freeganism?

[readblood]

I was waiting for my take-out a few days ago and grabbed a New York Press from a stack on the counter.  Their cover story was a rolling eyes moment if I've ever had one.

"The activity is part of a larger social movement known as freeganism, which views capitalism as the primary force in destroying the environment and avoids the capitalist structure

Comments

[charlotte_s]

i haven't read the article you are referring to, but it seems like they're trying to make freegans out to be no-good, lazy bums as opposed to relatively intelligent activists they tend to be.

see this definition of freeganism:
"Freeganism is a strategy for preventing waste, saving money so we can work less, and minimizing the impact of our consumption. Freegans are building a culture where people voluntarily help and share with one another rather than competing for resources. We seek to reclaim control of our lives from an economic system that turns us into wage slaves and makes us complicit in the exploitation of the environment and human and nonhuman animals. Under capitalism, the prime motivator for businesses selling goods is not to serve consumer needs, provide for their workers or improve the overall state of the world, but to generate profits for their investors and owners. Even products marketed as “green” or “vegan” operate on the same principle, their “greenness” becomes a selling point to consumers, while obscuring exploitative aspects (e.g. labor exploitation, shooting and trapping of wildlife). Simply put: freegans seek to prevent waste by reclaiming, recovering and repairing available resources rather than generate new profit."

and

"We focus on urban foraging, recovering wasted food, books, clothing, office supplies and other items from the refuse of retail stores. Most items are frequently discarded in brand new condition. We also make use of wild foraging, using wild-growing plant foods and medicinals. These can be found everywhere from the deep woods to a city park. Sharing the wealth instead of adding to the waste is important too. On email lists like Freecycle, websites like Craigslist, fairs like the “Really, Really Free Market” and in permanently established “Free Stores,” people donate items they don’t want and others find things they can use. We also repair and mend items instead of tossing them out and hold workshops to teach others to do the same. We typically squat, finding abandoned, decrepit buildings and restoring them into homes and community centers for low-income families. Squatting challenges the values of an economic system where homeless people freeze to death on the streets while landlords and municipal governments sit on boarded-up buildings. Freegans also convert garbage-strewn abandoned lots into beautiful garden plots amidst the asphalt and concrete of urban neighborhoods. The gardens are refuges for urban wildlife and allow communities to grow their own food in neighborhoods where supermarkets under-stock healthy fruits and vegetables."

read more in this satya interview:
http://www.satyamag.com/may06/weissman.html

[readblood]

Thanks for this. It does shed some light.

I'm certainly not equipped to debate with you (econ queen) on this matter, but I like (responsible) capitalism. I do think, in many ways, it does serve needs and if everyone became a "freegan," we'd be living in some type of (oxymoronic) new stone age. Foraging is cool in theory, but despite how "evil" capitalism and is and all the ills it brings to the world, statistically speaking, we have a longer life expectancy than ever before and it's helped a lot of people grow a voice they otherwise wouldn't have (e.g as opposed to say, communist cuba).

Again, you're more educated on the subject, but I can't help but think I have some point here.

[charlotte_s]

you're comparing capitalism to state-run "communism". that's not what freegans stand for... think more hippy-run commune. a system where people people work, but work for things that directly benefit them and their small community (i.e. food, clothing, etc.)

i'm not actually anti-capitalism and i don't think i would ever be able to adopt a freegan lifestyle. i like "things". that said, i think they are generally incredibly intelligent people, well-versed in economic theory who have their own strong ideas that they are willing to live out. i respect that.

[readblood]

Isn't freeganism rather unrealistic though? I mean, could it ever be applied to a state? If it could, wouldn't it eventually evolve into state-run communism? And if not, couldn't it be defined as a rather paradoxically selfish movement since it can't be effective in the social structure we have set up in most places around the world?

I think I'm "cool" with the cause, but it seems impractical on a larger social scale.

[charlotte_s]

you're still misunderstanding. they advocate for sustainable local cooperatives, not massive "states". (think anarchy / less govt. *not* big govt.)

it seems impractical on a larger social scale if you stay within the dominant paradigm. if you can fathom a world without capitalism, without "states", then it's not impractical at all.

see more on the wikipedia article on freeganism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism

though the article refers more to practical aspects of freeganism and less their overall economic view (though it does at least say: "Many freegans are anarchists and identify with libertarian communist ideals of voluntary cooperation and mutual aid, and place a strong emphasis on forging socially and ecologically sustainable and egalitarian communities.")

[charlotte_s]

see anarchism on wikipedia, more links available there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

("The word "anarchy", as most anarchists use it, does not imply chaos, nihilism, or anomie, but rather a harmonious anti-authoritarian society that is based on voluntary association of free individuals in autonomous communities, mutual aid, and self-governance.")

[readblood]

I can't fathom a world without capitalism and certainly without states because a) we've been there and it hasn't proven to be sustainable and b) you can't just reverse the state system we have in place now. I can't imagine freeganism to be anything other than disaster. Practicality is a big deal to me, since I think that's a far more selfless idea under our dominant paradigm.

Maybe i'm still misunderstanding or maybe I just have a fundamental disagreement. I 'respect' the idealism behind it now that you've given me some literature but outside of corners in Brooklyn and the LES, this just doesn't fly.

[charlotte_s]

look here for examples of anarchist communities:
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/anarfaq.htm#part17

it can and has be done. by definition it is small scale (like israeli kibbutizm which are a great *current* example.)

if you're really interested, you can do research on this - i'm far from an expert, but there's a lot written out there about the feasibility of small, voluntary societies. it has been practiced in the past and is currently being practiced.

[readblood]

Oddly enough, I remember Ms. Dunn telling me about the israeli kibbutizm; she lived among them for a while?

I guess I measure a state, in large part, by its power. Power = leverage, obviously, and I can't ever see a freeganist society as an effective player in the world system.

[charlotte_s]

she may have - it's a really interesting social structure. it could be cool to learn more about them, visit one eventually, etc.

you're still using the term "state" though and still conceiving of things on a vastly different scale. small, voluntary communes are very different - their members aren't thinking in terms of power/leverage or even the "world system". it's a perfectly valid, sustainable social structure - it doesn't need to be implemented on a world-wide level to be so.

[readblood]

but, if you're thinking about the "impact of consumption" wouldn't it be necessary to apply this to a world-wide level for significant results?

outside of their tiny territories, they have no effect. and thus, serve no greater good.

i respect their cause, but i embrace our advances.

[charlotte_s]

part of the idea is that by showing it is sustainable and reasonable, etc. they will show an example that others will follow. consciousness raising, etc. that's certainly a valid effect. (i.e. ms. dunn even. a lot of american / other western people have left to join israeli kibbutizm or created hippy-like communes in other areas, etc. because of the example shown by others. living it out and showing it can be done can be just as powerful, if not more, than forcing a system on people.)