5 ms·

My understanding is that the "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" phrase is meant as a direct antithesis of the "liberal idea that there is no suc

by ATsch 9y ago

My understanding is that the "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" phrase is meant as a direct antithesis of the "liberal idea that there is no such thing as a systemic issue, it's just that the wrong people are in charge". It is, I feel, often interpreted as unnecessarily defeatist, but I instead interpret it not as that you should just give your money to the worst company you can because it's all evil capitalism anyway, but that these changes alone will not solve the underlying and inherent issues of the system. It's interesting that you mention these 'greenwashing' marketing tactics as well, as I have never really drawn a line between these two phenomena. I am always surprised to hear how many very smart and un-naive people fall for transparent tricks like this. It seems that, like Harley stating that they don't sell motorcycles, they sell a lifestyle, these companies could be said to sell neo-liberalism along with their products. No need to worry about the fact that a system where corporations are destroying the planet might not be perfect, I bought from a company that donated $100k to save the Orangutans once etc. Note also that the worshipping around Elon Musk is much the same thing, just for techies.

wickawic 9y ago
Nit: neoliberalism means different things depending on context, but it really doesn’t mean “new-fangled leftism”.
- wz1000 9y ago
  Neoliberalism(as leftists use the word) is used quite appropriately here. See Zizek: > Let’s turn to the high point of our consumerism. Let me take a drink. > Starbucks coffee. I’m regularly drinking it, I must admit it. But are we aware, that when we buy a cappuccino from Starbucks, we also buy quite a lot of ideology? Which ideology? > You know, when you enter a Starbucks store, it’s usually always displayed in some posters, their message, which is: “Yes, our cappuccino is more expensive than others,” but, then comes the story. > “We give 1% all our income to some Guatemalan children to keep them healthy, for the water supply for some Saharan farmer, or to save the forest, to enable organic growing for coffee, or whatever or whatever.” > Now, I admire the ingenuity of this solution. In the old days of pure, simple consumerism, you bough a product, and then you felt bad. “My God, I’m just a consumerist, while people are starving in Africa . . .” > So the idea is that you had to do something to counteract your pure, destructive consumerism. For example, I don’t know, you contribute to charity and so on. > What Starbucks enables you, is to be a consumerist, without any bad conscience, because the price for the countermeasure, for fighting consumerism, is already included into the price of a commodity. Like, you pay a little bit more, and you’re not just a consumerist, but you do also your duty towards the environment, the poor, starving people in Africa, and so on and so on. > It’s, I think, the ultimate form of consumerism.
  - wickawic 9y ago
    I was unaware that zizek called this form of consumerism neoliberalism. I was only aware of the economic definition of the term relating to Keynesian economics and deregulation and the like. The reason I piped up is because that definition is really more in line with American right-wing policies (although Democrats seem to have little issue getting on board...)
    - TremendousJudge 9y ago
      In America, "Liberals" are "The Left", while in other countries, "Liberals" are "The Right". Many internet discussions on economic policy fall into misunderstanding due to these types of terminology differences
      - fenwick67 9y ago
        Yeah the word "Liberal" is vague enough that it has a wikipedia disambiguation page with 12 different political idealogies. I refuse to use it and usually avoid conversations involving it because of how many things it can mean.
- ATsch 9y ago
  What makes you think that is what I think it means? I'm not a native speaker, perhaps I could improve that section a bit for future readers.
Faark 9y ago
> Note also that the worshipping around Elon Musk is much the same thing, just for techies. Huh, you mean Musk doesn't actually push R&D more than other car manufacturers / launch providers? Its only natural those marketing tactics work. Who the hell does have the time to research environmental impact when buying a $4 brush. Don't forget to also research its durability, health impacts, social ethics, and so on. Apart from "evil" gov regulations, consumer organizations can help you to at least some degree. But i doubt that is enough for a good society.

by ATsch 9y ago

wickawic 9y ago

Nit: neoliberalism means different things depending on context, but it really doesn’t mean “new-fangled leftism”.

wz1000 9y ago
Neoliberalism(as leftists use the word) is used quite appropriately here. See Zizek: > Let’s turn to the high point of our consumerism. Let me take a drink. > Starbucks coffee. I’m regularly drinking it, I must admit it. But are we aware, that when we buy a cappuccino from Starbucks, we also buy quite a lot of ideology? Which ideology? > You know, when you enter a Starbucks store, it’s usually always displayed in some posters, their message, which is: “Yes, our cappuccino is more expensive than others,” but, then comes the story. > “We give 1% all our income to some Guatemalan children to keep them healthy, for the water supply for some Saharan farmer, or to save the forest, to enable organic growing for coffee, or whatever or whatever.” > Now, I admire the ingenuity of this solution. In the old days of pure, simple consumerism, you bough a product, and then you felt bad. “My God, I’m just a consumerist, while people are starving in Africa . . .” > So the idea is that you had to do something to counteract your pure, destructive consumerism. For example, I don’t know, you contribute to charity and so on. > What Starbucks enables you, is to be a consumerist, without any bad conscience, because the price for the countermeasure, for fighting consumerism, is already included into the price of a commodity. Like, you pay a little bit more, and you’re not just a consumerist, but you do also your duty towards the environment, the poor, starving people in Africa, and so on and so on. > It’s, I think, the ultimate form of consumerism.
- wickawic 9y ago
  I was unaware that zizek called this form of consumerism neoliberalism. I was only aware of the economic definition of the term relating to Keynesian economics and deregulation and the like. The reason I piped up is because that definition is really more in line with American right-wing policies (although Democrats seem to have little issue getting on board...)
  - TremendousJudge 9y ago
    In America, "Liberals" are "The Left", while in other countries, "Liberals" are "The Right". Many internet discussions on economic policy fall into misunderstanding due to these types of terminology differences
    - fenwick67 9y ago
      Yeah the word "Liberal" is vague enough that it has a wikipedia disambiguation page with 12 different political idealogies. I refuse to use it and usually avoid conversations involving it because of how many things it can mean.
ATsch 9y ago
What makes you think that is what I think it means? I'm not a native speaker, perhaps I could improve that section a bit for future readers.

Faark 9y ago

> Note also that the worshipping around Elon Musk is much the same thing, just for techies. Huh, you mean Musk doesn't actually push R&D more than other car manufacturers / launch providers? Its only natural those marketing tactics work. Who the hell does have the time to research environmental impact when buying a $4 brush. Don't forget to also research its durability, health impacts, social ethics, and so on. Apart from "evil" gov regulations, consumer organizations can help you to at least some degree. But i doubt that is enough for a good society.