Less than a year ago, the Delta and Pine Land Company, a U.S. cotton seed firm, announced it had received a joint patent with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture on a technique that genetically disables the capacity for plants
to produce seeds that will germinate.
Since the announcement, critics of the USDA and the corporate agricultural
multinationals have been predicting that the technology will be used to
control the country’s food supply. Not only that, they say, but in a worst-
case scenario, the technology could be used as a weapon to control elements of the population who may resist such concepts as world government. However, some industry experts who are equally critical of the technology and the agricultural corporations, say that the idea of using terminator seeds to accomplish such a grand scheme are possible but — at this point — unlikely.
The terminator technology incorporates a method of biogenetic engineering
that turns off the reproductive processes of plants so that the seed
produced by the plant is sterile. Farmers who use this seed would not be
able to collect seed from their own crop for the following year’s planting,
and would be forced to buy new seed every season.
By the end of last year, the Rural Advancement Foundation International
(RAFI), a civil organization that pays particular attention to the
patenting of biogenetic resources, came out against the technology,
but determined that, so far, the
method has only proven effective for tobacco and cotton. However, the RAFI
said the patent covers all crops, and the Delta and Pine Land Company is
planning to develop the technology for a much broader range of crops after
the year 2000.
Michael T. Seigel, SVD,
writing for the Service of Documentation and Study, a Rome-based
Catholic theologian group, is worried about the economic impact the
technology will have on both domestic and third world farmers if they are
forced to purchase new seed annually.
In the Third World, he said, “poor farmers grow 15 percent to 20 percent of the world’s food, and they directly feed at least 1.4 billion people — 100 million in Latin America, 300 million in Africa, and 1 billion in Asia. These farmers … continue to produce food in this way, saving the seed from their
best plants every year to plant the following season.”
The most important aspect of this new technology, Seigel wrote, is that up
until now, all new agricultural biotechnology was designed to enhance, not
limit, production.
“The sole purpose of this ‘terminator’ technology is market control,” he
wrote. “It adds nothing of value to the seed. Its sole purpose is to make
farmers ever more dependent on the seed companies. In fact it is a
biological form of built-in obsolescence.”
A source who spoke directly with WorldNetDaily on the condition of
anonymity agreed with Mr. Seigel’s conclusion that the technology could in fact be used to control markets, but he said he didn’t think that was possible
“right now.”
The source, who is the owner of a Midwest feed and seed research firm and
who must also buy his seed from one of the few corporate agricultural
conglomerates still in existence, said that while the technology was a new
development in farming, “I’m not convinced it’s going to be as big as
everyone says.”
“Even if this thing clicks, we’re still five to six years away from
complete adoption.”
He added that he believes before the seed companies adopt this technology,
“they’re going to look long and hard at it first,” because “if we (farmers)
have a couple of bad years and they (the big seed corporations) lose their
base seed production, they won’t have any stores to fall back on.”
The thing to remember, however, is that seeds are a “low profit venture,”
which is why some of the world’s largest suppliers like Monsanto may be
interested in the terminator technology. “Making farmers come back to them
every year to buy seeds would boost their sales,” the source said.
Farmers are struggling already “and they know it,” the source said. But,
he added, despite the desire to boost profits, most farmers would likely
pressure the seed companies not to adopt the new technology. “If the big
corporations did it anyway, then you’d see farmers by the droves quitting
the business and moving on,” thus costing the agricultural multinationals
“billions a year.”
Instead, the source said, more and more farmers will “simply start saving
back more and more of their seeds every year, to cut their costs as much as
possible.”
“Southern farmers, and especially cotton growers, are notorious for saving
seeds,” the source said. “People like Monsanto will tell you that most
farmers are not saving their seeds anymore, but I’m here to tell you that’s
not the case.”
“They’re saving them,” he emphasized.
One other reason the source discounts the theory that the government and
big seed companies would use the technology to control the flow of food, is
because of the sheer number of sources of seed production.
“One major company would have to contract with each seed producer to
produce seeds with the terminator gene,” he said. He admitted that could probably be done because “they (the large agricultural companies) probably have the power to squeeze out any producer who didn’t go along with the plan.”
But, he said, that’s a logistical nightmare, and he admitted that it would
be most difficult to keep such a large undertaking out of the public’s eye.
“In cases like that, the public’s outrage would indeed be heard,” and “the
corporations and the politicians would have a hard time explaining why they
were trying to control the food market and risk starving everyone to
death.”
“You don’t want to be a politician in this country who was partially
responsible for messing with Mr. and Mrs. America’s food supply,” he added.
Clearly, however, others have contemplated the kind of power that could be
wielded with the total control of a society’s food source. Fabian Socialist
Bertrand Russell described how food could be used to control entire
populations in his 1953 book, The Impact of Science on Society. He wrote,
“A scientific world society can not be stable unless there is a world
government….This authority should deal out the world’s food to the
various nations in proportion to their population at the time of the
establishment of the authority. If any nation subsequently increased its
population, it should not on that account receive any more food.”
