> Is it outside the scope of this list to talk about the economic
> rationals behind agriculture? Is it outside the scope to discuss
> animal welfare issues (very hot in the organic National Rules
> discussion)? If there's no money in CRP, why should farmers conserve
> soil if crop prices are high and they can make money by planting on
> marginal lands? I can't see *this* going anywhere but to a "non
> physical" discussion.
There is no way to make a clean split between physical, political and
spiritual. Underlying all your above examples is the matter of values.
Sustainability is all about values and ethics. If we have no discussion of
these, it seems like the matter is left hanging. Also, without some
consideration of values and motivation, the implication is that everyone who
disagrees with any aspect of the sustainable orthodoxy is simply evil. They
may just have a technical disagreement.
I would recommend that everybody make an effort to include an informative
statement on the subject line, demonstrate in your post how your subject is
related (somehow) to agriculture, and then don't worry.
Dale
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail