I'm not sure if you know your history, nor am I sure if you understand that the "Western way of doing things" is not the "American way of doing things", and tha

I'm not sure if you know your history, nor am I sure if you understand that the "Western way of doing things" is not the "American way of doing things", and that perhaps even "American way of doing things" is not "Gates' way of doing things" (given the number of American farmers who have had trouble with Monsanto and co.)? I think, if I were to be charitable, you mean "scientific way of doing things" when comparing the "African way of doing things" vs. the implicit "Western/Non-African way of doing things". Then, I am not sure if you distinguish that the "scientific way of doing things (which is ) is also not the "commercial way of doing things", and that tensions and conflicts around this issue exist in the West itself. For example, the article discusses the issues around the so-called "Green Revolution" in India, as the "Green Revolution" had multiple phases: some of the later ones were much more heavily reliant on corporate (closed-source) products, which exacerbated a variety of issues, e.g. soil sustainability (certain high yield methods come at the cost of depleting soil nutrients faster than they are replaced), birth defects in children, seed prices, and so on. This is what AFSA wants to avoid. The AFSA isn't advocating for "traditional methods" (whatever that is), but for scientifically-driven approaches that go hand-in-hand with agricultural (and ultimately, economic) resiliency and independence. (But why am I kidding myself? It's unlikely that you do not understand the points above, and more likely that your revulsion comes from prejudice.)