Sat, 5 February 2011
My guest this week was Aaron Lucich, the film-maker of the upcoming film 'We Are What We Eat'. Aaron also is a public speaker on the subject of Organic Food.
In our interview we, of course, covered many topics but mainly centered the ideas that are in his film. We talked about the need for more sustainable and natural growing of food rather than the industrial model of farming which is wasteful and ultimately unsustainable. We talk about the best methods of reaching out to the masses and consider options that could be used on a large-scale (beyond the small pockets of already aware citizens). We also talked about eating lifestyles such as Weston A Price and Vegan.
At the end of this podcast I added on another seperate podcast that is just of myself, Steve Patterson, that you will enjoy. I rant and rave like a madman, but not really. I just jotted down a few things I wanted to say, turned on the microphone, and riffed for a good 35 minutes. Let me know what you think of my random thoughts, and if you feel it necessary you can email me at twobeerswithsteve(at)hotmail.com.
Bob Cannard Video Interview From the Aaron Lucich Facebook Page... a must see.
Direct download: Episode_82_-_Awakening_to_the_Food_Revolution.mp3
Category:general -- posted at: 4:54 AM
Hey Steve, Been listening to your podcasts on and off for a while. I wholeheartedly agree that food is the key, probably because it holds the most promise for direct practical solutions. Just my vote that you should continue your focus in this direction. (Actually, the tagline of my blog is "Take Control of Your Food Supply.") I'm also glad to hear that you're investigating Weston Price. My wife and I were former mostly vegetarian (actually "Starch"itarins), who have slowly been converted by the work of Dr. Price.
Milo, I'd also like to add one more thing. I hope you know I'm sincere when I say that you are right, because I think that 'rule of law' would probably be the best avenue for an organization like the tea party. But I've actually done public speaking and one-on-one conversations with folks. You find out that people either don't want to take the time to learn anything or they just don't care. When you get out amongst the people, it's much harder than coming up with the perfect idea. Because the people have to care about your perfect idea. The food issue is my trojan horse. I'll march in behind the fortress walls and pique the curiousity of the curious. That is all an activist can do nowadays. Steve
Milo, Thanks for the comments. My wife has just informed me that the second part of that episode was 'the ravings of a mad man'. I have to say that I agree a bit. I had some things to say but no outline and I was following a stream of consciousness. With that said, I think that I am correct to say that the food issue will get more mileage and be more productive than either small government/lower taxes and your platform of the rule of law. I agree with you wholeheartedly on everything you said and I wish I could organize around that theme... but I would be all alone in this town, maybe even this county. The point is that this movement may be decades in the making, I would love it to be otherwise. I need an audience of interested people before I can have a movement and before I can have a revolution. But first I have to plant the seeds that will become the grassroots movement. Steve PS. I wish Max Keiser would get some national attention already.
I wanted to comment on the no-guest addendum podcast. I admire your activism, and I really like the process of your thinking behind how you approach it. But I think you walked right past something important in the construction of te reasoning that led you away from the Tea Partiers to the realm of food. Not that you are wrong about food. Keep that up by all means. But somewhere between your phone call to the AG's office, and highlighting the Tea Party hypocrisy about government, you lost another obvious area for activism that may have more universal appeal than anything else you talked about, because there's no conflict of interest. It's Denninger's point actually. Rule Of Law. The AG may not take you seriously as an individual, but it's a much better issue to raise at a Tea Party meeeting than food. if all the mad people who are blind to the widespread conflict about government dependence were to shake the trees about prosecution of the fraudsters it's a wide open playing field. I haven't seen much discusion...maybe Max Keiser, but eben in his case only in passing, about the fact that the mortgage scammers are the same actual people who were the internet pump and dumpers in the prior decade, and the inside traders in the Drexel junk bund / inside trader / levered buyout / asset stripping 80s. The same people, that is, apart from the fresh blood constantly arriving from the B schools. If the Tea Party anger and energy strategy (interference in primaries, running their own candidates...) could be brought to bear on law enforcement, it would play well in the news media, be very hard to counter (exactly who takes the opposite side of this argument?), and has no natural enemies other than the fraudsters themselves. In the most optimistic scenerio success might even break the chain that perpetuates the cultural appeal of this sort of exploitation/fraud capitalism to new entrants for a while, or at least sends it underground for a generation. A little like the Broken Windows theory of community policing which was thought by some to have contributed to lowering crime rates in the major cities over the past 20 years. A more pessimistic view, at least as regards whether the Tea Party would take this up is the conspiracy critique that the Tea Party money backers, who end up determining what issues that arise in local chapters get funded as national issues aren't interest in issues that threaten the upper classes. The small gov't low taxes issue really is about leaving those who already have more with more of what they have and that it's a diversion for those whose anger might otherwise be focused on making government work better rather. Rule Of Law might be a useful issue either way. If it takes, we get some justice, some disincentive for future frauds and maybe just less future fraud because of a reduced population of fraudsters. If the Tea Party doesn't run with it, maybe the conspiracy critique is correct, which is useful to know.
Steve, I loved the "Rat on crack" "Frat beer keg" analogies. Aaron touched on two different points 1. Eating healthy 2. Sustainability - I agree with both, but not completely on board with the sustainability argument. The population is set to go from roughly 6 billion today to over 9 billion by 2050 - that to me makes any personal attempt at sustainability in the US with roughly 300 million people a complete joke. What is eventually going to HAVE to happen is WAR to lower the population, there is no sustainable way to keep 9 billion people on earth. period. I also liked how you noted the rudeness of your attorney generals office; this is how the MAJORITY of government workers are - they are lazy and rude - this is why small government is ideal, because the government just can't do anything right. Private enterprise does everything better in EVERY instance - from XE Services providing soldiers, to for profit medicine, to private schools - the government sucks at everything it does. I think that big government socialism has spectacularly failed before our eyes - Socialist Europe and California are BROKE - yet the small government models in Texas and Utah have nearly fully funded pensions (texas), and are raking in all of California's fleeing businesses. Socialism/Liberalism has failed.