I was very interested in Bob McGregor's responses to Bill Duesing's posting on potatotes. My initial reaction to McGregor's first posting was that he was one of those who Claire Gilbert has called "goons of the internet"--phoney greenies (often in the employ of pollutors) planted on environmental lists to dispute claims of environmental problems and disrupt such lists with flares. As I read on, I began discounting that hypothesis and became more convinced that McGregor was among those SANETters who represent the green wing of conventional agriculture.
I am glad that a variety of perspectives on sustainable agriculture appear on SANET because this may offer us our best hope of working together to advance sustainable agriculture in the face of ecological, technical, and social uncertainties. I do think, however, that such advancement will be substantially retarded if we do not consider presuppositions that underly the different perspectives on sustainable agriculture. These presuppositions related to such matters as the importance of economic efficiency, the significance of biodiversity, risks posed by agricultural chemicals, and what constitutes social justice. Out of the presuppositions and practical knowledge about agriculture comes visions for the future of agriculture. Unlike McGregor, I think that the presuppositions, the visions, and the practical details of making these visions realities should all be topics of discussion over SANET. Only after having in-depth understandings of those taking different positions can we have meaningful dialogue.
My assessment is that Duesing and McGregor have very different visions about what agriculture should become. I see that Duesing's vision for agriculture is local, diverse, and under the control of the people supported by that agriculture. He is an environmental educator whose column has been appearing on SANET for some time. I did not regard the latest column as being perceptibly more radical (from the standpoint of those adhering to the greener side of the conventional agricultural paradigm) or any more provocative than previous ones. His goal is to make us think about our current food system and possible alternatives that would be more sustainable. I see that McGregor vision is for an agriculture not greatly different from what we have now, except that the negative side-effects of practices would be minimized in balance with economic considerations. He describes his own social situation his last posting.
What is your vision for agriculture and our food system? What are its
advantages and disadvantages compared to alternative visions?
****************************************************************************
Gil Gillespie gwg2@cornell.edu
voice: 607-255-1675 fax: 607-254-2896
Department of Rural Sociology (& Division of Nutritional Sciences )
439 Warren Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-7801
USA
The transition to sustainability is like a bend in the road. It will be
the end of the road only if we fail to negotiate the turn.
****************************************************************************