Filed under: Commodities trading, solutions & positive steps | Tags: CFTC, Chicago, chicago board of trade, chicago mercantile exchange, commodities trading, family farm defenders, insider trading, protest
Come one, come all, to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange / Board of Trade building at La Salle & Jackson on Friday, April 15 (tax day): It’s time for the annual Family Farm Defenders protest!
FFD has been protesting down at the CME for several years now, and from what I’ve been told (oh, how I wish I were able to be in Chicago for this) the traders actually know about – and sort of look forward to – the protest and the discussion. The web link above has a concise, cogent explanation of what’s wrong with the CME and what needs to change to make the institution more transparent, fair and democratic. If you don’t live in Chicago, there’s information about who to call at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Senate Judiciary Committee to demand reforms.
Posted By: Ben, a.k.a. HINTERHEARTH
These first couple posts might seem somewhat inappropriate in their lack of wheat-related content, but, after staying up many nights mulling it over, I realized that they were necessary as introductions to the astoundingly broad historical context of this familiar foodstuff, and so to its contemporary relevance to conversations of sustainability and social change. So with the hope that said introductions are interesting, and with the promise that I will indeed blog on wheat extensively in posts to come, I begin.
In any analysis that is as wide-ranging as I dream of this project being, it is especially important to be up front about our assumptions. As specific people having specific experiences within specific cultural contexts, it is unwise to imagine ourselves capable of espousing a view that is objective or unbiased in any absolute sense. This is not to imply some flaccid relativism in which it is hopeless to make any attempt to inform and guide our behavior. There exists plenty of room, and plenty more need, for a sort of relative objectivity, within which we do our very best to pay mind to the dynamic tension between such polar notions as subjective and objective, relative and absolute. This in-between space is where real life happens, and as real live people, the ideas we shape must be concrete enough to act by, but flexible enough to re-examine. In our writing and our framing of further discussions, we will necessarily make some broad assumptions, not in an attempt to assert their incontrovertible truth, but to suggest their relevance to a workable understanding of the world we live in.
The most basic assumption underlying this work we are beginning has to do with the relationship between humans and the environment in which and from which they live. It deals, both initially and finally, with but one general pattern of interaction between people and their surroundings. We may use any number of descriptors for this pattern; industrial/post-industrial, global-capitalist, First World, modern/post-modern, Western civilized, fossil-fueled, and so on (to say nothing, at the moment, of patriarchy or euro-centricity). On the scale of our history as a species, it is very recently emerged and revolutionary in its break from many of the paradigms that were central to all previous modes of human living. Of the most interest is a shift from dependence on what can be described as “current” solar energy (sunlight recently embodied in the tissues of plants and animals, or as usable currents in the atmospheric cycles and patterns of water and wind) to “fossil” forms of solar energy (sunlight trapped through photosynthesis millions (oil) to hundreds of millions (coal) of years ago, and preserved and concentrated through geologic processes. Natural gas fits here too). These fuel sources don’t by any means account for all of the energy used by this society, but their unique qualities, particularly those of oil, have contributed to many of its distinctive features, and present us with some of the most immediately troublesome consequences of extensive use.
In seeking the broadest and most appropriate general consensus from which to begin, we align ourselves with the diverse critiques calling into serious question the sustainability of this form, based both on its dependence upon nonrenewable resources, and the widespread degradation and destabilization of crucial natural systems that have accompanied its spread, which, in all likelihood, will amplify into the future. We also recognize, and stress, that resource renewability and ecological integrity, though tremendously important, are not by any means the only measures of the sustainability of a society. Social justice in all its dimensions is a topic that deserves at least as much consideration, and not as a separate issue to be considered alongside environmental concerns. As I’ll explore in my next post, the ways in which human beings relate to each other are inextricably connected to the ways in which they relate to the non-human world.
Initially, however, we’ll frame our assumptions in the expansion upon those general environmental themes: We assume that if the current patterns of industrialized society continue, then at some point, either the nonrenewable energies or the basic ecological functions on which it depends will be sufficiently depleted or degraded as to imperil billions of lives, if not the entirety of humanity. Though it doesn’t do justice to the localized complexities of this situation, there are some initial advantages to an outlook that is so decidedly abstract and global in scope.
The foundations of modern scientific thought that make such a vast and powerful viewpoint possible, that enable individual human beings to recognize the thread of relatedness that connects their day to day activities with processes that affect the fate of the entire planet and the lives of future generations, have been laid within the unfolding of the very civilizational forms that we are calling into question. Any serious inquiry into alternative paths requires an examination that presses beyond a superficial understanding of our crisis of civilization and challenges the deep-held assumptions and societal patterns that have marked its progression. It is on these grounds that we hope for this project to take root; in a simultaneous reckoning and rediscovery through which we confront the legacy of human destruction and domination with one hand, and embrace with the other the rich possibilities for cooperation and sustainability with which that legacy has been intertwined throughout our history and into the present.
Filed under: Food Geography & Culture, solutions & positive steps | Tags: British Columbia, community-supported agriculture, CSA, grain
Out on the western fringes of the continent, British Columbia seems to be a smallish hotbed of experiments in local grain growing. Today I found out about not one, not two but three recently formed CSAs devoted to growing wheat – Island Grains on Vancouver Island; Urban Grains on the mainland. Further inland in the Creston Valley, the Creston Valley Food Action Coalition and parter organizations started BC’s first CSA devoted to grain. These folks actually organized a fleet of sailboats to transport their harvest – see the radio series devoted to the venture here.
I promise a longer update, soon – the last couple months have been devoted to trying to bring together all the moving parts of this project. There are a lot of them, but it’s slowly starting to come together.