| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
|
|
>
> | Conspicuous Consumption and the Environmental Movement |
| | |
|
>
> | Comments welcome (and appreciated!) |
| | |
|
>
> | Working outline |
| | |
|
<
< | - 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 |
>
> | - Accepting that Veblen's tehsis is correct, ow can the environmental movement survive in a world of conspicuous consumption |
| | |
|
<
< | 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.] |
>
> | History of the Environmental Movement |
| | |
|
<
< | 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? |
>
> | - Gained mainstreem awareness with Silent Spring |
| | |
|
<
< | AndrewGradman - 27 Mar 2008 |
>
> | - Remained mostly a fringe movement for the next 40 years |
| | |
|
>
> | - Now, is cool to be eco-friendly (proliferation of eco-friendly household products, cars, organic foods, etc) |
| | |
|
>
> | The Taste of Eco-Friendliness |
| | |
|
<
< | 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. |
>
> | - Eco-friendly products are less of an example of a movement, and more an example of upper-middle class taste. Has all of the trappings of what Veblen discussed in his section on taste |
| | |
|
<
< | -- JuliaS - 27 Mar 2008 |
>
> | - Makes items more expensive w/o becoming more useful (Veblen 50) |
| | |
|
>
> | - Showing one's values through consumption habits (not a new practice) (Veblen 51) |
| | |
|
<
< | 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. |
>
> | - Perfect example of what Veblen meant when he discussed the love of hand-crafted items. Now is a sign of not just beauty, but political awareness. Link: Pottery Barn tables (Veblen 55-6) |
| | |
|
<
< | "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. |
>
> | Failings of Eco-Friendly Products |
| | |
|
<
< | 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. |
>
> | - Environmental problems aren't just caused by consumption of the wrong things, they're caused by consumption in the first place |
| | |
|
<
< | 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. |
>
> | - Many enviro-friendly products are still worse for the earth than no product at all |
| | |
|
<
< | 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. |
>
> | --> Eco-friendly cleaners are still a waste of plastic, and not really that necessary to begin with |
| | |
|
<
< | -- DanielHarris - 27 Mar 2008 |
>
> | --> Organic tables still hurt the environment if they wind up in a landfill after 10 years |
| | |
|
>
> | Harnessing Conspicuous Consumption |
| | |
|
<
< | Hi All, |
>
> | - How do you get people to consume less if conspicuous consumption is really what makes the world go 'round? |
| | |
|
<
< | Sorry I wasn't more specific earlier, I just jotted the above down as a note to myself between classes so I didn't forget what I was thinking by the end of Con Law. |
>
> | --> It's much easier to change people's taste than to make more fundamental changes (Veblen 88) |
| | |
|
<
< | More specifically:
Based on our class discussion yesterday, I was thinking about trying to use Veblen to analyze the "successes" and "failures" of the environmental movement (although I share Daniel's concerns about the dangers of applying Veblen to every situation). |
>
> | - Still, environmental movement may be able to channel the forces Veblen describes to its own ends |
| | |
|
<
< | Based on my (admittedly limited) knowledge of the environmental movement, environmental concerns reached widespread popular knowledge in the sixties with Silent Spring. Despite that, environmentalism remained a fringe movement until recently, when suddenly it's very cool to be "Green." So what changed? Sure, the environment is rapidly deteriorating, but it was fifty years ago, too. I think one explanation is that environmentalism has recently become consumable. You can pay double for your organic food and your free-trade coffee, signalling to others both moral superiority and economic superiority. |
>
> | --> Institutions change in reaction to external stimuli (Veblen 83, 84) |
| | |
|
<
< | Possible places I might go with this:
- Look at how conspicuous this consumption might be. E.g., Do people buy recycled envelopes, or recycled envelopes with "made from recycled paper!" written on the back.
- Should the environmental movement embrace this phenomenon? Isn't a large goal of the environmental movement getting people to consume less? In order to be successful, should it try to get people to consume, not less, but differently?
- How does this tie into Veblen's ideas about who reacts to change (the middle class) and who resists (the upper and lower classes)? Who is willing to pay more to be green?
- Perhaps tie this back to Veblen's discussion of charitable donations, although that might be biting off more than I can chew. |
>
> | --> That change is usually in response to a stimulus that is economic in nature (Veblen 85, 86) |
| | |
|
<
< | While writing this paper, I also want to keep in mind the fact that the environmental movement is not a unified movement (by any means), and that in a lot of areas it's not even environmentalists who are pushing Green products. Clorox is coming out with a new line of "green" products, but I don't think anyone will accuse them of loving the earth. |
>
> | - Cost of gas is rising |
| | |
|
<
< | Thanks for all the comments. If anyone else has ideas with where I can go with this, or criticisms of the places I'm thinking about going, I'd welcome all comments. Also, you all should know that I consider myself an environmental activist (whatever that means), so let me know if I'm not keeping my biases in check. |
>
> | - When the water tables dry up water will become expensive
- Heating costs will rise
- People will decry any shift in behavior that is too alien to them (Veblen 89)
- So let people have their conspicuous waste, but emphasize wastes of TIME, not of goods -- try to shift back to conspicuous leisure
- We've already seen conspicuous leisure. It's not too foreign, and retrogression is easier to achieve than progression (Veblen 86)
- Can help the environment by attempting to get people to stay away from buying products they don't need
- Can also channel wastes of time to environmental ends: Community gardens, washing clothes by hand, etc. See: No Impact Man |
| | |
|
<
< | -- AmandaHungerford - 27 Mar 2008 |
| |
This Time Magazine article, "The Clean Energy Scam," is somewhat tangential, but it reminded me of your paper topic. The demand for farm-grown fuels, it seems, is beginning to have negative environmental impacts. |