by Twilight » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 10:30:09
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'P')ersonally, for a long time I was very critical of these European, and national policies; I thought that subsidizing agriculture robbed poor countries of their chances to develop and that restricting city growth robbed Europeans of the opportunity to buy (US style) home in the suburbs for relatively little money. Now with peakoil on the doorstep, I think both policies will prove to have been the right thing all along.
I agree, the Common Agricultural Policy has taken a lot of fire over the years for locking the third world out of some of the few commodity markets open to them, causing ruin, famine, the deaths of millions along the way.
But at least we retained much of the domestic agricultural skill base.
It may seem unsightly to be subsidising specialty cheese makers at the expense of Africa, but the green revolution was never renewable, and therefore it's an insurance policy we are going to have to call in. Meanwhile, the traditional humanitarian and environmental movements will have to sort out the contradictory dogma that there is enough food available to feed the world, and that this inequitably distributed surplus is sustainable. The ugly truth is the world's remaining resource base is insufficient for further development.
And so there will doubtless come a time when the subsidies will seem good value.