[lbo-talk] Politics of food

[brad bauerly]

>
>
> I'm guessing that "lifestyle activism" is a bad thing though I'm not quite
> sure why. Because it focuses on the consumer rather than the producer?
>
> I've made it a point to eat food I buy at the local farmer's market, and I
> have been very happy with the quality and with eating food that is in
> season. It makes the year more interesting.
>
> I'm also guessing that chemical-free, hormone-free food is healthier than
> the alternative.
>
> But since you're the one with the farming experience, let me ask. Why is
> this a bad thing?
>
> Joanna
>
>
>
> Alright, let me qualify that, it is not sufficient, but I too practice
lifestyle activism.  I always have a hard time addressing this issue because
it can be the way to a deeper analysis.  However, often it is taken in the
opposite direction towards an understanding of consumer sovereignty and the
market as the site of social change.  In my experience, and the source of my
frustration, the people who want to do good in this type of activism have to
make a sacrifice by paying higher prices or putting in time that many don't
have an excess of (hairshirt activism).  So it can become an elite project
that then looks down on those who cannot afford the correct lifestyle.  It
is also dangerous in that it individualizes social struggles into personal
choices.  Like I said though, it is good when connected to a deeper, yes
productivist, analysis.

Brad

PS.  I checked and I was wrong on Federal farm status: it is any property
that produces at least $1000 from ag products.  State regs differ.