Print

Print


>  The point is that you have to look at the
>big picture as well as the small picture. If you focus on the
>small-scale, it is always one more technical problem to be fixed,
>which then gives rise to a new set of technical problems. If you
>focus on the big picture then you will be instinctively suspicious of
>the technical "solutions", not because technology in itself is to be
>feared, but because it is technology controlled by capitalists,
>driven by capitalist goals and priorities, in which short-term profit
>generally trumps all other considerations.

I don't have a problem with this viewpoint.  I agree.  A little
overwhelming a task, but right in principle.  Who can do it in
practice is an open question.

>That, in a nutshell, is why I take the critics of GM technology
>seriously. To dismiss them as
>"technophobes" is unhelpful, to say the least.

Friend, I would like to make clear if I haven't already, that I don't
dismiss critics of GM technology as "technophobes".  I criticize
critics of GM technology that don't present well supported,
fact-based arguments as technophobes.  Those are aplenty.

Is it not the responsibility of the critic to get their facts
straight if its their business?  Or are we relying on the emotionally
manipulative techniques that Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber point
out in "Trust us, we're experts" that corporations resort to to
peddle their wares.


--
|||///\\\///\\\///\\\///\\\|||O|||///\\\///\\\///\\\///\\\|||
Jose Morales Ph.D.