You're viewing part of a thread.
Your complaint seems to be with capitalism and is completely separate from GMO.
Your complaint seems to be with capitalism
Who do you think is peddling the (alleged) "need" for GMO food crops, genius? The tooth fairy?
I've seen lots of scientists pushing the need for it: decreased land use, decreased pesticides use, drought tolerance, etc.
Gmo is just a tool. Sure capitalists will take advantage of it for profit, but again, separate from the tool.
decreased land use
You mean that thing we can already do without the need for GMOs?
decreased pesticides use
Once more... you mean that thing we can already do without the need for GMOs?
drought tolerance
And finally... you mean that thing we can already do without the need for GMOs?
separate from the tool.
You exist in a capitalist society - nothing can be separated from it, genius.
You mean that thing we can already do without the need for GMOs?
So if you think it's exactly the same, then obviously there is nothing to worry about. You're defeating your own position with this statement.
You exist in a capitalist society - nothing can be separated from it, genius.
I don't follow this argument. Cross-breeding also exists in a capitalist society. So if GMOs are bad for this reason, everything we eat is. You're, again, defeating your own position with this statement.
So if you think it’s exactly the same, then obviously there is nothing to worry about.
Is this the only way you exercise your mental faculties? Making gigantic logical leaps without rhyme nor reason?
everything we eat is.
Food existed before capitalism - I certainly hope this isn't news to you.
Food existed before capitalism - I certainly hope this isn’t news to you.
You exist in a capitalist society - nothing can be separated from it, genius.
Oh, so now, even though we live in a capitalistic society, things can be separated from it. . .despite just moments ago when you were arguing nothing could be separated from it. Which is it? These blatantly contradictory statements are hard to follow for someone like me who has such limited "mental faculties."
even though we live in a capitalistic society, things can be separated from it
This probably made sense in your head while you were typing it. Would you like a chance to gather your thoughts before continuing? It seems like you need one.
Can I ask real quick because I think this would give us much more information on your perspective: What would be your stance on the use of GMO in a socialist society where there would not be capital gain and/or patents and the use of the crops/seeds would be under governmental control?
(Just to make it clear, I absolutely see your point with capitalism and agree with you on it. Fuck capitalism and the idea that a free market who caused most of our problems will solve all our problems. But I also, having studied at a campus of two universities who focused on a variety of life sciences, biotechnology, forestry, agriculture and horticulture - organic, conventional, big scale, small scale, traditional, futuristic - I must admit I am very much pro GMO as a technology.)
What would be your stance on the use of GMO in a socialist society
I don't have a stance on it - that would be for them to decide. That is the whole point of socialism. If you asked me what they'd probably decide about it, I'd say that they would probably find a use for it - and a lot faster than a capitalist society would (as capitalist society hamstrings it's own scientific development due to everything in that society being slaved to the irrelevant profiteering needs of a capitalist elite).
It's highly unlikely that they'd use it for food production - considering that food production has, for centuries now, been perfectly adequate (despite the right's Malthusian histrionics) and that every major famine we've experienced since the Enlightenment could easily have been prevented if our food distribution wasn't under the control of imperialist interests.
and the use of the crops/seeds would be under governmental control?
There can be no such thing as a socialist society where anything is under government control. If it has a state, it's not socialist in any way or form. The purpose of socialism is, and has always been, to place the productive labor of humanity under the control of the people performing said labor - not a state that will simply entrench it's own power and privilege by handing all the fruits of said labor to a class of complicit and parasitic aristocrats/capitalists/party apparatchiks.
That is the whole point of socialism.
"alleged need"
The types like you are funny. On the one hand you complain that we can't use efficient food, but on the other we must feed everyone. Which is it?
Being anti science may be cool but it won't save this world.
Yes yes, Monsanto is evil and things need to change and improve, but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater
On the one hand you complain that we can’t use efficient food, but on the other we must feed everyone.
Yet more liberals whose only intelectual exercise comes from taking incoherent logical leaps? Do they churn you out in a factory somewhere?
but don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater
Oh, look at you - protecting the status quo while pretending to criticize it!