Anybody who disagrees with this, I entirely invite to Oklahoma to walk a week in my workboots.

And that's just an exhausting sentence to even think about.

I have a hard time framing say, buying food as unethical. The situation may be unethical from a different perspective but I can’t see choosing survival w/o open conflict as an ethical failure at an individual level

Glad you used "qualified" instead of something like "slightly". 👍

In my mind,

• There is no ethical consumption under capitalism when alternative product sources are readily available.and
• There is no ethical production under capitalism.and
• There is no ethical production that capitalism will not attempt to destroy.

Capitalism, like Communism, is a term only authoritatively defined by Marx. Full Laissez Faire is not remotely the same as an economy guided per Piketty’s Capital au XXIe siècle.
But then again, consumption isn’t actually a market operation. May the consumption of a self sufficient Thoreau be ethically judged by surrounding capitalism?

I put "qualified agree" because like, yes, sure, but people use it as an excuse not to try to be as ethical as they can sometimes.

I feel that it might be possible for some goods and services, but it's impossible for all consumption to be ethical under capitalism.

I would think it's the sourcing that's abused (i.e. less ethical and fair) to get the cheapest possible to maximize profit margin.

"Ethical consumption" would be when more than one offers a product, and people pick cheap but also pays for quality and origin too, not only cheapest.

The problem with this question is the definition of capitalism. Exchanging art one creates for money is capitalism. Running a small shop is capitalism. Working in concert with like-minded individuals to acquire all the media outlets in a country to subsequently affect public opinion and political policy is also capitalism. My opinions on these three forms of economic activity are radically different from each other.

Absolutely. But, also, we *do* have to live day-to-day.

We can't forget, but we also can't be so paralyzed by ideological purity that we don't make things *better* simply because we can't make things *perfect*

consumption requires production. Production requires labour. Labour requires exploitation by capital (wage labour under capitalism, that is). Exploitation is not ethical. Therefore consumption under capitalism cannot be ethical.

That said, there can of course exist ethical forms of consumption within a capitalist system, but the production would have to not be capitalist in origin. So it'd be ethically produced despite capitalism, not because of it.

it’s not a reason to not being vegan tho #govegan

Problem isn't capitalism, it's unfettered capitalism. We have eliminated the controls and now it's almost completely exploitive. Some capital is required unless we go to a pure barter system or something. But we need trade of some sort to survive as a society.

I mistakenly voted for strong agree. I meant to vote strong disagree.

I agree but I hope it doesn’t mean that we aren’t thoughtful about the choices that we make (when the choices are available to us).

Really depends on how you define the word “consumption” and how it can be “under” capitalism.

/Strong Agree/

Remember, capitalism does not equal markets.

strong disagree, no matter how much I dislike capitalism, I'm sure there's plenty products that come from an ethically acceptable logistics chain.

This is a common saying online. I haven't been able to find a source.

I'm a qualified disagree. I think the quest for ethical perfection keeps us from doing things that are better, even if not qualitatively good.

Thanks to all who replied.

Content warning: politics Click to open/close

As ever, "capitalism" means such different things to different people that it's a useless word.