scot mcphee on Mon, 11 Jun 2001 07:12:57 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> Planet destroyed; film at 11 |
You know, Mr Mandl, I resent your attempts to paint me as some sort of apologist for GM companies. While you attempt to analyse my miscellaneous statements in isolation from their whole in regard to the matter, perhaps you could look at your own rhetoric before you start spraying various shonky insinuations around. > - When they want to cross a new line or bring about a paradigm shift, > they claim that the new thing is "just like" an existing thing that is > in fact very different but is not questioned by anyone. For example, > Scot McPhee said this on Nettime a few weeks ago: OF COURSE, I speak for the "Them"!!! Naturally, merely because I raise a question about some particular methods used to resist GM food, I must be a public advocate in the pay of multinational conglomerates. Well get this -- I'm NOT!!! I'm allowed to make my own mind up and it doesn't have to agree with you and that simple fact doesn't make me any sort of apologist for anybody or anything. > > And of course all agricultural crops and animals are 'GM' by virtue > > of selective breeding anyway. > > >From which I infer (this isn't an actual quote from Scot): "There's > little need to even debate about GM, because we've actually had GM for > thousands of years now!" That's the kind of thing you hear a lot Well, you *infer* quite wrong. We *have* had gene modification in some form for thousands of years now. To deny otherwise is to deny the facts. The question, and debate, is whether the old style of gene modification (localised, slow, without the bounds of natural possibility) is 'better than' the modern practices of forced transgenic engineering. But you have to start from foundations, and foundations mean that you must acknowledge that some form of genetic manipulation has been practiced by all agricultural cultures. Frankly, that debating style reeks of the ones that Israelis use to discredit their critics; "Nazis are anti-Semitic, criticism of the Israeli state is anti-semitic, therefore you are anti-semitic". Your reactions here, are just the binary opposite to those of the seed companies. These type of "everyone fall into line now - GM is bad mmm'kay" responses, which is what you dumped on me, is just as stifling to debate as that of the seed companies! Can you *not* deal in absurd binary opposites for just one second, or is everyone who doesn't hold your exact position simply against you? I'll contrast your style against some others who followed up my post, who sought to clarify their positions and actions. You just dug yourself deeper into your foxhole entrenching your own attitudes in the face of criticism. To explain it out exactly to you; my postion in my original post was one of querying how an anti-GM activist could justify the release a GM organism to combat another GM organism. Others, not you, explained that this os because those doing these actions are not opposed to GM per-se, but to its specific structural formation and resultant practices in the gene companies. I had never encountered this position before, because from my perspective as a concerned consumer, the only position I had encountered in the opposition was always 'GM is bad mmm'kay'. Simply, I did not agree with that position. I agree that there must be informed debate about GM, about its environmental impact, its socio-economic formation (in particular) but I do simply refuse to agree to the pre-condition that first I am in uncritical awe of everything any self-appointed anti-GM activist happens to say or do. That's the purpose of the debate. And I refuse to accept the label that because I don't accept your pre-conditions, that I am to be tarred with some magical brush that makes every statement I say in support of the enemy. But like most Stalinist totalising positions, one has to agree to the totality of that position or one is simply, a member of "the Them", an apologist for gene-manipulation, or American imperialism or whatever is the going concern this month. So *why* should I listen to *you* lecture me about 'debate' when all you wish to hear is what you already believe parroted back at you by others? For all these reasons of a stultifying and totalising opposition are part of why the GM companies are acting like they have already won, and why we have a stultified and totalised Spectacle dominating every square inch of the surface of this already dead planet. scot mcphee a concerned nobody sydney australia _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold