Simplified Chapter 2:
To understand the food on our plates today, we have to start further back than anyone might expect. We have to trace the origins of a mindset—a way of seeing the world that changed when we started to separate ourselves from the ecosystem, viewing ourselves as elevated above the plant, animal, and seasonal world around us. This underlying shift made later extraction and processing techniques seem not just logical, but desirable.
The simple solution is to eat real foods, closest to the ground—the most delicious, nutritious, and science-backed way to eat. But for centuries, this approach was treated as 'less than' more sophisticated dishes, profoundly shaping our perception. Luckily, real food offers a win-win-win: beauty, taste, and deep nourishment, often with an amazing story that helps us see through the idea we've been sold about food.
Words as Living Fossils
A useful starting point for understanding this power shift is to look at our own food words. Language is a living fossil that reveals lingering prejudice against "simple" foods—prejudice that has more to do with conquest than nutrition.
When Julius Caesar raided Britain in 55 BC, he deemed the locals "barbarians," his journals dripping with disdain for their simple way of life. Though he never conquered the island, his contempt for "crude" northern peoples set a precedent that would echo for thousands of years. The pattern was clear: Mediterranean "civilization" looked down on northern "simplicity."
Fast forward to 1066 AD. The island of Britain was now home to the Anglo-Saxons—Germanic tribes with a rich culture, formidable in battle, but still dismissed by continental Europeans as unsophisticated. The Normans (Viking descendants who had settled in northern France and adopted French language and culture) saw an opportunity.
On October 14, 1066, at the Battle of Hastings, history pivoted on a single day. After hours of brutal fighting, with the [Germanic] Saxon shields holding firm against repeated assaults, the [French] Normans came up with a new strategy: they feigned retreat. A fake-out. The Saxons, thinking they had won, broke formation, when the Normans wheeled back and slaughtered them. England's fate was sealed. By nightfall, the island had new masters.
The Normans ruled for the next two hundred years, but (Latin based) French remained the language of power, law, and sophistication for the next three hundred years. English as we know it emerged from this island—two languages, two distinct people, living side by side for half a millennium- hardly interacting in daily life. The ruling class spoke French. The workers spoke Germanic English. And crucially, they had to speak to each other. You cannot run an estate without communicating with the people who tend your animals and harvest your crops.
The Class System Baked Into Your Vocabulary
What resulted is a language where the power dynamic is literally embedded in the words we use for food.
Germanic words remained for the basic ingredients and the work of raising them:
Cow, pig, sheep, chicken, deer
Milk, bread, apple, water
Work, help, eat, drink
French words took over for the refined dishes and the pleasure of consuming them:
Beef (bœuf), pork (porc), mutton (mouton), poultry (poulet), venison (venaison)
Dine, sauté, blanch, cuisine itself
Refined, gourmet, sophisticated
The peasant raised the cow. The lord ate the beef.
Germanic people did the labor in the fields. French aristocrats enjoyed the results at the table. The animal had a Germanic name when it was alive and a French name when it was cooked. This wasn't an accident—it was a linguistic map of who had power and who didn't.
Even today, we unconsciously reinforce this ancient bias. We say "refined" and mean superior. We say "simple" and mean lesser. We describe processed food as "sophisticated" and whole food as "basic" or "rustic."
“New” meant “better”, while “traditional”, once “wise”, was now “improved” upon.
We've inherited a value system built not on nutrition, but on conquest. We were forced to forget our shared past to glorify the new power.
The Irony Science Reveals
Science now affirms the wisdom of simplicity. Less processing means more nutrients. Less heat means more phytonutrients and vitamins survive. The foods closest to the ground—the ones our ancestors ate, the ones that built strong bodies and sharp minds—are nutritionally superior to the "refined" dishes that came to symbolize status.
The [Germanic] Anglo-Saxons eating their porridge, their bone broths, their sour apples and roasted meat and roots were doing just fine. The elaborate French preparations that buried food under sauces and sugar, removing it from its natural state were not superior, necessarily, they were just different- the foods of people with enough wealth and time to complicate something for the sake of mouth feel.
Yet, even those 'complicated' European cuisines often retain a connection to real ingredients that American food has lost. Many Americans traveling to France or Italy find they can enjoy bread, pasta, and rich foods without the negative effects experienced at home. Why? Because European food, despite its own history, often still relies more on traditional preparation, real fats, fewer pesticides (many banned by their governments), and less industrial processing than the standard American diet.
In a way, we are still eating according to a power dynamic established by conquest a thousand years ago. We've been taught to reach for the ready-to-use “refined” white flour over whole grains, processed "convenience" over real cooking, "gourmet" packaged foods over simple vegetables. Food manufacturers have exploited this linguistic prejudice brilliantly, slapping words like “heart healthy” on foods that clearly do not deserve the title.
Meanwhile, the foods that actually nourish us—bone broths, organ meats, fermented vegetables, whole grains, seasonal produce—have been dismissed as peasant food, old-fashioned, too simple for modern, educated people.
It's time to see this bias for what it is: a lie we've been sold that serves profit, not health.
The "simple" foods our ancestors ate weren't inferior. They were optimal. And reclaiming them—choosing the cow over the factory, the whole over the refined, the real over the processed—is an act of rebellion against a system that has literally been broken since 1066.
Expanded Chapter 2: How We Got Here
To understand the food on our plates today, we have to start further back than you might expect. We need to trace the origins of a mindset—a way of seeing the world that changed when we started separating ourselves from the ecosystem, viewing humans as elevated above the plant, animal, and seasonal cycles that sustain us. This underlying shift made later techniques of extraction and industrial processing seem not just logical, but desirable.
The simple solution to a healthier relationship with food is to eat real foods, closest to the ground—the most delicious, nutritious, and science-backed way. But for centuries, this approach was treated as 'less than' more sophisticated dishes, profoundly shaping our perception. Luckily, real food offers a win-win-win: beauty, taste, and deep nourishment, often with an amazing story that helps us see through the ideas we've been sold about food.
A useful starting point for understanding this power shift is to look at our own food words. Language is a living fossil, revealing a lingering prejudice against "simple" foods—a prejudice rooted in conquest.
Words as Living Fossils: The Battle Baked Into English
When Julius Caesar raided Britain in 55 BC, he deemed the locals "barbarians," his journals dripping with disdain for their simple way of life. Though he never fully conquered the island, his contempt for "crude" northern peoples set a precedent: Mediterranean "civilization" looked down on northern "simplicity."
Fast forward a thousand years to 1066 AD. The island was now home to the Anglo-Saxons—Germanic tribes, formidable in battle, but still dismissed by continental Europeans as unsophisticated. The Normans (Viking descendants settled in France, adopting French language and culture) saw their chance.
On October 14, 1066, at the Battle of Hastings, history pivoted. After hours of brutal fighting, with the Saxon shield wall holding firm, the Normans faked retreat. The Saxons broke formation to pursue. The Normans wheeled back and slaughtered them. By nightfall, “England” had new masters.
The Norman French ruled England for the next two hundred years, and French remained the language of power, law, and sophistication for an additional hundred years. English as we know it emerged from this pressure cooker—a mutt of Latin-based French (the rulers) and Germanic English (the workers).
You can force people to do many things under new rulers, but it's hard to change what they call their food. The words that survived tell a story:
Germanic words stuck for the basic ingredients and the work of raising them:
Cow, pig, sheep, chicken, deer
Milk, bread, apple, water
Work, help, eat, drink
French words took over for the refined dishes on the aristocrat's table:
Beef (bœuf), pork (porc), mutton (mouton), poultry (poulet), venison (venaison)
Dine, sauté, blanch, cuisine itself
Refined, gourmet, sophisticated
The pattern is stark: The peasant raised the cow. The lord ate the beef. Germanic people did the labor; French aristocrats enjoyed the results. The live animal kept its Germanic name, while the French name is presented on menua. This provides a linguistic map of power embedded in our daily language.
Even today, we unconsciously reinforce this ancient bias. We say "refined" and mean superior. We say "simple" and often mean lesser. We describe processed food as "sophisticated" and whole food as "basic." We've inherited a value system built on conquest, not nutrition.
Here's the infuriating irony: Science now affirms the wisdom of simple. Less processing means more nutrients. The foods closest to the ground—the "simple" foods dismissed by conquerors—are nutritionally superior. The Anglo-Saxons with their porridge, bone broths, and roasted roots were eating optimally. The elaborate French preparations weren't inherently better; they were just the foods of people with the wealth to complicate things.
This linguistic class system didn't stay frozen. By the 1900’s, food manufacturers exploited this bias brilliantly. "Refined" white flour sounded better than whole grain. Processed foods became symbols of "convenience" and "modernity." Even the idea of Home Ec in schools was paid for by food companies to help share how to used these newly processed foods in our kitchens. Meanwhile, the foods that actually nourished us—bone broths, organ meats, fermented vegetables—were dismissed as peasant food, old-fashioned, too simple for educated people.
We are still eating according to a power dynamic established a thousand years ago. It's time to see this bias for what it is: a system serving profit, not health. The "simple" foods weren't inferior; they were optimal- they held power. Foods held power that EMpowered its people and threatened the ruling class. Reclaiming them—choosing the cow over the factory product, the whole over the refined, the real over the processed—is an act of rebellion against a system broken since at least 0 BC/AD.
Science now proves what traditional cultures always knew, and what our own language tried to tell us all along.
Wisdom in Traditional Cultures
Upon more digging into old journals with modern research tools, we learn that native people, wherever they lived, maintained close ties with the earth. The gods were the sun and moon and rain. Foods were understood as sacred, and integrally connected with life and the changing seasons. These same gods could not be seen as powerful, since they challenged other beliefs in the divine. So their gods, and foods, had to be diminished.
We should look to people that were able to sustain communities for thousands of years (like Egyptians and Native Americans and Hawaiians), to understand how to live truly sustainably on the same land, over many generations, to help solve our modern food crisis. We still have not figured out how to live intelligently on our land so we are not just extracting, and ruining the earth for the next generations- even with all our science and technology.
Because as native cultures were overtaken, their insights were overlooked. Their “primitive” nature and cooking techniques were not marvelled over, they were mocked. We are lucky if any of their wisdom survives. Even today, some descendants remain, and it is up to us to listen, and even learn their languages, to understand this ancient world view that may help us understand ourselves even more today.
This dismissal of 'simple' wasn't just linguistic; it meant ignoring profound wisdom. Traditional cultures, those sustaining communities for millennia (like ancient Egyptians, Native Americans, Hawaiians), held deep knowledge about living with the land, not just extracting from it... Their insights were overlooked, their 'primitive' techniques mocked, precisely because they didn't fit the 'civilized' model of dominance
Of course, the extraction (and history lesson) does not end there.
Extraction as Old as Empire
Rome provided a blueprint for extraction- one that many still use today, unknowingly.
Rome relied on extracting wealth from conquered people to feed its own citizens. It was a parasitic technique- its own land could not supply enough food for its growing population. It relied on its vassal states to pay for its wars of expansion, but also to extract food. Its greatest jewel of conquest was Egypt, which funded its "bread and circuses" with Egyptian grain and gold.
The problem with an extractive technique in land management, was that, as more destructive modes of farming are used, the less sustainable it becomes. We see one culture after another going to waste as we observe plundered, extracted, and laid it to waste.
Caesar in Egypt
We come again to Caesar in Egypt to see a moment when Rome had a choice. Two first two Roman Emperors (if you want to call them that), both Caesar and Marc Antony, proposed partnership with Egypt. But extraction won out. The third: Augustus chose extraction, leading to Egypt's cultural erasure. (Even Augustus was not called Emperor in his day, yet is considered the first. Caesar is effectively the first ruler after the Republic, and killed for trying to be sole ruler, which Augustus won through brilliant manipulation).
Both first rulers of the new Rome had children with Queen Cleopatra of Egypt. But once the Queen, and Caesar, and Marc Antony (and their children) were killed, Egypt's grain, gold, and glory flowed to Rome like a broken hose.
Temples were defaced, traditions outlawed. Within generations, Egyptians forgot their own language. Hieroglyphics, a 3,000-year-old writing system, died out. (Only the elite 5% could read and write this “language of the gods”. Not even the Greeks, who ruled Egypt for 300 years after Alexander the Great, would NOT be taught it).
The last known inscription dates to 394 AD at a Temple of Isis - a mother goddess, mother of the Sun god Ray/Horus (giving us words like sunRay, REIgn of a queen, REYes, and HORIZon), and even imagery that is strikingly similar to another Mother with divine Sun/Son in the Roman world.
Old religions and food celebrations don’t vanish easily. Their removal requires laws and executions, loss of life, as well as plundering of the land. When Rome outlawed ancient religions and scattered the religious leaders, knowledge vanished. Ways of living sustainably disappeared. Egypt suffered cultural amnesia until the Rosetta Stone offered a key nearly 1,800 years later.
The Roman historian Tacitus recorded an anti-Roman speech given by a Caledonian (Scottish) chief: "They create a desolation and they call it peace".
Rome perfected the template: Conquer. Extract. Erase. Rename. Control. Give people amnesia. Archeology suggests at least 25 cultures vanished in its rise.
In another example, Rome renamed Judea to "Palaestina" after the Jewish people revolted over brutal rule in 135 AD, deliberately using the name of their ancient enemies, the ancient Philistines (Peleshet in Hebrew, meaning "invader") to sever the Jewish people's connection to their homeland. Hebrew as a language was outlawed, and effectively went extinct for 200 years, surviving only through conscious effort in private religious study.
Out of Rome grew Roman Catholicism. When the Western Empire fell, the Church carried the template of extraction forward.
Two letters from the Vatican Pope may have even given direct approval for countries to initiate the slave trade and permission for conquering new territories.
Two famous Bulls (essentially LAWS for Christians): Dum Diversas (1452 AD) and Romanus Pontifex (1455 AD) provided moral justification for European powers to invade, and turn to slaves, anyone who would not convert to Christianity.
This was official Church doctrine authorizing the transatlantic slave trade and centuries of colonialism. Wherever European empires went, missionaries climbed into the first boats, often suppressing indigenous languages, burning sacred texts (like Mayan libraries), demonizing traditional religions, and replacing diverse foodways with colonial agriculture- often to extract wealth for the ruling class. All under the explanation of “saving their souls”.
The Pattern Repeats: Britain, America, and the World
Britain inherited Rome's dominator mindset.
Once Britain took control of India, the once global powerhouse of cloth and spices, was forbidden from using its own raw goods. Britain made it illegal for Indians to produce finished goods from their own cotton. Raw materials flowed to British factories; finished products were sold back at inflated prices, leading to devastating famines and economic ruin. This led directly to Britain’s Industrial Revolution. I once looked up how the small island of Britain became a world power with so little local resources- it was through extraction of external colonies.
And this was official policy. The global drive for expansion, fueled by events like the fall of Constantinople (1453, the Christian loss of the once Roman Capital) disrupted trade so severely to those rich Indian and Asian sources, that led explorers across oceans.
America, breaking from Britain (only with French help), soon adopted the extraction pattern internally. Our nation was built on stolen land and stolen labor of americans, africans, and islanders of many oceans.
The idea of Manifest Destiny, to go from “sea to shining sea” was a direct byproduct of the European Pope’s allowance of domination under a religious excuse of divine right to rule.
The sugar industry, cornerstone of the processed food revolution, relied on slave labor until the 1960’s. In Hawaii, the largest shareholders of private land are descendants of the first missionaries who helped extract land and remove the sustainable indigenous agriculture (ahupua'a) for mono-cropping of sugar and pineapple plantations. This all left the islands dependent on cheap imported (processed) food and corresponding negative health outcomes.
This model continues globally. In parts of Africa, laws (often pushed by foreign powers) forbid farmers from planting their own native seeds, locking them into dependency on patented seeds that have to be purchased every year from global super powers. Locals are forced to grow and export foreign crops while they face hunger. The pattern is consistent: undermine self-sufficiency, create dependency, extract wealth.
Wars, Industrialization & the Addiction Playbook
The World Wars supercharged industrial extraction. America's boom coming from new manufacturing techniques, and newly invented chemicals pivoted to consumer goods:
Canola Oil: Industrial rapeseed oil (a lubricant for planes) was processed into an edible version and heavily marketed to displace traditional fats (like butter).
Pesticides: Derived from nerve agents (linked to Agent Orange), repurposed to kill insects, have been shown to cause cancer by disrupting our own gut microbiomes internally.
Processed Foods: Wartime needs promoted preservatives and artificial ingredients. Food was made to last on a shelf. Factories shifted from weapons to cereal. Apples like the Red Delicious were bred for shelf-life for 9 months and pesticide resistance, not flavor.
As Kurt Vonnegut said, "I'm sorry, we were drunk on petroleum."
The final twist came from Big Tobacco. Facing regulation (and bad publicity) in the 1960’s, they were hired into giant food companies (like Kraft and Nabisco) and brought their addiction playbook: engineer products that are hard to resist (find the "bliss point"), fund research that supports their needs (demonizing fat, ignoring sugar), market relentlessly (especially to kids), and lobby aggressively.
They taught us to count calories instead of nutrients, and we are still counting.
The Violence of the System & Food Justice
This entire system rests on violence, disproportionately harming marginalized communities:
Native Americans: Land theft, cultural genocide, extermination of native bison (that gave us our fertile top soil, now depleting), dependence on commodity foods all lead to catastrophic health (see diabetes in Havasupai tribes).
African Americans: Centuries of stolen labor helped build American wealth. Thousands of ships brought millions of people, who where were denied access to their own rich West African food heritage (greens, yams, legumes, fish). Enslaved people ingeniously created soul food from scraps. This survival cuisine, later corrupted by industrial ingredients and food apartheid (lack of access to fresh food), became intertwined with identity even as it contributed to health disparities rooted in systemic injustice, amplified by the systematic destruction of a cultural identity for centuries.
This pattern persists today: exploited farmworkers, food deserts, targeted fast-food marketing, global policies prioritize profit over health.
If we put children first, if we said our children’s health, no matter where the are from, was the main goal, everything would have to shift.
My Perspective
I explain this detail of history (our shared story) as not a critique of personal faith, but of how institutional power, often cloaked in religious righteousness, has historically justified systemic brutality and extraction. Understanding this pattern is crucial to seeing how our modern world treats our own food as it does.
I say this as someone who grew up Catholic but now finds more resonance in the intricate beauty in both science, and observations of the natural world. I see a design in natural systems—an innate rationality in our cells mirroring ecosystems, that is beautiful and useful. The reflection is so intricate between us and the natural world, that I could understand anyone seeing life as needing a blueprint- and as such, needing an original designer that could put something together so intricately. I see it all as a blend of magic and science- where scientists are awed at what they find in nature and ancient wisdom: fermentation enhancing nutrients, bone broth healing the gut, seasonal eating aligning with our biology.
Our Way Back Through Food
But food remembers. Food preferences, won in childhood, are deeply wired. Cultures hold onto recipes. Food words survive erasure—okra, yam, gumbo (West African); succotash, squash (Native American); bagel, knish (Yiddish); naranja (Arabic via Spanish). They are archaeological clues. Indian recipes of turmeric and pepper, heated over oil, enhance qualities of each of the ingredients in ways we now study in labs and process into supplements.
Because food remembers, and it offers a path back. Reconnecting with real food—simple ingredients, traditional recipes—is an act of reclaiming biology, culture, AND health. Our bodies recognize real food. Taste buds recalibrate (offering hope!). Flavor and nutrients realign. Cooking becomes an act of wholeness and cultural reclamation.
This history is heavy,. It can even be enraging. But seeing the design removes its power. It wasn't inevitable. It was not because “simple” was “lesser”- it was because native wisdom held power.
The modern system was designed for profit, not health. And it's not our fault. We cannot point fingers at anyone alive today for the mess we are in. We cannot blame our sons for the deeds of some brutal men in the past. But the solution must come from us. What was designed can be redesigned. We can demand real food again, even if it just in our own homes. Understanding how we got here is the first step in choosing who we want to be, one meal at a time.
Use the unprecedented freedom and access we have now.
Use it to set yourself free.
