Hence, this afternoon I tried something a little different with my Google searches, and here's a little of what I found. I hope you'll take some time to read these pieces. They are interesting, and, if not necessarily convincing, at least show another perspective.
First off is farmer Blake Hurst, who wrote in The American (Thursday, July 30, 2009) an article in response to Michael Pollan's Omnivore's Dilemma which he called "The Omnivore's Delusion: Against the Agri-Intellectuals." He makes an interestingly powerful case, the basic premise of which is that "farming has always been messy and painful, and bloody and dirty. It still is. This is something the critics of industrial farming never seem to understand." Check out his arguments and let us know what you think.
Next, this article which appeared in Foreign Policy in June of 2010: "Attention Whole Food Shoppers." Writer Robert Paarlberg suggests that we "stop obsessing about arugula. Your 'sustainable' mantra -- organic, local, and slow -- is no recipe for saving the world's hungry millions." This very interesting article about solving global hunger will give you pause about what's right and what's wrong. (Anna Lappe directly refutes Paarlberg in Zester on July 21, 2010 in her article "Debunking Myths About Agriculture.")
More on global hunger from Jay Rayner, a British writer writing in The Guardian in September 2010. Rayner's article, "Big Agriculture is the Only Option to Stop the World Going Hungry," warns that if we are to survive the coming food security storm, we will have to embrace unashamedly industrial methods of farming.