Chris and I were talking about localism, and some of the opposition we’ve encountered locally to some new avenues of inquiry (a lil’ agrarianism, a dash o’ distributism, a big chunk of ‘true religion’, higher liturgy, etc. – trust me, they’re all related).
Anywho, he was talking to someone else who’s coming from a different direction (probably not a Co-op shopper, for instance) and the charge was raised that localism is marked by ungratefulness. “We hate corporations, banks are robbing us, WinCo is evil”
Chris made the argument that he’s doing all this precisely in order to be grateful, to know how the food gets from the ground to his mouth. We must always be doing this out of gratefulness and love, emphasizing the positive side of the case. Having a negative case makes it reactionary, a passing fad, and makes it easy to swing all the way to the other side. “We want to explore the benefits of this thing right here, we think it might be good, and growing our own food is healthy and good for our souls and we can maybe share it if we get good at it,” as Chris put it.
All good points, but I think the original objection radically misses the point. I think I might even own that objection. Every new movement is based on discontent, and populated my malcontents. We started our own Classical Christian schools because we were dissatisfied by the available options. All the standard cautions against being reactionary apply, but this community shouldn’t have any problems with movements.
It reminded me of a post by Dr. Leithart on malcontents and church plants.Â
In the end, this is tempest in a teakettle… we’re pursuing this stuff out of gratitude and divine discontent at the same time, and we’re attempting to be productive in all. I’m not an ivory tower kinda guy, so I test every new idea by attempting to do it and see if it works.
No offense intended to anyone, but I’m very grateful for WinCo, but there’s something off about it at the same time. I’m grateful for capitalism, but usury is evil. “What is this conversation that you are holding with each other as you walk?†y’know?
Nice post, Austin. I think the charge of ingratitude/cynicism is about the reverse of any impulse I have toward localism. Seems to me that localism is precisely an attitude of being grateful for what we’re given, even if we don’t like it. Check out this brilliant piece over at FPR about loving the unlovable town of South Bend, Indiana (this one struck home for me, of course).
I don’t see a problem in talking about what localism is “against,” since any thesis has a necessary antithesis. However, the charge that localism is ungrateful is really not an argument against supporting local businesses, but an argument against being an ass about it. To which I can only say Amen, and then let’s talk about substance.
Sometimes, though, I wonder if the skepticism about local ag, small businesses, and homegrown miscellany isn’t really an unspoken conservative desire to keep as much distance as possible from hipster liberals. But I think that is a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of supporting local economies. If localism becomes hip, I could care less. I’m not looking for manufactured localism; that’s obviously an oxymoron. Of course, that’s what plagues some of the leftist versions of localism, imho. When you go down that road you get Whole Foods, Birkenstocks, dreadlocks, and monotonous social uniformity (the counterpart to Wal-mart, pick-up trucks, and the mullet).
True localism is going to be messy, because every region has it’s ugly spots. Regionalism in Louisiana is going to have both Cajun cooking and a dose of latent racism. Regionalism in Chicago is going to have deep-dish, amazing sports bars and corrupt city aldermen.
But as a business owner, I’d rather have to deal with Richard Daley’s Machine than Sam Walton’s rapacious heirs. Localism would rather deal with a bad neighbor than a bad corporation. Localism stands against the kind of greed that believes that bigger is always better, that ideology trumps region, and that Smoky Mountain Pizza is a better neighbor than Lefty’s Burgers.
If what we call “localism” is some unified ideology, like some other artificial social system (e.g. suburbianism or capitalism), count me out. We don’t need another movement. What we need is a better idea of how to be good neighbors. And I cannot believe that suburbianism or Wal-mart make better neighbors. They may or may not increase my quality of life, but they don’t help me live in community.
I really must add that nobody, including us Distributists, should actually hate WinCo. They have generous employee profit sharing and pay some really killer benefits. It’s a sterling example of how a company should be run.
While WinCo does sell a lot of super-cheap, denutrified corporate foodstuffs, you’ll note that most of their prices are better even on high-end name-brand products. There are many reasons for this, but a primary one is their employee-owner structure is not given to bloat or excessive profits – but rather fair profits – and this structure actually leads to all sorts of efficiencies. When there isn’t a 400:1 wage ratio between CEOs and entry-level workers, you can afford to pay the :1 crowd generously and still charge a lot less.
I’m with Davey, and in my conversation this morning with Austin, this same argument against “ungratefulness” came up almost immediately. When you know your food – you’ve cared for and fed that cow, you’ve tilled the soil around those vegetables and prayed for the rain that helped them grow – you can’t help but be more thankful for it. And when you share that bounty with your neighbor, good and earthy bounty that is manifest by dirt under your fingernails, you begin to understand what things like labor and charity and community really mean.
We’re vigorously pursuing a world in which we know intimately, and are thus so thankful for, what God has given to us. We want red meat, crisp veggies, and tanned leathery necks. We want rain to be mana. We want, absurdly, for manure to once again mean resurrection.
I think it’s also helpful to note that the poor often buy the cheapest stuff available even if it is “de-nutrified”. So while we can be all for organic, natural whatever for good reason, it’s also good to recognize that cheap sustenance is still sustenance and is the only option for a lot of people. If we come to the conclusion that it is better to give folks the natural organic whatever, then we should hopefully be moved to be more than generous with the good that we have been given.