Tom:

<< does the community of raw fooders constitute a movement?  Yes and no - it
 is a collection of small groups that simultaneously compete with, and to a
certain extent, cooperate with one another.>>

Probably a political science background would help answer this question, but I
certainly don't have one. I guess I've always thought of a movement as an
organized effort to make social change. So I guess my question was, is there a
"social-change movement" (as opposed to a few isolated voices like the NFL)
with the purpose of promoting raw-food eating?

<< Why foster a movement?  Well, certainly not to promote the "cult of 100%
 raw" - that describes the immature fanatics. >>

Why then call it a raw-food movement, or have raw food specifically be the
focus? I'm not saying that there shouldn't be ... I'm just trying to clarify
in my own mind exactly what the best focus of a health-food movement should
be.

<< Because raw diets are a legitimate tool for good health, when used
appropriately, such diets can be of benefit to people. >>

Yes, but what about people that cannot or should not eat raw, because their
digestion can't handle it, or for whatever other reasons? Tom - don't get me
wrong here - I am a long time raw eater myself, and try in my work to
encourage people to include as much raw food in their diets as makes sense for
them. I also enjoy "movements" - and have spent most of my life at the heart
of various movements that I have believed in, helping to get them off the
ground, and to give them momentum and organize them and give them life and
energy and vision and focus. So, the reason I am asking is to try to get a
picture in my own mind of what a raw-food movement could look like.

<< So, a moderate, non-fanatical movement, oriented towards health and healing
>>

How do you see the focus of such a movement - what would you see the 'message'
of such a movement as saying, and what would be its agenda?

<< ........(and not fanaticism, slogans, and self-righteousness)....... The
slogan quoting fanatics are just the lunatic fringe of raw, and can be
ignored. >>

Yes - these types are foolish, don't speak for many, have no longevity, and
don't constitute any kind of a movement.

Looking forward to your thoughts.

Love, Liza

[log in to unmask] (Liza May)