This is on Bill's reply to my reply: > > Peter said: > > >I am all for asceticism, frugality, "more soul" and such > >for the well-to-do folks <in _both_ First and Third Worlds> > >as you know <!>, but doesn't a solution based on > >getting people to adopt moral consumption patterns > >presuppose the myth of consumer sovereignty? > > well i see no inconsistency. No, there is no inconsistency--I'm FOR rational, ethical consumption. But my point was that one cannot realistically--not logically, but realistically--expect to achieve this worthy goal, or expect a consumer choice strategy to work effectively in the absence of tackling corporate control of marketing, media, etc. As Bill notes: > CS is usurped by the capitalist supply-determined demand imperative > and info is denied by the glitzy advertising I said: > >Yes we need more asceticism, more rational consumption, > >but for that we need to tackle transnational capital > >directly, not just rely on our "marketplace freedoms" Bill replied: > I don't know how i can tackle multinational capital directly > as Bill. Aw, c'mon Bill--don't be so modest! > i can stop buying their goods (which if we all did would > have an effect) and i can lie under bulldozers (which if we all did > would have an effect) or other group actions. That's right--group actions, POLITICAL actions, some of which would be aimed at changing consumption habits, but some of which must be aimed at restraining <ultimately more than just restraining> corporate power over people's lives. > also, remember chile. it is hard to take over the interests of capital. > eventually they get mean (after imposing economic hardship) and bring out > the guns. so if we are going to do it directly then maybe we should be the > ones in the militia (a point paul c. has already pointed out. I'm all for class struggle--but violence must be confined to self-defense in extreme, last resort situations. Things are bad and getting worse, but I think there's still some way to go before we get to that point in Europe, North America, or even OZ. Think of the progress made in restraining corporate power from, say, 1900 to 1970 without mass bloodshed, at least in the First World. We've regressed since 1970, but we can start again, and from a starting point that is still better than where we were in 1900. Cheers, Peter Burns SJ
