The Sentinel

Issue date: 5/4/09 Section: Commentary

Let's suppose that the environmental food gurus are right. (The science supporting their claims is often shaky, but for the sake of argument, let's pretend.) Let's assume that "organic" and "natural" foods are better for the short- and long-term health of the human who eats them and the planet that grows them. If we make these assumptions, eating organic foods would seem like a no-brainer for every consumer, right?

The problem is cost. Because of higher supply-chain costs, organic, natural, and fresh foods are usually more expensive than processed foods. So why make them? The answer: retailers of these products (such as Whole Foods) have discovered that a certain chunk of the population-middle- to upper-class, progressive-minded, Obama-bumper-sticker-displaying folks from the suburbs-will pay for their products.

As a fan of free markets, I'm with these retailers 100 percent. I see absolutely no problem with their business models.

I only get agitated when the customers get up on soapboxes and lecture me about the food I eat.

As much as I love the planet, I'll never listen. Why? Because paternalism sucks, and it's turning people off from eating eco-friendly foods.

There are two things that make these picky eaters so insufferable. The first is less about their argument itself and more about how it's delivered-a snotty tone, a condescending look, a little grimace as you take a bite of your out-of-season strawberries.

It stands to reason that the same people that judge your worth as a human being on the basis of your diet are the same people that support massive governments, cigarette taxes, and the regulation of private industry-they love paternalism. In their view, the best way to make progress as a society is not trial and error, but obedience to the intellectual elite. (By the way, I'm well aware that I'm overreacting. Bear with me.) They believe that they know what's best for your slovenly, meat-eating soul, and they can't understand why you just don't listen up and change your barbaric ways already.

The second reason that these food snobs and their lectures are so obnoxious is that their rhetoric is hollow. If these suburbanites are actually concerned with the planet, and not just concerned with looking cool or enlightened, why haven't they made a concerted effort to bring these foods to the poor-the people who could benefit the most from their apparently magical qualities?

I don't expect this effort to come on the part of the farmers, or the retailers such as Whole Foods-in a capitalist economy, it doesn't make sense for them to take this step. The only group that can bring the benefits of organic/natural/fresh food to the poor (or those members of the middle class that can't afford to shop at Whole Foods) are the consumers-turned-advocates-the tongue-cluckers who lecture you about the amount of additives in your frozen chicken.

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools