|
A proposal for Reducing Extravagant Consumption by Trevor Griffey |
Who is it that creates the large-scale contamination and destruction of most of the world’s ecosystems? Who uses the resources? Who eats the meat? Who puts pollutants into the air? Who puts trash in poor and predominantly minority inhabited neighborhoods? Who uses up the aquifers? Who homogenizes crops, uses pesticides, and erodes much needed topsoil in the process? Who makes the world’s poor suffer in the process? The world’s rich. In particular, almost all citizens of developed countries. Not just corporations. Not just governments whose values do not represent the country. But everyone. It is the ever-increasing demand for consumer goods in developed countries which, for all intents and purposes, is the cause of the environmental crisis.
The world economy is driven by the consumption demands of the wealthy. We are the wealthy. The multinational corporations which are so easily scapegoated as causing most of the world’s problems are only partly to blame. The US government, which often serves the interests of rich minorities at the expense of many of its own and most other nations’ citizens, is only partly to blame. Those who tolerate or support these corrupt, power-wielding institutions, i.e., the majority of US citizens, are very much accountable for the global state of the world.
Postmodernists might argue that there is no free, rational, individual choice for consumers or voters in the US, so blame should not fall as much on the American, European, or Japanese consumer, but on those who determine their consumption and voting patterns: rich elites in business, media, and government. To which I reply: who forces people to seek entertainment thousands of miles away from where they usually live (where did you go for spring break?)? Who forces people to drive instead of walk, bike, or use mass transportation? Who forces us to buy from companies which destroy rain forests or pollute? Who forces us to buy all sorts of shit that has almost nothing to do with a meaningful life, goods which will soon be thrown away? In short, why are the citizens of rich nations so wasteful--so environmentally irresponsible? Because of rich elites? Coercive advertisements? Cultural standards encouraged by corporations? Wasteful government policy and spending? To some degree, yes.
But culture is an interactive process. Just as much as we have a ridiculously extravagant and trivial culture based upon consumption habits which are inherited or forced upon us, we also shape it with our own consumption choices. Otherwise boycotts, reusing, conserving, and recycling are a waste of time: our lives are predetermined by experiences which elites tell us to have, and we have no freedom of thought; we can only hope for someone else to have a revolution and replace old elites who tell us what to do with new, more benevolent (sic) ones. Individual action, however negligible, is partially responsible for the environmental crisis, and hence must be a real part of the solution.
That said, all are to some degree empowered to help change the world in their everyday lives. If consumer demand drives energy use, natural resource use, and hence much of the polluting and destruction of the world’s environment, and the US’ consumption is extremely high, we have an obligation to reduce our own consumption in every aspect of our lives.
The sustainable development movement and some admittedly fluffy self-help organizations call action toward consumption reduction "voluntary simplicity." The principle behind the movement is that our standard of living is not based on the money we earn, how much we spend, or the kind of access we have to consumer goods. To buy something is to travel somewhere, spend time shopping, pay money and sometimes even incur debt, and then return home with this good. It requires having space for the good, which costs additional money; using the good or wasting the consumption; and maintenance of the good, which entails some mixture of time and money. Consumption of any good or service is thus really quite an investment--one in which people not only own what they possess or do, but what they possess or do owns their time and money.
This does not imply that all consumption is a ridiculous burden. Rather, it shows how too much consumption makes one a slave to working in jobs that pay extraordinarily well, in having a big house, a car that can hold lots of stuff, and requires the use of leisure time, turning leisure into another time of obligations which can make one busy or miserable. The words "too much" are key. With consumption having a negative element, we should buy only that which is of great value to us.
Ask yourself whether you truly need something every time you buy it. Need does not mean life or death, but whether the thing is important. You will certainly recognize the total frivolity and waste in American society in the process. For everything in our country is on sale: almost all our holidays revolve around buying something for someone else; our entertainment has become consumption-based and not interactive; advertisements are everywhere; art and even personal greeting cards are now purchased; some people even hang out in malls. On a personal level, you will probably find something that you could just as easily live without. The goal is not to throw everything out, but to become aware. With more time and careful attention to consumption, one will naturally consume less, and one’s consumption will mean more. And actions which consume less are not only better for the environment, but encourage people to be more self-affirming --to act on impulses to create rather than buy what has already been created and marketed for you.
OK. Voluntary simplicity sounds stupid and fluffy. It sounds like common sense that won’t change anything, that is a distraction from the real matter at hand, i.e., the environmental crisis. But then ask yourself this: how much clothing do you have? How much music do you have? What do you do when not in Middletown? What have you thrown away over the past couple days? When you say there’s nothing to do, what are you looking for? What do your parents own? What do you do for friends on birthdays or during winter holidays? Think of more immediate forms of consumption as well. Think about your use of natural resources. Do you drive to school? To Main street? Do you take the elevator rather than walk three flights of stairs? Do you use your own mug, silverware, or plates on campus? Do you double side your academic papers? There is no right or wrong answer for these questions, but one should be able to justify one’s actions with a clean conscience.
Voluntary simplicity does not deal with major political issues. But it serves to emphasize that there may be an enormous gap between what the world’s rich actually need and what we buy. As long as we don’t recognize this gap, we have little incentive to recognize our own, more personal complicity in the environmental crisis, and could very well be making ourselves miserable in the process. World governments need serious reform. Our industries need to be more environmentally responsible. But people’s mundane habits need serious reform as well. We buy too much, and what we buy, we don’t use efficiently. Voluntary simplicity will not change the world, but no change can be made until we stop flying and driving all over the world; until we recognize that financial security depends upon what we consider necessary in our lives more than on the amount of money we have; or until we recognize that we do not merely own possessions, but in many real ways, they own us.
There will be a garbage pile up to commence Earth Week in front of Olin on April 27. I suggest you go.|
Amount of garbage produced every day in the US: Enough To Fill the New Orleans Superdome Twice Amount of pollution and toxic leaching produced by a landfill receiving 1000 tons per day of waste: 22,000 lbs. After a landfill closes, it is estimated that emissions could remain constant for as long as: 30 years In the last five years we have closed 1/3 of our land fills. Within the next five years we must close another 1/3. We are beginning to burn the garbage; this creates horrible air pollution and is not an acceptable solution. |