The End Of Agriculture

The End Of Agriculture

How Agricultural Practices Are Obsolete And Antithetical To Human Survival.
53
views

In the year 2016, food security is a critical issue needing to be solved. Efforts over previous decades has been towards Industrial agriculture, especially monoculture; heavily centralized into private corporate hands. For almost a century, the agricultural process has become largely intertwined with the petrochemical industry. In more recent years, the debate over the employment of genetically modified organisms, not to be mistaken with natural selection driven hybridization and modification, has raised a philosophical issue that few seem to recognize. The question that we as a civilization and as a species has to seriously ask ourselves, is whether or not the process of agriculture is in and of itself still relevant in the 21st-century.

We must first come to terms with reality that this is a +10,000 year old model and method of food production. One which is largely designed for the generation of surplus resource. We must also come to terms and acknowledge the immense psychological conflict and moral issue that agriculture generated. Which makes us try to fight and conquer nature; bending the biosphere to our will, in order to anthropocentrically sustain ourselves. This anthropocentrism is further reflected by our more modern desire to artificially prop up agricultural products by synthetic means as a source of profit; rather than the logistics for food security. It must also be recognized that the entirety of human civilization for the last 10,000 years, organizing entire economic and political systems, has been over the basis of food production, distribution, and consumptions systems. These cultural moldings and dictations generated by this agricultural model have twisted entire economies and nations into consumerist mentalities that defy all sustainable logic and is suicidal in its un-sustainability.

Since the agricultural model has been the basis of civilization for the last 10 millennia; it is imperative that a new model is employed expeditiously. We possess technological means in the year 2016 that is unseen in human history. Besides normal greenhouses and local civil alterations like edible plants at parks or community gardens. Vertical industrial greenhouses are structures that we can build in every city, town, and settlement; which requires 1/10 of the resources to produce via techniques like aquaponics, hydroponics, aeroponics, etc. It is locally based to ensure direct food security; eliminating distribution systems. And can supply year round production that requires no leeching off or dictated alteration and control of the biosphere. Community gardens operating off of permaculture would be a prime means of food security while restoring and rejuvenating ecosystems. Permaculture is a method that also dates back to a similar date as the inception of agriculture. However, it is opposite of monoculture; meaning it is a wide array of genetic diversity used to cultivate food production. As well acting as a means of rejuvenating and restoring ecosystems.

Shifting away from fossil fuels in terms of energy would require a complete food production overhaul. Since the entire process is the skeletal system of our entire global Oil based civilization that is a huge consumer of oil and petroleum products. These food production systems and oil based civilizations spawned from the skeletal means of distribution and transportation is a main driver of climatic destabilization. The amount of oil based materials that is require to produce the food, ranging from herbicides, fertilizers, pesticides etc.; to the amount of oil base machinery and oil powered vehicles used to produce and distribute the food. Results in massive amounts of resource consumption of fossil fuels. And the toxicity of the environment through ecological destruction in exchange for cropland, as well as the pollutants of the petrochemicals within the greater environment.

Not only is the food production system inadvertently a huge destabilizing force; traditional agriculture and its production network is not capable of withstanding a catastrophic event. Whether it is natural disasters, ecological collapse, civilization collapse, or extraterrestrial impacts. The system of food production and distribution is incapable of supporting the entirety of the human population. A decentralized localized technological source is an imperative alternative that our civilization needs to adapt to immediately.

While it may seem difficult to perceive the notion of evolving past a 10,000-year-old method of production that has single-handedly shaped human civilization throughout its history. We must keep in mind that a plan of mobilization towards the efforts of creating a new skeletal system of civilization based on a decentralized localized technologically organic production of food is currently being proposed by a presidential candidate within the United States. The Green Party and its platform, led by Jill Stein, outlines a means to shift the entire US energy system to 100% renewable energy sources by the year 2030. This plan is proposed under the auspice of a Green New Deal. Which proposes to mobilize industry equal to that of wartime mobilization. Not only is this mobilization intended to convert the entire energy system; it is also designed to lay the legitimate foundations for a skeletal system of food production that is exactly what our civilization, and the human species, requires for survival.

The challenge of evolving and upgrading ancient archaic ideas and models that have been the foundation of civilization progression throughout the millennia is one that we must confront. Just as the evolution of agriculture itself has changed immensely since its onset after the end of the last Ice Age. So too must our perception as to why we originally created agriculture. It was a means of harnessing a food supply to ensure humanity survival through the climatic changes that occurred following the Younger Dryas Mass Extinction. Through a cruel cosmic irony, that very system of agriculture that once saved us from the brink; now pushes us to the precipice of an even larger mass extinction. Let us keep in mind that this dilemma is by no means unalterable. And is by no means beyond the reach of humanity or our civilizations. A potentially major political party within the United States is currently mobilizing and organizing towards the initiation of a new paradigm of food security. Let us recognize and embrace this effort and usher in the coming decades with new model of human civilization. One that aspires to ensure the life of its citizenry over potential profits off of commodified surplus. One that relinquishes attempts to control and dictate the biosphere; and one that ceases the Conquest of Nature.

Cover Image Credit: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=imgres&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjZ5uulze3PAhUO8GMKHU-0BxIQjhwIBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweburbanist.com%2F2016%2F05%2F22%2Foff-grid-self-sufficient-regen-villages-with-vertical-farms%2F&psig=AFQjCNEfchbetIS0YVtNof5jd8F7bmnfsg&ust=1477197940889756

Popular Right Now

The Trump Presidency Is Over

Say hello to President Mike Pence.

46438
views

Remember this date: August 21, 2018.

This was the day that two of President Donald Trump's most-important associates were convicted on eight counts each, and one directly implicated the president himself.

Paul Manafort was Trump's campaign chairman for a few months in 2016, but the charges brought against him don't necessarily implicate Trump. However, they are incredibly important considering was is one of the most influential people in the Trump campaign and picked Mike Pence to be the vice presidential candidate.

Manafort was convicted on five counts of tax fraud, two counts of bank fraud, and one count of failure to file a report of a foreign bank account. And it could have been even worse. The jury was only unanimous on eight counts while 10 counts were declared a mistrial.

Michael Cohen, Trump's personal lawyer, told a judge that Trump explicitly instructed him to break campaign-finance laws by paying two women not to publicly disclose the affairs they had with Trump. Those two women are believed to be Karen McDougal, a Playboy model, and Stormy Daniels, a pornstar. Trump had an affair with both while married to his current wife, Melania.

And then to no surprise, Fox News pundits spun this in the only way they know how. Sara Carter on Hannity said that the FBI and the Department of Justice are colluding as if it's some sort of deep-state conspiracy. Does someone want to tell her that the FBI is literally a part of the DOJ?

The Republican Party has for too long let Trump get away with criminal behavior, and it's long past time to, at the very least, remove Mr. Trump from office.

And then Trump should face the consequences for the crimes he has committed. Yes, Democrats have a role, too. But Republicans have control of both chambers of Congress, so they head every committee. They have the power to subpoena Trump's tax returns, which they have not. They have the power to subpoena key witnesses in their Russia investigations, which they have not.

For the better part of a year I have been asking myself what is the breaking point with Republicans and Trump. It does not seem like there is one, so for the time being we're stuck with a president who paid off two women he had an affair with in an attempt to influence a United States election.

Imagine for a second that any past president had done even a fraction of what Trump has.

Barack Obama got eviscerated for wearing a tan suit. If he had affairs with multiple women, then Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell would be preparing to burn him at the stake. If they won't, then Trump's enthusiastic would be more than happy to do so.

For too long we've been saying that Trump is heading down a road similar to Nixon, but it's evident now that we're way past that point. Donald Trump now has incriminating evidence against him to prove he's a criminal, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller is just getting started.

Will Trump soften the blow and resign in disgrace before impeachment like Nixon did? Knowing his fragile ego, there's honestly no telling what he'll do. But it's high time Trump leaves an office he never should have entered in the first place.

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

For Those Of You Boycotting Nike, Here Are 10 Times You Need To Just Stop It

There's no need to burn your gear.

108
views

As everyone knows, Nike created an ad that included Colin Kaepernick and the white supremacists went wild. They began burning their Nike gear, and no longer want to support the brand.

1. Why? 

Giphy

There are two reasons why I think you are boycotting Nike and that is because either you are assuming the race of Colin Kaepernick or you are mad because he kneeled during the National Anthem. Either way, you have the right to boycott whatever you want. Boycotting is a great way to protest. However, you're going about it all wrong

2. Why are you mad? 

Giphy

If you're assuming this man's ethnicity, you are assuming. Check your facts, Kaepernick is American. If you are mad because he kneeled during the National Anthem, I do not understand why that is even an issue. Just like you are protesting Nike, the NFL players were protesting police brutality. So, really, your thinking is on the same level. People who protest want something to be corrected. What exactly do you want to be corrected?

3. Nike knew what they were doing

Giphy

Of course Nike knows what they're doing! Nike has been successful for years and they aren't going to stop because they aren't going to conform to whatever the majority wants, especially if they don't stand for it. Nike is a business, they have marketing strategies, and believe it or not, they are most likely going to blow up. If not, they'll do just fine. Nike employees many athletes and owns multiple other companies. The reality of it is, if you don't like what Nike stands for, they don't want your business and they don't care if you're gone.

4. Let’s be honest

Giphy

The majority of people burning or mutilating their Nike gear are people who splurge on such items when they've saved up enough money to buy something nice. You tore up one pair of socks? You burned one pair of shoes? Honestly, it's your own money wasted.

5. You look like a buffoon

Giphy

Seriously, the internet is making fun of you. You are burning your own clothes. Sure, be mad at the brand, boycott it if you must. But, really, Nike already has your money. It is a business, not a person, they don't care whether you burn their clothing articles because you already bought it. What are you going to do? Buy more socks to cut or keep buying the same socks you normally wear? I think the joke is on you. You have fewer clothes and less money.

6. It’s an article of clothing

Giphy

You're not bothering Nike but Nike is bothering you. Some people would be thrilled just to have a cool shirt or nice pair of shoes and would gladly take that swoosh off your hands. But you're too busy caught up in your own fury to even think of the people less fortunate than you, right? Clothes that are in good shape are taken so much for granted. Typically when people are done with their clothes they donate them to Goodwill…

7. Or the army

https://www.instagram.com/p/BnX27tmD2by/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet

Which seems to be one of the topics that some are so angry about. You talk about respecting the troops but don't think to donate an article of clothing that someone would not only be excited to have, but possibly need. Instead, you destroy it and hope someone's feelings get hurt. Keep in mind, businesses don't have feelings, people do.

8. If someone who cannot afford clothing saw you destroying it

Giphy

They would be distraught. Some people rely on thrift shops or donations just to live in habitable conditions. No one cares who you boycott or for what, but destroying a good pair of shoes, socks or even clothes for the sake of protesting is kind of dumb. Just donate whatever it is and don't buy from the company.

9. It’s not hard to be a good person and protest

Seriously, just donate your clothes. Figure out exactly what it is that you're mad about and decide whether it's worth the trouble. Making it public that you're angry about a small thing results in more people making fun of you and supporting where you lack; it doesn't matter whether you're buying from the company or not.

10. There’s a reason why people are making fun of you for burning your clothes

https://www.instagram.com/p/BnX27tmD2by/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet

It's because everyone else sees that this issue should not be an issue. People have their clothes and wear them, whether the brand is getting a bad rap or not. You're mad at Nike for creating a commercial with someone they have been sponsoring for years who kneeled during the national Anthem to protest the victims of police brutality. It was a one time thing, and like you, they were protesting.

11. If you can be mad at that, you can be mad at things that matter

If you can spend all this energy on one small thing, you can protest things that actually matter, police brutality, for example. It's okay not to like something, but this isn't an issue. Michigan still doesn't have clean water, many people need affordable healthcare, there are people who live on the streets and need food, and global warming is a serious problem. There are way bigger issues than someone kneeling during the National Anthem. So, how will you help the world?

Related Content

Facebook Comments