Farmageddon - Movie Trailer from Kristin Canty on Vimeo.
Alex Beam's article in the Boston Globe has some shortcomings. Food Sovereignty is a movement that necessarily goes beyond food security.
Food security is near-sighted and, in my opinion, has been used by industrial agriculture, like Monsanto, as a propaganda tool. It is based on the idea that food needs to be produced BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY to support the exponential growth of the human population. "Any means necessary" means that Big Ag can pump cows, chickens, pigs, you name it, full of growth hormone. The animals produce more or grow plump in a completely morphed and unnatural time frame so that people can eat meat 2-3 times per day (instead of a recommended 1-2 times per week). It means animals can be cramped into awful, inhumane, disgusting and unhealthy living conditions in which chicken's feet may grow around the cage or cows have to take antibiotics to offset the current disease-infested conditions they're exposed to. It means genetically modified seeds and products account for 60-70% of processed foods found on grocery store shelves.
When capitalism takes hold of our food system it makes plans for a "terminator gene" or Genetic Use Restriction Technology (GURT) that congenitally sterilizes second generation seeds. This means that farmers cannot save seeds to grow food the next season. They are locked in to buying new seeds from Monsanto every year. A little counter-intuitive when discussing food security, don't you think?
Then there are systemic pesticides that are absorbed by the plant as it grows and become part of the plant (they cannot even be washed off like some sprays can). These pesticides may be the very reason for Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) or the record die-off of the U.S. bee population. Honey Bees = the creatures that help pollinate our food so that it grows and fruits. Long-term food security? I think not.
Vanishing of the Bees - Trailer from Bee The Change on Vimeo.
Within the U.S., food sovereignty has translated into disenchantment with the USDA and FDA, when the U.S. Farm Bill and NAFTA has allowed industrial farming practices to swallow sustainable, local farms whole. But, food sovereignty goes beyond the U.S. In Haiti, food sovereignty means a food revolution. It is an act of resistance against behemoths, like Monsanto, when farmers save healthy heirloom seeds to grow food for years to come. It is a move towards political stability when Haitians don't have to rely on imports to feed their people. Therefore, it is an act of sustainability and resilience in the face of looming climate catastrophes, economic failures and world food shortages. (From http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/6337/)
Haiti
Bear Guerra — "Peasant Bounty" narrated slide show from Orion Magazine on Vimeo.
This success story of food sovereignty in Haiti is reflected in other countries like Brazil and Cuba. And the tide is just rising.
Brazil
Cuba
That may start with equally subsidizing healthy, organic food as opposed to pesticide covered, genetically modified, mono-crops, like corn. It may start with having labels on all foods that are genetically modified or use genetically modified ingredients. It may start with banning a terminator gene and systemic pesticides. Locally grown food does not mean unsafe food and industrial, nationally regulated food does not mean safe food. Locally grown food DOES generally mean a lesser climate impact when food does not have to be trucked in from across the country of world. With any of those beginnings, my hope is that an end to industrial agriculture will be the conclusion.
~Shreena
So how would 'food sovereignty" "support the exponential growth in the human population"?
ReplyDeletewould love to have a speaker about this issue at our OW Earth Day Fest
ReplyDeleteOccupy the machine!
ReplyDeleteI would add that local farms create more jobs, and as a result, can not only raise significant tax revenues, but with increased production, could I go so far as to say an increase in GDP? Lastly, local food = healthier people, thus a cost-savings benefit for employers, social programs, and healthcare providers. Healthier people are also more productive, once again adding to the GDP.
ReplyDeleteit looks interesting. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteGreat piece.
ReplyDeleteFYI...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/05/science/earth/05harvest.html
I think our government is bent on criminalizing our entire society. Lead off in handcuffs for raw food?!! Food must remain a commodity and not a right for corporations and their supporters in government. We are hanging on by our fingernails in the fight for our personal freedoms.
ReplyDeleteShreena - Nicely done, thanks for sharing!
ReplyDeleteWell put, Shreenie. I agree completely. Did you hear about the farmer in France who sued Monsanto and just won?
ReplyDeleteWe had 62 local residents attend last night's showing of the "World According to Monsanto" which was preceded a short on in injecting bovine growth hormone into cows to yield more milk. Many in the audience were shocked to learn about the Monsanto business model and the fact that the "substantial equivalence decision" on GMO food made it impossible in the U.S. to label the GMO crop content in the foodtthat we buy in Supermarkets.
ReplyDeleteSince I had attended a 7 hour workshop on rising sea level onCape Cod and its likely consequences along our coast, I was immersed in grim news about environmental issues that seem beyond the reach of the average citizen/grassroots environmentalist. Doing educational outreach on environmental problems, it only useful if you have a plan that can be implemented. The GMO food debate and climate adaptation/mitigation challenges seem insoluble at the local/state level. Europe appears to be light years ahead of the U.S. in dealing with both issues.
Hi Shreena, your blog post is thought-provoking. However, is the real problem perhaps not the inefficient allocation of resources across the world, gross waste and over-consumption? Each territory should produce the crops most suited to its particular soil and climate, and export the surplus in order to purchase other foodstuffs, rather than attempt to achieve self-sufficiency / food sovereignty or produce crops purely for profit, but at the detriment of the local water tables and soil.
ReplyDeleteApart from that, I wholeheartedly agree that farming should centre on the humane treatment of livestock (free range) and natural pest-control methods that are as free from chemicals as possible. I don't know if it is possible to avoid using GMO's in our efforts to feed 9 billion people between now and 2050, though...
Posted by Wolf Draeger