that's not the argument, the argument is that proles shaming other proles for not buying nothing on buy nothing day is divisive and pointless
-
-
-
What is better: To utilize your alienation tokens to support the cause or to utilize your alienation tokens to support business as usual? If there actually is a difference, then perhaps there actually is such a thing as "ethical consumption" under capitalism.
-
buying conflict free vegan tube socks or whatever that are more expensive is liberal and not revolutionary, and this is coming from someone who does eat almost 100% organic due in part to medical reasons
-
That sidesteps my question entirely. We buy ideology. That's part of the game. But, guess what? "No ethical consumption" is just as much a part of consumer ideology as vegan tube socks. Also, organic for medical reasons??? Heh?
-
the reason capitalism is bad is because it denies people the necessities of a fulfilling life. to chide other working-class people for not being even more self-denying than expected of them by their economic conditions is smug liberal purity politics.
-
Commodity fetishism is more self-denying than asceticism. Conspicuous consumerism is more self-denying than community engagement. Consumerism is liberalist and alienating regardless if it's "ethical" or not. Also, are you an Owenite?
-
commodity fetishism isn't the fault of proles. blaming individuals for not being ascetic enough is empty moralism and presents capitalism as the fault of individuals for making bad choices rather than a systemic problem with a systemic answer.
-
So punching individual Nazis is good praxis but trying to make consumer choices which might hinder the most egregious capitalist institutions is just smug liberalism... because somehow punching individual Nazis is a systemic answer while altering consumption habits ain't?
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.