Aug. 6, 2022
“For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets. No wonder people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset. “
George Kent, United Nations, originally archived November 28, 2021
(See below for entire article)
George Kent is, among other things, an Emeritus Chair of the Political Science Department at the University of Hawaii. According to the IPRA Foundation he is also,
“Co-Convener of the Commission on International Human Rights of the International Peace Research Association. He has worked as a consultant with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the United Nations Children’s Fund, and several civil society organizations. He is part of the Working Group on Nutrition, Ethics, and Human Rights of the United Nations System Standing Committee on Nutrition. He is on the Governing Board of the Hawai’i Food Policy Council, which he helped to start in November 2010.
Professor Kent’s approach centers on finding remedies for social problems, especially finding ways to strengthen the weak in the face of the strong. He works on human rights, international relations, peace, development, and environmental issues, with a special focus on nutrition and children.”
When searching for Mr. Kent's publications I found a list of them twenty-five pages long, written on just about everything. He has published papers and articles on such diverse topics as commercial fishing policy, child-welfare, food security, global trade, preventing revolutions, sustainable development and library card indexes. A majority of his work, both as professor and in retirement appears to be prepared for the United Nations and its NGO's including the Food And Agriculture Organization, the World Bank and World Economic Forum.
In 1974, less than four years into his position as political scientist at the University of Hawaii, Mr. Kent published one of his more forward-looking articles espousing a single point of control for the world's resources, food in particular, in an effort to avoid hunger and remove the disparity between rich and poor. After reading his 1974 work “World Order Design – What Could Be More Practical” and comparing those 'design' principals to the food, financial, security and environmental policies currently being implemented by most U.N. NGO's and 'left-leaning' governments, one could say that he either saw what was coming, or is responsible for its coming.
You know, the amazing part of Mr. Kent's impact on global socio-economics, trade and resources is the fact that he lacks formal training for any of those disciplines. He is not a political or agricultural scientist, nor is he an economist, lawyer or pediatrician, rather he is an electrical engineer with a degree in communications. He is reminiscent of Bill Gates in many respects.
Here is an excerpt from a 2014 interview he gave to 'BestFoodFacts' in which he describes his surprising transition from Electrical Engineer to Political Scientist;
“I retired from the University of Hawaii’s political science department in 2010, after 40.5 years there. I never formally studied that topic. My undergraduate degree is in electrical engineering and my graduate degrees are in communications.
In the 1960s I suddenly became a professor of international relations at San Francisco State when I got a cold call from them inviting me to join them as a professor. I suddenly became a political scientist when I got a similar unsolicited call from the University of Hawaii in 1970.”
Reprinted below is his November 28, 2021 Archived Article. It was, for a short time, displayed on the United Nations website before being removed in the last week or two. Perhaps this will help you decide if he 'saw it coming' or is responsible for its coming.
George Kent, United Nations
“ We sometimes talk about hunger in the world as if it were a scourge that all of us want to see abolished, viewing it as comparable with the plague or aids. But that naïve view prevents us from coming to grips with what causes and sustains hunger. Hunger has great positive value to many people. Indeed, it is fundamental to the working of the world's economy. Hungry people are the most productive people, especially where there is a need for manual labour.
We in developed countries sometimes see poor people by the roadside holding up signs saying "Will Work for Food". Actually, most people work for food. It is mainly because people need food to survive that they work so hard either in producing food for themselves in subsistence-level production, or by selling their services to others in exchange for money. How many of us would sell our services if it were not for the threat of hunger?
More importantly, how many of us would sell our services so cheaply if it were not for the threat of hunger? When we sell our services cheaply, we enrich others, those who own the factories, the machines and the lands, and ultimately own the people who work for them. For those who depend on the availability of cheap labour, hunger is the foundation of their wealth.
The conventional thinking is that hunger is caused by low-paying jobs. For example, an article reports on "Brazil's ethanol slaves: 200,000 migrant sugar cutters who prop up renewable energy boom". While it is true that hunger is caused by low-paying jobs, we need to understand that hunger at the same time causes low-paying jobs to be created. Who would have established massive biofuel production operations in Brazil if they did not know there were thousands of hungry people desperate enough to take the awful jobs they would offer? Who would build any sort of factory if they did not know that many people would be available to take the jobs at low-pay rates?
Much of the hunger literature talks about how it is important to assure that people are well fed so that they can be more productive. That is nonsense. No one works harder than hungry people. Yes, people who are well nourished have greater capacity for productive physical activity, but well-nourished people are far less willing to do that work.
The non-governmental organization Free the Slaves defines slaves as people who are not allowed to walk away from their jobs. It estimates that there are about 27 million slaves in the world,2 including those who are literally locked into workrooms and held as bonded labourers in South Asia. However, they do not include people who might be described as slaves to hunger, that is, those who are free to walk away from their jobs but have nothing better to go to. Maybe most people who work are slaves to hunger?
For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets. No wonder people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.”