Wednesday, October 21, 2015

This day ... two years ago (1)

(Re-posting from 2013)
The liberals have always been suspicious about me, and they have good reasons to--they know well that I will depart from many of their views more often than not.  That I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU doesn't convince them that I am a liberal.  A committed liberal is no different from a committed conservative, and they are often no different from a religious fundamentalist either--because I don't worship their gods, I have to be kept at a distance.

Works well for me.  Except that the decisions they make affect my life and the lives of millions of others too.  So, I blog!

First, food and Monsanto.  To the left, Monsanto is like Voldemort.  Perhaps even worse.  A few weeks ago, I blogged about the graffiti on the bike path:

Of course, that is not the only post where I have wondered about such dogmatic opposition to GM food and Monsanto (like herehere, andhere.)  Now, I have one more in this post, thanks to this piece on argumentum ad monsantum in the Scientific American blog:
It’s fashionable to think that the conservative parties in America are the science deniers. You certainly wouldn’t have trouble supporting that claim. But liberals are not exempt. Though the denial of evolution, climate change, and stem cell research tends to find a home on the right of the aisle, the denial of vaccine, nuclear power, and genetic modification safety have found a home on the left (though the extent to which each side denies the science is debatable). It makes one wonder: Why do liberals like Maher—psychologically considered open to new ideas—deny the science of GM food while accepting the science in other fields?
You can imagine what happens when you point out to the left how dogmatically ideological they are on some issues, and you point out to the right how dogmatically ideological they are on some issues.  Soon, there is nobody to talk with.   So, I blog! ;)

So, what is the deal with the "Monsanto is evil" religion?
We tend to accept information that confirms our prior beliefs and ignore or discredit information that does not. This confirmation bias settles over our eyes like distorting spectacles for everything we look at. Could this be at the root of the argumentum ad monsantum? It isn’t inconsistent with the trend Maher has shown repeatedly on his show. A liberal opposition to corporate power, to capitalistic considerations of human welfare, could be incorrectly coloring the GM discussion. Perhaps GMOs are the latest casualty in a cognitive battle between confirmation bias and reality.
We continue with the confirmation bias with food deserts. 

No, a food desert is not about lack of food in Darfur or one of those places. 
Food deserts can be described as geographic areas where residents’ access to affordable, healthy food options (especially fresh fruits and vegetables) is restricted or nonexistent due to the absence of grocery stores within convenient travelling distance. 
An informed person somewhere in India or Tanzania or anywhere on the planet will have a tough time imagining Americans not having access to food.  Not only because it is the land of plenty, but also because there are plenty of social institutions--public and private--to address food insecurity issues.  Keep in mind that food deserts are not the same as food insecurity--there will be an overlap between the two, yes, but the food desert concept is above and beyond the real and serious food insecurity issues

A simple logic tells me that choices increase with affluence and that the poor have fewer choices.  As in life so is the case with food.  Will it, therefore, surprise us to find that the less affluent have limited access to healthy food options?  Should we worry that Bubba doesn't have access to arugula, and that he eats way too much at the neighboring McDonald's instead, and bypasses the salads there?

Imagine, if you will, how easy politics will be if the liberals and the conservatives alike ditched their dogmatic and ideological passions and, instead, merely looked at how to solve problems.  Oh, wait, I see Ted Cruz coming to attack me with a hardbound edition of the Dr. Seuss collections for merely suggesting this ;)


Ramesh said...

Oh yes, denial of inconvenient facts is not just the monopoly of the rabid right. The loony left is equally guilty as you have pointed out.

I wonder why the liberals don't consider you as one of their own. Perhaps the loony left won't , but you are a moderate leftie and that should be enough to those liberals who are not loony.

I am dogmatically ideological that I have to argue with you; so don't worry, you have at least one person to talk to :)

Anne in Salem said...

One would think the loony left (thanks, Ramesh) would embrace GM foods given how GM rice in particular has saved millions from dying of starvation. The fear seems more phobic than rational. What can one expect from the liberals?

Sriram Khé said...

The GM Rice (golden rice) is yet to go into full production because the anti-GMO crowd has been doing everything possible, including vandalism, to delay it ... It is a crazy world out there.
So, yes, this is an example: when I write/argue in favor of GMO, the uber-liberal left does not want to talk to me. When I write about the awful gun issues, for instance, the uber-right does not want to talk to me. When I write about India, most Indian friends do not want to talk to me. Finally, I will be all by myself and will disprove the adage that no man is an island ;)

Mike Hoth said...

Ah, but Sriram, you can't be an island yet! You have at least three or fours readers left on your blog who are willing to converse with you! And since your range in just the last few months has been as widespread as poetry, religion, politics and describing how a man shakes his penis at a urinal before not washing his hands, you may be stuck with us.

Sriram Khé said...

Hehehe ... I suppose it will be a while before you folks forget the urinal post ;)

Yes, there are a couple of regulars here and plenty of silent subscribers too--I wonder what I should write about in order to shake all you people off! ;)
Kidding aside, yes, thanks to the commenting readers--the regulars and the occasionals--and the silent ones too, for these conversations that enrich my life.

Most read this past month