Capitalism and the Environment: Best Arguments on One Side of the Debate
It’s a known fact that humans have altered and are continuing to alter the earth. We see it everyday no matter how big or small the altercations are. It can be something as simple as the roads we drive on or the fact that it’s the end of October right now and it’s still 80 degrees outside. Capitalism is one of the main contributors to climate change largely because it’s a system that is made up of production, profit, competition, and consumption. Because of the competitive nature that comes along with capitalism, the stakeholders involved like CEOs of big brands and companies, pay no regard to how the environment is being affected. One of the stakeholders, the consumer, plays a big role in this system, they create the demand for the products. Big companies also play a big role in this system, they’re the ones making the big decisions on how they want to produce their goods. So is it best for consumers or big companies to make changes that will help overturn or prevent further damage to the environment? In this blog post, I’ll be analyzing the best arguments made on the side that believes it’s best for consumers to change their habits in order to prevent further damage to the environment.
In her National Geographic article, Hillary Maywell argues that earth is suffering due to consumerism so it’s up to the consumers to make a change. Mayell opens the argument stating that almost everyone in the world takes part in consumerism, but the people who belong to what’s known as the “consumer class” is who we have to worry about. Mayell describes the consumer class as “people characterized by diets of highly processed food, desire for bigger houses, more and bigger cars, higher levels of debt, and lifestyles devoted to the accumulation of non-essential goods.” This very harsh description of a large part of the world’s population, appeals to the audience’s pathos. As someone who is part of the consumer class, reading this made me feel guilty, Mayell hasn’t even said anything about the effects consumerism has on the environment yet and I’m already thinking about all the ways this lifestyle is harmful to the earth. She then refers to Christopher Flavin, a former president of an environmental research institute based in Washington D.C. According to a statement Flavin released to the press, “the devastating toll on the Earth’s water supplies, natural resources, and ecosystems exacted by a plethora of garbage bags and other cheaply made goods lead to a ‘throw away’ mentality.” By including Flavin’s statement in her article, her argument appeals to the audience’s ethos. One thing Mayell didn’t include in her argument is talk about the feasibility of it all. How easy would it be for a consumer to make changes to their habits and what changes need to be made? Not everyone is knowledgeable on climate change and not everyone is aware that they’re actions affect the environment negatively so it would have been helpful for the audience to take away at least one thing they can change after reading Mayell’s article.
Another article I read focused on the cosmetic industry and how it affects the environment. The article by Green America makes the argument that consumers should make some changes since companies don’t seem to care about how their cosmetic products affect the environment. The article opens with information on regulation of cosmetic products. Surprisingly, there are little to none when it comes to the safety of the environment. The article also discusses ingredients to avoid when it comes to purchasing cosmetic products, for example, oxybenzone. Oxybenzone is a chemical found in sunscreens and high concentrations of it alter coral DNA and acts as an endocrine distributor. This causes baby coral to incase itself in its own skeleton and die. To prevent this devastating event from happening, consumers can look for reef safe sunscreen to use when they go to the beach. By giving examples like this, the author helps their argument by proving how easy it is to stop environmental degradation from happening. All I would need to do as a consumer is look for sunscreen that has “reef safe” on the label or I can look at the product’s ingredients before purchasing it. One thing that the argument could have done would have been to include a list of some sustainable cosmetic brands that are not harmful to the environment, this way, the readers would get an idea about where to start.
After analyzing these arguments, I’ve reflected on my own habits as a consumer. Hillary Mayell’s argument helped me realize that I’ve been sucked into a system that’s sucking the Earth’s natural resources and if something doesn’t change soon, my future could be at stake. But the consumer class didn’t create itself, after World War II, the idea that a good consumer equals a good American was implemented into many Americans’ heads. The consumer class allowed the working class to acquire “the good life”, it allowed them to work their way up the ladder. The argument made from Green America showed me how easy it is for consumers to shop with the environment in mind, once you know what to avoid it becomes easy to spot them out in stores.
