Peak Food: Blaming the Victims高峰期的食物：指责受害者
By通过 Nafeez Ahmed nafeez艾哈迈德 | I’ve already written about this in previous posts under the ‘hidden holocaust’ theme, but am prompted to re-address this issue given the way it’s been dealt with by mainstream media and associated ‘experts’. |我已经写这在以往的职位，根据『隐藏的大屠杀'的主题，但我提示重新正视这个问题给予这样的的处理，由主流媒体和相关的'专家' 。
In today’s在今天的 Independent 独立 we see an eye-opening article revealing that amidst what is described as a series of “global food shortages”, a new “government-backed report” shows that “the British public” annually throws away “4.4 million apples, 1.6 million bananas, 1.3 million yoghurt pots, 660,000 eggs, 550,000 chickens, 300,000 packs of crisps and 440,000 ready meals.我们看到大开眼界开放的文章透露，中，什么是被形容为一系列的“全球粮食短缺” ，一个新的“政府支持的报告”表明， “英国公众” ，每年抛弃“ 4400000苹果，香蕉， 1600000 ， 1300000酸奶罐， 660000鸡蛋，鸡55.0万， 30.0万包crisps和440000准备饭菜。 And for the first time government researchers have established that most of the food waste is made up of completely untouched food products – whole chickens and chocolate gateaux that lie uneaten in cupboards and fridges before being discarded” — adding up to “a record £10b” every year.并为第一次，政府的研究人员已经确定，大部分的食物渣滓，是取得了完全原封不动的食物产品-全鸡和巧克力G ateaux可整装待发“对此，在橱柜和冰箱前，被丢弃” -加入到“创纪录的£ 1 0 B条”每年。
And that’s just us Brits.这只是我们英国人。 Imagine what the totals are for the Western world combined: Scary and revealing stuff that makes the word “overconsumption” seem like a gross understatement.试想总数是为西方世界的结合：可怕的，揭示的东西，使单词“过度”好像总轻描淡写。
But despite the shock value of such important revelations, I’m increasingly concerned at the way in which the food crisis is being portrayed.但是，尽管休克的价值如此重要的启示，我越来越关注的是，该以何种方式的粮食危机正在描绘。 The Independent goes on to explain the causes of the food crisis as follows: “… millions of the world’s poor face food shortages caused by rising populations, droughts and increased demand for land for biofuels, which have sparked riots and protests from Haiti to Mauritania, and from Yemen to the Philippines.” 独立的推移解释的原因，粮食危机如下： “ … …以百万计的世界上的穷人，面对粮食短缺所造成的人口的上升，旱灾和增加对土地的需求，为生物燃料，已引发暴动和抗议，从海地到毛里塔尼亚，并从也门到菲律宾的“ 。
So the food crisis comes down to three things:因此，粮食危机归结为三件事：
1) rising populations (presumably not us in the advanced West, but rather those Third World crazies breeding like rabbits despite being so poor) 1 ）人口的上升（假设而不是我们在先进的西方，而是那些第三世界的疯子一样，家兔育种尽管既然如此穷人）
2) droughts (which may be exacerbated by climate change but in any case often occur naturally and therefore we purportedly can’t do much about) 2 ）干旱（可能是因气候变化而加剧，但在任何情况下往往是自然发生，因此，我们在据称是不能做的不多）
3) and the drive from energy corporations for investment in biofuels. 3 ）和干劲，从能源企业的投资在生物燃料。
Indeed, according to the British government’s new chief scientific adviser, Professor John Beddington speaking at a government conference two months ago:事实上，根据英国政府的新的首席科学顾问，教授约翰beddington出席一个政府会议在两个月前：
“price rises in staples such as rice, maize and wheat would continue because of increased demand caused by population growth and increasing wealth in developing nations . “价格上涨，在主食如大米，玉米和小麦将继续，因为需求增加所造成的人口增长和增加财富，在开发中国家 。 He also said that climate change would lead to pressure on food supplies because of decreased rainfall in many areas and crop failures related to climate.他还表示， 气候变化会导致压力的粮食供应，由于雨量减少，在许多领域和农作物歉收有关气候。 ‘ The agriculture industry needs to '农业产业化需要
double its food production, using less water than today.’ ” 双其粮食生产，用较少的水比今天 “ 。
So again, population and economic growth in the ‘developing nations’, plus climate change, are to blame, and can only be addressed by doubling food production using less water (technologically impossible for all intents and purposes, but we’ll come back to that).再次，人口和经济增长，在'开发中国家' ，加上气候变化，是咎由自取，只能加以解决增加一倍，粮食生产用较少的水（在技术上是不可能的所有意图和目的，但我们会回来认为） 。 It’s Them again — too many of Them, wanting More.它的他们再次-太多，他们想更多。
As if to emphasise the point, we hear in the same piece that:好像是为了强调这一点，我们所听到的，在同一块：
“Hilary Benn, the environment secretary, said at the conference that the world’s population was expected to grow from 6.2bn today to 9.5bn in less than 50 years’ time. “希拉里本，环境局局长说，在这次会议上指出，世界人口预计将增长从6.2bn今天9.5bn在不到50年的时间。 ‘How are we going to feed everybody?’ he asked .” '我们如何去饲料大家呢？ '他问 “ 。
Only a rhetorical question of course.只是一个修辞的问题，当然。 Sorry to break it t’ya folks, but ‘feeding everybody’ has never really been one of the state’s major concerns.很抱歉，打破它t'ya乡亲，但'喂养大家'从来就没有真正的一个国家的重大关切。 That’s why “Each tonne of wheat and sugar from the UK is sold on international markets at an average price of 40% and 60% below the cost of production respectively (ie,这就是为什么“每公吨小麦和糖来自英国出售的是在国际市场上平均售价为40 ％和60 ％ ，低于生产成本分别为（即， it is dumped 这是倾倒 )”, thus undercutting local farmers across the South, who thus lose any semblance of agricultural-independence they may have once had (ie the ability to feed their own people), thus becoming subject to the whims of the global food market, manipulated through speculation in the interests of Northern investors and consumers. ） “ ，从而削弱了当地农民的全国南，谁因此失去了任何的假象农业台独他们可能曾经有过（即有能力养活自己的人民） ，从而成为受到的冲动全球粮食市场，通过操纵投机在利益的北部投资者和消费者。
But the important point for now is that as far as Hilary Benn is concerned, it’s clear that the cause of the problem is “their” population growth.但重要的一点，现在是，据希拉里本而言，它的明确表示，问题的原因是“他们”人口的增长。
Later in the article, Professor Beddington is cited pointing out that global grain stores are currently at the lowest levels ever, just 40 days from running out.后来在文章中，教授beddington是引述他指出，全球粮食店目前处于历来最低的水平，只要40天，从不多了。 He again emphasises the question of food production: “I am only nine weeks into the job, so don’t yet have all the answers, but it is clear that science and research to increase the efficiency of agricultural production per unit of land is critical .”他再次强调的问题，粮食生产： “我只有9个星期到工作，所以尚未有所有的答案，但很明显， 科学和研究以提高其效率，农业生产每单位土地是关键 “ 。
According to Beddington, food security is the “elephant in the room” that politicians must face up to quickly.据beddington ，粮食安全是“大象在房间内”的政治家必须面对迅速。 In reality, the “elephant in the room” goes far deeper than the surface issues scratched at lamely by the government, and sits in the heart of global food production .在现实中， “大象在房间内”远远超过更深的表面划伤的问题，在lamely ，由政府和设在的心脏， 全球粮食生产 。 Some of Beddington’s observations show that he is dimly aware of this problem.一些beddington的意见表明，他是dimly意识到这一问题。 He understands that production needs to be increased drastically.他明白生产的需要，必须大幅增加。 But his solution is a technological one, “science and research” in order to maximise “efficiency” so we can produce faster and better to meet escalating global demand.但他的解决方案是一个技术之一， “科学和研究” ，以最大的“效率” ，让我们可以产生更快，更好地满足不断升级的全球需求。 This is unlikely to happen.这是不大可能发生。 Beddington knows it. beddington知道。 Benn knows it.本知道。 The supermarket chains know it.连锁超级市场知道这一点。
From this conventional analysis of the food crisis, we are not left with many solutions.从这个常规分析粮食危机，我们不走与很多的解决办法。 We may, however, pick among the following: 1) the proliferation and prolongation of droughts due to climate change means that we need to slow down our CO2 emissions by introducing ‘market incentives’ (ie big taxes) targeted largely at consumers, who are blamed for having no regard for the size of their individual carbon footprints.我们可能会，不过，挑选其中以下几点： 1 ）的扩散和延长的干旱，由于气候变化意味着我们需要放缓，我们的二氧化碳排放量，引入市场诱因' （即大税）有针对性的，主要是消费者，谁是指责没有考虑到的大小，他们对单个碳的脚印。 transfering to alternative renewable energies is, for some odd reason, irrelevant.转移到其他可再生能源的是，对于一些奇怪的理由，无关宏旨。 2) reducing population growth in developing countries to decrease demand for food (nothing at all to do with 2 ）降低人口增长是在发展中国家，以减少对粮食的需求（什么都做 NSSM 200 nssm 200 , of course). ，当然） 。 3) go easy on the biofuels (but fail to propose investment in other 3 ）去很容易就生物燃料（但不建议投资于其他 viable alternative energy sources 可行的替代能源 ). ） 。 4) pray day and night that Science will somehow generate a technological miracle of agricultural production. 4 ）祈祷，日夜奋战，科学将在某种程度上产生一个技术的奇迹农业生产。
Obviously, none of these ’solutions’ seems to really offer a way out for the food crisis — and that’s because the analysis is fundamentally flawed.很明显，所有这些解决方案' ，似乎真的提供了一条出路，为粮食危机-这是因为分析是根本站不住脚的。 It’s not completely wrong, it just misses out half the picture, and so comes up with a false diagnosis of what’s actually gone wrong.它不是完全错误的，它只是错过了一半的图片，所以来了一个虚假的诊断是什么的，其实乱子。 The result is that the institutions that require urgent re-structuring are being absolved.结果是该机构的迫切需要重新构建现正开脱。 The government, the state, and the network of giant multinational corporations that govern global agribusiness, are excused of any culpability.政府，国家和网络巨头跨国公司执政全球农业综合企业，是免除任何责任。 The cause of the crisis, we keep hearing is, WE, THE PEOPLE!危机的原因，我们不断听说是，我们人民的！ It’s the developing nations, who just won’t stop breeding, dammit.它的发展中的国家，谁只是不会停止繁殖， dammit 。 It’s us Western consumers, who won’t stop eating and throwing a third of our food away.这是我们西方消费者，谁也不会停止进食和投掷的三分之一，我们的食物。 It’s everyone except the state-corporate complex that controls the food industry.它的每一个人，除国家企业的复杂的控制食品工业。
I’m not suggesting for a moment that you and I are NOT culpable.我并非暗示一个时刻，你和我都没有罪责。 Of course we are.我们当然。 We do throw away tonnes, literally, of food.我们扔掉吨，从字面上看，食物。 We do, each of us, have large carbon footprints that we should try to reduce in our own ways.我们做什么，我们每一个人，有大量的碳足迹，我们应该尽量减少在以自己的方式。 Populations are increasing.人口正不断增加。 But the question is this: are these factors the fundamental causes of the current global food crisis?但问题是这样的：是这些因素的根本原因，目前全球的粮食危机呢？ Or are they exacerbating factors that are accentuating and intensifying the impact of the food crisis?他们或恶化的因素是加剧和深化的影响，粮食危机？ Following mainstream news coverage of food shortages, one would be forgiven for believing that rising food prices are all because of you and me, the public, the general consumer.以下主流新闻报道的粮食短缺，一会原谅，以为不断增加的粮食价格，都是因为你和我，市民，一般消费者。 We have been thoroughly pathologised.我们已彻底pathologised 。 And the British government, with its eye-opening study of how much food the British consumer chucks away without thinking, is complicit in this pathologisation.和英国政府，其眼开放的研究有多少食物，英国消费者夹头，毋须思想，是共犯在这pathologisation 。
Why is that the government-backed report discussed in today’s Independent , says nothing about the institutions who are primarily responsible for food wastage, the supermarkets, the multinational food chains?这是为什么政府支持的报告，讨论了在今天的独立 ，说什么谁该机构主要负责食物的浪费，超级市场，跨国公司的食物链？ If the government is genuinely concerned about food wastage in this country, why won’t they do something about the fact reported by the same newspaper in February, that:如果政府是真正关心粮食浪费在这个国家，为什么他们会不会做一些有关的事实报道，由同一报纸在二月，即：
“ “ Retailers generate 1.6 million tonnes of food waste each year… 零售商产生160万吨的食物渣滓，每年… An influential watchdog, the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC), will condemn targets set by the Government’s waste-reduction programme as ‘unambitious and lacking urgency’. 一个有影响力的看门狗，可持续发展委员会署（ SDC ） ， 将谴责的目标，政府所订的废物减少计划，作为' unambitious ，缺乏紧迫感。 It will also say multi-buy promotions are helping to fuel waste and obesity in Britain. 它还将说，多买促销活动，帮助燃料浪费和肥胖在英国。 Speaking to The Independent on Sunday ahead of the report’s publication on Saturday, Tim Lang, SDC commissioner, said it was ‘ludicrous’ that the Government had not pressured retailers into setting tougher targets to cut waste. 在谈到向独立于周日之前，该报告的出版对周六，添郎，南区区议会专员 ， 说这是'可笑的' ，政府并没有施加压力，零售商到设定更严格的目标，以削减浪费。
Three years ago, the government-funded Waste and Resources Action Programme (Wrap) left it up to supermarkets to find voluntary ’solutions to food waste’ in an agreement dubbed the Courtauld Commitment. 三年前，由政府资助的废物及资源行动计划（总结）离开了超级市场找到自愿的解决方案，以食物渣滓'了一项协议，被称为courtauld的承诺。 ‘The Government is frankly not using its leverage adequately. '政府是坦白不使用其杠杆充分。 It really should toughen up on Courtauld, which must be enforced because this is ludicrous,’ said Mr Lang, who is also professor of food policy at City University, London. 是否真的要锻炼了对courtauld ，这必须得到执行，因为这是可笑的， '郎先生说，谁是还教授粮食政策在城市大学，伦敦。
The 18-month study, which found that ‘too many supermarket practices are still unhealthy, unjust and unsustainable’, said Wrap should adopt a ‘more aspirational approach to reducing waste in food retail by setting longer-term targets and [supporting] a culture of zero waste’… 18个月的研究，发现'太多，超市的做法仍然是不健康，不公正和不可持续的' ，说的总结应该采取'更期望的做法，以减少废物在食品零售设定长远的目标和[支持]文化零浪费' … …
A separate study by Imperial College for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, found that supermarkets preferred to throw away food that was approaching its sell-by date rather than mark it down in price.” 另一项研究是由帝国学院，该署为环境，食品和农村事务部发现，超级市场，宁愿扔掉的食物，这是接近其出售日期，而非马克下来，在价格“ 。
So three months after being hit over the head by the Sustainable Development Commission, the government’s waste reduction programme completely ignores the warnings that supermarket profit-maximisation policies are not only directly generating billions of pounds of waste by dumping good food, they are encouraging consumers through excessive advertising, multi-buy offers, and refusal to slash prices on older foods, to also buy excess food they don’t need, a third of which they dump in turn.因此， 3个月后，被击中超过头部的可持续发展委员会，政府的减少废物计划，完全无视警告说，超市的利润- maximisation政策，不仅直接产生数十亿英镑的废物倾倒良好的食物，他们是令人鼓舞的消费者通过过多的广告，多买优惠，并拒绝降价对老年人的食品，还购买过剩的食物他们不需要，其中三分之一，他们转储在好转。 Instead, the government simply blames consumers.反之，政府简单地归咎于消费者。 Period.期。
Don’t penalise Profit, nor Power.不惩罚的利润，也没有权力。 Pathologise People. pathologise人。
The corporate-biased law doesn’t help either, because: “The scale of the wastage from supermarkets, food processors, wholesalers and restaurants is公司偏见的法律没有帮助，因为： “大规模的流失，从超市，食品加工，批发商和餐馆 not known 不知道 , because many companies refuse to make their data public, citing commercial confidentiality.” In other words, we don’t even know the real scale of corporate food wastage. ，因为许多公司的垃圾，使他们的数据公开为由，商业机密。 “换句话说，我们甚至不知道真正的规模企业食物的浪费。 Worse, the government regularly does the same thing — here’s an example: “In the past 10 months, the government’s food intervention board更糟的是，政府经常做同样的事-这是一个例子： “在过去1 0个月，政府的干预粮食局 dumped almost 30,000 tonnes 倾倒近3万吨 of fresh vegetables and fruit which had been withdrawn from the market to guarantee farm prices.”新鲜蔬菜和水果已撤出市场，以保证农产品价格“ 。
So the problem is far more complex, rooted in a consumerist culture that is tied to a political economy being deliberately sustained by those institutions with the most to gain from this entrenched structure.因此，问题是复杂得多，植根于1消费文化是联系在一起的政治经济正在持续，刻意由这些机构与最从中获益，这根深蒂固的结构。 The government has no interest in transforming that political economy.政府有没有兴趣在转变，政治经济。 So the result is an insistence on inspecting only half the picture, ignoring the role of the global corporate food industry.因此，其结果是，坚持检查，只有一半的图片，无视的作用，全球食品工业企业。
Driven by capitalist imperatives for short-term profit maximisation and long-term cost-minimisation, global agribusiness has established an international food production system that is, basically, dying.驱动资本主义所必需的短期盈利及maximisation长期成本减少，全球农业已成立了一个国际食物生产系统是，基本上，死亡。
Most of the Earth’s fertile land is already now being used for food production.大部分的地球肥沃的土地已经是现在被用作粮食生产。 Scientists at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2005 reported that “there is now科学家们在威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校在2005年报告说， “现在 little room 余地不大 for further agricultural expansion.” One of the scientists, Dr Navin Ramankutty, points out: “The real question is, how can we continue to produce food from the land while preventing negative environmental consequences such as deforestation, water pollution and soil erosion?” Or, more bluntly, how are we going to keep producing food if our production-system continues to destroy the very means to produce food?为进一步扩大农业“之一，科学家，医生纳ramankutty ，指出： ”真正的问题是，我们如何能继续产生的食物从土地，同时防止消极环境后果的，如森林砍伐，水污染和水土流失“ ？或者，更直截了当地说，我们如何去保持生产食品，如果我们的生产系统继续破坏非常手段产生的食物呢？
It’s not that the Earth can’t produce the food.这并不是说地球上不能生产粮食。 Its that corporate agribusiness can’t produce the food.其认为， 农业产业化企业不能生产粮食。 In fact, as I’ve warned previously, it has been failing to produce the food since the 1990s, during which grain production has事实上，正如我已经警告以前，它一直未能出示食品20世纪90年代以来，在此期间粮食生产 increasingly slowed 越来越放慢 . 。 The frenzied application of fertilisers and other modern agricultural practices served to temporarily escalate production, but simultaneously have intensified soil erosion, destroying in years essential nutrients for crop-growth that take centuries to replace.疯狂的应用化肥和其他现代农业服务的做法，暂时升级，生产，但同时加剧了水土流失，破坏了在年必需的营养素，为作物生长需数百年来取代。 The imminent peak of world oil production, oil being the chief underpinning for industrial agricultural methods, which is either just round the corner in 2010-ish (or worse, passed in 2005) means that the global corporate food production system is up against its own physical limits.迫在眉睫的高峰期，世界石油产量，石油作为行政的支柱工业，农业的方法，这是刚轮的角落在2010年-原位杂交（或者更糟的是，通过在2005年） ，即全球性公司的粮食生产系统是对自己的物理极限。
For us to keep eating, it’s true, we have to put an end to our insane overconsumption and wastefulness.为我们继续吃，它的真实，我们要杜绝我们的疯狂的过度消费和浪费。 But there are real limits to what the consumer can do within the existing global corporate food system.但也有真正的限制是什么，消费者可以做的与现有的全球粮食系统的企业。 So we need to turn our attention to that system, and demand that it changes fundamentally, which means, of course, a wholesale transformation of our political economies in ways which rely on renewable energy resources and localised less-intensive but no less successful traditional agricultural practices.因此，我们必须把我们注意这一制度，并要求它从根本上的变化，这意味着，当然，批发转型，我们的政治经济体系的方式，依赖于可再生能源资源和局部性的少密集，但没有不太成功的传统农业的做法。 We need some kind of grassroots action, which makes our voices impossible to ignore.我们需要某种形式的基层的行动，这使得我们的声音不可能忽视的问题。 It will take time to develop, to become strong, to gather momentum.这是需要时间的发展，成为强有力的，以收集的势头。 But it needs to be done, and now.但它需要做的，和现在。 Because at current rates of declining food production and rising prices, fuelled by unscrupulous market speculation, many, many people are likely to die, not just in the South, but here too.因为在目前的利率下降的粮食生产和价格上涨，助长了不良的市场投机活动，许多，许多人死亡的可能性，不仅在南方，但在这里太。 And while this death escalates, a few at the helm of the global corporate food industry will reap unprecedented windfall profits from their deaths.而这死亡的升级，有几个在领导全球企业食品工业将获得前所未有的意外利润从他们的死亡。 That’s why real solutions aren’t being put on the table.这就是为什么真正的解决方案并没有被提上就座。 Death is regrettable, but when it comes wrapped in £££$$$, it’s not so bad…死亡是令人感到遗憾，但谈到裹在£££$$$,它不是那么差劲…
See More: 看到更多的： World News 世界新闻Have Your Say: Peak Food: Blaming the Victims 你说：繁忙的食物：指责受害者
Please note, only selected comments will be published.请注意，只有选定的评论将出版。
Or discuss this report in our our new forums 或讨论这个报告在我们的我们的新论坛
This entry was posted on Thursday, May 8th, 2008 at 8:07 pm and is filed under 此项目被张贴在周四， 2008年5月8日在下午8时07分，并提交下 General 一般 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反应，此项目通过 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 喂养。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回应 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 从你自己的网站。
Free Newsletter 免费通讯 
Related News 相关新闻
- Bush backs modified crops布什支持改良作物
- Despite bumper grain crop, 33 countries in food crisis: UN尽管丰收，粮食作物， 33个国家在粮食危机：联合国
- Food additives ‘can cause hyperactivity’食品添加剂'可导致动'
- Brown urges G8 action on food scarcity布朗敦促八国集团行动，粮食短缺
- Food Additives as Damaging as Lead食品添加剂的损害作为牵头
Email This Page To A Friend 电子邮件此页给朋友
Latest Headlines 最新的新闻标题
- Peak Food: Blaming the Victims高峰期的食物：指责受害者
- The Challenge Of Modern Slavery挑战现代奴役
- Ex-MI5 chief warns over detention前军情五处行政警告以上的拘留
- Abuse Claims Mount Against Pentagon, Contractors虐待索赔山对五角大楼，承建商
- Britain throws away £10bn of food every year英国抛弃100亿英镑的食品，每年
- Does Organic Really Mean Organic?是否有机真正的意思有机？
- The New Whopper: Burger with a Side of Spies新whopper ：汉堡与方间谍
- US/IRAQ: Pressure to Cut Costs, Troops Strains “Surge”我们/伊拉克：压力，以降低成本，部队株“风”
- Under US Law Torture is Always Illegal根据美国法律，酷刑，始终是非法的
- Suicide bomber was in Guantánamo, says US自杀炸弹是在关塔纳摩说，美国
More更多 Breaking News突发新闻
Archive 存档