"Europe will not accept genetically modified foods. It doesn't make any difference in the final analysis what Brussels does, what Washington does, or what the World Trade Organization does"

Jeremy Rifkin’s statement underscores the depth of European resistance to genetically modified (GM) foods, portraying it not as a transient political position but as a deeply rooted cultural and social attitude. He argues that the outcome is not subject to fluctuation based on the decisions of institutions like the European Union’s administrative center (Brussels), the United States government (Washington), or even global regulatory authorities such as the World Trade Organization. The implication is that the European response to GM foods stems from factors that are largely impervious to outside legislative or economic pressure.

This suggests a fundamental disconnect between policy-making entities and the society they aim to govern. European skepticism is historically grounded, shaped by a prioritization of tradition, precautionary principles, and consumer protection over technological or market-driven arguments for agricultural biotechnology. The concern is not confined to food safety or environmental impact, but extends to distrust of multinational corporations and anxiety over the loss of food sovereignty.

Furthermore, Rifkin implies a potential futility in attempts by powerful governmental or international organizations to sway public perception and regulatory frameworks. Efforts to push for the acceptance of GM foods via trade negotiations or legislative harmonization are likely to fail if they do not address underlying beliefs and values. The position taken by the European populace operates independently of top-down initiatives, reflecting a democratic assertion of consumer will and local identity over external influence.

Rifkin’s comment frames the debate over GM foods as emblematic of broader tensions in globalization, where technological advancement and economic integration often clash with local cultures and value systems. Regardless of legal mandates or trade agreements, the ultimate acceptance of innovations like GM foods depends on their alignment with public consensus and cultural narratives. Thus, the final analysis is determined not by policy, but by the powerful, persistent convictions of a society.