Hi Aubrey,
I vote Yes for LPSF to participate on the Monsanto March, but only if we are able to have a table with our view point on the subject. If not a table, at least be able to distribute our own literature containing our own viewpoint. For that, we need to formulate fact-based, rational arguments. Do we have any?
For example: Is there a crucial difference between broccoli (which is proprietary, just like Monsanto seeds) and foods whose DNA are modified with those of divergent species? How can we support labeling GMO foods, when so many are -- and have been for years -- GMO's? Is there a difference between protecting Monsanto from suits due to their food production and protecting vaccine manufacturers?
Marcy
It’s a violation of individual rights to force individuals to label the foods they sell or to refrain from growing and selling GMO foods.
Agreed to some extent, Michael. However, the question here is whether the LPSF needs to develop some general consensus about Monsanto's practices in order to participate in this March Against Monsanto. If so, what would that consensus be. For example, since I do not agree that sellers have the right to sell GMO foods that are not safe for human consumption, or poisoned food, or spoiled food, then apparently we do not have a consensus. My view is that I really do not want to die so that others can avoid a particular seller.
A bigger question for this Activist List is whether LPSF expresses general thoughts that are way over the heads of the general public, and thereby be totally politically irrelevant, or it expresses specific solutions to specific questions at hand.
Marcy
Thanks, Marcy, for your thoughtful reply.
I agree with you if someone sells poison in their food this is a violation of the NAP. This is not the issue here, since as far as I know sellers of GMO food do not (knowingly or unknowingly) include poison in their items.
On the LPSF policy issues, when there’s divided opinion among members whether to participate in an action, I suggest those who wish to participate do so as individual Libertarians who are also LPSF members, rather than as a group under the LPSF banner.
Warm regards, Michael
Hi Michael,
Totally agreed on your suggestion, if only one or a few members wish to do something that more members do not, or vice versa. That is why I suggested developing consensus. At this point we only have four "votes" Daniel for yes, me for yes if we know what we are talking about, Aubrey for maybe, and you for no.
With that, I will leave it up to Daniel, to take the discussion further if he wishes to do so. I think this could be an opportunity to form some down to earth policy and be relevant on an issue before the general public. But since this was not my proposal, I will leave it up to Daniel to move the action along.
Marcy
Michael,
I agree that the possible effects of GMOs on health, the food supply, the environment, and independent farmers do not appear to be clear-cut issues from a libertarian perspective, and that the LP probably should not take a position on them for that reason, although I personally see Monsanto's operations regarding food as a cause for concern. But another reason to speak out against Monsanto that might be less ambiguous is the company's history with supplying Agent Orange to the U.S. government. (See http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/agent-orange/ ).
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))