Skip to main content

Biting the hand that feeds you/Feeding the mouth that bites you.

So I was part of a pretty spirited conversation at the Co-op the other day about Growing Power's acceptance of a $1 million grant from Wal-Mart. On one side, the sustainable businessman who referred to Wal-Mart either as the Devil or Satan, I forget, but who absolutely supported Will Allen's decision. I'm blanking on the other guy, who just stopped at Wal-Mart is the Devil, no compromises.

In the middle (literally and figuratively), was me. As in, "Thank God I wasn't asked to make that decision." My first thought on seeing that headline was, "Ooo, boy, that's gonna be controversial." Does anyone really think there wasn't some serious soul searching going on over there before they said yes? Which brings me to this post on Civil Eats this morning. For Andy Fisher of the Community Food Security Coalition, it comes down to this:

Wal-Mart’s and the “Good Food Revolution’s” interests may dovetail in bringing groceries into food deserts. However, the broader interests of these two parties are in direct opposition to each other. Wal-Mart’s operations cause larger problems to the food security of the communities in which they locate.

I had brought up many of the same points in our conversation, mainly that Wal-Mart has stated it is aiming to offer more local produce; which, as Fisher also points out, happens to fit quite closely with its PR efforts to get in to urban markets. I'm not arguing a chicken and egg situation here. I'm sure Wal-Mart's question was "How do we break into urban markets?" and local foods was one of the answers. Does that negate the benefits? Obviously, as Fisher shows, there's a strong argument to make there. Is Will Allen an idealist? Hells yes. The first tour I took of Growing Power lasted four hours, and we never even made it out of the main greenhouse, Will was so excited to show us everything. Surrounded as I am with farmer's markets and urban gardens and organic veggies for my Bi Bim Bop, it's easy to lose perspective. But I try hard to remember that a few miles away over on Silver Spring Road, most of Growing Power's target audience shops at Wal-Mart every day. Monsanto money? Easy. Refuse it. Wal-Mart money? I'd say the same...but what does that say to their audience? "Wal-Mart is bad, and I shop at Wal-Mart, so does that mean I'm bad?"

As usual, I have argued myself from one side of an argument to another and back again.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

This post was a whole long longer and more emotional an hour ago...

First off: It's sad that I get better wireless reception in my backyard than in my apartment, right? Sigh. I normally try to stay out of the quagmire that is the abortion debate, but as usually, elyzabethe wrote something insightful about feminist issues that I had to comment on. Actually, I had to comment on the framing war that was going on in the comments section between elyzabethe and another friend. Then I ended up emailing back and forth with her for awhile. Then someone at work mentioned how the "choice" frame is starting to lose ground, even though advocates don't want to admit it. I started scribbling notes, sighed, and thought, "well, I'm gonna have to blog about this." Elyzabeth rants often against anti-choice organizations and legislation, as is her wont as a libertarian feminist. She’s particularly good at teasing out how anti-choice (A, if you’re reading this, bear with me, I’m referring to ‘anti-choice’ as more than just the abortion issu...
The City of Milwaukee launched this ad campaign this week (along with Serve Marketing , my new dream employer). My first reaction was that it was a striking and effective ad, but then I realized it was aimed at co-sleeping, not just putting babies to sleep on their backs. I know next to nothing about co-sleeping, but I have a feeling that there are healthy ways to co-sleep, and un-healthy ways to co-sleep. Putting a child in bed on their stomach would be one of those un-healthy ways, but so is putting them on their stomach in their cribs. I don't know that it's necessarily fair to confuse the two issues. Plus, according to the City of Milwaukee's web page , Between 2006 and 2009 there were 89 infant deaths related to SIDS, SUDI, or accidental suffocation.  Of these 46 (51.7%) infants were sleeping in an adult bed at the time of their death.   Meaning that 48.3 percent (or 43 babies) were not co-sleeping, but presumably in their cribs. Although I loathe to say tha...

Less Blogging, More Tweeting

FYI, I haven't been happy with how a lot of my posts are turning out, as well as the frequency with which I'm posting. Since most of the time, I just want to share a link that has an interesting take on telling its story, I'm going to dust off my Twitter account to share those and only post here if I'm really inspired. To the twelve people who read this blog, thanks.