Ethical Consumption

One very frequently, when browsing Online Leftist content, sees the phrase “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism”, particularly in regards to veganism and other ethically-driven decisions regarding one’s consumption. I believe this may have started off as a meme, but I have found many who use it seriously - it is to those supra-mentioned individuals I address this. While, on the surface, this may seem true; capitalism is an inherently unethical mode of production and ergo one can not ethically consume the commodities produced thereby. Here, however, we’re going to dig a little deeper.

Before we proceed, I’d like to clarify a few things, particularly about metaethics and my view regarding that field. I do not believe in objective morality. However, I do believe that one’s own sense of morality, which certainly exists, is culturally inspired; one is only a product of their environment and as such one will echo and shadow many values one’s culture has given one. That being said, I won’t be using any arguments from an ethical sense insofar as “oh, my morality is contradictory to that statement and therefore your statement is incorrect.”

One must consume; everything from food to clothes and much more are necessities for survival. As one cannot always produce those things oneself, particularly in sufficient quantities, one is forced - in order to live - to purchase them. It is here where my first, and biggest, issue arises; one cannot expect someone to do the impossible. In short, “ought implies can” (Kant, I.). This means that one shouldn’t expect another to do something if they cannot. We here see the inherent contradiction in the phrase “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” - as one must consume, it cannot be unethical to do so. That being said, there is unethical consumption under capitalism. This leads me onto my next point.

In a choice where all choices, when individually evaluated, may seem unethical (insofar as someone is poorly treated, etc.), the most ethical choice - nay, the only ethical choice - is the least unethical choice. This is because, in general, one should always seek to minimise net oppression, &c to the best of their abilities. In doing so, one does their best to act in the least unethical, or rather the most ethical, way possible. Let’s return to the earlier example of veganism. Provided one thinks that the current meat industry, or the meat industry in general, is unethical - and I’m not saying that you have to - one should not participate in it (as a consumer). That is a simple, but specific, application of these principles. Let’s speak more generally; if company/industry/&c A has more net unethicality than company/industry/&c B, then it is better to choose company B when possible. This is, in short, “lesser evilism” (which is entirely unpopular with the left, but I believe - for the aforementioned reasons - is a flawed and unnuanced position to have on “lesser evilism”).

To fix the phrase “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism”, I’d change it to “as there is no ethical production under capitalism and one must consume, one must choose the least unethical choices in regards to the consumption of the commodities produced thereby.”

Now, tactically, you may see a few issues. Notably, that boycotting certain things on an individual is ineffective. Furthermore, one may see that most people do not have the time to evaluate the ethical standards of all commodities and companies. These two issues can be solved with the following: Revolutionary Consumer Unions. Let’s break that term down: unions are an alliance of people; the consumer adjective denotes its exclusive relation to consumers; and the adjective revolutionary shows that it isn’t a liberal (i.e. moderate/capitalist) union. When these three parts are used in conjunction, we see the following: a group of people who, together, deem which choices are most ethical from a revolutionary perspective (or at least present information regarding a company/industry/&c’s ethical policies and practises). With these, we can see how both these issues are avoided: (1) it is a collective effort and (2) the work is distributed between many more people.

To conclude, we see from the earlier reasoning that, as consumption of commodities is necessary, it cannot be unethical to consume commodities in general (following “ought implies can”) and, therefore, one must minimise the unethicality of one’s actions. Furthermore, to maximise the effectiveness of these tactics, we must form Revolutionary Consumer Unions as these bypass a number of issues related to individual ethical consumption.