Over the past year or so I have become more and more immersed in ideas
and questions about Social Justice and the Common Good (SJCG). It has more or
less consumed my academic life. This interest comes from many classes that have allowed me to
explore the subjects in more detail that has humbled me because I have discovered so much, known so little,
and realize that there is so much more to learn.
The common denominator between all that I have learned, is the
importance that all cultures place on food. When I was first introduced to the
idea of SJCG I do not think I would have ever reduced the idea of SJCG to the
simplicity of food, other than issues directly related to poverty and hunger. I
do think it is disgusting the amount of food we are capable of producing and
distributing globally compared to the amount of people who die of hunger each
year, yet that is only partially my point.
What I am trying to say is that the accessibility of healthy food offers
the possibility of solidarity between all cultures because it is a basic necessity
of life.
One of our main texts, Matarialist Ethics and Life Value by Jeff
Noonan is a complex book that gives a critical perspective on liberal
democratic societies. Noonan argues that we should attribute value to all
things in life in a way that is more intrinsic, and thus very different than we
currently live. Amongst various terms he elaborates on are what he calls
“Physical-Organic Life Requirements.” These requirements are what we need to
survive that are common to all peoples. Chief among these requirements is
access to food, as we must consume the proper nutrients in order to survive.
Therefore a society must develop a sustainable system of food, which is a very
basic social rational. Yet we have developed a system that does not place this
basic life necessity as accessible to all.
Noonan argues that we have taken our Physical-Organic Life
Requirements (universal human needs in order to survive) and created a system
that does not allow everyone access to these requirements. The goals of profit,
under current economic systems, create a blindness to issues of basic life
requirements. A simple example can help
explain Noonan’s thinking here. A banana worker in Ecuador might ignore
the fact that her work conditions are completely unfair, the pesticides used
are harmful to both herself and her environment, and that it is not a
sustainable process. Yet, she will still work at this place because she needs
to feed her family today.
Noonan argues that there is a fundamental contradiction in this system
because those who are benefitting from the commercialization of these basic
life necessities are benefiting at the expense of someone else. Furthermore,
under capitalism, food may be distributed throughout the globe but we still
limit people’s access based on its price. The fact that everyone needs food is
a great opportunity for global cooperation and solidarity, yet it has turned
into a system of exploitation through profit margins and the gross divisions of
profit between the worker and the employer.
All of that said, I think we use food as a tool for building community
and solidarity quite naturally in social settings. Every meal I share with
family or friends is a chance for discussion, whether it is an issue in the
family, current events, or something totally random and completely over our
heads. I do not think that these conversations would happen in the same way if
we were not sharing that space together centered on food.
This was no different when I went to Honduras this past summer. I was
able to feel at home in a place so much different than where I am from because
I was welcomed at the dinner table. The boundaries of difference were
eliminated due to the fact that they, my host family, literally shared food
with me, a total stranger (at first). This sharply contrasts the experiences of
other students where food was not shared so kindly and a sense of community was
harder to create.
For me, the community we create around access to food is what makes
this a call to make radical change in order to create a system of food that is
sustainable and available for everyone. The fact that our system is not
sustainable and not available for everyone is the first step to recognizing
that we live in an unjust system. If we are not able to create a system where
everyone gets what they need to survive, then how are we going to solve more
complex issues that are unjust?
I think this is an easy argument to make: We need to change our
unjust system of food, and create one that feeds all.
Anson J Liski - 3rd Year Political Studies - SJCG
No comments:
Post a Comment
Respectful comments are welcome. All comments are moderated by the blog author.