There is nothing more impotent than the consumer and the concept of "consumer advocacy" perpetuates that impotence. For instance, workers at a factory suffer various inhuman attacks against their rights to unionize, are frequently intimidated etc. What do the "consumers" do? They boycott. A boycott is more likely though to harm the workers you are acting in solidarity with though. For instance, take the Coca Cola boycott. Who would be harmed by a boycott, billionaire Coke or workers who are laid off due to falling profits? The concept of consumerism also creates myths which help to disguise the true problems in society. Who is the consumer? The consumer is both bourgeois and proletarian. Obviously the bourgeoisie has a greater consumer power than the proletarian although the proletariat form the numerically vast majority of the consumers. Thus consumerism puts the bourgeoisie at the fore of the proletariat and demands class collaboration. This is unacceptable because the bourgeoisie have an interest in leading the proletariat to their own demise; to strengthen their grip over these slaves. The really powerful individual is the producer, not the consumer. The actually ACT which destroys the proletarian, which strengthens the bourgeoisie and which robs from man the products of his labour is in the act of production. This is where we need the revolution, peaceful or otherwise, to take place. It is in production where we find the division of labour where the worker is reduced to nothing more than a tool. It is here from which things acquire "prices" and are reduced to this price, and all the subsequent solemn feelings of urban alienation are derived. By consumer, and placing it in opposition to producer, you disguise the concept of class. The opposite of producer is not consumer, it is capitalist.
if the consumer didn't consume the product the producer couldn't viably produce it, consumer advocacy is trying to stop consumers from consuming piss poor products thus crippling supply and demand, it works if consumers listen and advocates aren't corrupt
"if the consumer didn't consume the product the producer couldn't viably produce it, consumer advocacy is trying to stop consumers from consuming piss poor products thus crippling supply and demand, it works if consumers listen and advocates aren't corrupt" I like the way you put in "viably" there, nice. Of course the producer could continue to produce, that however is neither here nor there. Equally, it seems, it is not the aim of all "consumer advocates" to stop the production of piss poor products. Some of them have higher aims, evidenced by the poorly paid migrant farmworkers thread and others. I am not simply addressing people who are only concerned about the volume of ice cream they get in their bucket. But a note too to them: why do you get ripped off on half of your purchases? thats the wrong question. why did the capitalist order his workers to make that item you purchased? did he want you to enjoy that icecream/clothing/whatever? no, of course he couldnt care a less, he hast got to eat/wear it! This commodity was produced for nothing more noble than exchange. In capitalism production takes the form of production for the purpose of exchange. In a truly natural human (communist) society, production would be for the sole purpose of consumption! Anyone can see that supply and demand doesnt work to sort out the desirable from the undesirable, only the profitable from the unprofitable. It is a sad fact that people will continue to consume rubbish (see my thread in astrology about commodity fetishism). So in fact you will be better addressing the problem again by fighting the entire capitalist system! This fight, for previously explained reasons, is one in which the opponents are found to be divided in the quarters of production and not consumption. I am quite aware that the consumers I am addressing are not just of one sort but are workers and capitalists alike. I know too that the capitalists have no interest in taking the fight to the domain of production instead of consumption. btw, i love what you've done to the sunflowers
if the producer is the one who is seperating the classes how do you change that? It's eays to say that a revolution needs to happen but it's harder to go about one. I try my best not to consume from coporations as much as possible, but living in a small town there aren't that many independent stores that i can go to, so what would you suggest?
My point is that, like you say, capitalism is virtually ubiquitous. The problem though is not with the machines, tools and materials that a corporation uses but the actual social relations that exist between worker and capitalist. The bare bones of a new, better society are already latent within this society. The only thing that needs to be done is for the workers to obtain political power. I suggest that you give workers solidarity and support them in their struggles against their employers and that you should also agitate for action against big business and all their various institutions. This is not boycott action but strike action and political engagement. It is class war.