June 9, 2014

Even the Corporate Media Can’t Defend Bt Brinjal


A Guardian piece on the failed Bt brinjal (eggplant) farming trial in Bangladesh contains lots of corporate media turpitude such as asserting in the reportorial voice such corporate lies as that Bt toxins are safe for humans and animals. There’s zero scientific evidence for this, and significant evidence against it. It prominently copies and pastes direct propaganda from paid flacks.
Nevertheless it contains some good information on how slipshod the procedures were, and in particular a typical example of how “stewardship” procedures which allegedly can prevent GM contamination are nothing but a PR scam. In this case the Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) openly admits it made no attempt to monitor and enforce the paper guidelines. BARI is a typical public-private entity, funded by the taxpayers (mostly US taxpayers through USAID), performing research on behalf of Monsanto, with the subsequent profits to go to Monsanto and other corporations.
The farmers also flouted labeling requirements.
As for the performance of the crop, this piece gives a more positive review of its initial performance against the target fruit-and-shoot borer than earlier reports. Since the piece is basically pro-GMO we can’t take its information as more reliable than the earlier reports it mentions but dismisses. Meanwhile, it gives more detail than before about how the GMO varieties were more susceptible to bacterial wilt and water stress than regionally adapted traditional brinjal varieties.
Of course even if these Bt brinjal varieties actually did initially work against the target pest, it will quickly develop resistance and the crop will cease to work. That’s been the case with every Bt crop variety thus far, and it will always be the case, even when we’re at the point of stacking literally dozens of poisons in every crop cell destined to be our food.
The piece is pro-GMO and sees fit to brand critics as “activists” in the subheading and the text, thus regurgitating another cartel canned lie. But those who develop and grow these poison plants are by any objective measure at least as aggressively active as any activist you’ll find in any other context. But there’s a perfect example of corporate media ideology and bias. Corporate and government activism is normative and not considered to be activism at all. Only dissenting action is to receive that allegedly disreputable term. That’s a core part of the Status Quo Lie, that institutionalized insanity is no longer insanity, institutionalized crime no longer crime, while any criticism or dissent, no matter how objectively moderate and rational, is by definition “extremism” and irrational. As Hegel wrote in his crusty conservative old age, “the real is the rational”. Or, might makes right. That’s the one and only principle of the corporate state and its media flunkeys.



  1. I didn’t know “activist” was a negative term. I suppose because the opposite would seem to be “passivist”. But I see what you’re getting at.

    Comment by DualPersonality — June 9, 2014 @ 11:11 am

    • “Activist” in this context = emotional, unscientific, shrill, often with an ulterior motive. Actually fits the GMO proponents better than anyone else.

      I myself admire pro-humanity activists and am proud to be one. GMO cadres and supporters are anti-humanity activists.

      Comment by Russ — June 9, 2014 @ 1:50 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: