www.adbusters.org for those interested in a more progressive media

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Dec 25, 2003
12,356
218
0
70
#5
I am a firm believer in stopping or slowing overconsumption...I believe the process involved in learning conservation applies to a host of other social realizations we as Americans have yet to make.
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,356
218
0
70
#9
The start is the destruction of the American "individualist" ideal. Unfortunately for Bill O'Reilly, no man, or country, is an island. Our actions have reactions, consequences, etc. A "Me me me" ideal is not helpful if any way, for any group, over long periods of time. When conservatives laugh the concept of "global community" they lack even the vague notion that they are, unfortunately, a part. Unless their goal is to destroy the rest of the world with nukes, which we could be on a path to someday.

Step two is radical and increased environmental awareness.

Step three is a reduction in the purchase and consumption fast foods, microwave foods, McDonald's, and all the other unhealthy garbage that we can whip up in 30 seconds or less, as well as the reduction of meat consumption.

If any of these were to be achieved alone, I would be extremely surprised. Communism requires the same sort of awareness and no small degree of empathy, something completely alian to our society...so overconsumptionism and Communism face the same idealistic roadblocks...however I believe Communism is an even more radical paradigm shift and possibly even less likely to be achieved.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#10
“Environmental awareness” and “the destruction of the American "individualist" ideal” sound like nice ideas but how is that realistic? Consumption is not just the individuals of America, it is American companies. How can we tell private companies that they need to use less paper each year when the sole purpose of a company is to make profit? How can a company be concerned with issues like consumption and the environment when they themselves are trying to survive?

Step three is a reduction in the purchase and consumption fast foods, microwave foods, McDonald's, and all the other unhealthy garbage that we can whip up in 30 seconds or less, as well as the reduction of meat consumption.
Again, how? Do you know how many companies would go out of business? Is McDonalds going to help advertise that we need to eat less fast food?
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,356
218
0
70
#11
We need to bring the corporate behemoth to heel. Once we can work from this vantage point, the rest is possible.

And companies have shown that they will acquiese to environmental concerns if the threat to their profit is high enough. We need to demonstrate that you can make money while appealing to ethics and ecological sustainability if it represents a good enough boost in support by the people...

Companies and people have been out to make a profit since the beginning of time. Retraining this motive to me seems more of an impossible venture than an introduction of ethics and accountability.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#12
Yes, but again I don’t see how this can be possible in America. How can we get the corporate behemoth to heel? Is one president going to come along and viciously attack big corporations and pass all these reforms under our current system? How can that be? How can any of these changes seriously be implemented?

If any of these changes are made, as minor as they may be, corporations are going to loose money and corporations as you know, will do everything in their power to prevent that.
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,356
218
0
70
#14
The implementation of anti-corporate policy and public directive must come through an internal hegemony; namely, education. I honestly believe that a well-educated populace tends to shy away from conservatism, jingoism, and unfettered capitalistic goals.

What I believe must happen requires the same kind of paradigm shift in public opinion that would be needed to implement communism. Obviously no matter how noble a goal or directive an American socialist revolution is, it would fall flat on its face would it lack the support of a sizable portion of the populace.

Corporations as a whole are in no small way singular and self-serving. People recognize this to a small extent, but they also believe that corporations and business are (obviously) necessary for the survival of American economy. When people can be shown and truly understand the actions of corporations in pursuit of profit, their sense of justice and accountability will override pure capitalist price competition. Examples of this can be seen in liberal places like San Francisco and Seattle, where co-ops, small business, and ecologically sound practices are supproted en masse.

Liberalism, Secularism, and Holism always gain ground over time. Conservatives eventually lose the ideological battle 10 times out of 10. They were wrong on slavery, wrong on "race mixing", and wrong on the women voting. Gay people will eventually get married, Jesus will one day only be taught as religion, and those screaming in outrage over whatever Bill O'Reilly cause of the time will lose their voices, literally and figuratively.

What we need is a progression of the mind of the average American, and I believe it will come in time. The strange thing about this is it applies universally to both of what we champion - what are now considered "far-left" causes: socialistic policies, environmentalism, and corporate accountability.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#16
The implementation of anti-corporate policy and public directive must come through an internal hegemony; namely, education. I honestly believe that a well-educated populace tends to shy away from conservatism, jingoism, and unfettered capitalistic goals.
I agree that well educated people turn away from conservatism etc., however here in America and any other rich capitalist country, large business form monopolies and it would be impossible for the people to simply force these companies to be environmentally friendly or concerned about consumption or “override pure capitalist price competition.” That’s wishful thinking.

When people can be shown and truly understand the actions of corporations in pursuit of profit, their sense of justice and accountability will override pure capitalist price competition. Examples of this can be seen in liberal places like San Francisco and Seattle, where co-ops, small business, and ecologically sound practices are supproted en masse.
This is on a very minor scale. Here is Seattle some small business survive that do not have the large capitalist outlook, however Seattle is still controlled by the corporate giants; Starbucks, Microsoft, Boeing etc. All of these giants were at one point small local companies but the inevitable will always occur- they will only be concerned about maximizing profit. In order for companies to survive in America they must attract outside investment and in order to do so they must maximize their profit. If investors believe they can make a better return elsewhere, they will withhold funds, and the company will not survive. Investors will always shy away from “moral” companies or environmentally friendly companies because they know that they are not making as much $$$ as possible.

When these large companies grow, they are able to cut their costs by producing on a much larger scale and using their revenues to invest in new technology, doing business with other large companies etc. This gives the biggest companies a competitive advantage and allows them to become monopoly producers, which in turn drives their competitors out of business or in other words, the small companies (environmentally friendly etc.), these giants are then able to fix prices and wages for entire industries.

It’s much bigger than simply the masses being educated and trying to pressure large companies to comply with their code of ethics or whatever you want to call it. When entire industries are monopolized, there is nothing the consumer can do. (Protesting, boycotts, etc. will only go so far)

As you know, I believe Marx's idea of a planned, socialist economy would solve these problems. If the major industries and banks were publicly owned, then we as a society could democratically plan how to use our resources. Public ownership and democratic planning would allow everyone to have some input into these decisions. Rather than considering profit margins and market share etc. etc. etc., a system of democratic planning would consider how to use resources most efficiently to satisfy everyone's wants and needs, the environment, etc.

And yes, I agree, a massive paradigm shift in public opinion would have to occur. Where we disagree is that I don’t think we can realistically implement these changes under our current system. There’s too much money, the rich are too powerful to simply bow down to the masses and allow us to take their wealth. It’s never happened in the history of our planet.
 

shep

Sicc OG
Oct 2, 2002
3,233
2
0
#17
it is possible if we look at the world as ecosystems instead of economics. ecosystems include everything (including economics)

the problem is, changing everyone's view to that of an ecosystem perspective