True, but missing the point. If you prove, convincingly, to a "locavore" that the stated benefits of their choices are in fact better achieved by (say) acquiri

True, but missing the point. If you prove, convincingly, to a "locavore" that the stated benefits of their choices are in fact better achieved by (say) acquiring all your food from Wal-Mart, will they thank you and be glad that they know this now? Of course not, they'll get angry. And that's because the actual desire for "locavore" eating is not about the stated benefits, it's about being able to feel superior to others. Now me, I don't see the point of this. But that's probably just because I have plenty of other reasons to feel superior to others. But if I were denied these then, heck, maybe I'd be tempted to engage in this sort of hair-shirt behaviour too. What I say is: let the baby have his bottle. If someone wants to feel superior to others due to whatever random harmless activity he's engaging in, then give him a pat on the back and try to avoid bringing logic and reason into the conversation. Everybody has a deep-seated psychological need to feel like they're better than others, and if denied this fairly harmless sort of outlet then these folks will start lashing out in other, probably more harmful, ways.