Ah, Those Dastardly Farmer’s Markets

 

Out of 300,000,000 people you’re going to get just about as many different thoughts about any subject you bring up. That’s a given. Most of those differences are only mildly different and don’t change anything.

I don’t know what the actual number is but out of our population are those who wildly think different and want us to think like themselves. This isn’t to say that such difference in thinking is automatically wrong because it is out of the norm, norms can be wrong, but outrageous thinking is easily spotted, especially when it is couched inside political correctness.

Everyone in every socioeconomic station and every intellectual capacity are susceptible to political correctness. Political correctness is where everything about our lives are made political subject to control by others in accordance to their ideology.

Such is the case of two San Diego State University professors who are challenging those “farmer’s markets” some cities set up offering farmers direct access to consumers on set days of the week. We’re talking mostly fruits and vegetables. The implied promise of farmer’s markets, while direct from farm to you cutting out the middle man, is not so much better prices but better fruits and vegetables because they are closer to ripe than seen in supermarkets.

However professors Pascale Joassart-Marcelli and Fernando J. Bosco believe that the “whiteness of farmers’ markets” contributes to “environmental gentrification” wherein “environmental improvements” are a catalyst in displacing long-term, indigenous residents.” Who would have thought that farmer’s markets were racists and evil? Also the pair worry that “farmers’ markets in urban areas are also exclusionary, because oftentimes, many residents cannot afford the food and “feel excluded from these new spaces.”

I’ve been to a few such markets in various cities and I didn’t find wild bargains, nor did I expect this though it would have been fine if I did. But I also didn’t find wildly high prices. What I did find was a variety of farmers of different ethnic stock as well as different ethnic customers (or wannabe customers) selling delicious looking fruits and vegetables, some of which I hadn’t seen in supermarkets. Having grown up on a peach ranch and worked just about every fruit growing I know that what often goes to the market are not yet ripe fruits because they need to meet the travel time and distance and shelf life for customers far away from the farm. So we get hard peaches that will never sweeten like those that ripen on the tree. This, the ripe sweet fruit, is why I went to the different farmer’s markets, as well as for good looking vegetables.

The pair also makes this statement:

“The most insidious part of this gentrification process is that alternative food initiatives work against the community activists and residents who first mobilized to fight environmental injustices and provide these amenities but have significantly less political and economic clout than developers and real estate professionals”.

Now that’s a mouthful. Words like “insidious,” “gentrification,” “alternative food,” “activists,” “environmental injustices,” and “political and economic clout,” clearly tells me that these two professors have made everything political and are using farmer’s markets as sticks to whip up their political ideology. Wow! So much political correctness put on those innocent farmer’s markets that in the scale of selling fruits and vegetables don’t even make a percentage point of reference they are so small.

Was I really that naïve when at those markets that I didn’t recognize their “insidious gentrification”? And I just thought it was about farmers selling their products. I didn’t realize they represented the evil Bourgeoisie against the innocent proletariat.