Re: Massive Starvation For World Feared Over Myanmar And Chile Catastrophes

On 2008-05-08 13:33 +0100, dusty allegedly wrote:
> On May 8, 8:00 pm, Vngelis <meberr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Global Famine by Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, May 2, 2008
> 
> I remember a discussion some 20 years ago in the pages of the 
> theoretical journal of the “Slaughter WRP” as to the question of the
>  “stagnation of the productive forces under modern imperialism – at 
> the time much of it was a rather abstract discussion. So much of this
>  article is testimony to that thesis: the capacity is there (the 
> productive forces) but the contradictions in the capitalist system 
> are leading increasingly to an impasse in the distribution of those 
> benefits to the people.
> 
> One aspect he tends to by-pass is the impact of the crisis in the US
>  dollar in driving the speculative mania in the grain markets. In the
>  1973-4 oil crisis, following on from the Nixon devaluation of the
> $US – in fact cutting it adrift from gold altogether and subsequently
>  seeing it devalue, the price of all basic commodities, including 
> grains, minerals and so on skyrocketed. As Marx said, in a crisis all
>  seek to exchange money for commodities that congeal real value. That
>  is what happens in Chicago now.
> 
> I presume that the stated motive of the IMF/World Bank neo-liberal 
> aficionados regarding the restructure of the agricultural mix of 
> third world (and other) countries was the principle of comparative 
> advantage – get out of staple food production and leave this to the 
> prairies – produce flowers and oranges for the European/US markets. 
> What a sad climax to this misused policy.

While I certainly don't deny the influence of capitalist machinations in
this whole affair, the thing that strikes me mostly is how
painstakingly, through the whole board of the discussion about food and
famine, the subject of overpopulation is avoided. This goes for the
general subject of poverty as well. At the same time, countries that
attempt to implement rational measures to control their populations, to
wit control of births, are scoffed at (like China) or even hindered
(like some African countries).
The Earth is ****ing overcrowded. In rich countries as well as in poor
ones (only it is more flagrant in poor ones). The last article posted by
Vngelis claims that global agricultural production is sufficient to
nourish the staggering six-plus billion. Maybe it is (although one would
have to ask additionally: what's "enough"? Is a bowl of rice enough?).
But there's more to life than food.

We live in a finite world. As well as everything else, resources are
limited. The more entities resources have to be distributed among, the
lesser each entity has. Not only food, but also energy and space. Should
be simple enough to understand.

Yet the Earth's population is projected to grow -- how much? I tend to
forget marish figures -- staggeringly over the next very decades. Will
agricultural output rise fast enough to sup****t twice as much as today
-- and even more?
Maybe. But tell me this: when it comes to the point where the whole
biomass is part of the human nutrition cycle; where each atom is in
either soil or fertiliser or crop or cattle or food or crap, ergo no
"nature"; where we all have to live in six-tatami rooms (if we're lucky)
-- when it comes to this, what the **** are we supposed to live FOR?!

Birth control is one of the most critical issues of our time (and one of
the greatest taboo at that). It is generally critical, for political
reasons: scarcity leads to inequality, inequality to oppression. But is
even more critical in our time, for the Earth's ecosystem is on the
verge of being lastingly harmed. Species are disappearing at a
frightening rate. Pollution and desertification are rampant.
If we don't take control over our numbers in our hands, nature will. If
we do not control our births, eventually nature will control life --
through starvation. No amount of "regulation" of speculations will
change that. And it applies to capitalist or socialist/communist
societies alike.

-- 
DF.