WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE FRANCE - news journal UPDATE - (en) France, Monde Libertaire - It's not the cows that need to be slaughtered, but the Capitalist virus and its vector, the State! (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 The media keep repeating that, faced with Lumpfish Dermatosis (LDD),

"there is no other alternative" and that the total culling measures are
based on international standards founded on scientific studies. This is
both true and false. It is true that this is what international
standards recommend (the Terrestrial Animal Health Code of the World
Organisation for Animal Health, WHOA, formerly OIE), standards which are
incorporated into European Regulations, the only competent authority
regarding veterinary rules in the 27 member states of the European
Union. But it's crucial to understand that these standards are not
health standards, but COMMERCIAL standards. The purpose of WHO standards
(and therefore EU standards) is not to protect animal health but to
guarantee the free international movement of animals and their products.
These standards are defined in the "Terrestrial and Aquatic Animal
Health Code," which the WHO website itself describes as "standards for
international trade in terrestrial and aquatic animals and their products."

The World Organisation for Animal Health is one of three "sister
organizations" (along with the FAO's Codex Alimentarius and the FAO's
International Plant Protection Convention) recognized by the WTO (World
Trade Organization) to establish standards that limit the principle of
completely free trade in products. These limits on international trade
are defined in the WTO's SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary) Agreement,
which "establishes a multilateral framework of rules and disciplines to
guide the development, adoption and enforcement of sanitary and
phytosanitary measures in order to minimize their adverse effects on trade."

These sanitary standards are therefore not intended to protect animal
(or human) health, but rather to ensure that international trade in
agricultural or food products is conducted without distortion of
competition for sanitary reasons. The crux of the problem with regard to
the DNC (National Cattle Breeding System) lies in an economic, not a
sanitary, issue: beef cattle farming in France is organized according to
two completely different economic models. In times of "sanitary peace,"
these models do not compete and coexist. The dominant model is that of
raising young animals (weanlings, animals aged 6 to 12 months) which are
then sent to Italy where they are fattened before slaughter. This market
represents over EUR1 billion in annual exports.

The second, less common, economic model is fattening in France for the
local market.

The first model is primarily found on large farms, located mainly in
Burgundy (Charolais cattle), Limousin (Limousin cattle), and central
France (Charollais and Limousin cattle). The president of the National
Federation of Cattle Breeders (FNB, the beef branch of the FNSEA) is one
of these large producers who depends on exporting their young cattle to
Italy.

The second model is primarily found on small farms, particularly in the
Southwest (Occitanie and Nouvelle-Aquitaine regions), and these farms
are not dependent on young cattle exports.

The introduction of the DNC (Disease Control Directive) initially
suspended exports of young cattle to Italy, and these exports are now
more or less restricted depending on the animals' area of origin
(disease-free zone, restricted zone, or vaccination zone). Widespread
vaccination would also hinder exports to Italy, as Italian regions not
affected by the DNC refuse to import vaccinated animals or do so only
under very complex conditions. The two economic models that previously
coexisted are now antagonistic, as their interests are no longer compatible.

This is precisely what happened with avian influenza in the poultry
sector, where the interests of the chicken industry and those of the
duck (foie gras) industry clashed on health issues. The authorities only
gave credit and interest to the chicken industry (and in particular LDC,
the leading French producer and one of the European leaders). It took 10
years of systematic culling, and record compensation of 1 billion euros
in 2023 for the State to agree to consider changing the health paradigm
by authorizing vaccination (even though the vaccines had been
technically ready for several years and French vaccine companies had
made production offers...). However, it turned out that this paradigm
shift was not accompanied by an explosion of influenza; on the
contrary... (even though there are more cases this year than in previous
years, there is a consensus, both scientific and professional, that
without a vaccination campaign, the damage would be far greater).

The battle of standards being waged today is, in fact, a battle for the
economic model. Either we prioritize international and cross-border
trade, or we prioritize the localized economy.

The dominant economic model, that of liberal and globalized capitalism,
necessitates adopting measures that involve total culling in the hope of
halting the spread of the disease and confining it to certain localized
areas. So when we hear scientists say, "We have no other alternative,"
it's true: in the liberal capitalist economic system, we have no other
alternative.

But if we opt for another economic system, widespread vaccination is
also a scientifically feasible solution. (The argument that if we don't
completely cull the population, we risk seeing 1.6 million animals die
tomorrow from the disease is true if we don't vaccinate, but false if we
do: vaccination reduces animal mortality. Some animals would certainly
carry the virus, but not be so ill as to die from it.)

That being said, even if we were to vaccinate completely, we would still
be operating within the framework of a localized and sovereign
capitalism, which would not change the situation of livestock farmers.
They would remain dependent on slaughterhouses (notably the Bigard
group) and food distribution companies (only 5 distributors in France:
Carrefour, Auchan, Leclerc, Intermarché, Super U) that control the
market and prices, squeezing the farmers who are, after all, the ones
who produce our food.

Even before the National Nutrition and Health Program (NNP), the suicide
rate among farmers, and especially beef cattle farmers, was very high.

It's clear there's a systemic problem, which the DNC (National
Directorate of Cattle Breeding) is simply highlighting. It's not the
cows that are sick, it's the capitalist system that's sick. Capitalism,
through its relentless pursuit of profit, allows diseases to spread
along trade routes, is the cause of climate change which leads to the
spread of disease vectors, pits farmers against each other for cutting
corners on biosecurity to reduce production costs, organizes the
offshoring of vaccine and medicine production essential for animal and
human health, reserving it solely for the wealthiest, and so on.

The vector of this deadly disease of Capitalism is the State, which
serves as its instrument for imposing its power through laws and its
entire repressive system. What happened in Les Bordes-sur-Arize was not
a sanitary measure but a demonstration of the State's authority. It's
obvious that the farmers of Les Bordes-sur-Arize weren't going to take
to the hills with the 208 cows they were going to slaughter. There was
no need for such a deployment of military equipment, unless the State
wanted to send a message: it holds a monopoly on violence and fully
intends to use it if necessary.

If we truly want to protect the health of animals, plants, ecosystems,
and humans, it's not the cows that need to be slaughtered, but rather
deadly capitalism and its instrument of power: the State.

A red and black veterinarian

https://monde-libertaire.net/?articlen=8741
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca