facebook controversies over this pic:
Here’s my one-sided account:
I’m really glad Bernie Sanders was talking “down” about Monsanto. They are a company that uses their media ties and copious revenue to continue veiling horrible, obsolete, practices. I find it very likely that threat occurred. It’s happened before, why couldn’t it happen again? Seems legit that in this sensitive election period, he wouldn’t want to pick a fight by talking about it.
It’s logical to think genetically modified (in the general sense) is SAFE forcrissake, we all eat apples and modern versions of food humans have messed with. The people of America (not only Virginia) want to know in the grocery store: has Round Up has been sprayed on this? Did it come from a petroleum-soaked mono-crop? Is a continent going to lose its bee population because of my purchase right now?
I recently saw a good quote from a farmer that was something like “Let me call my product “food” and they can call theirs “chemical food”
If Bernie Sanders is trying to appease people’s desire to address the SUPER-FUCKED-UP MONSANTO MONO-CROP RACKET….then isn’t he only doing exactly what an elected representative is supposed to do? It’s not the just the organic “industry” of his home state… it’s many people over many states because it involves the entire scope of how people eat (kind of a big deal). Of course it’s infinitely complicated and the information is constantly at odds because the players are family farmers against media-owning companies (no conspiracies! Legit business).
I’ve never heard “anti-science” used outside of a religious base. To elude that [geoengineering], [petro-poison], and [people who don’t believe in preventative pharmaceutical use] are connected in having an agenda against science…. is nonsensical to me.