"A refuge is supposed to prevent what? The genes from flowing out of sight? This refuge idea won't stop insects from moving across boundaries. That's absurd"
About this Quote
Rifkin weaponizes incredulity here, and the form matters as much as the content. The opening question, "A refuge is supposed to prevent what?" is a trap door: it forces the audience to admit that the policy instrument being discussed sounds tidy only on paper. Then he lands the punchline in biotech terms - "genes from flowing out of sight?" - which is classic Rifkin: take a bureaucratic euphemism and translate it into the messy material reality it tries to manage. "Out of sight" is doing extra work, hinting at regulatory theater: containment as optics, not ecology.
The subtext is a broader skepticism about technocratic fixes in a world of porous systems. In debates over GM crops and pesticide resistance, "refuge" has a specific meaning: set-aside areas of non-Bt plants meant to slow the evolution of resistant insects by maintaining susceptible populations. Rifkin isn't arguing the evolutionary math in detail; he's attacking the political promise embedded in the term itself. "Refuge" sounds humane, protective, controlled. He flips it into an image of genetic and insect mobility that ignores property lines, jurisdictions, and the comforting fantasy that you can draw a boundary around biology.
"That's absurd" is blunt by design. It's not a scientist's hedged critique; it's an economist-activist's move to reframe the argument from technical compliance to structural plausibility. The intent is to make the listener feel the mismatch between regulatory geometry and ecological movement - and to imply that the policy exists to reassure consumers and regulators more than to constrain consequences.
The subtext is a broader skepticism about technocratic fixes in a world of porous systems. In debates over GM crops and pesticide resistance, "refuge" has a specific meaning: set-aside areas of non-Bt plants meant to slow the evolution of resistant insects by maintaining susceptible populations. Rifkin isn't arguing the evolutionary math in detail; he's attacking the political promise embedded in the term itself. "Refuge" sounds humane, protective, controlled. He flips it into an image of genetic and insect mobility that ignores property lines, jurisdictions, and the comforting fantasy that you can draw a boundary around biology.
"That's absurd" is blunt by design. It's not a scientist's hedged critique; it's an economist-activist's move to reframe the argument from technical compliance to structural plausibility. The intent is to make the listener feel the mismatch between regulatory geometry and ecological movement - and to imply that the policy exists to reassure consumers and regulators more than to constrain consequences.
Quote Details
| Topic | Nature |
|---|
More Quotes by Jeremy
Add to List
