About book The Vegetarian Myth: Food, Justice, And Sustainability (2009)
As somebody that actually eats meat, and knows a thing or two about agriculture, nutrition, and factory farming...This book is awful. For one, it's poorly researched, relying on second and third-hand statistics and concepts from popular bestsellers, with very little basis in actual scientific knowledge. Just checking Keith's facts alone is a journey down an endless rabbit hole, a scavenger hunt leading through internet articles, pop. nonfiction, and poorly substantiated quotes taken out of context. It's a nightmare. Particularly troubling is her section on nutritional vegetarianism, which she attacks with a blatant and glaring lack of firsthand knowledge about human nutrition. Reading this section of her book is like reading every popular "alternative nutrition"/"paleo diet" blog ever, and it's absolutely painful. Secondly, her arguments are occasionally marred by vaguely referenced, barely explained and frankly jarring references to the evil Patriarchy and rape as the causes of overpopulation and environmental degradation. I'm not saying that there's nothing there, just that her remarks about this come entirely out of left field with little to no explanation, and at the expense of her discussion of the issue at hand. Third, Keith struggles to keep any sort of sensible structure to her book. The majority of it is split into three sections, "Moral Vegetarians," "Political Vegetarians," and "Nutritional Vegetarians," presumably in order to tear down the untruths that constitute the arguments for vegetarianism rooted in these three areas. If the sections themselves actually kept to this structure, they might be a bit less convoluted. But alas, the "Political Vegetarians" section at one point bleeds into a treatise on how agriculture and war are practically synonymous, local food is the answer, and the Haber-Bosch process will be responsible for our eventual downfall. Again, I'm not saying her arguments are always entirely without merit. However, their structure is often nonsensical, switching from narrative form to secondhand statistical dumps to half-explained feminist rambling from paragraph to paragraph. At the heart of the structural issues in The Vegetarian Myth is that Keith is trying to do two things at once, neither of which is she really qualified (nor has even attempted to do enough digging through primary literature to become educated enough) to do: On the one hand, she truly believes that the major arguments people give for becoming vegetarian are incorrect, and wants to dispel these illusions. On the other, she believes that agriculture as we know it goes hand-in-hand with environmental destruction, and wishes to argue that the whole system needs an overhaul. These are both understandable positions, and not ones that I entirely disagree with. However, the vehicle she has chosen to get these points across is overwhelmingly ineffectual, and it shows in the sprawling, poorly structured, occasionally vague and often under-researched nature of her writing. I suspect Keith would have been much better off seeking to write a book about the issues with agriculture and current research on solutions to these problems (because honestly, if she'd done any primary research whatsoever she'd have seen that these problems are not exactly new to the scientific community, and concepts like food sovereignty, ecological footprints, and fossil fuel input reduction are all hot topics today). The topic of vegetarianism would have without a doubt have come up in that debate, and many of her political/environmental arguments against vegetarianism as the catch-all solution would have been much more relevant and on-point. And with any luck, we might have been spared her 'expert opinion' on the ideal human diet, not to mention the rambling chapter on moral vegetarians that could easily have been dispelled into a three page essay. The author outlines the ridiculousness of the Vegan and Vegetarian mythos and digs into political, social, moral, nutritional, and most importantly, the sustainable aspects of eating... and ultimately our footprint, as a species, on planet Earth.For this reader there was no huge revelations, since I'm well versed in the realities of agriculture and food at this point, and spend a great deal of time immersed in the natural and agricultural world, but the author nicely packages a fairly comprehensive discussion of the topic into this volume. There is a disturbing element to having all this laid out in one volume though: As you read it, it really underscores the pervasiveness of a community of folks that live their lives entirely divorced from the realities of the natural world and the cycles of life, death, and rebirth. I don't want to sound overly harsh, but it is a bit unavoidable. These are folks that look at nature from inside a bubble... through a pane of glass. Never really understanding it. Some is their fault, but it is a societal disorder, long in coming considering urbanization and how housebound most people in the 1st world are today.The other disturbing element to the story as outlined by the author, is that though we know what we need to do to address the deeper ecological realities of massive over-population on this planet I personally am not confident that we'll take the necessary steps, and I don't think the author is either.And that is where the biggest surprise of the book was found. The author was not afraid to summarize the corrective course of action that we would have to take as humans to make things better. Finally someone is bold enough, in a relatively mainstream book, to state that in order to ever have a sustainable, ecological, and ethical food system (or any system)... over-population really needs to be addressed. Severely. It will solve itself eventually, but it can either be messy and violent, or orderly and peaceful. Not many authors writing a mainstream book are bold enough to state it so plainly.4 stars: There are three issues I had with the book: (1) The author slips into "appeal to emotion" a bit much, (2) It's hard to weed out the good science from the bad or mediocre, and (3) There is no index... which means you have to take notes, write in the margins, and highlight, or just have a really good memory. ;) Geez. Books like this *have* to have an index. I blame her editors. What a disappointment.Great book. Folks, if you are confused as to why the vegan/vegetarian lifestyle is unsustainable, unnatural, relatively unhealthy, un-ecological, and ultimately more than a bit silly (but with non-silly implications)... this is a great book to to read. Even more importantly, it is a great discussion about environmentalism, food security, and agricultural sustainability, and of course, overpopulation -- topics that I am particularly passionate about, even more so than the main topic of the book.Recommend.
Do You like book The Vegetarian Myth: Food, Justice, And Sustainability (2009)?
Knjiga, ob kateri ti postane jasno, zakaj gredo veganom najbolj v nos nekdanji vegani, konvertiti.
—Emma
Excellent. Makes you think about the current way we eat. How we will feed the plannet.
—raziaansari
