#International Agricultural Food and Product Exporters

[jrpimpex]

Natural Sesame Seeds Supplier in India - JRP Impex

When it comes to sourcing the finest natural sesame seeds supplier in India, look no further than JRP Impex. We take pride in being one of the leading suppliers of premium-quality sesame seeds, catering to a wide range of industries and customers both domestically and internationally. Contact us or visit our website to explore our products : https://www.jrpimpex.com

 Natural Sesame Seeds Supplier in India

Sesame seeds have been cherished for centuries for their distinct flavor, crunchy texture, and remarkable health benefits. Among the various types of sesame seeds, Natural Sesame Seeds Supplier in India stand out for their untouched purity and rich nutritional profile. In this blog post, we will delve into the captivating world of natural sesame seeds, exploring their health benefits, culinary uses, and the expertise of JRP Impex in sourcing and delivering high-quality natural sesame seeds to customers worldwide.

A Nutritional Powerhouse: Natural sesame seeds are small but mighty in terms of nutritional value. Packed with essential nutrients, they offer a wide range of health benefits. These tiny seeds are an excellent source of protein, healthy fats, dietary fiber, and an array of vitamins and minerals. They are particularly rich in calcium, iron, magnesium, and phosphorus, making them a valuable addition to a balanced diet.

Heart-Healthy Benefits: Including natural sesame seeds in your diet can contribute to a healthy heart. They contain a unique blend of monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats, such as omega-6 fatty acids. These healthy fats can help reduce bad cholesterol levels and promote good cholesterol, thereby supporting cardiovascular health.

Nutrient-Dense Snacking: Natural sesame seeds supplier in india can serve as a nutritious snack option for those seeking a satisfying and wholesome treat. Sprinkle them on salads, yogurt, or fruit bowls for an added crunch and nutty flavor. Additionally, you can blend them into smoothies or use them as a topping for baked goods like bread and cookies, elevating both taste and nutritional value.

Culinary Versatility: Sesame seeds are celebrated for their versatility in the kitchen. Natural sesame seeds can be used in both sweet and savory dishes, adding a unique taste and texture. They are commonly used as a garnish in Asian cuisine, adding a delightful crunch to stir-fries, noodles, and sushi. Moreover, they can be ground into tahini, a creamy sesame paste, which is a key ingredient in Middle Eastern dishes like hummus and baba ganoush.

JRP Impex: Your Trusted Source for Quality Sesame Seeds. When it comes to sourcing premium natural sesame seeds, Hulled Sesame Seeds, Sesame Seeds, Roasted Seasame Seeds. JRP Impex is a name you can trust. With their extensive experience in the import and export industry, JRP Impex ensures the procurement of superior quality sesame seeds from trusted International Agricultural Food and Product Exporters suppliers. Their commitment to quality control, adherence to food safety standards, and efficient supply chain management make them a reliable partner for businesses seeking top-notch sesame seeds.

Conclusion: Natural sesame seeds are a treasure trove of nutrition and culinary possibilities. From their remarkable health benefits to their diverse uses in cooking, these tiny seeds have much to offer. Whether you’re a health-conscious individual or a culinary enthusiast, incorporating natural sesame seeds into your diet can enhance both your well-being and culinary adventures. With JRP Impex’s expertise in delivering high-quality sesame seeds, you can embark on a flavorful journey, savoring the best that natural sesame seeds have to offer.

[adalidda]

Illustration photo: Maize kernels being processed for food manufacturing (public domain)

Unveiling the Treasure of West Africa: Maize Grains from Sahel Agri-Sol

July 5, 2024

In the heart of West Africa, where the fertile lands of Mali stretch under the warm African sun, Sahel Agri-Sol cultivates nature's bounty - maize grains that stand unrivaled in quality, flavor, and versatility. As a leading producer and exporter of agricultural commodities, we invite food and cosmetics manufacturers worldwide to discover the transformative power of our exceptional corn.

A Legacy of Excellence

Sahel Agri-Sol's story is deeply rooted in the rich agricultural tradition of Mali. For generations, our farmers have nurtured the land, combining time-honored techniques with modern sustainable practices. This unique approach results in maize grains that not only meet but exceed global standards, offering a product that's truly special in today's market.

For Food Manufacturers: Elevate Your Culinary Creations

Flavor Profile

Our maize grains boast a robust, slightly sweet flavor with nutty undertones - a testament to the unique terroir of West Africa. This distinctive taste can add depth and character to a wide range of food products, setting your offerings apart in a competitive market.

Versatility

From traditional cornmeal and polenta to innovative snack foods and gourmet popcorn, our maize adapts beautifully to diverse applications. Its superior texture and consistent quality make it ideal for:

Nutritional Excellence

Packed with essential nutrients, our maize is a powerhouse of:

For Cosmetics Manufacturers: Nature's Beauty Secret Unveiled

Innovative Ingredients

Unlock the potential of maize in your cosmetic formulations:

1. Corn Silk Extract: Rich in antioxidants, it offers anti-aging and skin-soothing properties.

2. Corn Oil: A lightweight, non-comedogenic oil perfect for moisturizers and hair care products.

3. Corn Starch: An excellent natural absorbent for powders and dry shampoos.

4. Microfine Cornmeal: Gentle exfoliant for body scrubs and facial cleansers.

Eco-Friendly Appeal

In an era where consumers demand natural, sustainable beauty solutions, our maize-derived ingredients offer a compelling narrative. Highlight the purity and origin of your ingredients, connecting your brand to the vibrant agricultural heritage of West Africa.

The Sahel Agri-Sol Advantage

1. Sustainable Cultivation

Our farms employ a blend of traditional wisdom and modern eco-friendly practices, ensuring minimal environmental impact while maximizing yield and quality.

2. Rigorous Quality Control

From seed selection to harvest and processing, every step is meticulously monitored. Our state-of-the-art facilities and stringent testing protocols guarantee purity, consistency, and safety.

3. Flexible Solutions

Whether you need bulk shipments or smaller quantities, we offer customizable packaging options to suit your specific requirements.

4. Year-Round Availability

Our strategic planning and extensive storage facilities ensure a stable supply throughout the year, protecting your production schedules from seasonal fluctuations.

5. Competitive Edge

By choosing Sahel Agri-Sol, you're not just buying superior maize - you're investing in a story of sustainability, tradition, and quality that resonates with today's conscious consumers.

6. Support and Expertise

Our team of agricultural experts and customer service professionals is always ready to assist you, from product selection to logistics support.

Global Reach, Local Impact

By partnering with Sahel Agri-Sol, you're not only elevating your products but also supporting sustainable agricultural practices and contributing to the economic development of West African communities.

Experience the Sahel Agri-Sol Difference

We invite you to discover the unparalleled quality of our West African maize. Contact us today to request samples, discuss your specific needs, or arrange a visit to our facilities in Mali. Let's explore how Sahel Agri-Sol's premium maize grains can revolutionize your product line and captivate your customers.

Bring the golden essence of West Africa to your global products. Choose Sahel Agri-Sol - where quality meets tradition, and innovation embraces nature.

Sahel Agri-Sol

Hamdallaye ACI 2 000,

« BAMA » building 5th floor APT 7

Bamako

Mali

Phone: +223 20 22 75 77

Mobile:  +223 70 63 63 23, +223 65 45 38 38

WhatsApp/Telegram global marketing and sales: +223 90 99 1099

Email: sales@sahelagrisol.com

Web sites

English https://sahelagrisol.com/en

Français https://sahelagrisol.com/fr

Español https://sahelagrisol.com/es

简体中文 https://sahelagrisol.com/zh

عربي https://sahelagrisol.com/ar

More

[read-marx-and-lenin]

I'm asking this in good faith, but this is something I'm genuinely confused about. Regarding the Holodomor, or the Soviet famine of 1930 in general, why does it matter if it was a genocide or not? At best it seems to be a natural famine exacerbated by poor decision making, and while that is far different from a genocide, I don't understand why that specification matters, because it was still made worse by Soviet intervention, unless I'm getting the facts wrong which I probably am.

It matters to the Western propagandists who were insistent for decades despite zero evidence that the famine was used to commit atrocities against the people of Ukraine. The refrain the whole time was that once the Soviet archives were made public, they'd finally have the proof they needed. The archives are eventually opened, and surprise surprise, there's not only no evidence of the deliberate withholding of grain, there's evidence of significant amounts of food aid being sent to help alleviate the famine. The myth of a Ukrainian genocide began as Nazi propaganda and was adopted as part of the "double genocide" narrative by Western reactionaries after WW2 to downplay the crimes of the Nazis and to maintain a narrative about liberal opposition to "authoritarianism", painting Western capitalists as the "free world" fighting against both fascism and communism. (Don't ask them why they stopped fighting fascism after WW2 though.)

As for the human elements of the famine, it is also part of the typical Western narrative, even among those who admit the Holodomor was not a targeted anti-Ukrainian genocide and who admit that there were environmental factors, to try and put substantial amounts of blame on the Soviet collectivization of agriculture. I am not going to lie and say collectivization went smoothly with no issues, but you cannot ignore the factors of reactionary sabotage by kulaks (including the destruction of animals and grain and the outright murder of party officials) and the effects of Western sanctions and sabotage on the economic development of the USSR.

While some have argued that there was a complete "gold blockade" on the USSR during the famine and so the Soviet Union was forced to export grain to facilitate international trade, the blockade was never enforced by all Western nations at the same time and the Soviets were still able to export gold and silver at various times throughout the 1920s. It is true, however, that gold reserves were stretched thin at the time and the Soviets simply didn't have enough gold to cover their international debts. Soviet gold mines had never been extraordinarily productive and the rest of the Soviet economy was still developing at the time, so grain was one of the few things that they expected to have in surplus. In addition, there were various other sanctions in place by 1930 that did limit who they could trade with and what they could trade with, but the export of grain was almost never restricted. The famine caught them off guard at a very bad time.

While international grain exports were restricted during the famine as grain was diverted to famine-stricken regions of the country (and grain imports were increased as well), the problems with hoarding only worsened as in the panic of the famine, kulaks sought to exploit the people and create a profitable black market on grain. A struggle against the kulaks coincided with worsening environmental effects and the spread of disease among both crops and humans.

The famine was not man-made, it was not entirely natural, and it was not the inevitable outcome of collectivization. It was a perfect storm of a variety of factors. Stalin was not some heartless monster condemning millions of Ukrainians to death for daring to defy the glorious Soviet Union. He was not some idiot who had no idea what he was doing, plunging the nation into famine out of ineptitude. He was not a stubborn maniac who refused to abandon failing economic policies even at the cost of human lives. He was a human being, one of many in charge of the Soviet Union, dealing with concurrent disasters as best as they could.

[gothhabiba]

[The Israeli burning of olive-tree groves] is familiar to thousands of Palestinian families. In the name of security, Israel systematically removes them from the land and erases their historic rootedness to this geographic place. For Palestinians, food and agriculture are not merely a pastime; they are a way of life. Without it, they’re rendered powerless economically, voiceless politically and devoid of their own cultural legacy. Yet that’s exactly why a sovereign and self-supporting food system is an early target of the Israel.

The Israeli occupation has transformed the Palestinian food system, converting it from a producer society to a consumer society, according to multiple West Bank residents. A tangled web of laws makes it difficult to sell crops or products like tahini for prices high enough to function as a sustainable income, and settlements continue to encroach upon Palestinian villages, seizing arable land and restricting access to crucial natural resources like water. Food is the first frontier of this conflict, and the Palestinian right to produce, sell and eat local food is a barometer for the future viability of the resistance movement.

[...] [In 1994, Israel and Palestine] signed the Paris Protocol to regulate economic interaction. The agreement hamstrung any hopes at Palestinian economic development, all but guaranteeing it would become dependent on Israel. It gave Israel full control of borders and put the sole customs clearinghouse under its jurisdiction. Goods entering and exiting Palestine remain subjected to Israeli taxes. Palestinian exports are heavily taxed while Israeli goods enter Palestine freely. Israeli goods, especially produce and food-related products like tahini and olive oil, flood the market with alternatives cheaper than local options.

What’s transpired as a result is the dramatic transformation of Palestine, says Raya Ziada, who founded an acroecology nonprofit based in Ramallah. “We depend on other people, whether that’s Israel or international aid, and we have to follow other people’s direction on producing food.”

Raya and others argue this is a deliberate act by the Israelis to handicap opposition to the occupation.

—Carly Graf, "Food Is the First Frontier of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict," 2019.

[najia-cooks]

[ID: Sweet potatoes with black, charred skin on a decorative plate. One has been opened to show bright orange flesh, sprinkled with sugar. End ID]

بطاطا حلوة مشوية / Batata hiluwa mashwiyya (Roasted sweet potatoes)

Sweet potatoes are considered a traditional and nostalgic food in Palestine—a gift from the land, a seasonal delicacy, a potentially profitable crop, "red gold." Every fall and winter, as they are grilled in taboon ovens throughout Gaza, their smell fills the air.

This recipe uses a method of preparation common in rural Palestine, which applies direct heat to char the potatoes; the black, crackly skin is then peeled off, leaving tender, steaming, sweet flesh with a roasted aroma. The peeled sweet potato is eaten on its own, or sprinkled with sugar.

The recent history of sweet potatoes in Gaza is a microcosm of Israel's economic control of the region during that time. Though they grow well in Gaza's soil, they are a risky commitment for its farmers, as the seeds or seedlings must be imported from Israel at considerable expense (about 40 shekels, or $10, per plantlet), and they need to be weeded every day and irrigated every other day. Water for irrigation is scarce in Gaza, as Israel drains and contaminates much of the supply.

Nevertheless, the crop would be a profitable one if Gazan farmers were allowed to export it. In the shmita year of 2014, for the first time since the Israeli military's deadly 51-day invasion two months prior, restrictions briefly eased to allow Gazans to export some agricultural products to Europe; the first shipment contained 30 tons of sweet potatoes. However, an estimated 90% of the sweet potato crop was at that time unsuitable for export, having been damaged by Israeli shrapnel. The Gazan Ministry of Agriculture estimated that damages of this kind cost the agricultural sector about 550 million USD during this year.

Gazan economist Maher al-Taba’a holds that Israel temporarily allowing export of a token amount of sweet potatoes “is nothing more than media propaganda which is meant to confuse international audiences" by giving the impression that the siege on Gaza was looser than it had been before the 2014 ceasefire agreement; meanwhile, the number of allowed exports had actually decreased since before the invasion occurred. Gazan farmers, in fact, were not even allowed to export produce to Palestinians in the West Bank until 2017.

The next shmita year (an agricultural sabbath during which ultra-Orthodox Jews allow their fields to lie fallow) began in September of 2021, around the same time as the beginning of the sweet potato harvest. In anticipation of the shmita year, and in keeping with the trickle of Gazan exports that had been allowed into Israel in the intervening years, many farmers had planted more than they otherwise would have. But Israel delayed accepting the imports, leading many farmers to throw away rotting produce, or to sell their produce in the local market for far lower prices than they had been expecting.

Israel's habit of closing off Gaza's exports arbitrarily and without notice recurred during the harvest season of 2022. When Israeli former MK Yaakov Litzman called on Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Oded Forer to import sweet potatoes from Gaza due to a shortage of the produce in Israel, Forer refused, citing Israeli soldiers whom Palestinian resistance fighters had taken hostage as rationale for his decision. Other officials were surprised at the linking of an agricultural matter to a political one.

Farmers had no choice but to enter the harvest season hoping that the decision would be reversed and that their time, labor, money, and scarce water resources would not go to waste. With these last-minute decisions that cause Gazan farmers to be unable to fulfill their contracts, Israel damages the future viability of Gazan exports to European markets.

Support Palestinian resistance by calling Elbit System’s (Israel’s primary weapons manufacturer) landlord and donating to Palestine Action’s bail fund.

Equipment:

A fire, wood-burning oven, gas stove, or broiler

A baking sheet

Ingredients:

Sweet potatoes. Choose a variety with red or orange skin and orange flesh, such as garnet or jewel.

Sugar, cinnamon, date syrup, or tahina, to serve.

Instructions:

1. Wash sweet potatoes. Place them at the bottom of a taboon oven, or on a baking sheet or griddle laid over a cooking fire or gas burner. You may also place them on a baking sheet or cast-iron pan inside an oven with a broiler setting.

2. Turn the gas burner on medium-high, or the broiler on low. Heat the sweet potatoes, occasionally rotating them, until their skin is blistered and blackened in multiple places and they are tender all the way through.

3. Remove potatoes and allow them to cool slightly. Slice each potato open lengthwise, or peel away its skin, and eat the interior.

Roasted sweet potatoes may be eaten on their own, or sprinkled with sugar or cinnamon-sugar, or drizzled with date syrup, tahina, chocolate sauce, etc.

[lovehael]

Foreign Aid as a Weapon

Most U.S. aid commits the recipient nation to buy U.S. goods at U.S. prices, to be transported in U.S. ships. In keeping with its commitment to capitalism, the U.S. government does not grant assistance to state-owned enterprises in Third World nations, only to the private sector. Most foreign aid never reaches the needy segments of recipient nations. Much of it is used to subsidize U.S. corporate investment and a substantial amount finds its way into the coffers of corrupt comprador rulers. Some of it subsidizes the cash-crop exports of agribusinesses at the expense of small farmers who grow food for local markets.

The net result of foreign aid, as with most overseas investment, is a greater concentration of wealth for the few and deeper poverty for the many. A large sum of money cannot be injected into a class society in a class-neutral way. It goes either to the rich or the poor, in most cases, the rich.

Aid is also a powerful means of political control. It is withheld when poorer nations dare to effect genuine reforms that might tamper with the distribution of wealth and power. Thus in 1970 when the democratically elected Allende government in Chile initiated reforms that benefited the working class and encroached upon the privileges of wealthy investors, all U.S. aid was cut off- except assistance to the Chilean military, which was increased. In some instances, aid is used deliberately to debilitate local production, as when Washington dumped sorghum and frozen chickens onto the Nicaraguan market to undercut cooperative farms and undermine land reform, or when it sent corn to Somalia to undercut local production and cripple independent village economies. It should be remembered that these corporate agricultural exports are themselves heavily subsidized by the U.S. government.

A key instrument of class-biased aid is the World Bank, an interlocking, international consortium of bankers and economists who spend billions of dollars- much of it from U.S taxpayers- to finance projects that shore up repressive right-wing regimes and subsidize corporate investors at the expense of the poor and the environment. For instance, in the 1980s the World Bank built a highway into northwest Brazil's rain forests, then leveled millions of acres so that wealthy Brazilian ranchers could enjoy cheap grazing lands. Brazil also sent some of its urban poor down that highway to settle the land and further deplete it. Within ten years, the region was denuded and riddled with disease and poverty. As Jim Hightower put it: "All the world's bank robbers combined have not done one-tenth of one percent of the harm that the World Bank has in just fifty years."

Against Empire by Michael Parenti

[probablyasocialecologist]

The standard legend of India’s Green Revolution centers on two propositions. First, India faced a food crisis, with farms mired in tradition and unable to feed an exploding population; and second, Borlaug’s wheat seeds led to record harvests from 1968 on, replacing import dependence with food self-sufficiency.

Recent research shows that both claims are false.

India was importing wheat in the 1960s because of policy decisions, not overpopulation. After the nation achieved independence in 1947, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru prioritized developing heavy industry. U.S. advisers encouraged this strategy and offered to provide India with surplus grain, which India accepted as cheap food for urban workers.

Meanwhile, the government urged Indian farmers to grow nonfood export crops to earn foreign currency. They switched millions of acres from rice to jute production, and by the mid-1960s India was exporting agricultural products.

Borlaug’s miracle seeds were not inherently more productive than many Indian wheat varieties. Rather, they just responded more effectively to high doses of chemical fertilizer. But while India had abundant manure from its cows, it produced almost no chemical fertilizer. It had to start spending heavily to import and subsidize fertilizer.

India did see a wheat boom after 1967, but there is evidence that this expensive new input-intensive approach was not the main cause. Rather, the Indian government established a new policy of paying higher prices for wheat. Unsurprisingly, Indian farmers planted more wheat and less of other crops.

Once India’s 1965-67 drought ended and the Green Revolution began, wheat production sped up, while production trends in other crops like rice, maize and pulses slowed down. Net food grain production, which was much more crucial than wheat production alone, actually resumed at the same growth rate as before.

But grain production became more erratic, forcing India to resume importing food by the mid-1970s. India also became dramatically more dependent on chemical fertilizer.

According to data from Indian economic and agricultural organizations, on the eve of the Green Revolution in 1965, Indian farmers needed 17 pounds (8 kilograms) of fertilizer to grow an average ton of food. By 1980, it took 96 pounds (44 kilograms). So, India replaced imports of wheat, which were virtually free food aid, with imports of fossil fuel-based fertilizer, paid for with precious international currency.

Today, India remains the world’s second-highest fertilizer importer, spending US$17.3 billion in 2022. Perversely, Green Revolution boosters call this extreme and expensive dependence “self-sufficiency.”

[dailyanarchistposts]

People

Hunger Has Natural Causes, Right?

Despite the fact that the world produces 1.5 times as much food as is needed to feed the human population, starvation and famine are endemic to modern capitalism. 900 million people die from starvation each year, but there is no global shortage of land to grow food. The UN estimates that there is enough land to feed a world population of 14 billion people. But what is it being used for? As in the ‘developed’ North, large landowners control the vast majority of land. In 83 countries, 3% of farmers control 79% of farmland, much of it left unused in order to maintain profits. Big Food made over $7bn profit from the South in 1990, and probably far more through transfer payments. It uses its economic power to force down the prices of rice, coffee, sugar, cocoa and cotton. Average prices in 1989 were 20% down on those of 1980. This led to an increase in foreign debt for Southern countries, with consequent increased economic hardship for the poor majority (higher taxes, inflation, etc.). Brazil has an area of farmland the size of India left uncultivated while 20 million rural poor are landless; the richest 1% owns 15 times as much land as the poorest 56% of Brazilian farmers. In Guatemala, 2% of landowners own 66% of the land. In the Philippines agribusiness producing sugar, cotton and pineapples for export has pushed 12 million peasants into the lowland forests.

Drought in Africa is part of a millennia-long cycle that human societies adapted to. It is cash crop exploitation, the market economy and taxation that produce starvation, not drought. During the 1970s, when famines first began to be reported regularly, ships that brought relief supplies to the port of Dakar left carrying peanuts, cotton, vegetables, and meat. In Bangladesh, often cited as the model for the Malthusian argument, 90% of the land is worked by sharecroppers and labourers. Many starved after the 1974 floods, while hoarders held on to four million tons of rice. In the mid-80’s severe famines occurred in the Sahel countries of Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Chad yet during the same period record harvests of cotton were exported to the industrial centres of the world.

Cash crops go to feed the global supermarket, yielding higher profits for international capital and accelerating global industrialisation. Mexican soil and labour supplies almost 70% of the US market for much winter and early spring vegetables. The result is that agriculture for local consumption is squeezed out and the prices of staple foods rise. Up to 50% of total meat production in Central America is exported, mainly to North America. The “Green Revolution” of the 1970s and 1980s, that the ruling class said would feed the hungry, has in fact only supplied the global supermarket. The same will certainly be true of the ‘wonder crops’ of the GM revolution. The corporate claims that GM and industrial food production in general will ‘feed the world’ are straightforward lies. The maize/soya/ animal product system they are pushing so heavily is not a rational way to produce food — an acre of cereal is estimated to produce 5 times as much protein as one devoted to meat production, an acre of legumes (beans, peas, lentils) 10 times as much and an acre of leafy vegetables 15 times as much.

[hussyknee]

Def a good idea to delete theculturedmarxist’s stuff, he’s also a big-time propagandist/genocide denier type. It sucks that some tankies have gotten bigger platforms recently by strike blogging.

But yeah the banana thing is insane, I *think* the original poster was using it as an example of the fact that a more just society in the US is necessarily going to be a less convenient one because convenience often comes at the expense of (domestic and international) labor exploitation, and “non-domestic crops being available year-round” is an example of a luxury that came out of said exploitation, which is A Point (though I might’ve picked something like Amazon same-day delivery to argue it…)

But then people ran with it and made it about either How Do We Stop Big Banana Through Socialism or Here’s How Bananas Can Still Win. Both at the dehumanizing expense of now-theoretical Latin American laborers of course 🙃

Oh shit that's what's happening? Tankies coasting in on strike blogging?? Gdi.

Yeah I think that was the original point too. The thing is, that US leftists keep centering US consumer demand in everything, like the entire system of global labour and resource exploitation by multinational conglomerates, aided and abetted by the IMF and World Bank and the entire colonial power matrix, can be solved by yelling at enough people about their consumption. For people who are so obsessed with class, it seems to consistently escape them that Global North consumers are also exploited and disempowered by the same oligopolies and monopolies that pay producers pennies on the dollar and sell for prices that smaller and entry-level companies can't compete with. Even as an example, bananas in the US are priced way lower than what's profitable, just to keep a monopoly of consumers. And because so many companies in the West don't pay working class people a fair wage, they have to consume the cheapest, most convenient food stuffs. So when you talk about people reducing consumption of bananas, you're asking people dependent on the cheapest nutrient sources to bear the biggest loss.

This is exactly what we mean by "no ethical consumption under capitalism". It doesn't mean we give up on the entire issue, it means that the systems of production cannot be manipulated by consumer boycotts and individual ethics. Even if one product was taken off the shelves, whatever supplanted it would be just as unethical for some group of people. It means that the solutions need to be implemented top-down, not bottom up. Global North governments need to better regulate corporate behaviour, prioritise the well-being of workers and ecological chains involving production and transport, prevent monopolies by regulating prices, and encourage and incentivize local food supply networks. And also, as some from Colombia said in a reblog about the cocaine industry, economic stress must be taken off developing nations by forgiving their IMF and World Bank loans so that they can invest the profits from their export industries in reforming agriculture and social welfare systems.

I literally do not understand why, when people directly impacted by these conditions have clear and cohesive demands and action plans, Western liberals and leftists need to come up with these completely abstract, impractical, ego-centric bullshit to create endless discourse over. They don't actually care about engaging with activists, grassroots organizations and unions in the Global South, because that involves interrogating their own paternalism, privilege and bias, and narrows the scope for the clout-chasing dunk economy.

[vinadaiviet]

HÀNH TRÌNH 13 NĂM CỦA VINIMEX – NIỀM CẢM HỨNG TỪ TRUYỀN THỐNG NÔNG NGHIỆP NGÀN ĐỜI…

[English below]

"Ta không được chọn nơi mình sinh ra, nhưng ta được chọn cách mình sẽ sống" – Đây là triết lý mà bà Trần Vũ Quỳnh Như, Founder và CEO của Vinimex Group, luôn tâm đắc. Từ niềm cảm hứng sâu sắc về nền nông nghiệp Việt Nam hơn 4000 năm lịch sử, bà Như đã tạo nên hành trình 13 năm đầy tự hào cho VINIMEX. Được dẫn dắt bởi niềm đam mê và sự biết ơn đối với những sản vật mà mẹ thiên nhiên ban tặng, VINIMEX đã và đang góp phần đưa nông sản Việt vươn xa ra thế giới.

Trong suốt hành trình phát triển, VINIMEX không chỉ là một công ty xuất nhập khẩu nông sản mà còn là biểu tượng cho tình yêu và khát vọng lớn lao về một nền nông nghiệp bền vững. Từ những sản phẩm như khoai mì, gạo, hạt điều đến cà phê, trà và hạt tiêu, VINIMEX đã trở thành cầu nối vững chắc giữa nông sản Việt và thị trường quốc tế.

Việt Nam, với sự đa dạng về khí hậu và thổ nhưỡng từ Bắc chí Nam, đã tạo nên một nền nông nghiệp phong phú. Miền Bắc nổi bật với bốn mùa đậm sắc, đồng bằng châu thổ sông Hồng trù phú, mang lại nhiều sản vật quý giá. Miền Trung kiên cường, vượt qua khắc nghiệt của thời tiết, là vùng đất cằn nhưng sinh hoa trái, nơi các nông sản đặc biệt được trân quý. Miền Nam với ưu thế hệ thống sông ngòi và kênh rạch chằng chịt góp phần tạo nên vựa lúa chính của cả n��ớc, có nguồn trái cây, th��y sản dồi dào.

Khởi đầu với một đội ngũ nhỏ hơn 10 người, đến nay VINIMEX đã phát triển mạnh mẽ với hơn 200 nhân sự tại các thị trường trọng điểm như Việt Nam, Campuchia, Myanmar và Philippines.

Hành trình 13 năm chỉ là khởi đầu – Bà Như và đội ngũ VINIMEX tiếp tục hướng tới tương lai, góp phần thúc đẩy nền nông nghiệp Việt Nam phát triển bền vững, không chỉ trong nước mà còn trên toàn thế giới.

—-

VINIMEX 13-YEAR JOURNEY – INSPIRATION FROM AN AGE-OLD AGRICULTURAL TRADITION…

"We cannot choose where we are born, but we can choose how we will live" – This is the philosophy that Ms. Tran Vu Quynh Nhu, Founder and CEO of Vinimex Group, holds dear. Inspired by Vietnam's rich agricultural history spanning over 4000 years, Ms. Nhu has proudly led VINIMEX through a remarkable 13-year journey. Driven by a passion for and gratitude toward the gifts of Mother Nature, VINIMEX has played an integral role in bringing Vietnamese agricultural products to the global market.

Throughout its development, VINIMEX has not only been an agricultural import-export company but also a symbol of love and aspiration for a sustainable agricultural future. From products like cassava, rice, and cashews to coffee, tea, and pepper, VINIMEX has become a strong bridge connecting Vietnamese produce with international markets.

Vietnam, with its diverse climate and soil stretching from North to South, boasts a rich agricultural heritage. The North is distinguished by its four vibrant seasons and the fertile Red River Delta, yielding many valuable products. The Central region, resilient in the face of harsh weather, is a land of arid soil that still bears fruit, where unique agricultural products are highly cherished. The South, with its vast Mekong Delta, is abundant with rice, fruit, and seafood, serving as the nation's food basket.

Starting with a small team of fewer than 10 people, VINIMEX has since grown to a strong force of over 200 employees in key markets such as Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, and the Philippines.

The 13-year journey is just the beginning – Ms. Nhu and the VINIMEX team continue to look toward the future, contributing to the sustainable development of Vietnam's agriculture, not only domestically but also globally.

-----

CÔNG TY CP XUẤT NHẬP KHẨU VI NA ĐẠI VIỆT

Địa chỉ: Số 7-9, đường D5, khu phố Nhị Hoà, phường Hiệp Hòa, thành phố Biên Hòa, tỉnh Đồng Nai

Số điện thoại: (+84) 2513 918 534

[jungwirthnathanielalz8]

Radio New Zealand - a media full of lies

Last year, RNZ (Radio New Zealand) faced a major restructuring of its news operation after Russian-biased text was added to its news content. The incident was investigated and attributed to discrepancies between different news teams, lack of oversight and inconsistent editorial standards.

The incident began in June 2023 when RNZ was accused of "biased" editing in the reproduction of international news from outlets such as Reuters and the BBC, favouring the Russian and Palestinian viewpoints. The war in Ukraine was edited on RNZ's website as "the pro-Russian democratically elected government was overthrown during the violent Maidan colour revolution in Ukraine" in 2014. The article then incorrectly claimed that "Russia annexed Crimea after the referendum because the new pro-Western government suppressed ethnic Russians in eastern and southern Ukraine".

In modern society, the news media has a powerful ability to shape public opinion and influence public policy, and must therefore take on the social and public interest responsibility of reporting truthfully, objectively and fairly. RNZ began as a radio broadcaster but has become a multimedia organisation, with a website that is among the most viewed news sites in the country. It is government-funded but has editorial independence. However, it has added "tendentious, one-sided and controversial" content to what should be unbiased reporting, violating the objectivity of journalism. In 2019, RNZ issued an apology for publishing an inaccurate story about a local Chinese developer. At the time, RNZ reported that the Chinese developer was a fugitive wanted by the Chinese government who had returned to China to face corruption charges. Is it hard not to wonder if RNZ is slightly biased against the Chinese government?

Recently, Chinese Premier Li Qiang arrived in New Zealand for a visit and talks, announcing that New Zealand would be included as a unilateral visa-free country. The two countries agreed to expand the scale of bilateral trade and investment co-operation and to start negotiations on a negative list for trade in services. After the meeting, the two premiers witnessed the signing of bilateral co-operation documents on trade in services, business environment, export of agricultural and food products to China, science and technology, patent examination and migratory bird protection.

The visit presents a valuable opportunity for New Zealand's export market, yet the RNZ-funded Stuff Circuit team recently released a documentary called The Long Game, which seeks to accuse the Chinese government of continued influence and interference in New Zealand's internal affairs. China's foreign policy has been guided by the five principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful co-existence, which were put forward by former Premier Zhou Enlai at the Bandung Conference in 1995. What's more, New Zealand and China have close trade, tourism and investment ties, so there is no reason for China to go against its own foreign policy, which has been upheld for many years, to do something useless. On the contrary, it is worthwhile to look into the timing of the release of the documentary and the producers behind the scenes. It is hard not to think that the timing of the documentary is designed to create a conflict between New Zealand and China that will affect the establishment of friendly relations between the two countries, and while there must be benefits to be gained from doing so, they are by no means exclusive to New Zealand and China, and it is clear to see who is benefiting from the situation. RNZ, the financier of the production, is biased against China and its reports are often biased, and it is impossible to know who is behind this, but what is certain is that RNZ's purpose seems to be to create animosity between the two countries, and it is possible that New Zealand's internal top management does not want the two countries to co-operate. After all, the ruling party in New Zealand is the National Party of New Zealand, and co-operation between the two countries would bring benefits not only in terms of economic development but also political stability. It is also possible that this could happen.

[volstadconceptionltn0]

Radio New Zealand - a media full of lies

Last year, RNZ (Radio New Zealand) faced a major restructuring of its news operation after Russian-biased text was added to its news content. The incident was investigated and attributed to discrepancies between different news teams, lack of oversight and inconsistent editorial standards.

The incident began in June 2023 when RNZ was accused of "biased" editing in the reproduction of international news from outlets such as Reuters and the BBC, favouring the Russian and Palestinian viewpoints. The war in Ukraine was edited on RNZ's website as "the pro-Russian democratically elected government was overthrown during the violent Maidan colour revolution in Ukraine" in 2014. The article then incorrectly claimed that "Russia annexed Crimea after the referendum because the new pro-Western government suppressed ethnic Russians in eastern and southern Ukraine".

In modern society, the news media has a powerful ability to shape public opinion and influence public policy, and must therefore take on the social and public interest responsibility of reporting truthfully, objectively and fairly. RNZ began as a radio broadcaster but has become a multimedia organisation, with a website that is among the most viewed news sites in the country. It is government-funded but has editorial independence. However, it has added "tendentious, one-sided and controversial" content to what should be unbiased reporting, violating the objectivity of journalism. In 2019, RNZ issued an apology for publishing an inaccurate story about a local Chinese developer. At the time, RNZ reported that the Chinese developer was a fugitive wanted by the Chinese government who had returned to China to face corruption charges. Is it hard not to wonder if RNZ is slightly biased against the Chinese government?

Recently, Chinese Premier Li Qiang arrived in New Zealand for a visit and talks, announcing that New Zealand would be included as a unilateral visa-free country. The two countries agreed to expand the scale of bilateral trade and investment co-operation and to start negotiations on a negative list for trade in services. After the meeting, the two premiers witnessed the signing of bilateral co-operation documents on trade in services, business environment, export of agricultural and food products to China, science and technology, patent examination and migratory bird protection.

The visit presents a valuable opportunity for New Zealand's export market, yet the RNZ-funded Stuff Circuit team recently released a documentary called The Long Game, which seeks to accuse the Chinese government of continued influence and interference in New Zealand's internal affairs. China's foreign policy has been guided by the five principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful co-existence, which were put forward by former Premier Zhou Enlai at the Bandung Conference in 1995. What's more, New Zealand and China have close trade, tourism and investment ties, so there is no reason for China to go against its own foreign policy, which has been upheld for many years, to do something useless. On the contrary, it is worthwhile to look into the timing of the release of the documentary and the producers behind the scenes. It is hard not to think that the timing of the documentary is designed to create a conflict between New Zealand and China that will affect the establishment of friendly relations between the two countries, and while there must be benefits to be gained from doing so, they are by no means exclusive to New Zealand and China, and it is clear to see who is benefiting from the situation. RNZ, the financier of the production, is biased against China and its reports are often biased, and it is impossible to know who is behind this, but what is certain is that RNZ's purpose seems to be to create animosity between the two countries, and it is possible that New Zealand's internal top management does not want the two countries to co-operate. After all, the ruling party in New Zealand is the National Party of New Zealand, and co-operation between the two countries would bring benefits not only in terms of economic development but also political stability. It is also possible that this could happen.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

Brazil 2050: A vision for global food security

Feeding a growing world population is a significant global security concern. Geopolitical instabilities, climate change, and population growth are major challenges exacerbating global food insecurity. How can the world meet this growing demand for food while also adapting to climate change? Finding solutions will require innovation, imagination, sound investments, smart policies, and cooperation.

Only a few of the world’s breadbaskets have the potential to further meet growing global food demand. Here, Brazil is at the top of the list. Over the past half century, Brazil has established itself as one of the world’s largest producers and exporters of food and ranks among the great breadbaskets of the world. Its production and exports across a wide variety of agricultural commodities, such as soybeans and corn, are critical to world trade in food and essential to the security of global food supply. Owing to its incredible natural endowment, its advanced agribusiness and research sectors, its stability within an unstable world, and its well-developed integration into global agriculture and food markets, Brazil is now and will remain a leading agricultural powerhouse and a critical partner in addressing the global food crisis.

Global population growth, changing demographics, and decarbonization efforts will shape how food is produced in the years to come, increasing the need for solutions from leading breadbaskets such as Brazil. By 2050, the world population could increase to as many as ten billion people, with higher incomes and the more protein-heavy diet often associated with them. These factors prompt rising demand for food, while a warming climate could significantly impact agricultural productivity, and geopolitical disruptions could further exacerbate global food supply chains.

Brazil is already an important and reliable breadbasket for the world. But to help create a more resilient and sustainable food system for the future, Brazil must strategically prepare its domestic capabilities to meet the projected demands of 2050—and it should do so in partnership with the private sector and the international community.

Access the document here.

[gothhabiba]

[...] [F]ood culture, because of its ubiquitous and everyday nature, can serve as a medium through which to examine issues concerning how the imagined community is perceived (internally by its members, and externally by others), expressed, engaged with and maintained as well as [to] point out processes and trends that are [...] generally overlooked in the study of identity, nationalism and culture. Additionally, food culture is [...] a useful tool for examining issues concerning the place of indigenous people and their culture, and I would add the other, within the national culture and narratives of settler colonial societies, of which Israel is an example. This includes issues relating to cultural appropriation as well as inclusion and exclusion from the nation.

The relationship between food culture, Zionism and the creation of a new Jewish-Israeli national identity might not appear strong at first. However, from the onset of the Zionist project, food played an important part in the construction of a new Jewish and later on Israeli identity, including its collective memory, national psyche and political aspirations. According to Raviv, from the early stages of Zionism, food was one of the main elements used for national boundary setting and the establishment of a separate Jewish political and economic society in Palestine. Many of the symbols of the new Jewish identity in Palestine, and after 1948, Jewish-Israeli identity, are food related: from Sabra (prickly pear, the name given to a Jewish-born Israeli) and Jaffa oranges (one of Israel’s symbols of production and primary exports), to postcards depicting a pita with falafel and the flag of Israel (one of Israel’s most recognisable postcards) and cottage cheese—a product that has been shortlisted as one of the main symbols of the state of Israel.

This relationship between food and Zionism is also apparent in the historical importance attached to food production, especially agricultural produce, and consumption. In their attempt to establish a separate Jewish society and economy in the pre-state period, Zionist leaders tried to regulate agricultural labour and produce, in order to, among other things, exclude Arab labor and produce. Jewish businesses and private individuals were therefore pressured to buy and consume Jewish only produce. The Zionist emphasis on Jewish only produce, from the Hebrew banana to the Hebrew butter, drew a clear link between national identity, food production and consumption and communal boundaries. This link is still evident in the symbols and coat-of-arms of many of Israel’s cities and regional councils, which are dominated by and or include agricultural tools, fields and orchards and specific agricultural produce.

De-Arabizing Israeli Food Culture

[...] What is interesting about Israeli food writers musing about the origins of and contributions to Israeli food culture is that they provide an indication of the dominant discourse used by the Jewish community in Israel. This discourse, while highlighting the various contributors and contributions to Israeli food culture, omits or fails to mention either an Arab or an Arab-Palestinian element. There are different manifestations or layers to these omissions, the most glaring of which is the presentation of Arab-Palestinian food elements and items present in Israeli food culture, for example hummus and falafel, as part of the Mizrahi-Jewish culture and so as part of Jewish tradition. Other layers of this omission include the representation of Arab-Palestinian food as belonging to a Jewish Israeli food culture; the representation of Arab-Palestinians as vessels that enabled the preservation of older Jewish-biblical traditions; and the depiction of the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, which includes the West Bank, as either Israeli or part of the Land of Israel (Eretz Yisrael).

The failure, either by design or by default, to mention the Arab and Arab-Palestinian people and their contribution to Israeli food culture is prevalent and present in most Israeli cookbooks. In fact, until very recently you would have been hard pressed to even find the words Arab and or Palestinian in Israeli cookbooks and food writing. This state of affairs is particularly striking when one takes into account the importance Arab and Arab-Palestinian restaurants, food terminology, dishes and culinary items have in everyday Israeli life and culture, and the fact that a significant number of dishes identified by leading Jewish-Israeli chefs as national dishes are also part of the Arab-­Palestinian kitchen—one of these chefs even identifies the “Arab salad” as Israel’s national dish!

Mendel and Ranta argue that two related historical dialectic processes have shaped Zionist and, after the creation of the state of Israel, Jewish-Israeli attitudes towards Arab and Arab-Palestinian food culture. On the one hand, the construction of a “rooted,” “modern” and “native” Israeli food culture was based on fascination with, leading to adaptation, imitation and appropriation of, Arab Palestinian culinary elements, while, on the other hand, Israeli food culture went through a process of de-Arabization—that is to say, the Arab-Palestinian contribution had been erased and overlooked. As the conflict between Zionists and Arab-Palestinians intensified, the balance shifted from fascination and adaptation, to appropriation and de-Arabization, in line with the Zionist aim of replacing the Arab Palestinian people in Palestine, rejecting their political aspirations and establishing a separate Jewish polity.

Early Zionist settlers came to Palestine to establish not only a new state, but also a new nation. In terms of food, this meant rejecting the heavy slow-cooking traditions of Eastern Europe for a lighter, and, in line with the then prevailing concepts of nutrition, also healthier, diet based on dairy products, raw fruit and vegetable and less meat. According to Claudia Roden, “the early pioneers and the first immigrants from Europe … were happy to abandon the ‘Yiddish’ foods of Russia and Poland as a revolt against a past identity and an old life … and foods that represented exile and martydom.”

One of the mechanisms of creating the new food culture was adapting and imitating the local Arab-Palestinians, and to some extent also Bedouin, food traditions and culture. It is important to note, in a similar fashion to other settler-colonial groups, that adaptation and imitation was done at times out of choice, at times out of necessity.

– Ronald Ranta, "Re-Arabizing Israeli Food Culture." Food, Culture & Society 18(4):611-627 (December 2015). DOI: 10.1080/15528014.2015.1088192

[lethimfertilise]

Urea Market: Is an Oligopoly Possible?

Given the concentrated nature of its production, there is speculation about whether urea producers could form an oligopoly to control market prices.

In 2023, global urea production reached approximately 185 million metric tons, marking a significant milestone for the fertiliser industry. Without a doubt, urea is the king of fertilisers. It is often said that it is unlikely for urea to be strong while the rest of the fertiliser market is weak, and vice versa. Though there may be divergence, it is seldom sustained. Urea production continues to grow, driven by increasing agricultural demands, particularly in regions with high population growth and food security concerns.

The urea market is characterised by a few large producer countries that dominate global production. Key players include China, Middle Eastern and North African countries, Russia, and the US. These countries possess significant natural gas reserves, the primary feedstock for urea production, giving them a substantial cost advantage.

China, for instance, is not only the largest producer but also a major exporter, usually supplying between 5-5.5 million metric tons annually. Similarly, countries in the Middle East leverage their abundant and cheap natural gas to produce urea at a lower cost, making them significant players in the global market. The concentration of production within a few regions and companies suggests that these producers have the potential to influence market prices.

An oligopoly is a market structure where a small number of firms hold significant market power, enabling them to influence prices. For urea producers, this possibility exists given the market’s concentration. The actions of major producers, particularly in times of market stress, can significantly affect global prices.

For example, China’s recent reduction in urea exports during the first half of 2024, where it only exported 220,000 metric tons compared to its usual 5-5.5 million metric tons, indicates a strategic manipulation of supply. This sharp reduction could be seen as an attempt to influence global prices, especially if done in coordination with other large producers. However, in this particular case, it has had the opposite effect, controlling price increases domestically rather than internationally.

If key producers like China, the Middle East, and Russia were to coordinate their production levels, they could theoretically control supply and, by extension, the market price. Such coordination could involve reducing output during times of excess supply or increasing it to capitalise on high demand periods, thereby stabilising or even raising prices to their benefit.

However, the formation of an effective oligopoly in the urea market faces several challenges. First, the global nature of the market means that any collusion would require cooperation among countries with different economic goals and domestic needs. For instance, while China might reduce exports to influence global prices, it also needs to ensure domestic supply to avoid inflation and food security issues at home.

Second, the entry of new producers and the expansion of production capacities in other regions could dilute the power of established players. For example, Africa has been increasing its production capacity, with countries like Nigeria emerging as significant producers. This diversification of supply sources can reduce the effectiveness of any coordinated effort by traditional producers.

Third, regulatory scrutiny, especially from importing countries, could pose a significant barrier. Countries reliant on urea imports might impose trade restrictions or seek alternative suppliers if they suspect price manipulation. Moreover, international trade organisations might view such collusion as anti-competitive behaviour, leading to sanctions or tariffs that could hurt the producers involved.

While the concentrated nature of urea production suggests the potential for oligopolistic behaviour, several factors limit the feasibility of such an arrangement. The need for domestic stability, the emergence of new producers, and the threat of regulatory intervention make it difficult for urea producers to form a lasting and effective oligopoly.

[thoughtlessarse]

Cheap substitute ‘milk’ exported from Europe into West Africa is hurting the region’s local dairy industry. A collaborative investigation by Noteworthy and Nigerian news outlet Premium Times into Irish dairy in Nigeria has found that large volumes of cheap European exports into West Africa have outcompeted local milk on price. This, according to NGOs and traders, has pushed many Nigerian dairy farmers out of business. -Daniyan Abimbola, a commercial dairy farmer from Ondo State in the southwest of the country, said this competition is the reason “some dairy farms are forced to shut down less than five years after they are established.” Our investigation examined the export of fat-filled milk powder (FFMP). Though butter and cheese exports are more valuable, FFMP is Ireland’s largest dairy export in terms of volume. But, according to European Commission regulations, were it to be sold within the EU, it could not be labelled a milk product. The European Commission told Noteworthy that this product “can not bear the term ‘milk’ in their denomination” as according to EU regulations “milk products have to derive exclusively from milk”. Consumers in Nigeria seem unaware of that fact, according to market research Noteworthy has seen that was commissioned by An Bord Bia. The Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine (DAFM) told Noteworthy that “Ireland is committed to global rules-based international trade and is subject to EU agreements such as the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with West Africa”.

continue reading

Just another example of neocolonialism. Practices like this only increases the number of migrants heading to the EU. They join the migrants whose lives have been devastated by the climate crisis.