|
September 12, 2007
Taking Freeganomics seriously?
I hate it when I make up a word that's already been pre-anticipated for me and "invented" by others. In this case, it's been pre-anticipated 3400 times, but numbers are not the issue, and have nothing to do with the uniquely original originality of what I originated first! Naturally the fact that I'm saying I pre-anticipated it first will make them claim otherwise -- as if the fact that they used the word online before I did means anything in terms of ultimate truth! Whoever said something first is not necessarily the most original sayer of what was said, OK? I realize that explaining this is complicated, so I won't. It is beneath my dignity! I mean, why ruin a perfectly good meme by allowing facts to get in the way of originality? Besides, I was diving in dumpsters before most of these pipsqueaks were born. Don't get me wrong. I only took good stuff from dumpsters, and these people are stealing garbage; I'm just saying that my diving was more original than theirs, as is my use of the word "freaganomics." Anyway, the freeganomics movement has now gone national with this LA Times "exposé": Nelson, 51, once earned a six-figure income as director of communications at Barnes and Noble. Tired of representing a multimillion dollar company, she quit in 2005 and became a "freegan" -- the word combining "vegan" and "free" -- a growing subculture of people who have reduced their spending habits and live off consumer waste. Though many of its pioneers are vegans, people who neither eat nor use any animal-based products, the concept has caught on with Nelson and other meat-eaters who do not want to depend on businesses that they believe waste resources, harm the environment or allow unfair labor practices.Yes, and they are morally superior people, daring anyone to look askance, much less arrest them for trespassing. Besides, everybody's doing it. At the rate things are going, it might be a cool new way to protest Bush fascism! Here's the LA Times picture: And the caption: Janet Kalish, center, with a papaya she collected during a New York City trash tour for people interested in becoming freegans -- anti-consumerists who, in the words of one advocate, are "opting out of capitalism in any way that we can."Aren't they just too cool? In light of the admission of one of them that she "took home a salmon carcass from D'Agostino's trash and made ceviche," and "was somewhat surprised she did not get sick," I suppose that the stores' legal departments will weigh in, and Trader Joe's dumpsters will eventually have to be secured and up -- safe from the prying hands of the conspicously virtuous. Hey, maybe they can have a showdown! Dumpster divers get arrested! For trying to save the planet! Not being a trained or licensed economist (I'm assuming they're as licensable as lawyers), I'm not competent to run the stats or do the number crunching which might shed some light on the extent to which the dumpster divers are actually saving the planet. However, because the word "freeganomics" is now in the public domain, I'm hoping someone will. There's probably a Ph.D. in the works. And imagine how much fun the field research would be! But anyway, I wasn't planning a post on freeganomics until I saw this farmer's lament posted at Mrs. du Toit's blog: ....I don't want to turn this into a lament for times past. Time marches on, and the changes that have occurred have been good in the grand scheme of things. Cheap plentiful food means fewer hungry people. I'm convinced that there is no longer hunger in this country. I feed leftovers from the local free food pantry to my pigs. That's undeniably a good thing.I suspect that many people share this view, and not all of them are farmers. The obtaining of food is a big deal, and I don't think it's an understatement to venture that it might touch on a basic part of our nature. Maybe even instinct. We've gone from a rural to a largely urban culture in the blink of an eye, and while we think of a guy who puts on a suit and goes to work in an office every day as "the provider," there's something about going and getting the food -- whether it's selecting the meat, the veggies, whatever, that touches on what it really means to be a member of the human species. Seen this way, the dumpster diving phenomenon, while childish, histrionic, and neurotic, represents a pathetic, possibly instinctive desire for simpler times when there was hands-on involvement in the obtaining of food. Fortunately, the divers aren't smashing store windows to demonstrate against the WTO, but dismissing this mindset as idiotic (which it is) ignores its appeal. Why do we laugh at the dumpster divers? I think it is because they are on a moral crusade. They take themselves seriously. They believe that they are saving the planet. They are making a statement that we are wasteful, that we are ruining the planet, and that they are not. The irony here is that by trying to take them seriously, I will irritate them more than if I resorted to pure ridicule. They would see my attempt to understand the involvement of human instinct as condescending in the extreme. Is it? Is it condescending to laugh at serious matters like instinct? I do it all the time, and I like to think I am also laughing at myself. I'm not planning to become a farmer, nor am I planning to take up dumpster diving and call it "freeganism." (For starters I am not a vegan, and never will be.) OK, before I write another word, let me stress that I do not mean to make fun of farmers here. Nor am I in any way making a moral equivalency argument between American farmers and spoiled brats who think it's cool to pilfer from Trader Joe's dumpsters while solemnly proclaiming that you're better than everyone else. My father grew up on a farm, and my grandfather was a farmer until he died. Farmers are great people, and it's a shame to see the way their lifestyle has been rendered anachronistic, and almost impossible. To live the life my grandfather lived would be impossible. To illustrate, here's a picture I recently found of him, using horse-drawn farm equipment. Yeah, I suppose if I went to a lot of time and trouble, I could manage to do that. I'd be willing to bet that the emotional reward would be enormous, too. But would it be cost effective? More likely, it would cost me more money to buy and maintain a fine set of plough horses and a tractor they could draw than it would to buy a tractor. And at the prices I might be able to get for whatever I could manage to grow using these methods, I'd be lucky to feed the horses, much less meet the mortgage payments on the acreage. It's a crying shame. No, the dumpster divers are in no way comparable to the farmers. But I think my grandfather would have gotten quite a kick out of the modern urban trash thieves. He made fun of my father for taking up life in the big city and did his best in the small amount of time I spent with him to make sure I knew that no one -- least of all him or his son, my father -- should ever be taken too seriously. No, I will not repeat what he said, lest he be as misunderstood as I often feel that I am. But it was a lifelong moral lesson, and I never forgot it. The problem with people who take themselves too seriously is that a lot of them don't stop there. The younger and more emotional ones want to take things to the next step, which is telling other people what to do, and then to the next step -- which is working to enact their idiocy into actual laws. (I'm old enough to remember laughing at things like the anti-smoking movement, which is now solemnly mainstream, and not funny at all. I remember when decent people would never have castrated a normal male dog.) Freegans are militant vegans, santimonious moralists who believe not only in saving the planet personally, but in making me save the planet according to their rules. If they had their way, they'd stop me from eating meat, owning a dog with genitals, driving my car and probably a lot of other things I've never thought of. My natural reaction is scorn and ridicule, but when I try to temper it with understanding, I guess I go too far. I probably have the defective liberal brain gene, but that's another topic. AFTERTHOUGHT: I think my grandfather was onto something. So was Freud. But I think the freegans confuse instinct with emotion, and emotion with morality. UPDATE: I just learned that the horses pictured with my grandfather were named "Prince" and "Topsy." MORE: This video might shed some light on the nature of the dispute between my father and my grandfather. "Country Ain't Country," by Travis Tritt
It actually brought tears to my eyes when I first heard it (probably because the dispute is in my blood.) (YouTube link here.) Instinct? Or emotion? posted by Eric on 09.12.07 at 09:26 AM
Comments
Many would agree with you. There are public health reasons for these things being thrown away. Eric Scheie · September 12, 2007 12:27 PM I think you're being a little too hard on the Freegans. I know a little bit about the New York ones (but no, I have not sat down to a meal with them and I don't intend to). Sure, many are sanctimonious lefties who want to tell you how to live. But you'll find that in any group trying to step outside of mainstream consumer society and, of course, the newspaper is going to zero in on some of the nuttier ones to get good quotes. But many of the people into the Freegan lifestyle, especially the early adopters, are fully aware that, as scavengers of society's waste, they are dependant on a wasteful society and therefore, there is a limit to what freeganism can accomplish. In addition to being cheap, these people are driven by a reaction against our tendency to throw out perfectly good and useful things. And when you see what they find in trash cans, you can't help being annoyed at the grocery bill. Maybe if the stores ran themselves a little less wastefully, you could have cheaper food without gyping the yoeman farmer. tim maguire · September 12, 2007 01:44 PM I have problems with the movement, too. For one thing: if it weren't for the piggish petty-burgeoisie like me, freegans wouldn't have dumpsters to dive into. When we all become freegans, no one will be able to be a freegan. (That said: I suppose that means grocery stores will have to invest in technology to DESTROY (incinerate, whatever) food that is truly dangerous - like the potentially-botulism-tainted green beans of earlier this summer. I wonder if there are lawyers following the freegans around, reminding them that if they get sick off of something outside the Safeway, they might be able to sue and make a killing. And I'm not at all sure that every freegan would choose to say, "hell, no" to that) ricki · September 12, 2007 05:08 PM I saw your statement about not being a vegan. Then I looked down and saw the team of horses right below the statement and the first thing I thought of was "food". M. Simon · September 12, 2007 08:09 PM "For one thing: if it weren't for the piggish petty-burgeoisie like me, freegans wouldn't have dumpsters to dive into. When we all become freegans, no one will be able to be a freegan." tim took the words right out of my keyboarding fingers. I have more respect for the freegans, who actually live what they preach. In contrast to, say, oh I don't know - global warming proponents, who tell us to do what they say (e.g. make third-world children pump water) and not what they do (e.g. shop in Europe via private jet). Could you imagine Al Gore digging through trash for a luxurious dinner? Mental image of the week! Scott · September 12, 2007 11:55 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
September 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
September 2007
August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Money goes in circles?
Education is child's play Taking Freeganomics seriously? Wrong song! It's not 1992! I had absolutely no knowledge about the temporary parking, officer! 9/11/01 Remembering the day they attacked the Enlightenment A different kind of education lessons in tolerance for the intolerant No shirt, no what?
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Eating garbage is disgusting.