Monday, September 14, 2015

Musings: Well-Fed White Folks

Flying over the midwest, the land all scored into neat sections, the squares and rectangles connected by the straight lines of farm roads, I'm confronted by the vastness and efficiency of American agriculture. The idea that this much land could be optimally cultivated without technology is immediately rendered ludicrous.

We're never going back to the oxen and plow, the scythe and the hoe — not with 7 billion human mouths to feed, plus livestock and pets. It's time to stop romanticizing about “yardens” and local agriculture, and recognize that while they're legitimate small pieces of the food puzzle, they're never going to replace what agtopians disparagingly describe as “industrial ag.”

Later, walking through the Phoenix airport, I noticed a sign on a heavy door offering “temporary sanctuary” and I thought, oh, how nice, a respite from the chaos and noise of the terminal crowds, like the meditation room at the Seattle airport. Then I realized no, it's where you run if a shooter opens fire.

And that made me think of how, before the start of the Cornell Alliance for Science “Ask Me Anything About GMOs” public Q&A session, we'd identified an escape route at the Ithaca Unitarian Church in case we had to get the five scientists off the stage in a hurry, seeing as how some crazies had issued death threats against Kevin Folta, one of the panelists.

The anti-GMO troops had already been harassing Kevin relentlessly on social media, posting his address on Craigslist and urging folks to pay him a visit at home, where his wife was alone, with their dog, listening to strangers pound on her door in the dead of night. They'd already inundated his administrative assistant with nasty, frightening phone calls, prompting his dean to disconnect the number to spare her further trauma, and flooded his in-basket with abusive emails. Some of them were sent by folks I recognized as extremists in the Hawaii anti-GMO movement.

Kevin's “crime”? Accepting $25,000 in an unrestricted grant from Monsanto for educational outreach, as revealed in emails gathered under a Freedom of Information Act from an anti-GMO group — an effort, as Kevin characterized it, to smear any scientist who speaks favorably about biotechnology.

In other words, the anti-GMO groups are bound and determined to make people STFU if they're talking sense about biotechnology, and scare off those who contemplate adding voices of reason. In the religion of anti-science/anti-GMO, facts are heresy, questions are sacrilege and those who speak up are akin to the devil.

Before the discussion, we'd all sat in a room and discussed whether the panelists should disclose every source of funding they'd ever had until I said, no, these aren't the McCarthy hearings. This is an educational forum, where public sector scientists have volunteered their time to answer questions from their fellow citizens. Guilt by broad association has no place here.

How has this topic become so insane? Why has it stirred up the same irrational emotional fervor as abortion, gun ownership? And more important, at least to me, why are we allowing the extremists to define the debate? Why aren't more good people speaking up against these terror tactics? Why aren't the voices of reason publicly condemning the politicians and activists who have created a movement based on bullying?

After witnessing the ugliness of the anti-GMO debate in Hawaii, I wasn't surprised at how the Ithaca “Ask Me Anything” event unfolded. I was expecting the misinformation campaign on social media that preceded the event, the paranoia about the format, the pontificating, the allegations that we'd deliberately sabotaged the live stream, the unwillingness to entertain another point of view, the discourtesy and outright rudeness of many audience members, the hypocrisy of those who denounced biotechnology, then munched down on the refreshments without knowing whether they were made from organic or genetically engineered ingredients.

As one scientists noted afterward, "I think it went well. At least we weren't shot."

But many of the Alliance for Science Global Fellows, some of them in the United States for the first time, were shocked, even frightened. I saw their expressions of disbelief and dismay as they witnessed the unruly crowd. I noticed several of them looking askance at people who talked over others and loudly muttered comments from their seats.

Yeah, this is what “democracy” and “free speech” can look like. Bet you guys are just itching to take it back to your countries, too.

What really caught my attention, though, was when some of the international students and Global Fellows spoke up. One student from China told of how she'd seen people starving before she left home, villagers desperate for something, anything, to eat, and asked how Westerners could quibble about labeling while her countrymen perished from lack of food. A Fellow from Africa wondered how Westerners could advocate keeping biotechnology on the shelf while the people of Africa struggled to ease poverty and hunger.

They weren't questions and perspectives that Western progressives and greenies are typically forced to face, or even consider.

But to me they underscored the reality that the anti-GMO campaign is predominantly a movement of well-fed white people who have no real understanding of the ramifications of their actions. Because if they did understand, how could they morally continue?

34 comments:

  1. awesome article, ms. joan. you are a badass!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for saying what needs to be said! Absolutely horrific what this movement is capable of.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow! Now that Ashley Lukens is coming to town next week should we all go bang on her door in the middle of the night and scare her family just because we don't agree with what she is saying? Why don't we all harass and threaten them and just shut the meetings down before they start? No rational human being with a shred of decency would ever do any of that. I don't care how much you disagree with what your opponent is saying. I agree with Joan...where is the outrage????

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is the bottom line and the best post you've ever written, Joan. Especially if it succeeds in opening up people's minds to reality.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. When all you have is scare tactics to silence your opponents you know your argument is dead as fear and group think are all that is left.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Joan, none of us well-fed white people or hungry dark people have any real understanding of the ramifications of our actions. We are all only fooling our selfs if we claim to hold the moral high ground. This is by design. We humans are GMOs. We were created to be good slaves, but not smart enough to realize we are slaves. Our creators made over 4000 coding errors, but so what, we are just slaves. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=euQeqM41PZ8

    Now we have let our numbers far exceed the earths carrying capacity by maybe five times. Industrial agriculture has only been possible because of cheap and abundant fossil fuels. These fuels have peaked and our whole economy is doomed to fail. Our numbers will return to the earths sustainable carrying capacity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What evidence do you have that fossil fuels have peaked? There's more accessible than ever.

      Delete
  7. How much does it take for one to be a follower? "Pure Money" to hop skip and jump. You want money, be an activist. I'll tell you were to go and what to do. Yep "Pure Monkey".

    ReplyDelete
  8. Link above not working. Please try again.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=euQeqM41PZ8

    ReplyDelete
  9. But no one talks about how "they" said cigarettes weren't bad for you it like how soda with all its additives aren't bad for you.

    So you can argue for or against things but until there are proven facts then we are just figuring out the arguments.

    I am in the middle and leaning towards more studies. But I still don't trust Monsanto for I like hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians has been poisoned by their chemicals compounds. Which has been proven in court and federal agencies but has been denied by congress and the veterans admin.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @12:06 pm, if you use that logic, then organic food might be bad for you too. Dangerous pesticides are used in organic farming, and there's always the threat of e-coli. Why not outlaw organic food "just in case"?

    And I'm curious what your opinion is on legalizing marijuana.

    ReplyDelete
  11. These anti GMO advocates behave just like climate Warmists., Ears plugged, blindfolded and vicious.,

    ReplyDelete
  12. To all veterans, mahalo for serving our country. It is very saddening that the VA is turning their backs on the veterans of the Vietnam War and other wars that were exposed to "gas". When someone pays you to make something to kill foliage like how Agent Orange did, you make it. Time to short to test the product. Hurt lot of our Veterans. Obama had to take us out of the Middle East. He don't want a war with Russia. We can't afford another war. Nobody wins in a war. But the smart guys make PURE MONEY, Haliburton, something like that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To be honest with you, that statement about Vietnam and agent orange and gulf war syndrome has been addressed by the VA.

      It took them decades to back track the denials but when most are dead, almost dead, have suffered through many medical problems that the VA could no longer hide the FACTS.

      It took the federal government decades and until most Filipinos were deceased for them to receive benefits from serving and suffering during WWII.

      It's all about MONEY and there's no HONOR in that.

      This is coming from a person who was poisoned through military service and also worked in a VA medical records dept and saw the labels on medical records identifying agent orange, gulf war syndrome, and other ailments that they were denied.

      This is the casualty of serving in the military that no one hears about.

      But I still LOVE my country and will serve HER for the rest of my life and beyond if I am able to do so.

      Delete
    2. How can one overlook that agent orange was used to fight a war, save lives in an attempt to end a war?
      How can it be summarized as being all about the money?

      Delete
  13. Thank you, Joan, for doing your part to contribute to the divisiveness on Kauai. You're the best!

    ReplyDelete
  14. 4:40 Ah, yes, of course. In the Orwellian world of the antis, which you inhabit, those who speak against the divisive tactics are the divisive ones, while the dividers and polarizers are hailed as aloha Aina warriors. Classic!

    ReplyDelete
  15. 4:40. No you can thank Gary Hooser, Mason Chock, Joann Mount Yukimura, King Jay Furfarp, and Tim Sue Happy Bynum for the divisiveness on Kauai for passing Bill 2491 and creating division. Joan is trying to clarify fact from fiction.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This is NOT about Agent orange or Monsanto. That is a straw man argument that the antis use to deflect attention from their own bad behavior.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wrong. I am neither an anti nor am I a supporter of GMO companies and you not knowing the history of where these toxic chemicals originated from is what's wrong with you people arguing for or against spraying toxic chemical compounds into the water, soil, air and food.

      Delete
    2. @5:17. I know the history. So what? They aren't spraying Agent Orange on any crops.

      Delete
    3. Can't have a conversation with a fool. It's useless!

      Delete
  17. RoundUp carcenogenic in California

    SUBHEAD: California just announced it will label Monsanto's glyphosate as cancer causing chemical.

    By Claire Bernish on 12 September 2015 for Anti-Media -
    (http://theantimedia.org/california-just-announced-it-will-label-monsantos-roundup-as-cancer-causing/)


    ReplyDelete
  18. I would have had a field day there with the activists. The key is to not let them control the conversation and ask THEM questions about THEIR beliefs. After all, THEY are the entire reason everyone is there in the first place (except me :(). You guys aren't really there to learn more about biotechnology, you're there to learn how the hell to deal with anti-GMO activists.

    Anti-GMO activists are the stars of this whole show, and they need to be put on center stage. THEY, in fact, ARE the subject. It is THEIR beliefs that have created the Alliance for Science.

    As soon as you sow some seeds of doubt, they start to get real quiet. If you allow them to control the debate, you lose. If anything, you guys should have been asking THEM all of the questions.

    ReplyDelete
  19. If you get into an elevator in Cali it has a whole long list of cancer causing agents. You still use the elevator. Labeling Round Up there won't change anything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think you've heard of OSHA and the EPA or had to deal with their rules and fines.

      Delete
  20. You when the facts they have are none, Anti's start lashing with their tongues because that's all they've got.

    ReplyDelete
  21. We weren't there to engage the activists or ask them questions about their beliefs, Bronson. I agree that could be a fine approach in a different situation or format, but in this instance, we were interested in sharing some valuable resources — the knowledge of five scientists — with the larger community. That's why it was entitled "Ask me anything, an evening for the curious."

    You also seem to be confused about the role of the Alliance and its Fellows. It's not to "learn how the hell to deal with anti-GMO activists." It's to understand the bigger science, policy, law, social and environmental picture of biotechnology and share science-based information with the general public, or those in the middle, not go toe-to-toe with activists.

    ReplyDelete

  22. To 5:38 pm:
    Regarding the much-touted California proposed addition of glyphosate to its Proposition 65 list of chemicals “known to the state to cause cancer”......

    California IS REQUIRED BY THEIR OWN LAWS to list as a carcinogen any substance as a carcinogen if IARC has classified the chemical as a carcinogen, WHETHER OR NOT THEY AGREE with the IARC classification or the science behind it. And as you are probably aware, the IARC listing is highly controversial.

    Importantly, California EPA has not done or reviewed ANY new science to arrive at the listing; they have merely followed their state law which requires this. There is no separate evaluation of the evidence considered by the agency.

    http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/CRNR_notices/pdf_zip/051713draft_laborcode_reg.pdf

    Sure, other states might follow this "lead"; anything's possible. But anyone familiar with the California system would not see this proposed listing as ground-breaking or precedent-setting. And most people who live in California are so inundated with this crazy Prop 65 labeling that they ignore the warnings anyway.

    BTW, Aloe vera and goldenseal root were proposed for California listing earlier this year on the same basis; both have been classified by IARC as “possibly carcinogenic to humans”.


    ReplyDelete
  23. Just label our darn foods (gm0, non gmo) and some of the ugliness will go away! Whose afraid of labeling? That's what's it about--fear of losing something----could it be $?!

    ReplyDelete
  24. No 8:34AM - It would just "prove" to the Anti''s that they weren't wrong and they'd bring it up constantly as they work to completely ban GMO's and all pesticide use. You're extraordinarily naive, or cunning, to think or say differently. Look how some Native Hawaiian activists wrongly use the U.S.'s "apology resolution" as some sort of approval for giving up Hawaii as a state.

    ReplyDelete
  25. A friend of mine at an East Coast college, a geneticist, told me the other day that other faculty members encouraged her to take on a 30-minute radio segment that would allow her to talk about any scientific subject at her disposal. The first topic she chose: genetically modified organisms. I literally had to take 30 mins. out of my day to run her through all of the possible scenarios out there that she should prepare for — people calling her names, people saying that she's being paid by the biotech industry to spew her "skewed" take on genetic research, people digging up her dirty laundry and airing it for all to see and smell. And then it dawned on me: Why should anyone have to feel so afraid to make waves? Sad the life. Why can't people simply disagree politely anymore instead of resulting to bombastic and hyperbolic scare tactics?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.