OT: The President has signed into law the Protection of Monsanto

[Dorothea]

Well, I don't know. In a way I guess, but the US actually seems to be one of the worst western nations for this problem of polarization and blatantly false media reporting, where political rivals can't even have a discussion where they can agree on a starting point.

There is a reason a lot of people inside and outside the US won't watch American news - it is so politically polarized it is almost useless, and its highly sensationalist.

Many other countries are what you might call more secular, but their political processes and public discourse are not nearly so divided or polemical.

You're right, imo. I don't disagree with you. Our country is very polarizing, and I believe it's been done for years on purpose. I wish I could remember what I saw on that particular issue...it was during the general elections this past November.

Many other countries' governments aren't as GREEDY as this one is (wanting their piece of the pie in any country that has $$$ in some form). Forgive me.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Oh boy.....

For about a week now I've been asking myself why I get on CF/TAW? I'm still asking that question today and have precious few answers?

So many opinions, a lot of rancor, people jumping on each other, bad vibes, taking ourselves so seriously, people telling other people that they're heretics and liars and people judging me....I often wonder if these forums edify and help us to grow, or are just idolatrous outlets for us to spew our opinions with pride....

Pretty strong statements, Bruh...

Personally, there are a lot of times I've felt edified by the forums - but other times where I've thought a lot of it was truly off the wall - and at other times, I wonder if some things would be said if we were all in person or at a local barbecue.

 

[Thekla]

Here's some recent history on the "fight":

Obama Deregulates GMO Crops Despite Supreme Court Injunction

Obama's Broken Promise on GMO Food Labeling | Mother Jones

Obama's Science Commitment, FDA Face Ethics Scrutiny in Wake of GMO Salmon Fiasco - Forbes

Political Battle Over Genetically Modified Foods: Should They Be Labeled? - The Daily Beast

Also, when considering media reports, look at the history.

Having deliberately followed media coverage for decades, I can say that lack of major media outlet coverage of facts and failure to investigate issues that are 'inconvenient' to policy is de rigeur here.

 

[brinny]

Well, this is horrible news. I heard about it yesterday or the day before of this part hiding in the bill that went through the Senate and passed and was sent to the president to sign.

What does Monsanto need protection for? It is a HUGE corporate monster that bullies farmers and pays off politicians and other folks so that food isn't labeled with all the poison from the pesticides they're using on their GMO-poison food.

It's becoming more urgent that we some time start buying non-GMO seeds and start planting them in little pots if we don't have access to a backyard garden.

There was a priest who died in the 1950's who prophesied that there will come a day when we will not be able to eat the fruit off of trees. Lord, have mercy.

I signed the petitions, tried several times to call the WH to put in my views on this horrid bill, but I wasn't able to get through - the phone was busy.

We need much prayer in this country and the whole world.

Food Democracy Now | Obama signs Monsanto Protection Act! It's Time to Label GMOs!

I agree. Praying.

 

[MKJ]

You're right, imo. I don't disagree with you. Our country is very polarizing, and I believe it's been done for years on purpose. I wish I could remember what I saw on that particular issue...it was during the general elections this past November.

Many other countries' governments aren't as GREEDY as this one is (wanting their piece of the pie in any country that has $$$ in some form). Forgive me.

No need to ask for forgiveness!

I wonder about the greed thing - its an interesting observation. But I don't think that people who happen to be born in the US are any more inclined to greed, by nature, than anyone else.

So is it about some values they learn? Or about your political or economic institutions? It does seem to be related to the sort of individualism you see in the US I think, and the fear that any kind of looking at the good of society against that of the individual is (gasp) socialism. Everyone must be as close to totally free as possible in order to pursue their own personal good.

So maybe it goes back to the founding principles that come from that idea? Because in a lot of places, there is much more emphasis on how we need to work together for the good of all, sometimes even sacrificing our personal goods.

Its interesting to me that in Christianity, more freedom is not obviously linked to the Good - in fact it could be said to be opposed to it. The only real argument for giving more freedoms is that because of the Fall, trying to restrict freedoms absolutely tends to have very bad effects, and is ineffective too.

I read an article recently saying that the desire of political parties to polarize debate is because they believe if they paint the other side as evil, it will create a block of voters that will be totally loyal.

The problem of course is two-fold: the other side will do the same thing and you will be no further ahead; and it will destroy the whole purpose of liberal democracy which is way for people of different opinions to come to resolutions that are better than what any would come up with individually.

 

[Dorothea]

No need to ask for forgiveness!

I wonder about the greed thing - its an interesting observation. But I don't think that people who happen to be born in the US are any more inclined to greed, by nature, than anyone else.

So is it about some values they learn? Or about your political or economic institutions? It does seem to be related to the sort of individualism you see in the US I think, and the fear that any kind of looking at the good of society against that of the individual is (gasp) socialism. Everyone must be as close to totally free as possible in order to pursue their own personal good.

So maybe it goes back to the founding principles that come from that idea? Because in a lot of places, there is much more emphasis on how we need to work together for the good of all, sometimes even sacrificing our personal goods.

Yes, I believe you are correct. That is basically how this nation was formed.

Its interesting to me that in Christianity, more freedom is not obviously linked to the Good - in fact it could be said to be opposed to it. The only real argument for giving more freedoms is that because of the Fall, trying to restrict freedoms absolutely tends to have very bad effects, and is ineffective too.

True, and I agree again. We are free in Christ. Whether we're in a totally "free" country/society is not as paramount, it appears.

I read an article recently saying that the desire of political parties to polarize debate is because they believe if they paint the other side as evil, it will create a block of voters that will be totally loyal.

The problem of course is two-fold: the other side will do the same thing and you will be no further ahead; and it will destroy the whole purpose of liberal democracy which is way for people of different opinions to come to resolutions that are better than what any would come up with individually.

yeah, that sounds about right to me.

 

[Thekla]

Um, if you look at the OP, it gave a very inaccurate description of what this legislation says, which is why gzt bothered to post what he thought was a more accurate description. He is not exactly a poster inclined to excessive claims, so I don't see why people would dismiss him out of hand now. There is a lot of talk about what kind of precedent it may set, or how it may be used in the future, but that does not mean that it will be able to be used that way. I haven't seen anyone here show that it will be so - everyone has pretty much assumed it will do what the OP says.

There is a history of the kid gloves used with Monsanto over the years, and the way things work in the US.

Here is an example (there are many more, of course):
How Monsanto outfoxed the Obama administration - Salon.com

The OP included conclusions drawn from this understanding. See this analysis:
IPS – Secretive U.S. Amendment Would Weaken Biotech Oversight | Inter Press Service

This legislation has nothing to do with farmers who have had their crops infected by neighbour's GMO crops. Such legislation would probably be a very good thing. But that is not change what this legislation is saying, or make it, in itself, bad. There are lots of laws that do not help farmers in that situation, they are still either good or bad laws on their own merits.

Again, look at the analysis and historically the "way things play out" in the US, especially of late. Sure, the language is "homey" and tends in one direction - but given the history and the way the legislative/legal system works in the US, it's not the way things appear to be that is the concern.

And do consider this:

Why is it, in spite of promises and public outcry, that GMO food is not labelled ?

If this rider is about protecting farmers, why only some farmers ?

Polarizing is when you demonize anything you see as being on "the other side", attack them as being the devil or out to destroy humanity, and report information in a way to make those who disagree with you look as bad as possible.

See the Salon article.

And it doesn't take the motive to destroy something to destroy something.

Look at the labeling issue history in the US over RgBH (not allowed in Canada, btw).

If people do these things with regard to GMOs, they are polarizing the debate, essentially making it impossible to have a productive civil discourse on the issue.

Could be. Or could be they know the history and the way things work here.

(Ironically, ask farmers how civil Monsanto is when they "disagree" with farmers.)

It helps no one except those who hope to win votes by sweeping any serious questions aside.

Then we should for sure move beyond a shallow look.

I think GMOs are a bad idea, probably on a theological level as well as practically. But I am sure as heck not going to stoop to misuse of information to convince others of the same thing.

Don't stoop. But do dig - again, into the history of this issue and similar in US history.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

yep. it's just how I feel, man

Pretty strong statements, Bruh...

Personally, there are a lot of times I've felt edified by the forums - but other times where I've thought a lot of it was truly off the wall - and at other times, I wonder if some things would be said if we were all in person or at a local barbecue.

 

[Dorothea]

There is a history of the kid gloves used with Monsanto over the years, and the way things work in the US.

Here is an example (there are many more, of course):
How Monsanto outfoxed the Obama administration - Salon.com

The OP included conclusions drawn from this understanding. See this analysis:
IPS – Secretive U.S. Amendment Would Weaken Biotech Oversight | Inter Press Service

Again, look at the analysis and historically the "way things play out" in the US, especially of late. Sure, the language is "homey" and tends in one direction - but given the history and the way the legislative/legal system works in the US, it's not the way things appear to be that is the concern.

And do consider this:

Why is it, in spite of promises and public outcry, that GMO food is not labelled ?

If this rider is about protecting farmers, why only some farmers ?


See the Salon article.

And it doesn't take the motive to destroy something to destroy something.

Look at the labeling issue history in the US over RgBH (not allowed in Canada, btw).

Could be. Or could be they know the history and the way things work here.

(Ironically, ask farmers how civil Monsanto is when they "disagree" with farmers.)

Then we should for sure move beyond a shallow look.

Don't stoop. But do dig - again, into the history of this issue and similar in US history.

Very good points, and thanks for the links, Thekla. I'm thinking maybe since MKJ doesn't live in the U.S., she of course, wouldn't have a more intimate understanding of how our government works. I could be wrong, but I know for sure I don't know enough (barely anything) about other country's governments and local law suits or federal law suits going on to even be able to venture an opinion. She is quite smart and seems to be well-informed, but maybe with her not living here and being a citizen and all, she may not know the deep scope of this issue.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I'd tend to say you're wrong on that one, Dot. Meghan is such a brainiac that sometimes I think she has a brain like the Talosians on Star Trek....she's exceptionally bright imho, and she probably knows more about our government than we do! She could probably tell you who the secretary of agriculture is in Zimbabwe!

I'm thinking maybe since MKJ doesn't live in the U.S., she of course, wouldn't have a more intimate understanding of how our government works. I could be wrong, .

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Speaking of conspiracy theories:

Yahoo! News UK & Ireland - Latest World News & UK News Headlines

Funny how Putin's critics wind up dead.....

Fresh off the headlines

 

[Thekla]

Speaking of conspiracy theories:

Yahoo! News UK & Ireland - Latest World News & UK News Headlines

Funny how Putin's critics wind up dead.....

Fresh off the headlines

Interestingly, the recent oil pipeline spill (in Arkansas, tar sand oil, Exxon) doesn't show up in my Google news feed, even when I expand the US News section ...

curious

 

[RobNJ]

Interestingly, the recent oil pipeline spill (in Arkansas, tar sand oil, Exxon) doesn't show up in my Google news feed, even when I expand the US News section ...

curious

Just took a while,, at 10:26 Eastern, they items are there,,timed as being posted "1 hour ago"

ETA: When actually looking in Google News, under oil spill arkansas, I find more stories from yesterday.. Hmmm..could it be because I'm nowhere near local to AR?...or juuust a co-inky-dink?? (not that I would EVER think that Google would help a MAJOR corporation & possible advertising client hide bad press.... )

 

[nestoj]

Could you try a positive approach - label the non-GMO food as "GMO free"? I don't think anyone could object that.

 

[Thekla]

Just took a while,, at 10:26 Eastern, they items are there,,timed as being posted "1 hour ago"

ETA: When actually looking in Google News, under oil spill arkansas, I find more stories from yesterday.. Hmmm..could it be because I'm nowhere near local to AR?...or juuust a co-inky-dink?? (not that I would EVER think that Google would help a MAJOR corporation & possible advertising client hide bad press.... )

I ran into the story yesterday also, but it didn't come up in the feed; I had to search the news page to find it. At least it's up today then ...

 

[Thekla]

Could you try a positive approach - label the non-GMO food as "GMO free"? I don't think anyone could object that.

Monsanto (and the FDA) has in the past:
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20120423/NEWS03/120422010/GMO-labels-in-vermont
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/9/..._makers_from_advertising_products_as_gmo_free

The other problem is that with pollen drift, it's getting increasingly difficult/expensive to certify (organic farmers are worried that they won't be able to maintain their European markets).

 

[BluhdoftheLamb]

This is ... not surprising and so distressing.

Just thought to re-post this:
Vandana Shiva on the Problem with Genetically Modified Seeds | Moyers & Company | BillMoyers.com

From a comment on your link:

"I have a bumper sticker (from Northern Sun) that says," I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one." Monsanto would be a good one to start with."

 

[BluhdoftheLamb]

The problems in American politics seem to be systematic, maybe right down to the constitution and the founding documents. But with so much confusion and obfuscation to try and serve partisan ends, no one will be able to bring any light to that.

Obviously false. Never has a Nation risen to such strength so quickly, and others have followed the lead and done quite well by it. You may wish to stick to labeling anyone who dares to question anything mainstream as a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy nutter; that is currently quite popular.

 

[BluhdoftheLamb]

she probably knows more about our government than we do!

Not at all. Our Nation was founded on sacrificing self interest, in favor of the whole. She has demonstrated not being aware of any of that.

 

[Thekla]

From a comment on your link:

"I have a bumper sticker (from Northern Sun) that says," I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one." Monsanto would be a good one to start with."

This soulless "person" certainly seems to have a favored status.

I also wonder if this rider offers protection for the administration - both GMO alfalfa and GMO sugar beet were fast-tracked for approval.