The UN took recently down an article entitled: The Benefits of World Hunger. It claims, Hungry people are the most productive people, especially where there is a need for manual labour.
The article is written by a supposed expert in world hunger named George Kent who hails from the University of Hawaii. His tract essentially tries to seemingly make hunger out to be a good thing:
Much of the hunger literature talks about how it is important to assure that people are well fed so that they can be more productive. That is nonsense. No one works harder than hungry people. Yes, people who are well nourished have greater capacity for productive physical activity, but well-nourished people are far less willing to do that work ...
For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets. No wonder people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.
As far as Dr. Kent is concerned, hunger really isn't all that bad, unless you're the one who is hungry. Is it any wonder that Communist societies frequently had food lines and people would go for long periods without food?
What it comes down to, is that hungry people can be controlled or enslaved since they will work for food. Very interesting that this is revealed now with the Dutch farm revolt occurring.
No comments:
Post a Comment