Author Topic Options
Offline

Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2043
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:06 am
 


<strong>Written By:</strong> Reverend Blair
<strong>Date:</strong> 2007-11-16 09:06:31
<a href="/article/184031199-you-cant-eat-money">Article Link</a>

<p>Given Prime Minister Harper’s ties to oil and big agri-business, it’s not really a surprise that an organization created to shill for those interests is also happy to shill for the Conservative government. What is more surprising is the Harper government’s willingness to let lobbyists from the CRFA into its government, yet they <a>hired Kory Teneycke, a lobbyist from the CRFA, as a research director.</a> It is exactly the kind of thing that Stephen Harper promised to stop with his Accountability Act, but apparently the loopholes were built in to allow the Harper government to evade the spirit, if not the letter, of their own law. The revolving door between lobbyists and government is spinning as fast as ever.</p> <p>The bio-fuel lobby is a powerful one. It has the backing of the genetically modified crop industry and the oil companies. It is also backed by the farm lobby which, especially in the United States, wields an extraordinary amount of political power. The development of bio-fuels has increased that political power.</p> <p>In the United States the push to develop ethanol for the new flex-fuel vehicles has pushed the price of corn up. The <a href="“http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/HowEthanolBitesYouInTheWallet.aspx”"> ripple effect</a> of that within the United States has been to increase the price of other crops as more acres are seeded to corn than to other crops. While that serves to benefit small farmers, it is at least as harmful to the environment as burning fossil fuels. Farming corn using modern methods requires not only the burning of fossil fuels for seeding and harvest, but the use of chemical fertilizers derived from fossil fuels. Those fertilizers release greenhouse gases from the time the raw material is removed from the earth until the nutrients they provide are long spent.</p> <p>The ripples also reach far outside of the United States. Food riots in Mexico in the last year are directly related to the increase in the price of corn and the monoculture created by the rush to produce suitable crops. Food crops are internationally-traded commodities so higher prices in the wealthy nations of North America and Europe also mean higher prices in the developing world where people were already going hungry because they couldn’t afford food. Now that prices for food are rising, that number could rise from 850 million hungry people to over a billion.</p> <p>Exacerbating that problem is the amount of land being turned from food production to bio-fuel production. In Swaziland, the current famine is made worse because the government has decided to turn 40 percent of the crop land over to bio-fuel production. That fuel is not for use in Africa, but for export to Europe to help meet the EU’s goal of having five percent of the fuel supply come from bio-fuels.</p> <p>India is planning to turn 40 million hectares over to bio-fuel in the form of jatropha. While the jatropha plant grows well on marginal land, as George Monbiot pointed out in a <a href="“http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/67478/”">recent column</a> it grows even better on good land and is the kind of crop preferred by large agribusiness instead of small farmers. </p> <p>Bio-fuels are not the only factor putting pressure on food crops. Many hectares are lost every year to suburban sprawl, especially in North America. Low density housing, large houses on large lots, are the style of the day. The sprawl eats up arable land at an incredible rate and puts further stress on resources and the environment.</p> <p>We are also losing land to soil degradation through erosion and nutrient depletion, especially in countries close the equator. Affecting those same countries is warming that is already occurring, is making seasonal rains unpredictable.</p> <p>The combined effects of all of these factors is the world supply of grains is shrinking even while the population is growing. This year marked a 47 year low in global supplies with the USDA estimating that we have only a <a> 53 day supply of world grain stocks.</a> Exacerbating a problem by dedicating land to fuel production is a questionable decision at best.</p> <p>None of this means that bio-fuels are all bad. As a niche fuel and an interim step to cleaner fuel, they are important. Other bio-fuels, like natural gas collected from animal, and human waste, offer substantial reductions in greenhouse emissions. Alternative crops such as switch grass and hemp can offer reduction emissions while creating carbon sinks. Certain kinds of algae, which can be farmed in tanks isolated from watersheds and oceans offer still other opportunities. </p> <p>That is not how bio-fuels are being presented right now though. Those things are often offered as justifications, but the real push is for ethanol and diesel fuel derived from plants. Corporate interests and the politicians who represent those interests would have us believe that ethanol and bio-diesel are some sort of magic bullet that will enable us to continue driving gas guzzling SUVs. The problem is not with the bio-fuels themselves, or even our ability to develop them. The problem is with a corporate structure that influences political decisions.</p> <p>That structure is not based on science or careful consideration of the facts surrounding an issue. It is not based on what is sustainable. It is not based on ensuring the poor have enough to eat or having clean water for people to drink. It is based on the fallacy that what is good for corporations is good for the rest of us. </p> <p>The usual justification of that claim is that doing the right thing will cost jobs or hurt the economy. Since the adaptation of new technologies makes the economy grow and creates new jobs, usually with higher wages and more benefits, that justification is nothing more than a scare tactic designed to protect vested interests with connections to the Conservative Party. </p> <p>A recent poll suggested that Canadians are willing to make at least some sacrifices to address global warming and overall environmental degradation. If given the right set of options, we will make the right choices. Those choices are not too complex for Canadians to understand, in fact most indications are that Canadians understand those choices better than our government does. </p> <p>Our present government, just like our past government, seems overly determined to ensure that the choices we are offered are those favoured by their friends in the lobbying industry and the corporations involved in the bio-fuel industry. Perhaps somebody should point out to Mr. Harper and his friends that you can’t eat money.</p> [Proofreader’s note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on November 19, 2007]


Offline

Active Member

Profile
Posts: 103
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:25 am
 


My favourite is

• When the white man discovered this country Indians were running it. No taxes no debt, women did all the work White man thought he could improve on a system like this.
~ Old Cherokee Saying


Offline

Active Member

Profile
Posts: 339
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:10 pm
 


A few months ago as the push towards biofuels heated up I did a little research on exactly how "green" the current biofuel realy is. It is too long to post here as a reply but you can find my synopsis at <a href="http://saugblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/as-push-towards-biofuels-gains-momentum.html">http://saugblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/as-push-towards-biofuels-gains-momentum.html</a>.<br />
I think that besides trying to eat money we should ask if we want to feed cars or people. Displacing food crops, whether for human or animal consumptin in favor of growing crops for convertion to fuel is NOT the answer.<br />
<p>---<br>When you are up to your ass in alligators it is difficult to remember that the initial objective was to drain the swamp



When you are up to your ass in alligators it is difficult to remember that the initial objective was to drain the swamp


Offline

CKA Elite

Profile
Posts: 3540
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 1:41 pm
 


"I think that besides trying to eat money we should ask if we want to feed cars or people. Displacing food crops, whether for human or animal consumptin in favor of growing crops for convertion to fuel is NOT the answer."

Then think again, Amigo.
Limited choices leave only limited answers.
Hemp, a yearly crop needent "displace' food cropps. It ain't an either or situation unless ones thinking is stuck in that mode. I've read most of what you have presented here and yoiu are not a dullard.; Do some brainstorming and i have every confidence you can move beyond your current assertions


---
"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake



"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake

"To acquire knowledge, one must study;
but to acquire wisdom, one must observe."


Offline

Active Member

Profile
Posts: 339
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:02 pm
 


You are right Dio, crops for fuel do not HAVE to replace food crops, but that is indeed what is actualy happening. The use of algie ponds to produce either Biofuels or Hydrogen shows some promise but are a looong way off! Crop residues can also be used but is less "efficient" than using corn, thus the push by the corporations to use corn and the like for the source.

---
When you are up to your ass in alligators it is difficult to remember that the initial objective was to drain the swamp



When you are up to your ass in alligators it is difficult to remember that the initial objective was to drain the swamp


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1277
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:33 pm
 


We can't eat money but money seems to be able to eat us. Go figure!

---
"We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"



LeCanardHasBeen
Malgré tout!


Offline

CKA Elite

Profile
Posts: 3540
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:20 pm
 


Here is a ps to my last post
the point being that what we focus on we get
I don't give much energy to either/or situations.

An old Cherokee is teaching his grandson about life. "A fight is going on inside me," he said to the boy.
"It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves. One is evil - he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego." He continued, "The other is good - he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith. The same fight is going on inside you - and inside every other person, too."
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather, "Which wolf will win?"
The old Cherokee simply replied, "The one you feed."
Here is the same story, but it is called "Grandfather Tells" which is also known as "The Wolves Within"
An old Grandfather said to his grandson, who came to him with anger at a friend who had done him an injustice, "Let me tell you a story.
I too, at times, have felt a great hate for those that have taken so much, with no sorrow for what they do.
But hate wears you down, and does not hurt your enemy. It is like taking poison and wishing your enemy would die. I have struggled with these feelings many times." He continued, "It is as if there are two wolves inside me. One is good and does no harm. He lives in harmony with all around him, and does not take offense when no offense was intended. He will only fight when it is right to do so, and in the right way.
But the other wolf, ah! He is full of anger. The littlest thing will set him into a fit of temper. He fights everyone, all the time, for no reason. He cannot think because his anger and hate are so great. It is helpless anger,for his anger will change nothing.
Sometimes, it is hard to live with these two wolves inside me, for both of them try to dominate my spirit."
The boy looked intently into his Grandfather's eyes and asked, "Which one wins, Grandfather?"
The Grandfather smiled and quietly said, "The one I feed."


---
"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake



"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake

"To acquire knowledge, one must study;
but to acquire wisdom, one must observe."


Offline

CKA Elite

Profile
Posts: 3540
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:40 pm
 


Ah! Thanks You just made clear that that confused me
BTW do you still believe me to be an Anti-Semitic?



---
"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake



"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake

"To acquire knowledge, one must study;
but to acquire wisdom, one must observe."


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1325
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:30 pm
 


The wholesale forced introduction of the neoclassical market economic theory really started with Thatcher in Britain, Reagan in the USA and Mulroney in Canada and we can see the results.

When Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior, James Watts, a religious fundamentalist and rapturist, was asked by reporters whether it bothered him that logging in National Parks may not leave any trees for future generations, he replied:

"According to our calculations there won't be too many future generations and when the last tree is cut the Lord will return"

Now, how can anybody argue with such superior knowledge and faith, that conquers all?

That was about the time when I realized that something was very wrong and started studying economics to see what their scriptures preach and found that the whole racket was a monumental fraud, still going on, worse and bigger than ever.

Ed Deak.


Offline

Active Member

Profile
Posts: 119
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:51 pm
 


<p>The UN agrees with you... <blockquote><p><b>Biofuel moratorium proposed to prevent starvation among the poor: UN Rapporteur</B> <p>UN rapporteur calls for biofuel moratorium <p>More and more corn is being used for biofuel at the expense of food, according to Jean Ziegler. <p>The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food is demanding an international five-year ban on producing biofuels to combat soaring food prices. <p>Switzerland's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Ziegler">Jean Ziegler</a> said the conversion of arable land for plants used for green fuel had led to an explosion of agricultural prices which was punishing poor countries forced to import their food at a greater cost. <p>"232kg of corn is needed to make 50 litres of bioethanol," Ziegler said on Thursday. "A child could live on that amount of corn for a year." <a href="http://oilsandstruth.org/biofuel-moratorium-proposed-prevent-starvation-among-poor-un-rapporteur">Oil and Sand</a> </blockquote> <p>...but that same corn that could have feed that child is the same corn we feed to cows. <p>Right... <p>Let's recap...If Iran or any other tries to assert it's independence from 'dino juice' franchise, the white right screams 'war'. <p>If any other Third World country asserts it autonomy over it's RESOURCES, the white left screams "you'll starve". <p>Oh BTW Swaziland is poor and starving BECAUSE it's main exports are actually sugar cane and wood chips. It also has the enviable record of one of the highest rate of HIV in Africa (I know...yesterday's political cause). <p>It also has one of the highest concentrations of wealth anywhere in the world with a class system largely maintained by a small white colonial minority. very very small... <p><b>Does anyone for a single minute possibly think that the starvation problems of Swaziland can be attributed to 'bio fuel conversion'.</b> <p>So white men who like to quote aboriginals are pissed off that aboriginals and 'natives' in Third World countries are asserting control over their sovereign territories again, huh? <p>So even though that we KNOW that one of the biggest debt burdens on Third World countries is energy costs and infrastructure <p>... which goes to maintain IMF/WB loan dependencies for the benefit of First World economies, <p>... who have never given a shit whether people in the Third World starve and infact have consciously killed millions through the illegal collective punishment of sanctions, <p>...you comfortable demanding that they cease and desist economic alternatives to that oil dependency? <p>Just curious...how many people will starve in the Third World or here when oil prices hits 130/bl. or 140/bl. or 170/bl. Any idea? <p>That's right...you've been fooled. <p>The PRESSURE to convert to bio-fuels is a direct result of the first world monopoly of oil and the handful of interests that game the price of it...including white men who are afraid to pay the real costs of their oil and food and still want to maintain a system of modern global slavery. Apparently white men want to change the rules so they can still get their bananas. <p>(Oh that's right...the real hit here is those countries who freely choose to get a higher price for their agricultural products like WE DO for our 'cash crops', will eventually get around to 'converting' those vast fields of lettuce, bananas, bean curd, carnations, cocoa, canola, sugar cane for rhum, barleys, feed corn, etc because the high cost of energy no longer makes the 'trade in bananas' profitable for them) <p>You know the same interests that are directly involved in the current Nazi-like invasions of the Middle East. <p>Anyway it does strike me as these 'phony' stories about 3rd world starvation being linked directly to bio-fuel conversion is simply a) an anti-protectionist con job done to maintain white right manage their economies and b) setting up in the weak white mind another 'moral' justification to play God and destroy Third World people under another crusade to save them from themselves. <p>So anyway I'll leave you guys to discuss how to maintain your cars, while you munch your chocolate bars? <p>Do third world folks eat a lot of chocolate bars or iceberg lettuce? Besides, where were all these crocodile tears for a 'starving planet' when their commodity prices fell about and caused widespread starvation, conflict and military repression. Please note that while those economies were being smashed and people starved, we white folks made out like bandits. <p>The only moral choice these days IS protectionism and national substitution programs. That's the best way to keep corporate capital and it's war machine starved. <p>It's really too bad Canadians have never asserted autonomy over their resources and are NOW stuck utterly dependent on the same globalist corporatism they decry. <p>Hint: one doesn't need to worry about Swaziland to get rid of our own dastardly agricultural subsidies...we can just stop doing it anytime...we don't NEED to wait for an angle <p>Viva Chavez!!!


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1942
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:57 pm
 


Can anyone vision the oil companies sitting back while their product is replaced? No mom & pop farm will benefit from this and certainly no one is going to make the same ludicrous profits, like oil companies. Somewhere, in the backs of the minds of the consumer, is a vision of low cost fuel for their cars. We feel we are being punished for using fossil fuels and consequently the high prices will go away, once we "burn green". I just watched a commercial about the benefits of using Hydrogen. It claims that wind farms providing the energy makes hydrogen a clean green fuel. Simple isn't it? Wind farms & farm crops will allow us to run SUV's forever. Who would bother to ask for more?

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.



Expect little from life and get more from it.


Offline

Junior Member

Profile
Posts: 34
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:47 am
 


No you cant eat money, but you can burn food.

The Oil companies have no problem whatsoever with Bio-fuels. To them its not a competeing product, its a flavouring for their own. It helps prolong the 'Combustion' age and thus keeps their bread and butter market alive, the domestic car, and thats all its about. They have no competition, demand is shy-rocketing weekly. Even if all cars were electric, the military fuels market ALONE could keep them profitable. Its not about protecting their product, its about maintaining the 'Dino-fuels' market, that uses it.

Combustion technology based on any kind of mineral spirits is primitive no matter what its made from. Even the German war machine of WWII had no crude supplies of its own. It made huge amounts of synthetic fuels from its coal reserves. (just needed a few easily obtained additives from our side) Big industry however, dosent need cheap food, it needs cheap coal, so Forgetaboutthatone. Our descendents will laugh and cry about the old days when we used to burn food in our fossil fuels based SUVs. The car makers even prolong this lie with thweir BS Green maketing tactics. help SAVE the Environmet, buy THIS car!' - you do care about the evnvironment...dont you? It really is that stupid.

The UN and all its Antactic expiditions and food surveys is just a PUPET show! staged and performed by the same PUPETs the FOCHIN Corporations ALLOW us to call our Governments.

BURN IT ALL QUICKLY! get the Hydro-Carbon age over with. The next step in evoloution is Hydrogen from water. The only problem the Corporations see their is...Who controls the water?

Hal,
Ottawa


Offline

Active Member

Profile
Posts: 119
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:41 am
 


<p>But you can eat people as well...or render them. <p>But did you say synthetic fuels! <blockquote><ul><p>STANDARD OIL <p>• The Nazi connection: The oil giant developed and financed Germany's synthetic fuel program in partnership with the German chemical giant, I.G. Farben. <p>• Helping Hitler: As late as 1934, Germany was forced to import as much as 85% of it's pertroleum from abroad. This meant that a worldwide fuel embargo could stop Hitler's army overnight. To get around this threat, Nazi Germany began converting domestic coal into synthetic fuel using processes developed jointly by Standard Oil and I.G. Farben. <p>• Standard taught I.G. Farben how to make tetraethyl-lead and add it to gasoline to make leaded gasoline. This information was priceless; leaded gas was essential for modern mechanized warfare. An I.G. Farben memo stated, "Since the beginning of the war we have been in a postition to produce lead tetraethyl solely because, a short time before the outbreak of the war, the Americans had established plants for us ready for production and supplied us with all available experience. In this manner we did not need to perform the difficult work of development because we could start production right away on the basis of all the experience that the Americans had had for years." Another memo noted that "without tetraethyl-lead, present methods of warfare would not be possible." (Trading With The Enemy) <p>• Still another I.G. Farben memo chronicled Stadard's assistance in procuring $20 million worth of aviation fuel and lubricants to be stockpiled for war: "The fact that we actually succeeded by means of the most difficult negotiations in buying the quantity desired by our government... and trasnporting it to Germany, was made possible only through the aid of the Standard Oil Co." (Note: According to a 1992 article in the Village Voice, Brown Brothers Harriman was the Wall Street investment firm that "arranged for a loan of tetraethyl lead to the Nazi Luftwaffe" in a 1938. A senior managing partner of the firm was George Bush's father, Prescott Bush.) <p>• Standard Oil may also have undermined U.S. preparations for war. A congressional investigation conducted after World War II found evidence that Standard Oil had conspired with I.G. Farben to block American research into synthetic rubber, in exchange for a promise that I.G. Farben would give Standard Oil a monopoly on it's rubber-synthesizing process. The investigation concluded that "Standard fully accomplished I.G.'s purpose of preventing the United States production by dissuading American rubber companies from undertaking independant research in developing synthetic rubber processes." <p>• Standard Oil may have also helped distribute pro-Nazi literature in Central America. According to Charles Higham in Trading With The Enemy, "on May 5, 1941, the U.S. Legation at Managua, Nicaragua, reported that Standard Oil subsidaries were distributing Epoca, a publication filled with pro-Nazi propaganda. John J. Muccio, of the U.S. Consulate, made an investigation and found that Standard was distributing this inflammatory publication all over the world."</ul> <a href="http://www.karenlyster.com/hitler.html">Global Intel news</a> <p>The Crimes of I G Farben <a href="http://www.thenewamerican.com/node/2759">New American</a></blockquote> <blockquote><p>"...On August 7th, "Texas oil operator C.R. Starnes appeared to testify that Standard had blocked him at every turn in his efforts to produce synthetic rubber after Pearl Harbor. . . ." <p>On August 12th, "John R. Jacobs reappeared in an Army private's uniform (he had been inducted the day before) to bring up another disagreeable matter: Standard had also, in league with Farben, restricted production of methanol, a wood alcohol that was sometimes used as motor fuel." (16) <p>The restriction against methanol production apparently did not apply to the Nazis, however. "As late as April 1943," Higham reveals, "General Motors in Stockholm (Sweden) was reported as trading with the enemy. . . . Further documents show that, as with Ford, repairs on German army trucks and conversion from gasoline to wood-gasoline production were being handled by GM in Switzerland." (17) <p>The use of hemp as a source of methanol was known to the Nazis. <p>The Nazis considered hemp a vital war material that could be used to produce methanol, or "wood gas," at the same time, in 1943, that Du Pont-controlled General Motors in Switzerland was "converting from gasoline to wood-gasoline production." This, taken into consideration along with the earlier statement that Standard Oil- I.G. Farben had "restricted production of methanol" and the GM- Standard Oil-I.G. Farben joint venture, Ethyl, Inc., whose profitability depended on the production of lead-tetraethyl for oil- -based petrochemical gasoline - in direct competition with the alternative methanol, or "wood gas," certainly opens new avenues of investigation into the existence of a conspiracy against hemp as an alternative, and competing, industrial raw material, by these very same corporations which sold America out to the Nazis for profit and control of world resources and markets. <p>"Just after Pearl Harbor," writes Seldes, "the Assistant Attorney General, Mr. Thurman Arnold, issued a sensational report of the sabotage of the national (war production) program, the first report naming the practices which were later to be referred to as the treason of big business in wartime. Said Mr. Arnold: <p>"Looking back over 10 months of defense effort we can now see how much it has been hampered by the attitude of powerful basic industries who have feared to expand their production because expansion would endanger their future control of industry. <p>"'Anti-trust investigations during the past year have shown that there is not an organized basic industry in the United States which has not been restricting production by some device or other in order to avoid what they call "ruinous overproduction after the war."' (19)..." <a>href=http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/randy/swas1.htm>Nazis in the Attic</a></blockquote> <p>I think we agree -- the globalist corporatism as a movement has been going on for quite awhile. <p>But the Third World has been it's biggest victim in spite of the Left in the first world to do little more than 'show' sympathy and use them as objects of fear... <p>-- We are ONLY now starting to realize what they already Know and that we live in a system where the very ground we walk on is more valuable to some 'economic system', than the humans that walk upon it. <p>Under corporatism, human liabilities are recoverable either through labour or physical biological bodies. <p>That's why I am saying that the only way to reverse this is to place the immediate value of 'things' that people actually use in their communities. Once you alienate 'ownership' through regional and then international markets, the value of local goods will always (inevitably) rise to the highest level of that larger market. <p>Protectionism would force the real value of actual goods and resources up locally, while eliminating overvalues from the speculative international market which cares little for local needs. Local initiatives to convert 'whatever' to fuel wouldn't be a 'international' or local problem if there wasn't a massive First World corporate-run system of global control designed entirely to use artificial values to wrest local control away from people. <p>The economy of the 'dino juice' is the same economy of the cellphone (or the carnation that is flown daily from Colombia because the UN thought that flowers would be a great substitute for cocaine). <p>You can't change one and not the other -- that's why I find worries about white people and their cars to be a little boring. OPs like this are really just the Machine working the 'cult of individualism' and trying to scare people closer to it. It makes 'opinionists' worry, think and fear about an international system they can't ultimately control, save through LOCAL action. <p>So long as the humans still think that the solution will come from 'outside' their communities, still follow imperialism and the nation-state, and still think that someone can legitimately OWN something on the other side of the planet over and above local needs, we are doomed. <p>Local control would assume a balance approach to everything; alienated control means diaspora. <p>Want an irony? In Swaziland as well as a couple of other African nations, they are converting cassava to bio-fuels. Cassava was a gleaner type crop used to keep the locals alive and tied to areas that can't support humans 365 days a year, which is a requirement for slavery and the nation-state. The irony is that cassava isn't native to Africa -- it comes from the Americas and was more or less introduced there as a food substitute much like bread fruit was transported around the world to the various British slave colonies as a food substitute. <p>See the irony of bio fuel conversion -- the locals there need to use a gleaner crop in order to make fuel, because the usual fuel is too expensive, and must do this in order to get wood and sugar cane to the export market. Huh? Most of these bio-fuel conversion schemes are being done in order to kept to their export commitments. The fuel we WASTE is done for our domestic needs -- like driving the SUV to the 711. If Swaziland or any of those countries are damaging their food supply, it's because of the export burden. <p>One will find that this was the criticism and legitimate criticism of Kyoto by China and those other producers. They commented on the fairness of a energy rationing regime that doesn't differentiate against consumption and production. If China or a Third World countries expends it's 'calculable' energy to produce products for exclusive export, then why would those countries be hit with all the 'energy' debt. The people in those countries are not getting the benefit of the products. Shouldn't the countries that IMPORT said products ALSO be hit with the 'energy' costs. <p>Kyoto sucked for a lot of reasons and nothing Gore or Lomborg want to say on the subject, touches this base problem of local control, autonomy and ultimately societies that embrace direct participatory democracy. <p>Amen.


Offline

Junior Member

Profile
Posts: 34
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:37 pm
 


Its more true now than ever before. Soylent Green is MADE OF PEOPLE!

Hal,
Ottawa


Offline

Junior Member

Profile
Posts: 34
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:37 pm
 


Its more true now than ever before. Soylent Green is MADE OF PEOPLE!

Hal,
Ottawa


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  1  2  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Vive Le Canada.ca. Powered by © phpBB.