At first I struggled to understand everything Vandana Shiva was saying.
At about 7:30, she dismissed the idea of seeds being intellectual property. Regardless of whether or not I agree with her, I think she oversimplifies it. Monsanto genetically modified seeds to make them grow certain chemicals in them which kill harmful insects. So, there was some intellectual innovation. This issue is covered in today’s other post.
11:00 – The Austrian Economist in me cringeD when she suggests Monsanto’s seeds are causing crop failures, because I thought she was suggesting that government needs to keep farmers from using them? If the seeds are unproductive, the free market would remove them from use.
20:00 – Here and elsewhere she talks about the destructiveness of new technologies. I remained confused about this, as the free market would get rid of harmful technologies.
The first glimpse of evil I comes at 24:00, when she talks about an agreement between U.S. and Indian governments and Monsanto, but I’m confused again at 26:30. If organic farmers are 10x more productive, why are their neighbors still using Monsanto seeds? The free market is the best arbiter of ideas.
The heart of the problem finally becomes clear at 36:00. The Indian government seems to be preventing farmers from saving seeds. She says “there is no need for state regulation.” Okay. Now I’m with her. Like all regulation, the Indian government’s seed regulation is an attempt to eliminate competition for big companies, in this case Monsanto, by preventing farmers from saving seeds.
From 36:00 until she finishes her talk at 43:00, she speaks about seeds from a freedom perspective.
“If we don’t have seed for nutrition, we won’t have nutrition. If we don’t have seed for climate-resiliance, we won’t have climate-resiliance. And if we don’t have seend for freedom, we won’t have freedom.”
I lover her passion.
on the intellectual property issue… this is more complicated than just providing a innovation… what most GM crops are, are regular seed with particular sequences modified, most (all?) of these sequences are not actual “inventions” but rather are found in other organisms and inserted in. So the sequence that makes the crop innovative, isnt itself special, just the final seed product. The problem is, there is clear evidence of genetic drift between GM/nonGM crops… if the new inserted sequences start cropping up in regular crops, are those farmers then in stealing monsanto’s product? it seems so… too lazy to look it up right now, but monsanto has sued farmers whose crops were contaminated by near by monsanto crops and unknowlinglt grew them.
ive (obviously ;)) got more to say, but ill save it for when im done watching ;)
this is why people get annoyed at this “market solves all” philosophy. it doesnt. some problems can be created whose negative effects occur years down the line, and that cant be erased or mitigated. it takes time for genetic drift to occur, it takes time to see the effects on other aspects of the environment aside from crop yield (like invasion of new crop vermin as has been the case with bt cotton)…and every harvest of GM crops means less normal seeds to save for future use, increasing dependence on HM seeds.
Sure, farmers wake up to the poor yields and effects of GM crops, but many do only after theyve invested everything they have on this “sure thing”. Of course, they really needed this sure thing, cause the prices of cotton have been fucked over by… sigh, obviously, US farm subsidies.
I dont know what the answer is to all this, I dont actually think GM crops are going to take over completely, but they sure scare the shit out of me and i wish more people were worried about them, not about sensationalistic or just plain nonsensical evils of “frankenfood”, but about the longterm effects on our ecosystem.