Does mass production mean mass destruction?
Since the birth of the industrial revolution, while we pat those involved on the backs for modern ways of mass production, we find a grave new challenge that no human has ever encountered before – the destruction of all the old ways, but will it be to our own detriment?
With the birth of mass production of food we have implemented new laws to protect the consumer and at the same time make mass-produced food a viable option and a profit-making haven.
But with the birth of these new laws it is slowly destroying the old ways that mankind has survived for so long from, for example as these laws become more stringent due to law suits and insurance policies, we find it becoming less and less viable to live off of growing your own produce. Eventually not only will people be unable to sell their food produce to others, due to insurance and certificates being required to sell to others, you wont even be permitted to consume your own produce because of the laws that are designed to govern big mass production food companies. These laws end up choking the life out of the small independent companies who simply can’t meet the requirements of these new laws and insurance criteria.
“But this is progress” I hear you say. Is it really?
On closer examination we see a huge danger to humanity as a whole, one like never before, because no nation has ever been in this position prior to the industrial revolution. We risk the possibility of global starvation.
As we centralise our food produce and hand it over to be monopolised we find a great problem like never before. Through all of history you have had people growing their own crops and food and this has led to diversity of the food cultures. So if your neighbour’s crop had a disease it didn’t mean it would automatically cross contaminate your produce and in so doing we had a large abundance of genetic differences that would keep food alive. But in the example of the banana where a disease managed to spread across nearly all bananas we found a near possibility of the banana becoming extinct and could well have done in 50 years time under these new laws. However, there was one man in Devon England who had cultivated his own crop of banana and we were able to avoid the extinction of the banana species. This may be the last remaining alternate banana crop for now but what if this was 50 years ago? Would we have had enough varied banana variants to continue to have an abundance of bananas? Yes we would, but perhaps not in the future as at the moment we currently have 1 since the disease is still attacking the original mass-produced banana crop.
So as we continue to move toward these great monopolies and food giants we see 2 dangerous possibilities. The first being the lack of variation as I mentioned before and the second being total control of all food in the hands of a small handful of companies. This may have echoes of conspiracy theories but let us ignore the obvious conspiracy theories and address a deeper threat, accidental damage. If a mere 5 or less companies control all mass-produced food in the future which will happen if the laws and insurance policies etc. continue to be designed for them at the sacrifice of the smaller food companies then this means that only a small number of food giants will be able to produce the world’s food source and as we have seen anything can happen to a company a crop an accident a value etc. which will leave the world’s populace at the mercy of their expertise or lack of, the mercy of their research and disease treatment centres the mercy of their methods. If these disease treatments or farming methods are in error in any way then we will inherit those problems in mass.
We already know it wont be cost-effective for one food giant to grow a multiple of varied crops because it will threaten their profit margins which in turn could mean they are swallowed up by one of the other food giant companies who have a higher profit margin because they are still risking the single variant of crops. So it is inevitable and a natural course that these things shall come to pass, but because mankind at large has never come across such challenges or trials this generation will very much be the guinea pigs but at what cost?
Could these moves to end world hunger actually bring about world hunger if not addressed early enough or taken more seriously? Are we possibly walking into this so excitedly and hurried that we are encouraging this assuming that we will somehow worry about that later? What is the answer?
Perhaps the answer can be found in the Energy giants plans for the future? As the energy giants hold their breaths regarding the future with questions such as will we have enough energy to sustain an ever-growing population? and with that an ever-growing dependency on modern technology all of which are powered by those sources of energy? While those in charge rub their hands together as the profits increase over the decades let us not forget those hands are sweaty palms as they nervously anticipate the future.
What are their key plans for future energy? Well, strangely they borrow from the past which is quite digression rather than progressive – they are looking to the individual and their personal energy production in the form of solar, wind and water mills. That’s right we have come so far that the future will look very much like the past, with the use of sun as the Egyptians worshipped the sun-god Ra, the wind after deserting thousands of windmills over the last 100 years and the water by installing water generators in rivers on the land of individuals. Businesses install their own windmills to generate their offices and in turn we help to supply the huge energy giants with out excess energy supplies.
It would seem that this will in turn be the answer to the food crises which may lie ahead. I see the only answer to the possible or inevitable food crisis to be the small holdings and individual grower and farmer. To perhaps grow and sell their produce to the local supermarket for and on behalf of the food giants perhaps. Perhaps these food giants could employ the individual for the excess foods they grow at home as the solar energy customers do today already. Perhaps rather than our food travelling thousands of miles losing much of its nutrients in transit our local growers can drive a mere 5 miles to the local supermarket and deliver their produce for and on behalf of the food giants? This would lower fuel emissions, packaging and the dangers of disease in food wiping out entire food stocks.
While seemingly quite idyllic and answer the is staring us in the face but for one thing the laws will need to revert back to the old laws the insurance policies need to revert back to the old policies in order that the small holder and private grower were able to freely sell their produce on the behalf of the food giants or else they will not be able too. We will need to reintroduce farming back in the curriculum even in the towns and cities in order that a sufficient number of people were encouraged to choose farming as an option and be employed by the food giants. This would create more jobs and help to re-establish a more varied supply of species within our food groups thus avoiding the obvious possibility of mass starvation due to mass production in the future.