A bit of both. We are brought up in a culture which "hides" things (TV
censorship, death, abottoirs (tend to be located out of town),and so on).
The reality of seeing what went on at an abottoir made me question why I
could accept this mass killing being done on my behalf by other people. If
I had to I would be happier taking the responsibility for killing something
on my own rather than asking soemone else to do it for me.
Also my experience of farmers is that a lot of them denigrate their
stewardship of both the land and the animals on it. Further as a group
farmers seem to be one of the few groups in the county which merit
compensation when a lot of their problems stem from their own actions rather
than those of any other group.
Rob
> ----------
> From: robert stephenson[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 28 February 2001 16:22
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Why compensate farmers?
>
> hello robert,
>
> What criteria in particular turned you against meat eating? Was it merely
> ambivalence towards the animals or more an institutionalised form of human
>
> "aggression" towards our fellow creatures?
>
> Rob
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: Robert Polson <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: Robert Polson <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Why compensate farmers?
> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:53:39 -0000
>
> Good points, plus where were the farmers during the social upheavals and
> all
> other associated problems during the 1970's/80/90's - admittedly some were
> very good at supplying stuff during the coal disputes, but these were a
> minority.
>
> Also why were none of the casualities of this time period compensated at
> the
> same level of the farmers?
>
> Finally as someone who has worked with farmers and in abattoirs I found
> the
> attitude to the animals under their care worrying. The abottoir
> experience
> turned me to being vegetarian.
>
> Rob
>
> > ----------
> > From: Hillary Shaw[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Reply To: Hillary Shaw
> > Sent: 28 February 2001 08:32
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Why compensate farmers?
> >
> > Imagine you ran a dodgy bus company. You offer very cheap fares
> > and frequent services, because all your buses have dodgy tyres, no
> > insurance, inexperienced drivers etc etc. You use cheap fuel, so
> > that your buses keep breaking down. After a while your safety
> > record is so bad that despite your cheap fares no-one will use you.
> > In fact several people have died in accidents due to the state of
> > your buses, reckless driving by your drivers, and their novel,
> > experimental, anti-highway code driving. In fact you are broke, and
> > have a fleet of useless broken down buses. What you are now
> > entitled to is compensation from the Ministry of Transport. No?
> > Well since farmers began feeding bits of dead animals to
> > herbivores (sheep and cows), keeping animals inside cramped
> > crowded buildiongs, not what they were designed for, stuffing them
> > full of antibiotics and athoer artificial chemicals, ditto the (GM)
> > crops - all in the name of cheap, plentiful food (the Western World
> > has an obesity problem, not a lot of this surplus gets to the
> > starving South, but thats bot the farmers concern) we have had one
> > farming crisis after another. And a few fatalities (CJD). Some of the
> > crisis is external, the high £, price lowering by the supermarkets,
> > etc, but a lot is due to farming methods. Sp why compensdation. It
> > surely can't be because the farmers are the "guardians of the
> > conutryside" as, prarie-factory farming in Lincolnshire aside, much
> > farmland is in a very artificial state. "Disease free" farms restrict
> > access by ramblers, in case some evil walker brings in some
> > bacterium which the poor delicate chemical-stressed flock can't
> > cope with. Farmers go bust and the countryside returns to a state
> > of wilderness? Loss of rural employment? Farms have already shed
> > many jobs, many villages are inhabited largely by wealthy
> > commuters, and I guess a return to a bit of natural wildlife wouldn't
> > go amiss in the very artificial state the rural parts of much of
> Britain
> > is in.
> > Hillary Shaw, P/G Geography, University of Leeds
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
|