(Don't) Let Them Eat Bananas

The bizarre banana boycott

I have just read that some virtuous liberals have now decided to save the world by refusing to buy or eat bananas. Their argument follows the lines that the transportation of bananas from Central and South America is too expensive in terms of fuel consumed. They hope, it seems, to do their part to prevent global warming by buying only locally grown produce. What next?

I’m sure they feel righteous in sacrificing to save the world from global warming in this manner (think globally, act locally, after all). What a shame they’re jousting with fearful phantoms that have no basis in science (but then what does science have to do with it -- it’s really about who has the most persuasive lawyers and the largest checkbooks, isn’t it?).

Misguided as they are on the problem, how can their solution (a bizarre boycott of bananas) save the world? That’s the question that kept me awake last night. Did they remember to tell the banana growers that demand will be shrinking? Do the transportation companies have plans to reduce their fleets? Or will the banana growers just keep right on growing and shipping, using the same amount of fuel to send every last banana on their trees to the grocery stores for those who are less enlightened and not nearly as righteous?

Isn’t this latest greatest idea for world salvation the equivalent of a boycott against someone’s national economy . . . the same economy they tried to save by eating only South American nuts in their Ben & Jerry’s ice cream in order to save the rain forests? Will bananas alone do it, or must they also boycott all chocolate, coffee, and sugar? Now we’re moving into the realm of true personal sacrifice.

But wait! Transportation costs being what they are, it seems to me that they also should buy only manufactured products produced in local factories. That means nothing more from China. Depending upon where they live, this could be a real hardship. I’m not certain that anything is manufactured in the continental U.S. anymore. Not even our flags.

Now that they’re eating only locally grown food, they’d better quit their jobs (commuting probably requires too much fuel anyway) so they can devote their springs, summers, and falls to growing and putting away crops for the winter. With all the canned and preserved food as their core meals, they’ll no doubt need to put in root cellars and they could then get rid of their energy-hungry refrigerators.

Now that they’ve a bit more time on their hands, they could save a lot of fuel by doing their wash in oaken buckets with washboards and using hand-powered wringers and the clothesline drying method. They could even haul their own water. They could get rid of their family automobiles (never mind what will happen to the landfills if they all decide to dump the family cars at once).

If we are all to get back to basics in this way, we’ll each need a much larger plot of land than most suburban dwellers own. That could be a complication, since there are so many of us and so little land left. But don’t worry. If some zealots decide this is a good idea for them, they’ll no doubt try to legislate it for the rest of us. Maybe they’ll need a czar and a federal bureaucracy to oversee the allotment of farmland, seeds for crops, how often we could water those crops, our use of pesticides, payment for not planting . . . just think of the additional government jobs that could be created!

After some reflection, it doesn’t seem as if we can easily revert to the 1800s after all. My conclusion is that we may as well eat bananas. We’ll need the energy they provide to fight the real problems we face today. In fact, the biggest problem we face may very well be the well-meaning zealots who would like to change their lives and ours too.

KTL