The world is not poor.
The world is plundered.
The planet has enormous wealth in oil, gas, gold, metals, rare earths and energy. There is enough production to feed, heat and live decently for all people. And yet today we are told that we should get used to eating insects.
This is not ecology. It is admission of failure of an unjust system.
While energy and food multinationals are breaking all profit records, people are being asked to accept lower living standards. Not because there is no wealth, but because wealth is being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands.
Poverty hits societies.
The oligarchy is getting richer than ever.
And instead of correcting inequality, they suggest we change our diet. To eat less, worse, cheaper, more "sustainable" for the system, not for the person.
Humanity doesn't need worm flour.
He needs fair distribution of wealth.
When in a world of abundance, citizens are asked to live as if in times of scarcity, then we are not talking about a resource crisis. We are talking about political and moral crisis.
And this crisis will not be solved with insects on the plate.
It is solved with truth, justice and political will.
The signing of the new European agreement on the import and use of products derived from insects, such as cockroaches, worms and other animal derivatives, is not just a technical regulation of the food market. It is a political and cultural decision with profound consequences for millions of European citizens.
In the name of the "green transition", sustainability and reducing the carbon footprint, the European Union is paving the way for the replacement of traditional foods with insect flour, larval products, and processed proteins that until recently were considered animal feed.
The question is simple: who decided that this is the future of European nutrition?
Europe is not a continent of hunger. It is a continent of agriculture, livestock, fisheries, family farms and thousands of years of food traditions. Instead of supporting farmers, ranchers and small producers, EU policy chooses to open the doors to industrial insect protein laboratories, controlled by a few multinationals.
Even more worrying is the fact that all this is presented as “progress”, while in practice it transfers the costs of the global food crisis to ordinary citizens. While the elite will continue to consume high-quality meat, fresh fish and natural products, the average European is being asked to get used to bread made with worm meal.
This is not about environmental sensitivity. This is about social engineering.
The transformation of human nutrition into a field of experimentation, without public consultation, without democratic legitimation and without cultural respect, is more reminiscent of technocratic imposition than ecological policy.
The signing of these agreements shows a Europe that is moving away from the citizen and closer to the markets. A Europe that treats nutrition not as an element of health and identity, but as a cost problem.
The real question is not whether insects can be eaten. The question is whether we want a continent that, instead of protecting its people, adapts them to ever lower standards of living in the name of "sustainability."
Europe deserves better than a future where its bread is made from insect flour and its agricultural tradition is sacrificed on the altar of industrial efficiency.
And this is an issue that's not just about food. It's about who we are and what future we accept.
France said "no" but Brussels moves forward
Within this setting, the attitude of France reveals the rift that is now opening within Europe itself. The French president has clearly stated that his country does not accept the EU-Mercosur agreement, considering that it leads to massive imports of agricultural and livestock products from Latin America which do not comply with European safety, environmental and quality standards.
France defends its farmers, its small farms and its food sovereignty. And it is right. Because the Mercosur agreement allows the entry of cheap meat, soy and industrial agricultural products produced with pesticides, genetic modification and environmental practices that are banned in Europe.
The question is relentless:
Why is the European producer obliged to follow strict rules, while the foreign importer is not?
This is not free trade. It is competition with tied hands for European farmers and livestock breeders. And ultimately it is the European consumer who will pay for the degradation of quality on his plate.
Mercosur is not just about trade. It is about Who controls Europe's food?And when Brussels bypasses even large countries like France, then we are talking about a Union that is dangerously moving away from its people.
France is protesting, what exactly will Greece do!!!!?
photo Greek Radio FL
