5 ms·

> people need to take the rise of companies like amazon and really think hard Consumers don't think, they consume. Much like zombies. If you want consciousness

> people need to take the rise of companies like amazon and really think hard Consumers don't think, they consume. Much like zombies. If you want consciousness in the system that has to come from gasp government. But that would be against what we all stand for. And it will continue to win until there is some major paradigm change. It has nothing to do with any choices, and everything to do with consumer and corporate behavior.

_red 9y ago
>Consumers don't think, they consume. Much like zombies. Nearly every part of that statement is false. >If you want consciousness in the system that has to come from gasp government. So, the masses are too stupid to know where to buy toilet-paper, but they are intelligent enough to elect the right politicians whom will enforce the right regulations?
- nefitty 9y ago
  I avoid the cognitive dissonance of consumption by explicitly not thinking of the environmental and societal impact my purchases make. What is false about the statement, "consumer's don't think, they consume"?
  - johnny22 9y ago
    you're a consumer. Are you thinking or not? Seems like avoiding thinking about it means that you know it's a thing.
    - devoply 9y ago
      Well there is thinking and then there is thinking. Consumers on the mass consumer level, my self included, think about how we can get the most benefit from the limited amount of resources that we have. So how can I get good shit for the cheapest price. I am not concerned for instance about the global effect of my consumption or even local. That's how consumers in general think on the mass scale. Now you can say that this is not all consumers, but that doesn't really change the effects of their actions. Sure there are wealthy sub-genre of consumers that might think local. But that's not he mass of them. For a corporation like Amazon or Walmart to survive they only need the masses. The small minority of conscious consumers don't affect them... and even if they do, it's not as if lots of conscious consumers don't buy from Amazon and Walmart anyway, despite the fact that they might disagree with their business practices or business philosophy. Consumers in general in America and Europe don't care that much about these things... and even if they do massive corporations can buy other corporations and sell to them through that brand while still furthering their own business philosophy, business practices: example Whole Foods.
  - Govindae 9y ago
    >What is false about the statement, "consumer's don't think, they consume"? There exists at least one consumer/thinker.
    - sokoloff 9y ago
      Humans are bipedal and walk upright. IMO, that statement doesn't become "false" by the existence of an amputee or someone wheelchair-bound. Similarly, I believe the "consumers..." thought has relevance and information content even With awareness that there exists a particularly thoughtful consumer.
- Retric 9y ago
  There is a vast difference between a person and groups of people. If there was only one thing to ever get upset about then sure crowds would resemble people. The problem is everything has issues when you look close enough so you can only meaningful think about a tiny fraction of these isssues at a time. Net result Exxon did not even need to change it's name after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. BP, paid a fine and then moved on after causeing 10's of billions in dammages without any real consumer backlash. In part because which oil company are you going to turn to?
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  So, it turns out that voter-based democratic government may have some stumbling blocks as well: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/1/15515820/donald-trump-democracy-brexit-2016-election-europe https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/1/15515820/do...
- Jabanga 9y ago
  People spend more time on each of their consumer decisions than evaluating each of the items on a political candidate's platform (despite consumer decisions far outnumbering platform positions). Handing the economy over to government is eliminating individual agency and practically all semblance of accountability.

_red 9y ago

>Consumers don't think, they consume. Much like zombies. Nearly every part of that statement is false. >If you want consciousness in the system that has to come from gasp government. So, the masses are too stupid to know where to buy toilet-paper, but they are intelligent enough to elect the right politicians whom will enforce the right regulations?

nefitty 9y ago
I avoid the cognitive dissonance of consumption by explicitly not thinking of the environmental and societal impact my purchases make. What is false about the statement, "consumer's don't think, they consume"?
- johnny22 9y ago
  you're a consumer. Are you thinking or not? Seems like avoiding thinking about it means that you know it's a thing.
  - devoply 9y ago
    Well there is thinking and then there is thinking. Consumers on the mass consumer level, my self included, think about how we can get the most benefit from the limited amount of resources that we have. So how can I get good shit for the cheapest price. I am not concerned for instance about the global effect of my consumption or even local. That's how consumers in general think on the mass scale. Now you can say that this is not all consumers, but that doesn't really change the effects of their actions. Sure there are wealthy sub-genre of consumers that might think local. But that's not he mass of them. For a corporation like Amazon or Walmart to survive they only need the masses. The small minority of conscious consumers don't affect them... and even if they do, it's not as if lots of conscious consumers don't buy from Amazon and Walmart anyway, despite the fact that they might disagree with their business practices or business philosophy. Consumers in general in America and Europe don't care that much about these things... and even if they do massive corporations can buy other corporations and sell to them through that brand while still furthering their own business philosophy, business practices: example Whole Foods.
- Govindae 9y ago
  >What is false about the statement, "consumer's don't think, they consume"? There exists at least one consumer/thinker.
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    Humans are bipedal and walk upright. IMO, that statement doesn't become "false" by the existence of an amputee or someone wheelchair-bound. Similarly, I believe the "consumers..." thought has relevance and information content even With awareness that there exists a particularly thoughtful consumer.
Retric 9y ago
There is a vast difference between a person and groups of people. If there was only one thing to ever get upset about then sure crowds would resemble people. The problem is everything has issues when you look close enough so you can only meaningful think about a tiny fraction of these isssues at a time. Net result Exxon did not even need to change it's name after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. BP, paid a fine and then moved on after causeing 10's of billions in dammages without any real consumer backlash. In part because which oil company are you going to turn to?
dredmorbius 9y ago
So, it turns out that voter-based democratic government may have some stumbling blocks as well: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/1/15515820/donald-trump-democracy-brexit-2016-election-europe https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/1/15515820/do...
Jabanga 9y ago
People spend more time on each of their consumer decisions than evaluating each of the items on a political candidate's platform (despite consumer decisions far outnumbering platform positions). Handing the economy over to government is eliminating individual agency and practically all semblance of accountability.