A - I n f o s

a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **
News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts Our archives of old posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Catalan_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ _The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours | of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008 | of 2009 | of 2010 | of 2011 | of 2012 | of 2013 | of 2014 | of 2015 | of 2016 | of 2017 | of 2018 | of 2019 | of 2020 | of 2021 | of 2022 | of 2023 | of 2024 | of 2025 | of 2026

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF - How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups

(en) France, Monde Libertaire - It's not the cows that need to be slaughtered, but the Capitalist virus and its vector, the State! (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Date Fri, 16 Jan 2026 09:34:39 +0200


The media keep repeating that, faced with Lumpfish Dermatosis (LDD), "there is no other alternative" and that the total culling measures are based on international standards founded on scientific studies. This is both true and false. It is true that this is what international standards recommend (the Terrestrial Animal Health Code of the World Organisation for Animal Health, WHOA, formerly OIE), standards which are incorporated into European Regulations, the only competent authority regarding veterinary rules in the 27 member states of the European Union. But it's crucial to understand that these standards are not health standards, but COMMERCIAL standards. The purpose of WHO standards (and therefore EU standards) is not to protect animal health but to guarantee the free international movement of animals and their products. These standards are defined in the "Terrestrial and Aquatic Animal Health Code," which the WHO website itself describes as "standards for international trade in terrestrial and aquatic animals and their products."

The World Organisation for Animal Health is one of three "sister organizations" (along with the FAO's Codex Alimentarius and the FAO's International Plant Protection Convention) recognized by the WTO (World Trade Organization) to establish standards that limit the principle of completely free trade in products. These limits on international trade are defined in the WTO's SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary) Agreement, which "establishes a multilateral framework of rules and disciplines to guide the development, adoption and enforcement of sanitary and phytosanitary measures in order to minimize their adverse effects on trade."

These sanitary standards are therefore not intended to protect animal (or human) health, but rather to ensure that international trade in agricultural or food products is conducted without distortion of competition for sanitary reasons. The crux of the problem with regard to the DNC (National Cattle Breeding System) lies in an economic, not a sanitary, issue: beef cattle farming in France is organized according to two completely different economic models. In times of "sanitary peace," these models do not compete and coexist. The dominant model is that of raising young animals (weanlings, animals aged 6 to 12 months) which are then sent to Italy where they are fattened before slaughter. This market represents over EUR1 billion in annual exports.

The second, less common, economic model is fattening in France for the local market.

The first model is primarily found on large farms, located mainly in Burgundy (Charolais cattle), Limousin (Limousin cattle), and central France (Charollais and Limousin cattle). The president of the National Federation of Cattle Breeders (FNB, the beef branch of the FNSEA) is one of these large producers who depends on exporting their young cattle to Italy.

The second model is primarily found on small farms, particularly in the Southwest (Occitanie and Nouvelle-Aquitaine regions), and these farms are not dependent on young cattle exports.

The introduction of the DNC (Disease Control Directive) initially suspended exports of young cattle to Italy, and these exports are now more or less restricted depending on the animals' area of origin (disease-free zone, restricted zone, or vaccination zone). Widespread vaccination would also hinder exports to Italy, as Italian regions not affected by the DNC refuse to import vaccinated animals or do so only under very complex conditions. The two economic models that previously coexisted are now antagonistic, as their interests are no longer compatible.

This is precisely what happened with avian influenza in the poultry sector, where the interests of the chicken industry and those of the duck (foie gras) industry clashed on health issues. The authorities only gave credit and interest to the chicken industry (and in particular LDC, the leading French producer and one of the European leaders). It took 10 years of systematic culling, and record compensation of 1 billion euros in 2023 for the State to agree to consider changing the health paradigm by authorizing vaccination (even though the vaccines had been technically ready for several years and French vaccine companies had made production offers...). However, it turned out that this paradigm shift was not accompanied by an explosion of influenza; on the contrary... (even though there are more cases this year than in previous years, there is a consensus, both scientific and professional, that without a vaccination campaign, the damage would be far greater).

The battle of standards being waged today is, in fact, a battle for the economic model. Either we prioritize international and cross-border trade, or we prioritize the localized economy.

The dominant economic model, that of liberal and globalized capitalism, necessitates adopting measures that involve total culling in the hope of halting the spread of the disease and confining it to certain localized areas. So when we hear scientists say, "We have no other alternative," it's true: in the liberal capitalist economic system, we have no other alternative.

But if we opt for another economic system, widespread vaccination is also a scientifically feasible solution. (The argument that if we don't completely cull the population, we risk seeing 1.6 million animals die tomorrow from the disease is true if we don't vaccinate, but false if we do: vaccination reduces animal mortality. Some animals would certainly carry the virus, but not be so ill as to die from it.)

That being said, even if we were to vaccinate completely, we would still be operating within the framework of a localized and sovereign capitalism, which would not change the situation of livestock farmers. They would remain dependent on slaughterhouses (notably the Bigard group) and food distribution companies (only 5 distributors in France: Carrefour, Auchan, Leclerc, Intermarché, Super U) that control the market and prices, squeezing the farmers who are, after all, the ones who produce our food.

Even before the National Nutrition and Health Program (NNP), the suicide rate among farmers, and especially beef cattle farmers, was very high.

It's clear there's a systemic problem, which the DNC (National Directorate of Cattle Breeding) is simply highlighting. It's not the cows that are sick, it's the capitalist system that's sick. Capitalism, through its relentless pursuit of profit, allows diseases to spread along trade routes, is the cause of climate change which leads to the spread of disease vectors, pits farmers against each other for cutting corners on biosecurity to reduce production costs, organizes the offshoring of vaccine and medicine production essential for animal and human health, reserving it solely for the wealthiest, and so on.

The vector of this deadly disease of Capitalism is the State, which serves as its instrument for imposing its power through laws and its entire repressive system. What happened in Les Bordes-sur-Arize was not a sanitary measure but a demonstration of the State's authority. It's obvious that the farmers of Les Bordes-sur-Arize weren't going to take to the hills with the 208 cows they were going to slaughter. There was no need for such a deployment of military equipment, unless the State wanted to send a message: it holds a monopoly on violence and fully intends to use it if necessary.

If we truly want to protect the health of animals, plants, ecosystems, and humans, it's not the cows that need to be slaughtered, but rather deadly capitalism and its instrument of power: the State.

A red and black veterinarian

https://monde-libertaire.net/?articlen=8741
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en
A-Infos Information Center