Getting Away From the Joneses

thrift or abundance

2011-03-16T19:19:00.000-07:00

Is thrift and abundance mutually exclusive? Can both be pursued with vigour? I think, yes, absolutely. Self-sufficiency should not be confused with austerity; frugality is not analogous with the good life. In fact, self-sufficiency is about making a better life. It is not about rejecting consumption, it is about controlling the means of production. Self-sufficiency, when it comes to homemaking, is all about production and consumption. But it is the home that becomes the factory and the family the workers. Very often the desire for better products, healthier food and ethical consumption drives the decision to pursue the self-provider ethic.

Would self-sufficiency have a place in a pre or post materialist world? I believe that self-sufficiency is as much a product of consumer capitalism as it a reaction against it. Very much the product of material abundance, self-sufficiency is dependent on ideas of choice, democracy and affluence.

2010-12-19T21:24:00.000-08:00

DIY Self Sufficiency

2010-12-19T21:05:00.000-08:00

Throughout the immediate postwar years ‘self-sufficiency’ meant ‘doing-it-yourself’ and ‘making do’ with limited resources not as a result of choice but necessity brought about by housing, material, product and labour shortages. From this earlier type of self-sufficiency two distinct lifestyles emerged. Marketers began to recognise the potential of ‘do-it-yourselfers’ as consumers and began to cash in with campaigns directed at young home-makers to entice them to buy a range of products from Laminex to paint. By contrast, the 1970s ‘back to the earth’ movement with its focus on self-sufficiency, organic gardening and sustainable living emerged as a response to dissatisfaction with mass consumption.

These two lifestyles continue to be promoted and adopted. There is a sharp contrast between the desires of aspirational ‘home-makers’ on the one hand and alternative life-stylers on the other. Alternative sustainable lifestyles – that reject the ideology of mass consumption – are in sharp contrast to the consumerist aspirations as presented in TV DIY shows ‘The Block' and ‘Better Homes and Gardens’, numerous glossy magazines and even more numerous retail outlets. This type of packaged DIY is not about self-sufficiency and sustainable living at all. What is evident is that there are philosophical differences between those who ‘do’ it themselves and those who ‘watch’ DIY being performed by professional TV personalities; between those who consciously reject over-consumption and those who remodel perfectly functional kitchens in order to maximise auction results by superficial enhancements of their homes.

Self-sufficiency and sustainable living is about making a conscious choice to really ‘do-it-yourself’, about setting and meeting challenges. But is also about a wider concern with lessening the impact on the environment by conserving resources, not just for one’s own family but the benefit of the whole community for now and the future.

Marketers and advertisers are certainly adopting buzzwords like ‘green’, ‘environmentally-friendly’ and ‘organic’. But self-sufficiency as adopted by alternative lifestylers remains outside marketing hype. Or does it?

THE NEW CRAFT

2010-10-27T16:00:00.000-07:00

Is the new craft the new consumerism? DIY (do it yourself) is no longer about making do but linked with making money.

Don't Buy - the only ethical choice?

2010-10-09T21:05:00.000-07:00

Is ethical/green/sustainable consumption is an oxymoron?

Since the 1970s, consumers have been told to 'reduce, reuse, recycle', yet these alternatives are often based on ways to reduce specific harms rather than presenting a serious challenge to consumer capitalism by reducing consumption per se. Most consumer information has been focused on encouraging consumption and alternatives are limited to reducing packaging, food miles etc. Little attention has been given to rejection of entire groups of consumer products and the mass consumption ethic. Most attention has been directed at boycotting particular brands such as Nike and Nestle in an effort to force companies to change their unethical practices. Not buying whole groups of products is the most ethical option and a real alternative to the potentially shallow and ineffective option of 'sustainable' consumption.

It is not a matter of trying to distinguish the ‘best of a bad lot’ – sometimes there are no ethical alternatives – so the only option is not to buy. There may be, for example, no ethical dairy products. There may be no ethical reasons for buying king-sized sheets, plasma televisions and bananas in Victoria.

Instead of trying to ascertain the merits of particular brands – whether products are actually organic, free-range, fair trade, the ethics of the company producing it (or its parent-company), how and where it was produced, it is perhaps simpler not to buy at all. Until governments get serious about labelling products to provide real information and until marketers stop co-opting ‘informative’ terms such as ‘eco’, ‘green’, ‘sustainable’ and ‘free-range’ in an effort to prey on consumer insecurities, consumer’s real power lies in not buying. Is McDonalds’ ‘Rainforest Alliance’ branded coffee an example of the company finally taking heed of consumer demands for ethical alternatives? Perhaps, but McDonalds – it wasn’t your coffee that was destroying rainforests – it was your beef production. Supermarket ‘Green Bags’ are still made out of plastic with very limited useful lives. Now consumers who have been convinced to ‘do the right thing’ pay for bags with brand-names on them. Are ethical alternatives just obscuring the real issues and obscuring consumer choice?

What do you think?

Abundance

2010-07-04T22:46:00.000-07:00

Today I've been reading and thinking about the domestic sphere, working outside the home and doing productive work at home. I'm attempting to reconcile independence and meaningful work, making a contribution and not doing harm. I'm reading Sharon Astyk's fabulous 2008 book Depletion and Abundance: Life on the new home front. Much to think about.

I'm wondering about why I work, why I want to work and why I don't. Ultimately I am trying to work out what the essentials are - the interconnections between luxuries and necessities and choice. What are the absolute necessities for a full and happy life? What can I give up and what should I include in my plan?

I'd like to know what you couldn't live without. I'm seriously thinking of never buying new consumer durables again. There is so much stuff, so much waste and so little real recycling. But I'm less clear about what should constitute necessary non-durables. I'll keep thinking; hope you do too!

Ethical Consumption

2010-07-01T10:12:00.000-07:00

As Australian consumers the abundance of goods available to us is almost unlimited. Although we want to make the best decision when we buy, our decisions are often made harder because we are spoilt for choice. How can we choose amongst so many brands offering such similar claims? It is, of course, possible to make better choices if we are armed with that age-old consumer adage ‘buyer beware’. We need to be aware that when we buy our decisions have far reaching consequences, not only for our hip-pocket but also for the people that produce the product and the environment. As consumers we can be more ethical in our decision-making if consider the following guidelines every time we make a purchase.

Do I really need it? How long will it last? Can it be reused?

Where was it made? Was it made in Australia? How far was it transported?

Who owns the company making the product? Does the parent company have an ethical or questionable history?

What is it made of and how was it produced?

Who made it and under what working conditions was it made?

How many times can I use it? Is the packaging recyclable or made from recycled material?

What happens to it when I throw it away? Is it recyclable or will it just contribute to land fill?

And finally

Is there a better – fair trade – alternative?