From: dc_ags@ac.nsac.ns.ca (Don Christie)
Subject: why
Reply-To: dc_ags@ac.nsac.ns.ca
Organization: Nova Scotia Agricultural College, Nova Scotia, CANADA
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 14:28:07 GMT


I received an email from someone this morning insisting I apologize to
the green movement for my comments in an earlier post. I'd like to
attempt to clarify my position for that person, and for others who might
have been mislead by my earlier post.

In the first place, I see government as the agency responsible for setting
the agenda for all of society, including agriculture. Specifically, I think
(in relation to agriculture) that the government should be responsible for
establishing rules and regulations surrounding the production, sale, and
distribution of agricultural commodities. When new research strategies are
required (as dictated by the information at hand), then it is the government
who should be responsible to provide the wherewithall to get the research 
done and the results into the hands of those who will benefit from it.

There's nothing new in this. In fact, that's the way it has always been, and
still continues to be. 

The agricultural system as it has been since WWII has developed in response
to a great many pressures, Among them are the exodus of rural people to the
urban centers and the pressure to remain profitable on those remaining in
the industry. (profitablity is not a crime; in a free market society i.e.
a democracy, it is absolutely essential).

so farmers did whatever they could to remain profitable... new cultivars that
yield well if well fertilized and machinery which allowed them to manage
large tracts of land came about. Pesticides allowed them to control the
various bugs, fungi and weeds that plagued their operations. At the time,
little was known of the long-term effects of these practises. What I'm
getting at was there was no conspiracy... these people were acting on the 
best knowledge they had available to them at the time.

As the seventies and eighties wore on, more and more evidence came to light
of the large-scale damage caused to the environment by the farming practises
that were feeding us. The governments of the day were cautious... making the
changes that were being called for required more information and money than
they had... But... certain members of the public deciced that governments
were not doing their part... indeed they forwarded the opinion that the
reason why governments weren't responding to their demands was because of a
conspiracy amongst the larger financial interests... 

It was the so-called `environmental movement' that was making the largest
noises, and their message was that anyone who was associated with the
industry of agriculture OR anyone who was involved with government wasn't 
to be trusted, simply because they were the beneficiaries of the conspiracy
that was being foisted upon the public. Mass media communication and some
imaginative grand-standing stunts ensured that their message got across.

so they got public support, and they succeeded in undermining the credibility
of almost anyone who had any claim to knowledge.

I wish to point out, however that their very existence (i.e. these so-called
environmental groups like the green movement and greenpeace) was unnecessary.

What they were trying to accomplish was in fact the mandate of government,
and government should be permitted to assess the situation and take measures
to remedy it as it saw fit. These groups were attempting to be a political
force, and saw it within THEIR mandate to take power from the government and
give it to the PEOPLE... what a noble gesture... the problem is that the
people ALREADY have the power. These groups have and continue to employ 
tactics that can be described as pacifist terrorism. They evoke emotional
outrage from all who hear their message... they have effectively undermined
the system. My question is WHY??

I know they will be quick to answer: "we do this for the PEOPLE... they
deserve better than they're getting" ... but I suggest there is another
reason... as I said, their continued existence serves no useful purpose...
the changes that they are advocating are in the process of being made... but
it takes time... and money, and commitment -- not just on the part of one
sector of society, but all of it. The problems that we are trying to solve
are so large they are almost beyond comprehension, and these environmental
movements are actually impeding progress simply by undermining the system.

And then there's the financial aspect of their existence... it isn't cheap
(or easy) to organize movements like these on a national or global scale...
there's plenty of money involved. Where is that money coming from? and where
is it going? Who benefits? The organizers... that's who. I know there will
be a hue and cry from the rank and file memberships of these organizations
who will emphatically state that THEY aren't making money off the movement,
and that furthermore, nobody they KNOW does either. One person already 
enlightened me to the fact that nobody in the green movement makes more than
$20,000 a year.... give me a break! You're trying to tell me that someone is
going to organize a national movement, manage large amounts of money doing
so, and is themselves going to earn poverty wages, all in the name of 
HUMANITY?? Come on... I wasn't born yesterday!

So my position is that these movements need not exist at all. I think the
memberships of these organizations might devote some time and effort to 
repairing some of the damage THEY themselves have caused, but other than
that, I see no useful function for them in society.

As I've said, there is no conspiracy linking government and big business to
agriculture... the systems are the way they are because they evolved that
way, not because someone hatched a grand plan to poison the world for profit.
It is the responsibility of government to do the job that they purport to
do... if it weren't for the efforts of these organizations undermining the

efforts of the government and all who work for the agricultural sector, then
we would already be seeing more progress than has been realized. 

In summary, and in response to that unknown net.person who thought I owed
the green movement an apology, this is it.

//Don
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who ELSE could have written The Adventures of Wild Bill Groady??