But really the anti-GM groups are deployed frikkettoni,
ex-Katanga, friends of the lobbyist or lobbyist themselves? Apart from the language and labeling
belonging to a world "other" and
who persecute us from '68, perhaps things are not true.
criticism and resistance to GMOs and farming practices
free from pesticides, have a global character and see
protagonists in the first place
peasant movements and organizations of the South. Women and men who report such as GMOs and pesticides are
the advanced part of a system that
agri-business world dominated by large multinationals, which has produced
all current and dramatic distortions. A system that keeps the peasants
countries "developing" in permanent
poverty and dependence. That produces the most and least feeds,
as demonstrated by the failure of all commitments to fight hunger in the world
. That's when feeds creates obesity. A system that survives
only by very heavy public support, pace of the most enthusiastic supporters of fate
saving the free market.
in USA as in Europe, where subsidies account for more than 40% of
budget, this paradigm instead of producing work
good, good soil, good food, systematically favors the wealthy.
Large shareholders and managers of multinational companies that control
seeds, pesticides, GMOs and now, and so have the power
food on reproduction and genetic inheritance,
systematically violating the human right to food and food sovereignty
. O people, big landowners in the first place, which derive
benefit from subsidized exports to the detriment of agriculture
family members of third countries or producers of "biofuel" that subtracts
agriculture and food delivery to feed the machines.
Thus the products of this system profoundly unfair that most
costanos from the standpoint of environmental impacts and its
poor, feed the poor end to the "discount" or
are shipped to impoverished countries in the form of food aid,
and quality, which saves the commons, such as health
the Earth and people, becomes a luxury. Of course you can consider this
ricostruzioneanticapitalistica and ideological
for us is instead a critical paradigm. That is not science
to save us, is practical experience. Agriculture is full of revolutions
scientistic green, (last in order of time the plan was launched by Bill Gates and Kofi Annan
for a new green revolution in Africa - AGRA
) separating increasing food production by factors
natural, and the effects are before us.
hunger and obesity, pandemics, desertification and the greenhouse effect. Sure you can always argue that
that at least 16% of greenhouse agriculture produces
this does not come from long cycles, from the excesses
chemicals from factory farms, but from hens kept in
earth. Or you want to forget that agriculture clean, traditional, small-scale
can be an important factor
adaptation to the greenhouse effect. But there it is absurd and cruel. What are the Alevis
intensive cage everybody knows, as we all know what will
also in terms of animal suffering.
Sure you can turn a somersault with the precautionary principle,
founding of Europe and key international law
environment, where you show that the things you do not hurt
into its opposite. Or you can do everything that
has shown that it hurts, especially on private land owned
. Or trying to say, based on a British study,
that the products are organic agriculture, in terms of consumer health
, comparable to those with agricultural pesticides,
forgetting the health of people who grow, and
poison every day. What about the victims of Nemagon
in Central America, or of those lands and aquifers poisoned by deadly chemical substances
as glyphosate? Sure you can cite studies
always available as there are many who say that nuclear
is the greenhouse effect, or that the same effect
global warming is a natural factor, but the reality of the relationship between society and
modern science is what science and science
discuss and choose. A debate that goes as far
critical technologies, inherently entrenched around
interests of the powerful and who can not stand the criticism of democracy. And
struggles to appropriate technology, diffusible and controllable. For
where RU486 can be for and against GMOs, because you're with
women and farmers. So Europe has validated consensus
human responsibility the greenhouse. Reflecting the
we also propose to the other. Among discuss everything and everything is
show, there is a difference. And if it is right to criticize any experience
root of the left, maybe still trying to look
beyond their geographical boundaries, the other would find
magnificent and progressive capitalism.
Roberto Musacchio
Francesco Martone
