Greenpeace is destroying the Amazon
I hate McDonalds. Keep this in mind while you read the rest of this post, lest you think I am defending that crap fast food giant, or any other fast food giant for that matter.
In their latest “save the rain forest campaign” Greenpeace is trashing McDonalds, blaming the fast food giant for the destruction of the Amazon forest.
Well, their argument is that the Amazon forest is being destroyed do produce soy, that soy is then used either for human consumption and sold in supermarkets in Europe or sold for animal feeding (mostly chicken and cows) and those animals are then used to make hamburgers and chicken nuggets...
McDonalds being the greatest seller of hamburgers and chicken nuggets is then to blame for the destruction of Amazon.
Well, generally I support Greenpeace campaigns, generally I agree with their points of view.
But not this time. This time I think it is actually Greenpeace that is destroying Amazon.
You see, some people like me have a rather balanced diet, we eat veggies and fruit and often have vegetarian meals, we eat fish and meat also, making it short: we eat pretty much everything.
Others however have their own reasons to have a less balanced diet, they don’t eat meat nor fish and some of them subsist mainly on soy based products, those “soy based lifeforms” are usually the “radical ecologist” type, as such they are also usually Greenpeace supporters. SO... if Greenpeace supporters seem to be the main consumers of soy and soy based products THEY are destroying Amazon.
It’s a bit like when I started telling some friends they were destroying our atmosphere. They try to use mostly recycled paper. True enough that saves trees, but the energy used to recycle the paper comes mostly of fossil fuels and as such it pollutes.
Our ecosystem has very complex and intricate balances and this means everything is connected like a giant spider web: if you give it a little pull somewhere it will reverberate through the all system, trying to find single causes for a complex problem can’t usually be taken seriously.
Don’t get me wrong, I know the actions of the big soy producing companies in Amazon are a crime against mankind and against the planet, yet it seems to me that while Greenpeace is trying to make an evil icon out of McDonalds plenty of other major companies, smaller companies, governments and investors in general are just as much to blame. Moreover, McDonalds is as much to blame as any company or any person who eats or uses soy or soy based products.
In their latest “save the rain forest campaign” Greenpeace is trashing McDonalds, blaming the fast food giant for the destruction of the Amazon forest.
Well, their argument is that the Amazon forest is being destroyed do produce soy, that soy is then used either for human consumption and sold in supermarkets in Europe or sold for animal feeding (mostly chicken and cows) and those animals are then used to make hamburgers and chicken nuggets...
McDonalds being the greatest seller of hamburgers and chicken nuggets is then to blame for the destruction of Amazon.
Well, generally I support Greenpeace campaigns, generally I agree with their points of view.
But not this time. This time I think it is actually Greenpeace that is destroying Amazon.
You see, some people like me have a rather balanced diet, we eat veggies and fruit and often have vegetarian meals, we eat fish and meat also, making it short: we eat pretty much everything.
Others however have their own reasons to have a less balanced diet, they don’t eat meat nor fish and some of them subsist mainly on soy based products, those “soy based lifeforms” are usually the “radical ecologist” type, as such they are also usually Greenpeace supporters. SO... if Greenpeace supporters seem to be the main consumers of soy and soy based products THEY are destroying Amazon.
It’s a bit like when I started telling some friends they were destroying our atmosphere. They try to use mostly recycled paper. True enough that saves trees, but the energy used to recycle the paper comes mostly of fossil fuels and as such it pollutes.
Our ecosystem has very complex and intricate balances and this means everything is connected like a giant spider web: if you give it a little pull somewhere it will reverberate through the all system, trying to find single causes for a complex problem can’t usually be taken seriously.
Don’t get me wrong, I know the actions of the big soy producing companies in Amazon are a crime against mankind and against the planet, yet it seems to me that while Greenpeace is trying to make an evil icon out of McDonalds plenty of other major companies, smaller companies, governments and investors in general are just as much to blame. Moreover, McDonalds is as much to blame as any company or any person who eats or uses soy or soy based products.
posted by DCveR at 3:18 PM
12 Comments:
we're all doomed no matter how we look at it... ohhhh
Future Mrs Viking actually works as an environmental technician for a shipping company in the Amazon. She's leaving that because all the soy dust in the air is starting to bother her lungs.
i'm guessing that greenpeace is armed with the statistics to back their claims that MCDs is perhaps the largest offender of keeping the soy farmers in the amazon in business. whatever the case may be, i'd rather be a part of the solution than the problem. Eat veggies, soy, meat, whatever... from local farmers. That's my solution.
ale: Even if we are, we can't go down without putting some fight, no?
viking: That's usually a problem with soy production workers too.
bees knees: I bet (and hope)they are armed with the statistics that prove MCD is who profits most, nonetheless I think the campaign exploites too much the attack on MCD and puts little stress on all others who profit with this soy business.
Why doesn't Greenpeace just go straight for the farmers who are cutting down the Amazon?
Why are they attacking me for eating soy?
By the way, D, did you ever see that movie with Chico Mendez?
That Amazon destruction troubles me a lot, and I wonder when will govts. get together to do something. It's the same with the forests in Indonesia. Greedy men cutting, selling, destroying the homes of forest dwellers too.
GG: I've seen several documentaries on Chico Mendes, which movie are you referring to?
When will govts actually do something about it? I don't know but when I read this comment of yours Easter Island images sprung into my mind... fortunately I am too skeptical to believe it was some kind of omen...
That's it! I'm off soya sauce on my big Macs!)
Really enjoyed this post. I think Greenpeace have lost their way and it's boring to go after biggies like Micky D's. You're absolutely right in your argument but I think Greenpeace hopes that less intelligent people will latch on to their cause. Have a good weekend x
cream: LOL Do you actually eat any big macs? Yuck!!!
I refuse to give up the soy sauce with my sushi!
nml: The sad thing is that this kind of campaign keeps many of us who atcually agree with most of their actions from giving them more support. Have a nice weekend too.
The movie with Chico Mendes was not a documentary, and I can't remember it's name now :-(
Easter Island? Here I am, ignorant again.
I saw the Green Peace thing in our papers; they're saying that they are blocking the incoming soy from the Amazon, therefore blocking trade of the big farmers there.
Easter Island, Rapa Nui, where the natives destroyed all the trees.
Thanks for the link, D. I remember those carvings now. I saw an article saying "Easter Island has become, for many, a metaphor for ecological disaster."
When you fly over the Dominican Republic, then over Haiti, you see a dreadful difference. You fly from green to grey.
As with writing, I can talk about the environment for hours, boring folks.
Post a Comment
<< Home