Searching for a post-Outrage world
Part I Sweet Crude – Sugar, Petroleum and Outrage
Right now, at the global and national levels, one experiences what might be termed a “call to outrage”. Beckoned by the media or simply human observation, citizen consumers continue to speak out in rational and sometimes less-than-rational voices. By “outrage” in the following essay, one speaks of a kind of fist-wielding, finger-pointing anger directed away from oneself toward a world perceived as indifferent, as “other”, or perhaps both.
Here, “outrage” is not “phase one” of action, but almost a static disorder of inaction that results in bickering, name-calling and other expressions that serve to break rather than foster communication. Voices and emotions emerge at feverish pitch from many individuals who try to articulate anguish or frustration about one or more current issues. Individuals feel trapped, powerless to stop or effect change as the insensitive wheels of bureaucracy and time grind away before his or her very eyes.
Outrage is warranted, certainly, as a response to many of the horrors that percolate beneath the surface of our sometimes-shiny lives. But, indeed, will chronic outrage actually help anyone, in the end?
Perhaps one can first offer here a brief overview of issues that demonstrate many justifiable reasons for “outrage”.
Food and Outrage
Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle (1906), a novel of the early 20th century and the heartbreak of an immigrant family serves as a kind backdrop for films like 2009’s Food Inc. Focused upon an unregulated food industry and the lives of workers caught in its web, the readers of Sinclair’s novel helped to bring about stronger laws to protect consumers from food industry negligence.

1906 Chicago meat inspection at Swift Co. from Wikipedia Commons
Similarly, if one watches Food Inc., one may be disgusted and outraged by the film’s documentation of contemporary food industry practices. Sanitized, processed, and artificially preserved food has been the dietary norm for most consumers of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Indeed, how long can the ubiquitous corn-based Twinkie last on the shelf?
One need not pay money to encounter the truths Food Inc. attempts to convey. Enter a local grocery store and witness the surgery-room lighting, the stacks of animal parts on white plastic trays, and the air-puffed sugar boxed up for $5.00 a pop. For many the grating sense that something is wrong has infused consumer reality for at least the past two decades. Yet, the monolith of a corn sugar based, highly regulated food industry that produces food but not health remains. Even as the rise of organic food and urban farming offer hope, the base structure remains intact.
Flowing directly from consumer diet to consumer health, one may be outraged that the effective marketing of corporate food has resulted in high levels of disease and toxicity in human bodies of the 21st century.
People have heard and obeyed the marketers. Kids eat Happy Meals, boxed-up prepackaged lunchmeat meals, and chocolate puff cereals. Obesity now afflicts children and teens, not to mention adults. However, the thriving pharmaceutical industry has come to the rescue. Observe the latest pharmaco-helpful prescriptive for diabetes following on the heels of a Happy Meal ad right in the midst of a televised event like the Super Bowl, or even just an average weeknight at home.
The Jungle and Food Inc address regulatory failures unique to diverging historical contexts. People want to have a voice and make good choices. Yet, as shown in Food Inc, meat industries rely on inhumane and unhealthy conditions for livestock, industry workers and consumers. Many people have little notion of where to turn. With the rise of local farmer’s markets, the outrage

Fresh produce, grown near Rio de Janeiro for local market photo by Armando Bravo Martinez
about food may ring at a lower pitch than it did a few short years ago. The food industry debacle will most likely continue.
Oil’s Labyrinth
Moving from food to fuel, corporate petroleum and the petroleum-based economy provide the natural resources that support our “nutritional”, food industry endeavors. Indeed, infusing our lives in the form of plastic, upholstery, fertilizer, and fuel, the same industry underwrites ballet, metropolitan symphonies, and of course presidential elections.
Sadly, the defining global event of the past six months has been the oil drilling accident that allowed millions of gallons of oil to gush into the Gulf of Mexico, unchecked, for many months. Those citizens who frequently call for less government and less taxation now pounded, fist-in-hand for more government involvement and accountability. In oversight mode, the government launched directives to BP to find a solution, cap the well, resuscitate decimated wildlife, compensate victims and provide specialized equipment to work at the 1 mile depth of the pulsing source of oil in the ocean floor.
Angered, frustrated, and demoralized Southern citizens watched as the delicate economic balance of the oil industry with Gulf of Mexico tourism, agriculture and seafood industry collapsed. Under the weight of its own negligence, British Petroleum deepwater drilling now symbolizes all that is wrong with a head-in-the-sand approach to global reliance on petroleum.
2007 Oiled seabird in San Francisco Bay
The undersea images of pulsing oil, the twisted carcasses of intelligent marine mammals like dolphins, oil-smothered endangered pelicans and a devastated oyster industry are more than adequate fodder for apocalyptic levels of outrage.
End of Part I
Allison Addicott is a writer and editor. She serves as a managing editor and writer at The Washington Times Communities. Her work also appears at BalkingPoints.com.






Without engaging in the neck-bending volleys of finger-pointing between the administration, the BP gang and the public, the latest news from the White House is a kind of updated “access dashboard” for those who seek to volunteer or locate a job working on the frontline of the recovery and repair process, wherever that kind of position might send a person.

The powers at work include, here, the federal government’s broad response – using over 20,000 people, BP’s corporate “team”, the oversight roles played by Janet Napolitano and Kenneth Salazar, and the independent scientists attempting to obtain data and offer analysis. Landry affirmed her role as a public servant – separate from corporate concerns – with a devotion to bringing information as transparently as possible to all parties.

Recent Comments