Hello again, dear reader. In
yesterday's post, we discussed how J.R.R. Tolkien's hobbits can be used as a
window into the world of Zen and mindfulness, which can then help us all lead
meaningful and less stressful lives. However, it is short time later I realized
that a big part of Zen and mindfulness believe it or not, is having a
well-rounded healthy diet. The theory goes that it is much harder to be mindful
or Zen, if one's body does not have the proper fuel and/or healthy living
conditions. This of course got me thinking about the hobbits and the thing they
love most in the world (next to blowing smoke rings with Longbottom leaf of
course) is eating hobbit absolutely relish food they eat something like seven
or eight times a day. They have multiple breakfasts, and several suppers and
dinners. Not only to hobbits take pride in where their food comes from and how
it's prepared. But they also thoroughly enjoy the act of eating a meal as a
sort of Zen meditation and relaxation process. Hobbits use a meal as an excuse
for discussion and mindfulness, but it can also be a form of meditation,
wherein they are fully absorbed in the moment, focusing on nothing but the
flavors and aromas and sensations of their food being able to be in the moment
is the ultimate goal of any Zen or meditation practitioner so let's take a
lesson from the hobbits and learn to appreciate the mindfulness of food...
If there is one area of life most
people can change in order to return to the Shire, in a metaphorical if not
literal sense, it’s their eating habits. You can live in a 20-storey
high-rise in Manhattan or Paris and still adopt a Hobbit lifestyle when it
comes to eating. That’s because Hobbits are different from most of the
enslaved subjects of Mordor not only in what they eat … but also in how
and why they eat it. Hobbits, along with most of the free
peoples of Middle-earth, eat pure, naturally grown, mostly wild foods from
their own gardens or nearby fields: lush berries, fresh bread, cheese,
cold meats, mushrooms (lots of those!), wine and beer. They eat
frequently, usually in groups and often accompanied by poetry readings and
songs. Hobbits are not vegetarians but they have a varied diet of whole,
local foods, including Nimcelen, the hobbit version of potato salad; Soroname,
a warm soup filled with pasta, meat, tomatoes, beans and onions; and Lembas,
Elvish waybread. They drink wine and, when they can get it, such
invigorating liquors as Ent-draughts and Mirror, the life-giving
and energizing elixir of the Elves. Food has a spiritual as well as a biological
purpose for them.
As even cursory readers of The
Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings know, Hobbits like to eat well and
often. They also take their time. “And laugh they did, and eat, and drink,
often and heartily, being fond of simple jests at all times, and of six meals a
day (when they could get them),” Tolkien notes in the famous “Prologue” to The
Fellowship of the Ring. Indeed, foods of all types feature prominently
in the long saga of The Lord of the Rings. The entire epic begins
with a magnificent feast for Bilbo’s eleventy-first birthday party. As
many commentators have pointed out, there is more eating than fighting in The
Lord of the Rings, despite the gore of Hollywood’s over-amped CGI film
versions. After what Tolkien calls “a very pleasant feast” at Bilbo’s
birthday and going-away party—“rich, abundant, varied and prolonged”—Tolkien
goes on to describe Frodo’s meal with Gildor Inglorion and the High Elves and
another magnificent dinner at the Prancing Pony in Bree. The Elves describe
their travelling food as “poor fare,” and yet Pippin recalls the food as
“bread, surpassing the savour of a fair white loaf to one who is starving; and
fruits sweet as wild berries and richer than the tended fruits of gardens” and
a cup “that was filled with a fragrant draught, cool as a clear fountain,
golden as a summer afternoon.” The fellowship leaves the Elves to share a
few meals with the strange, primeval creature known as Tom Bombadill—including
such delights as “yellow cream and honey-come, and white bread, and butter;
milk, cheese, and green herbs and ripe berries gathered”—and then head for the
small village of Bree. There, at the inn known as The Prancing Pony, they
gather their strength for their quest, and Tolkien describes the food in
detail:
They were washed and in the middle
of good deep mugs of beer when Mr. Butterbur and Nob came in again. In a
twinkling, the table was laid. There was hot soup, cold meats, a
blackberry tart, new loaves, slabs of butter, and half a ripe cheese: good
plain food, as good as the Shire could show, and homelike enough to dispel the
last of Sam’s misgivings (already much relieved by the excellence of the beer).
In Tolkien’s vision, the growing,
preparation and enjoyment of food take up most of the hobbits’ time—and serve a
much higher purpose than the mere utilitarian re-fueling of Mordor’s
orcs or modern society. The meals of the hobbits and the elves have
social, even spiritual, purposes, helping to cement the bonds of friendship and
strengthen the soul for hardships to come. In this, Tolkien is echoing an
ancient spiritual tradition that extends back through his own Catholic faith,
and the Anglo-Catholicism of his friends at Oxford, all the way through the
Jewish and Christian testaments. The elaborate family Sabbath and Passover
meals are central to Jewish religious practice. The central act of Christian
worship in the majority of denominations, the Eucharist, is essentially a
ritualized meal and a re-enactment of the Last Supper. To put it
simply: What and how we eat matters … and there is a vast chasm existing
between the nourishing, fresh, locally grown food eaten in the Shire (and in
most traditional societies)… and the manufactured, per-packaged, artificial
“food products” consumed by the harried worker-bees of consumer society.
The
Shift to Industrial Mass Production of Food
Ironically enough, the growing and
eating of food also provides a startling case study in just how radically
different is the social and economic vision that informed Tolkien’s formative
years—the Third Way DE-centralized economics of G.K. Chesterton and his
circle—and the dominant economic paradigm of our own world, the literal fusion
of Big Government and Big Business in the modern corporate state. That’s
because at the heart of Distributes or Third Way thought is a belief in radical DE-centralization, diversity and local control—particularly
when it comes to the production of food. In contrast, the very essence of
modern industrial food production is centralization, lack of diversity and
national or corporate control.
In the early 20th century, there
were approximately 6.4 million farms in the United States producing food for a
population of 76 million people. By the year 2008, which number had fallen
to just 2.2 million producing food for 300 million in the U.S. and for tens of
millions more abroad, even those statistics don’t tell the real story of
consolidation and monopolization, however. That’s because most of the
“independent” farms that still exist are really controlled by a handful of
agricultural conglomerates—aided and abetted by Big Government regulators, such
as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Big Business and Big Government
work together to create regulations supposedly for the public’s benefit but
really designed to put small competitors out of business. As a result, by
some estimates just four companies now produce 90% of the food consumed in the
United States: Cargill, Tyson Foods, General Mills and Kraft.
The success of global agribusiness
is well-known. In some ways, it’s a triumph of modern science and
technology. Beginning in the 1920s, large agricultural conglomerates began
applying the techniques of the Industrial Revolution to the growing and
marketing of food. In place of diverse crops and animals grown in a variety
of places, the big companies began a program of standardization, mechanization
and centralized control. Efficiency became the prime directive. In
place of small family farms dotted across the landscape, a handful of enormous
factory farms were created that produce assembly line “food products.” The
goal was to produce vast amounts of standardized foods at extremely low prices
… and the big conglomerates, with the help of government subsidy programs and
regulations tailor-made for big companies, succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest
dreams.
Thus, the twin forces of
globalization and industrialization have created an enormous and
inter-dependent multinational food industry that has resulted in supermarkets,
at least in prosperous First World countries, being stuffed full of seemingly
limitless amounts of per-packaged “ready to eat” foods. A typical North
American or European family is a virtual United Nations of food consumption,
eating “beef products” produced in Argentina, coffee grown in vast plantations
in Columbia, wheat grown in Nebraska, and strawberries from Turkey.
But as many food analysts have
pointed out, the diversity that appears on store shelves is really an illusion
carefully designed to mask an ugly truth: mass
standardization. While there may be dozens and dozens of different
“brands” of cereal on the shelves, mostly owned by the same one or two
corporations, the underlying reality is that what’s inside the boxes is
virtually identical. The negative health consequences of this relatively
monotonous diet of per-processed food products are only recently becoming
apparent to average people.
The
Health Consequences of Industrial Food
In recent years, ordinary consumers
and health researchers have come to realize that this centralized industrial
food production comes at an enormous cost in human health. The “virtual
foods” we see on store shelves are mass-produced, chemically enhanced synthetic
products like the “fake butter” on movie popcorn, that looks like real food but
have all the nutritional value of chew able plastic:
1. High-yield, genetically modified
(GMO) fruits and vegetables grown in depleted soils drenched in pesticides,
picked weeks early and filled with chemical dyes and preservatives so they
arrive in stores looking “fresh”.
2. Corn- and animal-fed industrial
meat products filled with potentially dangerous synthetic antibiotics (such as
Zeranol, Trenbolone, and Melengestrol) and growth hormones—BANNED, for
health reasons, from the European Union.
3. Dairy products, from milk to ice
cream, produced from cows given a genetically engineered hormone called rBGH to
increase milk production.
4. Refined carbohydrates designed
for maximum shelf life rather than nutritional content.
5. Laboratory-created “fat
substitutes” that were designed to pass through the human body undigested.
6. Synthetic “instant” fast food
products pumped full of chemical preservatives, partially hydrogenated oils and
High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HGCS) to increase hunger and encourage increased
consumption.
… And on and on.
The result is a tragic paradox:
Despite record levels of obesity and despite gobbling fistfuls of chemical
vitamins, millions of people in the industrialized west suffer from real
nutritional deficiencies without even knowing it.
Medical researchers first suspected that
people living in modern industrialized societies may suffer from unknown but
potentially dangerous nutritional deficiencies when they began looking at two
sets of facts:
1. The unexplained explosion in
the rate of certain ailments since 1920, when modern industrial food
manufacturing began in earnest; and,
2. The extremely low rates of these
same chronic health problems among traditional peoples who don’t eat from tin
cans or plastic boxes.
The first set of facts has been
known for decades. Beginning about 1920, about the time when
industrialized farming and the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides by
crop dusters became common, the death rate from heart problems in the U.S. more
than doubled and the death rate from cancer nearly tripled. At the same time,
Americans also became afflicted with dozens of other ailments almost
unknown to their grandparents and great-grandparents, including numerous food
allergies, autoimmune ailments, joint problems, chronic breathing difficulties,
migraine headaches, sexual infirmities, and the list goes on and on.
The truth is: Thanks to
improvements in medicine (antibiotics) and public hygiene (sewer systems),
Americans today live longer than their pioneer ancestors but are sicklier,
weaker, and prone to health problems that didn’t even exist in 1900.
A second set of facts is even more
alarming. Traditional societies that remain isolated from modern
industrialized farming remain remarkably healthy, virtually free of the chronic
health problems that plague modern North Americans and Europeans.
“On my arrival in Gabon, in 1913, I
was astonished to encounter no cases of cancer,” wrote the medical missionary
Dr. Albert Schweitzer, of his decades spent among African nations. “I saw
none among the natives two hundred miles from the coast.” Nor was
Schweitzer alone in his observations. When anthropologists, medical
missionaries and others visited isolated groups all across the world, they were
struck by the same fact: a remarkable absence of chronic disease! As the
nutrition writer Michael Pollan writes in his magisterial expose of the food
industry, In Defense of Food, these early researchers found “little to
no heart disease, diabetes, cancer, obesity, hypertension, or stroke; no
appendicitis, diverticulitis, malformed dental arches, or tooth decay; no
varicose veins, ulcers or hemorrhoids.”
The typical response to this has
been that “primitive” peoples simply didn’t live long enough to get such
“western” ailments as cancer and heart disease. But we now know that this is
not true. A recent study of longevity among the few remaining
hunter-gatherer societies—such as the Yanomami in the Amazon rain forest or the
Kung people in Africa—found most traditional peoples live almost as long as
their western counterparts, despite their utter lack of modern medical care. What’s
more, when doctors examine the older members of hunter gatherer peoples, they
find that they are largely free of the diseases that plague modern Americans.
What Pollan and other nutrition
researchers now believe is that the recent explosion of chronic health problems
in developed societies is due almost entirely to the nutritional deficiencies
of modern industrial food production.
To put it simply: Modern
industrialized farming and mass-production meat factories have traded quantity
for quality. For convenience and shelf life, the giant food companies
inadvertently strip out the vital plant nutrients that keep you strong and
healthy—and, in their place, pump in synthetic sweeteners, chemical
preservatives and other additives. This makes abundant “food” that can
last almost indefinitely on store shelves, but which lacks almost all of the
vital nutrients you need for health, healing and longevity. Pollan and other
food researcher’s claim, therefore, that it almost doesn’t matter what your
specific diet is—the fish-oriented diet of Greenland, the Mediterranean diet of
Greece, the rice diet of Japan—you will be far healthier eating that way than
eating the processed foods of modern developed countries. How the food
is produced turns out to be far more important, in terms of its effect on your
health, than what you eat! Put another way, you’d be better off
eating organic whale blubber every day than you would eating frozen pizzas.
Increasingly, medical researchers
are agreeing with this assessment. Research now links poor or inadequate
nutrition to four of the top 10 causes of death in the developed world: heart
disease, cancer, stroke, and diabetes Research done by the Center for
Nutrition Policy and Promotion found that a staggering 74% of Americans suffer
from inadequate nutrient intake. Another study found that only 41% of the U.S.
population gets enough phytonutrients from vegetables and only 24% get enough
from fruits—and of some vital phytonutrients, such as the vision-supporting
nutrients found in yellow vegetables like squash, they get almost none.
In other words, the harried citizens
in modern industrial democracies have access to vast amounts of what looks like
food yet are suffering from nutritional deficiencies that are seriously
undermining their health and even shortening their lives.
The
Political and Economic Costs
As you might expect, the early Distributes,
writing in the 1920s when large industrial farms were just being created,
foresaw this development clearly. They advocated a return to family owned
farms (not necessarily small) for financial, spiritual, political and health
reasons. An early Distributist manifesto was even entitled Flee to the
Fields. They maintained that a decentralized system of food co-ops
and farmers’ markets, seen in Europe for generations, was the best way to
ensure the security of food production and quality. In this, they were a
voice crying in the wilderness, dismissed as “anti-modern” and old-fashioned.
Distributions thinkers such as G.K.
Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc believed that modern political parties of the
Left and Right were essentially different sides of the same coin: Marxists
and Fascists, Democrats and Republicans, Labor and Conservative, all believe
in big factories, standardization, uniformity, centralized control and mass
production. They just quibble over who should be in charge, government
bureaucrats or corporate executives. Stalin and Mao created vast
industrial farms every bit as large and uniform as those of ConAgra and Tyson
Foods.
Distributions, in contrast, have
been the only serious movement to question the orthodoxy of the modern
corporate state, to insist on decentralization over centralization, local over
national control, diversity over uniformity, smaller over bigger. In this,
Distributes are quite in harmony with the growing local and organic food
movement, a movement that is embraced by people across the political spectrum.
While many people associate local
and “slow food” efforts to be per-eminently left-wing and hippie-like ideals,
many conservative and libertarian-minded folks also embrace the same
ideals. One reason for this is because there is a growing awareness among
ordinary people that large-scale industrial farming, controlled by a handful of
agribusiness monopolies, comes with a startling number of hidden economic as
well as political costs. Many organic and small farmer organizations even
question whether, when all these hidden costs are taken into account, large
factory farms are really as efficient and productive as they claim to be.
“Many of the costs of industrial
agriculture have been hidden and ignored in short-term calculations of profit
and productivity, as practices have been developed with a narrow focus on
increased production,” says the Union of Concerned Scientists, in a special
report issued in 2008. “The research establishment that underpins modern
industrial agriculture has until recently paid little heed to the unintended
and long-term consequences of these systems (emphasis added).” The UCS is
calling for a fundamental re-thinking of the modern system of food
production. “A new awareness of the costs is beginning to suggest that the
benefits [of industrial farming] are not as great as they formerly appeared.”
One obvious hidden cost of
industrial agriculture cited by the UCS is the high energy requirements of
transportation—not just of the foods themselves (transporting oranges from New
Zealand to the USA, for example) but of the myriad products that go into
industrial food production itself. For example, the corn and soybeans that
is used as feed for most industrial livestock—in place of the ordinary grass
used by organic ranchers—must be transported from gigantic farms to the
ranches. The petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides used to growth
that wheat must, in turn, be transported to the farms, often over long
distances. Then there is the energy costs used in industrial farming
itself: the enormous combines and harvesters. In addition to
transportation, there are refrigeration costs: again, all from limited
energy sources.
Finally, that’s not counting the
indirect costs of damage to the environment or to other food-producing systems,
including,
- “Damage to fisheries from oxygen-depleting microorganisms fed by fertilizer runoff…”
- “The cleanup of surface and groundwater polluted with… waste…”
- “The increased health risks borne by agricultural workers, farmers, and rural communities exposed to pesticides and antibiotic resistant bacteria.”
It’s little wonder that the USC
concludes that “the full costs of industrial agriculture… call into question
the efficiency of this approach to food production.”
Of greater concern to Tolkien and
the early Third Way thinkers, however, were the political costs of
industrialized, large-scale, centrally planned food production. When
hundreds of millions of people are utterly dependent upon just a handful
of large multinational corporations for their very survival—or, for that
matter, a centrally controlled State—it gives new meaning to Belloc’s term for
the modern citizen: servile. For both Tolkien and Belloc,
industrialism brings with it a radical dependence that undermines society and
encourages a subtle despotism—particularly when it concerns food
production. When the agents of Mordor take over the Shire in The Lord
of the Rings, this is precisely what happens. As Matthew Akers
describes it in the St. Austin Review:
This environmental destruction [of
industrialization] has also destroyed the indigenous culture of the hobbits.
They have become industrial serfs rather than agricultural freemen. Now, the
hobbits depend upon the industrial work they perform at the new mill for their
livelihood rather than enjoying the fruits of their agricultural labor. They
also crouch in fear before the big government that has taken over the Shire,
for this new government controls the mill, the hobbits’ source of livelihood.
Once the hobbits are severed from nature, they are severed from their very
essence: they are no longer free and fun-loving. Instead, they have become
industrial slaves, both to their masters at the mill and to their bureaucratic
masters in government.
Tolkien and the distributions did
not believe everyone should be family farmers. In the Shire, as in the
Middle Ages, there were tradesmen, repair men, merchants and
lawyers. Tolkien himself was a university professor, Chesterton a
newspaperman. Yet they did believe that the “means of production” should
be DE-centralized, controlled by the many and not by the few. This
is in stark contrast to the aims of both Big Government liberals and Big
Business conservatives, who seek to ensure that the means of production, in
this case food production, are controlled by the few. Big Business does
this through its relentless quest for monopoly; Big Government does this
through myriad regulations that drive smaller companies and farms out of
business. “Loathing Capitalism, however, Chesterton loathed Socialism
more,” writes the Catholic philosopher Michael Novak of G.K. Chesterton, one of
Distributism’s chief theoreticians. “He took his stand on two values which
Capitalism claimed to stand upon but, he thought, destroyed: private
property and personal self-determination.” Chesterton was one of the few
thinkers to see clearly that both Big Business and Big Government want the same
thing—total control— and that this is not in the best interests of the
average person. This is especially true, we are now discovering, when it
comes to the production of food.
The
Fox Guarding the Hen House
One of the most troubling aspects of
the corporate state’s control over food production is the way in which Big
Business operatives infiltrate and control the very government agencies that
are supposed to be regulating them. For example, many of the top officials
of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—charged with protecting the health of
American food consumers—are themselves former employees of, or paid consultants
to, the large multinational agribusinesses. Talk about the fox guarding
the hen-house! For example, former U.S. Food and Drug Administration
commissioner Lester Crawford was actually convicted for lying about his
financial ties to companies the FDA regulates (Pepsico). Clarence Thomas,
the U.S. Supreme Court Justice who wrote the opinion that the Monsanto
Corporation could legally patent its genetically modified seeds, was once a
corporate lawyer in the pesticide and agriculture division of, yes, Monsanto.
Practical
Steps
There are a number of practical
steps you can take to begin eating more like a Hobbit and, thereby,
contributing to both your personal health and your political
liberation. Here are a few.
1. Go organic. Whenever
possible, begin buying organic food, especially when it comes to meat and dairy
products. Organic products are more expensive so every family and
individual has to adjust their purchases for their own economic
situation. Many people believe that, for health reasons, switching to
organic, free-range meats and dairy is more important than organic vegetables
because of the use of growth hormones and antibiotics in meat and dairy.
2. Buy local only. Almost every town
and city in North America and Europe hosts farmer’s markets where the few
remaining family and small farms come to sell locally grown produce. There
are now also hundreds of websites where you can quickly and easily identify
stores in your area that sell locally grown produce.
3. Eat in season. This is
the hardest step of all to take. That’s because globalization means that
consumers in prosperous nations have gotten used to eating whatever they want,
whenever they want it, regardless of the season. But again, convenience
comes at a high cost: the fruits you buy in January are picked unripe and
artificially ripened with ethylene gas or calcium carbide (yum,
yum!). Buying foods in season, however, has the effect of encouraging a
far more diverse diet than would otherwise be the case: apricots in April,
cherries in May, blueberries and raspberries in June.
4. Start your own
garden. One reason to start your own garden is because it sensitizes you
to what you’re missing by eating only mass-produced industrial
food. Anyone who has ever tasted a homegrown heirloom tomato grown on the
vine has trouble going back to the tasteless, “per-ripened,” dyed-red globules
sold in most supermarkets. Even if you only have a few green pepper plants
sprouting on your balcony in your high-rise apartment, it is a vivid reminder
of the Shire and why you should go out of your way to find “Hobbit-grown” foods
whenever you can.
5. Join the Urban Chicken
movement. Thousands of families in urban and suburban settings have set up
small chicken coops in their back yards, sometimes disguised as children’s
playhouses. The fun of growing chickens is heightened by getting dozens of
“farm fresh,” organically produced, nutritious eggs.
6. Eat less meat. Hobbits
are not vegetarians and neither are most human beings. Yet their favorite
foods are grown in the wild, particularly mushrooms. Many people are
finding that a return to the so-called “Paleolithic diet,” the diet of our
hunter-gather ancestors, can result in surprising health benefits and even
weight loss. This is a diet made up primarily of fruits and vegetables
with occasional lean meat dishes.
7. Lobby for labeling. The
industrial food lobby, aided by most national governments, has fought tooth and
nail against food labeling requirements. The Big Food lobby has been
especially fierce in its opposition to labels for Genetically Modified (GM)
foods since so many consumer food products today now contain genetically
altered plants, such as corn. It is also opposed to mandatory labeling for
products that contain growth hormones, antibiotics, pesticides and so on.
That’s because the food industry does not want consumers “voting with their
pocketbooks” and choosing organic foods that do not contain these chemical
additives.
As always thanks for listening, and there will be more to
come soon.
PS I can't guarantee tomorrow's post will have anything to
do with hobbits.
Sage advice! I believe many people eat only locally grown food (food grown within a 100 mile radius). The Mediterranean diet is very "Hobbitish." Love reading your blogs. Keep them coming!
ReplyDelete