From raw milk farmer Michael Schmidt:
I am honored to have been part in all three Freedom Riders events, in Maryland at the FDA headquarters, in Wisconsin at Vernon Hershberger’s trial and in Minneapolis at the jury trial of Alvin Schlangen (which got postponed due to overload of the courts till next week).
In the meantime several significant developments have been taking place across this continent. Amongst them at Organic Pastures in California which had to face several recalls in the last 6 months combined with severe criticism for it’s handling of the situation.
Another one is the continued harassment of the cow share operation in Chilliwack which turns out to become one of the greatest legal farces initiated by Fraser Health.
It doesn’t seem to matter if raw milk is legal, like in California or banned like in BC.
The attacks continue on the farmers and the food supply of our choice.
The different philosophical approaches between voluntary or forced standards and no controlling element at all, except individual responsibility for whatever you do, continue to dominate the debate and are in fact crucial issues worthy not to be ignored.
This became very clear when I talked with Michael Hartman in Minnesota, who continues to battle authorities on the issue of jurisdiction, legal realm and private contract.
I have had lengthy discussions with another farmer who is now operating (under a private contractual arrangement between himself, farmers and consumers) his own raw milk business. He firmly believes that this is out of the public realm and therefore out of the jurisdiction of government and courts,unless or until someone gets sick and then according to the principle of fundamental justice can legally claim damages.
The language and approach which these farmers take and others is fascinating because it sounds like a very well rehearsed interpretation of a legal concept which, by the way makes sense, if we separate ourselves from the reality of the ever changing power play of Government, corporate interests and a well fed population, deprived of real hardship.
Legal principles should form the basis of justice if in fact there is an interest in justice.
Regulatory or statute law does not address the issue of justice it addresses the issue of compliance and enforcement to support policy.
Therefore we are in a vicious circle of trying to fight justice where no justice can be rendered.
The enforcement culture has provided plenty of fuel to the debate of jurisdiction and has in fact shifted in individual cases the focus away from the public safety realm.
The twisted statistical approach on raw milk outbreaks by government in order to enforce existing or create new policies in the “name of safety” has rarely lead to a change in law which accommodates the needs of people.
In that sense it is understandable that one of the approaches is, to try to remove yourselves from the claws of statute law and force the courts to face the question of justice but only if there is an injured party!!!!!
In most cases no, there are two consenting parties entering into a contract and continue until the need of this relationship is terminated or until there is an injured party.
The conditioning of society to rely on government is part of the plan to be grateful for it’s role as protector and in fact is welcomed because it is convenient and creates the illusion of safety.
The raw milk safety issue needs to be separated from governments controlling intention and taken on as a moral responsibility to provide quality and nourishment away from the commodity and rights debate.
Food quality and safety goes hand in hand and is a must if we want to rid ourselves from the shackles of control.
It is a tool of common sense, a roadmap to transparency and a service to society.