How food becomes unaffordable

Our production of food requires climatic stability. Without enough rain, we suffer droughts that make food production impossible. With too much rain, we suffer the opposite problem: Fields covered in water that cause the crops to rot. So after England just had the wettest 18 months ever recorded, things are not looking good. Farmers across the British isles are unable to plant their potato spuds, as putting them in the ground will simply cause them to rot when there’s too much water. But you can’t store them forever either. Prices for anything made of potatoes are going to surge as a result.

Cocoa prices are skyrocketing too:

There’s going to be a supply shortfall, because in West Africa they’re dealing with abnormal weather too: Excess rain in July harmed the flowers and helped disease spread. The pattern of droughts followed by excess rain is a normal consequence of climate change, but not good for many crops. And for countries in West Africa where the entire economy revolves around chocolate, this can not be good either. There are solutions: They can decide to plant their crop under trees, which would capture excess rain and protect the crop.

With eggs and chickens you now have the problem of bird flu spreading across the globe, forcing producers to kill millions of the poor birds. This will cause prices to go up. There’s a good chance we will see the same happen for dairy products. They’re saying the bird flu spreads between cows because of the machinery used to milk them. But if you don’t milk cows they’ll die, so you can’t just wait until the cows get better.

This whole situation comes after many cows in Texas died in the second-largest fire in American history. What happened there is that excess rain last summer caused the grass to grow very rapidly. Then in late autumn it freezed, so the grass died. During the very warm winter, that grass then dried out. Finally, the conditions were set that allowed fire to spread very rapidly. It’s somewhat similar to what happened on Maui. The food they were going to feed to their cattle went up in smoke.

In the Texas panhandle they used to grow crops, but when they ran out of groundwater, they increasingly began to depend on cattle. It seems to me that the non-native grasses they’re mostly using can’t properly cope with the weather extremes, so they ended up with a bunch of dead dried out grass, providing a lot of fuel for the fire.

Of course many people are not really willing to acknowledge that billions of animals kept in cages cause viruses to evolve in harmful ways:

It must be a conspiracy to stop people from eating meat! Well, that reminds me of this chart:

If you’re a liberal, you’re going to feel depressed and go to the doctor for it. But if you’re a conservative who thinks Trump is about to shut down a network of satan-worshipping pedophiles, the government is creating and spreading bird flu to force you to stop eating meat or houses are painted with blue roofs by celebrities so that the government does not destroy them with space-lasers, you’re not going to think of yourself as mentally ill. The more conservative you are, the more unwilling you are to acknowledge the mental problems you’re dealing with.

Instead of acknowledging that humans have destroyed the global food system by putting billions of animals in cages, causing climate change and transforming bird flu into an abnormally deadly virus, it seems about a third of all Americans are going to be sucked into a rabbit hole of mentally ill people who imagine there must be some sort of plan to make meat unaffordable to them and force them to go vegan or die of hunger.

Of course there are a lot of things that people could do to solve these problems, but they’re just not doing them. Let’s look at England for a moment. The native vegetation of northwestern Europe is deciduous forests. But England today has basically the lowest woodland coverage of Europe, together with my own country:

Both countries are very eager to import infinite numbers of brown people, for whom they will have to build houses. But here’s the thing: Even if you convinced all those brown people to stand in their backyard with their mouths open gazing at the sky, it would not allow you to capture all the rain!

I understand politicians have a kind of dick-measuring contest with each other, to prove how not-racist they are by importing more brown people than the other politicians, but if those brown people then starve to death because you’re no longer able to produce food, you will still be considered racist! Try importing trees instead of brown people, if you want to grow food!

British LSWMs: “If we leave the EU, does that mean fewer brown people entering our country?”

Conservative party: “Um yeah, haha, um sure… no more brown people, in fact, all the pakistani rapists will go back to their own country, pinky-promise!” (proceed to turn the country into a tax haven)

Narrator voice: The country became even browner

If England and the Netherlands had not pursued endless population growth through migration, they would have had room for forests that can capture the excess rain. This means you would not have to flood your farmland to keep the cities dry. The soils used in agriculture have a decreasing capacity to store water, because of heavy machinery that compacts the deeper layers. But trees make deep roots, that allow water to be stored in very deep layers. Then when you start having a dry period again, the trees will help release that moisture.

Of course as (trigger warning for LSWMs) Monbiot illustrates here, the British really kind of do it to themselves. Have a look at this:

Keep in mind this is not just their agricultural fields where they have grazing animals. They do it to their nature reserves too! They will just have some hill with a bit of grass on it and think that this is the natural landscape. All that rain that would normally be captured by trees will flood downhill, towards the farmers fields where they try to grow potatoes.

In Ireland all the same problems apply. Unlike Britain, Ireland still has a low population density. Ireland could just cover wide parts of the country in forests, so that the trees capture the excess rain, so they don’t have to go through another potato famine. But instead of planting trees, they also want to plant brown people! In Ireland, 2.8% of the population came to Ireland in the last year. Here’s my suggestion to the Irish: Just call yourselves indigenous people of color, then you are 100% not racist and don’t have to prove it with infinite numbers of brown people!

Of course I know the argument. “Brown people create economic growth.” Well you will soon find out that you can not eat money. The economy is all fake anyway. If your wife cuts your hair for you it contributed nothing to the economy. If you go get your haircut by a person of color downtown, you get the exact same result, but now it shows up in the GDP figures and ZOMG GDP WENT UP BY 2% IMAGINE HOW MUCH MORE IT WOULD GO UP WITH EVEN MORE BROWN PEOPLE I’M COOMING.

But nobody really wants to seriously think about any of these problems. A third of the population wants to fill their country with as many brown people as possible to prove they are not racist, apparently forgetting that climate change means you’re going to go hungry. Another third of the population thinks that Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates are making deadly viruses to force low IQ low status white males to stop eating meat.

The final third of the population just tries to ignore it all and bases their entire personality and sense of self worth on their job, as if they can somehow work themselves out of these problems. They imagine there will be some sort of technology down the line that will solve these problems for them. I hear the dumbest bullshit peddled: “Vaccines! Nuclear! We can block the sun!”

If you can’t see what a dramatic failure the COVID vaccines have been, I can’t help you. If you can’t figure out that nuclear power plants that take a decade before they come online and already have to shut down in Stockholm during summer because the water gets too warm can’t save us, I can’t help you. And if you seriously want to start blocking the sun, I guess you just kind of deserve what’s headed our way. The ocean continues acidifying even if you block the sun.

And if you just decide not to pay attention to it all, if you decide to just drown yourself in entertainment, or if you just decide to pretend your bullshit job is the most important thing in the world, you just kind of deserve it too.

Don’t look away. Just try really understanding the world, even if you don’t like what you see, it’s more dignified.

I’m going to make some new Youtube videos for you guys, I promise they will be interesting.

But please, don’t look away.

And don’t get upset with me for not looking away.

You’re not stupid.

You can see this happening.

Don’t pretend not to notice it.

Don’t try to distract yourself.

Acknowledge it.


  1. You forgot about the other third — us boomers who only have to worry about the next twenty years, who’s main problem is how to spend our savings and really no longer give a shit that Democrats (commie fascists) are destroying the US and the Liberals/NDP (commie fascists) are doing the same to Canada, and other commie fascists are following the same demented playbook in Scotland (8,000 ‘hate’ complaints in first week of new hate-crime law), Ireland, next England, when the dreadful Tories get turfed for the even more dreadful Labour party, and much of the Continent, which wants to send their children to either fight Putin or take gender-bending drugs. Twenty years is all I ask.

    • Bob, none of us will get that twenty years. The tighter the sociopathic asses squeeze, the sooner things deteriorate. None of this is avoidable.

  2. Interesting food for thought. There is a reason why we do not see any alien civilization, and we might be witnessing these reasons ourselves.

    Remember that famines due to crop failures, often weather-related, were a regular occurrence during the pre-industrial era. They are greatly mitigated now by the global food trade.

    I recall a WEF agenda article posted around last summer that explained that climate change might necessitate a change of crops and growing more millet and less wheat, or some such. I cook millet occasionally, by the way.

    • I’m of the opinion, based on observable evidence, that we see remnants of either alien civilization, or highly advanced human civilization, that ceased to exist. Or, a hybrid civilization of earthly beings influenced by alien civilization.

      A related opinion, is that we see clues indicating the alien civilization is currently influencing earth events. The collective “we” just don’t want to consider that possibility.

      On the other hand I’m just an idiot who steals ideas.

  3. I’m neutral on “climate change”. If “climate change” affects food production, then we should see its effects on China, one of the largest producers and consumers of global food supply, and one of the worst “climate offenders”.

    Based on Statista data for the last decade, I simply do not see any decrease in food production in China. Total production volume of major grain crops in China has steadily increased and is up almost 10% over a decade. Total Fruit production volume increased by about 1/3 over that same period. Pig livestock and meat production volume also show no sign of decline.

    Sure, UK and Netherland may have problems but how can you be sure that it is a result of climate change and not simply normal fluctuations or other local factors.

    You may be proven correct but your evidence is weak.

    • >I’m neutral on “climate change”. If “climate change” affects food production, then we should see its effects on China, one of the largest producers and consumers of global food supply, and one of the worst “climate offenders”.

      Sigh. It’s a global thing. The atmosphere is well mixed. I’m amazed this has to be explained.

      • I just looked up India, another billion population. On farming, Statista data on gross value added from the crop industry over a decade shows a gain of 20%. Sure the atmosphere is well mixed and climate change is real. Then shows us the global food production decline over the last decade or century due to climate change. Otherwise, you are just cherry picking data to prove your climate change hypothesis.

        • orca, i agree with you in that i’m neutral on climate change. however, i think your argument extrapolating from the past is misguided.

          i think we can all agree that the earth is finite. (can we?) since the earth as a whole is finite, one component of the earth–hydrocarbons–is also finite. ipso facto, peak oil exists. however, stupid economists will claim “hah, US crude production is the highest ever!” as if uneconomic fracking means anything.

          to return to food: i don’t doubt your statistics about food production, but they aren’t telling the whole story. it is documented that fruits and vegetables are getting less nutritious due to soil depletion, analogous to the reduction in the quality of hydrocarbons being extracted today. how about all the water rights battles plaguing the southwest? if you can manage to increase production by 2% for 1.1x the water cost, surely that’s a warning sign. apiarists take their hives on the road because we’ve destroyed the natural habitat of pollinators. if you can get 1% more almond trees planted but have to bring in 3% more hives to pollinate, that’s another problem. we can currently absorb these increases because for the past 100 years or so, with increased mechanization and the haber process, agriculture has orders of magnitude more productive than we need (cf. population boom), but surely that can’t continue forever. anyways, with peak oil, there’s the “energy return on energy invested” metric that has been pretty steadily going down, even if raw production is stable or increasing. has something like that been calculated for food production? is it stable (your assumption) or decreasing (RR’s assumption)?

          again, i don’t know who’s right and i agree with your climate change neutrality, but i think you are victim of normalcy bias by pointing to aggregate production statistics.

          • I am not here to dispute Rintrah’s climate change hypothesis. You have super intelligent people on both sides of the hypothesis. However, he is citing poor food production in countries like UK and Netherland, which IMHO is specific to those countries, when we do not have a global food production problem. Sure cocoa prices have shot up, but I can almost guarantee you that they will revert to normal next year, if not year after next. We have had orange shortages some years, so is he going to cite them as proof of “climate change” when we have a poor harvest? He needs to provide better evidence to convince people like me. Well, he did not believe in “climate change” previously and maybe he will change his mind again in future. Who knows.

    • China is also arguably the most technically capable country on earth with a strong government able to take drastic action. And it has taken drastic action to preserve and grow its agricultural and supporting sectors, but they and everyone else knows there are limits.

  4. I agree with your takes on climate, COVID, animal agriculture, etc. But I’m not convinced by your anti-nuclear stance. China has been building nuclear reactors within 5 years.

    • I’m a chemist and will also have to read it 3x, having only skimmed it. At first sight, the guy needs to debate Michael Mann and/or James Hansen (on TV or online).

      FWIW, as Dr. Steve Koonin pointed out in his book ‘Unsettled’, the warming rate in one period in the early 20th.C was nearly as rapid as the rate since the 1960s. Fossil fuel consumption was low.

  5. The English Brexited because they were fed up of the Poles and other white East Europeans, for reasons known to themselves.

    If they want to limit brown people, they can freely vote for extreme right wing parties, as can you in the Netherlands.

    Vote for a Hitlerian party if you want to send all the brown people in the Netherlands to the gas chambers.

    But in a democracy you have to respect the majority.

    Rad, you are a bloody hypocrite.

    On the one hand, you admire Budhhists and Hindus – brown people, also kinder to animals than the factory farming white people.

    On the other hand you have a go at brown people all the time for no reason.

    Brown people are not creating the policies and laws in Europe – white people are.

    I am not advocating murder in any form, but Breivik went for the white people who were responsible for bringing the brown people in his country. He could have more easily murdered more brown people if he wanted to.

    It is white people who have created the mess in Europe, not brown or black or yellow people.

    On the one hand you promote veganism, which I support.

    On the other hand, you admire evil cannibal monsters like Amin and Bokassa, not to forget Nigerian witch doctors who could solve your problems by sacrificing humans for you.

    The LSWMs you attack all the time probably think more rationally than you do.

    They have defined their bottom line and stick with it, like the Brexiters.

    You on the other hand are all over the place.

    Making brilliant comments and then spoiling the whole article to exhibit your prejudices.

    Why don’t you use your superior intelligence to think and write rationally instead of seeing everything in terms of white and brown?

    • >Why don’t you use your superior intelligence to think and write rationally instead of seeing everything in terms of white and brown?

      I enjoy shitting on bourgeois social norms.

      Same reason sid vicious and Nancy wore swastikas.

  6. If by brown people you mean people of a certain Middle Eastern religion, why don’t you say so openly?

    Although they are more white than brown.

  7. LOL, the haircut by a person of color is such a brilliant way to explain the fake economy, GDP boost and line-go-up.

    Unfortunately, I don’t think the Irish will be able to declare themselves indigenous people of color. Even the Portuguese and southern Italians couldn’t do it and instead must continually prove they’re not racist.

    Speaking of excess rain, I remember reading local news about mass deaths of birds as they couldn’t feed when it rained in a single month the amount expected for the whole year.

    • The haircut example kind of misses the broader question; what is an economy?

      No one needs their hair cut. You could just let it grow. Having it cut is sheer vanity.

      Most human activity is around things we want and not need. The fact that we act to fulfill these wants is what drives others to take action.

      If I want my hair cut, I have to generate value to someone else, so that they will pay me and I can give that currency to a brown barber. Even if I have my wife do it, I have to work to support her.

      There is no way to measure this creation and exchange of value, because value itself is 100% objective, which is the same as not existing.

      The idea of GDP is Fugazi and is part of the smokescreen used to control people.

  8. Just remember to go a bit easy on yourselves.

    It’s like someone struck a match, and now it’s flaring up, and will inevitably burn out – unless it is suddenly plunged into water and extinguished. Either of those outcomes would be bad for the system (and by extension all of us), as the system needs to keep burning stuff up to stay alive.

    There really is no great way out of this.

    The match was struck before any of us were born. We got no say at all in it. And now, events have a momentum of their own and just have to run their course.

    It’s a bit late for a tame greenie like Monbiot to stand in an empty field, waving his hands at the barren landscape, with a few ragged weeds growing by the roadside and spout his hopium: “We can just fix this can of shit!”

    Ha, ha – no you can’t! It’s not going to happen, and it’s already gone.

    It’s only when the system has finally burned out, that nature will finally have a chance to climb its way out of the ashes.

    • We can fix it. It is technologically feasible.
      The problem is that people want a Government to do it, rather than themselves.

      Example: as populations mature, their birth rate goes down. Thus self-solving the problem of overpopulation. The Statist solution to this is to rob less-mature populations of their most-mature members, thereby forcing population growth in both populations higher.

      Statism is not a system which is competent to actually fix any problems of any size. All solutions implemented by a government will always spiral into huge problems themselves. Always.

      • So, less government will fix the global, planet devouring, industrial-technological system?

        Sorry, I don’t find that convincing.

        I don’t find more government convincing either.

        No matter what sort of operating system purports to control it (and I have serious doubts as to whether the system is under rational, human control), the system is a terminator.

        And the terminator gonna terminate.

  9. Those UK net migration figures – if you add the two lines up, you will see that actually the total is very stable compared to the jump in the graph.

    I have heard this blamed on the fact that brown people were using the EU as a migratory path into the UK.

    Either way, you can have open borders, OR you can have a welfare system. You can’t have both.

    Anyway, it is clear that people’s support of Government is just destroying the whole planet.

  10. You are not a Jew. You assert that you are a Jew, but I do not believe you. You speak about ridding Europe of the impure degenerate brown inbred races, you are a vegan and encourage the whole of Europe to go vegan, you are against the queer-trans-globo-homo cultural Marxism takeover, you hate communists and view communists as the enemy, you are into mind bending drugs, you are kind to animals, you are in favor of sending Jews to British Palestine, you are against animal vivisection testing, you are pro animal rights and animal protection laws, you engage in artistic pursuits and you are an on-line leader of the low status working class people. You are not a Jew. You are a next-gen online pro-Europe pro-racial-purity skinhead with facial tats.

  11. Summary: We need forests.
    The Dutch have been saying this for a few years now, because they noticed that forests near crops also provide better health to the crops. But I can’t find the link.
    Not so relevant:
    What is interesting (at least to my fellow LSWMs–lol), is that the Netherlands can be viewed as the real cradle of Capitalism, even before England. Perhaps, because the English had a strong monarchy, which, combined to the ties with France, led to a clever (or cunning) building of an Empire. There is no true “laissez faire” in England, bc the state was using state power against its competitors.
    Note that the English are Anglicans, which is not a pure form of Protestantism (the Dutch worldview).
    Anyway, the Dutch was obviously a great place to live and prosper for the Jews who were probably (genetic) descendants of the other great merchants, the Phoenicians.
    Interestingly, the Phoenicians had also accumulated great knowledge on farming (my guess: from their travels and the fact they were intermediates of great cultures), which were used in Carthage too. The Romans were very interested in them and learnt a a great deal.

    • Jews experts in information -> political power not money

      Orwell said “trust a snake before a Jew and a Jew before a Greek but don’t trust an Armenian.”

      There are better commercial races out there. Jews turn their money (and all their other activities) into political power via gaining control of information.

      Money, for them, is just a means to a political end.

      But sure, they got turbocharged by obtaining money so easily living among the rich and productivity but gullible North Euro

      • > Jews experts in information

        I can very easily agree to this! It is in their tradition… Their Scriptures, besides a treasury of wisdom, are also a very efficient database…
        And probably you are right about other “commercial races”. The Jews don’t seem to be hoarders..

  12. Yup, pro-immigration politicians are destroying Ireland. We already have record homelessness and housing shortages, but our traitorous leaders don’t care.

    Thankfully however, we are (at least for now) the second most food secure nation in the world, just behind Finland:

    However, since the majority of our farmers are vaxxed and boosted, God only knows what will happen in the future.

    Also, if AMOC collapses we are completely and utterly screwed.

  13. I have no problem with predators eating other animals. Just the other day I watched an eagle snatch a duck from the water. I’m sure the duck screamed and felt pain. But I want the beautiful eagle to survive, and the entire ecosystem collapses without predators.

    The problem with humans is overpopulation. Every incremental human is more land taken for roads, houses, mining, farming, etc… Habitat destruction and pollution are the problem. We *smart* humans need to control ourselves.

Leave a Reply

The patients in the mental ward have had their daily dose of xanax and calmed down it seems, so most of your comments should be automatically posted again. Try not to annoy me with your low IQ low status white male theories about the Nazi gas chambers being fake or CO2 being harmless plant food and we can all get along. Have fun!

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.