(Yes, this post IS on topic!)

The book "The One Straw Revolution" about Masonobu Fukunobu (sic?)
is a great classic. Note, the book is written by one of his disciples
(that my
not be the correct word there).

I just got done reading "Instinctive Eating" by Zephyr, and found it
interesting.
It introduces many ideas about using instinct to guide food and life
choices.  There are several points do not agree with and think I have
better ideas.

First, I agree that eating more natural and raw food is a better
health
choice in an ideal world.  Also other life choices by instinct is a
good idea.

The problem with his approach is that you must define what is
"natural"
which circles back to the fundamental identity question, "What is
Man?"

If you decide that Man is simply an ape, then his book is correct.
There
is then no morality, choices in food, sex, culture, etc. can be simply
made
by "what you feel is right".

If you believe that man is a child of God (I do) , then what is
"natural" is far different.
1.) Sexual promiscuity as promoted in his book becomes a "un-natural"
      choice.  In fact moral purity is then the natural and best mental
health
      way to live and promotes a deeper and more natural love.  In
fact, the
      life style and value promoted in this book are incredibly self
centered.
2.) Social structure becomes important and the need to live "in the
world
     but not of it" becomes very important.  The relationship between
people
     becomes not a purposeless "monkey tribe in the jungle" existence,
but
     one of a united humanity and striving toward world peace, and
individual
     inner peace.
3.) [And why this IS on topic] Food choices must be framed within #2
above,
     you can't be a recluse and just live isolated on some island.  The
real
     world intrudes and must be dealt with.  Despite utopian dreams
(yes I
    have a few too) there are evil people in the world that do and will
continue to
    wreck the world for the rest of us.  In fact Zephyr only lives the
life he does
    under the umbrella of the United States' technologic and military
umbrella.
    There are many groups in the world that would love to kill him
because of
    how he chooses to live and don't because of that umbrella.
    In my own personal case, I can't abandon a wife and 6 kids to go
live a
    utopian dream, nor would I want to.  Thus food choices must be
reasonable
    and prudent and in the context of the whole world situation.

Not only would I not want to become isolated from the world (OK,
living
in Utah is a little isolated. "Welcome to Utah USA, please set you
watch
back 30 years") but instead would rather live fully in the world and be
an
example and worker to help make the world a better place.

Also, my long term food storage (in case of earthquake, social unrest,
war etc....)
is not paleo.  It is wheat, beans, dried pasta, canned food, etc.
because it is
cheaper that way and because a all paleo food storage would be brutally

expensive and impractical.

Oh, well, enough of that part.

Secondly,
I think that ultimately during the millennial reign of Christ,
we will all grow our own food, live at peace, and be truly
instinctive and in harmony with God.  I think life then will be
an interesting mix between ultra-advanced technology and
natural farming and living.  Till then, lets not
be isolated, but work together toward that goal.

It seems to me that the people that have the most influence
on the world for good are those that choose the correct balance
between idealism and pragmatism.

R. Keene