I recently had an experience while doing a simple Google search that was so profoundly weird that it stopped me in my tracks.
Understanding this Google se...
The distinction is that everything you listed is “intellectual property”, aka “thoughts”.
All of those are tools that are used to do the same shit we used to do without those tools, and if it all went away overnight, we could just go back to doing things the older way (the way we used to do things before they homogenized food in order to maximize profits, despite the reduction in nutritional value).
You are operating from the premise that profits are more important than anything else. That is flawed logic, and it’s based entirely on this specific current status quo. Outputs are not equal to profits, some farmers are paid by the government to specifically not grow things.
Your idea that the disappearance of Monsanto would cause widespread famine ignores the fact that none of Monsanto’s knowledge would die with the company. They have records, and there are living humans who know how to do everything on your list.
The existence of a corporation is not what allows agriculture to function. It functioned for thousands of years before Monsanto existed, and has functioned for less than 100 since (1945 is the year they first had anything to do with agriculture)
To be clear, I’m not saying we need them, I’m saying that if we did need them, we have methods of preserving their machinations without allowing them to have complete regulatory capture.
Also, to your earlier point, you could assume that we need Monsanto now that they play such a large role in the system (I personally disagree, but you can make that argument), there is no argument to say “we’d all be dead already if Monsanto never existed”, which is essentially your argument. There is nothing special about Monsanto that gives them abilities others don’t have, they’re just the only company that’s currently and legally allowed to do so. Other people already know exactly how to do what they do, but they don’t because they can’t legally profit from it.
I can’t believe I’ve let you sidetrack me this far tho, we were talking about Google. You think the world would end without those chucklefucks? Because I think it’s more likely that the internet would begin to slowly revert to a “marketplace of ideas”, rather than remaining in it’s current form, a wall of corporate propaganda.
Well we already waste 1/3rd of all food manufactured, so we could theoretically grow 1/3rd less and still feed everyone the same amount.
You’re explicitly saying that people would need to die in order to get rid of Monsanto, which is just simply not true, and a massive logical leap. I’m not going to play “which people should go” with you, because I don’t accept your premise that anyone would need to go.
I’m not saying to replace them with identical corporations, and I’m not saying that whoever replaces them should operate the exact same way. I’m saying that Monsanto disappearing would not in and of itself prevent anyone from doing the things that they do.
My morning after plan for after Google is gone? I don’t need one, they’re already gone from my life, and have been replaced by better options (mostly FOSS stuff, so no “replacement corporations” like you seem to think would be necessary).
If Google disappeared right now, the only thing that would change for me is I would no longer have to listen to dumbassess tell me what “Google said” and that they themselves now wholly believe and accept about any given topic
Removed by mod
The distinction is that everything you listed is “intellectual property”, aka “thoughts”.
All of those are tools that are used to do the same shit we used to do without those tools, and if it all went away overnight, we could just go back to doing things the older way (the way we used to do things before they homogenized food in order to maximize profits, despite the reduction in nutritional value).
You are operating from the premise that profits are more important than anything else. That is flawed logic, and it’s based entirely on this specific current status quo. Outputs are not equal to profits, some farmers are paid by the government to specifically not grow things.
Your idea that the disappearance of Monsanto would cause widespread famine ignores the fact that none of Monsanto’s knowledge would die with the company. They have records, and there are living humans who know how to do everything on your list.
The existence of a corporation is not what allows agriculture to function. It functioned for thousands of years before Monsanto existed, and has functioned for less than 100 since (1945 is the year they first had anything to do with agriculture)
Removed by mod
I mean, in this hypothetical scenario the government could just nationalize Monsanto
Removed by mod
To be clear, I’m not saying we need them, I’m saying that if we did need them, we have methods of preserving their machinations without allowing them to have complete regulatory capture.
Also, to your earlier point, you could assume that we need Monsanto now that they play such a large role in the system (I personally disagree, but you can make that argument), there is no argument to say “we’d all be dead already if Monsanto never existed”, which is essentially your argument. There is nothing special about Monsanto that gives them abilities others don’t have, they’re just the only company that’s currently and legally allowed to do so. Other people already know exactly how to do what they do, but they don’t because they can’t legally profit from it.
I can’t believe I’ve let you sidetrack me this far tho, we were talking about Google. You think the world would end without those chucklefucks? Because I think it’s more likely that the internet would begin to slowly revert to a “marketplace of ideas”, rather than remaining in it’s current form, a wall of corporate propaganda.
Removed by mod
Well we already waste 1/3rd of all food manufactured, so we could theoretically grow 1/3rd less and still feed everyone the same amount.
You’re explicitly saying that people would need to die in order to get rid of Monsanto, which is just simply not true, and a massive logical leap. I’m not going to play “which people should go” with you, because I don’t accept your premise that anyone would need to go.
I’m not saying to replace them with identical corporations, and I’m not saying that whoever replaces them should operate the exact same way. I’m saying that Monsanto disappearing would not in and of itself prevent anyone from doing the things that they do.
My morning after plan for after Google is gone? I don’t need one, they’re already gone from my life, and have been replaced by better options (mostly FOSS stuff, so no “replacement corporations” like you seem to think would be necessary).
If Google disappeared right now, the only thing that would change for me is I would no longer have to listen to dumbassess tell me what “Google said” and that they themselves now wholly believe and accept about any given topic
Removed by mod