This tweet caught my eye yesterday.
Original photo source here
As did the Sustainable Table movement again
This group are doing fantastic work in their drive to address one of the biggest problems on the planet – Food Waste but they are making me so cranky about the way they are depicting main stream agriculture.
So how does main stream agriculture get the real story out there. Who is our audience?. What are our messages? Why are some people so ready to err in favour of the propaganda proliferated by the picture on the left
Lets look at our audience. It certainly isn’t the hardliners on both sides ( and yes agriculture has them too). In laymans terms they are in the main a lost cause and a big waste of energy.
As the scientists say
Firstly they are motivated to believe what they do, and unless those motivations change, it is unlikely they will be swayed by rational argument.
Secondly their logic is self-sealing, designed to be impermeable to external reasoning. Source here
Lets look at our messages. What are our messages? Yes its definitely time we get those right
In the first instance it is time we make a strong delineation between animal welfare/wellbeing and animal cruelty. If the hardliner animal liberationists where truly serious about animal cruelty they would be targeting owners of companion pets who make up more than 60% of the people charged for animal cruelty. Note farmers make up less than 5%.
Why don’t they target companion pet owners you ask? . Yes that is definitely one question we should be asking. I think in this case this just reinforces my point that this group of people have their own agenda and reducing animal cruelty seems to be well down the list of their priorities with raising money at the top.
So getting back to Sustainable Table (see footnote) who I have mentioned in my blog before. See here
Its a beautiful website, obviously started by some very passionate people doing some great things. This initiative also has some very credible people backing it as do a number of people who promote similar farming enterprises. I have no problem at all with people who want to farm using these philosophies but I want to use this post to debunk some of the very naive thinking that underpins this ethos and makes me really cranky by promoting it by deriding large scale farming practices
What a difference their approach is to the Fair Food Farmers United beautifully outlined by Tammi Jonas here. Tammi is an advocate of the ‘produce less for more’ model and walks the talk.
Don’t produce more for less, produce less for more.
By that I mean we must value the land, animals, and workers and ensure their health is paramount in every agricultural system and then ask eaters to pay a fair price for our efforts.
All of which is easier said from a farmer in a miniscule supply chain selling direct to eaters. The bigger challenge is for the majority who are under pressure from centralised market power and long supply chains…
What do you think? How can we address the serious structural imbalances between farmers, processors, distributors and supermarkets in Australia? How can we support all farmers to make a living growing food in the fairest ways possible?
I will be blunt. I believe the Sustainable Table approach to the way they depict main stream agriculture farming practices ( or what they believe are main stream agriculture farming practices) is dangerous and divisive and damaging to Brand Agriculture and needs addressing by mainstream agriculture. Its time for polite, constructive and robust two way conversations. Its time to invite them to our table.
Footnote: I don’t view Sustainable Table as hardliners
