The Foie Gras Wars and the Ideology of Contract

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. I suppose there’s surface irony there. But the actual ideologies that people hold across their lifespan(s) don’t tend to live up to the characatures that you find propagated on editorial pages, or loud mantras shouted by dissenting opinions.

    PETA is largely despised in mainsteam American politics, both among the liberals and the theocrats, due to PETA’s unfair advertisements and the controversial nature of their position. Moreover, even if it weren’t that way, you’ll likely find that liberals support (fair) free markets; and this helps motivate the disgust for oligopoly that you may find in this case.

    My take on it is that the law which allows one business entity such a large share of a national market is illegitimate and dysfunctional. However, once that is in place, the contracts which this entity makes are within its rights. If people feel stung, it’s because either a) they need to wake up to the wider reality of the situation, not because of some detail in contract law; or b) they see the law as a game of ideological chess instead of as a great machine whose parts that are meant to behave in specific ways.

  2. Nate Oman says:

    Benjamin: Well for a blog post, I will settle for surface irony ;->. FWIW, I actually don’t know if PETA is directly involved with the Whole Foods decision on foie gras.

  3. Jerry says:

    It’s a shame that a LIVER gets a bigger fight than an unborn human baby. What’s next, fruits and vegtables?