It’s easy to become outraged, as I did Monday, about a global food system in which individual farmers are anonymous cogs in a system controlled by huge international corporations. I can talk about not buying any more ginger, but what does that really accomplish?

The fact of the matter is that I am hooked on the global food system. I like my California strawberries and Argentinian blueberries and New Zealand apples in winter, and my Costa Rican bananas and Guatamalan mangoes year-round. I have no idea where the almonds in my almond butter or the cashews I enjoy come from.

 

Yet I think I need to avoid getting totally down on myself about this. Henwhisper has a great idea—that I should grow my own ginger. And probably other things as well. We need to be open to simple alternatives for improving self sufficiency. Maybe some chickens around the yard?

 

Beyond that, the fact that rapidly increasing numbers of individuals are trying to purchase directly from local farmers has to be worth something. The better financial base local farmers have, the more difficult it will be for the forces of food globalization, and the coming National Animal Identification System (NAIS), to steamroller them. And this trend has contributed to the new term Linda Diane Feldt alerts us to (which I hadn’t heard before)–locavore.

 

As Steve Atkinson points out, there is no substitute for personal experience. Favorable personal experiences lead to positive word-of-mouth, which lead to more positive personal experiences.

 

It’s also encouraging to learn from milkfarmer, elderberryjam, and Steve Bemis that both Ohio and Michigan have experienced regulatory turnarounds, and greater official tolerance of raw milk. Elderberryjam’s account of how she seeks to spread the word and correct errors about raw milk is instructive, and inspiring.

 

Personally, I try to answer erroneous or confused assumptions as much as I can, but I’m going to try to be more diligent from now on. For example, in several places that posted my Nation article, readers wondered, quite logically: Well, why shouldn’t Greg Niewendorp have his animals tested? I didn’t explain that point real well in the article, because there are several answers that are each kind of complicated. Among the reasons: Greg didn’t want his animals injected with the testing substance, potentially contaminating his beef; he felt the testing program is a government boondoggle; he resents the government’s unwillingness to examine other ways of countering bovine TB, such as through improved mineral supplementation of cattle; and most of all, he resents the government’s intrusion into his private relationships with customers.

 

The reality is that most people want the freedom to purchase whole foods like raw milk and grass-fed beef, even if many individuals don’t take advantage of the freedom.  In the end, after much pain in Michigan and Ohio, the combination of discussion, lobbying, and publicity had a favorable impact, and made everyone more open to compromise and respect.

 

For those accomplishments, and much more, we should be thankful.