Food, Inc. To Be Released
Print This Post
Food, Inc. comes out today. It’s a film about American food production, both plant and animal agriculture.
Here’s an official description:
In “Food, Inc.”, filmmaker Robert Kenner lifts the veil on our nation’s food industry, exposing the highly mechanized underbelly that’s been hidden from the American consumer with the consent of our government’s regulatory agencies, USDA and FDA. Our nation’s food supply is now controlled by a handful of corporations that often put profit ahead of consumer health, the livelihood of the American farmer, the safety of workers and our own environment. Featuring interviews with such experts as Eric Schlosser (Fast Food Nation), Michael Pollan (The Omnivore’s Dilemma) along with forward thinking social entrepreneurs like Stonyfield Farms’ Gary Hirschberg and Polyface Farms’ Joe Salatin, “Food, Inc.” reveals surprising — and often shocking truths — about what we eat, how it’s produced, who we have become as a nation and where we are going from here.
Because the film puts the onus onto consumers to “demand” healthier food that’s produced in more environmentally sustainable ways and that’s more humane to animals, the viewer is left with a sense that the ball is in their hands. Viewers feel compelled to change their consumption habits, even if only to eat less fast food.
It may well create some new vegans! But not because it tries to make vegans. In fact, the film doesn’t even mention the word vegan or vegetarian once! Not once! In fact, it actively encourages “happy meat.”
I saw the film with some omnivores and even though the factory farms shown were generally clean and even though the farmers were sympathetic and even though there weren’t long scenes of blood or violence, the image of animals being killed was enough to make one omni claim the film was “a strong case for veganism or at the very least, vegetarianism.”
For more, please read the review that “Convenient Vegan” wrote when she saw a sneak peak >>
You are complicit in animal exploitation.
What are you talking about, Nick?
I’m talking about how in countless posts, both here and in comments on other peoples’ blogs, you advocate things that advocate happy meat. This movie does NOT encourage people to go vegan, it encourages them to eat happy meat. If you don’t believe this, you are out of touch; there is a growing movement of these locavore/Michael Pollan types who are convinced now more than ever that exploiting animals is not only okay, but that it is in fact virtuous. This is a direct result of films like this one.
Films that encourage people to eat happy meat are anti-vegan, even if they do depict the horrors of factory farming.
And I have no qualms about being rude about this. If this were a film advocating “humane” concentration camps instead of standard ones, I think (or hope) that you would agree with me. The same goes for a film advocating “humane” rape, “humane” paedophilia, “humane” murder, “humane” slavery, etc.
Nick, you haven’t seen the film, have you?
You’re fallacious appeal to authority due to your having seen the film and my not having seen it is an irrelevant defense. I know that the film advocates “happy meat,” and I know that the Stonyfield Farm yogurt company is advertising for it. End of discussion, good bye.
I have seen the film, and Nick is right that it is anti-vegan. It shows chickens being “humanely” slaughtered, and it is absolutely sick.
Nick, what’s your plan to dominate the planet with vegans, if at all possible give me a time frame and rough draft.
Here’s some food for thought. I’ll do my best to educate those that I can, about veganism, I know you’re doing the same. Some people will say forget it, some will say I can’t go that far, some will see the light and jump right in. For those that don’t totally commit to becoming vegan, should I tell them forget it then, because you’re doing more harm than good, it keeps cows and hens enslaved for years of torturous abuse until their final demise as sausages etc?. If that’s your plan I’m not buying it, and therein lies a clue, if you haven’t got me convinced (and I’m an ethical vegan) how are you going to convince others?
Happy meat doesn’t help the non humans live, so their destiny, billions of times a year is death. If together with the growing number of vegetarians, we can bring some relief for now, to their torturous existence, I’m not going to deny them a little less abuse.
For your next question, what has welfare reform done so far, is not the right question to ask. Substantial welfare for non humans can and will happen as the numbers of vegans/vegetarians increases. Francione tells us welfarism hasn’t done a thing in two hundred years. Well an avalanche picks up pace as it goes down hill and has the most impact as it gets larger, so too with veg*ans. As we all grow in numbers we will make a difference.
In the interim, you and I will, along with a large group of passionate vegans extol the benefits to our health, and the benefit to non humans about becoming vegans to all that will listen. When we hit critical mass it’ll make a difference at a legislative level. In the USA that number has to be tens of millions. Personally speaking I will work hard and passionately for that time to see the light of day, and, I have the ability to fight for some relief for non humans at the same time
Nick,
No one here thinks happy meat is a good thing. I think your ire is misdirected.
Nick,
a) It’s ludicrous to assert that I’m “complicit in animal exploitation” because I stated facts about a film and I linked to a review that points out the sustainability problems with “happy meat.”
b) I think you need to learn what an appeal to authority is.
Tara,
So… in your opinion, a scene like this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfQ8Sa8iKu4
of small farm’s bird slaughter is simply “happy meat” promotion? You think most people watch stuff like that and think to themselves, “Oh, how nice. Now I’m going to eat some turkey.” Honestly, you think that average people aren’t disgusted by slaughter?
Get real. If people were so comfortable with killing and death, slaughterhouses would give tours.
meegan,
I agree with you that there’s a continuum of harm. So-called humane meat isn’t truly humane, but it’s less cruel than factory farming. And while I don’t support it, I’m simply not going to have the same amount of disdain for “humane meat” farmers that I have for factory farmers.
All,
a) The film is about much more than just “happy meat.” If it were only about that, I’d object to the film’s title because I don’t believe animals are “food.” But the film is mostly about the industrialization of farming – in general, both animal and plant agriculture – and how farmers are being ruled by fast food companies. There’s a whole segment on Monsanto that’s very interesting and doesn’t have anything to do with “happy meat.” The film is NOT mostly about “happy meat.”
b) The film will create some vegans. That’s just a fact. Some people will see factory farming and animal slaughter and go vegan. It really is just that simple.
c) Any promotion of “happy meat” should have an element of vegan promotion because of the inherent limitations of “happy meat” as a practical “solution” to feed people. Happy meat cannot feed the masses. In the “happy meat” utopia, the masses are vegan and only the elite few eat “happy meat.” The “happy meat” promoters who aren’t bothered by the elitism actively promote veganism as a solution for those who can’t afford “happy meat.” So in that way, though it feels uncomfortable, we are on the same team.
I know that feels counter-intuitive for some people. But it’s true. I urge you to re-read and re-consider if you’re like Nick and you’re struggling with point c.
PS – here is Eric Marcus’ review:
http://www.vegan.com/blog/2009/06/25/a-vegan-take-on-food-inc/
where he wrote: