Farmers and Pesticides

One of the statements that really stood out to me in our reading was how farmworkers are particularly vulnerable to pesticide poisoning and, ironically, often lack steady access to healthy food. Having worked on a peach farm before, I was aware of the chemical use there however none of the farmers used any PPE, in field or not. Even having been on a farm, I was detached from health hazards. Farmers feed our nation, facing health hazards daily, and yet there is a gap in protection for them. One of the most pervasive risks isn’t from heavy machinery or heat alone: it comes from pesticides, the chemicals are sprayed to protect crops but not only do they harm pests, they can also harm the people. I wish to emphasize how easy it is for this occupation to harm someone. Below are two articles I found regarding farmers and health risks.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11056488/#abstract1

https://www.ruralhealthinfo.org/topics/agricultural-health-and-safety

The World Health Organization estimates that up to 1 million people are affected annually by pesticide poisoning worldwide, and acute and chronic exposure can cause a range of health issues in agricultural workers. Research shows that pesticides can enter the body in multiple ways: through the skin; inhalation; even through ingestion when workers eat or drink without washing off residues. In the short term, exposure can lead to symptoms like headaches, dizziness, nausea, skin irritation, respiratory difficulties, and visual disturbances. Longer-term and repeated exposure is even more concerning. Pesticides have been linked to carcinogenesis (increased cancer risk), neurotoxicity (nervous system damage), reproductive problems, and weakened immune function; effects that may not appear until many years after exposure. Some neurological effects and cancers can take a decade or more to surface, making prevention and long-term monitoring vital.

Farmworkers who mix, load, or apply pesticides often without adequate protective gear face the highest risks. Even workers re-entering recently sprayed fields can absorb residues through their skin or breathe in pesticide drift from adjacent fields. Children and family members living with farmworkers may also be exposed indirectly through contaminated clothing or household dust. Across rural agricultural settings, workers are exposed not just to one but often multiple chemicals, sometimes without proper training or safety equipment. Widespread pesticide use (including chemicals like glyphosate, which research has connected with cellular toxicity and potential long-term disease risks) underscores just how hazardous these exposures can be.

Pesticides are just part of a larger pattern of health risks in farm work. Agricultural workers also face hazards from dust, fuel and fertilizers, extreme heat, and physically demanding labor which can interact with chemical exposures to worsen health outcomes.

Addressing pesticide risks requires better enforcement of safety standards like the EPA’s Worker Protection Standard, broader access to effective personal protective equipment (PPE), and much stronger training and education for workers about chemical risks. Researchers and rural health advocates also call for improved occupational health services and more community health resources in agricultural regions. Farmworkers deserve the same protections we expect in any workplace, especially when it comes to chemicals that can affect their health today and decades into the future.

Food Justice and the challenge to neoliberalism

 Alkon’s Article discusses the injustices that aren’t always seen regarding food. Sustainable agriculture is hard to put into play because as of right now, to minorities it feels like something for privileged or wealthy individuals. The stigma we talked about for a good portion of last discussion is also mentioned in this article stating that farming is glorified into being something for white people and white wealthy people go to farmers markets. The price of healthy organic food being so high speaks this into existence, that organic and healthy produce is for only those who can afford it. Americas health problem also heavily relies on the fact that healthy food is unavailable in populated low income areas. Alkon makes the point that Organic agriculture is incomplete without food justice. Organic food may be better for people and the environment but if it is only available to those who can afford it, it isn’t benefiting society as it should. By subsidizing healthy organic food, everyone would ahve access to vegetables and organic food, and by providing fair wages more people would feel compelled to farm and iyt would broaden the scope of cultures, races, and backgrounds of people in farming not just white men. By banning and regulating pesticides and harmful chemicals not only are we protecting the consumer and the environment but the farmers and people who work with these harsh chemicals everyday without proper PPE who produce the crops we need. This would also broaden the scope of who wants to farm because I know with all of the chemicals out there I would not want to be a conventional farmer. 

Food Justice + Neoliberalism

    From this reading, I took away the idea that Alkon wants us to see both the differences and the similarities between food justice progression and neoliberalism, and how the two can and are being used to forward food justice and related movements. It is highlighted that other researchers/scholars tend to argue that food justice movements are using neoliberalism ideas to advance or are neoliberal. A core idea of neoliberalism is minimal government intervention in a capitalist free-market. An increasingly common core step for many food justice groups is to market their cause in some way. This can be done by starting an organic farm, joining a group to provide fresh food for all, telling others to not buy from the businesses they oppose, or telling others to buy from like minded groups only, and many more. The point I believe she is making is that even though many food justice advocates/groups may oppose some neoliberal agendas like only using the free-market as their tool, they utilize neoliberal strategies to push their own, then attempt to dismantle something that one could also define as neoliberal.

    Personally, I think this has lots of truth to it, but I am not sure if neoliberalism is the absolute correct path of capitalism. According to Alkon, workers co-ops and food workers movements have shown to pave paths of success through neoliberalist strategies, which is great for those groups and can serve as proof of neoliberal strategies being linked to food justice progression, but I don't think it is neoliberal in itself. The strongest example in my opinion is groups mentioned like the CIW that can force a food justice advocates agenda onto a big corporation (or 11 of them), this is real systematic change happening at the business level with minimal governmental interaction needed. It is a real example of Alkon's point that even if CIW used neoliberal-labeled-tactics to gain the ground their on now, they are also using their power to rework places affected by neoliberal ideas, like how they were able to make wages better for countless farmers. 

    The last thing I want to say is that I don't exactly understand why, for example, an advocacy group using the capitalist market we live in to progress their cause gets labeled as neoliberal. I get that neoliberalism involves free-market tools, but that does not mean free-market tools = neoliberal. To me it reads the same as saying a worm is a harbinger of death for apples because it ate an apple, but killing apples was never the worms ultimate goal. How exactly is any group neoliberal for simply existing and operating inside a neoliberal market. "Scholars" who are quick to labeling these groups as neoliberal are defining their means as their ends.

Human & Labor Rights Vs. Neoliberalism

  If I had to make an analogy, which I love doing, I can only seem to relate neoliberalism with the 70s and the Vietnam War. Why you might ask? A separation of government from the people of the state. The people want help, but they don't want the government's help, people want peace, but they don't want to fight for peace. It's an interesting dichotomy and it seems to me at least from a surface value I can understand why sociologist would be concerned with neoliberal worldviews.

Addressing two "solutions" if you will that I found quite intriguing were the CIW and ROC. First and foremost, I believe that it's critical to make the distinction that when nothing but NGO's pop-up the problems can't be solved in communities because you need the proper funding. Having worked for an NGO previously gives me a unique perspective. While I agree that there needs to be a healthy push back from the citizens of said state I think that completely separating yourself from the government, although they appear to cause nothing but conflict, needs to be viewed under a different light. When enemies come knocking at the door feuding brothers unite.

The CIW is a doing some fantastic work, for being able create the Fair Food Program has enabled countless migrants to be heard and have better pay. I'm curious to see other coalitions like theirs that have pushed big corporations to raise their standards. I've know several farmers that hire migrant workers that are very grateful for their work, because without them, we wouldn't have as high quality of food that we do.

The ROC sounds like a long lost friend that is there to be a voice for all of the silenced voices behind the kitchen doors. Health insurance and sick time in restaurants is almost unheard of. Between farm workers and line cooks they are amongst the most underpaid and undersupported in the industry. I really wish there were more worker owned cooperative restaurants, when you give people the resources to make positive changes in their life doing something they love, it's almost unmatched what they will do for their company.

Making the connection between workers labor rights and taking a stand against neoliberalism was a huge eye opener for me. If we don't have the proper policies enacted we can't really enforce change on a large scale in today's society.

The Benefits of Neoliberalism in Food Justice

In Alison Alkon's text: Food Justice and the Challenge to Neoliberalism, Many subjects were touched upon regarding inequality in the food industry from production and harvesting of raw materials to taking those products and making a finished product. What peaked my interest the most was the focus on GM crops and the impact they have on the market. On one hand I agree that GM crops cause a shift in the market which segregates communities based on their economy and background, on the other hand I do believe humanity has reached a point that using GM crops is necessary to sustain the population we have on this planet. With the way trends are going currently, removing crops that grow faster and produce more would only expand food deserts and create an even larger gap to close to remove those food deserts entirely. While I disagree with removing food deserts I also disagree with the monetization of GM crops and believe that they should be accessible to everyone rather than being selectively built around specific pesticides and monopolized. This and continuing to move towards working with communities that live in these food deserts and helping them become sustainable would increase our liklihood of removing food deserts in their entirety. Alison also touches on “bad actors” and notes that while they may be activist groups working towards a sustainable food system for all, they specifically focus on restricting agribusiness products such as pesticides and GM crops. I agree with fighting against pesticides and how they are currently weaponize to restrict choices in crops to produce and from who you can purchase these seeds from, I still believe GM are a necessity, I think we should focus effort on fighting the weaponization of GM crops rather than GM crops in their entirety. 

Neoliberalism and the Transition to Sustainable Agriculture

Neoliberalism and capitalism have created a plethora of issues in our food systems. These issues range from accessibility/affordability of healthy foods to minorities, to the use of dangerous pesticides, among many others. 

As we discussed in more detail last week, many racial and economic minority groups have very limited access to healthy, whole foods and have been forced into food deserts. I did my GIS project on this topic last semester, titled, "Minority and Low-Income Access to Sustainable Agriculture in Pennsylvania". Below is a pie chart I made of some of my findings - 85% of sustainable farms in Pennsylvania are located in counties that I considered to have Very Low (1.69%-11.97%) to Low (11.98%-22.25%) racial minority populations (sorry if the quality is bad). A limitation to this is that the website I used to gather sustainable farm data is user-submitted and not inclusive of all sustainable farms in Pennsylvania, and there is not a standard for what is considered "sustainable". However, I think it is still jarring the disparity in this small sample I collected and I would be very interested in delving more into this. I did not incorporate a financial aspect to this, it is simply based on location of farms and minority representation, however it is evident that sustainable, organic agriculture tends to be more expensive that it's counterparts, furthering hindering minority populations from accessing it.

 

Pesticide (and other -icide) use comes with a great cost to our health, which many scientists warned about to policy makers in California regarding the use of methyl iodide. Policy makers and large agribusiness companies ignored these warnings and approved the use of methyl iodide anyways, despite the knowledge of the negative health and environmental impacts that go along with it. It wasn't until a lawsuit that would have hindered future use of other pesticides that the company pulled use of methyl iodide. Which was a big win, but had the judge in the lawsuit voted against the company, as he intended to, they would have been faced with hurdles using pesticides in the future. It was not out of care for the community or workers that they stopped using this pesticide, it was so that they could continue their detrimental practices, just in a different font. 

Changes to our food systems will not be able to be substantial whilst still following neoliberal rules. "Voting with your dollar" is great in theory, however it is still perpetuating the system that got us here in the first place. Additionally, many people can't vote with their dollar. The neoliberal capital system is designed to prevent change from being made, as the people and corporations at the top will lose their wealth. As we saw in the article, many groups are working towards developing alternative, mixed economical systems that do not solely rely on business-as-usual capitalism, which I think is great. However, I don't think it is the end all solution. In my opinion, a new economic system is required where money is not the basis. I am not sure what that would look like, but you cannot heal in the environment where you got sick, and the environment we are getting sick in is neoliberal capitalism.

 

Food Justice and the Challenge to Neoliberalism

Reading Alkon’s work made me realize how many problems in the food system I had never really thought about before. I usually think about food in simple ways, like price, taste, or whether it is healthy. After this reading, I started to understand that food is also connected to unfair wages, race, and power. It made me notice that the people who grow and prepare food often struggle the most, even though everyone depends on them every day. One idea that stood out to me was that food justice is about more than access to healthy food. Alkon explains that it also involves challenging exploitation and unfair treatment within the food system. This made me rethink common solutions like organic stores or farmers markets. While those options may help some people, they do not fix deeper problems like poverty or discrimination. Real change has to happen on a larger level. I was also interested in how society focuses on individual choice instead of responsibility from larger systems. Many food movements encourage people to create change by buying certain foods, but this mainly works for people who can afford those choices. This made me think about how easy it is to blame individuals for unhealthy eating without considering limits like money, time, or transportation. Overall, Alkon helped me see that food justice is really about fairness and human rights. It is not only about eating healthy, but also about treating workers with respect and creating a system that supports everyone. This reading changed the way I think about where food comes from and who is affected by it.

Food Justice and the Challenge to Neoliberalism

     This article brought light to topics I never knew about, many that surprised me. Farmers not having accessibility to healthy foods is jarring, since they are the one’s growing the organic foods. Receiving minimal wages for back breaking labor and pesticide poisoning while not receiving proper health benefits. They should be recognized more by larger corporations that sell their organic produce. 

    I also never thought about how conflicting it is for farmers to raise their prices, because while they deserve more money, it also means that people who are lower middle class cannot afford it, making it more difficult for them to have access to organic foods. The idea of community gardens seems to be the best option for this specific issue. However, as we talked about during our last class, many don’t want to do the work in order to get their food. Which I completely understand, they don’t want to wait long for their food to grow, and even when it does grow how can we guarantee that it’ll be enough to sustain a family. 

    I have never heard of a worker cooperative before, and they have begun to be more present within the past decade. I decided to look more into the Mandela Grocery Cooperative to see how it functions. People who shop there can apply for an EBT card which allows them to purchase California grown produce for half off. This allows people who have lower incomes to get produce at a reasonable price, while also supporting local farms. The fruits and vegtables they sell at Mandela change based on what’s in season.

FJ and the Challenge to Neoliberism

 Alkon's food justice dissertation is used to combat neoliberals.  She used food justice as a counter to use market-based solutions, privatization, and individual responsibilities. She states neoliberalism policies deepen food insecurity by limiting social safety nets while promoting agriculture dominance. 

Alkon's approach is to develop collective responsibilities, community control, creating equity in our food systems, promoting farmers markets in addition to organic foods and cultivating food justice activism against mainstream movements which lean towards neoliberalism. Although I see a need for food justice improvement, I am not prepared to abandon all neoliberalism's advantages. Certainty the Laissez-faire pure capitalism economic system that contributed to the great depression of the 1930's was not a good model, letting business run unrestricted. A good example to this is Upton Sinclair's book the "Jungle", reporting on how unhealthy the Chicago meat business at the turn of the century.  Paving the cries to establish the USDA to ensure better purity and healthy conditions in our food processing industry. His book was pure activism to create change for better food justice.

There will always be advantages to certain market freedoms that allow individuals to build better with fewer restrictions. Acclaimed inventors like Eli Whitney with his cotton gin, Henry Ford's automobiles, and Bill Gates Microsoft are strong examples of positive results of neoliberalism. These inventions contributed more helping the masses directly and less to causing inequality and injustice.

I love my clean air and clean water which would not have happened without government intervention and regulation. The unfortunate fact federal and state governments are woefully inefficient. Their help comes with agencies wrought with waste and fraud. This impedes growth and contributes to food injustice and food insecurity.

A system with a more balanced approach of understanding how we regulated our food systems with goals of less discrimination. We need to demand better accuracy to address the food injustice inherently present through our food service chain. I do not want to see a system running totally unregulated. Allowing federal or state to impose their rules without moderation or question, is as equally bad as pure neoliberalism.

Alkon's critique of "Alternative Food Movements" is a good start for positive system changes.  As long as we are cognizant of controlling the food supply to attain equity goals verses any negative effects. Each country will have its unique set of challenges to establish proper goals to build and inclusive system that will not hinder progress.

Challenge to Neoliberalism - Thoughts

 “Food Justice and the Challenge of Neoliberalism” by Alison Alkon is a tough read, as it exposes a lifestyle that a majority of people fall into. This goes back to that idea of a farmers' market that we went over during our discussion in class. We like the idea of “buying local” as we are using our wallets to support local farmers. Alkon looks at farmers' markets as a luxury brand, rather than justice for our farmers.

We have been pushed to become consumers rather than citizens. Neoliberalism has made us feel as though the world’s problems can be solved when we check out with our purchases. “Voting with your fork” is a common idea that doesn’t fully work. You can only do so if you have the means to buy the food that is healthy for you. This completely eliminates those who are living in poverty from being able to participate in the movement. These communities that are unable to “vote with their forks” are arguably the ones who would benefit the most from food reform.

Focusing on whether or not people in your communities are buying local food allows us to ignore the systemic racism and corporate monopolies that are at play. These are the things that dictate what food is available in the first place. Alkon argues for a shift toward collective power, which I agree with. We need to support the people who are harvesting our food, whether or not that food is organic. Those people still deserve to earn a living, even if the food is not inherently healthy for you.

We also need policy reform demanding that healthy food is treated as a human right, rather than a luxury or commodity as it is now. We need to work on backing land trusts and co-ops that will keep money in the hands of the workers rather than going to a CEO. We need to stop worrying about trying to “fix” the market and instead build systems that work completely outside of it. 

Food, Access, and Inequality

 In her TED Talk, Alison Alkon talks about food justice and how food access is shaped by social and economic systems. She explains that eating healthy is not always a choice for everyone. Many people want to eat better, but their income, time, and location limit what food is available to them. Alkon makes it clear that food justice is about more than personal choices. One important point Alkon makes is that unhealthy food is often the cheapest and easiest option. Fast food and processed meals cost less and are easier to find than fresh food. Because of this, people should not be blamed for choosing these options. When people are trying to survive and save money, they choose what works best for them. Alkon challenges the idea that people should feel guilty about what they eat when the system does not give them fair choices. Alkon also talks about how food culture can judge people based on what they eat. Certain foods are seen as “good” or “bad,” and this often connects to class and race. Foods that are common in lower-income or minority communities are often criticized, while foods linked to wealth are praised. This creates shame and unfair judgment instead of understanding. Another topic Alkon discusses is the labor behind the food system. Many farmworkers and food service workers are immigrants or people of color. These jobs are physically demanding and usually pay very little. Even though these workers play a major role in feeding the country, they are often ignored or underpaid. Alkon shows how unfair it is that the food system depends on their hard work while giving them little support. She also explains that farmers who are women or people of color do not receive the same recognition or resources as white male farmers. Many of these farmers face problems getting land, loans, or government help. This shows how inequality exists not only in food access, but also in who is allowed to succeed in agriculture. Overall, Alkon’s TED Talk shows that food justice is a shared responsibility. Instead of blaming individuals, she encourages people to look at the systems that shape food access and labor. Her talk helps viewers understand that real change requires fairness, empathy, and support for the people who grow and serve our food.

Alkon Food Justice

 I had never considered food to be used as racism and this TED Talk really opened my eyes. I was shocked to hear about the way systemic racism plays into food and how processed unhealthy foods are cheaper when healthy food costs the same or less to produce. Fresh produce is so expensive when the farmers working to grow it are not being paid enough to live. White people are taught and brought up on the idea that white people farm and created farming and cultivating is for them only when the slaves were farming, and black people and people of other races are farming all over the world and in America and America is supposed to be for immigrants so the mistreating of them is truly insane. America is so heavily established on farmers and being producers to export when no other countries want as much corn and soy as we produce, and there is no need for farmers to be underpaid to overproduce. I think at a fundamental level this issue could be fixed starting with our kids. If we teach that differences and history matter, they are more likely to respect and understand it and fight for what is right. Alkon discus's the idea that kids are bullied for being different in schools because of the traditional meals they bring, and I think even that could be changed in the way children are raised. More importantly we need to fight for lower prices on fresh produce and healthy foods, especially when they are being raised for no reason. The farmers are still unable to survive and produce as much as they do on subsidies. I love the message Alkon is sending, and I agree and feel like I learned a lot. 

Food as Radical Empathy

Alison Alkon speaks on how food can build radical empathy, which she defines as an understanding of one another's circumstances and reality. She shares how food can bring together people and build communities. Her dive into the innate connections food brings to the world was enlightening. She brought up how food serves roles through symbolic, “secular” traditions and in religions that had never been emphasized to me before. I think it is a valuable way we can celebrate cultures and share them with communities and individuals to increase cultural awareness. I am participating in Fiddler on the Roof at Kutztown, and we had multiple rehearsals dedicated to the education of Judaism. One of the aspects of education was through food! A member of the company baked challah and brought it to everyone. Not only is it an engaging educational tool, but it also immerses individuals within the world of one another through the human senses of taste and smell.

There is also a point within the TED talk where Alkon claims that food can break people apart. Her initial example didn’t sit right with me because it didn’t seem like food was breaking people apart but was just an example of food failing to bring people together again. I view this as being very different from “breaking” people apart. I think her examples of food in some social movements were a better example of breaking people apart, for example, the Boston Tea Party. I also feel as if food breaks people apart in other ways, more similar to what she went on to talk about further in her presentation regarding food racism. 

I also was thinking about her examples of body-image issues and body-shaming in society. I think this topic could get its very own presentation. Dieting. Eating Disorders. Body-shaming of all body types. The complicated entanglement of food, women, objectification, societal pressures, body-image issues, and societal beauty standards. There is a whole vast world that could be explored deeply on how societal pressures determine how people look at food. Some view it as a source of calories to be carefully counted, some view it as fuel for high-intensity activity, some view it as enjoyment, some as relentless cravings, and others view it as a highly valuable thing that is always scarce in supply. Social media exposes young people to potentially harmful dieting behavior and beauty standards and can fracture the relationship between individuals and food, taking away its value and potentially its power to connect them with others (jeopardizing the potential to use food as a tool to facilitate radical empathy).

I loved when Alkon stated that we need to “engage with the totality of the food system.” It emphasized the reality of how interdisciplinary the food system really is. It is valuable and complicated and can be explored through many lenses and angles.

Food marketing is another part of the food system that is complicated. I tend to ruminate on the ethics of marketing something to populations when it is a food that is not “healthy” for consumption. I think about how sugar is marketed through sweets and candies and sodas and drinks. I think about the US’s problems with type 2 diabetes. I think about if we are causing our own downfall just to sell items in stores (AKA to make money). I think about how extremely processed foods have been generally normalized, especially because they tend to be cheaper and more accessible to a wider spread of people. I think about the lack of education and knowledge on health and nutrition (at least in my opinion).

I think about all of those things, and I have no idea how the system could be pushed to make significant changes. I know there are good changes happening out there, but it is hard to believe that businesses and industries will focus on the health of everyday people before the profits of their company. But that is why the movement towards supporting local farms/farmers markets is so great.

Native American, African American, Latino, and women farmers face discrimination within the food system, and Alkon focuses on this in her TED Talk. I think this is very important to giving listeners a well-rounded view of how racism and discrimination of different minority groups are still very, very present-day issues. It takes form as the credit of the sustainable agriculture movement being mainly directed towards young, white men and spans to other issues like immigration and the exploitation of labor.

Alkon’s call to action centered on advocacy and citizen involvement. She explained how education on food is more accessible due to the wide library of food literature available. She pushed listeners to engage with all food stories within different cultures and put the responsibility of diverse stories being told on those who work within the food system. She presents the importance of social and historical context in understanding other individuals, which emphasizes aspects of being an active member of society (specifically the responsibility of investigating and educating oneself from as unbiased of a standpoint as possible). She calls people to get involved to help improve aspects of the food system using free speech in the form of protests and advocacy. Another way is by voting (locally and federally) for leaders who reject all forms of racism and discrimination and will take action to improve wages and conditions of workers within the food system.

Overall, Alkon’s TED talk was very educational and emphasized the multifaceted nature of the food system. She emphasized the value of human lives and the access to basic human rights for immigrant workers and individuals. She focused on racism within the food system and proposed that creating radical empathy within people could help combat this issue. Education and the increase of awareness will hopefully increase the action taken by communities, groups, individuals, and populations so that actions of governments and world leaders will change. There were definitely many topics within this TED talk that could be explored in greater detail, but the presentation did a great job in expanding the horizons and perspectives to help engender change and action.

My Thought's on Alison Alkon's TED Talk

 Alison Alkon's perspective on food justice gave insight to many issues neither I, nor many other people across the country are aware of. systematic racism in the United States is a very common and easily observable issue that can easily be spotted if one knows what to look for. I personally have lived in a low income, poor neighborhood and saw the lack of access to healthy food options that people have. I also now currently live in what would be considered a middle class neighborhood and can directly compare the difference between the two. While I agree that this is mostly caused by policies that are ingrained into the american legal and marketing systems, i also am aware that there are a few potential avenues that can be approached before resorting to raising wages which I believe is only a shortsighted fix that would not sustain any poorer communities in the long term. Fresh produce is wasted on a massive scale due to the criteria of it needing to be "perfect" with no blemishes to become marketable to the general consumer. Simply utilizing that wasted produce would allow not only fresh produce to be potentially more accessible to poorer regions, it would also drive fresh produce prices down and change the question from: Do I choose healthy food or food that will feed my family? to: Why would I choose unhealthy food when healthy options are just as affordable? I also appreciate how she mentioned the corporatization of agriculture. I specifically know of companies like Bayer and Monsanto who have patented their genetically modified corn seed and will sue for unlawful use of their product. by that I mean it is growing on someone's land without the company's permission. On top if this they also have patented pesticide that they have created to be specifically used on their corn. Once a farm has decided to agree to contracting one of these companies it is unfortunately very unlikely to get out of that partnership.

Food as Radical Empathy Thoughts

 Food has always been one of the few essential things that humanity needs in order to survive. The sharing of food brings people together and can allow people to recognize different cultures. There are various positive aspects to food and food systems, however there are a mass amount of issues with it as well. For example, many are always extremely conscious about what they consume, considering how it could affect their health or appearance, which Alkon touches a bit on in the Ted Talk. I personally have been a victim of being hyperaware of what I eat, and feeling guilty when getting fast food. Alkon also mentions how unhealthy foods are more accessible and affordable to the middle class, so why should I feel guilty when I’m saving money while just trying to survive? I think with the rise of social media there has been more of a push towards a certain beauty standard, which coincides with the rise of people being more mindful of what they eat and how much they eat. Not only is it detrimental to one’s mental health, but it also promotes dangerous habits that can spiral into potential eating disorders. 

Another point that Alkon mentions is POC or immigrants who are farmers or work food service jobs. I’m glad that she brought up this topic because farm work or food service is extremely taxing on the mind and body. I don’t know much about the wages of farmers, however I do work in food service myself. The majority of my coworkers are POC, myself included, many work there as a full time job yet only make $12-14 an hour. My job isn’t a large corporation like McDonalds or Burger King, but it makes me wonder why my pay as a part time worker is the same as someone who is full time? This also leads me to wonder why bigger corporations don’t raise their wages for their full time workers, people who couldn’t afford to get a degree or are trying to save up to go to school. She also discusses POC or women farmers not being widely recognized or supported as much as white male farmers are, which is something I was not aware of. Alkon brings up that POC have been very important in the history of U.S. agriculture, and I completely agree with this mindset. Many minority groups have done the heavy lifting for many years and continue to do so, they deserve the same amount of support and recognition as white male farmers. 

Breaking Ground With Marginalized Groups

 The sociological perspective accounts for this distinct narrative story of hate crimes that have taken place across the United States of America. It encompasses the big issues that have arisen the past few decades and food was said to be the starting point for understanding one another. I've frequently thought about this, it's the one time feuding families can get together, just think of any holiday dinner, it's almost not complete without some sort of heated discussion or unfinished business being aired out. Psychologically one can say that most people feel safe and relaxed around the comforts of what they know and love. It provides a safe space, which most professionals who work in the mental health field will agree that communication can only first take place when a person perceives to be safe. It makes sense as to why Alison addresses food being the catalyst to having "radical empathy". As the rising, Joanne Molinaro a.k.a. The Korean Vegan has taken justice from the courtroom to the kitchen she opens up about the racial, sexual, and gender violence that has taken place in her life. When we make a choice, and eat a meal it says something about the bigger picture of who we are, and where we come from. 

In terms of the food production disparities either between racial groups or large industrial factories versus small-scale farms. One thing is clear, as Alkon mentions not only is there a tendency to allow racial prejudices to go overlooked when handing out loans and government subsidies but there also exists a promotion of GMO food production, directly causing the prices of products of small scale marginalized farmers to seem egregious. These government policies have even greater implications in food deserts in rural areas.  

 When we come together to raise our voices during concerning moments in life; it's important to listen and the effectively take communicate. While the convergence over a meal won't solve every problem, I can't think of better place to start. In regards to the social injustices that arise due to "repugnant" smells of foods in school cafeterias, to the stereotypical household such as refried beans, to even how the food is produced in first world countries, I believe that we can take a long pause and realize that we haven't always done a good job of showing hospitality towards the countless number of people we see in any given day.  Allowing Allison's talk to shine light not only on the past, but also our current ideologies, I think we can all agree that using food as a common ground to begin to solve our problems isn't a bad idea at all. 

Food Producers vs Food Processors

Alison Alkon's speech regarding food as radical thought was moving and inspiring in many ways. What resonated with me the most was her mentioning of "food producers vs food processors". We have transitioned from a system of small, regenerative farming, to that of Big Agriculture and factory farms in the matter of decades. Small family farms have been unable to keep up with the progression of modern agriculture and there has been a movement of "get big, or get out". Because of this transition to large factory farms, food is becoming more and more processed. Instead of sausage, eggs, and fruit for breakfast, it's processed grain cereal. Large food producers take fresh food, and turn it into something that may seem like food to us now, but is just empty calories that do not provide us the nutrition we need.

I am very passionate about people having access to real, whole foods, at affordable prices. Everyone should have the opportunity to actually nourish their bodies, not poison them. Much of this processed "food" is full of sugar, fat, and other additives that are 1. harmful to the body and 2. keep the consumer addicted so they keep buying more despite the consequences on their body. To some it may be easy to say "well they should just eat better". It is not that easy. For one, it is not economical for everyone in this system to eat healthy. Additionally, these food companies have spent decades formulating these products to be addictive. Sugar has been cited to be just as, or more addicting than tobacco, and it is in EVERYTHING. Of course, not all sugar is bad and we need sugar to survive, the issue is highly processed and refined sugars that are in most products lining grocery store shelves.

Luckily, living in relatively rural Pennsylvania, I have access to a plethora of small family farms for me to get my meat, eggs, and produce from. However, this comes as a cost. I cannot always afford to buy from local butchers or farmers, and it is not really readily available to me, I have to search these farms out. I live in Pottstown, which is a predominately black neighborhood, and while I'm not sure I would consider it a food desert, much of the food that is available is processed and not real food. The idea of choice and variety has taken supermarkets by storm. Food producers leverage human psychology and physiology to their advantage to keep the consumer coming back for more. This is all very intentional to keep minority populations addicted, as addiction breeds complacency.

 If you like music with a message, listen to "Fat" by Jesse Welles! 

Food As Radical Empathy

 Alison Alkon offers valid points viewing food as a focal point for all groups of people, working to create empathy for under recognized groups. She emphasized the importance of confronting political, material, and injustice.  Her call is to not just care for people's injustice, but to take action. Her strategic goals for change are to address capitalism, racial segregation, labor exploitation, and environmental degradation. My experience working different aspects of the food service and food sales has shown positive advancement in all the stated areas.  We will need to continue our awareness to make consistent improvements. Providing different cuisines, not only educates our palates, but it also brings us closer to each of these ethnic groups. The successful food companies are aware of our growing minority populations and produce foods to meet this growing demand, such as authentic cuisines and religious Halal requirements. We are seeing increasing wages in a traditionally low pay industry. Food manufacturers will need to listen to the growing younger populations, to meet their food preferences and requirements.  As the era of cheap foods deludes us, we have the power to demand clean nutritious foods for all people while addressing food insecurity.  We need to use our dollars to support companies that provide continued positive results in all these areas.

Food as Radical Empathy - JG

     Alkon presents a point I agree with that is often overlooked in the struggle to disperse healthy foods to all people. She argues that while it is important to lean towards healthy eating for ourselves, it is sometimes even more important to lean into why others might choose not to eat healthy foods. It brings up a point in my mind that even if all fifty states grew more healthy foods, the price would likely remain the same. The inputs to maintain organic farms large enough to feed a significant amount of people are typically much more than a conventional farm for many reasons, but some important ones being that yield per acre is typically far less on organic farms, and labor costs are much higher when you can't use machinery. So anyone choosing mostly cheaper and unhealthy foods probably still would if the abundance of healthy food was multiplied, simply because the way the food system is designed, the prices would likely stay the same. Making the farm bigger does not alone reduce the cost the consumer pays. Another point to back Alkon up is that some organic growers sell products for more than they need to. According to the USDA, in 2011-2014, the cost difference for organic corn was about $1.92-$2.27 more than conventional, but was being sold for up to $10 more per bushel than conventional corn, giving the farm significant profit, but gatekeeping the products to those who can afford to spend money on an unnecessary premium. The USDA also claims that during 2011-2014, the same story happened with organic soybean being sold for up to $15 more per bushel than conventional soybean even though the cost difference between conventional and organic soybean production was around $7. Obviously any worker wants to make a profit, but is it too high, or do these organic farmers need the income to continue scaling larger to reach more people? Alkon touches a lot on the history of American farm culture and the racism that steered a lot of it to make it what it is today. While that is all important to know, I think she could have benefitted from shedding more light on what remains today from old school farm culture, like policies and zoning laws that restrict where certain stores can be, where people can live, vote, etc. that all continue to make it harder for someone to cross that line from unhealthy to healthy. Some even ban people from growing their own food. Please refer to the SFSU link at the bottom to read more about zoning being used in this way. If an individual wanted to eat healthy, and the closest organic store to them was 45+ minutes away, chances are they are going to have some unhealthy or less healthy choices to eat between visits. Even if they like the taste and are okay with it, it is still a choice against their will.

https://basicneeds.sfsu.edu/news/how-zoning-laws-affect-both-grocery-deserts-and-housing-scarcity

https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2015/november/despite-profit-potential-organic-field-crop-acreage-remains-low

Food Justice in the Green Revolution

   One of my first thoughts when I hear about food and agriculture is the Green Revolution. It was one of the major points that led towards industrialized farming and agribusiness. When I was first taught about the Green Revolution we had been learning about its driving point, GMO (genetically modified organism) crops. The two main crops of the first were wheat and rice. That sounds like an obvious choice. Most places farm and consume these as crops and food.

Alkon's beginning quote from Isabel Wilkerson on how radical empathy is "Looking at their situation and saying, not what would I do if I were in their position, but what are they doing. Why are they doing what they're doing from the perspective of what they have endured", reminded me on why the first wave of the Green Revolution wasn't a perfect success. Looking past all the introduction of extra pesticides and pesticides, the Green Revolution was primarily focused on a specific diet. The Americas and Asia were the primary benefits of this revolution. Most countries did benefit in an increase of produce. Sub-Saharan Africa did not. The crops grown there are different, as well as the climate and requirements for crop growth. Most farms in Africa were not pressed for space and did not use highly industrialized machinery that Americans used. It required a second wave in the Green Revolution for us to finally modify crops that were more likely to be a success in the African continent.

The 1st Green Revolution was said to have started around the 1940s. The second is around the 2000s, as early as the 1990s depending on the source. This shows a 60 year gap before the situation in Africa and similar countries was truly considered something to be worked on. I've attached two links for sites and papers that touch on the Green Revolution impact in Asia, Mexico, and Africa. It's a shock to see how the difference.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0912953109

https://geosci.uchicago.edu/~moyer/GEOS24705/2014a/Notes/Hazell_IFPRI_2003.pdf

Food As Radical Empathy - Thoughts

    Most people look at food through the lens of calorie counts, environmental footprints, and how healthy the food is considered. In the video, Alison Alkon argues that the most important part of the food system is actually radical empathy. Purchasing food in the grocery store keeps us trapped within a privileged system. Typically, we only think about what we are making with the food or how much it costs. We don't worry about where the food came from, and whether or not it was a white or black person who grew it. This means that we remain ignorant of the human stories behind the food. 

    Food is a unique tool when dealing with the inequalities in the world, as it is something that links all of us together. At one point in the video, Alkon brought up that African American communities do not have access to the same healthy foods that other communities do. This led me to wonder where this is occurring. Was this an example from the United States or from other areas in the world? How can we change this if it is in an entirely different country? We can lobby for change in the United States, but lobbying for change in a different country is much more difficult. 

    Alkon also brings up the popularity of farmers markets and how they are considered to be "white spaces". I have never thought of this. There is a popular farmers market near my house, and now that I think about it, I have never seen a person of color in that market. This has made me start thinking to other places that I have been. For example, I have shopped for food in many different places, but the area that I most commonly see African Americans is Walmart. Is this related to the cost of the food at Walmart compared to other places?

    

Here are my amazing thoughts!!

Here they are. They are really amazing!!