Sugar and the Sweetly Murderous Trait of Modernity We all know that sugar is bad for us, more or less, but how much else do we ignore about this substance, and what are the threads that intertwine its vicissitudes with those of our modernity? When we talk about sugar, we're referring to sucrose, a disaccharide, a simple, sweet-tasting, water-soluble carbohydrate composed of glucose and fructose. Carbohydrates, however, are the starches in flour, which are water-insoluble polysaccharides and lack a sweet taste. The dictates of a healthy diet dictate that polysaccharides provide up to 35-50% of daily energy, while simple sugars should account for 5-10% of daily energy needs (this is about 5-10 teaspoons, the same amount contained in a can of Coke or a glass of fruit juice). This is because simple sugars cause a sudden rise in blood sugar levels, followed by the production of high amounts of insulin. Repeated use of this mechanism predisposes to the onset of diabetes. But this isn't the only consequence. Sugar is a true drug that activates the dopamine system and creates addiction, as the manufacturers of chips, snacks, and ultra-processed foods know well. They fill them with sugar and fat to create a craving for them. Sugar consumption also causes a progressive loss of minerals, with consequences ranging from osteoporosis to kidney stones, to name just a few. As if that weren't enough, excess sugar predisposes to obesity, cardiovascular disease, fatty liver disease, and tooth decay.
Moreover, sugar, in addition to affecting daily habits, has also impacted production models, trade routes, and colonial systems. The history of this substance is ancient. Its production, from sugarcane-Saccharum officinarum-seems to date back to 8000 BC in New Guinea; the first written records of its use come from India. In the 3rd century BC, Indian and Persian merchants brought it to Arabia and Egypt. With Arab expansion, starting in the 7th century, its cultivation extended to the Mediterranean basin. Shortly before the year 1000, sugar arrived in the Republic of Venice, and with the Crusades, it reached the courts of Northern Europe. At that time, the quantity of sugar in circulation was low; it was considered a spice and sold in pharmacies. Its cost was so high that it was reserved only for sovereigns and nobles. In 1400, Spain and Portugal, to free themselves from dependence on the East, transferred its cultivation to their North African possessions and the Atlantic islands. But a turning point came when Columbus took it to America, where sugarcane plantations spread rapidly, favored both by the climate and by colonization. It was in those lands that a pattern of behavior was implemented that has remained unchanged to the present day: the colonizers, specifically the Europeans, exploited the natives to the point of extermination to take over the land where they had lived in harmony for thousands of years, exploiting its resources until they were exhausted, before moving on to a new territory. At the end of the 16th century, sugar production shifted from the Mediterranean to the New World, where, to meet the high demand for labor, African populations were forced to relocate to the tropical regions of the Americas. Thus began the slave trade. To produce, sell, and eat sugar, the land was rendered sterile, animal and plant species were destroyed, and entire populations were kidnapped, tortured, mutilated, and exterminated, forced to work at a hellish pace. So much so that sugar production, in the 17th century, is considered by some authors to be the first form of industrial production. At the same time, in the West, sugar consumption increased from less than 2 kilos per capita annually in 1700 to 8 kilos at the beginning of the 19th century, and finally reached 35-40 kilos today.
This, however, was not the only modus operandi of modernity. In fact, although sugar continued to be a luxury good, the increase in its production, especially from the 17th century onwards, when the Dutch, French, and especially the English entered the market, and the associated decrease in its price led to increased consumption and its spread to social strata that until then could not afford it. Production and consumption did not develop by inertia but rather because they were incentivized by a very specific economic policy aimed at concentrating power in the hands of a few, through the industrialization of production processes and the creation of new needs among the poorest classes. To give just one example, in the English navy in 1731 the daily distribution of a quarter of a liter of rum, a sugar by-product, was made official; by the end of the century, the amount was increased to half a liter, while in the same period, sugar distributions in poorhouses became free. The role of this substance thus becomes twofold: on the one hand, it involves the masses in the drug-fueled dream of modernity with access, albeit limited, to substances previously reserved for the elite, and on the other, it makes living conditions more bearable, having worsened with the spread of the first processes of industrialization. Nothing new under the sun, we might say, given that the use of substances to enhance performance, quell dissident movements, and enable the logic of exploitation underlying capitalism are the same ones widely employed during the twentieth century and still used to facilitate the unfolding of everyday life: we take them to work, study, have fun, sleep, wake up, have sex, reproduce, or not reproduce. Substance use has become commonplace, even though it is demonized by the superficial moralism of respectable public discourse. What better way to promote the loss of individual and collective meaning of existence, the elimination of confrontation with limitations, the denial of the world outside ourselves and of all that appears different, than addiction to a system of rapid, widely available, and cheap gratification? And what does it matter if it's a pleasure that requires the plundering of the world, the destruction of many for the benefit of a few, the annihilation of the imagination. But are we really sure that practicing it is beneficial to us?
Brunella Missoric
http://www.sicilialibertaria.it/wp-content/uploads/aprile2026_compressed.pdf
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten