The sustainable food movement embodies a fundamental challenge to the American way of life. It forces Americans to examine their lifestyle and the consequences it has on the environment, on animal life, and even on their own health. Although the sustainable food movement certainly has valid critiques of our current system of food production, it has not provided a feasible alternative to the current system that accounts for basic economic realities such as the world's growing population. The organic food movement in particular overlooks the many benefits of the current system of food production, which allows us to produce far more food on less land than pre-industrial agriculture. Its proposal that the nation switch to a local produce model is neither necessary nor economically feasible for the United States. Thesis: From a utilitarian perspective, it would harm the interests of a large majority of society, who do not live next to small farms producing the foods that the need. .
The Organic Food Movement.
In Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan presents a damning critique of the American food distribution system. He illustrates how the country's huge industrial might has turned our natural, sun based food production system into a fossil-fuel based food production system. These fossil fuels process corn into feed for our livestock as a substitute for grass as well as corn syrup and other derivatives for humans in order to preserve packaged goods. Pollan argues that the switch to a fossil-fuel based system is toxic both to our environment as well as our bodies. He claims that the use of feed in lieu of grass diminishes the nutritional value of the meat produced from the livestock. Pollan believes that we need to revolutionize our way of getting food in order to detoxify our diets and our environment. Traditional alternatives to the industrial food-distribution system, such as organic foods and certifiably "free-range" chickens, are no longer sufficient (Pollan, 135).