Your food and obvious evidence your government doesn’t give a fuck about you

[ndv]

That's a tough question to answer.  Other than living off the land, it's kinda tough to void capitalism to certain degree.  Perhaps I think the least you may see but again to a certain degree would be farmers markets.

 

I'd suppose tribes and those who live in remote parts of Alaska would be the closest to being  "places" if you will be considered non-capatalist.  Yeah?

[abrasivesaint]

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/08/us-cropland-may-be-contaminated-forever-chemicals-study

 

https://www.thenewlede.org/2024/02/dead-livestock-and-poisoned-water-texas-farmers-sue-over-pfas-contamination/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/07/food-pesticides-toxic-forever-chemicals-pfas
 

https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/environment/600070-about-half-of-us-water-too-polluted-for-swimming/amp/
 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/01/25/us-louisianas-cancer-alley
 

https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2024/02/14/iowa-produces-more-factory-farm-waste-than-any-other-state-analysis-of-new-usda-data-finds/
 

https://truthout.org/articles/pollution-crisis-in-mexico-shows-limits-of-plastic-bag-bans-in-global-capitalism/

 

 

[abrasivesaint]

https://coloradosun.com/2023/06/05/colorado-home-late-herbicide-crop-dusting/
 

https://www.thenationalnews.com/mena/lebanon/2023/11/28/lebanon-white-phosphorus-dhayra-truce/
 

https://www.newson6.com/story/64898d41ee73a4070e62a6f1/oklahoma-city-bombing-victims
 

https://www.iarc.who.int/news-events/ultra-processed-foods-are-associated-with-increased-risk-of-cancer-and-cardiometabolic-multimorbidity/

[Mercer]

12 hours ago, ndv said:

That's a tough question to answer.  Other than living off the land, it's kinda tough to void capitalism to certain degree.  Perhaps I think the least you may see but again to a certain degree would be farmers markets.

 

I'd suppose tribes and those who live in remote parts of Alaska would be the closest to being  "places" if you will be considered non-capatalist.  Yeah?

 

It's hard to answer this without a wall of text so here goes. The first thing to understand here is people define capitalism in different ways. To be fair, my definition is different than most of the people with opposing viewpoints. Furthermore, Marx & Engles (the original proponents of Socialism/Communism) coined the term capitalism, so technically my definition can arguably be defined as incorrect. I just don't have a better word for it but unlike Communist/Socialists I do have a very concise definition for capitalism. People from the modern schools of economics have redefined the term capitalism to fit their own economic perspectives after abandoning the "Labor theory of value." A core principal of Marxism, and proto-marxists like Adam Smith, Ricardo, etc.

 

As someone who shares the perspectives of the Austrian School of Economics, who's founder espoused "subjective value theory" and in line with the Chicago School, Keynesians, etc. definition of capitalism. We define it as "the voluntary exchange of private property for mutual benefit." The subjectivity of value is key to this concept like "Labor theory of value" is the foundational principal of Marixism.

 

For example, I might value a hamburger more than the $20 that I'm spending on it, so I choose freely to purchase at that price. A hamburger vendor values the $20 more than he does his hamburger so they freely accept the $20 in exchange. The value of the hamburger, and the value of the $20 is subjective, and the difference in said value between the two that allows for an exchange is known as the margin. Likewise, there's no set price that applies universally to anything. Others may only value a Hamburger at $5 so there's no exchange with that vendor who values his at $20. Likewise a Vendor may value their hamburger at $50, and go out of business waiting on a customer who values it more than their $50.

 

Under my definition, "voluntary exchange of private property for mutual benefit" the only people truly free of capitalism are people living in small tribal communities without any private property. In fact, the vast majority of humans that have ever lived on this planet lived this way for hundreds of thousands of years. This is what we're hardwired for, sharing, and rejecting the concept of just one person owning something, and needing their consent to share with another. To most people, that's simply greed because as I've said that's how we're hardwired. If you lived in a small tribe and owned something others wanted/needed without freely sharing, you probably wouldn't make.

 

Capitalism (as I define it) came about, and began to prosper as a system because it incentivizes human effort in combating the scarcity of resources. It's counterintuitive to our hardwiring, but allowing a person to own an entire piece of land creates an incentive for that person to sow the land with crops. Why would they if anyone else could just come along and harvest whatever they needed? It also incentivizes voluntary mutual cooperation, which is also a very unintuitive. You don't have to force people to work together by threatening them, someone can offer another person some of their own private property in exchange for their labor (employment).

 

So to answer your question from my perspective, there are people not living under capitalism. Even in urban places in America. Likewise, belonging to a small trib void of much technology one can still operate under the idea of capitalism. In fact, there are many in tribal communities that do excercize private property rights, usually tribes where people engaged in animal husbandry/herding will fall into this category, because they do trade their private property with others voluntarily for mutual benefit.

 

An example of people that aren't participants of capitalism even in urban areas are children. They do not need to barter, buy, or trade anything to meet their basic wants & needs, their parents do so for them. My wife has everything she needs, and most of what she wants provided for her without the need to exchange anything at all for it including her body, which under my philosophy also falls under the very definition of private property, granting the owner absolute rights over their own body. Their informed consent is required to exchange their own body, and the labor it can produce for anything, and if not it's slavery.

 

This concept of "informed consent" is complex, but central to my philosophy, and brings me back to the topic at hand: the food system. If a provider of food along any part of the process adds something to the food without either admitting there's a secret ingredient, or sharing what's been added, the exchange process is not conducted under informed consent. It's fraud. If the additives are listed with the information is made publicly available, and the purchaser still chooses to exchange for it, that is no longer fraud, and it's a valid informed consensual exchange for mutual benefit.

 

People with the same beliefs I have (Vouluntaryists, the symbol my avatar represents) base everything on this concept of informed consent, and want all human interactions to be voluntary, non-forcible. For example, we think people should be allowed to do anything they want with their own bodies, including eating toxic food, as long as there's informed consent. The informed part of the "informed consent" excludes children, or adults unable to understand basic information about the exchange from the ability to provide informed consent. You can tell a retard there's arsenic in the food and expect them to understand. So technically selling chemically altered food to children, or someone who's knowingly unable to read and understand the ingredients is a violation of informed consent.

 

On the flip side, this does allow for drug dealing, prostitution, assisted suicide etc. We believe the laws of biology can't superseded physics, and the laws of man cannot supersede the laws of biology, specifically the concept of absolute self ownership of your own body. We think any attempt to supersede the concept of full self ownership causes more harm, than it's intended to fix. We simply believe in allowing people to be free to make their own choices regarding their own bodies. For example, we don't believe in the forcible, carceral implementation of the drug war, and think trying to circumvent self ownership is the reason drugs will win this war, and they're always going to available for purchase, even in maximum security prisons. Our laws cannot possibly stop people from doing whatever they want with their own bodies.

 

So from my perspective, if an adult wise enough to understand the health risks associated with slurping down a cup of edible glitter and various shit chemicals, who am I to say they can't. If someone enjoys living on the chunky side of life, and woofing down an entire bag of Doritos, or a full sleeve of fig newtons, that's up to them, and my judgement of them is invalid. It's not my place to forcibly change their diet/exercise for them, or have the government forcibly make someone else adhere to my values. I don't want men with guns and badges threatening the gas station for selling Doritos with arrest/fines, etc. It violates the principal of Voluntaryism. This concept extends to people who are perfectly content being opioid addicts. They can put anything they want into their own private property, AKA their own bodies if they're not harming someone else. The only effective route to helping drug addict is to provide ways to help out those willing to change themselves, and doing so without judgement or punishment. 

[Mercer]

I'm more worried about what government is putting into food, as opposed to keeping out of it. 

 

 

 

[ndv]

@Mercer  haven't read your entire response but will shortly.

 

I came here to ask, you all refer vitapro?  

 

Anyone not familiar with vitapro, it was something the government would put in meals to feed military.  Some states did the same in their penal system with convicts. 

[mr.yuck]

I think it would have been really interesting to see how communism evolved without the interference of NATO and America at every turn.

[Mercer]

 

 

[abrasivesaint]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/30/tyson-foods-toxic-pollutants-lakes-rivers

 

 

 

“There are over 5,000 meat and poultry processing plants in the United States, but only a fraction are required to report pollution and abide by limits. As one of the largest processors in the game, with a near-monopoly in some states, Tyson is in a unique position to treat even hefty fines and penalties for polluting as simply the cost of doing business. This has to change,” said the UCS co-author Omanjana Goswami.

The meat-processing industry spent $4.3m on lobbying in Washington in 2023, of which Tyson accounted for almost half ($2.1m), according to political finance watchdog Open Secrets. The industry has made $6.6m in campaign donations since 2020, mostly to Republicans, with Tyson the biggest corporate spender.
 

“We can be sure Tyson and other big ag players will object to efforts to update pollution regulations, but the EPA should listen to communities whose wells, lakes, rivers and streams have been contaminated and put people over corporate profits,” said Goswami.

Edited May 1 by abrasivesaint

[abrasivesaint]

“Meat and poultry companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to comply with EPA’s effluent limitations guidelines,” said Sarah Little from the North American Meat Institute, a trade association representing large processors like Tyson. “EPA’s new proposed guidelines will cost over $1bn and will eliminate 100,000 jobs in rural communities.”
 

“This Tyson plant helped put me through college and supports a lot of migrant workers, but there’s a dark side like the water and air pollution that most people don’t pay attention to because they’re just trying to survive,” said Rogelio Rodriguez, a grassroots organizer with Conservation Nebraska, which is part of a coalition pushing for stronger state protections for meat processing plant workers.

 

“If regulations are lax, corporations have a tendency to push limits to maximize profits, we learnt that during Covid,” said Rodriguez, whose family works at the plant

[abrasivesaint]

 

….

Edited May 1 by abrasivesaint

[ndv]

So basically what the map is showing me is pipelines run under ground from the plant to "wastewater lagoon".

[Mercer]

 

[mr.yuck]

 

 

[ndv]

@Mercer I completely agree with your stance on voluntaryism.  It is definitely one's right to choose.  But I also belive there are some additives in foods that shouldn't be there, like chemicals or foreign ingredients that cause harm.   I think there are reasons for the law in general.   For example, we shouldn't have to tell a retard "don't eat that, it has arsenic in it".  What we need to be asking ourselves, why is arsenic even allowed in this?

 

But like you said that's capitalism and that's how it caps. 🤷 

[Mercer]

I agree, and there is a point in which adding these dangerous chemicals do cross the line, and does become fraudulent, negligent, and should open them up to at the very least litigation, or sometimes even criminal charges depending on the circumstances.

 

That said, people have a responsibility to themselves, and knowingly putting that shit in their bodies the same way a cigarette smoker, or an alcoholic, or drug user, they bear some of that responsibility themselves.

 

On one hand, we all know there are at least some people who need things idiot proofed for them. On the other hand, if I want to eat, do, or ingest some dumb shit it should be on me. I mean we all know it was done with good intentions, but we also how well prohibition worked, and who's going to win the war on drugs (drugs will). S like a said, a balanced approach is wisest, but also, you're 100% responsible for your own health decisions. 

 

I'm not saying regulations are bad. I'd prefer it was done without government's involvement, much like building codes are done by entities like IBC, electrical code is done by NFPA, etc. People avoid reselling electronics that aren't UL listed leaving government out of it. Just because I know how absolutely fucked the FDA is and fuck them.

 

I could write entire chapters on how fucked that agency is, but I keep coming back to my original point. Make good decisions, because when you're fat, unhealthy, or on your death bed later it's not going to do you any good to start blaming everyone else. I know it's comforting to pretend it wasn't your fault and have someone else to blame, but those emotions, and emotional relief of thinking it's not your fault are nothing compared to the benefits one gains from taking care of themselves and being healthy.

[ndv]

I am pretty sure that edible glitter is made from the same aluminum silica used in mirror manufacturing. 

[misteraven]

On 4/26/2024 at 5:44 PM, Mercer said:

What non-capitalist places do you guys know of with better food?

 

Have a lot to catch up on this thread but this sin't really a response. Likewise, I also don't think what is happening here is a consequence of capitalism. Rather, its the abuse of capitalism and a system that not only doesn't do what it claims to do (looking out for people's health), but doesn't even come close to operating with any meaningful consequence or responsibility. There was a time when the USA led the world by example, but here's yet another example of how we've not just fallen short, but how government and industry are going out of their way to not just cut every corner possible, but intentionally making moves that they both know will eventually compromise health and kill humans. Some of it overtly without shame or subterfuge (because people are also systematically dumbed down and trained to the lowest common denominator), but just as much is literally bending rules and truths until they no longer resemble anything of the kind.

 

Example, citric acid being shopped as if it's vitamin C and healthy. When in fact it's processed derivative of black mold that has a similar molecular structure, with the all the extras of being super fuckin bad for you.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6097542/

 

Here's "Fact Checkers" skirting the issue by calling false on the fact that the food industry isn't conspiring o kill you, LOL... https://fullfact.org/online/citric-acid-black-mould/ 

 

Call it irony (or maybe simply, not surprising) that Pfizer came up with this shit... https://www.peacefulmountainmedicine.com/post/citric-acid-a-common-food-additive-with-an-uncommon-source

 

https://ldnresearchtrust.org/inflammation-mutant-black-mold-and-very-common-ingredient

 

At best it's described as preservative, meaning they seek to make something last much longer on a shelf than it should. Thanks to the miracle of science, it doesn't seem to spoil as quickly. Not only is that in itself, already kinda not the best idea (same with chemical ripening of fruit and vegetables), but doing it with a known inflammatory while adding pictures of citrus or callouts of "Vitamin C" while doing so is absolutely misleading.

[Mercer]

I think it's a great response. The topic at hand is the failures of our food system, which most people consider capitalism, and (I feel it's more like corporatism/fascism). Like I said, the people (us) aren't writing these regulations, the industry themselves are to meet their concerns, not the consumers, and the government is in bed with this, and many other industries because the regulators end up in cushy jobs in the private sector later, and sometimes accept direct bribes.

 

That said, if we're going to call this system capitalism,  we can't avoid the elephant in the room, this is in fact a shortcoming of "Capitalism" without question. I know for a fact Capitalism is not, nor will it ever be a perfect utopian system, without any unique flaws of it's own. The point I was making is one must consider the alternatives to Capitalism, and if they're any better.

 

It's like if we were discussing how much we all hate decorative pillows, and everyone started advocating being single & celibate to avoid the scourge of decorative pillows in our lives. Technically, yes, you could get rid of decorative pillows in your life by not dating women, but that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater, it creates an even worse condition by fixing a minimal issue. Much like giving up Capitalism would create the same conditions we see in every centrally planned economy, food shortages.

[abrasivesaint]

Ok, i’m going to break my recently rekindled silence regarding economic theory around these parts..

 

…to state that pointing out the shortcomings of Capitalism and arguing that there are better ways is a point i have tried to make around here for years. My argument has always been that unfettered Capitalism has just as dire of consequences as any other ism. You can overdose on anything.. everything in moderation, including Capitalism. 
 

The problem that i’ve always had around here is that these conversations, and the subsequent critiques that get directed at me, are based on economic systems that currently exist. You’re either a Capitalist, Socialist, Communist, and that’s it. No other options available.. no dissecting and embracing aspects of Capitalism, aspects of Socialism.. no thinking outside the box. Here’s your isms, choose one. 
 

The other general opinion is blame the government, and i agree, blame our government. However, as i’ve grown older i’ve understood that there’s always a “governing body”, regardless of what people like to think. Just like anything else, unfettered government is extremely problematic.
 

In my opinion, the creation of the U.S. federal government was supposed to look more like NATO than it how it currently looks. A collective of states that believe in a common idea and unite to serve as a means of defense, not total control over those states. However, because of the many flaws of humans (our religious, political, and economic ideologies) that got concept has been corrupted, and here we are. 
 

The internet changed the world. Barring a mass demolition of societal institutions, there is no going back, no “returning to monke”. However, we can use what we’ve created up to this point to build a better future. That requires us to stop and truly examine our systems. It requires some “hard conversations” regarding the hoarding of resources. A couple dozen people should not control the world’s resources and have the same amount of “wealth” as billions of people.

(Edit: removed a part here because i mis-worded it and it wasn't important enough of a statement ti reword properly, ha.)
 

I’ve spouted enough about this around here, i’m going to leave these links on my bow out.

 

The Post-Scarcity Anarchism essay.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-post-scarcity-anarchism

 

Democratic Confederalism

https://www.freeocalan.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Ocalan-Democratic-Confederalism.pdf

Post-Scarcity Anarchism (a collection of essays under the Post-Scarcity Anarchism title)

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-post-scarcity-anarchism-book

 

Edited Monday at 08:04 PM by abrasivesaint

[abrasivesaint]

Side bar: i’m at the grocery store and just saw a dude reading the nutrition facts on a Twinkies box. 
 

my man, don’t waste your time. It’s a Twinkie. Either eat that lump of dog shit and enjoy it or dont. 

[ndv]

That's pretty solid.   "Here are your isms, choose one" IMO seems like this is the easy way not to deal with the problems created.  "Pick one and move on".  The people who would say this are either too lazy to be part of the work it would require to overhaul the systems current issue(s) or they simply just do not have the intellectual capacity or understand to correct issues.   So it's easier to chose one, hoping you will to because they are comfortable in the pig pen. 

 

I agree that there has to be some type of governing foundation for multiple reasons but the current people in place of these governing bodies make the entire isms crap.

[Mercer]

That’s what keeps bringing me back to one’s own self control, and personal responsibility for themselves and what they eat. Capitalism/Socialism aside, this self determination is what’s key for individuals that actually care.

 

The FDA & USDA are so far gone, corrupt, and unadaptable that relying on them to make good choices for you is putting your life in the hands of strangers that give zero fucks about your well being. Minding your own business isn’t just about keeping your nose out of other people’s business as it is minding your own.

[ndv]

But I think that's part of the problem.  People are dietary illiterate for one, and the other issues is the fact that poor choice of food options are all that are easily accessible.  Meaning big companies make sure to muscle their way onto store shelves. 

 

Which again, like you said, it's pro-choice for someone to eat what they shouldn't and it none of my business to get into theor business. (See FOAO thread for a perfect example of getting into someone business).

 

The other issues is taste, the big companies know what additives trigger specific responses.  

 

The 2 most common misconceptions what most people excuse themselves of better dietary choice when they truly want to eat better I get is this.  "I would love to shop at Wholefoods but they are exspensive."  "The food doesn't taste as good".  

 

First.  It takes some learning to cook with organic foods.  Seasoning is key.

 

You know this fist hand Mercer.  I've seen the food stuff you posted.  And I am sure still too this day sometimes meals don't turn out at planned. 

 

Working with raw as in Kosher foods is not going to be easy in the beginning.

 

Second, the cost isn't really any much more than the typical grocer.   

 

Although, there are somethings, yes, just cost a bit more.  Again, this could be understood better in the illiterate economics thread.   The thread topic at hand explains the mass amount of food being processed today is cheaper becuase it the most abundant.  

 

If more and more people started eating healthier (organic), they would be able to control their pocket book a little more and grow some of the stuff at home. 

 

Corporations and government know the value of convenience and licensing while fines are just another revenue stream.

 

The convenience factor is a huge driving force to poor choices all around, even speaking outside of food.  

[abrasivesaint]

Ya buying healthier food like fruit and vegetables is actually cheaper than anything else now, the old “eating healthy is expensive” excuse doesn't hold up anymore. I could buy $10 worth of vegetables and eat for 2 days but a meal at any fast food spot is $15 easy. 
 

I have no doubts that aspects of the USDA and FDA are and can be lobbied or politically swayed, but they also do regulate and crack down from time to time. I don’t think things would be better if they didn’t exist, i think it would be far worse. Corporations use these chemicals that are “approved” as “safer” options but would absolutely choose the less safe cheaper options if they could.