4 ms·

Someone, somewhere out there is selling designer or artisanal-crafted dumpster diving shoes "for the very best comfort and agility during your homebrew solid-wa

Someone, somewhere out there is selling designer or artisanal-crafted dumpster diving shoes "for the very best comfort and agility during your homebrew solid-waste recovery activities."

heavenlyblue 2y ago
I was following this guy on instagram that makes the most amazing dumpster miniatures. Together with miniature trash that you can put in and out fo the dumpster.
- andyjohnson0 2y ago
  Just needs miniature dumpster diver figures and the commoditisation is complete
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Somehow I'm not even surprised. Train watching/spotting and train miniature making are both popular with overlapping communities, and apparently there is a smaller but still extant community of people who are big fans of garbage trucks in the way that others are with trains. Dumpsters seems like a natural extension of that. Incidentally, train fandom is definitely commodified, but I think not to the consternation or detriment of those into trains. I wonder why some subcultures are at odds with commercialization of their interests while others are at peace with it.
moomin 2y ago
U2 literally employ a stylist who buys their clothes from second hand clothes markets. An incredibly expensive way of supporting a “no consumption” aesthetic.
- protonbob 2y ago
  They are still consuming less natural resources and someone is sharing in their wealth. I don't see the problem here.
  - namaria 2y ago
    Any demand pull will ultimately increase consumption of resources at the end. There's no ethical consumption under capitalism. The only thing that works is consuming less. Pretending like there is a way to do it only opens up avenues for guilty-free consuming.
    - bluefirebrand 2y ago
      > There's no ethical consumption under capitalism I've seen this catchphrase thrown around a lot online, but I've never seen anyone explain how consumption becomes any more ethical under any other system without leading to other systemic problems "Consume less" seems to imply that any consumption is unethical by default. If that's the case, then the only way to consume ethically is by minimizing consumption This seems like a reasonable stance, but it leads to other problems. Who gets to decide how much is enough? If each individual decides for themselves, then we clearly have a problem because some people will never be satisfied. If everyone lets them continue, then they will hoard resources for themselves. This is sort of the situation we're already in However, if we have the group (community, society, country, whatever) decide "how much is enough", then we have to have a group mechanism for making that decision, like a council, or government department Then we need another group mechanism to enforce it, police, courts, etc. "Ethical consumption" becomes very authoritarian very quickly If the idea is "We could have ethical consumption if people would just consume less" then you don't even have a starting point because "people will never just So feel free to consume less if you think that's more ethical. That's what I try and do, myself. But I know that I cannot simply expect others to do the same, and I also don't really have any interest in policing how much others are allowed to have
      - namaria 2y ago
        Runaway consumption is bad. But it increases profits quarter after quarter. You're right, people will not give it up. Neither those who want to consume more and more, nor those who profit from and foment that cycle. Consumption under capitalism is therefore a problem, because it creates and reinforces rampant consumerism, which is destroying the habitat. We will drive society all the way into the ground before we give that up. I understand that. But I will not contort my mind into convincing myself it is either natural or ok.

Someone, somewhere out there is selling designer or artisanal-crafted dumpster diving shoes "for the very best comfort and agility during your homebrew solid-waste recovery activities."

heavenlyblue 2y ago

I was following this guy on instagram that makes the most amazing dumpster miniatures. Together with miniature trash that you can put in and out fo the dumpster.

andyjohnson0 2y ago
Just needs miniature dumpster diver figures and the commoditisation is complete
lupusreal 2y ago
Somehow I'm not even surprised. Train watching/spotting and train miniature making are both popular with overlapping communities, and apparently there is a smaller but still extant community of people who are big fans of garbage trucks in the way that others are with trains. Dumpsters seems like a natural extension of that. Incidentally, train fandom is definitely commodified, but I think not to the consternation or detriment of those into trains. I wonder why some subcultures are at odds with commercialization of their interests while others are at peace with it.

moomin 2y ago

U2 literally employ a stylist who buys their clothes from second hand clothes markets. An incredibly expensive way of supporting a “no consumption” aesthetic.

protonbob 2y ago
They are still consuming less natural resources and someone is sharing in their wealth. I don't see the problem here.
- namaria 2y ago
  Any demand pull will ultimately increase consumption of resources at the end. There's no ethical consumption under capitalism. The only thing that works is consuming less. Pretending like there is a way to do it only opens up avenues for guilty-free consuming.
  - bluefirebrand 2y ago
    > There's no ethical consumption under capitalism I've seen this catchphrase thrown around a lot online, but I've never seen anyone explain how consumption becomes any more ethical under any other system without leading to other systemic problems "Consume less" seems to imply that any consumption is unethical by default. If that's the case, then the only way to consume ethically is by minimizing consumption This seems like a reasonable stance, but it leads to other problems. Who gets to decide how much is enough? If each individual decides for themselves, then we clearly have a problem because some people will never be satisfied. If everyone lets them continue, then they will hoard resources for themselves. This is sort of the situation we're already in However, if we have the group (community, society, country, whatever) decide "how much is enough", then we have to have a group mechanism for making that decision, like a council, or government department Then we need another group mechanism to enforce it, police, courts, etc. "Ethical consumption" becomes very authoritarian very quickly If the idea is "We could have ethical consumption if people would just consume less" then you don't even have a starting point because "people will never just So feel free to consume less if you think that's more ethical. That's what I try and do, myself. But I know that I cannot simply expect others to do the same, and I also don't really have any interest in policing how much others are allowed to have
    - namaria 2y ago
      Runaway consumption is bad. But it increases profits quarter after quarter. You're right, people will not give it up. Neither those who want to consume more and more, nor those who profit from and foment that cycle. Consumption under capitalism is therefore a problem, because it creates and reinforces rampant consumerism, which is destroying the habitat. We will drive society all the way into the ground before we give that up. I understand that. But I will not contort my mind into convincing myself it is either natural or ok.