By GM Watch
UPDATE: See Channel 4 accused of misleading contributors to green documentary. (Reproduced in full in comments section below.)
This latest programme, What the Green Movement Got Wrong, from Channel 4 (airing Nov. 4 9pm) follows a long line of anti-environmentalist documentaries commissioned by this broadcaster. They include The Great Global Warming Swindle, Against Nature, Modified Truth – The Rise and Fall of GM, and The Greenhouse Conspiracy.
The latest from Channel 4 is supposedly aboout “a group of environmentalists across the world” who “believe that, in order to save the planet, humanity must embrace the very science and technology they once so stridently opposed. In this film, these life-long diehard greens advocate radical solutions to climate change, which include GM crops and nuclear energy.”
We understand that the programme alleges that GM could save the world, and that the fact it hasn’t is a result of a western-led NGO movement that imposes its ideology on the global South. This has led to death and starvation across the world. So essentially the anti-GM movement is responsible for the hunger and deaths of millions.
So who are the “environmentalists across the world” who have performed a u-turn on nuclear power and GM crops? According to the Sunday Telegraph they’re Mark Lynas, Stewart Brand and Patrick Moore.
Patrick Moore was one of the founding members of Greenpeace, but after leaving the organisation back in the mid 1980s, Moore ventured unsuccessfully into the salmon farming business before making a living writing, speaking and campaigning on behalf of the logging, aquaculture, nuclear and GM industries. He’s been described as “a spin doctor for corporations engaged in environmental destruction.”
Stewart Brand was once the editor of the Whole Earth Catalog. Ever the technophile, even back in those days Brand was pushing the idea of space colonies, and he’s claimed that if he’d known about GMOs then, he’d have been more than in favour: “30 to 40 years ago I think I would have said to all the genetic engineering stuff – hot dog!”
These days he promotes multiple techno-fixes, including nuclear power and geoengineering. Brand also favours mass urbanization, glorifying the squalour of third-world squatter slums as the solution to poverty in the South.
He even seems comfortable with political dictatorship. Liberal democracy can not deliver the kind of future Brand considers necessary. He’s a little coy about what should replace it but as Toronto Star journalist Cathal Kelly notes in the article below, “I put it to Brand that he’s advocating some sort of environmental dictatorship. ‘China’s headed in that direction,’ he says approvingly.”
When it comes to scepticism about GM, Brand claims, “We’ve starved people, hindered science, hurt the natural environment and denied our own practitioners a crucial tool.” Brand by contrast, “gushes about the technology in a way that might raise a blush even in a spokesman for Monsanto,” according to the science editor of the Financial Times.
Read the full post at GM Watch