| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
Conspicuous Consumption and the Environmental Movement |
|
<
< | Comments welcome (and appreciated!) |
>
> | Comments welcome (and appreciated!) -- please poke as many holes in my argument as you can find; I'd like to know where the weaknesses are. |
| | |
|
<
< | Working outline
- Accepting that Veblen's tehsis is correct, ow can the environmental movement survive in a world of conspicuous consumption |
>
> | First Draft |
| | |
|
>
> | Premise: if we accept, for argument’s sake, that Veblen’s thesis in The Theory of the Leisure Class is correct, how can the environmental movement hope to survive in a world of conspicuous consumption? |
| | History of the Environmental Movement |
|
<
< | - Gained mainstreem awareness with Silent Spring
- Remained mostly a fringe movement for the next 40 years
- Now, is cool to be eco-friendly (proliferation of eco-friendly household products, cars, organic foods, etc) |
>
> | Although the environmental movement has existed in one form or another for the past 150 years, it, for the most part, remained a fringe movement. While at times certain issues would capture popular attention, those issues inevitably faded from public consciousness. |
| | |
|
>
> | In the last few years, however, the environmental movement has seemed to have been thrust into the forefront of national attention. While Michael Moore has traditionally excited the public much more than Al Gore, Gore’s environmentalist PowerPoint? presentation, An Inconvenient Truth grossed more total than Moore’s Sicko. Sales of Toyota’s “green” car Prius have stayed high, despite a slow auto market overall. The sales of organic goods, such as organic coffee, steadily continued to rise. Even Wal*Mart now offers “earth friendly shopping." |
| | The Taste of Eco-Friendliness |
|
<
< | - Eco-friendly products are less of an example of a movement, and more an example of upper-middle class taste. Has all of the trappings of what Veblen discussed in his section on taste |
>
> | The increased prominence of environmentally-friendly products may at first seem to signal a new way of living, but in actuality “green consumerism” can be likened more readily to a change in taste than a change in lifestyle. Comparing Veblen’s descriptions of “taste” to green consumerism shows how apt the comparison is. |
| | |
|
<
< | - Makes items more expensive w/o becoming more useful (Veblen 50) |
>
> | In his chapter on “Pecuniary Canons of Taste,” Veblen notes that the most valued objects will be those that have added expense, but no added usefulness (Veblen, 50). That description fits many eco-friendly products perfectly. Organic towels , for example, cost more than five times as much as non-organic towels, but they don’t soak up water any better. |
| | |
|
<
< | - Showing one's values through consumption habits (not a new practice) (Veblen 51)
- Perfect example of what Veblen meant when he discussed the love of hand-crafted items. Now is a sign of not just beauty, but political awareness. Link: Pottery Barn tables (Veblen 55-6) |
>
> | Eco-friendly products are a popular taste not merely because they are more costly, but also because they are a way of signaling one’s superior values, another element of a successful consumption habit (Veblen, 51). By owning organic towels you’re not only signaling that you have the money to spend on a $30 dollar towel, but also that have the knowledge and savvy to buy such a politically-correct item. |
| |
Failings of Eco-Friendly Products |
|
<
< | - Environmental problems aren't just caused by consumption of the wrong things, they're caused by consumption in the first place
- Many enviro-friendly products are still worse for the earth than no product at all
--> Eco-friendly cleaners are still a waste of plastic, and not really that necessary to begin with
--> Organic tables still hurt the environment if they wind up in a landfill after 10 years |
>
> | While green consumerism has made “environmentally-friendly” a trendy catchphrase, it is up for debate whether it is actually that, well, environmentally friendly. Part of the problem is that the earth isn’t just harmed by certain kinds of consumption, it is harmed by high levels of consumption of any product. While environmentally-friendly products may well be better for the environment than their alternative, they’re still much worse for the environment than buying no product at all. It’s all well and good to get an energy-saving television, for example, but even the most energy-efficient appliances use some energy (even when turned off). Moreover, in a culture of conspicuous consumption, old “green” products must continuously be thrown out so that new ones can be consumed. The earth is helped very little by a landfill that’s filled with organic products, instead of non-organic ones. |
| | Harnessing Conspicuous Consumption |
|
<
< | - How do you get people to consume less if conspicuous consumption is really what makes the world go 'round?
--> It's much easier to change people's taste than to make more fundamental changes (Veblen 88)
- Still, environmental movement may be able to channel the forces Veblen describes to its own ends
--> Institutions change in reaction to external stimuli (Veblen 83, 84)
--> That change is usually in response to a stimulus that is economic in nature (Veblen 85, 86)
- Cost of gas is rising |
>
> | So whatever is the environmental movement to do? If green consumerism is not enough to stop global warming, what can be done in a world so fixated on conspicuous consumption? In fact, it may be possible for the environmental movement to yet channel the forces Veblen describes to its own ends. |
| | |
|
<
< | - When the water tables dry up water will become expensive |
>
> | Veblen notes that, while institutions are loath to change, they sometimes must in response to external circumstances (Veblen 83, 84). Usually, that change is in response to an economic stimulus (Veblen 85, 86). Such an economic stimulus is on the horizon, if it is not here already. With a rise in the cost of natural gas, it is become increasingly expensive to heat one’s home. The world’s water supply is shrinking, which will cause increased food and water costs. The cost of gas has risen dramatically in the last few years, and there is little indication that prices will go back down. While Americans have seen some of these costs before, the costs have always been temporary. This time it seems that the high prices may be here to stay. The time is right for the environmental movement to bring about institutional change. |
| | |
|
<
< | - Heating costs will rise |
>
> | Of course, people will shrink from any scheme of life that is alien to them (Veblen 89). Thus, any change will need to seem as familiar as possible in order to find acceptance. The environmental movement will be most successful if it attempts to reinstate conspicuous consumption of time: that is, try to re-emphasize conspicuous leisure. |
| | |
|
<
< | - People will decry any shift in behavior that is too alien to them (Veblen 89) |
>
> | Conspicuous leisure has all of the elements to be just as successful as conspicuous consumption. People are able to display their wealth through how much time they can afford to waste, instead of how many useless items they can afford to buy. Community gardening, washing dishes by hand, and ironing shirts (instead of dry cleaning them) all take time, and are not particularly productive (as evidenced by the fact that there is a less time-consuming alternative to all three activities). |
| | |
|
<
< | - So let people have their conspicuous waste, but emphasize wastes of TIME, not of goods -- try to shift back to conspicuous leisure |
>
> | Conspicuous leisure also allows for hierarchies of taste, since how you spend your time is as much of a marker of your wealth as the fact that you spent it at all. Just as it is a marker of class to buy organic sheets, so, too, can it be a marker of class to wash those sheets by hand. |
| | |
|
<
< | - We've already seen conspicuous leisure. It's not too foreign, and retrogression is easier to achieve than progression (Veblen 86) |
>
> | Conspicuous leisure is an plausible alternative not just because it allows for a way to appeal to people mired in a culture of conspicuous waste. It also is familiar: people have been practicing conspicuous leisure for centuries. The need is not to create a new form of conspicuous waste out of whole cloth, but to put increasing focus on an already-existing form of conspicuous waste. Veblen notes that retrogression is easier to achieve than progression (Veblen 86). Since conspicuous leisure is already familiar to most people, it won’t be difficult for them to revert back to it. |
| | |
|
<
< | - Can help the environment by attempting to get people to stay away from buying products they don't need |
>
> | Changing the focus from conspicuous consumption of goods to conspicuous consumption of time may not seem like a large change, but even seemingly small changes in the structure can have far-reaching effects (Veblen 88). And, granted, hordes of people working in community gardens eliminate global warming any less than hordes of people buying organic produce. But any shift away from consumption of goods will help the environment. At the very least, it’s a pretty good start. |
| | |
|
<
< | - Can also channel wastes of time to environmental ends: Community gardens, washing clothes by hand, etc. See: No Impact Man |
| | |