The World According to Monsanto

Brazen documentary filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin has crafted a lucidly vitriolic critique of the politics of big business in her new film The World According to Monsanto. Within, you'll find live footage of George Bush Sr. saying he's in the de-regulation business, the business that makes it possible for genetically modified products to be harvested and distributed to mass markets without having their side-effects seriously tested beforehand. One could argue, based upon the compelling evidence presented within Robin's film (and Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation), that thanks to the de-regulation business, a somewhat bizarre climate has developed where conscientious objectors who critique the development of GMPs and their associated counterparts (Monsanto's Pesticide Roundup) are instantly fired, in democratic countries like Scotland, Canada, and the United States, for not playing ball and treating the general consumer, i.e., everyone who eats, like a lab-rat, although, such arguments may find ironic opposition from companies who use rhetoric rather than science to support the enlightened nature of their bio-technical innovations. But this is, of course, simply just a supposition.

According to Robin's film, Monsanto barely even test some of their products on lab-rats. To a certain extant, The World According to Monsanto places America's economic infrastructure within a de-regulated free for all where the American people are free to be exposed to experimental products and are not free to receive a label on packages indicating whether or not the product in question was genetically adjusted. An individual who exposed one of Monsanto's hiccups couldn't even testify during his trial because he was told that if any of his testimony gave away company secrets they would sue him. How the hell is that legal? Robin interviews American farmers who claim they use Monsanto's seeds and can't save any of them after a specific date, and that Monsanto has a squad of individuals that hounds them if they think they have saved seeds. This squad also encourages 'good farmers' to inform upon rule breaking 'bad farmers', which, if I remember correctly, is a totalitarian tactic employed ruthlessly well by Russian and East-German Communists.

Robin succinctly demonstrates (through the use of a series of Google searches) how genetically modified products have received the American government's blessing due to the creation of the Principle of Substantial Equivalence. According to this principle, if a genetically modified product is thought to be genetically similar to its natural counterpart, then, it is substantially equivalent, and production can proceed unabashed. Imagine this concept applied to the sale of precious gems, or fingerprinting, or appraisal generally. It's like Dr. Hoffman's infernal desire machine living and breathing off soy nut fumes.

Every scientist interviewed within whom reviewed Monsanto's research has serious questions regarding their methods. Many of the individuals who drafted the legislation at the Food and Drug Administration (which keeps genetically modified products from being labeled and supports the Principles of Substantial Equivalence) were former Monsanto employees. In Canada, we banned Bovine Growth Hormone and our decision prompted the European Parliament to ban it as well. One can only imagine how many similar products slipped through and how many more will if the extremely right wing North American climate of unfettered big business continues to proceed without a potent public threat.

The counter-argument proceeds as follows: the world's population is growing at unprecedented rates. If we regulate food production, we won't be able to feed everyone or supplement the oil and gas industries with bio-fuels. The environmentalists and others who want to make sure products aren't carcinogenic are wishy-washy commies and terrorists who want to prevent the enlightenment from progressing. They have the nerve to want their food products to be tested before we sell them, as if a loving caring company like ours would ever sell them something harmful. Because we don't create harmful products, and we guarantee that by not rigorously searching for side-effects and firing and harassing anyone with the nerve to broadcast potential side-effects. Hey, if you think it's healthy, it's healthy. And who knows, after one generation develops all kinds of crazy cancers, then the next generation will likely develop immunities to those cancers, and everything will be fine, just in time for our new line of . . . And if you develop any psychological side-effects, the de-regulated(?) pharmaceutical industry can . . .

I'm not saying that that's what it's like, but that's the impression I got from The World According to Monsanto and I will definitely be staying away from non-organic soy nuts for-the-next-ever. It's my free choice. Hey, maybe I'll get cancer from organic soy nuts because my body's such a toxic waste dump that it needs disease to survive.

Who knows.

Seriously, check out this film. Robin's points are coherent as are her critiques of the 'scientific' decisions that made these developments possible. Hard-hitting reason demonstrating the financial rhetorical blindfold attempting to layer the subconscious of democratic North America.