 |
| ||
|
||||||||
|
« Obama already reinforcing A'jad in Iran |
Blog Home Page
| Harlan County takes sides »
May 21, 2008 Crop research and the world's poorThis article from Sunday's New York Times is poorly written and poorly edited, like most Times articles these days, but important nonetheless, for it describes the unnoticed decline of funding for crop research programs. What a boring topic, you might say. Quite so, except that 20 or 30 years ago, it wasn't boring at all. Indeed, crop research was celebrated for having wrought the "Green Revolution," a breakthrough in agricultural production of basic foodstuff crops like rice, wheat, and barley, that revolutionized the economies of many of the world's poorest and most populous nations, and brought freedom from famine and endemic malnutrition to millions who previously had endured these horrors as inevitable facts of their lives. Two passages, in the coyest and most pussyfooting terms, hint at where the missing funds that formerly supported crop research have gone: into the sexy cause of environmentalism.
Of course, in logic there is no necessary contradiction between sustaining the Green Revolution, and the cause of the environment. But we do not inhabit a world of logic. We inhabit a world of politics. And in this political world, it is an undeniable fact that for many of the environmental/ecology zealots who have managed to elevate their cause to premier status among the world's goody-goodies, the human race is an unfortunate parasitic infection of pristine nature. Big population reductions due to famine a la Malthus, to these people, would not be such a bad thing. Even for the non-zealots, who would never admit to harboring such dark thoughts, it is a difficult thing to sustain equal levels of concern for faceless masses in Asia, Africa, and South America, and the loveable little frogs and fronds of the rain forest. We've already had a recent taste of what strange "side effects" environmentalism can have, in the ethanol debacle, which has turned much of the world's most productive agricultural land into government-subsidized petrochemical factories, with corresponding giant rises in the wholesale prices of sugar, corn and wheat. Thanks, Al Gore! It appears that the world's poor will soon be experiencing even direr consequences. Does anyone doubt that the world's Al Gores will sashay away from these horrendous scenes of agony --"humanity has brought this upon itself with its gluttonous appetites" - with the same insouciant denial of responsibility that they evince now regarding ethanol's effects?
|
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|
Comments
At this rate, Algore will join an exclusive club with Rachel Carson and Karl Marx. (both wrote books that are responsible for millions dying)
Posted by: Michael Andersen | May 22, 2008 09:53 AM
Let's see. According to Gore and his wacko scientist, global warming is the result of elevated CO2 levels in the atmosphere. We now have roughly six billion people in the world and they all are inhaling oxygen and emitting CO2. Its not our SUV's that are causing the problem, its just too many people are breathing. Could it be that Gore and his ilk are really interested in reducing the human population to reach the many liberal goals. Think about it, if we eliminate the poor and starving of the world (which should cut the population in half), we will then have a cleaner atmosphere and the poor and starving will no longer suffer. Oh, by the way, by doing so, we will also eliminate poverty, there will be no desperate poor/starving people destroying the jungles and woodlands that produce oxygen, the birds and bees and slugs will then thrive in their untouched natural environment, there will be no emerging nations geared to consume greater quantities of natural resources and oil, and the cycle goes on and on. Talk about liberal Utopia. All of the world's problem solved under the guise of Global Warming. And we thought Gore was a buffoon. Boy, did he fool us.
PS: Please don't let the libs see this. They may actually think it's a good idea and try to implement this.
Posted by: Bill Moulton | May 22, 2008 11:51 AM