The case for mandatory GMO labeling – even if you believe in limited government and the fr

[thequietkid10]

Ok, lets see if I can get this all out.

To the extent that Monsanto crops damage other people's property, that they sue other farmers for "royalties" and that they sue others for "GMO Free" stickers, they are both anti libertarian and evil.

But the initial question seemed to be suggesting that GMOs are dangerous to human health, and more importantly that Monsonto doesn't want you to know. In effect Monsanto is running a disinfo campaign. So let's think about this in the context of a libertarian society. In this scenario I'm going to assume that GMO are dangerous to your health and Monsanto is evil and trying to stop you from knowing this, as some have implied


In a libertarian society there would be competing "regulatory" agencies who provide information to the consumer. Anyone can start such a group, including those connected to the industries being monitored. So for food, there might regulatory agencies who are tied to organic farmers, a couple funded by Monsanto who are pro GMOs and others who have less of an agenda and should be the most trusted. Here is where I have a couple of problems, mainly that Monsanto backed agencies are free to lie out their ass and hide their connections to Monsanto. (in this scenario that is why they were in fact created).With enough well placed scientific looking jargon, they could convince many people that GMOs are safe. Or at the very least confuse the general populace with science beyond their understanding, leaving them unable to make a good decision. Between those who they convince and those they confuse, they will continue to do lots of business, selling a harmful product.



Now let's look at another scenario, where Monsanto is not evil.

They would still be competing regulatory agencies, they're might even be one connected to Monsanto. But in this scenario, that agency doesn't want to lie to you. They exist because either
1. they honestly believe (or the truth is) that GMOs aren't as bad as they are being made out to be
2. they honestly believe (or the truth is) that GMOs are completely safe.
In this scenario, lets assume there is a report done that suggest the consumption of GMOs is "dangerous." Monsanto looks at the information and there heart sinks because it's a rock solid piece of science. Since they are not evil, they don't try and discredit the report completely, and they start re-evaluating the elements deemed dangerous to create a safer product. Free of overwhelming propaganda consumers in this scenario are free to shop with a more accurate understanding of the risks (or non risks) of GMOs, in the same way they do with candy and junk food.

I guess what I am saying is that I trust the free market regulatory methods to be effective watchdogs when dangerous products are the exception or an honest mistake, not company policy of a major business in the industry. Maybe that's not the most libertarian thing to say, but so if I'm wrong let me have it.

That is why I cannot understand how someone can reconcile a libertarian world view and the belief that Monsanto is evil (first sentence in this essay not withstanding)

 

[Travlyr]

This is less about GMO and more about spraying herbicide and insecticide on food. Monsanto was able to genetically modify plants so that herbicide and insecticide could be sprayed on food to kill insects and weeds while not killing the plant itself. Everything has been genetically modified either by nature or by choice.

 

[Travlyr]

On a side note: Industrial Hemp grows without the need for either chemical herbicide or insecticide. A farmer can get thrown in the brig for growing it, but it also replenishes the soil with nutrients as a natural cycle and the root system binds the soil to help prevent soil erosion. The products made from industrial hemp are numerous and of high quality. The plastics made from industrial hemp can be made compostable. It is illegal to grow it in most states. It is illegal because our rulers are paid by Monsanto, and other corporations.

 

[specsaregood]

There's no such thing as a right to exclusivity on an idea. That's a state-granted privilege that does not exist in Natural Law. Patents and other intellectual property protections are anti-free market and anti-liberty. If I come up with an idea I shouldn't be restricted from putting it to use because someone somewhere else also came up with that idea and was first to rush to the patent/copyright office. The fatal flaw in the idea of intellectual property is the false assumption that two or more people cannot come up with the same idea independently. Yet that is exactly what has happened over the history of scientific progress... as an example, take the development of Calculus by Liebnitz and Newton, respectively.

Your post represents the gross misunderstanding of the patent process; as you can't patent or copywrite an idea, only inventions. I for one am glad that our founders recognized the importance of protecting intellectual property.

But either way, the process needs to be reformed and instances such as monsanto's patented products infecting other peoples products and thus monsanto seizing their product as a result needs to be ended, immediately.

 

[donnay]

as far as I know, there's nothing libertarian about genocide, why do you ask?

Monsanto is the producer of Agent Orange, DDT, Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), Aspartame, Round-Up and Genetically Modified Round-up ready seeds.

Political contributions

Monsanto gave $658,207 to federal candidates in the 2010 election cycle through its political action committee (PAC) - 48% to Democrats, 52% to Republicans.[35]

Public relations & lobbying

Monsanto spent $6,560,000 for lobbying in 2010. $1,030,000 was to outside lobbying firms with the remainder being spent using in-house lobbyists.[36]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsanto

 

[soulcyon]

So how about a private organization that does ratings/certifications of food, rather than the government imposing the labels?

Essentially a privatized FDA... any takers?

 

[Travlyr]

So how about a private organization that does ratings/certifications of food, rather than the government imposing the labels?

Essentially a privatized FDA... any takers?

Shop at Whole Foods and Trader Joes. They are more expensive but they do their homework.

 

[donnay]

On a side note: Industrial Hemp grows without the need for either chemical herbicide or insecticide. A farmer can get thrown in the brig for growing it, but it also replenishes the soil with nutrients as a natural cycle and the root system binds the soil to help prevent soil erosion. The products made from industrial hemp are numerous and of high quality. The plastics made from industrial hemp can be made compostable. It is illegal to grow it in most states. It is illegal because our rulers are paid by Monsanto, and other corporations.

The plastic made from Industrial Hemp would be safer than the plastics we have out now leeching PCB's which was covered up Monsanto, Westinghouse, and GE.

Sources:
http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200103/conspiracy.asp
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsanto
http://www.naturalnews.com/023254_Monsanto_PCB_toxic.html
http://www.commonweal.org/programs/brc/ppt-presentations/Anniston_AL_PCB.pdf

 

[HigherVision]

I think you're missing the point. Government exists to preserve the righs of men against all who would wish to violate them. If GMOs are a legitimate threat to our liberties, it is the duty of government to enforce laws that protect consumers from false advertising.

Not unless the food companies put a gun to your head and force you to buy them is that true.

 

[HigherVision]

Monsanto is the producer of Agent Orange, DDT, Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), Aspartame, Round-Up and Genetically Modified Round-up ready seeds.

Political contributions

Monsanto gave $658,207 to federal candidates in the 2010 election cycle through its political action committee (PAC) - 48% to Democrats, 52% to Republicans.[35]

Public relations & lobbying

Monsanto spent $6,560,000 for lobbying in 2010. $1,030,000 was to outside lobbying firms with the remainder being spent using in-house lobbyists.[36]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsanto

If only organic farming was allowed the food supply would shrink and food would become unaffordable for millions of people. It's not a coincidence that people who are zealots about organic tend to be anti-capitalist and civilization in general. If you're against capitalism I'd suggest leaving the liberty movement. Honestly there are too many progressives around muddying the waters.

It's a bad thing that American companies have more freedom?

Yeah, we don't even have fully socialized medicine. We're completely barbaric. How did these people become Ron Paul fans? (the person you replied to)

 

[thoughtomator]

Your post represents the gross misunderstanding of the patent process; as you can't patent or copywrite an idea, only inventions. I for one am glad that our founders recognized the importance of protecting intellectual property.

But either way, the process needs to be reformed and instances such as monsanto's patented products infecting other peoples products and thus monsanto seizing their product as a result needs to be ended, immediately.

I understand the patent process. The thing that makes an invention what it is is the idea behind it; that's what the patent protects. I'm simply not convinced that there is any legitimacy to the concept of intellectual property. By its very name it makes an idea, not the actual item, a possession. But the nature of information is to be free.

 

[jt8025]

Is there anything keeping companies selling products that are non-GMO from putting a sticker saying non-GMO?

Instead of looking to not buy products with a GMO label just buy products with a non-GMO label.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Is there anything keeping companies selling products that are non-GMO from putting a sticker saying non-GMO?

Instead of looking to not buy products with a GMO label just buy products with a non-GMO label.

That is in fact the problem. Any company that dares to have the audacity to label their products "GMO-Free" is sued out of existence by Monsanto. If not for that fact, your suggestion would of course be the proper solution.

 

[donnay]

If only organic farming was allowed the food supply would shrink and food would become unaffordable for millions of people. It's not a coincidence that people who are zealots about organic tend to be anti-capitalist and civilization in general. If you're against capitalism I'd suggest leaving the liberty movement. Honestly there are too many progressives around muddying the waters.

Excuse me? How in the hell did we evolve without Monsanto and Dow Chemical? Seriously! I am not anti-capitalist, I am against crony capitalism! There is definitely a difference, and people like you fail to make that distinction. You are falling for the crony capitalists lie!!

Government pays farmers not to produce. Because they have their crony friends who lobby them to do so. Corporate Welfare!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/01/AR2006070100962.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012...nt-program-paying-farmers-not-to-plant-crops/
http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/06/senate_passes_5-year_farm_and.html
http://www.enotes.com/payment-kind-...yment-kind-program-pays-u-s-farmers-not-plant

Tell me this, why is Organic Farmers and Ranchers around the country being raided?

http://communities.washingtontimes....1/aug/6/rawsome-foods-raided-sad-day-america/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/rawsome-raid-_n_917540.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/08/04/the-rawesome-raid-and-raw-milk-controversy/


Why are Amish dairy farms being raided?
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...y-fda-raids-shuts-down-raw-milk-business?lite
http://communities.washingtontimes....da-escalates-war-against-amish-dairy-farmers/
http://www.wapf-houston.org/wapf-ho...-escalates-war-against-amish-dairy-farmers-2/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/amish/discuss/72157626654869501/

You need to get a clue there buddy. The waters are muddy from people like yourself, who fail to realize that the water is being polluted by propaganda.

Higher Vision-- interesting moniker you have picked, too bad you have been blinded, by crony capitalism.

 

[TheGrinch]

The problem is that Monsanto is not the result of free markets, it is the result of fascism, or corporatism. Monsanto is the king of 'captured regulators,' and God forbid a company dare to label their product "GMO Free" or "rBGH Free" they get sued into oblivion with the advice and consent of Congress.

IF we had a free market, then GMO labeling would be a bad idea, just like any mandate, because consumers who wanted to avoid GMO foods could easily choose products that advertised themselves as GMO Free. However in today's world, based on Monsanto arguments, labeling your product "GMO Free" is considered an insult to GMO and an unfair market advantage, and any company that dares to do so is banished from the marketplace.

That is why I literally oppose all government mandates in a free market, but support GMO labeling in the current market. Until we can break the back of the fascistic corporatist stranglehold that companies like Monsanto (with the full cooperation and assistance of our government by the creation of artificial monopolies) consumers who choose to avoid GMO's ought to be free to do so, and in the current market they are not.

You may not consider GMO's to be poison, but a significant share of consumers do. If a megagiant corporation with enhanced monopoly power from the ownership of government regulation managed to put arsenic in 80% of the food supply and used their government-enhanced power to destroy any company that labeled their product "Arsenic Free," then I would support state level mandatory labeling for products containing arsenic too.

It's a stop-gap emergency measure to ensure that consumers have the freedom of choice that has been robbed from them by a fascist government.

If we actually had a free market, then I would oppose mandatory GMO labeling vehemently. In our current market, I actually introduced a bill to require GMO labeling in NC, because our government is fascist (corporatist), and companies are not free to label their products GMO Free without being forced out of business.

I would prefer to make a bill that creates immunity from predatory lawsuits for companies who choose to label their products "GMO Free" but in the 21st century such a law in one state only will effectively solve nothing.

Show me a free market and I will oppose mandatory GMO labeling with everything I've got. Until then, there are people out there who are desperately trying to avoid consuming what they believe is deadly poison and they cannot. Like it or not, those people have rights too.

This is an incredibly well-thought out and pragmatic approach... Yes, we should be moving towards a truly free market that can regulate itself, but that's not what we have in the current corporate-controlled environment, and thus, some pragmatism is needed to not just let them steamroll over the market without transparency.

 

[liberdom]

Government pays farmers not to produce. Because they have their crony friends who lobby them to do so. Corporate Welfare!!!

you're mad that people are so greedy they care about money, rather than producing?

 

[liberdom]

That is in fact the problem. Any company that dares to have the audacity to label their products "GMO-Free" is sued out of existence by Monsanto. If not for that fact, your suggestion would of course be the proper solution.

what is the suit about?

can you give an example?

 

[liberdom]

I understand the patent process. The thing that makes an invention what it is is the idea behind it; that's what the patent protects. I'm simply not convinced that there is any legitimacy to the concept of intellectual property. By its very name it makes an idea, not the actual item, a possession. But the nature of information is to be free.

Even if its your social security number or home address? What about your name? I guess "identity theft" is not a crime in your books. What about counterfeiting?

I know you'll respond "but that's fraud!" and I will ask "How is it fraud? Why can't it be free speech? Do you own words or what they mean?"

 

[liberdom]

The fatal flaw in the idea of intellectual property is the false assumption that two or more people cannot come up with the same idea independently. Yet that is exactly what has happened over the history of scientific progress... as an example, take the development of Calculus by Liebnitz and Newton, respectively.

Ok, let's see you come up with one of them, let's start with some trade secrets, can you give me KFC, Coca Cola, and WD 40? Sure, it's not impossible that certain ideas can be found or discovered independently, but not only are they extremely rare, but there are reasonable exceptions, whether you are talking about copyright, trademark, or patent. Patent office has the obligation to deny patents which they either know are un-unique, or already registered.

 

[cajuncocoa]