From Occupythepress.org



Facing the problems the Occupy movement is trying to tackle, systemic problems in our government, corporate and financial structures, it is easy to feel overwhelmed and like there is nowhere to insert a wedge and make an opening for positive change. Occupy supporters recognize important, sweeping reforms that need to occur, but what else can we be doing to help, individually, on a day-to-day basis? One answer is quite simple, and yet extremely powerful: we, as individuals and as a nation, need to consume less.

It is no accident that 1% of the richest people in the United States own over 40% of the nation's wealth. It is no accident that we have become a nation of consumption. There is a direct link: the 1% own the businesses that we buy from, we fund them to bombard each and every one of us with thousands of marketing messages everyday, thereby causing us to buy even more "stuff" from them, and thereby unbalancing the wealth in our country even further.

We are running on a vicious hamster wheel, and it's definitely time to stop making it turn. It may seem an insurmountable battle to try and fight the corporate giants that largely run our nation's production, media, and even government. But reducing consumption dis-empowers these gluttons more than one might think. How much corporations are willing to give to keep us buying gives us our first clue to just how important consuming is for their survival: in 2008, for example, Outsell Inc. reports that over $412 billion was spent on advertising and marketing. That’s larger than the GDP of many first-world nations. Would that kind of money be spent on something of less than paramount importance? These advertising messages are delivered in a myriad of more and less subtle ways to us every day: an estimated 3,000 are seen by each person, each day, according to story of stuff website.

Consumption isn’t just important for the survival of America’s corporate hegemon, it is essential. According to Matlin Sulistiawan of CNN-Money, the ten most profitable companies made over $2 trillion in revenue in 2010.

Yet not only is this the single element of their existence most essential for their survival, is also the only point at which we, the 99%, have actual, direct power. Ending corporate personhood, or some other such demand, while necessary and valid, requires money, time, and political voice. Reducing consumption is the opposite; this is something that can be done sitting at home, it is a lack of action not an action.

Think of it like a factory strike: in order for the factory to continue to function it absolutely must have workers, and whether or not to work is the one thing within the workers’ direct control. They can’t necessarily have a voice in the company’s policy, but they can cease to work. That is the factory’s Achilles’ heel: they need workers, and the workers themselves control the decision to work. The opposite is the case for America’s 1%. They don’t need workers. They have workers, workers all over the world who are willing to put in long hours for far less than minimum wage. What they need is consumers.

Obviously this country’s pattern of consumption and waste needs to change

Consumption is the Achilles’ heel of the 1%, and it as much in our control as the factory workers’ decision to work. A difficult decision, true, but one it is possible to make. Corporations know this: thus the 3,000 advertising messages a day, thus the 412 billion dollars spent a year on advertising. They can’t let us stop consuming if they are to survive, and we can’t bow to their demands if we are to survive.

Consider this: 99% of things purchased in this country stay in use for less than six months, as reported by the story of stuff website. That’s a lot of stuff being consumed at a rapid pace; a lot of turnover of plastic utensils, Styrofoam cups, clothing, magazines, plastic wrapping… The list could continue ad infinitum. So what about stuff that we might consider to be longer lasting? According to the EPA, in one year an average of 205.5 million computer products, 26 million television sets, 140.3 million cell phones, and 3.16 million tons of e-waste are disposed of each year. So even if the product is going to last for some time, the consumption and waste of products in this country is still simply off the charts.

Somewhere along the line we, (or more accurately, those who profit from the production of such items), decided that it is “easier” to get oil out of the ground, shape it into a utensil, ship it to a store, have someone buy it to take it somewhere else, use it once, throw it away where it will pollute the environment, languish virtually forever in a landfill, or be burned and release toxins into the atmosphere—than to simply wash a metal spoon. Is this correct? Do we really need this much stuff flowing in an out of our lives?

Not only are these products moving into our lives and then into the waste stream far too quickly with very little actual benefit, the environmental impact of the creation and consumption of all this stuff is astounding. To take an example, in Iowa alone if even 10% of produce was consumed within 100 miles of where it was grown there would be an average annual savings of fuel in the range of 280,000 – 346,000 gallons, and annual saving of Co2 emissions ranging from 6.7 to 7.9 million pounds, according to sustainabletable.org.

This means the environmental impact of buying something local is significant, even something that weighs considerably less than, say, a sofa, and has to come considerably less far than China. This isn’t even touching on the waste coming from the production of the products, and what eventually becomes of the products themselves. The environmental impact of rampant consumption is perhaps even more dire than the economic and social impacts of continuing to empower the corporate 1%.

Most important, reevaluate your views of what you need, what gives you satisfaction, and what you have been told you need

Obviously this country’s pattern of consumption and waste needs to change. We can solve so many of our nation’s problems by re-prioritizing some of our most basic habits, thereby stripping power from the 1% and cleaning up our planet at the same time. So what can we do? Buy local and buy used, to attack that corporate Achilles’ heel. Switch from a mega-bank to a local credit union; they are run as not-for-profit cooperatives and they do not speculate with your money on exotic financial instruments further empowering the 1%.

Most important, reevaluate your views of what you need, what gives you satisfaction, and what you have been told you need and gives you satisfaction through years of advertising indoctrination. This can be hard to distinguish, but the answer, sometimes difficult to arrive at, is almost always that we need less than we think and that our greatest satisfactions come from sources outside the cycle of consumption.

So let’s go on strike against the 1% and America’s corporate hegemon. Eliminate the number of advertisements you see in a day. The typical family’s TV, according to California State University at Northridge website, remains on for 6 hours and 47 minutes sending out an endless bombardment of advertising. Turn off the TV. Make or grow the things you need or want. If you create family entertainment at home you will build irreplaceable bonds with those you love instead of relating through the acquisition of ever more “stuff”.

If you think you need something from a store, consider how you could purchase it used, and take a moment to consider if it is something you really need, or something you have been made to think you need. If you must buy it, try and buy a locally grown or crafted version. If we can recognize that most of what we purchase and own are not things we need, and stop depending on mega corporations for the things we actually do need, these corporations will quite simply cease to have power over us.

Works Cited:

(http://us.generation-nt.com/third-annual-outsell-inc-study-forecasts-412-4-billion-2008-press-894901.html)

(http://www.storyofstuff.com/)

(“The $2 trillion march of the Fortune 10”, C. Matlin, S. Sulistiawan, http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/storysupplement/historical_revenues/)

(“Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 2009 Facts and Figures,” US EPA, December 2010. http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/msw2009rpt.pdf)

(http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/eatlocal/index_pf.html).

(http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html)

© Fair Use. No Copyright intended by Fountain of Light

Top of Page