Environmentalism should be a serious movement: important, vital, and a harbinger of innovations. […]
…
Let’s look at some examples of inaccuracy or falsity that have characterized a certain ecological thought for decades. Does the Greenpeace campaign which claims that bees must be saved (and therefore we must finance those who fight for their salvation) make sense? This advertising campaign is a good example of the regime of simplification (and in some cases falsification) to which we are often subjected when we read about agricultural matters.
But let’s get to the devil: GMOs. They deserved at least applause and a deeper analysis. It is worth summarizing the issue, now with the dust settled, to understand how inaccuracies, conscious lies, ignorance in specific matters, have culturally and politically blocked these innovative tools. […]
Why has such a sustainable, effective practice been abjured by so many?
[E]cologists really like to suggest, seduce, scare, precisely conserve, so in the end we get bogged down in nonsense and here often, in the swamp, lazy, with little preparation to face the conflict, culturally and politically we die.Related on the SLP
[Editor’s Note: This article was translated from Italian and edited for clarity.]
