Anti-Consumerism Movement

Consumerism is not a perfect phenomenon, and the other side has described very compelling potential problems with consumerism. But nothing is perfect, and I would like to spend some time to bring up the alternatives.

I am a firm believer that history is our greatest teacher. An anti-consumerism movement is not a new phenomenon. It existed in all cultures, from the Japanese to Islamic to Catholic to Romans. Much of this takes the form of sumptuary laws, which aim to regulated against the expenditures of luxuries, particularly in food and dress. For example the male citizens were forbidden to wear silk and Shogun laws in Japan were notorious for imposing severe restrictions on dress by class. We see this today with uniforms in schools. What do all of these examples have in common? They are a means of social, religious or political control. After all, who gives the arbitrary right to decide what and how much to consume?

As a believer of personal liberty, how can a government have the right to decide what others may or may not consume? In history when a ruling body exercised this gross misuse of power, it only reinforced social hierarchy and discrimination. The bourgeoisie were famous for attempts at social oppression but limiting the ability for commoners to consume goods.

Alternatives to this in reducing consumption would require complete outlawing of consumerism (totalitarianism) or a change in human nature (communism/utopia). A third and final option may be to disconnect from society like Thoreau suggested. But people have always had the freedom to pursue this, as some even today have. Yet the vast, overwhelming majority don’t. Why not? It is because their choice has already been made. The benefits of society that stem from consumerism are too great to give up now, and so many billions in the world can only hope to reach this level.

Beyond personal liberty, consumerism has important implications for global justice, as Courtney has touched on in our...