What does sustainability mean? The dictionary defines this word as:
- The ability to be sustained, supported, upheld, or confirmed.
- Environmental Science, the quality of not being harmful to the environment or depleting natural resources, and thereby supporting longterm ecological balance: The committee is developing sustainability standards for products that use energy.
A contradiction in definitions when applied in real life. From the environment activists’ point of view, the definition is in the eye of the beholder. In most cases, the eye of the misinformed and corrupt.
How to balance the “living” environment, while creating a living environment for humans, is a sustainable living goal. From the prospect of human record, there always has been a living symbiosis between humans and their environment.
It is a fact that humans have damaged their living environment, but so has Mother Nature.
Love Canal is probably one of the worst human made stories in US history, here’s a link to a Time Movizine story. However, Mother Nature every year burns, floods and blows destruction across the land also. But you can’t control Mother Nature, regardless if people want to blame humans for changing the climate. As I said, it is a symbiosis relationship with a difference. Humans are supposed to reason.
It’s one of those words using in phrases that are overused and have lost its meaning. It’s a largely a misused word, as a statement to mean something that it really isn’t! When used, it evokes some emotional comfort that it’s a continuation … of something. Just what is it? Too often the word is conflated into some feel good statement that has no tangential meaning!
Planetary Husbandry! It’s not just because we have been formed in the image of our creator, but we’ve been given the gifts of: free thought, independence and liberty. We’ve reached out to the stars and touched them, but we cannot accept technology without progressivism. That is destructive!
The left is actually against science. They are not interested in what “sustainability” means. The left has successfully made science a crime. It’s like the Darwin controversy all over again. A colossal lie, for the greater cause, the truth is now illegal. Science is now judged by the religious zealots of environmentalism. Galileo once felt the sting of such religious bigotry, and we are seeing this today on Hawai’i Island with the passing of Bill 113.
All products; living and artificial, use fuel and food, as a means to survive. It makes you wonder if the possibility of humans living on another planets, other than Earth, and being able to do interplanetary travel, if possible.
But what If humans are bonded to the planet like other creatures that live here? Then, can they survive long term away from the planet? How would they survive without the basics of life?
- Air; we need to breath, without it, life would end rather quickly.
- Water; we need water to refresh the host! I define the host as being both the Human and the Planet. For without one, there cannot be the other. We were put here for a reason, and what we know of the Planets history and the History of Mankind’s existence, is the ceiling of our knowledge at this time in history. Water is what bonds us to the Planet.
- Food; we need food to nourish the body and the soul. The Planet is a gift with the promise to return the gift of life. As our Planet relies on us to maintain its life, the Planet returns life to us in the form of food. We nourish the soil to grow plants to nourish ourselves. It’s our symbioses relationship with the Planet that allows millions of humans to have at least one meal a day to nourish the soul, and provide us with life.
So why wouldn’t anyone not want to take care of that relationship and improve upon it?
With Humans, comes the ability to reason. However; like the weather, reason can have good days and bad days. Today is one of those bad days. When reason and common sense are cast aside for a Progressive ideology. The political philosophy of big government knows best; and therefore shall dictate what, how, where and who, shall either reap the benefits, or receive their disdain in the form of punitive laws.
After Mayor Kenoi signed Bill 113 into law, it abruptly changed the farming landscape of the Big Island. The Bill’s author, Margaret Willie, tries to explain it as a victory against “seemingly all-powerful multinational corporations”.
As Farmer/Business owner Richard Ha of Hamakua Springs Farms explains;
I ask; “Once you ruin the system, how do you put it back together?” I’ve likened this obviously terrible law to Obamacare. A terrible law that Americans are starting to feel the reality of its consequences. Because it brings reality to what happens when electing politicians with an agenda to hurt people for their definition of the “common good!” Those flowery words used to describe sustainability, like social justice and organic, these things, are not like the other.
“What about the rubbah slippah folks?” Richard Ha asked? Indeed, what about low income folks? Especially, the ones employed by farmers? What about the farmers that lease lands to farm? Will they continue their leases or decide to leave?
Big Island Video News reports: Richard Ha, of Hamakua Spring Farms responds. Go to time mark 3:05.
Margaret Willie’s Bill 113 does address those concerns, and she doesn’t care in the least for these people that will be affected by her horrific law. Neither do her supporters of Bill 113, they are of little consequence to the “common good”. Thus breaking the symbiosis bond between Human and the Planet. Bill 113 doesn’t hurt any of Margaret Willie’s evil corporations that she worries about, but the Bill will have an impact on Big Island Farmers. It will tear families, generations of island families, from their livelihood. But it’s all for the “common good”, you must remember that. Read her reasons for the law:
Thank you Mayor Billy Kenoi for signing Bill 113. Together we can, and today together we did, take an important step towards preserving and protecting our precious island — malama aina.
And as we share a common destiny, thanks to all who participated in this important island-wide conversation — regardless of the position taken.
These past six months, by way of the Bill 113 council legislation, we together took a big step towards sculpting our island’s future.
We are clearly moving in the direction of environmentally sensitive community-based farming with respect for the health of our soil and with respect for our watersheds and coastal waters, in a way that is pono and respectful of each other.
Our federal and state government officials have been lax. In 1992 our federal government established the absurd agricultural policy that GMO foods and crops are “substantially equivalent” to the corresponding non-GMO crops.
The result was no requirement of any pre-market health studies for GMO crops and foods.
Likewise there has been no requirement to assess the adverse impacts of the cultivation of GMOs on the health of neighboring property owners and on the health of our people especially those most vulnerable — the keiki now and those of future generations.
And to date our state legislators have followed the lead of their federal counterparts, and have not regulated these ag-chemical GMO corporations.
And instead our state government has catered to these seemingly all-powerful multinational corporations.
For this reason the last defense here and around the country, has been that of municipalities and counties taking a stand, based on the precautionary principle, to protect their people and their lands from becoming just one more GMO industry dominated location.
For these reasons our state legislators should take heed of the Kauai and Hawaii county legislation addressing the cultivation of GMO crops and related toxic pesticides.
Rather than seeking to undermine these neighbor island efforts, our state should set an example by embracing the wisdom and farsightedness of these efforts.
About the author: Margaret Wille is a Hawaii County Councilwoman for Council District 9, which consists of North and South Kohala.
Notice the veiled threat towards the State at the end…. that is the Progressive way, govern through threats and intimidation.
Bill 113 is an intended consequence. Yes, Intended! Much like Obamacare is an intended law to hurt people. Like Obamacare, the rich; those individuals and corporations, the law is supposed to target, will not be affected by the law. The rich can afford it. However, the consequences of the law has a “trickle down” effect. The middle class and low income people get hurt the hardest with higher prices and loss of income. Trickle Down economics works both ways. It can either benefit the people, or harm people. That’s why you do and economic impact studies to understand the economic consequences of such laws like Bill 113.
The callousness of these politicians will eventually catchup with their base that voted for them into power in the first place, but not before the damage is done. What to do till then?
Do not make the mistake in believing that these type of laws are anything less than democracy by mob rules. The first part of any propaganda campaign is to tell a lie: ‘A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.’ Quoting Winston Churchill
Weaving this law, Bill 113, as stated by the laws author; is not to promote organic farming, not to promote economic growth, and not to prevent GMO products from entering the island. The bill does none of that, instead the bill makes farmers into criminals. The Bill picks winners and punishes others with fines and jail time. The bill specifically targets against Farmers using technology to produce a safe food product, and the bill favors farmers using organic techniques. Those technologies have a price delta at the grocery store. Organics are much more expensive, 2 to 3 times, more expensive than non-organic produce. Guess who that impacts the most?
Effectively, a politician has used the laws to manipulate the free markets markets to favor a more expensive minority of the farming community. The Organics! And they criminalized other farmers using tried and true, safe and effective, inexpensive and high yielding technology. It was all done on a lie. A lie that says, tried and true farming is dangerous because it uses GMO and pesticide technology. Questionable reasoning? Or a deliberate effort to destroy a local industry? Sustainable?
It was never about GMO’s, which is a distraction away from the real subject of this law, corporate hatred. It’s in author’s own remarks which she accuses the Federal government of conspiring with mega-food corporations to poison people. I still don’t understand this logic by these people. I’ve lived around the world and seen how other countries food production and quality control works. Nothing compares to how rigorously the regulations on food production, exportation and importation works on these islands. It is fanatical!
That doesn’t matter anymore, because of faux environ-champions of the world, will see to it that your rights to a free planet are restricted, and regulated, to the point of economic oblivion. How does this this meet the standard definition of sustainability? How does this help sustain a fragile economy?
I had always thought the idea of sustainability was to maintain the environment and grow the economy! The land takes care of the people, and the people take care of the land. That has never changed until now. Bill 113 does change the economics of the Big Island’s Farming economy. It seems neither the Mayor, the Council, nor the Bill’s supporters, cared to examine the economic impact of Bill 113.
The Progressive philosophy of the common good, selectively discriminates against anything that does not conform to its vision of a global utopia. I call it the “Walt Disney” view of the world where people’s understanding of where vegetables come from is a grocery store!
Those that are like the celebrity 1%’er’s, the Hollywood types, that lend their socialist rich loud mouth voice into places where they don’t belong. They are not from here and they are not farmers. Oh sure, they might have a plot of land with some vegetables growing, but are they running a business to sell their vegetables? No, they are not farmers, and they never will be.
It’s like when government entities make decisions about your healthcare, putting themselves between you and your doctor. So why would anyone want to allow the government to get between you and your grocer or farmer? The government assumes that you, the consumer, are at risk by the farmers products.
That’s why we have a FDA, a USDA, an EPA and a host of other Federal government protections regarding the food production and safety. Now add more layers of regulations by the State and County and you have a tightly coupled set of protections for food safety. This, despite the huge cost of maintaining these regulations, food safety has been sustainable up until now. Just busted up a bit by government over-regulations.
The Bill’s author states in her reason that the government has an “absurd agricultural policy that GMO foods and crops are “substantially equivalent” to the corresponding non-GMO crops.”
Then she goes on to make more absurd claims about the health consequences by lack of any regulations. Which simply is not true! It’s a lie! And like Obama lied about Obamacare, this is also a law of consequences which will impact every island resident. I suspect the author, and like her followers of this misguided law, do still consider Obamacare the promise of free healthcare, as it was always touted to be. But we now know that was also a lie. It goes back to the sustainability model, it neither benefits the planet, nor its human inhabitants.
As I posted before, the Progressive does not consider humans as a part of the Sustainability equation. Therefore, the value placed on the human’s life and wellbeing is not in consideration. The whole question of a sustainable lifestyle does, and should, include a comfortable standard of living. However, that quality of life will be in jeopardy because of Bill 113. It’s punishing the people of these islands because some people don’t like corporations, so everyone must suffer because of it.
Equality and Social Justice is the Progressive platform. So if it must be, then its equal suffering for all, it shall be! It’s social engineering madness which uses fear and loathing as the churn to rancid butter. The poison butter used to spread onto baked breads using GMO grains and flour imported into the islands. The same GMO grown vegetables which will imported into the islands and lining the shelves of the big box stores. Volume will bring lower prices than the local organic grower can compete with. That’s just simple economics. So change the laws to punish the farmer that uses the evil corporate products to make a living for themselves. That’s the answer! That will show those evil corporations whose boss!
Exasperating prices at the grocery stores will have negative impact upon consumers and farmers alike. This hardly creates a sustainable economy. When the tools that other farmers use elsewhere, are prohibited for use here on this island, then that is an economic disadvantage to the local farmer. The reasons given against the use GMO products have never been proven. Safety in both the end product and the production has always been paramount within the farming community. By taking choices away from the farmer trying to produce a product that is proven to be safe, is counter intuitive.
It seems ever since the Progressive left has gained power, in almost all levels of government; Federal, State and county, the end result has been a struggling economy and more nanny state regulations. That’s what accompanies the Progressive model of government. I call it mob justice because it doesn’t employ common sense logic. It does, however, use fear, uncertainty and doubt, to craft legislation that soothes the anger of a deliberately misinformed electorate.
“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction” - Newton Law of Motion also applies to how fairly the government works for its people. As we wait to see what the eventual outcome of Bill 113 actions will be, we can be certain of the reaction. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to predict what the outcome will be.
Farsightedness, is not a term I would use to describe Bill 113. Because if it was, it would have never passed. Common sense would have prevailed, but it seems that crop is also low on cultivation these days.
Big Mahalo’s to Chair J Yoshimoto, Dennis “Fresh”Onishi, and Greggor Ilagan for voting “NO” against this travesty of justice. We farmers appreciate your support and representation. Mahalo!
What’s For Dinner?
GMO Hot Dog on GMO Bread with GMO Baked Beans and GMO Beer