In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

| 219 11 Eating for Change Josée Johnston and Kate Cairns Food shoppers are now regularly invited to practice their politics through their purchases. Whether it is upgrading to a fair-trade brew at a coffee shop, choosing organic milk at the supermarket, or perusing local fare at farmers’ markets, consumers are increasingly encouraged to approach the seemingly mundane task of grocery shopping as a political event.1 While varied , invitations to become ethical food shoppers are often organized around a central message: namely, that consumer food politics is a win-win enterprise, serving up delicious goods that also deliver a social or environmental “good.” A food journalism article celebrating the rewards of locally grown vegetables exemplifies this sentiment: “We all know that eating in-season, locally grown produce is best—it’s beneficial for the environment, for our health, and for the flavor of the dishes we prepare.”2 According to this account, the pursuit of individual self-interest offers the promise of social change—a narrative that, incidentally, has close parallels to classical market theorizing of private vices producing public virtues. In this chapter we explore some of the tensions obscured by the seamless “eat for change” narrative of consumer food politics. While our focus is on food, we suggest that the win-win mantra is not unique to the politics of the plate. Rather, this seamless narrative circulates across many contemporary sites of commodity activism as a means of reconciling critical sticking points in the fusion of consumption and politics. To be clear, this chapter is not an attempt to expose the “truth” about consumer food politics, or to suggest that consumers are deluding themselves by thinking that their actions matter. On the contrary, we are equally wary of critical counternarratives that categorize all acts of ethical consumption as mere “bourgeois piggery.”3 Rather, our goal is to provide an analytic counterweight to the seamless narrative of consumer agency and to generate a more nuanced picture of the historical, cultural, and political convergences that give shape to consumer food politics. We explore three sets of tensions associated with “eating for change,” examining particular histories, subjectivities, and forms of collective action 220 | Community, Movements, Politics that are imagined and enacted across sites of food politics. First, we argue that we must contextualize current forms of political eating within their rich histories, particularly in relation to the market as a means of social change. Second, we consider how the seamless narrative of consumer food politics obscures contradictions surrounding the individual consumer, exploring entangled issues of agency, affect, and access. Third, we examine the tensions inherent in an “ethical foodscape” that is centrally reliant on market mechanisms . A classic debate for social movements, like the labor movement, was how to influence the state without being co-opted into the state. Today, a locus of tension centers on the question of market dominance and the retreat of the state. Reflecting upon these shifting tensions provides new insights into the current neoliberal landscape, and the particular challenges and possibilities therein. Before proceeding with this analysis, we briefly explore the ubiquitous “win-win” consumer food politics narrative. Eating for Change: You Can Have It All! Popular food discourse suggests that today’s consumer can have it all—delicious , healthy meals and the satisfaction of contributing to a better world. This dominant account of consumer food politics is rearticulated across a range of institutional sites, such as food journalism, food policy, and marketing campaigns, as well as the daily practices of individuals. The apparent harmony of the ethical and the gastronomical makes consumer food politics an appetizing choice for those who consider themselves to be socially progressive and environmentally conscious consumers. An editorial in Bon Appétit sums up this logic: “Since better for the world means better tasting, this is one delicious revolution.”4 It is this tension-free portrayal of political eating that we refer to as the seamless narrative of “eating for change.” Drawing upon the democratic ideals of collective food projects like community supported agriculture, the seamless narrative packages political pursuits into a consumerist frame that centers on individual rewards like taste, pleasure and convenience. Prominent food celebrities further legitimize this narrative with heartfelt testimonials about how increased political awareness has enhanced their own culinary endeavors. According to restaurateur Joe Bastianich, business partner of celebrity chef Mario Batali, “Having a sustainable business is the way of the future. . . . But our fundamental principle is a better product. We’re doing what...

Share