CHSTU 320 - Food Sovereignty Movements in Mexico and the U.S.

CHSTU 320 | FOOD SOVEREIGNTY MOVEMENTS IN MEXICO & THE UNITED STATES University of Washington | Winter Quarter 2014 We have chewed dry twigs and salt grasses we have filled our mouths with dust and bits of adobe we have eaten lizards, rats, and worms. Weep, my people: know that with these disasters we have lost the Mexican nation. The water has turned bitter our food is bitter. -Colhua Mexica chronicles. Retold by Miguel Léon-Protilla, Broken Spears Class meets | Th 2:30-4:20. SMI 211 Office hours. W 330-5 by appointment only. DEN M42 Contact info | Email: [email protected] | Voice mail: 3-1507 COURSE DESCRIPTION. Interdisciplinary study of agrifood systems and food sovereignty movements in Mexico and Mexican-origin communities in the United States. Uses the methods and materials of ethnography, agroecology, and political ecology in concert with environmental history, rural sociology, deconstructive discourse analysis, eco-criticism, and predictive ecology. (5) I&S. Writing credit. Focus and Themes for Winter 2014. The Colhua Mexica (a.k.a. Aztecs) had a glyph for the City of Tenochtitlan, which is illustrated in the figure depicted above left. This is actually a photograph of a modern-day (1960s) tile work public-art installation on a wall in the Mexico City Metro subterranean station. The smaller glyph depicted near right is the stylized version prepared by Mexica scribes under canonical supervision during the production of the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (mid-16th C.). The glyph depicts a fruit-bearing prickly pear cactus growing out of banded volcanic rock. This glyph, and the place name it signifies, carries hidden deep histories of food, place, self, and civilization in Mexico. Like most Mexica toponyms (place names), this glyph incorproates environmental qualities characteristic of the given locale. Tetl = Piedra (rock) + Nochtli = Tuna (fruit of the cactus) + Tlan = Abundancia (abundance). Hence: Tenochtitlan = as the place “En el pedregal, donde abundan las tunas.” [On volcanic rocks where the cactus fruit is abundant.] The tuna – fruit of the cactus – was a delectable source of fruit for the earliest settlers of Tenochtitlan before the xinampas system was in place, especially at Lakes Xalco and Xochilimlco during the era of the so-called Triple Alliance. Tuna is still widely consumed today, both as street food and high-end restaurant delicacy – e.g., fancy sorbet made with an infusion of tequila and puréed tuna de nopal. When I read this glyph, I discern a deep history behind the origin of the place name. It reminds me that the Mexica were the last of the chichimeca to arrive in the Valley of Mexico from the Far North. On arrival in Anahuac, they first settled at Chapultepec (Grasshopper Hill) ca. 1248BCE. The Lake Texcoco District had by 1 then been fully inhabited for thousands of years and millions of people were living in the many shoreline city-states such as Azcapotzalco, which was the glistening capital of the Tepaneco city-state, and its many rural outliers. Other city-states included Xalco, Amecameca, Culhuacan, Texcoco, Tlacopan, and many others dating back to at least 600BCE and with direct ancestral and heritage links to the even more ancient Tolteca civilization at Teotihuacan. When the Mexica finally founded Tenochtitlan in 1325BCE the location was forced on them, and so they invented a poetic myth about the Serpent and the Eagle on a Cactus. The fact is that none of the established city-states granted permission for the Mexica to settle landside. They were evicted from Chapultepec and given the worst possible place to settle – a barren cactus-strewn volcanic rock island surrounded by marshy and brackish bug- and snake-infested waters. On this island they eventually built up their fabulous twincities of Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco (“The Little Hill of Land”) and brought fresh water from Chapultepec and other protected watersheds through a complex system comprised of dikes, aqueducts, canals, lagoons, and terrace gardens. Tlatelolco, at least during the reign of Moteuczoma Xocoyotzin, paid tribute to Tenochtitlan in the form of ground cacao (cacahuapinolli), ground chia (chianpinolli), and toasted tortillas (tlaxcaltotopochtli) – all this, despite the city’s limited land base (see Pedro Carrasco Pizana, The Tenocha Empire of Ancient Mexico, p. 108-09). This alterNative environmental history of the twin island cities reveals the extensive gardens and terraces maintained by the Mexica including in landside locales. With their neighbors they left evidence of complex and shifting agroecosystem landscape mosaics that involved a wider set of innovations beyond the rightly celebrated chinampas – a.k.a., xinampas – or floating gardens of Xochimilco and Xalco. Notably, the Mexica xinampas produced four to five crops a year and so much corn that the modern era of agriculture in Mexico would not surpass their level in 1519 until the 1940s. We will address the erasure of this vital missing part of the environmental history of North America – the Mesoamerican agroecological landscape mosaic. But we will also explore the ways in which the ancestral knowledge and practice by Diaspora natives and multigenerational place-based farming communities. The remnants of the fantastic terraces, gardens, baths, pools, and other agroecological structures found at Tetzcotzingo (depicted here in photo to the left) have too often been mischaracterized as mere “botanical gardens.” According to Avilés (2006) this is an instance of European arrogance that assumes the Mesoamerican agroecological mosaic is just another analog of the European forms. Instead, Mexica cultural and ecological landscapes are not even bunary; they are co-enacted rather than separate; spaces such as Tetzcotzingo merit consideration on their own terms. The Tetzcotzingo site was built during a time of growing demand for food and was another example of the widespread indigenous form of loma y bordo, a form that survives in the modern acequia permaculture practice of ancones (terraces) used by Indo-Hispano farmers in northern New Mexico and south central CHSTU 320 | FOOD SOVEREIGNTY | Winter 2014 2 Colorado today. However, the so-called botanical gardens of Tetzcotzingo were also clearly a sacred ceremonial space with significant spiritual value for the practices of prayerful retreat and healing through naturopathic medicine. The glyph of the cactus in volcanic rock therefore signifies two important qualities: (1) Deep Origins and (2) Displacement and Resilience – both relevant to the focus and themes of this class. First is the sense of the deep origins of Mexican peoples in legacies and cycles of conquest, displacement, and marginality. Second is the resilience and resurgence of indigenous Mexico, which unfolds in significant measure through the conservation of native crops, foods, food ways, and cuisines. These ‘foodscapes’ remain viable living pathways to the heart and sustenance of various Mexican national and ethnic identities in contemporary times and are critical assets in the development of a post-NAFTA Mesoamerican Diaspora that is playing a leading role in urban agriculture and food justice movements on both side of the border. Mesoamericans are the transborder native people. Our focus is the study of the deep history of food in Mesoamerican indigenous civilizations and how the indigenous sources of seed, knowledge, belief, and practice continue to shape and are re-enacted as part of contemporary movements for food sovereignty, justice, autonomy movements in Mexico, other parts of Latin America, and the United States. Students will organize into several research groups to investigate over three months the multiple dimensions of the political ecology of indigenous land races of maize (Zea mays L.) in Mexico, the principal Vavilov Center for the domestication of wild relatives of maíz criollo. Term Paper Focus. Our focus for the term paper research projects is on the Battle over Corn in Mexico and the United States. We will organize six separate research groups looking into: (1) Origins. The origins and development of Mexican corn varieties and corn culture. (2) State Making and Agrarian Reform. Effects of the Mexican Revolution, modern state, (3) NAFTA and Biotechnology. The ‘Green Revolution’ in Mexico. Free-trade treaties and the rise of commercial agricultural biotechnology. (4) Scientific Risk Assessment. Methods and politics of genomic, toxicological, and predictive ecology in the science of risk assessment of GMO corn; (5) Legal Frontiers. Patents, trade-related intellectual property; impact assessments, and related issues in the legal battle over corn; and (6) Social Movements and Alternatives. The organization of civil society in movements against the spread of GMO corn and the alternative models they are pursuing and protecting for sustainable and equitable agriculture. COURSE REQUIREMENTS/GRADING. See Instructional Handouts 1-5 for detailed instructions. 1. Critical Summaries of Assigned Readings. Each student must prepare and submit two-a-week critical summaries of the assigned readings. Due dates: Starting the second week of the quarter and through the tenth week. The 1-2 page summaries must be posted to each student’s GoPost space by 10pm on Mon. for Tues. class reading assignments and by 10pm on Wed. eves for Th. reading assignments. Grading: 16 summaries = 80 points toward final grade (based on a 200=4.0 point scale). 3 2. Group Term Research Paper. An interdisciplinary team of 3 students works on a common research term paper on an approved topic related to the substantive themes of the class. The report will range in length between 15-20 pages. It must address a specific applied theoretical and policy problem of concern to social movements and multi-sector stakeholders. Please use double-line spacing; Times Roman 12 pt font; and 1 in. margins. Include bibliography (separate from full-page count) and follow AAA format; consult AAA Quick Guide. For list of substantive topical areas and further instructions see Handout #2 - Group Term Research Papers. Due date: The first draft is due February 27 and the final term paper is due March 20, 5pm. Grading: 80 points. 3. Blog Post. The term paper research teams must also collaborate on the editing and conversion of their paper into a 2000-word essay to be published on the ejFood Blog. Due date: March 6. Grading: 40 points. 4. GoPost Participation. In addition to your use of the GoPost community discussion board to post your critical reading summaries, this is an important activity that rewards serious participation with up to 10 bonus points. This is done by starting conversation threads on topics and readings related to the seminar themes; you can post YouTube embeds; share .pdf files; provide links to information on community events, campus activities, and newsworthy items, etc. Grading: Earn up to 10 bonus points. Note on Academic Honesty. All students and faculty are expected to abide by the University of Washington standards on academic honesty. Because this class is heavily based on writing and learning from class readings, plagiarism is a very important issue. All formal presentations, writing assignments, and group projects must be original and must correctly cite readings and other sources when they are used to support arguments. Citations as listed in the course bibliography addendum below are acceptable. I encourage students to come to office hours or schedule a meeting for extra help with writing assignments. More information about the UW policy on academic honesty is available online: http://depts.washington.edu/grading/issue1/honesty.htm. Disability Accommodations. The University of Washington is committed to providing access, and reasonable accommodation in its services, programs, activities, education and employment for individuals with disabilities. For information or to request disability accommodation contact: Disability Resources for Students (DRS) 448 Schmitz, Box 355839, 206.543.8924/V, 206.543.8925/TTY, 206.616.8379 (FAX), or e-mail [email protected]. COURSE TEXTS. Only one textbook purchase is required: • Abarca, Meredith E. (2006) Voices in the Kitchen: Views of Food and the World from Working-Class Mexican and Mexican American Women. College Station: Texas A&M Univ. Press Readings may be downloaded from ShareSpace: https://catalyst.uw.edu/sharespaces/space/dpena/11804 GOPOST BOARD. Your participation in the discussion board is invited. You may post comments related to class discussions and readings; newsworthy items; information on campus or community events of interest to the class; etc. The URL for the GoPost board: https://catalyst.uw.edu/gopost/board/dpena/19855/ CHSTU 320 | FOOD SOVEREIGNTY | Winter 2014 4 COURSE CALENDAR. The course calendar includes a brief description of the topic or theme for the session plus the readings that are assigned and any assignment notes and deadlines as indicated by  JANUARY I. INTRODUCTION AND FRAMING T-7 Review syllabus, requirements, expectations, and logistics. ‘Framing’ Concepts/Themes: (1) Local, Slow, and Deep Food. (2) Sovereignty or Autonomy? (3) ‘Re-Commons’: Alternatives to Neoliberal Capitalism. (4) Paradigms Lost: Biotechnology and Agroecology. Th-9 The significance of the fall of Tenochtitlan and the long-duration echo of indigenous agroecology. • • Avilés, P. 2006. Seven ways of looking at a mountain: Tetzcotzingo and the Aztec garden tradition. Landscape Journal 25:2:143-157. Evans, S. T. 2010. The garden of the Aztec Philosopher-King. In: Gardening: philosophy for everyone. D. O'Brien, Ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. • Term paper research groups formed. T-14 Varied dimensions of the food sovereignty discourse. • • Patel, R. 2009. What does food sovereignty look like? Journal of Peasant Studies 36:3: 663-73. Rosset, P. 2008. Food sovereignty and the contemporary food crisis. Development 51:4:460-63. Term paper topic statements (abstract and list of team members) must be submitted for approval. Th-16 Understanding food as political weaponry. Linking social and ecological sides of sustainability. • • Cleaver, H. 1977. Food, famine, and the international crisis. Unpublished Flyer. Zerowork group. Austin, TX. https://webspace.utexas.edu/hcleaver/www/Zerowork/CleaverFoodFamine.html. (Accessed January 2, 2014). Allen, P. and C. Sachs 1991. The social side of sustainability. Science as Culture 2:4:569-90. Term paper consultations begin by appointment only. II. FATHOMING DEEP FOOD AND AGRICULTURE T-21 Greater Mexico as Vavilov Center. Three sisters plus. Managed mosaics and island metropoles. Conquest, colonialism, and the transformation of agriculture. • • Peña, D. 2005a. Environmental history of Mega-Mexico, El sur. In: Mexican Americans and the Environment: Tierra y Vida. Tucson: Univ. of Arizona Press, pp. 44-67. Peña, D. 2005b. Environmental history of Mega-Mexico, El norte. In: Mexican Americans and the Environment: Tierra y Vida. Tucson: Univ. of Arizona Press, pp. 68-110. 5 Th-23 ‘You are what you eat.’ Modernization, heritage cuisines, and the decline of health and wellbeing. • • T-28 Agroecology and the science of ‘deep agriculture’. Place-based TEK and conservation. • • Th-30 Barsh, R. 1990. Ecocide, nutrition, and the vanishing Indian. In: State violence and ethnicity, P. L. van den Berghe, Ed. Boulder: Univ. Press of Colorado, pp. 221-49. Nabhan, G. 2002. Diabetes, diet, and Native American foraging traditions. In: Food in the USA: A Reader, C. Counihan, Ed. New York: Routledge, pp. 231-37. Altieri, M. 2008. Small farms as a planetary ecological asset: Five key reasons why we should support the revitalization of small farms in the Global South. Environment and Development Series 7. Penang: Third World Network. Altieri, M. and C. Nicholls 2008. Scaling up agroecology for food sovereignty in Latin America. Development 51:4:472-80. Las acequias: Agroecological mosaics and biodiversity. • • Peña, D. 1999. Cultural landscapes and biodiversity. In: Ethnoecology: Situated knowledge, located lives, Virginia Nazarea, Ed. Tucson: Univ of Arizona Press, pp. 107-32. Peña, D. 2003. The watershed commonwealth of the Upper Rio Grande. In: Natural assets: Democratizing environmental ownership, J. K. Boyce and B. Shelley, Eds. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, , pp. 169-85. FEBRUARY III. POST-NAFTA DIASPORAS AND FOOD SOVEREIGNTY T-4 Deep food and the commons. The post-NAFTA Diasporas. Sovereignty or autonomy? Film: • • Th-6 The Garden (2009). Mares, T. and D. Peña 2010. Urban agriculture in the making of insurgent space in Los Angeles and Seattle. In: Insurgent public space: Guerrilla urbanism and the remaking of the contemporary cities, J. Hou, Ed. New York: Routledge (Taylor and Francis), pp. 253-67. Peña, D. 2012. Autonomia and food sovereignty: From state of exception to the end of ecological sovereignty. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Conference of the National Association for Chicana and Chicano Studies. Chicago. IL. More of traveling foods. Diaspora home kitchen gardens. • • Komarnisky, S. 2009. Suitcases full of mole. Traveling food and the connections between Mexico and Alaska. Alaska Journal of Anthropology 7:1:41-56. Mares, T. and D. Peña 2011. Environmental and food justice: Toward local, slow, and deep food systems. In: The food justice reader: Cultivating a just sustainability, J. Agyeman and A. Alkon, Eds. Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 197-219. CHSTU 320 | FOOD SOVEREIGNTY | Winter 2014 6 T-11 Mexico’s land races: Biosafety threats posed by transgenics. • • Th-13 Zapatista struggles for autonomy and food sovereignty. • • T-18 • • • Circle of Blue. URL: http://www.circleofblue.org/tehuacan/story/ Neoliberalism and Mexico’s food sovereignty. • • Th-27 Pilcher, J. 2010. Industrial tortillas and folkloric Pepsi: Nutritional consequences of hybrid cuisines in Mexico. In: The cultural politics of food and eating, J. Watson and M. Caldwell. Malden, Eds. MA: Blackwell, pp. 235-50. Peña, D. 2008. Tortured tortillas. Environmental and Food Justice. http://bit.ly/1cuSBi6. Bello, W. 2008. Manufacturing a food crisis. The Nation (May 15). Correa, E., W. Marshall, and R. Soto 2008. Financial speculation, global crisis, and food sovereignty. Paper presented at the Critical Development Studies (CDS) Network Conference, August 13-15, Zacatecas, Mexico. Tehuacán: In the birthplace of corn, farmers adapt by cultivating amaranth. • T-25 Eber, C. 1999. Seeking our own food: Indigenous women’s power and autonomy. Latin American Perspectives 26:3:6-36. Rosset, P., M. Martínez-Torres, and L. Hernández-Navarro. 2005. Zapatismo in the movement of movements. Development 48:2:35-41. Industrializing tortillas. ‘Financializing’ food crises. Derivatives and the food crisis. • Th-20 Quist, D. and I. Chapela 2001. Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature 414: 541-43. Kinchy, A. 2010. Anti-genetic engineering activism and scientized politics in the case of “contaminated” Mexican maize. Agriculture and Human Values 27:505–17. Henriques, G. and R. Patel 2003. Agricultural trade liberalization and Mexico. Policy Brief 7. San Francisco: Institute for Food and Development Policy. Pechlaner, G. and G. Otero. 2010. The neoliberal food system: Neoregulation and a new division of labor in North America. Rural Sociology 75:2:179-208. What is ‘slow’ or ‘local’ food? ‘Deep’ food? Case study: Chicos del horno (Colorado). • • • Nabhan, G. 1997. Let us now praise native crops. In: Cultures of habitat: On nature, culture, and story. Washington, DC: Counterpoint. Nabhan, G. 2002b. The headwaters and the foodshed. In: Coming home to eat: The pleasures and politics of local food. New York: Norton, pp. 191-207. Gallegos, J. 2010. The chicos way of life. In: Sangre de tierra: An acequia farmer’s sense of place. Tucson: University of Arizona Press (forthcoming). 7 MARCH IV. CURRENT POLICY AND POLITICAL DISCOURSES T-4 Women, immigration, and the U.S.-Mexico agrifood system. • • Th-6 Southern Poverty Law Center 2010. Injustice on our plates: Immigrant women in the U.S. food industry. Montgomery: SPLC. Sampson, K. 2008. A feminist political economic analysis of the U.S. chicken industry. Development 51:4:547-54. Gender, biodiversity, and food sovereignty. • • Pimbert, M. 2009. Women and food sovereignty. Liesa India (September). Vasquez-Garcia, V. 2008. Gender, ethnicity, and economic status in plant management: Uncultivated edible plants among the Nahuas and Popolucas of Veracruz, Mexico, Agriculture and Human Values 25:65-77. Blog assignments due by 5pm in the instructor’s email inbox. T-11 Consume this, if you can. Beyond the production/consumption dichotomy. • • Th-12 Agriculture, environmental justice, and sustainability. Studies of food justice activism. • • M-17 thru F-21 Jaffe, J. and M. Gertler. 2005. Victual vicissitudes: Consumer deskilling and the (gendered) transformation of food systems. Agriculture and Human Values 23:143-62. Alkon, A. and K. Norgaard. 2009. Breaking the food chains: An investigation of food justice activism. Sociological Inquiry 79:3:289-305. Pinderhughes, R. 2003. Poverty and the environment: The urban agriculture connection. In: Natural assets: Democratizing environmental ownership, ed. James K. Boyce and Barry Shelley. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Peña, D. 2002. Environmental justice and sustainable agriculture: Linking social and ecological sides of sustainability. Resource Paper Series (Oct 23). Second National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, Washington, D.C. URL: http://www.ejrc.cau.edu/summitIIPolicyPapersTOC.html. No class. Exam week. Complete term papers. Follow the deadlines: MARCH 20 12noon: ORIGINAL PRINT COPY OF TERM PAPER DUE IN PROFESSOR’S OFFICE MAILBOX IN DENNY HALL. MARCH 20, 5pm: DIGITAL BACK-UP COPY OF TERM PAPER DUE IN INSTRUCTOR’S EMAIL. MARCH 19, 5PM: ALL CRITICAL READING SUMMARIES MUST BE POSTED. CHSTU 320 | FOOD SOVEREIGNTY | Winter 2014 8 APPENDICES Appendix 1. Additional Learning Resources. Appendix 2. Course Bibliography. Appendix 2. Instructional Handout 1 – Critical Course Reading Summaries. Appendix 3. Instructional Handout 2 – Group Term Research Paper. Appendix 4. Instructional Handout 3 – Group Blog Essay. APPENDIX 1. ADDITIONAL LEARNING RESOURCES. There are a wide range of resources on the Web that address foodways, agrifood systems, and food sovereignty. Among more useful resources for this class: • Acequia Institute: www.acequiainstitute.org. The first NGO in the U.S. focused on funding research and advocacy programs for environmental and food justice with a focus on historic acequia communities of the Rio Arriba bioregion. • Agricultural Research Service: http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/main.htm. The USDA’s on-line electronic library of research materials, links, and other resources valuable to the agrifood system and hunger researcher. • Alternativas y Procesos de Participación Social: http://www.alternativas.org.mx/. One of countless community-based grassroots groups in Mexico organizing around ecoagriculture and food justice. Alter/Pros, a Slow Food Presidium, is at the center of the battle to restore the famous Tehuacán Valley watershed. • Association for the Study of Food and Society: http://www.food-culture.org/. Home page of the renowned professional scholarly organization. Good links, resources, and even a syllabi section. • Center for Food Safety: http://truefoodnow.org/. An important progressive voice for U.S. compliance with the biosafety protocols of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Codex Alimentarius. • Circle of Blue: http://www.circleofblue.org/tehuacan/story/. Site for access to links and a video documentary on the struggles for water and food justice in the Tehuacán Valley. • Community Food Security Coalition: http://www.foodsecurity.org/index.html. A leading NGO promoting community-based food security projects like farm-to-table school lunch cafeterias and school-based community gardens. • Council for Responsible Genetics – Biotechnology and Agriculture Programs: http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/Projects/PastProject.aspx?projectId=12. The grandparent of American NGOs that monitor and organize around human genome and commercial agricultural biotechnologies. 9 • Ecoagriculture Partners: http://www.ecoagriculture.org/. The renowned international network of ecoagriculture farmers, scientists, and adovcates. Active USA projects in the Southwest, Napa Valley, and Skagit River watershed. • Environmental and Food Justice Blog: http://ejfood.blogspot.com. This is Devon G. Peña’s personal blog; become followers, especially during the class. • Food and Culture Blog: http://foodandculture.blogspot.com/. This blog is maintained by an interdisciplinary team based at UC-Davis and posts information of interest to researchers investigating food and cultural studies, as well as the critical analysis of eating practices and broader cultures of consumption. • Food First: http://foodfirst.org. A pioneer in the area of agrifood systems research and advocacy, presenting reliable, left-leaning perspectives. • Food not Bombs: http://www.foodnotbombs.net/ [Note link to “Comida, no bombas”.] The utterly ubiquitous network of radical direct-action and non-violent food justice activists. • Global Exchange: http://www.globalexchange.org. Civil society networks serving social movements against neoliberalism and for “fair trade.” Very active in Mexico. • Gourmet Magazine – Food Politics: http://www.gourmet.com/foodpolitics. Huh? A pleasant surprise filled with thoughtful reflections on the state of food in the economy, social organizations, and popular culture. • Greenpeace-México: http://www.greenpeace.org/mexico/. A key NGO working on the transgenic maize problem in Mexico. • Native Seeds/SEARCH: http://www.nativeseeds.org/. The USA’s oldest seed bank and clearinghouse for Southwestern and other bioregional land race horticultural varieties. • New Mexico Acequia Association: http://www.lasacequias.org/. The nation’s oldest statewide organization of traditional acequia (community irrigation ditch) associations. • Organic Consumers Association: http://www.organicconsumers.org/. The country’s oldest consumer rights NGO focused on food and nutrition and biosafety issues. • Organic Seed Alliance: http://www.seedalliance.org/. Dedicated to in-situ (place-based conservation and stewardship of native landraces in the USA. • Rachel Lauden: A Historian’s Take on Food and Food Politics: http://www.rachellaudan.com/. A historian provides a unique set of perspectives on food politics, past and present. • School for Chiapas: http://www.schoolsforchiapas.org/english/projects/ecological-agriculturaleducation.html. A California-based activist network involved in Zapatista-inspired schooling projects that include agroecological education for native people. Huh? Would it not be the other way around? CHSTU 320 | FOOD SOVEREIGNTY | Winter 2014 10 • Slow Food-USA: http://www.slowfoodusa.org/. Home page of the world’s largest local/slow food activist/farmer organization. • South Central Farmers: http://www.southcentralfarmers.com/. Established to save the country’s largest urban farm, the SCF is now producing vegetables and herbs on an 80-acre community-based farm cooperative that supports urban-based community food sovereignty projects like “Food for the Hood.” • Via Campesina: http://viacampesina.org/main_en/. The international peasant-led farmers’ movement for food sovereignty in the Global South. 11