Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Evidence We're in a Third--or Fourth--Turning - Page 451







Post#11251 at 04-15-2007 10:52 PM by Uzi [at joined Oct 2005 #posts 2,254]
---
04-15-2007, 10:52 PM #11251
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
2,254

Quote Originally Posted by Mikebert View Post
In this case dropping the bomb would have been the wrong choice. But right or wrong the act itself was evil. That Truman did what he did and it was the right choice does not speak to his scruples, but to his wisdom.
If Truman was indeed a 'nomad' -- if such things exist -- then I doubt morality weighed heavily on his mind. Truman probably would have thought this way after the very bloody year of 1944: "What is the quickest, most efficient way of bringing this war to its conclusion?" The bombs answered that question. Truman was not Lincoln. Us Nomads are impatient managers, not the types that teach "great moral issues" courses.
"It's easy to grin, when your ship's come in, and you've got the stock market beat. But the man who's worth while is the man who can smile when his pants are too tight in the seat." Judge Smails, Caddyshack.

"Every man with a bellyful of the classics is an enemy of the human race." Henry Miller.

1979 - Generation Perdu







Post#11252 at 04-16-2007 12:55 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-16-2007, 12:55 PM #11252
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Backing up a bit here on this thread:

Quote Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54 View Post
Of late, neither organized nations fighting declared wars nor insurgent groups defying organized nations are making significant attempts to try to isolate non combatants from harm. Attacking civilian targets has become the most cost effective means of coercion, the most efficient means of achieving desired goals.

I for one would not confuse 'efficient' or 'effective' with 'moral.'
I am not even sure that targeting civilians is particularly effective much of the time. Hitler was most certainly targeting London civilians during the Blitz, and if anything it made the Brits more determined than ever to hold out against him.







Post#11253 at 04-16-2007 01:16 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-16-2007, 01:16 PM #11253
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
Of course, libertarians can -- and do -- push people around if it comes to that; one difference would be that the libertarian would recognize that he is committing a wrong in so doing (and depending on his character, participate in restitution for it),
Now that is some unique Kung Fu...didn't we have the restitution discussion some time back?







Post#11254 at 04-16-2007 01:25 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-16-2007, 01:25 PM #11254
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by salsabob View Post
I suggest any one reading this chronology (with its advantage of 60-something years of analysis) would still get the sense of the complexity of the situation that still leads to debates today of how ready the Japanese were to surrender prior to the A-bombs. Again, I would point out that any clarity we can assign today to that situation would be completely befuddled by being in the fog of the largest war ever fought on this planet. It approaches the line of ridiculous pompousness to judge the morality of any decision-making then without taking that into account.
Well, I'm happy to approach that line and play with the scenarios a bit more (though it would require me to do more reading on the subject than I'm prepared to do at this moment).

My philosophy has always been to get the best results with the least amount of violence involved. I'm in sympathy with Justin here. And I'm very, very uncomfortable with the idea that Truman might have made the decision to kill all of those civilians in an attempt to impress the Russians. That would definitely be an immoral intention, IMNSHO.

However, I am trying to keep an open mind about this. I appreciated Sean's posting about the preparations for an American invasion (and the consequences that may have occurred), and I look forward to learning a little more about the subject.







Post#11255 at 04-16-2007 01:38 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-16-2007, 01:38 PM #11255
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
And in addition to unintended consequences, we also have to bear in mind the interesting workings of reaction. I was a half-hearted Kerry supporter in 2004, but it seems obvious to me now in hindsight that Kerry would not have been as good in office as Bush precisely BECAUSE he wouldn't have been as stupid. The immediate problem of Islamic terrorism is trivial compared to some of the ones that are looming in the near future, and the approach Bush is taking to it (a swing to the extreme of nationalism) is disastrously wrong for those looming problems. It's also the wrong approach to Islamic terrorism, and we now have had a chance to see that and to provoke a national reaction against it. All leading to the Regeneracy: we have to be sufficiently stupid before we can get wise.
Brian, are you saying that having Bush in office to kick around for a few more months is going to bring about a stronger regeneracy?

I'm a bit bothered by the idea that we have to sink so much lower (and thus have that much larger a hole from which to crawl) before things finally turn around.

How much more Unraveling can we stand? I look at the scandal-a-day coming out of this White House and see a paralysis of leadership that is rather frightening. If the US is attacked in any significant way before the regeneracy has a chance to get off the ground, I see a lot of suffering in the picture.

And it doesn't help to observe that we might have had to fall pretty far the last time we went from 3T to 4T.







Post#11256 at 04-16-2007 01:48 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-16-2007, 01:48 PM #11256
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by salsabob View Post
That is why the ethical benchmark for initiating open conflict has to be considerable tougher than that for ending such conflict. Perhaps that's why those frail human beings attempting the latter should be given some benefit of the doubt? And why those attempting the former (especially with hubris) should always be given plenty of doubt.
Well, that's plenty to chew on right there....







Post#11257 at 04-16-2007 02:50 PM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
04-16-2007, 02:50 PM #11257
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Quote Originally Posted by salsabob View Post
That is why the ethical benchmark for initiating open conflict has to be considerable tougher than that for ending such conflict.
I can see this too, but then it also brings in complexities. What is initiating open conflict? OBL represents conservative Arab Islam. There is really no such things as an "Iraqi", "Jordanian" or a "Saudi" in the sense that there are Germans or English or French. They are all Arabs.
Prior to 1998 the US was making war upon Arabs in Iraq through its embargo and no-fly zone, both of which are overt acts of war. This war had produced large numbers of casualties. So what could religiously conservative Arabs morally do about America's war against Iraqi civilians? Would resorting to violence (as al Qaeda did in 1998) be initiating violence, or had the Americans already initiated violence by their war against the Iraqi people?







Post#11258 at 04-16-2007 03:12 PM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
04-16-2007, 03:12 PM #11258
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by Child of Socrates View Post
Now that is some unique Kung Fu...didn't we have the restitution discussion some time back?
Hey; if you've got to steal bread to eat, eat. Just a) don't complain if you get shot doing so and b) make a point to pay for it, plus whatever else is fair on top.

(haven't you read my new sig?)
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#11259 at 04-16-2007 03:40 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-16-2007, 03:40 PM #11259
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
(haven't you read my new sig?)
Well, I don't speak French, and Babelfish gave me some weird parsing when I ran it through them, but I think I understand the gist of it.







Post#11260 at 04-17-2007 07:20 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
04-17-2007, 07:20 AM #11260
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by Child of Socrates View Post
Well, I don't speak French, and Babelfish gave me some weird parsing when I ran it through them, but I think I understand the gist of it.
Online translators suck ass. Even when they get the gist correct, they are only barely better than not understanding at all.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#11261 at 04-17-2007 07:38 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
04-17-2007, 07:38 PM #11261
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
Online translators suck ass. Even when they get the gist correct, they are only barely better than not understanding at all.
High school French is useless. Would you mind translating?







Post#11262 at 04-18-2007 02:26 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
04-18-2007, 02:26 AM #11262
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
High school French is useless. Would you mind translating?
I'll give it a go; HS french should do it for you, though. The grammar and vocab aren't particularly tough. It's from Hugo's Ninety-Three. You can click on the link to get the context of it.

<please allow for the fact that any translation slaughters poetry; in most cases it is best to use whatever words are necessary to communicate the meaning and not sweat the direct word-to-word correspondence>

"What is this thing, the law? So one can be outside it? I don't understand. What about me, am I inside the law? am I outside the law? I have no idea. Is dying of hunger what it takes to be inside the law?"
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#11263 at 04-19-2007 05:31 PM by K-I-A 67 [at joined Jan 2005 #posts 3,010]
---
04-19-2007, 05:31 PM #11263
Join Date
Jan 2005
Posts
3,010

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
I wasn't aware that I had made any laws. Cool for me! Are they, like, on parchment or something?

However, the fact remains -- like the sum of angles in a triangle being 180 degrees -- that libertarian means certain basic things. And that applying them inconsistently means that one is (at most) an inconsistent libertarian. And that holding other things as superior to them means that one is something other than a libertarian. It's not a slur, and more than would be saying that a four-sided polygon isn't a triangle. It's just a fact. You need to find a word that describes you, rather than one that doesn't, if you want people to understand what you mean.
Dude, you make plenty of Libertarian laws. Example: If one voted for Bush, one supports warrantless wire taps then one isn't libertarian! Another example: If one believes in God, recognizes a higher authority above oneself, one isn't libertarian. Funny, I didn't realize libertarian represented an ultimate authority, have the power to tell others who or who not to vote for, what is right or wrong, what to or not to do, what to believe or not to believe, what to recognize as being authority or what to obey. Plus, a person who spills his version of morality all over the place, imposes it on others via guilt, harshly judges or condemns others who may disagree with him, makes shit up as he goes long, doesn't come across as being very libertarian like either.

As you mentioned above, libertarian means certain basic things. The word has a definition. One can't just make up their own things, establish their ideas or preferences as being part of the meaning and proclaim their personal things as being libertarian. I agree on one thing, one who claims to be a duck better look, waddle, quack and fly like a duck. So, using the concept of a duck, you can waddle like a duck, you can quack like a duck, however, you don't look or fly like a duck to me. Me, I've been a very consistant libertarian all along. The majority of my agruments or disputes have been with the fundy socialists or social activists trying to convince we mortals their angles or something.

Just for future reference. I'm not a Libertarian. I'm not a Republican. I'm not a Democrat. I'm an American with individual power, authority, rights and freedoms. The party who represents or defends my values and pricincles is the party who gets my vote. Oh ya, how I choose to use or apply these valuable things is up to me, not you, to decide.







Post#11264 at 04-20-2007 04:13 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
04-20-2007, 04:13 AM #11264
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by K-I-A 67 View Post
Dude, you make plenty of Libertarian laws. Example: If one voted for Bush, one supports warrantless wire taps then one isn't libertarian!
False. A libertarian could - hypothetically - vote for Bush. It comes down to what he imagines he is voting for (or what he fears and is therefore voting against). As for the other, since libertarianism is all about support for the rights of the people, it is safe to say that someone who supports concrete encroachments on the rights of the people is not a libertarian. It's like saying that something that contains no carbon isn't a diamond. Not a law; more of a tautology.
Another example: If one believes in God, recognizes a higher authority above oneself, one isn't libertarian.
Now this one, you just made up out of whole cloth. I've yet to even encounter anyone who inherently associates religion with one's position as regards to libertarianism. Very good arguments have been by strongly religious people that libertarianism -- that is, the actual thing, in the actual meaning of the word; not just it's arbitrary application to whatever we feel like -- is in direct accord with the teachings of Jesus. There are many, many, many religious libertarians.

Plus, a person who spills his version of morality all over the place, imposes it on others via guilt, harshly judges or condemns others who may disagree with him, makes shit up as he goes long, doesn't come across as being very libertarian like either.
You're right, you don't.
But being an asshole isn't really mutually exclusive with libertarianism, either.

Me, I've been a very consistant libertarian all along. The majority of my agruments or disputes have been with the fundy socialists or social activists trying to convince we mortals their angles or something.
You know, 'libertarian' doesn't mean "anti-socialist". The word for that in English is "conservative". Which is what your writings indicate pretty clearly you are. I've suggested before, and I will repeat: you should really know what a word means before you apply it to yourself.

Libertarian from Wikipedia.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#11265 at 04-20-2007 10:23 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-20-2007, 10:23 AM #11265
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
I've yet to even encounter anyone who inherently associates religion with one's position as regards to libertarianism. Very good arguments have been by strongly religious people that libertarianism -- that is, the actual thing, in the actual meaning of the word; not just it's arbitrary application to whatever we feel like -- is in direct accord with the teachings of Jesus. There are many, many, many religious libertarians.
You might find disagreements among religious libertarians about economic issues (such as what Jesus meant by "rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's"), but I think there is basic accord about the dignity of the individual, the Golden Rule, and not looking to earthly governments for the final Word.







Post#11266 at 04-24-2007 02:54 AM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-24-2007, 02:54 AM #11266
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by K-I-A 67 View Post
I'm an American with individual power, authority, rights and freedoms.
Yep. The freedom to be declared an "enemy combatant". The President has officially reserved the right to call you that if he wants to. It follows that you have the right to not have the right of habeas corpus, which again, the President says he can withhold from you. Finally, you have the right to be warrantlessly wiretapped and perhaps be exposed to other warrantless activities in the name of "Unitary Executive" theory.

In short, you have the right to disappear and never be heard from again. Congratulations. You have the Right to be Black Bagged.

Dude, your kind of libertarian would have LOVED 1970's Argentina.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#11267 at 04-24-2007 09:55 AM by Tristan [at Melbourne, Australia joined Oct 2003 #posts 1,249]
---
04-24-2007, 09:55 AM #11267
Join Date
Oct 2003
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Posts
1,249

I have thought 911 or even Katrina was too dramatic as the start for a 4T. Here is why the last three 4T's have started with events which weren't very dramatic. Some people throwing tea into a harbor, a presidential election, a stock market crash (there had been comparable stock market crashes and economic depressions before).

The USA is still probably in the 3T for now, but the 4T can't be very far behind.







Post#11268 at 04-24-2007 11:07 AM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-24-2007, 11:07 AM #11268
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by Tristan View Post
I have thought 911 or even Katrina was too dramatic as the start for a 4T. Here is why the last three 4T's have started with events which weren't very dramatic. Some people throwing tea into a harbor, a presidential election, a stock market crash (there had been comparable stock market crashes and economic depressions before).

The USA is still probably in the 3T for now, but the 4T can't be very far behind.
Of course that's possible. But I see, even feel, a profound shift taking place. Even without a direct economic contraction, the Center is becoming very uneasy with our quarter-century-old devil-may-care economic course. And the military-political view of America as a reborn, post-Vietnam hegemon that began in 1983 and came fully to the fore by 1991, and that was heavily augmented after 9/11, is now palpably shifting. Those are two types of shifts that haven't happened since the last turning-change period.

As I date the 3T in the US as 1983-2005, I am obviously very biased about where we are now. But if you're right and we are still 3T, then this is a 3T that's "looking into the light".
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#11269 at 04-24-2007 11:53 AM by Brian Beecher [at Downers Grove, IL joined Sep 2001 #posts 2,937]
---
04-24-2007, 11:53 AM #11269
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Downers Grove, IL
Posts
2,937

Looking into the light; another bonus army

I am curious as to what you mean by the 3T looking into the light. On another thread there was a link to an article about plots to outsource more American jobs, and yet to date there has been very little unrest concerning this issue. I wonder how long it will be before many displaced workers will organize a march on Washington ala the bonus army of 1932. Would love to see it happen in this three-quarter-century anniversary. Does anybody think it actually would? So far it seems as though we are still too disorganized and fragmented.







Post#11270 at 04-24-2007 01:44 PM by The Wonkette [at Arlington, VA 1956 joined Jul 2002 #posts 9,209]
---
04-24-2007, 01:44 PM #11270
Join Date
Jul 2002
Location
Arlington, VA 1956
Posts
9,209

Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
As I date the 3T in the US as 1983-2005, I am obviously very biased about where we are now. But if you're right and we are still 3T, then this is a 3T that's "looking into the light".
I would rather term it "looking into the abyss."

But then, I believe we are 4T and have been for a while (whether its been 1 1/2 years or 5 1/2 years is debatable, but we're there now).
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008







Post#11271 at 04-24-2007 01:49 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-24-2007, 01:49 PM #11271
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Beecher View Post
I am curious as to what you mean by the 3T looking into the light.
Dying.

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Beecher View Post
On another thread there was a link to an article about plots to outsource more American jobs, and yet to date there has been very little unrest concerning this issue. I wonder how long it will be before many displaced workers will organize a march on Washington ala the bonus army of 1932. Would love to see it happen in this three-quarter-century anniversary. Does anybody think it actually would? So far it seems as though we are still too disorganized and fragmented.
There may not be riots, but polls are showing a shift. The Middle Class is as uneasy now about job security as it usually is in the midst of a recession, and this is with an alleged 3-4% GDP growth and 4.4% unemployment! Support for the neoliberal agenda, let alone that of Bush's cronies, is dissipating.

Though the Iraq War is the main impetus behind the GOP's current popularity problems, IIRC polls show that economic insecurity is playing a strong role as well. Unfortunately (or not), the Democrats are not playing to the growing Populist sentiment. They either don't recognize it, or they are too afraid of their corporate masters to do so.

If I am right, and we are already cascading, then it seems likely that really wacky things will happen between now and E2K8 -- the stuff of Bonus Marches, Draft Riots, and committes of correspondence -- whatever our historical rhyme. But I can't make any predictions with "100% accuracy", like some we know. I could be wrong about the cascade. Or Mike A. (among others) might have a really good point in that cascades don't necessarily have to have a "doozy" factor.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#11272 at 04-24-2007 01:52 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-24-2007, 01:52 PM #11272
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by The Wonkette View Post
I would rather term it "looking into the abyss."

But then, I believe we are 4T and have been for a while (whether its been 1 1/2 years or 5 1/2 years is debatable, but we're there now).
Abyss might work. We are certainly digging deep holes for our nation on several issues.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#11273 at 04-24-2007 04:17 PM by cbailey [at B. 1950 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,559]
---
04-24-2007, 04:17 PM #11273
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
B. 1950
Posts
1,559

Beyond the Pet Food Crisis

I think we are still teetering on that 3T-4T line. There are so many "crisis" lining up, and as yet, we are still dancing the Charleston (with a touch of gloom in our step.)

And no, the latest "Green" issue of Vanity Fair with Leonardo Di Capprio and a baby polar bear on the cover did NOT signal we be 4T.




Tainted pet food a reflection of a much bigger concern
By Peter Kovacs
For The Washington Post
Salt Lake Tribune
Article Launched:04/24/2007 12:00:00 AM MDT
For Discussion Only

Lost amid the anxiety surrounding the tainted U.S. pet food supply is this sobering reality: It's not just pet owners who should be worried. The uncontrolled distribution of low-quality imported food ingredients, mainly from China, poses a grave threat to public health worldwide.

Essential ingredients, such as vitamins used in many packaged foods, arrive at U.S. ports from China and, as recent news reports have underscored, are shipped without inspection to food and beverage distributors and manufacturers. Although they are used in relatively small quantities, these ingredients carry enormous risks for American consumers. One pound of tainted wheat gluten could, if undetected, contaminate as much as a thousand pounds of food.

Unlike imported beef, which is inspected at the point of processing by the U.S. Agriculture Department, few practical safeguards have been established to ensure the quality of food ingredients from China.

Often, U.S. officials don't know where or how such ingredients were produced. We know, however, that alarms have been raised about hygiene and labor standards at many Chinese manufacturing facilities. In China, municipal water used in the manufacturing process is often contaminated with heavy metals, pesticides and other chemicals. Food ingredient production is particularly susceptible to environmental contamination.

Equally worrisome, U.S. officials often lack the capability to trace foreign-produced food ingredients to their source of manufacture. In theory, the Bioterrorism Prevention Act of 2001 provides some measure of traceability. In practice, the act is ineffective and was not designed for this challenge. Its enforcement is also shrouded in secrecy by the Department of Homeland Security.

Even if Food and Drug Administration regulators wanted to crack down on products emanating from the riskiest foreign facilities, they couldn't, because they have no way of knowing which ingredients come from which plant. This is why officials have spent weeks searching for the original Chinese source of the contaminated wheat gluten that triggered the pet food crisis.

That it was pet food that got tainted - and that relatively few pets were harmed - is pure happenstance. Earlier this spring, Europe narrowly averted disaster when a batch of vitamin A from China was found to be contaminated with Enterobacter sakazakii, which has been proved to cause infant deaths. Thankfully, the defective vitamin A had not yet been incorporated into infant formula. Next time we may not be so fortunate.

Currently, most of the world's vitamins are manufactured in China. Unable to compete, the last U.S. plant making vitamin C closed a year ago. One of Europe's largest citric acid plants closed last winter, and only one vitamin C manufacturer operates in the West. Given China's cheap labor, artificially low prices and the unfair competitive climate it has foisted on the industry, few Western producers of food ingredients can survive much longer.

Western companies have had to invest heavily in Chinese facilities. These Western-owned plants follow strict standards and are generally better managed than their locally owned counterparts. Nevertheless, 80 percent of the world's vitamin C is now manufactured in China - much of it unregulated and some of it of questionable quality.

Europe is ahead of the United States in seeking greater accountability and traceability in food safety and importation. But even the European Union's ''rapid alert system'' is imperfect. Additional action is required if the continent is to avoid catastrophes.

To protect consumers here, we must revise our regulatory approaches. The first option is to institute regulations, based on the European model, to ensure that all food ingredients are thoroughly traceable. We should impose strict liability on manufacturers that fail to enforce traceability standards.

A draconian alternative is to mount a program modeled on USDA beef inspection for all food ingredients coming into the country. This regimen would require a significant commitment of resources and intensive training for hundreds of inspectors.

Food safety is a bipartisan issue: Congress and the administration must work together and move aggressively to devise stricter standards. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, has deplored dangerous levels of lead in vitamin products originating in China. We must get to the bottom of this pressing public health issue, without self-defeating finger-pointing.

The United States is sitting on a powder keg with uncontrolled importation and the distribution of low-quality food ingredients. Before it explodes - putting more animals and people at risk - corrective steps must be taken.
---
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt







Post#11274 at 04-24-2007 07:48 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-24-2007, 07:48 PM #11274
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Par for the course. The transnational economic regime being developed would turn the whole world into a giant third world nation. The first world middle class is having it's very economic support taken away so that a transnational elite can live high on the hog as elites always have in third world countries. If the masses are provided inferior, possibily even poisoned, food, who cares? It's only a problem when Mr. & Mrs. Overclass can't get a clean bill of health on their special, superexpensive, organic groceries, superbaby food, and the like. Then it is unacceptable.

I am sick and tired of this transnational, "neoliberal" contingent that doesn't know, or often care, that they are destroying, yes literally destroying, America's future. Poisoned food is but one symptom of a much, much larger malady.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#11275 at 04-24-2007 08:00 PM by cbailey [at B. 1950 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,559]
---
04-24-2007, 08:00 PM #11275
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
B. 1950
Posts
1,559

Unhappy

Your local Sam's Club is a death trap.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt
-----------------------------------------