Good evening. In a previous blog I mentioned the paper that I wrote for my Ethics final last semester. I’ll be posting this paper over the next several blogs. It is an indictment of our current industrial food system. It should be clear how symptomatic this is to our interconnected web of human activity. It is likely that we are suffering through this economic crisis because we are malnourished, but eaten with disease from all of the fast food that we’ve ate.
Anyway, If you read the paper you’ll get the idea.
Below are my instructor’s remarks. She gave me an A-.
Your casual and light-hearted demeanor helped the class members grow in courage to participate in discussions. But it masks another side of you that cares deeply about economic justice. The cost to you of the casual approach is that people may not take you seriously. On the other hand, there were moments when you really nailed the major points of the reading.
Your moral argument has resulted in a rather comprehensive overview of the industrial food system. I count 26 pages, with the bulk going toward describing the negative effects of IFS. You end with a refreshing commitment to take and to urge personal responsibility for encouraging food production healthy for people,[sic] communities and the ecosphere.
For the most part, you used the Format for Moral Argument to good advantage. Thanks for researching big farm’s corporate responsibility statements. I concur with you that Cargill’s is meaningless on its face. They must really be evil to even publish such pablum.
Your paper’s presentation needs some attention, as you will see in my margin notes. I urge you to transform your sub-topics into reasons in a declarative sentence format. In most cases, to do so is fairly easy. I also urge you to forgo the rhetorical questions. And your footnote software is terminal.
An area of research that you discovered is the USDA FAS strategic plan, and how that might be related to free-trade treaties. This connection deserves some real attention to document the stake big farm has in free-trade treaties. I don’t know how the US got away with the demand for access to Haitian Markets. You suggest a conflict between trade treaties and international development efforts.
Your conclusion that cheap food is dishonest food triggered some word associations for me. Your rendition wears well, and might do a lot of heavy lifting among church -related people whose instincts include concern for the poor.