The Possibility of Famine

[shaberon]

Posted by Ewan (here)
We should know better than to repeat the obvious errors of a 1,000 years ago or more. The situation in Ireland needs a lot more investigation to understand that in such a short comment as disappearing - though you are correct, it was a precarious time.

Yes -- the vulnerability there was monocropping.

By contrast, medieval Peruvian potato farms were built in individual terraces, using about twelve varieties in multiple colors. If a blight affected one kind, chances are that others would resist.

Another thing about Ireland is that the British found they could alter the birth rate by changing the price of bread a few pence.

That's like a precursor or trial run for everything up to the "ration of calories" in Gaza.

Our vision of America was to be an open door for the disaffected Irish -- and although it was, that didn't help everybody.

Incidentally, I imagine you are aware that modern fertilizers are effectively killing the very soils they are supposed to be boosting?

Yes, I file it in the category of cheap oil along with Rockefeller medicine. These are the reasons America is able to produce a lot of "extra" people, such as myself. I'm more of an industrial by-product than part of a growing herd.


Considering why this less-than-ideal petroleum dependency is so widespread, among the modern institutions, the IMF is there to install broad government controls on social spending and any other programs you can do. They have to serve the interests of the United States, or your assets will be confiscated, or you will be attacked.

The World Bank more specifically manages development, particularly what you can and can't do with agriculture. Similarly to the IMF, it is to increase dependence, not independence. This is a recent remark from Prof. Hudson on its operations:

I’m glad that Richard mentioned so many people of our generation who studied economics focused on development. I worked for the United Nations for three years in the 1970s with the United Nations Institute for Training and Research. And what I found very quickly was that there was one group of these development economists studied how do we prevent development from occurring in a way that does not favor the United States.

Well, the World Bank was the leader in fighting against development. They published a report called Partners in Development that I reviewed, and I included that in my book, Superimperialism, called Partners in Backwardness. The World Bank made sure that there would be no loans for any country that was using its agriculture to produce its own food and thereby compete with American agriculture. I wrote my master’s dissertation and had a whole chapter in superimperialism on how every economic country review by the World Bank said you have to have essentially what the United States did under Franklin Roosevelt with the Agricultural Adjustment Act.

You have to protect family farming. You have to develop public marketing services, public agricultural extension services to provide seed. You have to develop trade relations and support food dependency. Every actual behavior of the World Bank was to prevent exactly this because it would not reflect American national security.

That’s why the heads of the World Bank were heads of the military, starting with John J. McCloy, the first president, and peaking with Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense. The whole perversion of development theory to dovetail into U.S. national security of control sort of perverted the whole idea of development to saying development means you let American corporations come in and buy control of your oil, mining, forests, and other raw materials, and you have to privatize your public utilities and public infrastructure.

And that’s how you develop. You let American financial companies and firms come in and develop. The whole idea of development economics was hijacked. And at the United Nations, when I made these points, the bankers who were funding the Club of Rome, Agnelli, I think, and some others, insisted that they would pull out all funding for UNITAR if they didn’t fire me. So I mean, this was quite explicit at the time. The whole idea of the Club of Rome, there’s too much population of non-white people in the world, of less developed countries.

That is inefficient. That’s not how developed you have to have population control. And the irony is that it was the Catholic Church that popularized most of my criticism of the World Bank in what became liberation theology. And my first books were published by the Catholic Church on this precisely because of attacking this population theory that was part of the distortion of the whole development economics that essentially led to that subject no longer being of much interest to today’s economic students.

[Antagenet]

If a major global famine is indeed in store, the plan (I was told) was the following:

Billions would die.
Only the most able, most aware, most resilient and most well-prepared would make it through.
After all this, by eugenic 'natural selection' (a) the human population would be greatly reduced, (b) the survivors would be much easier to control and corral, and (c) the resulting human genetic quality would be raised.

My Question Is: If only the most able will survive, then how will they be much easier to control? Since they will be the most resilient and probably some of the smartest? Woudlnt this be a group of people harder to control? Just because of a reduced population? Hmmm... reduced population means more places to hide and not be found. ;-)

[grapevine]

I planted some dwarf fruit trees just over two years ago, mostly in very large pots. The reason for this was because I live in a small east facing townhouse, where the sun comes into the garden at around 10am and then is gone, over the roof, at around 2pm, leaving the garden mostly in shade. I've been able to put the pots in the "best" positions through watching the sun's path. Fruit trees don't fruit for around 5 years, although one apple tree in particular has been quite abundant but the apples are too large and heavy for the branches atm and have been heavily pruned. I'm learning as I go along.

Before getting the fruit trees I wrote to our local MP asking for more fruit trees to be grown in common ground, Lambeth being one of the poorer boroughs in London. I recalled my mother telling me that everyone grew food/fruit in war time and nearly everyone had a well in their garden and some reared chickens, and this got me looking around my immediate vicinty. I recently found a heavily laden apricot tree and another plum tree, also full of fruit, much of which had fallen and been trodden into the pavement. In retrospect this is probably why there aren't many fruit trees in common ground (although these were in people's front gardens). By the time a food shortage is finally felt, most people will have lost opportunities to plant fruit and veg and will probably turn to scrumping, at which time I might bring the pots in and get some daylight light bulbs.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Antagenet (here)
If a major global famine is indeed in store, the plan (I was told) was the following:

Billions would die.
Only the most able, most aware, most resilient and most well-prepared would make it through.
After all this, by eugenic 'natural selection' (a) the human population would be greatly reduced, (b) the survivors would be much easier to control and corral, and (c) the resulting human genetic quality would be raised.

My Question Is: If only the most able will survive, then how will they be much easier to control? Since they will be the most resilient and probably some of the smartest? Wouldn't this be a group of people harder to control? Just because of a reduced population? Hmmm... reduced population means more places to hide and not be found. ;-)

This is exactly what I was told, too. (And yes, I had the same question)

[grapevine]

Provisions with long use by dates

I was amazed to see a use by date of August 2028 on the pack of Halloumi I opened yesterday and asked chatgpt for a list of other long food expiry dates which you may find of interest (especially the white rice :/). Presumably if frozen immediately then the relevant date can be added on when it's defrosted . . .

Chat gpt list:
"Here are some of the champions:

Honey 🍯 – The undisputed winner. Proper honey has been found in ancient Egyptian tombs that is still edible after 3,000 years. It may crystallise, but that's not spoilage. Warm the jar gently and it becomes runny again.

White rice – Kept dry and in an airtight container, it can last 25–30 years or even longer. Brown rice doesn't, because its natural oils go rancid after about 6–12 months.

Dried pasta – Usually has a best-before date of 2–3 years, but if kept bone dry it's often perfectly usable for much longer.

Canned foods – Things like beans, tomatoes, tuna and corned beef can remain safe for many years beyond their best-before dates if the can is undamaged. Quality may decline, but safety is often unaffected. (Never use a can that's bulging, leaking or badly rusted.)

Freeze-dried foods – The meals sold for expeditions or emergency supplies often have shelf lives of 25–30 years.

Salt – Effectively lasts forever. It's a mineral, so it can't spoil.

Sugar – White sugar also lasts indefinitely if it stays dry. It may go hard in lumps but is still fine.

Soy sauce – Thanks to its high salt content, unopened bottles can keep for years.

Hard spirits (whisky, gin, vodka) – Unopened bottles can last for decades. Once opened, they're still safe for years, though the flavour slowly changes.

Then there are foods that seem immortal but aren't quite:

Peanut butter – About 1–2 years unopened.
Maple syrup – Years unopened; once opened, it should be refrigerated.
Chocolate – Often several years, although it develops that harmless white "bloom."

One of my favourite examples is hardtack, the flour-and-water biscuits sailors took to sea. Properly kept, they could last for decades. They became so hard that soldiers supposedly joked they were more dangerous as weapons than as food! One old joke was: "The biscuits were so hard you had to soak them in coffee before you could hit someone with them." Another was that if you dropped one on the deck, you'd chip the deck rather than the biscuit.

The less amusing part was that they often came with extra protein in the form of weevils. Sailors would tap the biscuits on the table to encourage the insects to crawl out before eating them. Some reportedly ate them anyway, reasoning that the weevils were the freshest part! 🤢

It reminds me of another wonderful food story. During the Antarctic expeditions of Ernest Shackleton and Robert Falcon Scott, tins of food left behind over a century ago have been found in remarkably good condition because of the freezing climate. Some have even been analysed and found to be surprisingly well preserved—though no one's recommending them for lunch! "