- Possible paper topic: environmentalism and conspicuous consumption - the reality of a movement that wants people to consume less, but may only survive by relying on its own brand of consumption -- AmandaHungerford - 26 Mar 2008

Want to talk about paper ideas? Umm, we'll figure something out?

There's not enough here to inspire any particular kind of comments. But since you used the word "consume" a lot, it reminded me of a question from class today, which is, How do you identify "waste"? I think (unfortunately) that a big factor is when OTHER people think someone else doesn't have "enough" of that thing. But then, what's "enough," after all? I don't want to fall into the trap of using "wasteful" to describe others, when I really should be calling myself "jealous." [One man's conspicuous consumption is another man's private grudge.]

My assumption was that the function of conspicious Wastefulness, since it's a sign of power, sends a signal, "You should be my friend." But that feels mutually exclusive with its creating jealousy -- "I am your enemy; rob me." Uggh. Is it?

AndrewGradman - 27 Mar 2008

This is an interesting idea Amanda. I'm curious what kind of insights you might come up with by framing the ethos of the environmental movement in the context of Veblen's theory. Like, maybe it's not really about consuming less at all. Environmentalists are conspicuous in their own right; it's seems like green appliances and shade-grown coffee have become status symbols of a sort. I think you're very right that the movement may just be a repackaged brand of conspicuous consumption. I wonder what that means about the future of environmentalism, or how it will affect its ostensible goals? Anyway, sorry for sort of rambling, but yeah, I think this is a great idea and I'm really interested to see where you take it.

-- JuliaS - 27 Mar 2008

Amanda, I'm curious as to whether Julia is accurately restating your idea as "the movement may just be a repackaged brand of conspicuous consumption." If not, I apologize for getting this Veblen skepticism off my chest on your paper page and I definitely look forward to reading your take.

"Green" is definitely fashionable lately, but that's a broad brush with which to tar the environmental movement. There are certainly still (less commercially-successful) parts of the movement which don't emit clouds of smug.

More broadly: Veblen is bombastic and exciting to read, but once he's brought out the shiny hammers of conspicuous leisure and consumption everything starts to look like a nail. This isn't exactly an original thought.

Maybe the environmental movement, in general, if there is such a thing, is just an environmental movement. Maybe there's self-interest or at least self-congratulation at work, on some level, but we already buried that discussion.

Maybe (at least some) higher learning is for the sake of learning, for the sake of gaining a qualification, or for some other less exciting purpose than showing off.

As I read your possible topic, though, the environmental movement itself isn't necessarily a conspicuous anything, but it might thrive only because of its attachment to conspicuous new offices and Priuses and fair-trade venti soy lattes.

-- DanielHarris - 27 Mar 2008