and for anyone who is interested, here are some other Public Relation campagin attempts forwarded by monsanto.

http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/parade011905.cfm

you guys are fucking evil and unethical...

thanks monsanto, love your new PR campaign. hope your really getting across to people with this one guys!!!

Sidewinder77.... nice hacker-esque 21 century cover name... HAHAHA

you dont actual think anyone is BUYING this do you?

After seeing your clips of the Comanding Heights series, I went out and ordered it. Thanks.

I just posted a link to your videos of Hans Rosling @ TED to the Global-Culture.org blog.




Thanks.

I posted a comment about the GMO films...but it hasn't shown up yet...Maybe it takes longer than other boards...

What these videos won't show you is...This is a push for corporate control of our seed and food supply.
Ask yourself, why do we have laws that allow private corporations to patent 'life forms'?
U.S. Farmers have been sued. Indian farmers by the thousands have already killed themselves...
'Power brokers' have already influenced the legislatures in fifteen states to not allow people to vote on the GMO issue.
So, if you believe in liberty...Say NO to GMO!

You oughta stop with your GMO propaganda, how much is Monsanto paying you to spread that shit? You should be ashamed of yourself !

Thank you very much for your informative videos

OK, YouTube doesn't actually want us to discuss anything. That's alright. Please read my comments in reverse order, from the bottom to the top. I've made three long comments which add up to one general statement.

The only plausible solution is to redistribute (some) wealth. Against Friedman, I say this is not simply a case of "spending other people's money on other people," but of spending our money on ourselves.  Consider it capitalistically: if Microsoft knows it must advance new ideas, it cannot afford in the long run to be miserly on it's research and development arm. To do so would guarantee failure in the long term. Should Microsoft consider this financial outlay as "spending my money on somebody else," or "spending our money on ourselves?" If it makes sense to use the "our" in a corporate sense, then it makes sense to use it in a national sense. Elites should take care to make an outlay on projects which ensure the survival (and perhaps advancing development) of the state which has made their social superiority possible. (We could all be living in caves, eating raw meat, you know.)

A society split between the small population of can-do's and the much larger population of can't-figure-it-out'-and-getting-angry's will not be a happy place, as 19th Century Europe found out, and consequently the 20th Century. Economic Libertarianism seems to me to threaten to make all the same mistakes in social policy that led to the deep desire to abolish the elite classes in the Soviet Union and China. The elite individualists can't be all that elite if they stock the future with their own demise!