By John Robbins
2001


This is the award-winning article John Robbins originally wrote for
the best-selling 2001 book Imagine: What America Could Be in the
21st Century.

It's the year 2030. A meal is served. It was quick to prepare, just
a few seconds in the food enhancer (actually an irradiation chamber
based upon the old microwave ovens) was all it took. Of course,
there was the time that Mom spent driving, parking, reading labels,
and standing in line in fluorescent-lit grocery stores listening to
canned music, then driving again, getting stuck in traffic, opening
packages, and disposing of the trash. But she hardly noticed. She
also didn't notice the thousands of "Buy Now" messages to which she
was exposed nor the chemical-laden air that she breathed. Her mind
was elsewhere, spinning a mile a minute, but the behavior- and
mood-altering drugs she takes keep her from being too unhappy.
The food is flavored and enhanced by an array of artificial
chemicals, produced in factories located in those parts of the world
where labor costs are lowest and environmental regulations are most
lax. The foodstuffs involved were grown in assembly line conditions
on monocrop and factory farms in nations where there are no limits
whatsoever on the use of toxic pesticides or hormones, and they have
been so heavily refined and processed that it is impossible to tell
from what plant or animal they might have originated. All seeds and
food animals, like most of the people who work in the fields and
animal factories, are now bio-safe, the term used for seeds,
animals, and people that have been genetically engineered to
tolerate huge doses of herbicides, insecticides, and other toxic
chemicals.

Once in a while, Mom wonders what's in these foods and how much fat
or salt or sugar they might contain and whether the many chemicals
she and her family are eating might cause cancer. But no one has
seemed to care much about such things ever since food labeling of
ingredients was banned as an unfair barrier to trade.

The televisions are on throughout the meal. Advertisements no longer
exist since commercial messages are now fully incorporated into the
programs. Each person is tuned to his or her own channel. Mom is
trying to create a semblance of family life and sometimes thinks
perhaps they should once in a while watch the same TV show together,
but it never works.

And it's an impossible struggle to get anyone to help with the
dishes. Maybe they should just eat out all the time. Identical
McDonald's restaurants are now found in every neighborhood. The food
is cheap, especially if you don't count the cost of the gas to drive
there or the health consequences of eating what they sell.
Occasionally, a TV show will say something about the rainforests
that are now almost gone or the ever-worsening climate conditions,
but with everyone who can afford to living in totally controlled
conditions, it's easy not to think about it much.

Eventually, Mom gives up trying, gives in to social pressure, and
her family becomes even more normal. If anyone gets hungry, they
just fend for themselves, grabbing whatever is around and
convenient, to appease whatever sensation they are experiencing.
Stores are full of colorfully packaged, artificially flavored
ready-to-eat items with indefinite shelf lives. It takes only the
push of a single button to order, via the Internet, the food
pellets, injections, and implants that increasingly take the place
of meals.

Scientists are busy looking for a drug to handle the eating
disorders, cravings, and addictions that are so common now. The
children are obese, the teenagers are fixated on body-image
obsessions, and people of all ages are walled off in their own
worlds.

"It could be worse," Mom tells herself, remembering for a moment the
billions of children in the world who have nothing to eat at all.
But human hunger isn't talked about much anymore, with everyone
taking happiness medications. And people have been extremely
reluctant to discuss such things ever since the National Cattlemen's
Beef Association sued a prominent author for food disparagement. She
had dared to expose the fact that if Americans ate 10 percent less
meat, enough grain would become available to feed 60 million people.

A Different Scenario

:It's the year 2030. A meal is served. The old wooden table has been
in the family for several generations. Sturdy and simple, it carries
something of meaning from all the life it has witnessed and made
possible. Around it sit people who have love and respect for each
other. They communicate freely and easily. Each person is honored
for the unique gifts and talents he brings. Each person is supported
to fully express her powers. People eat in comfort and safety,
knowing that, thanks to the changes that have taken place, no one
anywhere, anymore, goes hungry.

The food this family eats, like the food now eaten by most families
in the nation, is wholesome and natural. Much of it comes from land
nearby. Throughout the land, families and communities of every race
and ethnic background gather together to enjoy healthy foods that
represent their unique cultural heritage. Families gather around
steaming bowls of fresh soup and meals made from delicious natural
ingredients. Large and colorful salads contain fresh leaves, not
only of lettuce and other vegetables picked from family and local
gardens but also of several wild plants that grow nearby. Children
are always excited to find these plants, as they are to find the
wild edible mushrooms that are frequently served with rice and a
delicious sauce of seeds and homemade vinegar. Grandma made the
vinegar last year from apples that had fallen fully ripe from the tree.

Children from different families play together and help in the
family and community gardens, where they learn to cooperate with
youngsters from different backgrounds. Small fingers in every
hue-black, brown, yellow, white, and red-play around in the fertile
soil, pulling weeds, playing with water and mud and worms. Worms
abound in the deep, rich soil, for it is teeming with organic life
and a vast mix of nutrients for the plants. For the children, it's a
game to harvest vegetables and carry them to the kitchen, where
adults wash and chop. Some of the vegetables they planted themselves.

As the children plant seeds, then watch the seeds turn into small
seedlings that will in turn grow into healthy plants, they know that
they, too, are part of the earth community and they, too, can grow
strong and steady into people who can contribute to the lives of
others. Understanding that they, too, have roots and stems, leaves
and seeds, they relish the harmonious development of all their
powers and potentials. Seeing how plants depend upon the health of
the soil, they learn the importance of caring for the environment we all share.

Most families shop at the local farmers' market, where community
farmers gather to sell direct to consumers. They don't have to
charge as much when there aren't huge distribution, transportation,
and marketing costs to pay, and when there aren't corporate entities
taking a share of everything. At the market, people meet the people
who grew their food and learn what's in season and what's ripe
today. The market is a pageant, extraordinarily alive with the vivid
colors of countless varieties of fruits, vegetables, seeds, beans,
nuts, and grains. Much of the food is grown organically. People come
together here to talk about local issues and topics of importance,
and rally around those concerns and people needing support.

At home, in a kitchen, a mother and daughter are shelling peas.
Other family members are peacefully sorting beans and making a soup.
Everyone in the house is smelling the fragrances of the simmering
soup, savoring the sensual pleasures and the creativity of it all.
People still go out to eat, but it is usually to sample new ways of
preparing wholesome foods and a variety of ethnic cuisines, not
because they have no place else to eat and not because they don't
have time to prepare a decent meal. For most families, the time
spent preparing meals is sweet, as is the time afterward, cleaning
up together. There is chatting, laughing, and joking. Even the
teenagers love it because here there is time for them to talk about
what is going on in their lives and to be heard.

When the teenagers bake breads, no two end up the same. Sometimes
they add apples and raisins and cinnamon; other times, tomatoes and
herbs and spices. As one teenager put it when her creation ended up
looking like nothing anyone had ever seen before, "Hey, it's an art form."

Which Way Will We Go?

We could go either way.

:We could go toward ever more chemicalized food and ever less real
human contact. We could go toward agribusiness-dominated factory
farms, where animals and workers are treated with disdain for their
needs, where water is poisoned and topsoil lost. We could go toward
ever more artificial ready-to-eat foods, instant everything, where
convenience and saving time are the only values. We could feed ever
more of our grain to livestock, while ever more of humanity is malnourished.

Or we could go toward real contact with ourselves and each other and
the natural world that makes our lives possible in the first place.
We could go toward farming systems based on respect for the lives of
the people and animals involved. We could eat food grown on living
soil, with respect for the vast ecological web that underlies all
that has ever been human. We could eat a plant-based diet that is
healthier for us, for the earth, and for the millions of people who
then could, because we ate simply, simply eat.

I am very clear about which way I'd prefer us to go. If I had my
way, we'd eat healthier food that was delicious not because it had
been processed and refined and loaded with artificial chemicals, but
due to its natural wholesome goodness and because our ability to
taste was heightened by the vitality and quality of the lives we
lived. If I had my way, our agriculture wouldn't be single-mindedly
devoted to profit at any cost, but would be sustainable and friendly
to the Earth and its creatures. If I had my way, we wouldn't depend
on genetic engineering to feed the world, but on sound agricultural
practices undertaken in harmony with the laws of natural systems. No
one would go hungry, because basic human needs would be given
priority over wasteful human greed. If I had my way, we'd see that
our relationship to food has much to teach us about our relationship to life.

I remember once appearing on Town Meeting, the most popular regional
TV talk show in the Pacific Northwest. Filmed in Seattle, the show
features a debate type of format, where representatives of opposing
points of view have at each other. On this occasion, I was one
guest, while the other guest represented the National Cattlemen's
Association. He didn't particularly appreciate my views. When I
expressed my vision of an ecologically sane agriculture that
produced healthy food, he puckered up his face and scoffed, "It's
just some ex-hippie's dream."

Is he right? Is it just a dream? I don't think so-not if it's
actually possible, not if it's a realistic alternative. Is it just
an idealistic fantasy? I don't think so-not if we can actually get
there from here.

Getting There from Here

It's the year 2030. We can look back now, from this perspective, and
see how we actually came to bring our food production and
consumption practices into alignment with the well-being of not only
ourselves and our health but the whole Earth community.

In the late 1990s, you may remember, the USDA proposed organic
standards that would have severely watered down the definition of
the word "organic". Had the proposed standards been implemented,
food that was genetically engineered, irradiated, and grown with
toxic and heavy-metal-laden sewage sludge could have been called
organic. Consumers would have lost all trust in the organic label.
The Department of Agriculture had every intention of putting the
proposed standards into practice. But then consumers made their
voices heard. They sent in postcards, they commented directly on the
USDA's Web page, they wrote long and specific letters, they called
their congressional representatives and asked for their support, and
they wrote to President Clinton. Meanwhile, natural-foods companies
and representatives were creating flyers, posters, advertisements,
Web sites, and letters; putting messages on cartons; and educating
people in a host of other ways. By the time the smoke cleared, the
USDA had received more than 275,000 comments, virtually all of them
vehemently opposing the agency's plan. As a direct consequence, the
proposed standards with the watered-down definition of organic were
scuttled.

People prevailed over agribusiness again a few years later. In the
first few years of the 21st century, you may recall, there was a
tremendous push by the agribusiness/chemical conglomerates toward
genetically engineered food. With the chemical companies so intent
on profiting from the genetic engineering of foods, it seemed
inevitable that they would get their way. But as had happened a few
years before with the organic standards, enormous consumer outcry,
once again coupled with sound ecological and health considerations,
shifted the direction of the culture. Monsanto said, "Trust us," but
weren't these the same people who had brought us Agent Orange and
PCBs? When human and planetary health are at stake, it was
recognized, arduous testing must be undertaken to be sure new
technological innovations are safe.

Agribusiness's plan to monopolize the world's food supplies took
another hit a few years later when a new series of diseases linked
directly to the factory farming of livestock prompted enormous
public outcry. The livestock industry had long pushed food
irradiation as the answer to the outbreaks of E. coli, salmonella,
listeria, and other pathogenic bacteria carried by meats, dairy
products, and eggs. But the emergence and widespread incidence of
new disease agents and the overwhelming evidence that these
purveyors of death and disease stemmed from
animal-factory-confinement operations had a striking influence on
public opinion.

Meanwhile, in the first dozen years of the 21st century, extreme
weather events were striking major population centers head-on, and
the cataclysmic results were waking increasing numbers of people up
to the unmistakable reality that human actions were causing severe
damage to the biosphere. It's a shame that it took so much
suffering. But perhaps, looking back, we can say now that the
enormous hurricanes that struck Miami and other coastal cities, the
floods that inundated heavily populated river basins, and the fires
that raged out of control in the drought-stricken Great Plains
served a needed purpose. They provoked an undeniable recognition
that the greatest threats to human security were not from military
invasion but from environmental degradation.

It was an electrical storm of unprecedented proportions that fouled
up computers worldwide and thwarted TV reception for months in 2007
that turned out to be the pivotal turning point. The worldwide
outpouring of sentiment for saving the environment was enormous.

Finally, a critical mass of public perception was achieved, and
elected officials were willing to take substantive action.
Looking back, it is fair to say that the one single event that
turned out to be the most crucial in turning the tide toward a food
and agriculture system that sustained life rather than exploited it
was the tax shift of 2008. Taxes, of course, had always been
supposed to raise money for the common good. But now it was
recognized that a good tax system could also help us reconcile our
needs for a prosperous economy with our needs for a healthy
environment. When it was first proposed that products which harmed
the environment and human well-being should be taxed far more than
those that contributed to the public welfare, the oil, cattle, and
chemical industries were hysterical, calling such a plan
un-American. But commentators had a field day pointing out that the
Boston Tea Party, after all, had been not about tea but about taxes.
It was such a simple idea, and it had such profound consequences.
After the tax shift of 2008, we stopped taxing things that add to
the general welfare, such as paychecks and enterprise, and started
taxing things that cause harm, such as toxic waste and resource
depletion. Many existing taxes were reduced or eliminated. The lower
and middle classes were delighted to see the end of regressive
property, payroll, and sales taxes. The wealthy were overjoyed to
see the end of enterprise-strangling business taxes, and just about
everyone was glad to see the end of the personal income tax.
Instead, public revenue was raised by taxing actions and products
that damage the public good.

It started innocently enough, when the sales tax on gas-guzzling
cars and trucks was raised. Soon, taxes were implemented on
emissions of deadly fine particles, greenhouse gases, and other air
pollutants. Not long after, other taxes were instituted on
discharges of toxic heavy metals and other water pollutants. Enough
revenue was pouring in from polluting industries that income taxes
began to be scaled back and eventually were eliminated.
It was all very creative. Traffic jams began to be taxed out of
existence when drivers were taxed for use of major routes at rush
hour. Natural ecosystems were protected by taxing the pumping of
fresh water, the damming of rivers, and the felling of virgin
timber. As polluters paid more, and those who tread more lightly on
the Earth paid less, incentives were created for people to do the
right thing.

The industries whose products were responsible for polluting the
environment and endangering public health fought against the tax
shift tooth and nail. Calling anyone who opposed them overwrought
extremists, they brought forth experts and scientists who were
willing to speak in their defense, and spent huge sums claiming that
things were too confusing to justify decisive action.

But even within these industries, there were those who saw the
writing on the wall, understood that the change was inevitable, and
found a way to make a profit from it. Oil companies began to see
themselves as energy suppliers and became heavily involved in
photovoltaic solar panels and hydrogen. Car companies started
pouring their research and marketing dollars into vehicles that
provided transportation without harming the biosphere.

The cattlemen started investing in windmills, converting much of the
vast acreages of the western states to wind farms. McDonald's led
the way among the fast-food companies, first going to all-organic
meat and dairy products, and then eventually phasing out most of
their animal products entirely, becoming the world's leading
supplier of organic soy burgers.

The reason was simple. The old practices that had caused so much
damage were no longer profitable. The tax shift of 2008 harnessed
the profit motive for environmental and health ends. The phenomenal
engine of market capitalism no longer drove us toward disease and
eco-catastrophe but toward the fulfillment of the human potential
and a healthy relationship with life.

Whereas before, restaurants that offered vegetarian fare had signs
emphasizing that fact, it was now accepted that all restaurants
featured primarily vegetarian offerings. By 2012, restaurants that
offered meat advertised that fact in their signs. Otherwise, people
just assumed they didn't.

One of the unexpected results of the tax shift of 2008 was a steady
drop in heart disease, cancer, and other disease rates. By 2012, the
reduced demands on the medical system were so dramatic that
universal health care became an affordable reality, and no American
ever went again without coverage for her or his basic health-care
needs.

Of course, by then organic agriculture had become the norm rather
than the exception. There had been worry that what the chemical
companies claimed might be true-that if taxes on pesticides were
increased, there wouldn't be enough food to go around. But that's
far from what actually happened. Instead, higher taxes on pesticides
stimulated farmers, researchers, and government agencies to devote
far more attention to low-chemical cultivation. With the highest
taxes imposed on those compounds that presented the greatest danger
to people and the environment, the revenue was used to fund research
and education programs to develop nontoxic alternatives. Gone were
the perverse incentives that led farmers to poison themselves, their
families, and their surroundings in order to survive. Communities
became not only less polluted but more prosperous, with the USDA now
supporting family farms and natural methods of cultivation as fully
as they had once subsidized chemical-based factory farms.

Then there was Project 2020, the remarkable plan first conceived 5
years earlier, in the year 2015. Recognizing that 20-20 vision had
long been the standard of perfect eyesight, the idea was that by the
year 2020, we would see the virtual end of malnutrition and hunger.
The idea moved toward fruition as taxes on junk food not only
decreased their consumption but also provided the revenue to
subsidize the production and widespread distribution of many
varieties of whole grains, legumes, and fresh vegetables. Hunger and
malnutrition faded away now as white bread and fatty meats became so
expensive that they were rarely eaten, while whole-grain bread,
fresh vegetables, and a wide array of full-protein soybean products
were everywhere available at a minimal cost and, of course, free to
anyone in need.

We look back today and shake our heads at how bleak the future might
have looked to people at the beginning of the New Millennium. At the
surface level, the economy was booming. But even as Internet stocks
were rising to staggering new heights, most of the Earth's
environmental systems and resources were deteriorating under the
impact of human economic activities. The Nasdaq was skyrocketing,
but shrinking forests, eroding soils, falling water tables, rising
temperatures, dying coral reefs, melting glaciers, and disappearing
plant and animal species bespoke a frightening future.

Today, when we have faced up to the fact that we depend entirely on
the Earth's natural resources and systems to feed and sustain us, we
have much cause for gratitude. Now that we eat well, breathe clean
air, and listen to each other, it is stunning how much creativity
has been released for the realization of humanity's needs, both
physical and spiritual. The Pope, of course, played a crucial part
in this Global Renaissance, when, in 2023, moved by the unbearable
burden that ever-growing populations were placing on the biosphere,
he called for an end to the Catholic Church's historic opposition to
contraception. God wanted us, he told the world, to limit our
numbers and cherish Creation as stewards, not destroy it as
polluters.

Now, when every day it seems we discover new opportunities to live
in greater harmony with each other and the Earth, we honor and
appreciate all those who played a part over the years in the Global
Renaissance. Humbly, we bow our heads in gratitude to those
farsighted people whose actions and choices helped to create the
world of prosperity and peace that we now accept as our birthright.

They persisted even when the future seemed bleak.

We thank them with all our hearts.