Foot and Mouth Genesis- An Eco-Marxist Explanation
hillbily at SPAMintergate.ca
Sun Mar 25 20:18:19 MST 2001
I see nothing in that article about using state resources to pay small
mixed farmers. I thought paying them "a living wage" was meant to be a
result of "voting with our feet," boycotting supermarkets, buying
organic produce, etc., the same market solutions the Green Parties call
And like the green agenda, it is devoid of class analysis and would
appeal to the middle and upper classes who don't care too much if the
price of their food goes up.
This is not marxist in the least, not even "eco-marxist."
> Tony Abdo quoted:
[...] It is time to consider paying farmers in small mixed farms a
as countryside custodians, to maintain and husband the land, domestic
animals and wildlife in the way we want it to be, putting the soul back
into the soil. Also, as urban consumers, we need to support local
farmers' market type initiatives, and vote with our feet by boycotting
This is "eco-Marxism"?
> Brian, what is it about this that you find to be offensive, or contrary
to the 'purity' of marxism? Why wouldn't marxists support this idea
of using state resources to pay farmers to 'husband the land'?
> As it is now, subsidies are payed to agribusiness to help degrade the
land. The small farmer is left to go bankrupt.
> Plus, isn't it better that the rural population be involved in
maintaining wildlife habitat, rather than competing directly against it?
Why should the farmer not be integrated into habitat management?
Should we leave this (in the US) to the National Forest Service or
Bureau of Land Management bureaucracies alone, God forbid?
More information about the Marxism