Martin LeFevre: The Green Revolution Reconsidered

Norman Borlaug, the chief scientist and driving force behind the Green Revolution, died last week. Vigorous and working in the field of plant pathology and hybridization into his ‘90’s, he passed away at 95. But the dilemmas that the Green Revolution exemplified persist.

At best, the Green Revolution saved hundreds of millions of lives while furthering a population explosion and a host of unintended consequences. At worst, the Green Revolution furthered a population explosion and a host of unintended consequences while saving hundreds millions of lives.

Vandana Shiva, one of the world’s leading environmentalists, is more unequivocal. “The Green Revolution has been a failure. It has led to reduced genetic diversity, increased vulnerability to pests, soil erosion, water shortages, reduced soil fertility, micronutrient deficiencies, soil contamination, reduced availability of nutritious food crops for the local population, the displacement of vast numbers of small farmers from their land, rural impoverishment and increased tensions and conflicts.”

For years Borlaug resisted such criticisms, saying they came from “elitists” who didn’t have to worry about where their next meal was coming from. That was an ironic remark where people like India’s Vandana Shiva are concerned, and an unfortunate mark on a great humanitarian’s life.

Later, Borlaug acknowledged the validity of some environmental concerns, and attempted to stanch the hemorrhaging of fertilizers and pesticides upon the land, one of the main byproducts of the Green Revolution.

After World War II, Dr. Borlaug walked away from a promising job at Dupont to try to help Mexican farmers improve their yields. His new job had political support in the US government, but Borlaug was driven by a desire to improve the lives of Mexican farmers and the people who depended on them to survive.

“These place I’ve seen have clubbed my mind,” he wrote to his wife, “ they are so poor and depressing.”

Borlaug grew up in a community of Norwegian immigrants in a tiny town in northeastern Iowa. The land ran through his veins. “When wheat is ripening properly, when the wind is blowing across the field, you can hear the beards of wheat rubbing together. They sound like pine needles in a forest. It’s a sweet, whispering music that once you hear, you never forget.”

That is as poetic a statement as one will ever hear from a scientist, and a quintessentially pragmatic American.

Throughout his life, Borlaug was frustrated that governments didn’t do more to stem the tide of population growth.

But there’s double irony. Like wheat, Borlaug’s semi-dwarf varieties of rice allowed yields to soar, which set the stage for China’s rise as an industrial power. It also led to a population explosion, which caused the Chinese government to institute its draconian one child per family policy.

That means a communist government, immensely benefiting by a program sponsored by the American government and capitalistic system to increase crop yields in Mexico, embraced draconian population controls.

Borlaug understood that “the population monster” had to be confronted, even though his work let it run amok. “If the world population continues to increase at the same rate, we will destroy the species,” he declared.

Dr. Borlaug’s great achievements notwithstanding, the Green Revolution is the best example in the 20th century, and perhaps in all of history, that solving half the equation produces more problems than it resolves. The human crisis must be taken as a whole, and resolved at its root.

Governments and international institutions are inherently reactive. They cannot and will not take the lead on confronting the environmental/population crisis. Only individuals and their aggregations in civil society can compel national governments and stuck-between international institutions to confront the issues confronting us all.

As Vandana Shiva has said, “The World Bank as an institution and the individuals in the World Bank really think they don’t need to learn anymore, they don’t need to look anymore, they don’t need to draw lessons anymore.”

Man is overrunning the earth like locusts, and with not much more reflection. Clearly there must be a revolution in consciousness. What will ignite it?

Certainly not imagining that it’s happening. Many progressives, indulging in wishful thinking, self-comfortingly believe that the revolution has begun. No idea is more injurious to the human prospect than the illusion that the psychological revolution essential to change the disastrous course of humankind has already begun.

It isn’t a matter of ‘my truth’ vs. your truth. The truth is never personal. Only darkness is personal, and in the end, even it isn’t personal.

Consciousness changes underground and manifests above ground. In our increasingly interconnected world an individual radically changing the way he or she sees, thinks, and feels can make a difference. Outward changes, such as eating as little meat as possible, and driving and flying as little as possible, are secondary to inward changes.

The Green Revolution held off humankind’s day of reckoning for 40 years. The question is, is this it?

Most people are still looking for scientific/technological or political fixes. But as Vandana Shiva says, “In sustainability there is never an end; every day is a new beginning.”

Martin LeFevre is a contemplative and philosopher. More of his work and an archive can be found at the Colorado-based site Fountain of Light (fountainoflight.net). martinlefevre@sbcglobal.net

© Scoop Media