Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Thoughts about consumption, materialism, ethics, and necessity

I've been reading some heated discussions elsewhere in the blogosphere about marriage, housework, capitalism, patriarchy, how to make social change, justice for immigrant workers. Of course these things are all related, and more and more people are trying to become aware of the relations and make changes in their lives and in our society. The particulars of the arguments are interesting in and of themselves, but I often get sidetracked in these discussions by how some folks like to think in the abstract and others prefer to think in the particular, and how few people move comfortably between these two kinds of thinking. We often talk at cross-purposes and get frustrated with each other, even though we might agree on some common goals (we should change our consumptions patterns to save the planet, for example, or exploiting other people's labor is a bad thing, whether that person is a wife-type person or a minimum-wage worker). These kinds of conversations can oblige us to stretch our empathy and solidarity muscles in ways that are painful, and also to do some soul-searching about values.

Anyway, it got me to thinking about my own passage through various stages of economic dependence and independence, and my own efforts to both live well within my means and to make more ethical choices as I do so. For years, I lived without a car. I did not get my driver's license until I was 32. Arguably, it was because I lived in a location (the SF Bay Area) and in circumstances (walking distance to excellent transportation services, work, school, etc) that meant that I did not need a car. And while I was in college and graduate school, I simply could not afford a car or car insurance. Any extra money I could get went into long distance travel instead. Therefore, accidentally, I also ended up saving a large amount of money by not owning a car, and reduced my carbon footprint, although neither of those two motives was uppermost in my mind at the time. Looking back, I know I wasn't unaware of these facts, but I just didn't sit down and decide that, as a matter of principle, I should not own a car for these reasons. Looking back, I also realize that I refused to learn to drive for many years because driving/riding in cars with my rage-aholic father was deeply traumatic, but that's another story. Did I live without a car because I was too poor to buy one? being frugal? virtuously thrifty? responsibly sustainable? too lazy to get my driver's license? able to live well without one by accident of geography? Who cares?

I finally did learn to drive and bought my first car after living for two years in a different city where the public transportation is only OK, and bike-riding can be extremely difficult for several months of the year due to weather extremes, both heat and cold, although I did gut it out for 2 years, and relied on walking, biking, the bus system (such as it is) and the kindness of friends. I also was finally earning enough money that I got my very first credit card, and had finally established enough of a credit record to be able to get a loan. For years before that, I had lived in a strictly cash economy because in California at the time, if you didn't have a credit card and a drivers' license, no business would accept your checks. I was turned down in my application for a credit card, even though I had a job, because of "choice of major" (Comparative Literature students were not good credit risks!). The only checks I could write were for rent and utilities; everything else was cash or recycling (other people's castoffs, garage sales, Good Will, trading).

I'm well aware of the degrees of privilege from which I've benefited over the years. On one level, as a student I was living on very little money, but I also had a safety net (family would put me up) and was working toward establishing a position as a credentialed professional, albeit in a field that does not pay the big bucks. As a white, well-educated woman, I also had access to opportunities that meant that if suddenly I needed a different job, I'd get my foot in the door more easily than many. So although I lived extremely frugally, I never felt poor or classified myself as living in poverty. Then again, I also made the deliberate choice not to merge my financial life with that of a man through marriage (self-reliance and economic independence above all) or to have a child (couldn't afford it and accomplish the goal of more stable forms of economic security). As I was the only one of my father's three children who received his financial support for my BA after high school, I was keenly aware that I was lucky. If my brother and sister could be kicked off the middle-class ladder to security by divorce along my mother just because they happened to be born after me, then I needed to make sure that I could provide for myself (and any children I might have) in the future, no matter what.

I've preserved many of the habits of frugality and thrift taught to me by my mother (who grew up in an immigrant family working its way toward the middle-class dream), and cultivated over fifteen years of living as a student. Now that I have a car, I find that I use it more than I absolutely need to because it makes so many things so much easier. I could take the bus to work, but I rationalize my choice to drive by saying that I need to be able to transport my child to school, buy groceries in larger quantities than I can carry on foot, etc, and this is because the time I would otherwise spend on these activities without the car could be better spent on work. This is true to some extent, but it is also true that the freedom and convenience of using the car enables me to do many pleasurable things, not just more work. When I had a broken foot and couldn't drive, many people helped me out, but I also got back on the bus once I was more mobile. I have next-door neighbors who work where I do who live without cars (but they don't have a child). I could take the bus more often, but I don't want to and I don't have to. I'm trying to refrain from qualifying these activities with judgmental language, but y'all can supply your own.

So, here's what I'm going to be thinking about today: what does it mean to live sustainably? Be a freegan? Be thrifty? What's the difference between being thrifty and being a tightwad? between being a tightwad and being too poor to eat without food stamps?

We do things to survive (eat out of dumpsters); we do things to be virtuous (waste not, want not, or, eat out of dumpsters); we do things to amuse ourselves (Look what I found in the dumpster!); we want to be responsible (we have to remove ourselves from the exploitative cycle of consuption, and rescue food from dumpsters); we do things to be mindful (I'm grateful for my food and all the labor that went into it). We do things because that's the way our family has always done it (clean your plate! those kids in Guatemala have to live in the dump!). We do things our families couldn't afford to do because now we can and that's why America is great (clean running water in your house. It's a good thing).

9 comments:

Professor Zero said...

There is much to be said for plumbing and I don't even think it is destructive in and of itself.

But ah well, tu sais. So the friend for whom I have had to function as home health worker, because a) only one arm and one leg broken does not qualify him for one through insurance, b) it is too personal to pay someone for anyway c) it is too personal/icky to ask a man to do ... not because of the type of work but because of having to show vulnerability, anyway he sent professional housecleaners to my house as a thank you present.

They arrived today and just left, having turned out to be a Gang of Four Cajuns, 2 men, 2 women, at least to guess from presentation. The question is have we just exploited some persons of color ...
the "color" of Cajuns being a topic of some debate since they are at least theoretically W, but not at all A, S, or P.

momo said...

What a nice thank you gesture! The discussion over at Twisty's reminded me that on some basic level we are all implicated in structures of oppression, but do we then think that we are always guilty? Guilt to me signifies willing complicity. Unconscious/unthinking participation can have similar effects, but there is at least the idea that someone might change their behavior if they learned better. As someone I know says, once you have been told that something is wrong, it is your responsibility to act on that knowledge. I think there are important distinctions to be made between living in a capitalist society (we don't get to choose that) and the ways we try to become aware and make the choices we can make about how complicit we will be (how we are going to live in that capitalist society). We can't escape being implicated or involved, but we can make choices around our circumstances in relation to exploitation. Do I think that paying folks to clean a house is in and of itself exploitative? no more than having someone do any other kind of work. Do I think cleaning someone's house for free is demeaning? not in and of itself. But we do know that men taking for granted that there houses will be cleaned by the women who live in them is exploitative, and that many people who clean for a living are being exploited in one way or another.
I think my post is about how are we taught to cast these acts in terms of value judgments that are not necessarily inherent in the acts themselves.

Professor Zero said...

Yes (to last sentence specifically).

I'd also say guilt is one thing, feeling responsibility is another.

What irritates me about the so-called progressive blogosphere, and professorisphere as well, is that everyone seems to have *just* discovered surplus value, 'privilege' etc. and boy do they want to lecture.

What I want to know is, what planet
have they spent their lives on heretofore ... how did they *not* realize something was up just by looking about them? This is my rant.

momo said...

Well, maybe they realized it, but a lot of the people they are talking to are still in denial.

Dolores said...

I'm just jumping into the debate between taking help as a given and providing it with a different meaning.

Does that apply as just not progressing into writing as a meaninful act? Or is it an expected given?

Thanks for sharing momo, I believe it does show some standing into values in times that proximity tends to call for a resourceful moment.

momo said...

Hi, Dolores, thanks for your comment. Are you asking about writing as one of the ways we assign value, or as one of the ways we talk back to being taken for granted when we do things like clean houses?

Dolores said...

Actually both; writing as assigning value in positive and negative terms, like when in the search for meaning, and paying attention to the most menial of tasks as an activity that deserves recognition, such as a place where a person delves.


It is a wonderful habit, to pay attention to all kinds of activities, and, acting accordingly, that would be one of the uses of writing.



Thank you for providing a room for argument!

Professor Zero said...

More on the moralizing crowd:

I just got coerced into giving a ride to my colleague with no car. She lives by me, and we were both leaving campus to go to our 'hood, so it was OK, but I have long since refused to give her the rides out of my way she still gets from others.

While you do the driving, taking time out of your day, burning gas you have paid for in a car you are maintaining, to get *her* to where she is going, she, no longer unable to afford a car, by the way, lectures you about how, by not having one, she is reducing *her* carbon imprint.

With the money she saves by using your car and gas while calling you an anti-ecologist, she buys a lot of airplane tickets. I am assuming she rides in carbon-free planes.

momo said...

Yea, ye shall walk through the valley of self-righteousness...

In all the time I was carless, I dont' recall thanking those people who gave me rides by haranguing them about my supposed ecological superiority.

Next time she asks you for a ride, tell her that you've decided to help her live up to her standards of purity by making her ride her bike.