Paris, April 1 (EIRNS)—In a sophistical tribune published on March 31 by Le Monde, “a group of scientists, members of institutions, and specialists in world food security and international markets,” in line with the recent Malthusian rants of the Potsdam Climate Institute, explain that the cultivation of European land “dedicated to biodiversity” would be both “disastrous from an ecological point of view” and would only “play a marginal role in alleviating the reduction of world supply.” “In France and in Europe the agricultural profession and many political leaders are claiming a responsibility to feed these countries, which would require the revival of agricultural production” And they even dare to claim that “the world has changed and environmental and health concerns should be put aside in the name of global food security. This call to produce more to feed the world had already reappeared in 2008 and again in 2011 following a surge in grain prices. However, the planet is no more short of food today than it was then.”
“By revealing Europe’s dependence on imported fossil fuels, the war confirms the absurdity of trying to revive industrial agriculture. For agriculture is totally dependent on oil and natural gas to manufacture its inputs (pesticides, fertilizers, fuels), which it cannot do without, and on imported soya for animal feed. The concerns generated by the soaring price of nitrogen fertilizer are there to remind us. In this context, it would be a mistake to pretend to avoid food crises in Africa and the Middle East by boosting European agricultural production. It is no longer time to rush ahead in a world that already produces too much.”
After this clear rejection to answer the immediate crises ahead with adequate food supplies, these sophists make two good points: