June 13, 2018

Bayer-Monsanto and Nuremburg


And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace…

The Nuremburg tribunal provides the precedent according to which all of today’s elite criminals – government and corporate leaders – should be judged and sentenced.
It also provides a precedent for the death penalty for a corporation: In this case the chemical conglomerate IG Farben and three of its six constituent companies were dissolved, allegedly because of their participation in Nazi crimes against humanity.
And yet even the unfathomable crimes of the slave labor program and death camps weren’t enough to warrant the death penalty for three of the IG Farben companies, including Bayer and BASF. These, unlike the cartel itself and the three lesser companies, were considered by the US to be too structurally important to the corporate-technocratic project. So they and their executives were given just a slap on the wrist. In fact, no corporations or corporate executives were judged according to the moral pretensions of the Tribunal, but only according to what place US elites saw for these German corporations in the post-war globalizing system.
This proves:
1. If a corporation is big and powerful enough, there is no level of crime up to and including literal mass murder which it will not be allowed to commit with impunity.
2. In fact, a core purpose of the corporate form is to organize the commission of crimes against humanity and the Earth, and to provide legal impunity for the leaders of these criminal projects.
3. We the people can never look to government, which creates and exonerates these corporations in the first place, for justice or relief. If we want to be free of the corporate tyranny, as indeed we must become if humanity is to have a future at all, we must organize and carry out the anti-corporate abolition movement from the soil up. That’s the only way.

May 16, 2016

Poison Sector Concentration: Monsanto May Get Bought


In my January piece on agrochemical sector concentration I mentioned that Monsanto’s last chance for a merger may be with BASF. Now the business press is percolating with talk of either BASF or Bayer buying Monsanto outright. Both companies have herbicide portfolios not dependent on glyphosate. Bayer also has extensive seed company holdings, while BASF has little in that way.
All the talk reinforces the perception that Monsanto’s Roundup business is seen as having a highly questionable future and that the only thing which might really interest anyone is the company’s potential to develop GM traits other than those based on glyphosate, along with the germplasm holdings among the seed companies Monsanto owns.
The specter of “monopoly” always touted in these connections by the corporate media and government is a misdirection ploy. The sector already has monopolies on pesticides and GM seeds, and the handful of companies in an oligopoly sector almost never compete on price, product quality, or anything else which might benefit customers or the public. Rather, they compete for market share through advertising and government lobbying. So a BASF/Monsanto or Dow/DuPont merger is unlikely to make any difference for industrial farmers. Anyone who actually cared about the evils of monopoly would target the sector as the monolithic whole it is, not fret over cosmetic mergers within the sector.
We can expect that any reconfigured entity will try to make the Monsanto name go away in the same way that Monsanto’s former contractor Blackwater changed its name to “Xe”.
Whatever cosmetic changes are made including in the name, we must still keep calling it Monsanto.
The main point of all this is as I analyzed in my longer piece. As pesticides and GMOs continue to fail, and as hypothetical ideas for the sector’s future become more and more scarce, it becomes harder for indoctrination and government subsidies to prop up the sector’s failed products, and the sector is less able to support the number of companies it has. Therefore they face the necessity of consolidating. This is always the sign of a sector’s economic and intellectual calcification.