Chuck Grimes wrote:
>As I tried to explain to my kid on Sunday, the issue is not the
>science or the `safety'. The issue is the political economic of GM. It
>is a means (a new, more pervasive, deeper and more thorough means) of
>corporate control over the production of food. The grain seed species
>are modified to fail reproduction, so that they can not be used as
>planting seed more than one season. It absolutely locks in particular
>grains, particular methods, particular production schemes to be
>subsumed under some asshole corporate board's arbitrary decision
>making. It also erases or replaces former methods and cultural
>histories, with those that giant US capital can make more money on.
>
>
Absolutely right on. It is another attack on the commons -- the commons
in this instance being Nature's innate reproductive capacity. It is
insane that it is not even possible to fight back in the right way --
that is, to fight against the privatization of Nature.
But, you know, the Roman empire basically poisoned itself to death. It looks like we're set to do the same. This sheds some additional light on the biblical "and the last shall be the first" because at the point when we discover that you cannot eat money (and there isn't anything else to eat), some Peruvian potato farmer that got cut out of all this civilization will prevail.
Joanna
>
>