Monday, December 13, 1999, 7:58:10 AM, you wrote:
WD> It used to be that any bright, industrious person could breed
WD> competitive pigs or corn.
It would follow then, that now they can't (it used to be, Dale says).
WD> The fact that this may no longer be the case, is threatening, just
WD> as the automobile industry is threatening if you want to build
WD> your own cars.
Corn and hogs grow in the ground. Cars are put together and run on
highways. There are a couple of other differences if you stop and
WD> I believe the view of agriculture as some special bastion of
WD> individuality and self-sufficiency, is based on a romantic myth,
WD> of which real farmers rarely partake.
Sure would like to meet one of those non-individualistic and dependent
real farmers Dale knows.
WD> I still believe that if you were more familiar with the breeding
WD> enterprise, you too would see it as engineering rather than
Ever hear about what familiarity breeds? You imply that one either
sees it as engineering as Dale does or aren't familiar with breeding.
Just Dale is.
WD> But you are right about the change from selection to
WD> Protection of varieties began a long time ago, when
WD> breeding became engineering.
It's become a fact then. Wonder if there's a date for that.
WD> There is no doubt in anyones mind,
Doubt dispersed by Dale Decree.
WD> that protection of varieties (and musical scores) has led to an
WD> enormous amount of new composition.
So when breeding became engineering, protection became recombination.
All very pat. Dale's got it all figured out.
WD> Red-baiting? Fuck....I'll bait who ever I want.
Uh oh. Dale has gotten very macho of late, and forgotten both his
netiquette and saneteer camaraderie.
WD> So, we agree that the issue of Socialism (private vs public
WD> control of the means of production) is THE central issue? Good.
Agreement by Dale Decree.
WD> I think that is an argument we should pursue. But I don't have time
WD> to pursue it this morning. I just got back from the ASTA, and I
WD> have a huge amount of mail to open.
Matt, maybe if you offer to help him open his mail, he'll debate what
he want's to with you when he wants to.
>> the line has to be drawn somewhere, and the discussion over GMO's
>> and the patenting of life-forms is probably the place to begin
>> rethinking where this somewhere is,
WD> Better jumping in points might be agricultural populism of the
WD> 20's and 30's, the history of agricultural collectivization, or
WD> the adequacy of Marxist analysis.
Pase issues. I would have thought it was farming: Soil ecology,
nutritional content of food, the elimination or radical reduction of
contaminants and carcinogens from the biosphere, companion planting,
calculating the environmental costs of distinct agricultural production
systems, the balance inherent in biologically evolved systems and the reverse
in re-engineered ones (does this relate to the motive behind the
re-engineering? And does that motive help one to maintain a hospitable
demeanor on sanet)?
WD> Unless we hear loud cries against pursuing this thread on Sanet, let's
WD> debate (nice and slow) Socialism in the agricultural context.
(after you've opened your mail, of course).
But let's not. said softly
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: