Law in Contemporary Society

View   r9  >  r8  ...
KalliopeKefallinosSecondPaper 9 - 23 Apr 2010 - Main.KalliopeKefallinos
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="SecondPaper"

The Conspicuous Consumption of Food and Babies

Line: 84 to 84
 Hi! I just happened to read over this, so I thought I'd respond to some of your comments so I can get your feedback on them. Regarding the organic food movement, my whole point is that the goal of the movement as practiced does not support people eating healthier. It supports all this economic stuff you've laid out. I am saying, IF that was the goal, then something is very wrong. (And I am using Veblen to expose one way to conceive of that wrong.) I think if you asked the average person what the goals of the movement are, the primary one would be people eating better. (This point along with environmental concerns were the main goals of the hippies who started the movement in the 70s.)
Changed:
<
<		You're same economic argument would seem to also apply in the adoption case, to which I would give the same response. My analysis is multi-discplinary-- and while there is an economic argument, that's not what I'm trying to expose. Does this make sense?
>
>		Your same economic argument would seem to also apply in the adoption case, to which I would give the same response. My analysis is multi-discplinary-- and while there is an economic argument, that's not what I'm trying to expose. Does this make sense?
 -- KalliopeKefallinos - 22 Apr 2010
Line: 98 to 98
 I'll continue this! I'm just throwing things out there.

-- JessicaGuzik - 22 Apr 2010

Added:
>
>

Yeah, I tried to use Veblen as a lens and propose my own solution. I think de-objectification is a good solution, and it seems like the only way to get that to happen would be through re-educating people how to think about what they eat. I also think wealthy Americans should stop using weak countries as baby factories-- either adopt the children that are available or don't adopt at all. The demand is creating a new market, where poor families have an incentive to give up healthy newborns for money-- does this seem OK to you? Besides education, do you have any ideas?

This last tirade of mine connects to the positive effects point you make. I don't think there are any positive effects which would justify the system as is. The child becomes an object of commerce for the psychological benefit of wealthy Americans. The actual orphans (both domestically and abroad) are for the most part being left behind for newborns. What's happening is the perpetuation of America's subjugation of countries like Ethiopia. There is no "right" to have a family.

-- KalliopeKefallinos - 23 Apr 2010

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->

# * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, KalliopeKefallinos


Revision 9r9 - 23 Apr 2010 - 03:29:44 - KalliopeKefallinos
Revision 8r8 - 22 Apr 2010 - 23:44:19 - JessicaGuzik
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM