Yeah its the farmers fault and not the people who determine which type of farming gets subsidized or the corporations that own everything they need and keep them dependant on unsustainable farming practices for menial wages at best.
The Palliser Triangle would like to know your location.
Pre 50s Ag was small scale, and did tons of environmental damage. The green Revolution promoted corporate Ag, which gave us the system we have now. None of this is ideal, and a better land management would have served us a lot better.
Yes but its not the responsibility of the individual to be environmentally sustainable. Thats an expanding field of research that we can’t expect every person to keep up with. Which is why we should have institutions that regulate farming practices in order to make them sustainable but unfortunately the ones we have are inept because sustainability is unprofitable. The problem originates with the organization of labor and should be treated in a manner appropriate to its origin.
Also the green revolution was designed to give the working class less power over food production because organized farmers could have a dangerous level of control over the economy. What if they were to strike?
I disagree on the environmentally sustainable aspect. It is our responsibility to be good stewards of the earth, though we all very much shirk that duty.
I agree on institutions and regulations though, very much.
The green revolution was more of a combination of factors. The early to mid 20th century saw a lot of mechanical and chemical development, with the Haber-Bosch process only discovered at the onset of WWI. There definitely was a ‘contain communism’ aspect to it though. I don’t think it was more about power over the working class, but more of ‘hey if Asia is hungry they’ll be angry, and if they’re angry they’ll get organized or be susceptible to communist influences’.
Yeah its the farmers fault and not the people who determine which type of farming gets subsidized or the corporations that own everything they need and keep them dependant on unsustainable farming practices for menial wages at best.
The Palliser Triangle would like to know your location.
Pre 50s Ag was small scale, and did tons of environmental damage. The green Revolution promoted corporate Ag, which gave us the system we have now. None of this is ideal, and a better land management would have served us a lot better.
Yes but its not the responsibility of the individual to be environmentally sustainable. Thats an expanding field of research that we can’t expect every person to keep up with. Which is why we should have institutions that regulate farming practices in order to make them sustainable but unfortunately the ones we have are inept because sustainability is unprofitable. The problem originates with the organization of labor and should be treated in a manner appropriate to its origin.
Also the green revolution was designed to give the working class less power over food production because organized farmers could have a dangerous level of control over the economy. What if they were to strike?
I disagree on the environmentally sustainable aspect. It is our responsibility to be good stewards of the earth, though we all very much shirk that duty.
I agree on institutions and regulations though, very much.
The green revolution was more of a combination of factors. The early to mid 20th century saw a lot of mechanical and chemical development, with the Haber-Bosch process only discovered at the onset of WWI. There definitely was a ‘contain communism’ aspect to it though. I don’t think it was more about power over the working class, but more of ‘hey if Asia is hungry they’ll be angry, and if they’re angry they’ll get organized or be susceptible to communist influences’.