Subsidies to corn and soy beans producers that make more than $200,000 a
year makes no sense. The empty calories that they produce are making us
sick. The fast food that they support has created a model for the work
place, where places McDonalds, and Wal Mart have 400% turn over in
employees because that way, they can avoid paying benefits. Fast food
isn't really cheap food because the cost of land degradation, water
pollution, necessary infrastructure, impoverishment of farmers becomes a
social cost, whereas the profits go into the private pockets of Cargill,
Archer Daniels Midlands, and Monsanto.

Write your congressperson and tell them what you think. When this farm
bill is cast into law, it will be another 5 years before there is a
chance to undo the harm.

http://web.missouri.edu/ikerdj/paper...%20Culture.htm


The New Food Cultu

Good News for Small Farms[i]



John Ikerd[ii]



At an organic farming conference in Winnipeg, Canada, a couple of years
ago, a woman in the audience stood up and said, ³Organic foods are not
going to become popular with mainstream consumers until they became
quick, convenient, and cheap.² My immediate response was that true
organic foods were not going to be quick, convenient, or cheap * at
least not for some time to come. It costs more to produce food
organically, at least in terms of dollars and cents, because
conventional food producers don¹t pay the full ecological and social
costs of their production methods. Fortunately, however, more and more
people are finding organic foods to be worth the necessary time, effort,
and money. However, that Canadian woman¹s comment caused me to think
further about the nature of our food system and about what we have done
to try to make foods quick, convenient, and cheap for consumers.



First, at the farm level, I concluded that our never-ending quest for
cheap food is the root cause of the transformation of American
agriculture from a system of small, diversified, independently operated,
family farms into a system now dominated by large-scale, industrialized,
corporately controlled agribusinesses. The industrial production
technologies that have supported specialization, mechanization, and
ultimately, large-scale, contract production, were all developed to make
agriculture more efficient * to make food cheaper for consumers. As
farms have become larger and fewer, millions of American farmers have
been forced off the land, those remaining are sacrificing their
independence, and thousands of small farming communities have withered
and died * all for the sake of cheap food.



The agricultural establishment has boasted that ever fewer farmers have
been able to feed a growing nation with an ever-decreasing share of
consumer income spent for food. Admittedly, the increases in economic
efficiency have been impressive, but what about the human costs.
Economists have totaled up tremendous savings for consumers from lower
food costs, but they have never bothered to place a value on the lives
of farm families that have been destroyed by the loss of their farms,
their way of life, and their heritage. They have never bothered to
consider the value of the lives of rural people, * with roots in rural
schools, churches, and businesses * who were forced to abandon their
communities as farm families were forced off the land. The human costs
of cheap food have been undeniably tremendous, but since they couldn¹t
be measured in dollars and cents, they have gone uncounted.



The ecological costs of cheap food, likewise, could not be measured in
dollars and cents, and thus, have been left uncounted and largely
ignored. Today, only the most diehard industrialists bother to deny
that we have degraded the productivity of the land through erosion and
contamination and have polluted the natural environment with
agricultural chemicals * in our never-ending pursuit of cheaper food.
Certainly, we had soil erosion in the ³dust bowl² days, but we were
making great strides in soil conservation, before the dawning of
industrial agriculture in the late 1940s. In spite of stepped up soil
conservation efforts of the 1990s, American farms still are losing
topsoil at rates far exceeding rates of soil regeneration. Feeble
efforts to control soil loss through reduced tillage leave farmers
increasingly reliant on herbicides that pollute our streams and
groundwater and that disrupt or destroy the biological life in the soil.
Future generations will still be as dependent upon the bounty of the
earth as when all people were hunters and gatherers. We are risking the
future of human life on earth, just so we can have cheap food.



The pursuit of cheap food also could mean the end of agriculture in
America * at least agriculture, as we have known it. The globalization
of agriculture, through so-called ³free trade agreements,² means that
food in the future will be grown wherever in the world it can be
produced at the lowest dollar and cent cost. High costs of land and
labor in the US * consequences of favorable employment opportunities and
the urban-to-rural population migration * quite likely will keep
production costs in the US well above costs in other food producing
regions of the world. The multinational food corporations that
increasingly control agriculture are not people * they have no heart, no
soul, nor citizenship in any particular country. They will produce or
buy agricultural commodities wherever they can produce or buy at the
lowest cost, without regard for national origin. America is not likely
to abandon agriculture completely, but we could well become as dependent
on the rest of the world for food as we are today for oil * a high price
to pay for cheap food.



The costs of making food quick and convenient probably are no less that
the cost of making food cheap. Nearly eighty cents of each dollar
Americans spend for food goes to pay for marketing services *
processing, packaging, transportation, storage, advertising, etc. All
of these costs are associated with making food more convenient * getting
it into the most convenient form and package, getting it to the most
convenient location, at the most convenient time, and convincing us to
buy it. So, we pay far more for the convenience of our food than we pay
for the food itself. In fact, we pay more to those who package and
advertise our food than we pay to the farmers who produce it. So, by
far the greatest part of the total cost of food is the cost of
convenience.



Our addiction to convenience also is placing control of our food supply
in the hands of a few giant, multinational corporations. As Dr. Bill
Heffernan and his colleagues of the University of Missouri have pointed
out, the global food supply today is dominated by a handful of giant
agribusiness firms, allied by various means, forming three ³global food
clusters.² [1] These firms influence and, in many cases control, nearly
everything that happens to our food because they control the processes
that make our food convenient. Think of the political influence
corporations will hold when they completely control our sources of food.
The price of convenient food is not just the eighty cents of each dollar
we spend for food; it¹s loss of control over our food.



The costs of quick food are similar in nature to the costs of convenient
food. Our growing addiction to fast food is evident in the
ever-increasing share of our food dollar spent at restaurants and other
eating establishments * a share approaching half of total food
purchases. And, fast foods places, such as McDonalds, Kentucky Fried
Chicken, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut, account for nearly half of all food
consumed away from home. Erick Schlosser, in his recent best seller,
Fast Food Nation, addresses the cost of our ³love affair² with fast
foods.[2] He states, ³fast food has triggered the homogenization of our
society. Fast food has hastened the malling of our landscape, widening
of the chasm between rich and poor, fueled an epidemic of obesity, and
propelled the juggernaut of American cultural imperialism abroad.² He
documents how quick food has lured us into choosing diets deficient in
nearly everything except calories, supporting practices deceptive in
every aspect from advertising to flavoring, and systems that degrade
nearly everyone and everything involved in the process.



The fast food industry has lured low-income consumers, along with the
affluent, into paying ridiculously high prices for low-quality meats,
potatoes, vegetable oil, and sugar. However, the high dollar-and-cent
costs are but the tip of the iceberg. The true costs of quick food must
include the costs of poor health, lost dignity in the workplace,
degraded landscapes, and ethical and moral decay in business matters,
including international trade and investment. We are paying a
tremendously high price for the time saved by choosing quick food.



Our quick, convenient, and cheap culture of food also has decreased our
enjoyment of food and has diminished, rather than enhanced, our
happiness. Certainly, eating is a primal act. Everyone must eat, and
in a physical sense, ³we are what we eat.² But, what we eat also
reflects who we are * our character, our temperament, our values, our
ethics, and our integrity. As Brother David Andrews, a fellow advocate
of sustainable agriculture says, ³Eating is a moral act.² What we
choose to eat affects not only how our food is produced, processed, and
distributed, but also who benefits, who pays, and how animals, people,
and the earth are treated in the process.



Perhaps even more obvious, eating is a social act. Historically, people
have socialized with their family and friends, lingering over meals that
nourish the mind and soul as well as the body. Historically, people
have taken great care and pride in their preparation of food *
reflecting their care and concern for those who were to eat what they
had prepared. What we eat, how it is prepared, how we eat, who eats
together helps to define our social and cultural identity.



A society also is shaped by how food and the benefits of food are
shared. A society in which all are assured a diet adequate to ensure
their physical and mental health and development is quite different from
a society in which people must fend for themselves or starve. A society
in which rewards are shared equitably among all who contribute to the
value of food is quite different from a society in which rewards go to
those with the greatest market power and political influence.



In our quest to save time and effort in preparing food and in eating, we
have created a food culture within which much of the real satisfaction
of eating has been lost. Our food choices are driven by urgency and
economics, not by ethics or enjoyment. Most Americans don¹t know where
their food comes from, who produces it, or the social and ecological
consequences of how it is produced. We are told that we shouldn¹t waste
our time preparing food or eating food. Food is treated as fuel for the
body, of little social or moral significance. Our choice of quick and
convenient food ignores the influence of food choices on the ethical and
social dimensions of our quality of life. We have taken the joy out of
cooking and eating.



Americans have become distracted from their historical pursuit of
happiness * not just in our food choices, but in all aspects of our
lives. In the pursuit of abundance, convenience, and leisure, we have
lost our sense of enjoyment. Historically, happiness had been widely
accepted as the motive of all purposeful human activity. The framers of
the U.S. Constitution, for example, listed ³life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness² among the inalienable rights of all people.
Philosophers throughout the ages have spent a lot of time thinking about
the meaning of happiness. Americans are so busy striving to become
wealthy that we don¹t have time to be happy.



The hedonist philosophers equated happiness to the sensory pleasures of
individual, personal experiences. This seems to be the average
American¹s idea of happiness. However, another group of philosophers,
including Aristotle, used the word eudaimonia for happiness.[3]
Eudaimonia is inherently social in nature * it is realized by
individuals, but only within the context of family, friendships,
community, or society. Aristotle¹s happiness, a social happiness, was
seen as a natural product of right relationships. Equally important,
this social happiness was considered a by-product of actions taken for
their own sake * not to achieve some sensory satisfaction, but instead,
because they are intrinsically good. In essence, Aristotle and his
followers believed that true happiness was not something to be pursued,
but instead, was a natural consequence of right living. The urges that
have driven us toward quick, convenient, cheap food are purely
hedonistic in nature * they are about the pursuit of narrow individual
self-interests. In our pursuit of hedonistic rewards, in all aspects of
our society, we have abandoned the social happiness of eudaimonia, and
we are suffering the inevitable consequences.



For those who need statistical evidence, Robert Putnam¹s book Bowling
Alone provides measure after measure verifying that America is becoming
a nation of increasingly disconnected, unhappy people.[4] For example,
each decade since the 1960s, fewer Americans have voted in elections,
belonged to organizations, participated in social activities, or even
visited each other¹s homes. Most such measures of social connectedness
or social capital have dropped by 30-50 percent since the late 1950s.
And, as Americans have become disconnected, we have become a more
contentious and less-civil society, as evidenced by our spending more
per capita each decade for lawyers, courts, law enforcement, and prisons.



Putnam also points out that our increasingly dysfunctional personal
relationships have been associated with our deteriorating physical and
mental health, with a ten-fold increase in mental illness and a tripling
and quadrupling of suicides among young adults and adolescents. Less
serious, but far more common, incidents of ³malaise² * headaches,
indigestion, and sleeplessness * have shown patterns similar to those
for mental illness. Between the late 1970s and late 1990s, each new
generation, on average, are not only less healthy but also have
indicated they are ³less happy² than were those of previous generations.



If the hedonists were right, then we Americans should be the happiest
people on earth. Americans would have the least trouble and strife and
the highest sense of purpose in life among all nations of the world. We
would have the fewest assaults and murders, the least drug abuse, the
lowest incidence of crime in general. We would be the most mentally
healthy people in the world, spending the least amount for mental health
care and experiencing the lowest rate of suicide of any nation.
Americans probably spend more money on themselves, for their own sensory
pleasure, than has any people at any time in human history. But, our
wealth has not brought us happiness. The evidence continues to grow
that true happiness is to be found in positive relationships, in family,
community, and society, and in righteous living * in social happiness,
not in hedonistic self-interest. We have a society that meets our
material needs, but not social or spiritual needs. We have a food
system that provides an abundance of calories, but leaves us hungry for
enjoyment and happiness.



We don¹t need a lot of information or statistics to tell us that
something is fundamentally wrong with the American system or to tell us
what kinds of food system we need instead. It¹s mainly a matter of
common sense. Our common sense tells us that food should feed not only
our bodies, but also feed our minds and our souls. Our common sense
tells us that food should bring us together, rather than tear us apart.
Our common sense tells us the food we eat should reflect an ethical and
moral sense of caring for each other and caring for the earth, rather
than thoughtless, self-centered exploitation of people and the earth
driven by cost and convenience.



While still a minority, a growing number of Americans are beginning ask
some common sense questions about their food system, and we are
beginning to see the consequences of their answers. The demand for
organic foods has been growing at a rate of twenty percent per year over
the past decade, doubling every three to four years. Consumers don¹t
want chemicals in their foods. Parents have demanded that soda machines
and fast foods be removed from their schools and replaced with wholesome
local foods. They want nutrition in their children¹s food. Customers
have sued fast food restaurants for obesity, accusing the corporations
of peddling addictions. Consumers have demanded country of origin
labeling, even though USDA has refused to implement it. Consumers are
buying more of their food locally, so they won¹t have to overcook their
hamburgers and eggs to avoid salmonella poisoning or worry about E coli
contamination or ³mad cow disease.² American consumers have lost
confidence in the health and integrity of the industrial food system *
in food safety, wholesomeness, and nutrition * and they have lost
confidence in the ability of either the corporations or government to
restore it.



These concerned Americans are not satisfied with quick, convenient,
cheap food; they want something else. Obviously, they want their food
to be safe, wholesome, attractive, flavorful, and reasonably priced.
But, a growing number of are now asking for something more; they want it
to be produced sustainably. They want their food produced in ways that
respects people * including farmers and workers in the food system, as
well food consumers. They want their food produced in ways that respect
the natural environment. A growing number of consumers are willing to
compromise, at least to some extent, on cosmetic appearance, preparation
time, convenience, and price in order to ensure the integrity of their
food. But, they will not compromise on food safety or wholesomeness,
and most consumers expect even higher qualities of freshness, nutrition,
and flavor from local, sustainably produced foods. These discriminating
consumers are creating a new American food culture.



This new food culture is but one part of a broader, more inclusive new
American culture. Psychologist Sherry Anderson and market researcher,
Paul Ray, in their book, The Cultural Creative, indicate that possibly
50 million already are involved in creating this new American
culture.[5] These cultural creating people believe that relationships
are very important, share a strong sense of community, are committed to
social equity and justice, believe that nature is sacred, and are
concerned for the natural environment and ecological sustainability.
They also tend to be more altruistic, idealistic, optimistic, and
spiritual than is the average American. They are less materialistic,
are less concerned about job prospects, and have fewer financial
concerns. These are all characteristics of people who are concerned
about the issues that are driving the new food culture.



These ³cultural creatives² have come together through various social
movements, including those advocating social justice, civil rights,
human rights, world peace, environmental protection, sustainable
development, holistic health, organic foods, and spiritual psychology.
These related issues are merging into a common movement committed to
building a more healthy and sustainable human society. While this group
represents less than one-third of the total adult population, their
numbers are growing, and they are far more than sufficient in numbers to
support a new sustainable alternative to the quick, convenient, cheap
food system of today.



This assertion is supported by the nationally respected Hartman Report,
which surveyed representative United States households to explore the
linkage between food purchases and environmental attitudes.[6] The
report identified two groups, the ³true naturals² and ³new green
mainstream,² which already make up about 28 percent of the population,
as prime markets for sustainably produced foods. Members of these
groups are very similar in attitudes and in magnitude to the group
identified by Ray and Anderson as ³cultural creatives.² Armed with the
ecological, social, and economic facts of today¹s food system, and an
opportunity to choose a healthy, sustainable alternative, an even larger
group of consumers likely would be willing to pay the full costs of a
sustainable food system.



The members of the new food culture will pay premium prices for
wholesome, nutritious food that really tastes good. They will pay
premium prices also for crops that are grown organically or for meat
from animals raised under humane conditions, without chemicals, without
hormones or antibiotics. They will pay a premium for food that is
produced in ways that protect the natural environment and the well-being
of farmers, food industry workers, and other involved in the food
system. And increasingly, members of the new food culture are showing
strong preferences for foods that are produced locally. They want to
know where their food comes from, how it is produced, and who produced
it. They want their food to come from someone they trust.



The old industrial food system was build upon impersonal, economic
relationships among farmers, food processors, food distributors, and
consumers. The new food system must be build upon personal
relationships of integrity. Farmers must form relationships with
customers who care about the social and ecological integrity of their
food * not just price, convenience, or even an organic label. The
social and ethical principles of sustainability ultimately must be
expressed through personal relationships among people and between people
and the earth. Consumers of the new food culture are seeking a
relationship with the earth as well as relationships with each other,
and their relationships with the earth will be through their farmers.
Corporations are not people, and thus, are incapable of forming personal
relationships with their customers. This gives farmers, particularly on
smaller farms, a unique advantage in meeting the expectations of the new
food culture.



The food system that meets the expectations of the new food culture will
need to be dramatically different from today¹s industrial food system.
Quite likely, it will be a network of local, interdependent community
food systems, completely separate from the corporately controlled global
food chain clusters of today. The key to success in this new food
system will be its ability to maintain a sense of personal connectedness
between those who produce food and those who eat it. Such connections
are far easier to establish and maintain in situations where farmers,
processors, retailers, and customers all live in geographic proximity *
in local markets. They become increasingly difficult, but not
impossible, as farmers, processors, retailers, and customers become more
numerous and dispersed.



The international Slow Food movement constitutes tangible evidence of
the emergence of a global food culture that expresses a strong
preference for local foods.[7] Slow Food is a worldwide movement with
over 80,000 members in 100 countries committed to promoting the
diversity of local and regional quality food produced and marketed in a
way that guarantees farmers a fair price and protects the environment
and the natural landscape. Those in the movement have a clear
understanding of the industrial food system and they realize that a
return to local and regional food systems will be necessary for
ecological and social sustainability. In his book, The Pleasures of
Slow Food, Corbey Kummer points out that Slow Food is not an elitist
gourmet movement, but instead, encourages ³good, honest food at
reasonable prices² and its appreciation and enjoyment to the fullest by
all.[8]



The Chefs Collaborative is a national network of more than 1,000
American chefs who are promoting sustainable cuisine by celebrating the
joys of local, seasonal, and artisanal cooking.[9] Their fundamental
organizational principles include ³sound food choices emphasizing
locally grown, seasonally fresh, and whole or minimally processed
ingredients.² Their other principles are very much in harmony with the
development and support of an ecologically sound and socially
responsible food system. Independent restaurants everywhere, across all
price ranges, seem to understand that their best defense against the
national franchises is to advertise their reliance on local farmers who
provide them with locally fresh, high quality foods.



These two organizations are just the proverbial ³tip of the iceberg.²
Increasingly, Americans are waking up to what is happening to
agriculture, our farms, our food systems, and to our lives in general.
We are beginning to realize that we have been so preoccupied with our
pursuit of individual economic self-interests that we have wandered away
from the path to real happiness. Slowly we are realizing that to regain
our lost sense of happiness, we must make time in our busy lives to mend
broken relationships and find new purpose and meaning in life. We must
search for happiness within the context of caring families and
communities and in a sense of rightness in our ways of living. And, we
can begin that search by reexamining our food choices. We can invest
the time, effort, and money in choosing food that reflect our need to
rebuild relationships with of each other and with the earth. We can
rediscover happiness in eating.



The emergence of a new food culture is good news for smaller independent
farmers and small independent food processors and retailers, who have
persisted against corporate industrialization of the food system. The
new network of local community-based food systems will be sewn together
from the remnants of these smaller, independent, community-connected
farmers, processors, and retailers who have remained committed to
producing food with quality and integrity for customers who want and are
willing to pay for food with quality and integrity. The persistence of
small family farms provides a powerful example for the rest of society,
of people who have refused to sacrifice the quality of a life that they
love for the promise of greater prosperity. Sustainable farmers, those
who refuse to exploit their neighbors, their land, or their customers
provide a powerful example of people who realize that true wealth arises
from the rightness of our relationships. The remaining independent food
processors and independent food retailers likewise provide powerful
examples of people who have been able to persist in the face of
relentless competition from the corporate giants by not compromising
their integrity.



From these remnants, a new ecologically sound, economically viable, and
socially responsible food system will be built. This new food system
will help reconnect people with the earth and with each other in
positive, mutually supportive relationships, which contribute to our
happiness and quality of life. The creation of this new and better food
system will point the way toward a brighter, more sustainable future in
general for America and for the rest of the world. Building a new food
system for a new food culture is a task that will take time and effort
to complete, but now is the time to begin.



At first, such a task might seem impossible; it is so large. But, we
should remember that the current quick, convenient, and cheap food
culture and the industrial food system was not built all at once, by
some fiat or decree, but was built by individuals, one person at a time.
One by one, as consumers changed their attitudes toward food, changed
what they ate and where they bought it, the America food culture was
transformed from a culture of enjoyment and happiness to a culture of
economics and expediency. One by one, as farmers changed what they
produced and where they sold it, and one by one, as processors and
distributors changed how and where they operated, the American food
system was transformed from agrarian to industrial and from local to
global. So, one by one, as farmers, consumers, processors, and
distributors make different choices, the food culture will change and
food system be transformed.



One by one, people all across America and around the world are beginning
to wake up to the consequences of our food choices, not just for our
individual health and safety, but also for our happiness and enjoyment
of life. One by one, they are beginning to make choices to restore the
health of our relationships with each other and earth, in hundreds or
thousands of little, but highly significant, ways. As we begin to make
different food choices, we begin to influence our little part of the
world, and we begin to do our part in the transition toward a new
healthy, sustainable national and global food system. One by one, as we
make choices that change our world, we in fact begin to change the world.



The noted anthropologist, Margaret Mead once said, ³Never doubt that a
small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it¹s the only thing that ever has.² So, let¹s do our part to
change the world by becoming a part of the new American food culture, as
farmers, food workers, or just as eaters. Let¹s start making food
choices that only enhance our own health and happiness, but also help
create a healthier, happier world.









[i] Presented at Small Farm Today Conference and Trade Show, sponsored
by Missouri Farm Publishing Inc, Clark, MO.
http://www.smallfarmtoday.com. Columbia, MO. November 6, 2005.

[ii] John Ikerd is Professor Emeritus, University of Missouri, Columbia,
MO * USA. E-mail: web site:
http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/faculty/jikerd



[1] For summaries of global food consolidation studies, see articles by
Mary Hendrickson and William Heffernan, in Small Farm Today Magazine,
April 1999 and July 2001, also available on the Internet at
http://nfu.org/images/heffernan.pdf and
http://nfu.org/images/heffernan_1999.pdf

[2] Eric Schlosser. 2001. Fast Food Nation. Houghton Mifflin Company,
New York, NY.

[3] Aristotle. 1980. Nichomachean Ethics. Oxford Press, Oxford, England.

[4] Robert D. Putnam. 2000. Bowling Alone. Simon and Schuster, New
York, NY.

[5] Ray, Paul and Sherry Anderson. 2000. The Cultural Creatives. Three
Rivers Press, New York, NY.

[6] The Hartman Report: Food and the Environment * A Consumer¹s
Perspective, 1999.
http://www.hartman-group.com/product...rtnatsens.html

[7] Slow Foods International website: http://www.slowfood.com/

[8] Corby Kummer. 2002. The Pleasures of Slow Food. Chronicle Books, San
Francisco, CA.

[9] See Chefs Collaborative website: http://www.chefscollaborative.org/
--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

On Oct 28, 2:06 pm, Billy wrote:[i]
Subsidies to corn and soy beans producers that make more than $200,000 a
year makes no sense. The empty calories that they produce are making us
sick. The fast food that they support has created a model for the work
place, where places McDonalds, and Wal Mart have 400% turn over in
employees because that way, they can avoid paying benefits. Fast food
isn't really cheap food because the cost of land degradation, water
pollution, necessary infrastructure, impoverishment of farmers becomes a
social cost, whereas the profits go into the private pockets of Cargill,
Archer Daniels Midlands, and Monsanto.

[.................................................. ...................]

[.............................................] we begin to make
different food choices, we begin to influence our little part of the
world, and we begin to do our part in the transition toward a new
healthy, sustainable national and global food system. One by one, as we
make choices that change our world, we in fact begin to change the world.

The noted anthropologist, Margaret Mead once said, ³Never doubt that a
small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it¹s the only thing that ever has.² So, let¹s do our part to
change the world by becoming a part of the new American food culture, as
farmers, food workers, or just as eaters. Let¹s start making food
choices that only enhance our own health and happiness, but also help
create a healthier, happier world.

Presented at Small Farm Today Conference and Trade Show, sponsored
by [.....................]


--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

"Margaret Mead" ... Isn't she the one who taught native
Samoans about rape and murder and other concepts of
American Business?

(That is a rhetorical question. The answer is "yes".)


In fact in this part of the Ulcered Sphincter or Arserica
Samoans are the top of the Food Chain of drug dealing:
Any non-Samoan attempting to bring in drugs is shortly
found in a ditch with his throat cut, and usually more
graphic illustrations of their dislike of competition.
This also happens to persons suspected of defacing
their Gang-Sign, which proclaims their "Ownership"
of the local drug trade on every signpost and highway
overpass.

So much for "enlightening" people.
Let's give ourselves back to England.

In article .com,
Don H3 wrote:
[i]
On Oct 28, 2:06 pm, Billy wrote:
Subsidies to corn and soy beans producers that make more than $200,000 a
year makes no sense. The empty calories that they produce are making us
sick. The fast food that they support has created a model for the work
place, where places McDonalds, and Wal Mart have 400% turn over in
employees because that way, they can avoid paying benefits. Fast food
isn't really cheap food because the cost of land degradation, water
pollution, necessary infrastructure, impoverishment of farmers becomes a
social cost, whereas the profits go into the private pockets of Cargill,
Archer Daniels Midlands, and Monsanto.

[.................................................. ...................]

[.............................................] we begin to make
different food choices, we begin to influence our little part of the
world, and we begin to do our part in the transition toward a new
healthy, sustainable national and global food system. One by one, as we
make choices that change our world, we in fact begin to change the world.

The noted anthropologist, Margaret Mead once said, ³Never doubt that a
small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it¹s the only thing that ever has.² So, let¹s do our part to
change the world by becoming a part of the new American food culture, as
farmers, food workers, or just as eaters. Let¹s start making food
choices that only enhance our own health and happiness, but also help
create a healthier, happier world.

Presented at Small Farm Today Conference and Trade Show, sponsored
by [.....................]


--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

"Margaret Mead" ... Isn't she the one who taught native
Samoans about rape and murder and other concepts of
American Business?

(That is a rhetorical question. The answer is "yes".)


In fact in this part of the Ulcered Sphincter or Arserica
Samoans are the top of the Food Chain of drug dealing:
Any non-Samoan attempting to bring in drugs is shortly
found in a ditch with his throat cut, and usually more
graphic illustrations of their dislike of competition.
This also happens to persons suspected of defacing
their Gang-Sign, which proclaims their "Ownership"
of the local drug trade on every signpost and highway
overpass.

So much for "enlightening" people.
Let's give ourselves back to England.

It's been a while since I read Margret Mead (50 years?). The Samoan have
a fairly old set of traditions as well (Pacific Islanders, see Guns,
Germs, and Steel by Jarod Diamond). Aspects of their social organization
are to be admired but they did make judgments about us and them. Please
refresh my memory about Ms. Mead.

Iraq used to shoot smugglers at the border as well and American F-16s
have been known to use their after burners to knock suspected drug
smugglers out of the air (when it wasn't an Air America charter, see
Dark Alliance by Gary Webb). I wouldn't suggest that you try to remove
any "Bloods" or "Crypts" gang signs that you may see in Los Angeles or
any other major metropolis for exactly the same reason as you mentioned.
They may be mindless but they are efficient.

As B. F. Stone said, "Governments lie. All governments lie". It has long
been acknowledged by the people of the world that the American
government is corrupt. It has also been acknowledged that the American
people are among the most generous in the world. The 'whiteman's burden"
has always been a pile of bullshit to justify, English or American
intervention in the world. The Arawacks only survived their encounter
with the Spanish for a few years. Enlightenment never was part of the
program. It was enrichment, just like Iraq and Iran today.

With the rise of the multinational corporations, nationality counts for
little. You may think that putting an English foot on your neck would be
preferable to having the same old American foot on your neck but that
isn't the game any more. These *******s aren't out to shear the sheep as
in the days of old. They want to skin us.
--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

In article
,
Billy wrote:

As B. F. Stone said, "Governments lie. All governments lie".

Yes , yes, I. F. Stone. I have the same problem on occasion with ponds
and standing water and the Sun rising in the West. Please read what I
mean and not what I write.
--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:41:14 -0700, Billy
wrote:

In article
,
Billy wrote:

As B. F. Stone said, "Governments lie. All governments lie".

Yes , yes, I. F. Stone.


Enthusiastic recommendation:

The late I.F. Stone's "All Governments Lie" is a most marvelous trip
through U.S. history, told via the story of Izzy Stone's life. A book
to revel in; read through once; then delve into again and again.

For info about Izzy Stone, including his magisterial "The Trial of
Socrates", Ask/Google his name; many links.

"The Trial of Socrates" is especially noteworthy, since we have
all been brought up with a basically positive image of Socrates
as one whose probing questions caused his young followers to
think. I.F. Stone taught himself Greek, well along in life, in order
to go back into original materials. He presents us with
a quite different picture of Socrates than we always had.

Persephone
[...]

On Oct 29, 5:15 pm, Billy wrote:[i]
In article .com,
Don H3 wrote:



On Oct 28, 2:06 pm, Billy wrote:
Subsidies to corn and soy beans producers that make more than $200,000 a
year makes no sense. The empty calories that they produce are making us
sick. The fast food that they support has created a model for the work
place, where places McDonalds, and Wal Mart have 400% turn over in
employees because that way, they can avoid paying benefits. Fast food
isn't really cheap food because the cost of land degradation, water
pollution, necessary infrastructure, impoverishment of farmers becomes a
social cost, whereas the profits go into the private pockets of Cargill,
Archer Daniels Midlands, and Monsanto.

[.................................................. ....................]

[.............................................] we begin to make
different food choices, we begin to influence our little part of the
world, and we begin to do our part in the transition toward a new
healthy, sustainable national and global food system. One by one, as we
make choices that change our world, we in fact begin to change the world.

The noted anthropologist, Margaret Mead once said, ³Never doubt that a
small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it¹s the only thing that ever has.² So, let¹s do our part to
change the world by becoming a part of the new American food culture, as
farmers, food workers, or just as eaters. Let¹s start making food
choices that only enhance our own health and happiness, but also help
create a healthier, happier world.

Presented at Small Farm Today Conference and Trade Show, sponsored
by [.....................]

--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

"Margaret Mead" ... Isn't she the one who taught native
Samoans about rape and murder and other concepts of
American Business?

(That is a rhetorical question. The answer is "yes".)

In fact in this part of the Ulcered Sphincter or Arserica
Samoans are the top of the Food Chain of drug dealing:
Any non-Samoan attempting to bring in drugs is shortly
found in a ditch with his throat cut, and usually more
graphic illustrations of their dislike of competition.
This also happens to persons suspected of defacing
their Gang-Sign, which proclaims their "Ownership"
of the local drug trade on every signpost and highway
overpass.

So much for "enlightening" people.
Let's give ourselves back to England.

It's been a while since I read Margret Mead (50 years?). The Samoan have
a fairly old set of traditions as well (Pacific Islanders, see Guns,
Germs, and Steel by Jarod Diamond). Aspects of their social organization
are to be admired but they did make judgments about us and them. Please
refresh my memory about Ms. Mead.

Iraq used to shoot smugglers at the border as well and American F-16s
have been known to use their after burners to knock suspected drug
smugglers out of the air (when it wasn't an Air America charter, see
Dark Alliance by Gary Webb). I wouldn't suggest that you try to remove
any "Bloods" or "Crypts" gang signs that you may see in Los Angeles or
any other major metropolis for exactly the same reason as you mentioned.
They may be mindless but they are efficient.

As B. F. Stone said, "Governments lie. All governments lie". It has long
been acknowledged by the people of the world that the American
government is corrupt. It has also been acknowledged that the American
people are among the most generous in the world. The 'whiteman's burden"
has always been a pile of bullshit to justify, English or American
intervention in the world. The Arawacks only survived their encounter
with the Spanish for a few years. Enlightenment never was part of the
program. It was enrichment, just like Iraq and Iran today.

With the rise of the multinational corporations, nationality counts for
little. You may think that putting an English foot on your neck would be
preferable to having the same old American foot on your neck but that
isn't the game any more. These *******s aren't out to shear the sheep as
in the days of old. They want to skin us.
--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

That may be the most succinct metaphor I've ever seen!
I'll look for B.F. Stone's book as soon as I can
(thanks also Persephone for the recommendation!)

The negativisms I first saw about Margaret Mead (MM)
were on PBS... Unfortunately a quick Google finds lots
of both Pro and Con reports on her by PBS.
The one I recall most vividly interviewed female
Samoans who had been in their early teens when MM
visited. Their stories... were of forcible gang rapes
by male tribal members to the extent that females no
longer dared go out at night at all, and then
subsequent home (hut) invasions by gangs for the
same purpose.
All of this in a culture where females had
previously been considered almost sacred.

The show I saw made it clear that MM, far from
making any Anthropological "Discoveries", actually
destroyed the very culture she claimed to be
reporting. Singlehandedly. I shudder whenever I
see her name.

Don~~

In article .com,
Don H3 wrote:
[i]
On Oct 29, 5:15 pm, Billy wrote:
In article .com,
Don H3 wrote:



On Oct 28, 2:06 pm, Billy wrote:
Subsidies to corn and soy beans producers that make more than $200,000
a
year makes no sense. The empty calories that they produce are making us
sick. The fast food that they support has created a model for the work
place, where places McDonalds, and Wal Mart have 400% turn over in
employees because that way, they can avoid paying benefits. Fast food
isn't really cheap food because the cost of land degradation, water
pollution, necessary infrastructure, impoverishment of farmers becomes
a
social cost, whereas the profits go into the private pockets of
Cargill,
Archer Daniels Midlands, and Monsanto.

[.................................................. ...................]

[.............................................] we begin to make
different food choices, we begin to influence our little part of the
world, and we begin to do our part in the transition toward a new
healthy, sustainable national and global food system. One by one, as
we
make choices that change our world, we in fact begin to change the
world.

The noted anthropologist, Margaret Mead once said, ³Never doubt that a
small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it¹s the only thing that ever has.² So, let¹s do our part to
change the world by becoming a part of the new American food culture,
as
farmers, food workers, or just as eaters. Let¹s start making food
choices that only enhance our own health and happiness, but also help
create a healthier, happier world.

Presented at Small Farm Today Conference and Trade Show, sponsored
by [.....................]

--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

"Margaret Mead" ... Isn't she the one who taught native
Samoans about rape and murder and other concepts of
American Business?

(That is a rhetorical question. The answer is "yes".)

In fact in this part of the Ulcered Sphincter or Arserica
Samoans are the top of the Food Chain of drug dealing:
Any non-Samoan attempting to bring in drugs is shortly
found in a ditch with his throat cut, and usually more
graphic illustrations of their dislike of competition.
This also happens to persons suspected of defacing
their Gang-Sign, which proclaims their "Ownership"
of the local drug trade on every signpost and highway
overpass.

So much for "enlightening" people.
Let's give ourselves back to England.

It's been a while since I read Margret Mead (50 years?). The Samoan have
a fairly old set of traditions as well (Pacific Islanders, see Guns,
Germs, and Steel by Jarod Diamond). Aspects of their social organization
are to be admired but they did make judgments about us and them. Please
refresh my memory about Ms. Mead.

Iraq used to shoot smugglers at the border as well and American F-16s
have been known to use their after burners to knock suspected drug
smugglers out of the air (when it wasn't an Air America charter, see
Dark Alliance by Gary Webb). I wouldn't suggest that you try to remove
any "Bloods" or "Crypts" gang signs that you may see in Los Angeles or
any other major metropolis for exactly the same reason as you mentioned.
They may be mindless but they are efficient.

As B. F. Stone said, "Governments lie. All governments lie". It has long
been acknowledged by the people of the world that the American
government is corrupt. It has also been acknowledged that the American
people are among the most generous in the world. The 'whiteman's burden"
has always been a pile of bullshit to justify, English or American
intervention in the world. The Arawacks only survived their encounter
with the Spanish for a few years. Enlightenment never was part of the
program. It was enrichment, just like Iraq and Iran today.

With the rise of the multinational corporations, nationality counts for
little. You may think that putting an English foot on your neck would be
preferable to having the same old American foot on your neck but that
isn't the game any more. These *******s aren't out to shear the sheep as
in the days of old. They want to skin us.
--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley

That may be the most succinct metaphor I've ever seen!
I'll look for B.F. Stone's book as soon as I can
(thanks also Persephone for the recommendation!)

The negativisms I first saw about Margaret Mead (MM)
were on PBS... Unfortunately a quick Google finds lots
of both Pro and Con reports on her by PBS.
The one I recall most vividly interviewed female
Samoans who had been in their early teens when MM
visited. Their stories... were of forcible gang rapes
by male tribal members to the extent that females no
longer dared go out at night at all, and then
subsequent home (hut) invasions by gangs for the
same purpose.
All of this in a culture where females had
previously been considered almost sacred.

The show I saw made it clear that MM, far from
making any Anthropological "Discoveries", actually
destroyed the very culture she claimed to be
reporting. Singlehandedly. I shudder whenever I
see her name.

Don~~
As much fun as it is to stomp around Google, it would be beneficial to
your argument that Margret Mead "actually destroyed the very culture she
claimed to be reporting. Singlehandedly.", by posting the Google sites
that support this view. It appears that she was not a saint, but then,
how many of us are? My impression was that Samoa had previously been
evangelized by Calvanists of some stripe and that it was already a
society in crisis.

I can only imagine the shock of a Southern Baptist on the beach at
Barritz. So much flesh and fun.

I'd better get that vision out of my head or nothing will get done today.

Anyway, some specific sites that you already have visited would
facilitate my enlightenment.
--
FB - FFF

Billy

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.
Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
- Bob Marley