6 ms·

Large scale monoculture is not necessary. It's not one tiny farm, it's many tiny farms owned by the people who live in that region. Many of the problems that a

Large scale monoculture is not necessary. It's not one tiny farm, it's many tiny farms owned by the people who live in that region. Many of the problems that are "solved" with technology don't exist in natural perennial polycultures. For example, pests. In a natural perennial polyculture, you have an ecosystem that naturally manages the pests (via predators). These organisms evolve with the pests. Tiny farms grow more food per acre than large monoculture farms. Agricultural tech creates problems of it's own & does not match the prowess of nature. Natural processes grow the food, not technology. Technology can help, however, it can also hinder, and it does in our current petrolchemical centralized paradigm. Look at the pollution, soil degregation, erosion, desertification, poverty, etc. Large scale monoculture ruined just about every ecosystem that it has been used on. For example, the American Plains used to have 10s of feet of rich topsoil built by natural processes over the years. It's now eroded due to runoff & mismanagement propagated by large scale monoculture. I can provide many other examples & problems, but I'll keep this post short. Large scale monoculture is a failed experiment & a blight on the planet. It's also only viable because of government subsidization. Our monoculture paradigm benefitted from, wasted, & toxified our natural inheritance in less than 100 years. So yes, monoculture is extremely efficient at creating a mess.

Turing_Machine 11y ago
"Large scale monoculture is a failed experiment" That is simply not true. Crop yields continue to increase. By a lot. http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg We no longer need to have 90% of the population working as stoop-labor agricultural peasants. Famine is essentially a thing of the past (it only happens in areas where the government is severely fucked up for one reason or another). Mechanized agriculture is the greatest success story in the history of the human race. If you really want to go back to the age of peasants and serfs, why don't you lead by example? Start by producing all of your own food using intensive hand cultivation. Then produce all of the food for 150 other people using intensive hand cultivation.
- briantakita 11y ago
  > Crop yields continue to increase This is like judging someone's wealth by their ability to rapidly use a credit card. Monoculture has destroyed our ecosystems, caused rampant desertification, caused soil runoff, stip mined the less fortunate countries, polluted our water, increased pests overpopulation, increased disease, etc. > If you really want to go back to the age of peasants and serfs, why don't you lead by example? Dualistic solution-centric thinking is an issue with our times. It's time to think systemically. How can we improve existing systems? Which paradigms are appropriate to our entire context? Can we move toward an ethics driven paradigm, instead of a solution centric paradigm? There are many solutions to a problem, but some have maladaptive implications in a broader context not considered by myopic vision. Can we start to view the world with a broader context; beyond money & a certain strain of technological progress? Can we move beyond reductionistic metrics & take the entire situation into account? Also, is it so bad to have more farmers? Many natural farmers don't seem to think so. Is the hustle & bustle of city life with it's stress & unemployment a good life? Will the Pharmaceutical industry cure our Nature Deficit Disorder? What's left when you worked hard all of your life & it's your time to die? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_deficit_disorder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_deficit_disorder While I don't own land (it's quite expensive in the current economic system), I do support local farmers & participate in local economies to a certain extend. I'd love to increase my participation because it's the responsible thing to do.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    That's a stretch. Iowa grows more every year; our soil is in the best shape its ever been; erosion is at a low; water pollution is at a low. We can certainly make it work.
    - briantakita 11y ago
      The best shape ever? Like before western civilization came when it was the grand prairie? Also, there are issues with runoff: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/us/conflict-over-soil-and-water-quality-puts-iowa-nice-to-a-test.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/us/conflict-over-soil-and-... There's also a concern about water management. Natural ecosystems tend to get the most out of their water usage. I seem to recall that the midwest water aquifers are a limited resource. That aside, I can buy that soil is improving. I also agree that we can make it work. I do applaud regenerative efforts in Iowa. However, I'm looking at a global scale, where desertification, pollution, runoff, lowering productivity, etc. are big problems. As an analogy, many climate change deniers will claim that it's still winter in their local area, but that perception is not fully representative of what is happening on a global scale. Re: the industrial paradigm on improving local soil systems; is importing nutrition on a massive scale, robbing that nutrition from other ecosystems, a responsible thing to do in a global context? I'm realistic in the sense that some importation may be necessary, in fact nature moves nutrients via animals, wind, etc. However, nature works in a cooperative & systemic way.

Turing_Machine 11y ago

"Large scale monoculture is a failed experiment" That is simply not true. Crop yields continue to increase. By a lot. http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg We no longer need to have 90% of the population working as stoop-labor agricultural peasants. Famine is essentially a thing of the past (it only happens in areas where the government is severely fucked up for one reason or another). Mechanized agriculture is the greatest success story in the history of the human race. If you really want to go back to the age of peasants and serfs, why don't you lead by example? Start by producing all of your own food using intensive hand cultivation. Then produce all of the food for 150 other people using intensive hand cultivation.

briantakita 11y ago
> Crop yields continue to increase This is like judging someone's wealth by their ability to rapidly use a credit card. Monoculture has destroyed our ecosystems, caused rampant desertification, caused soil runoff, stip mined the less fortunate countries, polluted our water, increased pests overpopulation, increased disease, etc. > If you really want to go back to the age of peasants and serfs, why don't you lead by example? Dualistic solution-centric thinking is an issue with our times. It's time to think systemically. How can we improve existing systems? Which paradigms are appropriate to our entire context? Can we move toward an ethics driven paradigm, instead of a solution centric paradigm? There are many solutions to a problem, but some have maladaptive implications in a broader context not considered by myopic vision. Can we start to view the world with a broader context; beyond money & a certain strain of technological progress? Can we move beyond reductionistic metrics & take the entire situation into account? Also, is it so bad to have more farmers? Many natural farmers don't seem to think so. Is the hustle & bustle of city life with it's stress & unemployment a good life? Will the Pharmaceutical industry cure our Nature Deficit Disorder? What's left when you worked hard all of your life & it's your time to die? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_deficit_disorder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_deficit_disorder While I don't own land (it's quite expensive in the current economic system), I do support local farmers & participate in local economies to a certain extend. I'd love to increase my participation because it's the responsible thing to do.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  That's a stretch. Iowa grows more every year; our soil is in the best shape its ever been; erosion is at a low; water pollution is at a low. We can certainly make it work.
  - briantakita 11y ago
    The best shape ever? Like before western civilization came when it was the grand prairie? Also, there are issues with runoff: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/us/conflict-over-soil-and-water-quality-puts-iowa-nice-to-a-test.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/us/conflict-over-soil-and-... There's also a concern about water management. Natural ecosystems tend to get the most out of their water usage. I seem to recall that the midwest water aquifers are a limited resource. That aside, I can buy that soil is improving. I also agree that we can make it work. I do applaud regenerative efforts in Iowa. However, I'm looking at a global scale, where desertification, pollution, runoff, lowering productivity, etc. are big problems. As an analogy, many climate change deniers will claim that it's still winter in their local area, but that perception is not fully representative of what is happening on a global scale. Re: the industrial paradigm on improving local soil systems; is importing nutrition on a massive scale, robbing that nutrition from other ecosystems, a responsible thing to do in a global context? I'm realistic in the sense that some importation may be necessary, in fact nature moves nutrients via animals, wind, etc. However, nature works in a cooperative & systemic way.