Lappe's Argumentative Essay

Proponents and opponents of biotechnology being a distraction is argued by Frances Moore Lappe. Multiple argumentative points are presented by Lappe on what’s the right issue to focus on. The first point Lappe argues is the amount of food we have. Lappe goes on to say, “They were telling us that we had reached the Earth’s limits to feed ourselves, but in fact there was more than enough food for us all” (249). In other words, “they” were telling us that there is less food to eat than Lappe believes we have. It is more or less true that hunger is the result of economic givens that we’ve created. The second point Lappe made is about getting what we put out. Lappe’s point was made was she says, “Thirty years ago, one-third of the world’s grain
We must find a way to increase our potential supply input. The third point Lappe presented is that we are only talking about the problem. An example of this is shown when Lappe says, “Not only is there already enough food in the world, but as long as we are only talking about food-how best to produce it- we will never end hunger or create the communities and food safety we want” (250). In other words, nothing gets done simply by talking about it. You must go out there and do something about it. Finally, Lappe ends her argument by pointing out that there is no need for new technologies, because hunger is caused by a scarcity of democracy. Lappe finishes by saying, “Hunger is not caused by a scarcity of food but by a scarcity of democracy. Thus it can never be solved by new technologies, even if they were to be proved “safe.” It can be solved only as citizens build democracies in which government is accountable to them, not to private corporate entitles” (251). I believe that there may be enough food for the hungry to eat, but in the future we may work out of these natural resources. Technology may give us the help we need to balance the problem with the gains received from