Global Movements for Food Justice - The Oxford Topic of Food, Politics, and Society - page 723

in accomplishing this (Rosset and Martínez-Torres 2005; 13-16, A1.33; Desmarais
2007,136-144),theyappeartobepursuingthechallengeofHardtandNegri's(2004,
68) Multitude : “he challenge of the multitude is the challenge of democracy . . . that is,
the rule of everyone by everyone.” The multitude seeks to balance the necessity of unity
asavoiceforpoliticalchangewiththeimperativetoavoidhomogenizationandcapitu-
lation of differences in the cause of such unity. The tensions and actions around gender
withinLVCbothresultfromandrelectthevaluesofself-determinationandtherightto
have rights. Determining what exactly these mean in the area of gender calls on the very
processes of participatory democracy that food sovereignty seeks to propagate.
Autonomy, Democracy and a
Defensible Lifespace
LVCisaproponentof defensible lifespaces (aterFriedmann1992,inDesmarais2007,
67-68).Conciselystated,adefensiblelifespaceisaphysicalandsocialspaceenabling
a family to make a living and to exert a degree of autonomy over their own conditions.
Autonomy here is not meant in the narrow sense of being completely self-provisioning
(acommonmisapprehensionofthedemandsofthelocalizationandpeasantmove-
ments),butratherisrelatedtotheabilitytoinluenceandchangematerialconditions
andsocialstructures.Inpracticalterms,thisimpliestheabilitytomakeadigniiedand
sustainablelivingasapeasant—asopposedto,forinstance,escapingpovertybyleav-
ingone'scommunitytomakeagoofitinthecity.Defensibilitywouldmeanthat,rather
than the ability to leave poor rural circumstances, peasants and peasant communities
have the ability to change the sociocultural and physical infrastructures creating and
maintaining endemic hardships.12
Unconstrained international trade places the control necessary for this physically
andsocioculturallyoutsidethereachofindividualcommunities—thelociofcontrolof
local prices and supply are moved from within a community, region, or country into the
hands of the supposed “invisible hand.” Alternatively, the loci of control lies beyond this
force: the formulation of empire elaborates on how cycles of planning and control, the
ability to enter and exit the market, what a farmer produces and how, all become con-
strainedwithinempire,forminga“visiblehand”(vanderPloeg2008,252;cf.Araghi
2008's“visiblefoot”).he“hands”ofthemarket,visibleorinvisible,movesitesofcon-
trol away from individual communities and into the stock exchanges and boardrooms
of the Minority World. Any given community must now push to enact change in a mar-
ketplaceinluencedbymillionsoftheircompatriotsaroundtheworld,besidesthe(from
the point of view of the Majority World13farmer)completelyunaccountabledecisions
of executives and foreign governments14—thoughthisisacontinuing,notnew,trend
(Davis2002;McMichael2009).heresultsarefoodproductstailoredfortheirsuitability
for mass and elite markets, rather than to the desires or needs of individual communities;