Wednesday, August 5, 2009


First check out SeeNew at;
Actually, it's a long and varied discussion on who (or what) is actually running things in our world - but this is a good place to start.
I don't get to drop by as much as I'd like because the spot is like school.
(No fluff here - well maybe from BigDon sometimes.)
But don't feel as though you cannot comment or ask questions - these guys (and ladies) are more likely to share knowledge than condemn you (or me) for a lack thereof.

But SeeNew asked if Corn was acting in a defensive mode in order to cull the North American herd.

Let's see...
A sweet white powdery substance (that may be addictive) that is consumed by most people in most of their food products acting in a way as to protect itself from man?
Sounds impossible.

For a long time, man and corn got along.
There was a balance.
Man cultivated corn -
and in return, corn nourished man.

But man got greedy.
Man needed more.
So a "smart" man added fertilizer to the soil. (A short term gain but a long term loss that could only be "fixed" by adding more fertilizer.)
A "smart" man genetically altered the structure of corn to produce bigger (but less nutritious) kernels.

Corn Starch got mad.
Corn Starch became so addictive that foods that contained none were seasoned and prepped with the substance.
Man became obese.
Man became sick.
But "smart" men thought that they needed the stuff.
In the end, many of these "smart" men will die.

With this culling of the "smarter" but weaker members of society - the relationship between Corn and Man will again be sustainable.
With the reduced need (coinciding with the reduced number of people), corn will go through atavism and again become a natural food.
There will be little or no need for petroleum based fertilizers.
There will be no need for genetic modification.

The war between Man and his food will be over.

Sounds ridiculous, huh?
I forget which wave law states that;
Waves that exist at high frequencies travel over short distances,
but waves that exist at low frequencies travel over long distances.
This would seem to be a general law of nature.
Strong acts cannot be sustained over long periods of time,
but more subtle (or weak) actions can last over long periods of time and become more widespread.
Maybe our food is killing us by it's own agency.


FreeMan said...

Let's just call it a trend instead of it returning to a balance. It's capitalism at it's best and since there isn't a demand then people will use less additives since their farm can produce in it's natural cycle.

But once the housing scare stabilizes we'll go back to corn starching the world. The problem isn't the corn starch it's really lack of education. The more educated the masses the more sophisticated their palate. So unless we get a big education boost they'll keep poisoning the fat ignorant people and also the intelligent people's kids because of the sheer amount of ish called snacks.

brohammas said...

My issue with this theory is that the corn has in no way become the actor, only been acted on. Sure it kills us, but only as we, the actor, change it, consume it, etc.
The corn stays constant only changing its properties or affects when we act upon it.
It is constant and we consume it, then remain constant on the couch watching tv.

CNu said...

But SeeNew asked if Corn was acting in a defensive mode in order to cull the North American herd.


my basic contention a la Michael Pollan, is that corn has enjoyed a centuries-long symbiotic (parasitic) ride from all major human groupings on the north american continent, period.

from the standpoint of genetic or evolutionary "success", i.e., giving rise to increasing amounts of genetic material, corn has wildly benefitted from this symbiosis.

uglyblackjohn said...

I was kinda' thinking along the lines of what happened to the Mayans and their civilization.

What made them just seem to disappear?
Could it have been something as simple as their corn?
Were they als victims of their own success?

FreeMan mentions a balance.
I think that there must be some inherent code that regulates the "ideal" somewhere within each of us.

brohammas - Corn could be a "passive actor" that is one of the many tools at nature's disposal which regulates this.

SeeNew points out corn's ride from a regional food to a hemispheric disaster.
It seems as though corn was doing fine as long as we didn't interfere with it's NATURAL progression.

Maybe we are becoming victims of our own success as could have the Mayans.