Cute story, but not adequate, IMHO, for two reasons:
The country dweller did “engage in continuous acts of destruction”; the good of the final product doesn’t alter that fact. Whether that end justifies the means is a different question.
The country dweller makes bread that way because he has no choice. If he could, say, grow bread on trees, there would be no destruction of fields, no cutting of plants, no grinding, etc. The same end result wouldn’t require the destruction. But his country is not of his devising; he is limited by the constraints of a universe he cannot control. Unlike God.