[Marxism] SOIL ALLIANCE resource hub

[Hans G Ehrbar via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*


Thanks for the link, David Walters.  Here it is again:

https://vimeo.com/80518559

Very interesting.  All of Peter Byck's videos make a lot of sense.
Painting roofs white, installing solar panels, recycling energy, putting
windmills on farms, etc., are all great ideas and I am all for it.  But
all this together will not bring down our carbon emissions quickly
enough.  We also have to reduce our footprint by consuming less.

Here is another remark regarding sequestering carbon in top soil.  We
should not think it is ok get more coal, oil, and gas out of the ground
because we can then sequester the carbon in top soil.  In the long run,
this sequestration is unreliable.  Right now, a lot of carbon gets
released because of peat fires in Indonesia and thawing permafrost in
the arctic.  All this is carbon sequestered in top soil which is finding
its way back into the atmosphere.  This is one of the reasons why GHG
concentrations in in the atmosphere are still accelerating, although
fossil fuel emissions have been declining.  (Another reason seems to be
that the warming oceans are absorbing less CO2).  We have no choice
but leaving the carbon safely sequestered far below ground where it is
right now.  Digging it back down into equally safe permanent
repositories is going to be incredibly expensive.

Hans G Ehrbar
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] SOIL ALLIANCE resource hub

[Hans G Ehrbar via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*


Ratbag Media  (Dave Riley) writes
(I am bringing seleted passages from Dave's email
with my responses in the paragraph after his passages):

> Hang on!  'Meat' is a commodity like everything else.

I disagree.  If we are talking of leaner lifestyles, different
use-values must be treated differently.  We don't want to restrict
things that make us more educated or healthier.  We want to restrict
those things which we can do without without living a too impoverished
life, and which allow us to reduce our footprint a lot.  Meat
consumption and air travel are rightly in the cross hairs as the main
things which we must learn to use only sparingly.

Further down you write:

> That's a basic principle of human evolution: we eat what we can get.
> Whether we kill or harvest it isn't the point. In rangelands the norm
> has been to grow meat and eat it BECAUSE horticulture is not an easy
> fit there. They are brittle landscapes.

You are changing the subject here.  I did not say that nomads in
Mongolia should not eat meat.  Of course they should, as long as they
maintain their traditional lifestyles.  But the masses in megacities in
Africa or Asia cannot eat much meat.  There are not enough Mongolias or
Australias or Argentinas on this planet to feed them.

Further down you write:

> Every landscape needs animals. It is a ecological fact. And landscapes
> have evolved in tandem with animals -- even our human farms.

There is a reason why we differentiate humans from other animals:
humans are too smart, we overwhelm the slow process of natural
selection and trial-and-error equilibria.  We cannot just satiate
our hunger with the thing that tastes best or even that is traditional.
We have to use our brains so that we don't disturb the balance
which we have evolved even more than we already have.

> As it happens, here in Australia the homo sapiens currently share a
> continental space where there are  74 million sheep to 23.5 million
> people with a further beef herd  of 13.4 million head.
>
> Is that too much grazing?

I have no idea how much cattle the Australian ecosystem can tolerate.  I
am sure it depends on how this cattle is being managed.  But this is not
my point.  Even if you double the meat production in Australia, you will
not produce enough meat for the billions in the emerging countries who
can afford meat now.  They must restrict their meat diet.  The Chinese
government has realized this.  The next quote is not from Dave but from
https://thinkprogress.org/united-states-meat-consumption-historic-increase-fccc1ebbf3aa#.2b2ddukl0

> This year, the Chinese government released dietary guidelines urging
> citizens to limit their meat and egg intake to 200 grams — or around
> 0.4 pounds — a day. (By contrast, the average American eats about 419
> grams of meat and eggs daily.)

I am arguing that not only the Chinese but also the Americans should be
satisfied with 200 grams of meat per day or less.  This is a simple
matter of equity, we all live on the same planet and must share what it
can give.  And if Australians produce 1000 grams of meat per day per
person (only as a matter of argument), they should also content
themselves with 200 grams and export the rest to those countries which
so far have not been able to import meat because their populations were
too poor.  This is my idea of an equitable distribution of the limited
resources of this planet.

> So I don't get you point at all.

That's why I just re-formulated it.  I hope I made it clearer
this time.


Hans.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] SOIL ALLIANCE resource hub

[Hans G Ehrbar via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*


Ratbag Media  (Dave Riley) writes
(I am bringing seleted passages from Dave's email
with my responses in the paragraph after his passages):

> Hang on!  'Meat' is a commodity like everything else.

I disagree.  If we are talking of leaner lifestyles, different
use-values must be treated differently.  We don't want to restrict
things that make us more educated or healthier.  We want to restrict
those things which we can do without without living a too impoverished
life, and which allow us to reduce our footprint a lot.  Meat
consumption and air travel are rightly in the cross hairs as the main
things which we must learn to use only sparingly.

Further down you write:

> That's a basic principle of human evolution: we eat what we can get.
> Whether we kill or harvest it isn't the point. In rangelands the norm
> has been to grow meat and eat it BECAUSE horticulture is not an easy
> fit there. They are brittle landscapes.

You are changing the subject here.  I did not say that nomads in
Mongolia should not eat meat.  Of course they should, as long as they
maintain their traditional lifestyles.  But the masses in megacities in
Africa or Asia cannot eat much meat.  There are not enough Mongolias or
Australias or Argentinas on this planet to feed them.

Further down you write:

> Every landscape needs animals. It is a ecological fact. And landscapes
> have evolved in tandem with animals -- even our human farms.

There is a reason why we differentiate humans from other animals:
humans are too smart, we overwhelm the slow process of natural
selection and trial-and-error equilibria.  We cannot just satiate
our hunger with the thing that tastes best or even that is traditional.
We have to use our brains so that we don't disturb the balance
which we have evolved even more than we already have.

> As it happens, here in Australia the homo sapiens currently share a
> continental space where there are  74 million sheep to 23.5 million
> people with a further beef herd  of 13.4 million head.
>
> Is that too much grazing?

I have no idea how much cattle the Australian ecosystem can tolerate.  I
am sure it depends on how this cattle is being managed.  But this is not
my point.  Even if you double the meat production in Australia, you will
not produce enough meat for the billions in the emerging countries who
can afford meat now.  They must restrict their meat diet.  The Chinese
government has realized this.  The next quote is not from Dave but from
https://thinkprogress.org/united-states-meat-consumption-historic-increase-fccc1ebbf3aa#.2b2ddukl0

> This year, the Chinese government released dietary guidelines urging
> citizens to limit their meat and egg intake to 200 grams — or around
> 0.4 pounds — a day. (By contrast, the average American eats about 419
> grams of meat and eggs daily.)

I am arguing that not only the Chinese but also the Americans should be
satisfied with 200 grams of meat per day or less.  This is a simple
matter of equity, we all live on the same planet and must share what it
can give.  And if Australians produce 1000 grams of meat per day per
person (only as a matter of argument), they should also content
themselves with 200 grams and export the rest to those countries which
so far have not been able to import meat because their populations were
too poor.  This is my idea of an equitable distribution of the limited
resources of this planet.

> So I don't get you point at all.

That's why I just re-formulated it.  I hope I made it clearer
this time.


Hans.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Taking a stand for Palestine, Celtic fans prove sport and politics do mix

[Juan Fajardo via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Not just a UEFA ban, but threats of arrest from the police, and outright 
street thuggery:


"Rangers fans attack Celtic fans with Palestine flags Celtic vs Hapoel 
Beer Sheva"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGgjexqKW-8

- Juan F




Message: 2
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 12:26:23 +1000
From: Stuart Munckton 
To: Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition

Subject: [Marxism] Taking a stand for Palestine,Celtic fans prove
sport and politics do mix
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

During Glasgow-based football club Celtic FC's August 17 European Champions
League qualifying fixture in Glasgow against Israeli club, Hapoel Beer
Sheva of Israel, Celtic supporters defied an explicit UEFA ban to fly
Palestinian flags in solidarity with Palestine's struggle for freedom.

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/62466


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] U.N. Admits Role in Cholera Epidemic in Haiti

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

NY Times, August 18 2016
U.N. Admits Role in Cholera Epidemic in Haiti
By JONATHAN M. KATZ

For the first time since a cholera epidemic believed to be imported by 
United Nations peacekeepers began killing thousands of Haitians nearly 
six years ago, the office of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has 
acknowledged that the United Nations played a role in the initial 
outbreak and that a “significant new set of U.N. actions” will be needed 
to respond to the crisis.


The deputy spokesman for the secretary general, Farhan Haq, said in an 
email this week that “over the past year, the U.N. has become convinced 
that it needs to do much more regarding its own involvement in the 
initial outbreak and the suffering of those affected by cholera.” He 
added that a “new response will be presented publicly within the next 
two months, once it has been fully elaborated, agreed with the Haitian 
authorities and discussed with member states.”


The statement comes on the heels of a confidential report sent to Mr. 
Ban by a longtime United Nations adviser on Aug. 8. Written by Philip 
Alston, a New York University law professor who serves as one of a few 
dozen experts, known as special rapporteurs, who advise the organization 
on human rights issues, the draft language stated plainly that the 
epidemic “would not have broken out but for the actions of the United 
Nations.”


The secretary general’s acknowledgment, by contrast, stopped short of 
saying that the United Nations specifically caused the epidemic. Nor 
does it indicate a change in the organization’s legal position that it 
is absolutely immune from legal actions, including a federal lawsuit 
brought in the United States on behalf of cholera victims seeking 
billions in damages stemming from the Haiti crisis.


But it represents a significant shift after more than five years of 
high-level denial of any involvement or responsibility of the United 
Nations in the outbreak, which has killed at least 10,000 people and 
sickened hundreds of thousands. Cholera victims suffer from dehydration 
caused by severe diarrhea or vomiting.


Special rapporteurs’ reports are technically independent guidance, which 
the United Nations can accept or reject. United Nations officials have 
until the end of this week to respond to the report, which will then go 
through revisions, but the statement suggests a new receptivity to its 
criticism.


In the 19-page report, obtained from an official who had access to it, 
Mr. Alston took issue with the United Nations’ public handling of the 
outbreak, which was first documented in mid-October 2010, shortly after 
people living along the Meille River began dying from the disease.


The first victims lived near a base housing 454 United Nations 
peacekeepers freshly arrived from Nepal, where a cholera outbreak was 
underway, and waste from the base often leaked into the river. Numerous 
scientists have since argued that the base was the only plausible source 
of the outbreak — whose real death toll, one study found, could be much 
higher than the official numbers state — but United Nations officials 
have consistently insisted that its origins remain up for debate.


Mr. Alston wrote that the United Nations’ Haiti cholera policy “is 
morally unconscionable, legally indefensible and politically 
self-defeating.” He added, “It is also entirely unnecessary.” The 
organization’s continuing denial and refusal to make reparations to the 
victims, he argued, “upholds a double standard according to which the 
U.N. insists that member states respect human rights, while rejecting 
any such responsibility for itself.”


He said, “It provides highly combustible fuel for those who claim that 
U.N. peacekeeping operations trample on the rights of those being 
protected, and it undermines both the U.N.’s overall credibility and the 
integrity of the Office of the Secretary-General.”


Mr. Alston went beyond criticizing the Department of Peacekeeping 
Operations to blame the entire United Nations system. “As the magnitude 
of the disaster became known, key international officials carefully 
avoided acknowledging that the outbreak had resulted from discharges 
from the camp,” he noted.


His most severe criticism was reserved for the organization’s Office of 
Legal Affairs, whose advice, he wrote, “has been permitted to override 
all of the other considerations that militate so powerfully in favor of 
seeking a constructive and just solution.” Its interpretations, he said, 
have “trumped the rule of law.”


Mr. Alston also argued in his report that, as The New York Times has 
reported, the United Nations’ cholera eradication program has 

Re: [Marxism] Smear campaign against Jill Stein by Democratic Party hack

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

From the most outspoken supporter of nuclear power on the left, no less.

On 8/18/16 10:08 AM, DW via Marxism wrote:

I would argue that this by itself is not most relevant aspect of the Stein
campaign. I'd say it is a problem, however.

David Walters

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Smear campaign against Jill Stein by Democratic Party hack

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 8/18/16 11:20 AM, Clay Claiborne via Marxism wrote:

But I was greatly saddened this morning to see Louis uncritically present
her claim that she is a "peace candidate."

What color is the swamp?


I don't need this demagogic race-baiting bullshit from either Clay or 
Joaquin. The next time I get even a whisper of it from them or anybody 
else, I will begin unsubbing people. After 18 years of moderating 
Marxmail, I have learned to figure out when people are tired of the 
list. It is usually when words like "swamp" or "petty bourgeois" are 
thrown around, or like when Walter Lippmann used to bait people for not 
supporting the Chinese Communist Party because we were in "comfortable" 
imperialist countries. I will vote for Hillary Clinton on the same day I 
will hail the Chinese bureaucrats.


That is it.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Interview with Vijay Prashad

[Andrew Stewart via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Has material here useful especially for organizers.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/17/exiles-from-the-future-an-interview-with-vijay-prashad/

-- 
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: China boosts Syria support - Global Times

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

 Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century, everybody is going to go
against them.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust 
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach 


On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Louis Proyect via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> Who's next? The Martians?
>
> http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1001150.shtml
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/opt
> ions/marxism/clayclai%40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Smear campaign against Jill Stein by Democratic Party hack

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

This is far from Jill Stein's biggest problem but it does speak to her
integrity. This is similar to the way Trump supports the worst CTs on his
side with the odd comment that definitely isn't lost on them.

But I was greatly saddened this morning to see Louis uncritically present
her claim that she is a "peace candidate."

What color is the swamp?

Anyway this is my latest on Jill Stein:
http://claysbeach.blogspot.com/2016/08/how-jillstein-tweets-for-trump.html

> Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein knows that since she doesn't
> stand a snowballs chance in hell of being elected, the key to getting
> progressives to vote for her is to convince them that it really doesn't
> matter whether Clinton or Trump is our next president. The problem is, that
> while Hillary Clinton may be just another Democrat, Donald Trump is the
> leader of a while supremacist movement of birthers and more that has
> hijacked the Republican party. While it is true that Hillary Clinton, like
> Barack Obama, supports the fundamental policies that support the white
> supremacists system, Donald Trump represents a much more aggressive form of
> white supremacy and if he is elected, it will be almost exclusively by
> white voters who supported this campaign that is making white chauvinism
> its center piece. These are critical realities of election year 2016 in the
> United States that Jill Stein's campaign is seeking to obscure in its very
> dangerous claim that it really doesn't matter if Donald Trump becomes our
> next POTUS. Hillary Clinton may be a continuation of Barack Obama, but
> Donald Trump is not another Mitt Romney. Dr. Jill Stein thinks the campaign
> she ran in 2012 should be rerun in 2016. Once again the Left is in danger
> of applying an old strategy to a new situation without really thinking it
> through.


See also:
http://claysbeach.blogspot.com/2016/08/huffpost-item-shows-how-jill-stein.html
http://claysbeach.blogspot.com/2016/08/meet-green-partys-jill-stein-putin-sock.html



Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust 
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach 

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] SOIL ALLIANCE resource hub

[DW via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Dave Riley brings common sense to this meaty discussion.

I urge list readers to view this video titled "Carbon Cowboys"

https://vimeo.com/80518559

It shows why cattle ranching in small packed herds rotating around a hugely
built up number prairie grasses actually creates a situation that allows
for a net consumption of methane into the soil vs bovine methane out put.
It shows truly the only way the soil can be conserved and made healthy
again (which, folks, REQUIRES cow herds to return to the land and thus our
necessary consumption of them
). Absolutely fascinating and well produced show. Made me rethink my
anti-cattle perspectives.

David Walters
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Smear campaign against Jill Stein by Democratic Party hack

[DW via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Louis does a poor job here of defending Stein. The issue was never really
about being anti-vaccinations, it was about her pandering to those who do.
Here as my initial response:

"Louis, she perhaps does believe what she says but she is clearly
*catering* to anti-vaxxers. This is the point of most of the blogs and
essays written about her position. The fact that she even brings up in the
paragraph you quoted her from is designed to placate the anti-vaxx
activists endemic in the Green Party today. Arel is essentially correct:
Stein is pandering here and it’s obvious and *beneath* her as a MD. The
bringing up of thimerosal is a case in point, which is no longer used, and
with it’s *removal* there has been zero effect on fetal brain development
for the better. In other words, it was a scare story from the get go.
Thimerosal is methylmercury NOT the kind of mercury we see coming out of
coal plant effluent or used in instruments which called ethylmercury. It is
good to question, but one has to look at the conclusions science has
delivered.

On her comment that is extracted about trusting the regulatory boards…and
directly associating it with the issue of vaccines is totally disingenuous
on her part: she fails to point out that it appears beyond a shadow of a
doubt that these same regulatory boards with regards to vaccines were 100%
correct and the doubters were 100% incorrect. And she knows this so why
does she bring it up? It’s called pandering to the anti-science wackos in
her milieu."

[Even the mercury charge was proven false...thimerosal was never proven
un-healthy was removed as a vaccination preservatvie *soley* due to public
(meaning, "no data") pressure groups.

By not coming full force in supporting, *specifically* the MMR vaccine,
which has been proven 100% safe she only reinforces the anti-vaxxers
criminal campaign again vaccinations. This is seen throughout the
discussion of 80 or so comments by defenders of the anti-vaxx campaign that
have infected Louis's essay...in support of Louis' defense of Stein.

She panders to the anti-wifi lunactic fringe of the Green Party as well. I
would, in fact, urge everyone to look at those links provided by the
initial post here on her. I have zero doubt this is for the benefit of
Clinton. But it is Stein who handed this issue to the Clinton supporters on
a silver platter.

I would argue that this by itself is not most relevant aspect of the Stein
campaign. I'd say it is a problem, however.

David Walters
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] next steps in Alexandria defense campaign

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Solidarity activities in the run up to the 9/18 hearing:
https://egyptsolidarityinitiative.org/2016/08/18/egyptian-trade-unionists-appeal-to-global-labour-movement/
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fwd: China boosts Syria support - Global Times

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Who's next? The Martians?

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1001150.shtml
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] How Cuba's revolution made it an Olympic powe

[Stuart Munckton via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/62475
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Smear campaign against Jill Stein by Democratic Party hack

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 8/18/16 1:45 AM, A.R. G wrote:

Yes but why share Naiman's e-mails about Stein unless there is a
rebuttal provided?


I have answered them on my blog:

https://louisproyect.org/2016/08/01/is-jill-stein-anti-science/
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Turkey: HDP calls for solidarity following closure and storming of Özgür Gündem newspaper

[Stuart Munckton via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/62464
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] SOIL ALLIANCE resource hub

[Ratbag Media via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Hang on!  'Meat' is a commodity like everything else. You may as well
suggest  that  (I'm suggesting as well) ' with a limited planet that
there is no need to restrict'  grain consumption or soya beans or rice
or corn or yams  or whatever.

Making a fetish of one element in the food chain obscures the
ecological reality.

My argument is that  meat production is related to 'meat's' relevance
to the environment...and THAT relates to its consumption. That's a
basic principle of human evolution: we eat what we can get.
Whether we kill or harvest it isn't the point. In rangelands the norm
has been to grow meat and eat it BECAUSE horticulture is not an easy
fit there. They are brittle landscapes.

Every landscape needs animals. It is a ecological fact. And landscapes
have evolved in tandem with animals -- even our human farms.

As it happens, here in Australia the homo sapiens currently share a
continental space where there are  74 million sheep to 23.5 million
people with a further beef herd  of 13.4 million head.

Is that too much grazing?

As for your confusing comment:

"The only reason why people in the rich countries can eat so much meat
is that they also consume the share of the people in the poor
countries, and that they pump fossil water using fossil fuels etc. "

 I don't have the consumption figures on hand for all the 'rich
countries'  but in the USA  the main meat suppliers of imported beef
into the US are Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

They aren't 'poor countries'.

http://beef2live.com/story-beef-imports-country-year-date-0-107548

As well as the US, Australia's primary export market for beef is
China, Korea and Japan...and the rise in meat consumption
internationally is being registered in the 'poor countries' generally.

So I don't get you point at all.

Of note is that most Australian lamb exports go to the Middle East
http://www.mla.com.au/Prices-markets/Market-news/How-did-2015-fare-for-Australian-lamb-exports-12012015

As for the question of meat consumption per se...indigenous peoples
diets are  various but here in Australia, as much as I can
research,aborigines generally ate more meat -- from various animals --
than the current Australian intake . In the Americas  the Plains
Indians  no doubt ate more meat than their East Coast cousins and the
Inuit of the north  were/are dependent on hunting for meat.

But that varies of course around the planet.Look at legume driven
India, for instance. That proves that meat consumption in large
quantities isn't  nutritionally essential. But no society has existed
without using meat or animal products such as milk or hides.

However I'm suggesting that large herbivores in most environments may
indeed be an ecological necessity.

Just as other animals -- pigs, poultry and the like -- may be
essential recyclers that consume AND STORE in their flesh what would
otherwise be wasted.

Yesterday's rotting fruits become tomorrow's bacon.

dave riley



On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 3:59 PM,   wrote:

> you are basically saying: if we do it right, we can produce so much with
> a limited planet that there is no need to restrict meat consumption, even if
> we are 7-9 billion people, and even if climate change drastically
> reduces what can be grown where.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com