I have a moral issue with organic agriculture… Fundamentally, the organic movement spawned out of and invented by the English fascism movement around WW2 (which was slightly different to European fascism, it was more concerned with moving us back to a feudalistic society with the aristocrat still in charge (‘blood and soil’ and all that)). Said movement rejected scientific agriculture as they felt it took power from the aristocrats and gave it to the common farmer, thus the aristocrats could no longer be ‘partners in husbandry’. These days the organic movement has transitioned away from its original fascist basis to more of an ‘anti-vaxxer’ mentality. The anti-scientific part remains with the rejection of scientific agriculture in favour of old pre-1900s practices (such as the Norfolk 4 course system amongst other methods which may be new but approximate the same concept) whereas the old promise to maintain the aristocracy via fascist means has now gone (thankfully). The flip side of this though, is that while no longer overtly fascist in the same sense that it used to be; organic agriculture still has fascist outcomes, just more indirectly. For instance, the implementation of organic farming universally will reduce food output significantly. This WILL produce a famine waaaaaaay in excess of any other man-made famine such as the Holodomor, etc. Likely half of the world population would die of starvation. If your given stance is that the world population is too high, and thus to you this is acceptable, the next question is who are you killing? Suddenly the fascism which is baked into the organic movement becomes a bit more obvious when those questions are asked so blatantly… Whether you realise you are supporting practices which would have these outcomes is a question for anyone who reads this. I suspect most people just naively think it’s better for the environment (which it can be, but is not necessarily true), so I don’t blame anyone for supporting organic practices. Especially as the organic movement has very good PR!
Half the world is already starving or on the point of starving or migrating in ever increasing numbers to parts of the world still able to grow anything in sufficient numbers. Need to take a look at some of these Chinese news channels at some of their farm related stuff, and see just what I tensive modern agriculture (which the CCP embraces with a fanatical fervour) has done to their land. Poisoned it, eroded it, starved it, turned it into wasteland and desert where once there used to be rich, deep, fertile soils. China has literally sped up the process of modern agriculture that we use in the West and damaged their soil faster (which is why so much of their fine agricultural soil in now in the Great China Sea, and not on the land, and why the CCP is hell-bent on expanding its empire around the world. They do that because they are dirt poor, not filthy rich). Chemicals used in farming 'are' causing serious health problems, that is no overstatement. It is fact. Only yesterday I watched a part of Courtney Swan's speech regarding the devastating effect Glyphosate is having on the American public. I have a little bee in my bonnet about Glyphosate, since I was a gardener by trade and half my former colleagues are now 'dead' from cancer related illnesses. Their average lifespan seemed to be about 50 years old. I survived my brush with cancer - just about - at age 39 (way too young to be getting cancer). My husband (who worked at the same place), survived a long battle with cancer at age 60. Gardeners shouldn't get cancer at the rate they are doing so now. We never used to. It was always considered a very healthy occupation, and should assure us a long life. So why are so many of us falling sick now? What's the difference between 20th/21st century gardeners? And farmers? And foresters? Ah, pesticides, herbicides, fungicides. A great way for a government to get rid of a large pension group of healthy people is to continue to allow chemical use on crops, plantation forests, parks departments and every over-fussy householder is to continue to allow the sale of chemicals, to let us all poison each other over and over again, while at the same tome - crippling the NHS so effectively, you die before you are suitably treated. Glyphosate (packaged into bright coloured bottles and renamed RoundUp) is made by Monsanto, the same chemical company that produced Agent Orange for the Vietnam war. Now, a company that happily produces a toxin like Agent Orange, that has caused so much genetic devastation in the places it was used (go look at some of the videos of the poor children 'still' being born severely deformed due to the residual effect of this chemical) is going to have no qualms whatsoever about producing another that has health implications for the population. Their king is money, and that's all that matters to them. Oh, and if you want to try and wave a bit of maths in my face, drumming up some government figures on how many people have died directly due to agricultural/horticultural chemicals - don't bother. I know full well they are completely false. How do I know? Because in 1988 I was sent by my workplace onto a chemical spraying course. The tutor was sent by the Department of Environment, and among his list of approved 'comforting facts' he stated that no person had ever died from using chemical sprays. That was the moment I had been waiting for, and I promptly told him that my grandfather 'had' died directly due to chemical spraying on a farm, when my father was just 11 years old. He collapsed the evening after he had been doing the spraying and lived about a week afterwards. The tutor then proceeded to make fun of my grandfather's death on occasions throughout the rest of the course, much to the disgust of the rest of the class. (I did not make use of the certification, and refused to spray any chemicals from that day forwards). Your particular worry seems to be organic fascism. Well, so far as I can see, there is absolutely free choice in supermarkets whether you want to buy organic or chemical-doused food in supermarkets. Indeed, it seems to me that organic food comes with an increased cost. So people are paying more for healthier food without the chemical garnish. So they are paying to live longer, live healthier, and be less of a burden on the NHS, the social care system and their families. Typical.
stopped watching this film at around 6 minutes when you show a tractor and sprayer followed up by a shot of a stream with brown iron oxide in the water,i presume suggest that this was pollution,iron in streams is ugly but totally natural.I afraid that for me you lost all credibility.
I appreciate you writing a comment and pointing that out. While I had not realised this was natural "contamination," I hope it didn't detract from the point that intensive farming practices do increase the potential for eutrophication and poor water quality. Best, Thomas
@@thomasscott potential and reality are two different things,the reality is that water companies ,not farmers ,are pumping raw sewage into lakes ,rivers and the sea,this has a massive B.O.D. ,in addition to this huge amounts of pollutant are washed off tarmac roads into rivers and streams,as both tarmac and tyres breakdown .
Which of these practices do you want to see more in your local area? Leave a comment and let me know! ✍🏻
Your sense of humor is amazing. This video was hilarious!
Rewilding
It was brilliant fun to film!
I have a moral issue with organic agriculture…
Fundamentally, the organic movement spawned out of and invented by the English fascism movement around WW2 (which was slightly different to European fascism, it was more concerned with moving us back to a feudalistic society with the aristocrat still in charge (‘blood and soil’ and all that)). Said movement rejected scientific agriculture as they felt it took power from the aristocrats and gave it to the common farmer, thus the aristocrats could no longer be ‘partners in husbandry’.
These days the organic movement has transitioned away from its original fascist basis to more of an ‘anti-vaxxer’ mentality. The anti-scientific part remains with the rejection of scientific agriculture in favour of old pre-1900s practices (such as the Norfolk 4 course system amongst other methods which may be new but approximate the same concept) whereas the old promise to maintain the aristocracy via fascist means has now gone (thankfully).
The flip side of this though, is that while no longer overtly fascist in the same sense that it used to be; organic agriculture still has fascist outcomes, just more indirectly. For instance, the implementation of organic farming universally will reduce food output significantly. This WILL produce a famine waaaaaaay in excess of any other man-made famine such as the Holodomor, etc. Likely half of the world population would die of starvation. If your given stance is that the world population is too high, and thus to you this is acceptable, the next question is who are you killing? Suddenly the fascism which is baked into the organic movement becomes a bit more obvious when those questions are asked so blatantly…
Whether you realise you are supporting practices which would have these outcomes is a question for anyone who reads this. I suspect most people just naively think it’s better for the environment (which it can be, but is not necessarily true), so I don’t blame anyone for supporting organic practices. Especially as the organic movement has very good PR!
I to watch Farming Explained. Would be good to have a debate with him.
Half the world is already starving or on the point of starving or migrating in ever increasing numbers to parts of the world still able to grow anything in sufficient numbers.
Need to take a look at some of these Chinese news channels at some of their farm related stuff, and see just what I tensive modern agriculture (which the CCP embraces with a fanatical fervour) has done to their land. Poisoned it, eroded it, starved it, turned it into wasteland and desert where once there used to be rich, deep, fertile soils. China has literally sped up the process of modern agriculture that we use in the West and damaged their soil faster (which is why so much of their fine agricultural soil in now in the Great China Sea, and not on the land, and why the CCP is hell-bent on expanding its empire around the world. They do that because they are dirt poor, not filthy rich).
Chemicals used in farming 'are' causing serious health problems, that is no overstatement. It is fact.
Only yesterday I watched a part of Courtney Swan's speech regarding the devastating effect Glyphosate is having on the American public.
I have a little bee in my bonnet about Glyphosate, since I was a gardener by trade and half my former colleagues are now 'dead' from cancer related illnesses. Their average lifespan seemed to be about 50 years old. I survived my brush with cancer - just about - at age 39 (way too young to be getting cancer). My husband (who worked at the same place), survived a long battle with cancer at age 60. Gardeners shouldn't get cancer at the rate they are doing so now. We never used to. It was always considered a very healthy occupation, and should assure us a long life.
So why are so many of us falling sick now?
What's the difference between 20th/21st century gardeners? And farmers? And foresters?
Ah, pesticides, herbicides, fungicides.
A great way for a government to get rid of a large pension group of healthy people is to continue to allow chemical use on crops, plantation forests, parks departments and every over-fussy householder is to continue to allow the sale of chemicals, to let us all poison each other over and over again, while at the same tome - crippling the NHS so effectively, you die before you are suitably treated.
Glyphosate (packaged into bright coloured bottles and renamed RoundUp) is made by Monsanto, the same chemical company that produced Agent Orange for the Vietnam war.
Now, a company that happily produces a toxin like Agent Orange, that has caused so much genetic devastation in the places it was used (go look at some of the videos of the poor children 'still' being born severely deformed due to the residual effect of this chemical) is going to have no qualms whatsoever about producing another that has health implications for the population. Their king is money, and that's all that matters to them.
Oh, and if you want to try and wave a bit of maths in my face, drumming up some government figures on how many people have died directly due to agricultural/horticultural chemicals - don't bother. I know full well they are completely false.
How do I know?
Because in 1988 I was sent by my workplace onto a chemical spraying course. The tutor was sent by the Department of Environment, and among his list of approved 'comforting facts' he stated that no person had ever died from using chemical sprays.
That was the moment I had been waiting for, and I promptly told him that my grandfather 'had' died directly due to chemical spraying on a farm, when my father was just 11 years old. He collapsed the evening after he had been doing the spraying and lived about a week afterwards.
The tutor then proceeded to make fun of my grandfather's death on occasions throughout the rest of the course, much to the disgust of the rest of the class. (I did not make use of the certification, and refused to spray any chemicals from that day forwards).
Your particular worry seems to be organic fascism. Well, so far as I can see, there is absolutely free choice in supermarkets whether you want to buy organic or chemical-doused food in supermarkets.
Indeed, it seems to me that organic food comes with an increased cost. So people are paying more for healthier food without the chemical garnish. So they are paying to live longer, live healthier, and be less of a burden on the NHS, the social care system and their families. Typical.
stopped watching this film at around 6 minutes when you show a tractor and sprayer followed up by a shot of a stream with brown iron oxide in the water,i presume suggest that this was pollution,iron in streams is ugly but totally natural.I afraid that for me you lost all credibility.
I appreciate you writing a comment and pointing that out. While I had not realised this was natural "contamination," I hope it didn't detract from the point that intensive farming practices do increase the potential for eutrophication and poor water quality. Best, Thomas
@@thomasscott
potential and reality are two different things,the reality is that water companies ,not farmers ,are pumping raw sewage into lakes ,rivers and the sea,this has a massive B.O.D. ,in addition to this huge amounts of pollutant are washed off tarmac roads into rivers and streams,as both tarmac and tyres breakdown .