Today it emerged that world leaders are to discuss what is being described as “land grabbing” or “neo-colonialism” at the G8 meeting next week. A spokesman for Japan’s ministry of foreign affairs confirmed that it would raise the issue: “We feel there should be a code of conduct for investment in farmland that will be a win-win situation for both producing and consuming countries,” he said.
Olivier De Schutter, special envoy for food at the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said: “[The trend] is accelerating quickly. All countries observe each other and when one sees others buying land it does the same.”
Some of the largest deals include South Korea’s acquisition of 700,000ha in Sudan, and Saudi Arabia’s purchase of 500,000ha in Tanzania. The Democratic Republic of the Congo expects to shortly conclude an 8m-hectare deal with a group of South African businesses to grow maize and soya beans as well as poultry and dairy farming.
Other countries that have acquired land in the last year include the Gulf states, Sweden, China and Libya. Those targeted include not only fertile countries such as Brazil, Russia and Ukraine, but also poor countries like Cameroon, Ethiopia, Madagascar, and Zambia.
De Schutter said that after the food crisis of 2008, many countries found food imports hit their balance of payments, “so now they want to insure themselves”.
Continue Reading Fears For The World’s Poor Countries as The Rich Grab Land to Grow Food
Bert:
I agree with your take on localization as it is being proposed by many groups.
That said, we have to move on both fronts. Power comes from bottom up and top down. And economic power is in your backyard, in your infrastructure and your global satellite systems, etc.
So we have to move on all fronts. Question is how. Essential that we each do what we can incrementally.
Meantime, you bet I am developing my own food supply. Given the national debt and the current state of the legal system, I am completely clear the extent to which it is not “mine.”
I am also do what I can to not invest, purchase from or support those 5 businesses or to affirm their leadership.
What would you tell the average citizen that they can do?
Catherine
Guy,
In short, we must not go along with their plans, that is our only option. It is therefore imperative to recognize their plans, and to openly discuss them in order to avoid very appealing and propagandized enticements.
This move toward localization is indeed part of their plan, a plan that seeks to establish a dialectic that sets an extremely sophisticated and technologically equipped superclass against the feudal masses.
With respect to the point at which “the individual” allowed to survive independently of vast control systems, I think that is certainly a debatable question. Americans certainly had varying degrees of liberty and independence, and much more freedom was at hand prior to all the institutions that you mentioned. But we can certainly look back at points throughout history and ponder that question…. of when was the tipping point. Here are only a few data points for the purpose of thought and discussion, in rough chronological order:
– The usurpation of the Articles of Confederation with the US Constitution.
– Samuel P. Chase Supreme Court decision to make Forced Tender legal.
– The Civil War’s usurpation of State Power under Federal Power.
– The origination of elite Foundations
– The passage of the Federal Reserve act along with the foundation of the IRS.
– The introduction of the League of Nations
– Academic think tanks introduction of plans to mass produce enlightenment as systems of control.
– Carnegie Foundation’s plan to modify the US Education system and amalgamate it with the Soviet system
– The building of the United Nations and the USA’s membership to this organization
– The successful selling of the manufactured Cold War dialectic and the resulting increased budgets and development of military industrial complex techniques.
– The Club of Rome’s development of new external threats (i.e. “Global Warming” & “Global Scarcity”) in order to replace the soon to abandoned Communism vs Capitalsm dialectic that was soon to be abandoned.
– GATT and the commensurate deployment of an international computer network (“The Internet”)
I guess we could continue with this list for quite an extensive period, and I’m not sure what we would ultimately gain from that exercise other than to learn that the public either goes along with elite plans, or is simply unaware of them, or simply does not understand their intended consequences.
Our key to survival is to reverse this trend, to recognize the techniques as they are deployed, to discuss the intended goals and to refuse to comply. Our complicity is our greatest weakness. For example, we now have 5 agribusiness multinational corporations who virtually control our food supply. Please tell me why the public should simply accede this food production to these controllers, and relegate ourselves to food production in rooftop gardens and the like? We should not let this happen, we should stop them from shutting down from taking all of the agricultural resources and then creating false scarcities. This is a moral issue, and we should be combating it head-on instead of running from it.
” Localization is like taking a few squares on the edge of the board but if you control enough of those you could make a move on the center….Taxing people and taking what they have limits the opponents ability to make alternatives, all thier resources are spent defending against the center.”
* That is a good point and definitely something to keep in mind. So – what moves can we make to make us more self-determined in the path of localization?
In a game of chess it’s important to control the center. This allows you to limit the movement of the other player. As long as your making the threats and the other player is reacting to them your in control. Monopolizing the mainstream would be like controlling the center, both colored squares Left (black squares) and right (white squares) but only in the center. The players would be the insiders vs. the outsiders. Localization is like taking a few squares on the edge of the board but if you control enough of those you could make a move on the center….Taxing people and taking what they have limits the opponents ability to make alternatives, all thier resources are spent defending against the center.
Bert:
I have to ask you – how does the work of Solari fit into all this, because it seems to me that you are saying that all this move towards localization(which Solari indeed is part of) is part of manufactured groups used to fulfill a long held agenda.
Also –
At what point was “the individual” allowed to survive independently of vast control systems or not isolated from fighting back against larger institutions? You have the debt you pay for your car, your house(which are both owned by the bank who gave you the money in the first place), your need to go to the industrialized food chain to get your food, your need(through threat of imprisonment) to pay taxes, government eminent domain, forced conscription into the military should the government decree it so, etc. The individual already hasn’t for years and years lived independently from vast control systems. We already have feudalism – most people don’t own anything they have anyway, whether their homes or cars. You are in debt bondage your whole life and have to work in wage slavery for a good portion of it just to survive.
Could you please share your vision as to an effective course of action.
Guy,
Right, small groups are marginalized and the big groups set the agenda. The groups that “guide this agenda” were deliberately manufactured. This is what the work of Herbert Markuse demonstrates. It’s not some “feeling” by white Christians, as you are implying. It’s similar to the pincer techniques used in the former soviet union, where the left is leveraged to apply pressure from the bottom while the right applies it from the top. It’s all designed to co-opt. That is my overarching point.
This push to local farming is part of an overall effort to co-opt… its is inherent in the plan… it is NOT something that might happen later, or be “co-opted” at some future date. Surpra national organizations have been established to govern what we can grow, how much and where. As said in The Blueprint to Advance Sustainable Development article, “Sustainable Development is a pseudonym for centralized control over human life.” Local independent farming is just one part of an overall effort to isolate the individual against large global institutions, whereby they are powerless to fight back. It is quite naive to think that individuals will be allowed to survive independently of vast control systems. Aldous Huxley tells us this. Two distinctly different classes of being are being created, one with all the advantages of modern science and unlimited resources and the other constrained to some form of feudalism. Once in this dialectic, I see no option for the lower class other than total submission, as 4GW (4th Gen. Warfare) will neutralize any meaningful thoughts of rejection.
Your all caps use of the term ‘reality’ in your sentence, “The REALITY of the matter is this…,” was not missed, and neither is the arrogance or naivety behind it. The fact of the matter is, that many of the assumptions that you present have been given to you without sufficient independent analysis. I strongly suggest a re-evaluation of the assumptions themselves and the sources from where they emanate. If your parents handed them down, can you source where they received them from? If not, how do you know that your basis assumptions are not already co-opted? Bottom line, you don’t.
Yeah Guy, it’s like unity in diversity means support everything openly but cut the legs off it at the same time. I simplify things by remembering the two lies in the garden of Eden. Ye shall not surely die and you shall be as gods. All these movements and organizations to give people a feeling of “empowerment” but they get less and less power over thier own lives. They players play on the imagination. To turn everybody into like obstinate children each thinking they know everything. Right and wrong a matter of opinion that nobody can question. Satanists say the law of Satan is “do what thou will”. That would be fine if everybody was good but not so good when it also applies to thieves and murderers. Unity in diversity. Do what thou will (diversity) fear not that any God will deny you (Unity).