Lamentations for a ‘Fast Food Nation’

At The Daily Beast, author Eric Schlosser reflects on the state of food politics since the publication of his best-selling book Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal, which paved the way for similar books and films including Morgan Spurlock’s McDonald’s-bashing documentary Supersize Me. While his decade-old book may have made waves in the left-leaning media world, Schlosser laments that America is “Still A Fast Food Nation” and that McDonald’s is serving more people around the world than ever before.

Schlosser correctly points out that since his book’s release “a food movement has arisen across the country, promoted by authors, activists, and filmmakers … That culture rejects highly processed foods, genetically modified foods, and the whole industrial approach to food production.” We think this movement is fine and well for those who want follow its precepts. The problem is that many progressives in this food movement are trying to turn their personal dietary preferences into law, starting with school lunch and food stamp programs. And the targets of this movement are no longer just big corporations like McDonald’s; more vulnerable small businesses like food trucks are bearing the brunt of heavy-handed regulations which even the left-wing L.A. Times editorial board call misguided.

(Shirt from zazzle.com)

While we disclose that we have not read all of Fast Food Nation, we’ve read a few excerpts over the years, and Schlosser’s writings generally give the impression that business is a monstrous force threating society. In his new article, he insinuates that that chain restaurants are conspiring to perpetrate some sort of Fast Food ‘Final Solution’ (“The fast-food chains, like the tobacco companies, are now aggressively targeting African-Americans, Latinos, and the poor,” he writes). He also tries to alarm his readers with some pretty laughable points: tossing out a statistic that “more than 23 million low-income Americans now live in ‘food deserts’ that lack supermarkets” (a RAND Corporation report released this month has somewhat debunked this notion by finding no correlation between subjects’ weight, consumption, and proximity to food outlets, and blaming George W. Bush for blocking further progress in food regulation (he can’t help blaming Bush: he’s a liberal).

Schlosser’s most interesting point sounds like a food version of John Edwards’ old talking point about “the two Americas.” He writes, “Two vastly different food cultures now coexist in the United States. While some Americans eat free-range chicken and organic produce, exercise regularly, and improve their health, most are consuming inexpensive processed foods, drinking large amounts of soda, and reducing their life expectancy.” He has a point, but is he suggesting that our country once had a single food culture? Haven’t wealthier people always eaten better, or at least had the opportunity to do so?

By focusing on the two extremes, with the healthy affluent people on one end and the processed-food eaters on the other, Schlosser is leaving out the vast population in the middle: those who value freedom, who take responsibility for their own health, and who want to be able to select their own diet without the interference of the government or the constant hectoring of those who have a compulsion to politicize every aspect of life including what we choose to eat and drink. Out of this population, another food movement is arising to counter the movement pushed by the Eric Schlossers of the world, and that food movement will surely create its own books, films, and blogs in the years to come.