Why both sides of the Rand Paul/GMO labeling debate are missing the point

First, I am an organic farmer. I work every day in this country and many others growing organic food and assisting other organic growers and educational organizations. I know the GMO/biotech issue quite well, and I have a long history of attaining knowledge of the intricacies surrounding it.

The recent debate over whether or not Rand Paul was right or wrong in voting against the mandatory GMO labeling amendment is a part of what the over-privileged industry wants from us. We should be questioning why labeling is even the big issue here at all...We all know the business cycle very well from reading plenty of Mises and Hayek, and how many other less divisive pick axes we could have thrown at the FDA/Monsanto powerhouse....an end to subsidies, reigning in monopolistic intellectual property or even reforming crazy litigation practices that doubly victimize farmers.

The group that spearheaded the labeling initiative(The Organic Consumers Association) is a Merck and Rockefeller funded organization that operates in disguise of anti-biotech activism. The organization's president frequently trashes John Mackey, a Ron Paul supporter and CEO of Whole Foods, our largest non-GMO distributor and most well positioned competitor in the grocery market. So, not only does the organization release way too many shallow anti-Whole Foods articles, they also champion divisive issues that stand no chance of galvanizing activists from all intellectual angles.

Sure, labeling may be a small punch to the GMO industry, and sure, it also means another heavy handed government regulatory scheme. But, this shouldn't become a debate over whether the classical liberal or paleo-conservative approach is best. This is a very important issue, so it is important to pay attention and find common ground with all of your anti-establishment friends without being divided and conquered by the interests you're supposedly against.