Abraham knew exactly what the land was for: it was to drip milk and honey into Abraham’s mouth. At the present moment, the assurance with which we regard this assumption is inverse to the degree of our education.

Countries that do not want their borders stormed by tens of millions of starving immigrants and refugees need to ask themselves: what is the best way to avoid this - to prevent starvation in the first place, or to commit two acts of absolute indecency by permitting starvation, and then employing military and police force against the starving?

If the price of world peace is to divert just one-tenth of the global armaments spending of US$1.5 trillion to sustaining the food supply, it is surely not too high a price to pay for any rationally led or ethical country to afford. The funds to achieve this exist and are already being invested in protecting every nation - but mainly in weapons of destruction rather than instruments of peace, creation, and renewal. Unfortunately, weapons of destruction get used sooner or later. So it is not the case of stressed national budgets being asked to find new funding for food security but rather of reallocating defense budgets that already exist to war prevention through sustainable food supply and the easing of international tensions. Interestingly, soldiers appear to understand this far better than politicians do.

Knowledge about how to produce food sustainably is, and always should be, free to all people. This is the moral principle for our time, the century of scarcities. It ought not to be owned and withheld by corporations, institutions, or countries.