I honestly don't see what the problem is with this for us Americans.  It's not our fault is the citizens of other countries want to sell us their crops.  What is this "let's blame America" attitude?  They made the decision whether to use their crops for food, or sell them to us.
I see this as a classic case of reality vs. perception. It isn't the fault of the western world that other people will sell their food crop for fuel, ignoring the potential for the western governments to introduce policies that might cause this. However, for the people on the ground in the third world, who likely do not have a say in who gets the food they grow, it doesn't matter who's fault it is. What matters is how they see the situation. Moreover, most humans have a bit of a selfish streak, especially when it comes to food, and in the long run, there is a lot of potential for trouble when people percieve others as living well while they starve.

Unfortunately this ties in with one of the great potential problems with PO, namely that how people see things will drive their decisions, whether those perceptions are right or wrong, which may not (or maybe more often than not) lead to the best outcome. These sorts of issues can scale to the local level as well.

"Itisn't the fault of the western world that other people will sell their food crop for fuel..."

No it's never the fault of the powerful,greedy and amoral what happens to the weak. Powerful marketplayers are entitled to kill anyone they want.

Powerful marketplayers are entitled to kill anyone they want ... and to call it preemptive "self defense"

Yes. That's the Golden Rule. (He with the gold makes the rules.)

While tooling around yesterday in my SUV looking for some $2.30 gasoline, I heard some right wing Harpie on the radio proclaim that America has the "best" democracy in the world. Then the fair-and-balanced Ronn Owens chimed in, "Yes, of course we do." (He is a popular talk show host out here in the San Francisco --Bay Area region who has rightish leanings but claims to be in the middle. He's basically the guy who says I supported George Bush 100% before I didn't support him totally now.) Sheesh.

Point is that many of my fellow Americans never heard of Parlimentary government. They are so deluded they actually think their button push on the Diebold voting machine counts. They religiously believe we Americans have the Bestest "democracy" in the world and it is our manifest destiny to spread its word around the globe and also the word of our true lord & savior, Adam Smith.

But then again, when our "elected" public officials go off and do a shock-and-awe thing on some 3rd world country, or bully them into selling us their crop for our fuel, we rationalize our responsibility away. We wash our hands of the whole messy affair. Hey it wasn't me. It wasn't me. I didn't go & ask all those dumbass 3rd world sub-humans to do foolish things, to sell their food to us and to starve themselves to death. The "blame" falls on "them". I am pure and clean as the Christmas snow. It wasn't me.

End of rant. (Note from me to me: What were you thinking dude? That's like narly irrational.)

But in a sense it is our fault as our gov't subsidize not only the end product (ethanol), but also the corn itself, which creates an artificial price against which a farmer in a thrid world country cannot compete.  If we subsidize the ethanol eperiment to try to wean ourselves of oil, that might be OK (I doubt it'll work out that way, but that is a decent motivation), but if we continue to subsidize corn to support our automobile infrastructure as others starve bc/ we've economically funneled food from them to meet our energy "needs", that's unethical.  Other nations have been grumbling for years at the WTO about Americas unfair farm/ food policies.
BS. You need to give a deeper thought of what the words "globalization", "free market", "liberalisation", "privatisation", World Bank, IMF, WTF mean for the third world countries. They may call it free market but I call it neocolonialism.
Speaking of globalization...

It looks like the second law of thermodynamics is kicking in and the wheels on the neoliberalization bandwagon are coming off.

Whether it is the idea of the unrestricted movement of goods and people! (despite the fact that humans are not "sentient pork bellies") or just the short-sighted policies of the WTO and the like, there seems to be a great unraveling taking place as nationalism and populism overtake globalism.

In today's news:

DISCONTENT SPREADING ACROSS EASTERN EUROPE

"Political life has fallen into disarray in Eastern Europe, and many are asking what has gone wrong in the 2 1/2 years since these former communist countries joined the European Union, expecting to reap the fruits of democracy and open markets.

Many experts say people are simply exhausted after years of economic sacrifices made to join the EU and NATO. They now lack the clear goals that drove them toward the West after the fall of communism in 1989.

And their discontent is mounting as the instant riches many believed would come from EU membership have failed to materialize."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2596817&page=1

Also, France is continuing to struggle with problems related to discontent immigrants.

FRENCH POLICE FACE 'PERMANENT INTIFADA'  

"On a routine call, three unwitting police officers fell into a trap. A car darted out to block their path, and dozens of hooded youths surged out of the darkness to attack them with stones, bats and tear gas before fleeing. One officer was hospitalized.

The recent ambush was emblematic of what some officers say has become a near-perpetual and increasingly violent conflict between police and gangs in tough, largely immigrant French neighborhoods that were the scene of a three-week paroxysm of rioting last year."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_re_eu/france_suburban_violence_4

A few years ago I read Amy Chua's book World on Fire and was taken aback at just how much of a powder keg many societies have become under globalization policies, particularly ethnic conflicts that seemed to underscore the unshakeable strength of tribalism - cultural and ethnic identities that are not easily blended into a neoliberal paradise.

it isn't surprising to me to see the most ethnic/racial hatred in area's with the most integrated society's.
Neoliberal?

I thought this was the height of neocontopian extremism. This was having our police enforcing the rights of our ownership society in a fair and balanced way. If those hoodlums can't get jobs, it's their "fault". Let them eat cake.

BTW, who is this Neo guy and why does he assault our non-negotable way of life?

Long live The Smith.

Speaking of Eastern Europe, I think that the West can blame nothing but themselves. After the collapse of the Soviet Union these countries were basically left to desintegrate. By using consultants and the power of international institutions the West actively pushed them in the direction of ruthless privatisation, abandoning of independant econominc policy, and finally reducing the state to a (not very good) police agent. The results are well known: without govt support the local industries basically vanished. Unemployment is very high and poverty is wide spread. There is a whole class of extremely riched people who got rich by scrapping off what was left from the previous industries.

In the end these countries are slowly turned into a source for cheap and highly qualified labor for the western companies which took over their markets - which I suppose was the initial intent anyway.

The thing about the 19th century classical liberal consensus was that it was promulgated by the British, who ran an Empire on the principle that they did the manufacturing and shipping, and their colonies produced the raw materials.

The US never bought into that: they ruthlessly protected new industries.  Neither did the continentals: Germany and France in particular.

Classical liberalism is the preserve of the powerful.

There are undoubtedly huge gains to trade, but they don't serve the interests, necessarily, of creating a strong nation state.

Absolutely agreed with that. It is only enough to take a look at China and its state protected economy.

Somebody said that pure capitalism works well only when it is among equals. Otherwise it easily turns into robbery in the end.

The governments of rich countries, mostly USA and EU, have stunted griculture in poor countries by stopping rich people from buying poor people's produce with quotas and tariffs, but more importantly by subsidizing exports to the point where US rice is cheaper than local rice in African markets. This is very well known and has been brought to the attention of rich governments for a long time.

If now, suddenly, the rich countries reduce the amount and raise the prices of food for export, places where the food supply is already strained will suffer. The rich governments are completely responsible for this, as they created this situation and are fully aware of this.

Capitalism is only efficient and somewhat fair when between equals. The wealthy and the powerful will subvert the rules to their advantage, without even noticing.

We've covered this time and again with those from the ethanol echo chamber here Mencial, but they just don't seem to get it.

I challenge any Food vs. Fuel protagonist here (Airdale, Pedal and Telum in particular) to explain why the WTO Doha Conference collapsed if not as a direct result of 1st world protectionist trade policy as it relates to 3rd world agro economies.

Furthermore I challenge Airdale, Pedal and Telum to watch the movie 'Darwin's Nightmare' before posting anymore 3rd world mea culpas.

"Capitalism is only efficient and somewhat fair when between equals. The wealthy and the powerful will subvert the rules to their advantage, without even noticing. "

That got me thinking about the big Seed Companies that do GM seeds.  They got this thing that the 3rd world nations have to take the GM seeds.  I think Iraq farmers are caught in this.  They don't reproduce, after a short while the farmers have NO seed for next year unless they buy it.  

Imagine something going wrong with one year's GM selection
(nudge nudge wink wink).  Maybe a virus that only affects That certain variety of GM seed?

One year's harvest is gone for everyone who used that year's seed.  Mass starvation of a whole country or region...  Talking about having a monopoly on FOOD. Buy from us or you Don't eat...

Hey, maybe I'll sell the movie rights to that plot.

Any, do some googles for GM

Iraq's new patent law: A declaration of war against farmers

<SNIP>
When former Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) administrator L. Paul Bremer III left Baghdad after the so-called "transfer of sovereignty" in June 2004, he left behind the 100 orders he enacted as chief of the occupation authority in Iraq. Among them is Order 81 on "Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Information, Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety." [1] This order amends Iraq's original patent law of 1970 and unless and until it is revised or repealed by a new Iraqi government, it now has the status and force of a binding law. [2] With important implications for farmers and the future of agriculture in Iraq, this order is yet another important component in the United States' attempts to radically transform Iraq's economy.

WHO GAINS?

For generations, small farmers in Iraq operated in an essentially unregulated, informal seed supply system. Farm-saved seed and the free innovation with and exchange of planting materials among farming communities has long been the basis of agricultural practice. This is now history. The CPA has made it illegal for Iraqi farmers to re-use seeds harvested from new varieties registered under the law. Iraqis may continue to use and save from their traditional seed stocks or what's left of them after the years of war and drought, but that is the not the agenda for reconstruction embedded in the ruling. The purpose of the law is to facilitate the establishment of a new seed market in Iraq, where transnational corporations can sell their seeds - genetically modified or not, which farmers would have to purchase afresh every single cropping season.
<SNIP>

http://www.grain.org/articles/?id=6

A couple others

http://web.mit.edu/thistle/www/v12/1/gmo.html

http://www.countercurrents.org/en-sharma200703.htm

Samsara, It isn't because the seed is GMO or Non-GMO. Its because they are hybrids. Hybrids do not reproduce 'true to form'.

I haul GMO and some NON-GMO corn to the elevators. The NonGMO has a premium attached to it.

Myself I raise both hybrid sweet corn to eat and open pollen(non-hybrid) just in case.  I eat one and save the seeds to the other.

Now as to Round Up Ready corn or soybeans. You can replant the soybeans but Monsanto finds you doing it and you get fined big time. I haven't checked this closely but take it on what I have been told.

No doubt though that Monsanto and other seed companies want a headlock on seed and they are getting it. Truth though is that they do produce very good genetics and it shows in the yeilds which are sometimes unbelievable.

Many varieties for many conditions. I think most big growers in S. America and elsewhere have already switched to the same seed we use domestically.

Funny thing is that the highest producing corn has the small ears and only one per stalk but the seeding population is very high and this must be the reason for the large yields.

It looks puny compared to the open pollen which can grow 12 feet high and have two huge ears per stalk.

All this being said. Like I said before. We are getting ready and already started to starving the rest of the world who can't feed themselves. I am not clapping my hands over this. I deplore it.

Yet not anyone on the right nor left is saying anything about it. I believe the left has a tendency to watch whose ox is being gored and acts accordingly.