| More
Home / Mad Cow Disease / Headlines


January 15, 2004
printable version email to a friend join our e-mail list


The Spider At The Center Of The Mad-Cow Web

While Luddite intellectual guru Jeremy Rifkin has stayed on the sidelines of the recent mad-cow debate, three of his former employees -- Ronnie Cummins, John Stauber, and Howard Lyman -- have taken the lead in fanning the flames of panic. This trio of scaremongers has a long-standing, Rifkin-inspired "beef" with beef. For them, the discovery of a single case of mad cow disease was simply an opportunity to score PR victories on behalf of their anti-corporate, anti-technology, and animal-rights ideology.

Along with his disciples, Rifkin seeks to impose his fringe politics on the dinner plate. He argues that "eating is the ultimate political act" -- taste, value and food safety be damned.

Rifkin's campaign against steak and hamburgers began in 1992 with his book, Beyond Beef. He described beef as a "new form of human evil" and a "malevolent force in the world." He falsely blamed it for everything from hunger to global warming to spousal abuse, and even claimed that "a person is committing an evil act by growing feed for cattle or consuming a hamburger."

The Houston Chronicle's reviewer saw through Rifkin's polemic:

Rifkin's beef is not really with cattle at all but with capitalism. He fully admits he has chosen beef cattle for his attack because they are the historic symbol of wealth and portable capital. In the America Rifkin envisions, beef cattle and capitalism are banished, the buffalo roam, the deer and the antelope play and Americans eat peas and corn bread in poverty but in solidarity with their Third World brothers.
It gets even wackier. In Beyond Beef, Rifkin wrote that forgoing prime rib is "a revolutionary act" heralding "a new chapter in the unfolding of human consciousness." And that's exactly what Rifkin and his disciples want -- to change human consciousness. Attacking beef is simply a proxy for this much grander goal, and hyping mad-cow fears is merely a proxy for attacking beef.

Rifkin scoffs at the strides humanity has made, preferring the distant past to our present levels of relative wealth and security. "Progress is only for that small, little group ... who have reaped the benefits at the expense of our fellows," he argues. "Modernity has brought only hunger and disease and an increasing sense of hopelessness and despair." As an alternative, Rifkin promotes a "post-modern view of science," based on "empathy with the environment."

These beliefs echo the philosophy of Deep Ecology, which holds that human beings are no more important than flora and fauna. No wonder, then, that the biggest donor to Rifkin's Foundation on Economic Trends (FOET) is the Foundation for Deep Ecology -- which financed the "Second Luddite Congress" in 1996.

The radical anti-corporate, eco-religious philosophy espoused by Rifkin and the Foundation for Deep Ecology is precisely what drives Cummins, Stauber, and Lyman to reach new heights of hyperbole in their descriptions of mad-cow dangers.

The behavior of Cummins, Stauber, and Lyman is reminiscent of Rifkin, whose Beyond Beef called the cow disease Bovine Immunodeficiency Virus "Cow AIDS" for shock value. Rifkin wrote: "The economic impact of BIV on the beef and dairy industries is likely to be devastating in the years to come." A column in The Washington Times angrily dismissed this idea as "Mr. Rifkin's mendacious exploitation of AIDS and cancer hysteria."

The following comments about Rifkin could easily be applied today to the mad-cow-related actions of Cummins, Stauber, and Lyman:

  • "Rifkin's arguments have been called dangerously simple-minded and sometimes downright specious. He has been accused, in effect, of demagoguery, of targeting the emotions at the expense of the mind. His intellectual honesty has been challenged." (The Washington Post, January 17, 1988)

  • "The problem is that Rifkin frequently presents his case in such a shrill and occasionally unscrupulous manner that in the debates he hopes to encourage, fear and anger frequently replace information and reasoned judgment." (TIME magazine, December 4, 1989)

  • "[Rifkin has turned] the art of delivering horrendously inaccurate predictions into a cottage industry. Each year the predicted catastrophes fail to occur, and each year the next round of horrible predictions is eagerly embraced by an environmental press desperate to produce startling stories with enticing headlines." (The American Spectator, April 1993)

email us comments




printable version email to a friend join our e-mail list

Daily Headlines

  • Ten Food Rules For Michael Pollan
    Posted On: Tuesday 3/10/2009
  • Seven New Things You Didn’t Know
    Posted On: Friday 10/17/2008
  • Yesterday’s Organic Food Propaganda, TODAY
    Posted On: Tuesday 9/9/2008
  • Perjury?
    Posted On: Friday 2/29/2008
  • Sitting On A Story
    Posted On: Thursday 2/28/2008
  • Could Some Mad Cows Be 'All Natural'?
    Posted On: Wednesday 6/14/2006
  • Mooving On From Mad-Cow Panic
    Posted On: Monday 5/1/2006
  • Catching Bird Flu Hysteria
    Posted On: Tuesday 11/8/2005


  • Activist Cash

    Howard Lyman
    Background
    A successful Montana cattle rancher for nearly four decades, Howard Lyman sold his farm in 1983 and became a professional lobbyist for the Montana Farmers Union and the National Farmers Union, promoting the passage of the National Organic Standards Act. read more here »

    John Stauber
    Background
    Though typically described by the mass media as an “investigative journalist,” John Stauber of the Center for Media & Democracy has spent his entire life in left-wing advocacy. read more here »

    OpEds

    Mad Cow: A cause for alarm?
    Americans should definitely change their habits in a post-mad-cow America, and I'm not talking about whether we eat beef. read more here »


    Copyright © 1997-2010 Center for Consumer Freedom. Tel: 202-463-7112.