Ancient agricultural traditions like
seed saving could replace disastrous GMO practices
everything we have all been told about the supposed benefits
of biotechnology is false, at least as far as its necessity
and usefulness in agriculture is concerned.
As it turns out,
traditional methods of agriculture, which include things
like seed saving, seed sharing.
Selective breeding, and
permaculture, are all far more viable and sustaining for
On this planet than
anything Monsanto has to offer in the way of
genetically-modified organisms (GMOs).
To think that forcing farmers
to buy new "terminator" seeds and crop chemicals every year
from private corporations will provide any sort of long-term
security for the food supply is naive at best.
The biotechnology model dictates that corporations control
the price, availability, and performance of seeds and crop
chemicals, both of which are confined to restrictive patents
that prevent farmers from taking true ownership of the foods
Seed saving, which is
prohibited for GMOs, is absolutely vital for food
Long before GMO crop systems were ever even a thought in the
minds of agribusiness opportunists, farmers relied on nature
to reproduce new seeds for them for free.
By growing a variety of different crops within the same
fields, as well as regularly rotating them, farmers also
utilized natural growing methods that promote soil health
without the need for artificial fertilizers and other
Since every growing region of
the world has its own unique combination of climate
conditions, native bug species, native plant and weed
species, and soil conditions.
Farmers, not corporations,
are best equipped to maintain independent control over the
growing process, which includes saving and distributing
And it is the many years of learning and adapting to the
distinct ecological balance in a particular area that
continues to allow farmers to develop the most effective and
efficient ways to grow food.
existence of food supplies worldwide
But biotechnology is destroying this heritage of cultural
farming, and replacing it with a one-size-fits-all system
that is controlled by private interests seeking maximum
profits at any cost.
And perhaps the worst part
about it is that the industry is doing this by making up
lies about the alleged benefits of GMOs which, contrary to
popular belief, do not perform better than traditional crops
at producing higher yields.
"It is a myth that mechanized, chemical, GMO agriculture
maximizes yield per hectare," writes Charles Eisenstein for
the U.K.'s Guardian. "Numerous studies show that when
organic agriculture is practiced well, it can bring double
or triple the yields of conventional techniques. With
intensive intercropping on mixed permaculture farms, yields
can be higher still."
Unlike GMO crop systems, traditional growing systems are
essentially fluid, as the variables of input often have to
adapt and change.
As Eisenstein puts it,
traditional farmers learn to "co-evolve" with the land over
many generations, which creates a lasting legacy of deep
understanding about how the natural world works, and how
mankind can successfully share its bounty without destroying
it in the process.
Traditional growing methods, many of which are openly
embraced today throughout Russia, are undoubtedly proving to
be the most effective way to maximize crop yields; create
food independence and sovereignty; and ensure a healthy,
clean food supply.
"Western-style agriculture faces a mounting crisis that is
insurmountable through the usual application of more
control-based technology," adds Eisenstein.
"This crisis calls us toward
more ecological farming methods that draw from the world's
ancient agricultural traditions ... [which] include not only
agronomic knowledge, but also social structures that allow
that knowledge to evolve and circulate."