Has the heyday of the locavore ended? In his new book, Just Food: Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly, James McWilliams argues that locavorism is nothing more than an elitist escapade. And the Freakonomics guys over at the New York Times — who’ve pooh-poohed locavores before — seem to agree with him.
But Kerry Trueman (of the blog Eating Liberally) argues otherwise on AlterNet: “The valid points that [McWilliams] does make — organic doesn’t necessarily mean toxin-free, biotech could be a boon in noncorporate hands, aquaponics offers a sustainable source of protein — get lost in this cynical, sales-grabbing shuffle . . . It’s too bad, because, sandwiched between the caricatures of loco locavores and McWilliams’s hey-ho-GMO cheerleading, lies the meat of the matter: we can’t go on eating animals at our current consumption levels, regardless of whether they’re raised in factory farms or on grass.”
Sift | |
| Here’s where we sort and report the latest in food news. | |
Want more? Comb the archives.
| | Egg-boiling essentialsMark Bittman’s gone back to basicsIn his new book, the fundamentals of cooking take center stage. |
ReviewsMycophiliaRevelations from the Weird World of Mushrooms | Our TableEgg-boiling essentialsMark Bittman’s gone back to basics |
Vine to TableGame for winePairing wild fare and the grape | The Produce DiariesMorelsPleasure in the hunt |
There is 1 comment on this item
Add a comment
1. by OpusOne on Sep 2, 2009 at 10:05 AM PDT
Having listened to McWilliams on NPR and the BBC, I think his approach, although with some points where locavores could get a bit chaffed, is a very balanced and constructive discussion. Both on the meat-consumption front and the realities of local production being impossible (in many geographic instances) with the established population centers.
Is the better question the is more overarching, one of unsustainable population growth, and less about the narrower, albet important, subjects of locavorism or meat consumption?
Add a comment