Some skeptics, like Princeton University's Peter Singer, argue that Americans have a duty to avoid going local and to keep purchasing raw commodities from the global South, like plantation-grown bananas and coffee. Yet given how little of each import dollar actually winds up in the hands of the workers most in need - probably less than a penny - this is, at best, an extremely inefficient antipoverty strategy. It perpetuates domination of the poor by global corporations.
If we really want to help the poor, it's far smarter to help poor countries, poor communities and the poorest residents living in them to achieve the same level of local self-reliance we seek for ourselves. Mohandas Gandhi argued that the way to defeat British power was to restore self-reliance, especially in basics like textiles and salt. He did not suggest that India embark on a campaign to attract nicer British factories or to expand exports to London.
This isn't going to be easy. As Madison's long-standing sister-city partnership with cities like Managua, Nicaragua, have underscored, serious global antipoverty work requires ongoing, long-term partnerships between communities, North and South, in which we help one another reorganize every element of our economies. As we in the North create community food systems, we might help partners in the South transform their food systems, away from the plantations and export crops and toward the cultivation of enough healthy fruits, vegetables, rice and beans to feed their own families. As we strengthen and spread our own local banks, credit unions, stock markets and mutual funds, we can help partners create these institutions as well, so that local savings everywhere increasingly support local housing, local education and local entrepreneurship. As we deploy new technologies to become more energy efficient, we can share our know-how with renewable resource innovators in the South.
This is what happened in Cuba - when they were cut off from Soviet oil, they saw that all their agriculture had been in the 2 main cash crops - sugar and tobacco. The workers had been serfs and the people's diet had been terrible.
Today in Cuba, the people with the money grow food. The diet for all is much much better. Cuba's health outcomes are better than the US.
All who grow food as an export cash crop get paid a pittance. On PEI it is potatoes. The farmers limp along - now we hear that the largest buyer is cutting back. Dire times ahead.
But a local food system on PEI could make food growing profitable and our diet and health so much better.
It would give us back control.
