democratization refers to putting democratic processes into action. "of land" means for land purposes.

That means we the people use our democratic processes to change the agricultural system away from MegacorpMonsantoGE etc from using all their lawyers-guns-and-money to influence how our nation produces food and how taxpayers subsidize their shareholders.

Our at prisonplanet do they look at the Monsanto issue and conclude we need less government intrusion into agruculture and land ownership so that the freemarketunicorn can magically "fix" Monsanto's bad practices? Remember, the libtard solution of taking it to the courts means Monsanto can tie it up for decades, all the while they accumulate more land, they can then use to acquire more lawyersgunsandmoney, with which they can buy more politicians who will push to "make govt smaller", or at least smaller than Monsanto, and Monsanto will then be able to continue their aristocratic - corporatization of rural America with the aid of libtards from prisonplanet, such as yourself.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm

On a broader point, my point, and the point of all progressives is that the power of government can and should be used through democratic processes to secure our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

When Megacorp owns all the land, and through their patented GMO seeds most life on Earth, it will be too late to save small farmers, or have a stable food production system or have small businesses competing to sell seed or buy farm produce.

When Malwart runs every other retail center under, then it is too late to save small businesses.

When GE has...

For 1000 years, the forces of democracy have run up against the authoritarians, and only in the period from 1931 - 1978 have they much success.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Quote nimblecivet:

I don't know if this interests any of you: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/06/201261653814554844.html

After accepting the resignation of his Interior Minister and his Chief of Police, Lugo has been forced out of office by the very forces who benefited from the slaughter of the rebels.

Campaigners for land rights say the land was distributed during the 35-year dictatorship of Alfredo Stroessner, when allies of his regime were rewarded with vast tracts of prime farmland in the landlocked nation of six million people.

The transition from oilseed to soybean production and ranching ("large scale agriculture") means that large landholders are reluctant to give up their property while "peasants" want legal ownership of this same land they have been farming for generations.

What the Aljazeera story and Ed's documentary link -- Food crisis and the global land grab Documentary Planet for Sale2 -- illustrate to me is how the capital power-based system is incapable of looking forward and adjusting to its own potential to create collapse. There are no "invisible hand" mechanisms built into capital investment at this level to deal with the necessity to respond to sustainability limitations.

The environmental crisis/population problems that results from the capital accumulation-->land grab process is what the vast majority of us face -- that is, we who are the majority who don't have the means to mitigate the power of accumulations of capital that will of their own logic inevitably result in investment pressures that will induce these capital-based land grabs by mostly absentee capital holders. The very creation of money that produced the need in that "Food crisis" documentary to invest in land comes from something unrelated to production related to a population and its environment and to long term sustainability. The system is based on accumulating powers of profit-making, not an environmentally constrained, ecologically-based adaptation to the planet's eco systems.

A further flaw in this form of societal adaption based on a market-driven orientation is these investors are often absent from processes resulting from their investments. They in fact are often located in far distant lands as the result of the evolution of a process involving the progression of colonialism as it evolved into this form of capitalism in the past 500 years. Adaption to any environment is dependent on feedback to those applying whatever social/cultural framework they develop in practice so that their framework can adjust to the environmental changes they may directly experience. Industrial agriculture is a macro pattern that employs extensive resources and technologies that have no relationship to the many different ecosystems on this planet. The system has no way to adjust to this absurdity until it essentially can no longer can produce a profit and collapses.

The huge flaw that the relatively tiny but hugely influential group of desperate investors do not bother with is the reality of finitude. Karl Polanyi points this out in his overview of the evolution of capitalism and its inherent contradictions: The Great Transformation. Land is treated as if it's a commodity, but itself cannot be produced and thereby expanded infinitely, the productive potential of the land is limited (in fact, with the industrial farming methods, that potential reaches a peak and then begins to degrade), the resource water itself cannot be produced, energy cannot be produced, thus these basic factors involved in their investment schemes conscribe limits to their profitability expansion, which has infinitude as its internal logic.

Anyone following the macro efforts to deal with this through the international institution we call the United Nations can see how the capital investment/profit expansion system continues to foil any efforts to manage it at that level. The results of the recent Rio+20 are anything but promising of a global wide coordinated solution. And the intrusion of corporate influence into the process has revealed itself as well. We have plenty of information about the effects of this system, but the political process itself continues to fail to come up with a vision and a procedure that won't be corrupted by the pressure to expand infinitely in order to respond to the need for profit accumulation.

Thus, the limits to growth and the predictions for a crash once this system reaches those limits seem to indicate that these profit-based global societies will not come up with a peaceful, sensible and fair resolution to that seeming inevitability.

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

What the Aljazeera story and Ed's documentary link -- Food crisis and the global land grab Documentary Planet for Sale2 -- illustrate to me is how the capital power-based system is incapable of looking forward and adjusting to its own potential to create collapse. There are no "invisible hand" mechanisms built into capital investment at this level to deal with the necessity to respond to sustainability limitations.

I'm afraid your right. For many years these kind of farmland grabs were thought to be too risky for big money absent owners to consider. It allowed us to still have time to develope and spread adoption of alternatives. But now the situation looks much more grim and time is against us. Listening to the RIO+20 speeches became obvious that most were just reading something they didn't at all understand.

The sliver of hope comes from the rapidly increaseing reaction from mother nature to this GMO chemical monoculture system here in the US. Hard to have hope through disaster but maybe sooner rather than later may at least leave us some land left to work with.

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

Wow so Prison-Planet actually promotes an intellectual discussion around here.

See why we shouldn't be BANNING anybody...

I'm talking to you Mr. & Mrs. as well as Ms. Sophophobe.

:D

antikakistocrat's picture
antikakistocrat
Joined:
Apr. 18, 2012 3:41 pm

Phaedrus76 - I am NOT libertarian. I've said it a BUNCH of times.

Again, again... and again... YOU "KNOW" THIS, YET... "PRETEND" NOT TO!

Because of this FACT. You prove how much of a phony you are. You are a guns for hire, political hack.

I stated very clearly... and EVERYONE KNOWS that you read my post because you QUOTED me... I am for independent ownership of farm land with reasonable GOVERNMENT safety regulations.

So you PURPOSEFULLY "choose" to ignore what is ACTUALLY stated... and opt to paint with the broad ad hominem propagandist brush.

Everyone sees it.

Everyone knows.

You are a bad man. You are a cowardly liar. You blatantly misrepresent everything and everyone... including yourself.

FINGER OF SHAME!

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

OK, so in farming, you support federal regulations to make the ownership of land more democratic, the use of federal power to make ownership of production more democratic, and reasonable safety regulations to protect workers and consumers.

So, now you are a progressive Democrat. Congratulations.

Now, you need to understand that in manufacturing, those same standards, democratization of wealth, democratization of production, and reasoanble safety for workers and consumers are also my standards.

Once you get there, you and I can have a drum circle with Iron John, and Dennis Kucinich.

The means to achieve these goals are both using govt power to help people directly, or to help people create institutions to empower themselves. We call those institutions unions, or community organizations.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm

Last week, powerful interests in Washington defeated the “Consumers Right to Know About Genetically Engineered Food Act'' in the Senate, denying you and all Americans the right to know about our food. Now they are at it again, trying to extend their control by barring agricultural officials and judges from being able to stop, when necessary, the planting of genetically engineered crops.

This unprecedented attack on our right to know about our food is gaining steam and we need your voice to fight back.

A provision has been introduced into the FY 2013 Agriculture Appropriations Bill that would strip federal courts of their authority to halt the sale and planting of an unapproved genetically engineered (GE) crop while the USDA assesses its potential hazards. This would allow farmers to grow potentially harmful GE crops during legal appeals of the approval process, instead of afterwards.

Labeled the “Farmer Assurance Provision,” this policy rider would:

  • Eliminate fundamental and constitutional safeguards of our judicial review system;
  • Undermine the USDA’s oversight and approval process, and weaken protections for consumers;
  • Allow powerful chemical companies to dodge reasonable safeguards against potentially hazardous GE crops.

This bill is now being debated in the House of Representatives. It is crucial that you tell your U.S. representative to oppose the “Farmer Assurance Provision"!

Additionally, if this provision becomes law, it may compel the USDA to allow all permits for continued planting of unapproved GE crops, even if previously unrecognized health risks are found. This has dangerous consequences, potentially exposing non-GE farmers to substantial damages and, due to international GE crop trade restrictions, put our nation’s agricultural markets at risk.

This provision compromises our constitutional right to know, and could negatively impact our environment and our health.

Please ask your U.S. representative to oppose the “Farmer Assurance Provision"!

As the people of the United States continue to voice concerns regarding the faults in our food system, influential players continue to introduce their own, profit-driven interests into national policies that negatively affect each and every American. Without the appropriate supervision and safeguards, large corporations will continue to control our food safety, with a high cost to both our health and environment.

Please ask your U.S. representative to listen to their constituents, and oppose the “Farmer Assurance Provision"!

This is an unprecedented move by special interests to subvert the separation of powers so carefully laid out in the U.S. Constitution to protect all of our rights.

Thank you for taking the time to voice your concern. We can’t do it without your help. David BancroftCampaign DirectorJust Label It

We're building a movement of concerned citizens – parents, health care workers, small business owners, farmers, and more – who care about what's in the food we eat.

In October 2011, the Just Label It campaign was formed when the Center for Food Safety filed a petition with the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to require the labeling of all foods produced using genetic engineering. Days later, we asked citizens from around the country to join us and tell the FDA to "Just Label It." More than 1.1 million Americans have contacted to the FDA urging them to label genetically engineered foods. Ask others to sign on at www.JustLabelIt.org/takeaction.

Like us on Facebook | Follow us on Twitter | Learn more at www.JustLabelIt.org

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

This blew my mind: http://www.naturalnews.com/036234_edible_landscaping_medicinal_plants_Tulsa.html

The article is about a woman whose entire garden was destroyed by overzealous city officials. As I stated in my comment at that site, this is America so corporations have unlimited "private property" rights while YOU CAN'T GROW VEGETABLES IN YOUR OWN YARD.

Absolutely the forces of capitalism are at work here. They drive everybody into the "for profit" system:

Quote http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/06/23-0:

'I never studied,' Sebastao said. 'I don't know how to steal. The only thing I know how to do is work. They need to compensate me so I can buy more land. Otherwise we are going to die of hunger.'

If there were co-ordinated political action it would be so everybody could be 'of the land' with such an honest ethic.

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

As it's generally put: A home garden is an accessory use to a principal residential use, and must comply with the lot and building standards for its zoning district.

Many areas only allow lawn, and certain approved trees and ornamental shrups/plants.

Personally, as a grass fed livestock farmer, I think chem lawns are pretty freaky looking. And it makes for a terribly boring landscape, house after house after house.

Our town has bought and accepted donations of a lot of "conservation" land. Much of it wasn't woods. So they are "letting it revert to it's natural state" Really? They are all now nothing but invasive plant nurseries spreading their seeds around the surrounding neighborhoods. Hardly any wildlife in them either.

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

Phaedrus76 - You are some piece of... work.

You are a mentally sick individual. Or an appendage of a mentally sick institution.

You "sum" up MY statement with the following...

"OK, so in farming, you support federal regulations to make the ownership of land more democratic..."

WHERE IN THE HELL DID I SAY THAT!?!

You sir, are in violation of the rules of the message board. You have purposefully misrepresented my words.

You applied the "Hegelian Dialectic" to ME... ME!

This is PROOF of just how "out to lunch" you really are! Of all people to to try this tactic on... I'm the ONE that you can't sneak a curveball past. I KNOW my stuff!

Being that this technique was made popular by Plato... and you've taken your name of Phaedrus which is also related to the time of Plato, you know very well the technique of the Hegelian dialectic.

BTW... Is it odd how someone would take the name of an aristocrat who fancies themselves as being "bright" and "radiant"? In today's vernacular, that person would call themselves a "pretty boy" or "metro-sexual". Hey! Different strokes for different folks. To each his own.

It's a shame that in our society... the "rules" don't apply to everyone. So, why should they here?

So you owe me ANOTHER apology! That's 2.

Explain your lack of a moral compass.

Do you think that you are doing some "over all good" by lying and misrepresenting the truth? Do you think that people find character assassination appealing? How is it that you think ANYONE will EVER be persuaded by your obvious and habitual LYING and slanderous ways?

Is this how you think people make decisions? "Oh Yeah! I really like the brand of lies that Phaedrus76 said today. They were so much better than the lies of that other guy."

Just because YOU lie and play the very non masculine game of "cutesy" with the truth... does NOT mean that everyone else does.

Does my pursuit of truth come at your expense?

I think that you've set up this mind game where you enjoy chasing down imaginary villains SO MUCH... that whenever someone encroaches upon this false reality that you've conjured up, you lash out like a junkie when someone threatens to take away their smack.

You respond with vitriol and hyperbole that it's unnatural. As Shakespeare so eloquently stated, "The lady doth protest too much, me thinks." Your habitual lying and ad hominem attacks reveal a severe inferiority complex that you obviously cannot contain.

You broke the major rule of the message board. You lied about another person's post. I would think that you owe the HOST of the site an apology as well.

With friends like you... who needs enemies?

Here it comes... wait for it...

BAM! FINGER OF SHAME!!!

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

EdBourgeois - To answer your original question. "NO". Not everyone agrees that the Monsanto type of farming is a bad thing. I wish they did.

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

EdBourgeois - I apologize to you for distracting from your AWESOME thread.

But I don't think it's on the side of righteousness to allow someone to "sneak" in their agenda into a more popular theme by the ruse of intellectual camouflauge.

I get extremely offended by those who use this technique. Like John Lennon said, "Say what you mean. Mean what you say. Put a beat to it."

I must admit that I do get some vain enjoyment out of being "Noam Chomsky" to Phaedrus76's "William F. Buckley".

So I do share a "smidgin" of responsibility.

There's a saying from the "G.I." (That's, "Gary, Indiana" for folks out there in the nice places.) "Don't START none... won't BE none."

If Phaedrus76 would conduct himself with dignity and respect for others... I wouldn't have to respond.

Again... EdBourgeois - I apologize to you. I hope you were at least somewhat entertained by my intellectual thrashing of a "Radiant Aristocrat". I regularly make him my intellectual "Welcome Mat".

Somehow, I don't get tired of it. I feel like Larry Holmes thumpin' on Randall "Tex" Cobb! (That was the fight that drove Howard Cosell into retirement from boxing.)

I don't want Phaedrus76 to "retire" or to be banned for breaking the rules of the message board... I just want him to be honest.

Damn! I did it again. "Vanity"... I really am sorry.

It's the BEST thread posed on here for quite some time.

I'd love to hear more.

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

Ease up on the birdshot feuding.

Farmland ownership is really complex. Just about every possible arrangement one can think of exists. There needs to be more work done on smoothing out some of the kinks in some of these arrangements. But certainly not necessary for gov. to get involved. Example: I didn't have a farm and traveled around for many years working setting up various farms with my reg.breeding herd of around 25 head traveling from farm to farm with me. Makes for interesting and complex negotiations. I've known a lot of other farmless farmers over the years. Many interesting situations. The future will have many young farmless farmers looking to steward some land..

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

Phaedrus76 - I am NOT libertarian. I've said it a BUNCH of times.

... I am for independent ownership of farm land with reasonable GOVERNMENT safety regulations.

Then how, pray tell, would you guess these aims could be achieved? You aren't paste eating freemarketeer libtard. You also oppose the federal govt doing anything to bring about these ends.

How would you have achieve independent, family farmers owning the land with reasonable govt regulations for safety and food security?

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm

Phaedrus76 - I would like to have regulations on safety.

The problem... THAT I'VE SAID OVER AND OVER AND OVER... with Libertarianism is that let's say their is an outbreak of salmonella. Now... the RICH/Corporate Monsanto Farm could BUY THE AIRWAVES so that the average public citizen would not be a well informed citizen and therefore make a well informed decision. We would still buy from the RICH/Corporate Monsanto Farm because we wouldn't know any better.

Those who did know about the RICH/Corporate Monsanto Farm making people sick would DIE before any settlement would ever be reached.

By Money = Speech... Lobbying... or as a normal person calls it... BRIBERY would only increase and get worse. Thus, the protections would erode under such a model... not get better.

I've said this time and time again.

We need a system of fair rules enacted by fair people BEFORE the fact... not after. The FDA is a good idea being run by bad people with an agenda to eliminate the individual family farmer and turn their land over to our Corporate/Government... what normal people call FASCISM.

So to combat this... we need to have a RULE OF LAW. Those who are in violation of said laws, need to be impeached/fired. We do not have a RULE OF LAW. We do not live in a society that respects the EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE 14th AMENDMENT.

I've said it OVER and Over and over again. You know this. Yet, you "pretend" not to.

YOU know this. Yet, you pretend NOT to. You're insane that way. Your blind ideology and mental defects cause you to lash out like a angry, spoiled 12 year old, radiant, aristocratic, school girl.

I never said ANYTHING that you summed up that I did. I also never said ANYTHING racist/incestuous or murderous/arsonistic or terroristic like you summed up that I have.

You have violated the rules of the message board and should be reprimanded. At the very least... you owe ME an apology and you owe the HOST of this site an apology.

The burden of PROOF is on you, jerky! Show where I said these things that you "summed" up. If not... then like Ricky Ricardo famously said, "You have some splainin' to do!" You have VIOLATED the rules of the message board. Are there rules... or are there not? Are the rules selectively enforced like in Arizona? I haven't heard of any white folks being asked to "show their papers" because they look mighty Canadian! I guess it's the same here.

What kind of a guest are you? Would you NOT take your shoes off, then drink straight out the milk carton instead of getting a glass and take the TV remote?

Show an ounce of decency and apologize like a MAN.

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

Please stop the personal assaults!

I tried to use an inclusive approach to this thread so maybe we could actually accomplish something. And maybe find some common ground across the normal divides.

2 points

It isn't going to be easy to have the farmer that farms the land also own the land. That has been on the decline for many years. The days of kids following in their parents footsteps has changed. And farming isn't and shouldn't be a high profit business so it takes a special person to be content with this. There are plenty of these people who find the value of farm life but many don't grow up on a farm nor do they have the kind on big money needed to buy one. And of course the banksters consider this a risky investment due to the many uncontrollable variables.

2nd,

I have major concerns that the chem based farming industries will not be up front with many of their future concerns. After 75years of this approach it continues to get harder and more complicated to stay ahead of problems of many types. Is what they're producing safe, healthy and diverse enough to eat over the long run. How will it effect the environment in the long run. And what will the future inputs costs/supplies be and can they keep up with the technology needed when they try to control nature vs working within nature.

EdBourgeois's picture
EdBourgeois
Joined:
May. 14, 2010 12:24 pm
Quote Phaedrus76:
Quote Fletcher Christian:

Phaedrus76 - I am NOT libertarian. I've said it a BUNCH of times.

... I am for independent ownership of farm land with reasonable GOVERNMENT safety regulations.

Then how, pray tell, would you guess these aims could be achieved? You aren't paste eating freemarketeer libtard. You also oppose the federal govt doing anything to bring about these ends.

How would you have achieve independent, family farmers owning the land with reasonable govt regulations for safety and food security?

Above where you say in the quoted area, "I am for independent ownership of farm land with reasonable GOVERNMENT safety regulations".

How would you achieve your goals?

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm

Phaedrus76 - #46 and #61 I stated that I am for independent ownership of farm land with reasonable government safety regulations.

#46 and #61.

#46 and #61.

Show me where I said the things that you "summed" up that I said.

You can't. You can't because they don't exist.

If you go over to the new thread titled, "LOSER LEAVES TOWN". I have a proposition for you. I really hope you take me up on it.

You've broken the rules of the message board... REPEATEDLY!

I have drawn a line in the sand... care to step over it?

Let's step outside of this area of the very cool EdBourgeois and discuss this further on the LOSER LEAVES TOWN thread, shall we?

EdBourgeois - This shallow thinker has stated that I would enjoy throwing Jews into ovens. Murdering black teenagers. Incest. Burning churches... you name it. So I hope you understand why I can't let a wannabe bully intimidate me by slandering me and stating things that I have NEVER said.

I'm sure that you would do the same.

In the meantime, I will leave your thread and I promise not to post anymore on it. It's a distraction. I apologize. I promise to keep reading it! Because it's a GREAT thread that has a lot of importance.

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

Monsanto DOES NOT OWN FARMS. I believe what Ed was talking about in the title of this thread was the style of farming, i.e. conventional farming or Monsanto style farming (chemical farming and mining of the soil) vs organic farming or biological farming.

The majority of farms are owned by individuals. In places like northeastern Oregon there are huge corporate owned farms, that produce wheat, etc. In the midwest the vast majority of land is owned by individuals. Farmers RENT LAND FROM INDIVIDUALS to farm large areas, i.e. over 1,000 acres. Monsanto sells agricultural chemicals and seeds.

The original farmsteads (here in Iowa and throughout the midwest) were about 180 acres which was the amount of land that a farmer could make a living on. These farms were diverse and basically self contained. They usually had cows for dairy products, chickens or pigs, horses for the farming and enough land to have a large vegetable garden and to raise the feed for the cows and horses and a little extra to sell. The farmer would use the manure from the livestock to fertilize his fields, keeping the fertility at a good level.

Today farmers have to farm 1,000 acres for a family of four to make a living. Therefore they rent their neighbors land. Farmers average a $50 an acre profit from farming, i.e. the 1,000 acres to make an average living.

Most farms are no longer diverse, if they have dairy cows, they raise alfalfa and corn to feed them and use their manure on their fields. Within a two miles of our house there are 3 to 4 dairies of 100+ dairy cows. Large pig operations dot the country side and poultry is pretty much limited to large poorly inspected operations, thus the salmonella outbreaks.

Though most farms are independently run the real problem in my eyes is the lack of crop diversity. The two crops in Iowa and midwest are corn and soybeans. If anything ever happens to those markets, these farmers will be in a world of hurt. Actually Iowa used to be a huge source of vegetables, truck farming. There were canneries that dotted the landscape with food being preserved and shipped all over the country. With the introduction of more chemical based farming corn and soybean have become the major crop.

As a side note..... this morning my husband told me that farmers in southwest Iowa are discing down their corn and planting soybeans hoping to get at least some crop this year..... we are experiencing a DROUGHT here in the midwest. The terrible drought in South America has destroyed or greatly reduced harvest of their corn, soybean and sugar cane crops creating worldwide shortages. So look for food prices to rise this year!

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

2 points

It isn't going to be easy to have the farmer that farms the land also own the land. That has been on the decline for many years. The days of kids following in their parents footsteps has changed. And farming isn't and shouldn't be a high profit business so it takes a special person to be content with this. There are plenty of these people who find the value of farm life but many don't grow up on a farm nor do they have the kind on big money needed to buy one. And of course the banksters consider this a risky investment due to the many uncontrollable variables.

2nd,

I have major concerns that the chem based farming industries will not be up front with many of their future concerns. After 75years of this approach it continues to get harder and more complicated to stay ahead of problems of many types. Is what they're producing safe, healthy and diverse enough to eat over the long run. How will it effect the environment in the long run. And what will the future inputs costs/supplies be and can they keep up with the technology needed when they try to control nature vs working within nature.

Point 1 is at loggerheads with government legal protections of private property ownership. The libertarians, conservatives, and I suppose a few others who might fit into Democratic Party categories who agree with the the notions that problems are created by the Monsanto (corporate, Green Revolution-oriented) farming issue will resist any notion of redistributing property that the Mansano farming instituions now control after about a 100-year process of driving small farmers off the land and replacing what was once a local farming and distribution system with a global, vertically-integrated production and distribution system that coordinates well with the current education system designed to prepare more people for corporate and government careers that pay well and allow people to dress up in suits and to keep their hands clean while they work.... -- I put it in those terms because I believe there's a powerful underlying metaphorical meaning that pressures people away from preparations that could involve moving back to an organic system of living that would counter those images. I think we have to recognize that factor as well.

Meanwhile the primary cheap energy that drove the growth of that system has obviously peaked, which is why we now have this pressure to go into the Arctic for oil, to go deep in the ocean for it, to develop the expensive and environmentally destructive tar sands for it, and to frack major portions of the world now for natural gas, also an important factor in global industrial farming and food distribution methods, not to mention property rights issues, water issues and so forth.

Here in the U.S. in particular, I don't see how to coordinate a mass population that supports current property rights protections to agree with some sort of needed redistribution of agricultural lands which itself could be part of a movement towards developing the localization of types of farms and farming methods that would change the current vertically integrated global industrial system. The federal government bureaucracy system itself is oriented in the opposite direction now and is increasingly influenced by powerful transnational corporate forces. But a huge segment of the population appear to inflexibly support the underlying property ownership issues that keep it in place.

I don't have any idea how to address Point 2 other than take down the system by addressing point 1 first. The ownership of patented genetic material and what can be done in the privacy of a corporate environment is part of that point 1 issue.

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

EdBourgeois - This shallow thinker has stated that I would enjoy throwing Jews into ovens. Murdering black teenagers. Incest. Burning churches... you name it. So I hope you understand why I can't let a wannabe bully intimidate me by slandering me and stating things that I have NEVER said.

I'm sure that you would do the same.

In the meantime, I will leave your thread and I promise not to post anymore on it. It's a distraction. I apologize. I promise to keep reading it! Because it's a GREAT thread that has a lot of importance.

I don't want either of you to leave. Only corruption by power wins when we allow it to divide us. Why allow division around other topics keep you both from still finding ways to accomplish good together. Farmers get it. It's easy to hate mother nature as she can seem mighty cruel at times. This topic is all about relooking at the natural world in a positive way. As a true farmer does. Questioning those who think nature needs not have a place in our existence.

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

Monsanto DOES NOT OWN FARMS. I believe what Ed was talking about in the title of this thread was the style of farming, i.e. conventional farming or Monsanto style farming (chemical farming and mining of the soil) vs organic farming or biological farming.

That's what I'm talking about too. It hardly matters at this point whether a small individual-operated corporation owns and farrms thousands of acres, or whether it's directly owned by a corporation like Cargill or Monsanto. What's involved in farming the acreage is a system of farming that involves property right ownership of the genetics of seeds and methods involved with those seeds. The farmers farming thousands of acres are able to do so because they employ an Industrial farming methodology. It's now an integrated system. A vertically integrated system that is about controlling nature, not working with it.

Quote jan in iowa:

The majority of farms are owned by individuals. In places like northeastern Oregon there are huge corporate owned farms, that produce wheat, etc. In the midwest the vast majority of land is owned by individuals. Farmers RENT LAND FROM INDIVIDUALS to farm large areas, i.e. over 1,000 acres. Monsanto sells agricultural chemicals and seeds.

I grew up in southern Michigan in the fifties and early sixties on a 240 acre diversified organically-oriented farm. I know exactly why we went out of the farming business. I was being pressured to go to Moo Yoo, as we called Michigan State University, to become something like a professional industrial agricultural engineer, or something like that, if I wanted to stay in farming. I was reading all the professional farming journals trying to help develop methods to make our farm work as it was failing while I was in high school. Eventually, I could see it was turning farms into factories, and I decided I didn't want to be an industrial farmer.

Are people that have stopped farming and own the land being rented out going to train the cadre of individuals who no longer know how to make a living off the land the way my family did before industrial farming came along? The issue is still how to go from industrial agriculture methods of property control to something more local and organic.

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

.ren

You are fortunate to know how farming works and to have grown up on a farm, but the vast majority of folks have NO CLUE. Why not explain how the thing came to be? I think that's important.

Conventional farming sucks..... I completely agree with you on that. My husband is a soil scientist and is on the frontlines of trying to get farmers to stop using glyphosate and other chemicals, and to grow nutrient dense food and to rebuild the microbial life in the soil. But all that is basically way too much for the average guy to get in a big dose. Most don't know what a microb is, or that the reason food has any nutrient value is because the plants draw the minerals out of the soil. They don't know that the reason the apples and other food don't have any taste is becasue the mineral content is almost non-existant in what they're eating.

So a little background is a good thing if you want people to get what we're all trying to do, don't you think?

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

So a little background is a good thing if you want people to get what we're all trying to do, don't you think?

Have I said anything to the contrary?

I was merely addressing the points EdBourgeios raised in post #71. I write too much as it is for most people's attention span tolerance. Doing a detailed history of how farming changed from local to global as technologies evolved through the late eighteen hundreds to now is fine, even necessary, but I just wanted address the property ownership issue which I see as a basic cultural impediment to coming to an agreement over the industrial agriculture methodologies. Especially when you consider the ideologies at play on this thread.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 7:50 am
Quote .ren:
Quote jan in iowa:

So a little background is a good thing if you want people to get what we're all trying to do, don't you think?

Have I said anything to the contrary?

I was merely addressing the points EdBourgeios raised in post #71. I write too much as it is for most people's attention span tolerance. Doing a detailed history of how farming changed from local to global as technologies evolved through the late eighteen hundreds to now is fine, even necessary, but I just wanted address the property ownership issue which I see as a basic cultural impediment to coming to an agreement over the indusrtial methodologies. Especially when you consider the ideologies at play on this thread.

I think you are doing the right thing talking about that.

I read through the other posts and saw that some of the other people posting didn't understand exactly what the role of Monsanto and other corporations is in this situation. I wasn't responding to what you were saying (or I would have quoted you), but to what I saw as a misperception. I consider it very important to educate people particularly on such an important issue as I'm sure you do, too. I don't see that we are in disagreement here.

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

Sorry, jan, I read your capitalizated and italicized phrases as a direct response to the issue of property ownership I had described in what had been a previous post to yours, which would make sense as well that you were responding to me, but now it's ended up the post after yours when I did some necessary edits. Another wonderful feature of this advanced software.

It's extremely difficult to hold court on a topic like this as Ed is trying to do. Arguments get confused and entertwined. I just wanted to clarify my take on the problem of property ownership in relation to this evolution of industrial techniques. One of my disturbing qualities that put people off is my characteristic adherence to a topic I try to develop. I can really piss people off with that. It's part of why I've changed my way of interacting on this board.

As a side note, if you want my opinion on what those you are addressing think about any of what you've written regarding the actual problem of GM modified foods and industrial agriculture, that's another issue, you won't get it. I don't believe anything I think about that would go well on this thread, or this board for that matter.

Good luck.

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

I grew up in southern Michigan in the fifties and early sixties on a 240 acre diversified organically-oriented farm. I know exactly why we went out of the farming business. I was being pressured to go to Moo Yoo, as we called Michigan State University, to become something like a professional industrial agricultural engineer, or something like that, if I wanted to stay in farming. I was reading all the professional farming journals trying to help develop methods to make our farm work as it was failing while I was in high school. Eventually, I could see it was turning farms into factories, and I decided I didn't want to be an industrial farmer.

I was in a similar situation during the same times but didn't grow up on a farm, only had a tiny piece of crappy land on the north side of a mt. to work as a kid and parents who had no interest in me farming. My success as a kid in the breeding stock and national show circuit was attractive to those like Harold Henneman at Moo Yoo. But I avoided the trap. Instead pursued my concept of creating a farm that mirrored nature's prairie, in the early 70s. With the introduction of high tensile fencing that was much cheaper and long lasting along with various temporary fencing the concept became possible. I worked with those who had the money and land and were willing to go against the feed-lot cafo trend. It has since proven very viable even though adoption is still limited.

The focus by the inorganic industral food and farming inputs suppliers has been based on controlling the farmer and thus controlling the farm. The elimination of any choices. I've heard a number of speeches wondering how things might now be had we continued research of organic systems as well as inorganic. Both are extremely knowledge and technology based.

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

Sorry, jan, I read your capitalizated and italicized phrases as a direct response to the issue of property ownership I had described in what had been a previous post to yours, which would make sense as well that you were responding to me, but now it's ended up the post after yours when I did some necessary edits. Another wonderful feature of this advanced software. I just wanted to clarify my take on the problem of property ownership in relation to this evolution of industrial techniques. If you want my opinion on what those you are addressing think about any of what you've written regarding the actual problem of GM modified foods and industrial agriculture, that's another issue, and I don't believe anything I think about that would go well on this thread, or this board for that matter. Good luck.

A gentleman as ever! I think your views and valid and worthy, keep at it!

And for the discussion of your opinions of GMO food and the rest, we should have that discussion... it might do everyone some good to learn a little more about what they are eating. But you may be right, at least we need to move forward in small steps?

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

I've heard a number of speeches wondering how things might now be had we continued research of organic systems as well as inorganic. Both are extremely knowledge and technology based.

Have you read the work of Dr. Arden Andersen, Dr. Don Huber, or Dr. Carey Reams? These guys are very interesting and you might find it all enlightening. Dr. Reams work is hard to find, though we've been putting compliations of his work in the monthly newsletter my husband edits. It may be possible that in the near future they will be available online in PDF, I'll post once that happens.

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

Hang in there folks. We too often look to quick solutions for complex situations. It takes time between planting a seed and getting to harvest. And much has to dealt with along the way. It's natural.

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

I've heard a number of speeches wondering how things might now be had we continued research of organic systems as well as inorganic. Both are extremely knowledge and technology based.

Have you read the work of Dr. Arden Andersen, Dr. Don Huber, or Dr. Carey Reams? These guys are very interesting and you might find it all enlightening. Dr. Reams work is hard to find, though we've been putting compliations of his work in the monthly newsletter my husband edits. It may be possible that in the near future they will be available online in PDF, I'll post once that happens.

I think I met Don Huber during the mid 90s. When I was working on a Kelloggs foundation IFFS grant. The Practical Farmers of Iowa were also part of the IFFS initiative. We all gathered in Iowa a one point. Have known John Ikerd for quite a few years, who has been a long time advocate of sustainable ag.

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

A gentleman as ever! I think your views and valid and worthy, keep at it!

And for the discussion of your opinions of GMO food and the rest, we should have that discussion... it might do everyone some good to learn a little more about what they are eating. But you may be right, at least we need to move forward in small steps?

I try to be more diplomatic these days.

Anyway, I do think we can continue to integrate these facts about how industrial agriculture is organized now into our responses, even to each other. Ed has made some excellent points here that can be expanded upon:

Quote EdBourgeois:

The focus by the inorganic industral food and farming inputs suppliers has been based on controlling the farmer and thus controlling the farm. The elimination of any choices. I've heard a number of speeches wondering how things might now be had we continued research of organic systems as well as inorganic. Both are extremely knowledge and technology based.

Those "controls" are exactly the factors we found ourselves up against back in the fifites and sixties. The government through state funded ag schools like Michigan State, also got input from big ag corps to do research, and those corporations then benefitted from that tax funded research and those who went into the universities to develop what became the Green Revolution, as they received many specialists who then became minions in corporations. Agriculture extension services were put in place and "experts" educated in universities came to "help" by spreading new methodologies, techniques and technologies to go with those techniques. Hard to ignore the ag extension services also served the corporations and their profit making.

Interesting that you were interested in growing plants in that way without having a family orientation towards it. I think it's people like you who are unique.

When my life flow and interest pursuit was dramatically interupted the Vietnam War, I came back and went to Moo Yoo anyway and got involved in anthropology and their ecology program, which at that time had recognized that the Green Revolution was being wiped out by its own results, some of which were environmental degradation, some involving the population explosion it was feeding. As a result my own interests move to a broader environmentalist perspective, and also a refresher on organics which had somehow become a national issue.

It wasn't until later that I came across the permaculture methods that I think parallel your own interests. Those folks came up with something culturally revolutionary that may be part of any future sustainability strategies we humans can employ.

Many new strategies are evolving from that basic concept. Transition communities, the WWOOF organization I mentioned earlier. How exactly that will fit into this property and farming issue you brought up is not easy to see, nor do I believe that's necessary at this point. I think educated and interested people like the kids I'm meeting here through our small farmers bringing in the WWOOFers, have the energy and interest to find a way. That's to me the most important driving force for change. Macro design changes are institutional and involve rules and regulations with the implications of enforcement mechanisms. Whereas initiatory and self actuated changes at a grass roots level are cultural, and culture-creating by nature. They come from the heart, not the mind (though they don't by binary opposition exclude the mind). Thus somehow including a heart orientation into this process becomes something of a challenge. And that's a particularly difficult issue to bring to a discussion.

WWINDY News The newsletter of WWOOF Independents

Read up on all the latest news from WWOOF around the world, as well as browsing an extensive archive of articles, including:

The WWOOF world's longest-running online journal has existed since 2003. Discover it for yourself
The WWIndy News

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

Those "controls" are exactly the factors we found ourselves up against back in the fifites and sixties. The government through state funded ag schools like Michigan State, also got input from big ag corps to do research, and those corporations then benefitted from that tax funded research and those who went into the universities to develop what became the Green Revolution, as they received many specialists who then became minions in corporations. Agriculture extension services were put in place and "experts" educated in universities came to "help" by spreading new methodologies, techniques and technologies to go with those techniques. Hard to ignore the ag extension services also served the corporations and their profit making.

My best and wisest teachers have all since passed away. They were the farmers who farmed through the introduction of inorganic agriculture. I would ask them how all this happened. It was basically war surplus needing a market. Why not use these chemicals of war for a war on pests and weeds from ww1 and tnt based fertilizers from ww2. I asked who convinced you to start using these chemicals and their answers were interesting. These surplus dealers could have never walked onto a farm alone to convince the farmer to use them. So they convinced extension agents that they had a good thing and to come along with them and give their ok. So I then asked when they started to realize there was harm connected with these chemicals and it was when soldiers started having problems due to their exposure of these chemicals of war. They then realized they were the same chemicals they were using and not warned of any concerns about using them. Sound familar to what happened post Korea and Vietnam with those war surplus chemicals?

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

Sound familar to what happened post Korea and Vietnam with those war surplus chemicals?

Sure, but it's not quite that simple, as ever.

Dow Chemical in Midland Michigan (not far from where I grew up) = Agent Orange. In 2012 Dow is headlining:

Dow Chemical calls its Omega-9 Healthy Oils a 'breakthrough' to world challenges Published: Monday, June 25, 2012, 12:00 PM

Omega-9 is derived from Dow AgroSciences' NEXERA canola and sunflower seeds and is used by restaurant chains and packaged food companies throughout North America, Europe, Latin America and Asia.

NEXERA™ seeds

Researchers continue new and innovative work to develop the next varieties of Omega-9 Oils with even more health benefits. Dow AgroSciences continues to be the global leader in oil, naturally-bred canola and field testing programs. Dow AgroSciences invests in their research to ensure that NEXERA™ canola support the agricultural industries throughout North America.

NEXERA™ seed growth partner KERB Flo

Blackgrass is an extremely competitive weed in combinable crops. Oilseed rape presents a great opportunity to tackle this most pernicious weed by using an active ingredient that has a unique mode of action with no known resistance - propyzamide. Kerb Flo contains 400g/litre of propyzamide in a liquid formulation.

etc., etc., etc.

Oilseed rape, or rapeseed

Rapeseed (Brassica napus), also known as rape, oilseed rape, rapa, rappi, rapaseed (and in the case of one particular group of cultivars, canola), is a bright yellow flowering member of the family Brassicaceae (mustard or cabbage family). The name derives from the Latin for turnip, rāpa or rāpum, and is first recorded in English at the end of the 14th century. Older writers usually distinguished the turnip and rape by the adjectives round and long(-rooted) respectively.[2] See also Brassica napobrassica, which may be considered a variety of Brassica napus. Some botanists include the closely related Brassica campestris within B. napus. (See Triangle of U).

Brassica napus is cultivated mainly for its oil-rich seed, the third largest source of vegetable oil in the world.[3]

I don't think it would do any damage to understand the Green Revolution. Here's a good place to begin looking into it: Green Revolution: History and Overview of the Green Revolution

Then you can decode headlines like:

CEOs pledge sustainability, urge 'green revolution'

Business leaders gathered at a Rio+20 conference Monday pledged sustainable policies and joined a call for world leaders to usher in "a green industrial revolution" to save the planet.

Which helps decode what what might come up in threads like:

The Rio+20 Declaration: A Gift to Corporate Polluters that is nothing less than a Disaster for the Planet

Now, when you see NEXERA™ seeds, what does that mean? TM indicates trademark. How do you trademark a seed? What does that have to do with property rights?

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

oooops I hit the call the moderator flag button by mistake. Sorry .ren

Good info.thanks,

The Norman Borlaug center at TAMU. nuff said

I've been watching their WCR world coffee research at TAMU as I'm a amateur roaster. The first thought to deal with problems was by advanced plant breeding for built in protection. Was totally not surprised. Farmers now riping out great heirlooms to plant crappy coffee that will cost the farmer more and will get paid less.

The thing is that the plant technology we have is interesting and useful. It's just the reasons and ways they are being used I can't help but generally disagree with.

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

oooops I hit the call the moderator flag button by mistake. Sorry .ren

Good info.thanks,

The Norman Borlaug center at TAMU. nuff said

I've been watching their WCR world coffee research at TAMU as I'm a amateur roaster. The first thought to deal with problems was by advanced plant breeding for built in protection. Was totally not surprised. Farmers now riping out great heirlooms to plant crappy coffee that will cost the farmer more and will get paid less.

No problemo. I'm sure I won't get banned for what I wrote.

I'm keeping tabs on that action too. My green coffee source has been Sweet Maria's for years. It's the only way we can get decent coffee out here in the boon docks. Hard to call myself an amateur when I can't buy roasted coffee at the top roasters in cities like Seatte as good as the beans I roast. I think of myself more as a custom roaster. I use a drum and I roast for friends as well. Sweet Maria's specializes in small batches from small growers, which means I'm always trying out new beans.

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

SM me too, Tom are Maria are really great folks, farm gate trade. me be farmroast in that world http://coffee-roasting.blogspot.com/

this is a nice youtube story of a dairy farmer Tom Trantham from SC learning from his cows. An interesting transition step in the right direction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLDKRXPyOh4

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

Phaedrus76 - #46 and #61 I stated that I am for independent ownership of farm land with reasonable government safety regulations.

#46 and #61.

#46 and #61.

Show me where I said the things that you "summed" up that I said.

You can't. You can't because they don't exist.

If you go over to the new thread titled, "LOSER LEAVES TOWN". I have a proposition for you. I really hope you take me up on it.

You've broken the rules of the message board... REPEATEDLY!

I have drawn a line in the sand... care to step over it?

Let's step outside of this area of the very cool EdBourgeois and discuss this further on the LOSER LEAVES TOWN thread, shall we?

EdBourgeois - This shallow thinker has stated that I would enjoy throwing Jews into ovens. Murdering black teenagers. Incest. Burning churches... you name it. So I hope you understand why I can't let a wannabe bully intimidate me by slandering me and stating things that I have NEVER said.

I'm sure that you would do the same.

In the meantime, I will leave your thread and I promise not to post anymore on it. It's a distraction. I apologize. I promise to keep reading it! Because it's a GREAT thread that has a lot of importance.

So, I claim that libtards oppose taking any type of action, and you get bent that you are not a libertarian. Then I figure out that then you must then be in favor of some kind of action to support reaching the ends for which you advocate, and you whine and bitch that I am wrong.

So what action do you propose we undertake to promote democratization of the land?

I know you can't answer, because deep down, trolls never answer.

You want to make this about YOU. I want answers to the issue of farming and land ownership. So, have your little WorshipMe thread, have it. Start some another about how this Negro deserved to get shot for walking on a sidewalk, or that Negro is not American enough to hold public office or brown skinned folks need to always assume they ought to get deported. But do not pretend that your questions are innocent or meant to illuminate and drive an honest discussion.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Quote EdBourgeois:

SM me too, Tom are Maria are really great folks, farm gate trade. me be farmroast in that world http://coffee-roasting.blogspot.com/

this is a nice youtube story of a dairy farmer Tom Trantham from SC learning from his cows. An interesting transition step in the right direction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLDKRXPyOh4

I like Tom's story and the way he tells it. We had 50 cows give or take and I milked them before and after school. I still speak that language. If we had one cow that gave us a 100 lbs of milk at a milking, that was a good milker for our herd back in those days. I imagine the selective breeding practices along with synthetic bovine growth hormones may have improved that by now. He said he had a 200 lb jump in his milking after his cows got into that fresh field that day, so I appreciate what that means. It's like adding two good cows to his herd.

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

Just read an article about BT Corn. Seems that all of Monsanto's attempts at dominating Mother Nature have again been for nothing. The wonderful little insects have in their own tiny non-patented genes become resistent to Monsanto's genetically engineered BT Corn. Isn't Nature grand!

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

Currently Chatting

Why the Web of Life is Dying...

Could you survive with just half of your organs? Think about it. What if you had just half your brain, one kidney, half of your heart, one lung, half a liver and only half of your skin? It would be pretty hard to survive right? Sure, you could survive losing just one kidney or half of your liver, but at some point, losing pieces from all of your organs would be too much and you would die.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system