There is a lot to unpack in this article and a lot of issues brought to our attention. After the initial introduction a section on page 4 kind of caught my eye. It was said “A third barrier can be found in the language of the sustainable agriculture movement itself. Scholars have argued that farmers’ markets and other spaces where sustainable agriculture can be practiced are often coded as white, not only because they are primarily and disproportionately frequented by whites, but because of the discourses that circulate through”. While I can’t sit here and argue against scholars and farmers, I feel this issue isn’t to be blamed on the farmers. I don’t like the term “coded for whites” because that simply isn’t the case. For me growing up and going to my local “farmers market” I saw a wide variety of people shopping and selling items. When you think about it, it’s a cultural thing for people to want to buy a product from someone of the same culture so I understand where this is coming from. It’s just a hard topic to relate to because I never saw anything like this, and she is making it seem like we’re still segregated. Another part I just didn’t like was when they mentioned, ‘getting your hands dirty in the soil’’ and ‘‘looking the farmer in the eye,’’ all point to ‘‘an agrarian past that is far more easily romanticized by whites than others’’. This seems to be putting words into other people's mouths by making agriculture seem like something it isn’t. She then says, “This cultural barrier can suggest to low-income and communities of color that sustainable agriculture is not for them, especially when combined with the lack of available organic and local produce in their neighborhoods.” This is something I don’t disagree with, but many people need to be aware that farmers in sustainable agriculture are simply not making money. They mention these low-income communities not having access when there are issues on both sides. It isn’t as simple as just understanding the roots, there has to be a more complex and beneficial solution for both of these sides because the struggle people have to get healthy food is a concern.
Overall, I don’t know how I feel about this article, she brought up a lot of good points and ideas. The Worker Cooperatives is something I see potential in but again everything always sounds easier than it’s going to be. It’s impossible to plan for things you don’t know are going to happen and that can have a big effect. My biggest problem that just was so consistent is the term “activist”. I love the idea of bringing awareness to the situation and the roots of our food system. I just feel we need to work from being activists to problem solvers. I feel like for how much information was in this article it was a lot of “bashing” and “calling out” instead of offering up better ideas. From the Ted Talk to this one as much as Alkon speaks out for people of color I feel like she tries to put them in a box and define everyone as the same if they're the same color. It sounds pretty rude, but we need to take our personal feelings out of farming completely and take a look at the real issues. I think nowadays we’re too stuck on trying to please everyone and we all know that’s an impossible task. I was appreciative of her very last words saying, “These new strategies make use of what has come before them, the market-as-movement that urges supporters to participate as consumers and entrepreneurs. Indeed, consumer support has often been key to the successes gained by these more collective strategies. This suggests a new way forward for food and agricultural activists, in which they build upon their economic successes to create broader and more collective campaigns….” The people are the most important part of this, without coming together and supporting each other we won’t ever see any change.
2 comments:
When I read that section in the article that talked about farming being "coded for whites", something about that section did not sit right with me, but I could not figure out what it was at first. She isn't wrong in the fact that our traditional view of a farmer is a white man. Reading your post made me realize exactly what did not sit right with me about that section - I feel like she is focusing on the wrong issue. The farmers are not to blame, and instead of picking fights with farmers because they happen to be white in a system that benefits white people, we should be encouraging and highlighting people of color that are farmers. I definitely agree with you in that it is a cultural difference, depending on where you grow up you are going to have more or less exposure to agriculture, and therefore are going to be more or less interested in farming.
As someone who isn't a farmer and didn't grow up around farmer's market's, I don't know much about being able to go to them throughout childhood. And I think that might be kind of what she is saying? I think? If you aren't being exposed to this, what is going to convince you that you belong there? Access to all, not access for "the ones who get it".
It may already be daunting for some people of color to approach a group of mostly white people selling produce in a rural area. In terms of what was quoted in the article though, I think that she was specifically speaking in regards to tag lines or jargon being used by younger generations to bring people "closer" to their farmer. Farm to table has grown in popularity right on the heels of farmer's markets and there is a bit of white-washing that is happening. It's becoming an "aesthetic" if you will. We need to stop seeing access to fresh, organic whole foods as something that only the elite can have.
Post a Comment