Posts Tagged ‘capitalism’

S510 — OBAMAFOOD – Starvation as a Weapon

November 23, 2010

Russian dictator and mass-murderer Josef Stalin, with Molotov, architects of the forced starvation of peasants

Josef Stalin understood the power of political persuasion. He secured the allegiance of his subordinates by murdering many of them as an example to the rest.

On a grand scale, however, he understood the persuasive power of man-made starvation.

You can only shoot so many people in the head in the basement of the Lubjanka Prison at a time, and the logistics of ammunition, shooters and body disposal impose an upper limit on the rate at which that can happen.

Suppose, however, that you find the entire population of a region to be inconvenient. You already have absolute power over the means of production, transportation and communication, because you are the head of a communist state, and that is what communism means.

Suppose that region is the Ukraine, one of the most fertile regions on earth. There are about 13 million people there who are distressingly unwilling to serve the state as they should. They deserve a bullet in the head, but the numbers are daunting.

You are saving up bullets to use on the German fascists, whose brand of socialism is competing with yours to enslave Europe, and getting more powerful by the day. “Cutthroat competition” may be a cliché among the capitalists, but to socialists, it is a literal way of doing business.

In this competitive environment, getting 13 million Ukrainians to stand up next to a ditch so you can shoot them is unlikely, and the logistical limitations frustrate the sensibilities of an absolute dictator.

The owners of the mega-farms of the Tsarist era have all been killed off by Lenin at the beginning of the 1917 revolution, but the vacuum has been filled by millions of peasant farmers, in Ukraine and other Soviet slave states, whose success at food production has made them distressingly independent of the Soviet state. Stalin sees them as the vanguard of a Ukrainian nationalist independence movement, and thus intolerable.

Food is power, and Stalin knows it.

He confiscates the stored grain that was both a form of currency, and the seed for next year’s crop, reducing the peasant farmers from self-sufficient producers to slaves, a status more consistent with the role he wants for them in his socialist utopia.

He sells a lot of the grain on international markets, making the communists seem productive, to the inattentive world, although the result will be starvation.

He introduces “internal passports” to discourage migration from the areas he has stripped of the capacity to produce food, effectively isolating them from the rest of the world, and, as the judges did for Terri Schiavo, “let nature take its course.”

While the New York Times expressed its admiration for the Soviet dictator in an endless series of articles by self-appointed Stalin PR flack Walter Duranty, the real consequence of “Uncle Joe’s” dabblings in the grain market is mass starvation.

While they hated his competing brand of socialism, the Nazis must have been impressed with his ruthlessness and expedience in disposing of inconvenient masses of people.

Fast forward eight decades, and tell me, please, what this has to do with a Senate bill, S.510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.

The purpose of this bill is “food safety,” right? Protecting our food supply, right?

Sure, in the same way Obamacare was about “reforming” our health care system, and “Cap and Trade” is about “protecting” our environment. What could go wrong with giving federal bureaucrats control over our health care, and over our energy supplies?

Throw in federal control over our food supply, and you have either a safer, more stable America, or you have the three sides of an iron triangle in which to make Americans prisoners in their own homes. I suspect the latter.

I sent the following letter to my US Senator, Nominal Republican Lamar Alexander, who is a co-sponsor of this power grab.

S.510 is a huge extension of federal authority into food production, with a great deal of discretion left to the “Secretary” (of HHS) as to its scope.

I cannot find anywhere an explicit exemption of coverage for individuals or families who want to grow or produce their own food, but a great deal of costly bureaucracy imposed at all levels of food production.

Like the indignities to which air travelers are now subjected, this will be expensive and of little use to advance its stated goals.

The Congressional Research Service summary of S510 includes the following language:

“…require that each person (excluding farms and restaurants) who manufactures, processes, packs, distributes, receives, holds, or imports an article of food permit inspection of his or her records if the Secretary believes that there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to such food will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.”

This would appear to require extensive record-keeping by me, if I want to grow vegetables in a garden. “If the Secretary believes” I have to show this paperwork to federal bureaucrat inspectors, I have to, and for no other reason than it is what the “Secretary believes.”  Criminal penalties may apply, if the Secretary wants them.

Furthermore, nowhere in the summary do I find what effect on the cost of producing food at any level, from the home garden to the corporate farm, this law will have.

As a cosponsor of this legislation, it is your responsibility to justify the legitimacy of this bill under the Constitution, and to account for the costs and benefits of this bill to the consumer.

I believe you cannot justify the constitutionality of this legislation, or its costs.

Leaving so much discretion to an unelected bureaucrat (how many times do phrases like, “at the Secretary’s discretion,” “if the Secretary determines,” “allows the Secretary to promulgate…” appear in this bill?) only reminds us of the enormous abuses heaped upon us in Obamacare.

I have had enough of this kind of intrusion on our rights under the guise of protecting us. You should be embarrassed to be associated with such a blatant power grab.

Please uphold your commitment to the Constitution by withdrawing your support from S.510 and working to defeat it.

Respectfully,
Thomas D. Cox

I guess if you can subject American air travelers to invasive x-rays or plastic-gloved groping as if they were presumptive criminals en route from their cells to the exercise yard, you can expect them to surrender their health care, their energy sources and now – their food supply — to federal government control.

Just hope and pray you don’t fall into what the government sees as a ‘politically inconvenient” group.

Advertisements

Environmentalism Three Ways: Pragmatists, Primitivists, and Watermelons

October 18, 2008

As a retired information technology worker, I find it convenient to organize some kinds of information into rows and columns, like a spreadsheet. It helps me get my mind around a complex topic.

While examining one such topic, environmentalism, I discovered that environmentalists can be divided into three general categories (spreadsheet columns): Pragmatists, Primitivists, and Watermelons. The three types address two, exemplary environmental problems – global warming and ozone depletion (spreadsheet rows) — and their solutions, very differently.

Theodore Roosevelt, a pragmatists who became an obnoxious Progressive (Wikipedia)

Pragmatists tend to follow the example of Teddy Roosevelt, an asthmatic city boy who developed a passion for understanding nature through science and personal experience. While developing enough respect for natural wonders to create the country’s first national parks, he saw man as the dominant species, and nature as his domain, to be exploited responsibly, but not to be destroyed needlessly.

Pragmatists seek to strike a balance between human needs and natural beauty, believing that, with recourse to accurate, scientific data,  humanity can benefit from nature without destroying it, and vice versa.

TR, unfortunately, set a strong precedent for government expropriating land for “public” use that was for esthetic reasons, rather than for meeting the nations practical needs — construction of fortresses, bridges, and other necessary evils. He did stop well short of turning the nation’s largest and most easily exploited sources of energy into untouchable preserves, however, leaving those morally-indefensible acts of government grand theft to later Progressives.

Pragmatists want to see objective evidence of global warming and ozone depletion, and to identify the most likely causes of these phenomena, before they entertain government policies meant to remedy them. Pragmatists become excited in the short term by the environment, if they find themselves at the foot of an erupting volcano, or in the path of a tornado, but otherwise, they tend to be focused calmly on the long term.

The romanticized "Indian," emblem of the Primitivist ideal -- the Unicorn, mascot of idealist nature-worshipers everywhere, was not available.

The romanticized “Indian,” emblem of the Primitivist ideal — the Unicorn, mascot of idealist nature-worshipers everywhere, was not available. (Wikipedia)

Primitivists have no use for science, other than political science, and its ugly, bastard son, junk science. Their ideal world is one from which humans and their civilization have been erased, or, better yet, one in which they never existed at all. If asked, they will admit to a desire to see about 99% of the world’s human population disappear, except for themselves and a few close friends with a similar orientation.

The most extreme Primitivists believe that human life is no more valuable than the life of an insect or a plant, and that the idea of exploiting an animal or a plant to extend or improve the life of a human is immoral and selfish. In their more tempered state, primitivists envision a romantically idealized harmony in the relationship of man and nature.

Their emblem of this ideal is the romanticized American Indian (whom they, of course, call a “Native American,” as if that phrase did not mean, literally, “one who was born in America”). This mythical character lives frugally and gently with the land, worshiping it as a god, seeing spirituality in every tree and rock. One assumes these characters would not build casinos and duty-free liquor stores in their pristine estates, or profit from the sale of mineral rights therefrom.

Primitivists accept global warming and ozone depletion without question, because these phenomena only serve to confirm their belief that man is a burden on nature, and that he will destroy it if allowed. Their remedy is simple and straightforward. Abort the unborn ones, and let the born ones freeze, bake and starve to death, and return their biodegradable packaging to the environment.

Green on the outside, but RED on the inside (Wikipedia)

Green on the outside, but RED on the inside (Wikipedia)

Watermelons are pragmatic, too, in their own way. Having been exposed as hypocrites or fools, these believers in a bankrupt, failed ideology that calls for government ownership of everything, had to find another rock under which to hide. Environmentalism is the perfect refuge for communists, because it allows those who are red on the inside to put a layer of green on the outside, and continue to spread their toxic theology. In the 21st Century, environmentalism is the last bastion of people who think private property is The Man’s way of oppressing the downtrodden.

In the Watermelon’s view, people are not entirely evil. A certain number of them are required to drive the party elite in their limousines from the halls of power to their dachas in the woods, to cook their gourmet meals, and to fight and die in the interest of preserving and expanding their empires.

However, the history of socialism in the 20th Century includes a laudable amount of population control in the form of purges.  The big-name socialist utopias lightened Mother Earth’s burden of humanity by a hundred million or so, in the interest of the state. While an unfortunate quantity of lead and carbon dioxide had to be introduced to the environment by firing squads, cattle trains and tanks, most of these deaths were accomplished with lower environmental impact — mass starvation and death by slave labor, predominating.

In the 21st Century, Communist China has recently taken the lead in recycling. Environmentally responsible Chinese leaders now harvest the skin, corneas and internal organs of the political prisoners they execute, and sell them on the open market. While this practice carries the unsavory taint of capitalism, watermelons believe any country that not only allows abortion, but requires it, must have its heart in the right place.

Watermelons readily embrace global warming and ozone depletion as crises, because the “solutions” for them involve government regulation of private industry. While not entirely satisfactory, government regulation of industry is a step in the right direction — toward the Watermelons’ ultimate goal: government ownership of industry.

Watermelons believe the best way to relieve human overcrowding (between purges) is to build large, ugly, concrete apartment blocks in major cities. Then, they force people selfish enough to live in their own homes to surrender these anachronisms to the state and move into the apartments. Problem solved.

Appalling tales of the worst environmental disasters on earth – horrible nuclear accidents and wholesale contamination of large areas with industrial poisons, perpetrated by communist states – do nothing to curb the Watermelons’ appetite for government control. After all, environmentalism is just a convenient form of cover for a Watermelon, not a real ideology.

The real goal of the Watermelon is, and always has been, government control of every aspect of life, from before birth, up to and including death. Individual humans are just too stupid to be trusted with running their own lives, and if they have to be sold on communism by bait-and-switch, well, so be it.

There you have it. I promised a spreadsheet, with rows and columns. Here it is:

Pragmatists

Primitivists

Watermelons

Global Warming

Identify real problems; Propose real solutions. Let people freeze to death in the dark. Abort or purge most people; forcibly relocate the rest and run their lives. Dominate the world.

Ozone Depletion

See above. Let people bake, and/or starve from lack of refrigeration. See above.