4
Thursday, August 6, 2020
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
OPINION
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
BRITTANY BOWMAN
Editorial Page Editor
Alanna Berger
Zack Blumberg
Brittany Bowman
Emily Considine
Elizabeth Cook
Jess D’Agostino
Jenny Gurung
Cheryn Hong
Zoe Phillips
Mary Rolfes
Michael Russo
Gabrijela Skoko
Timothy Spurlin
Joel Weiner
Erin White
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
EMMA STEIN
Editor in Chief
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
or traditional practices in mind — where
millions of Africans were stolen from
their families and their homes and
brought to the Americas through the
transatlantic slave trade. Society at
large thinks of chattel slavery and
dehumanization as something of the
past, something centuries away from
us all. Slavery is not a historical event.
It exists in many forms today — it is
ingrained in our existing social system.
Whether it be America’s incarceration
system, debt bondage, child labor — in
manufacturing, domestic and sex work
— or global slave trade through methods
of human trafficking, slavery was never
effectively abolished as so many have
the privilege to believe.
We as consumers have been com-
pletely complicit participants in this
slavery. From our phones, to our clothes,
to our coffee and rice, we are constantly
consuming the product of forced labor
and slavery. As globalization progresses
— the modern movement which encour-
ages the collaboration of nations in inno-
vation and content creation — we see
developments in economic wealth and
effective industry. However, these eco-
nomic benefits intensely feed the capi-
talist economy, nourishing the already
rich and further enslaving laborers. As
demand for cheap everyday products
increases, the value of human labor
decreases. This demand comes from us
as the consumer. And with that power,
we must ask ourselves what is more
important to us not in the moment, but
in life: the price of your phone or the life
of the child mining cobalt to get it to you
within your budget.
Complacency manifests quickly with
the help of social media. When compa-
nies like Nike release one ad that demon-
strates no actual action toward or pursuit
of racial equity and justice, and all of
social media’s civilian consumers praise
that ad release, the social system is not
disturbed, nor is the company. If instead
of praising this bare-minimum effort, we
as consumers rejected this ad as a perfor-
mative act, and, in place of those reposts,
put out demands about what we would
like to see changed within the culture
and infrastructure of the company itself,
there would be greater inspiration for
reconstruction.
Although it seems like a lot of tedious
work, doing devout research on the
companies you give your dollar to can
not only inform you of the ways you are
indirectly investing in oppressive institu-
tions, but can guide you to lesser known
companies and brands who produce
the same product more ethically. Here,
what the consumer loses is convenience,
which has been an apparently valuable
asset to American consumption. So, for
the people who have the financial means
to challenge their everyday expenses and
replace them with more ethical efforts,
this should be done immediately and
with perpetual consciousness, despite
the subtle impact it has on one’s sched-
ule — because put simply, to pay a higher
price or drive a little further for your
desired product for the sake of human
being’s lives everywhere should not be an
inconvenience, but a blessing. However,
many people who resort to these “easy
fix” companies such as Amazon or CVS
— because of their frequent locations and
consistent prices — are those who cannot
afford to instead support the Black bou-
tique or hardware store with challenging
prices in comparison. This makes it so
the people being the most oppressed are
also often the most reliant on the institu-
tions and companies that oppress them.
For those who have the means to invest
in ethically mature companies instead,
the responsibility is greatly on you.
None of this is to say that consumer-
ism cannot be used productively and
ethically. Consumerism can absolutely
be used for the force of good, but not
when it is done mindlessly to satisfy the
capitalist cycle. With consumerism,
comes rights of the consumer. Histori-
cally, consumerism pushed society away
from the slave institution, lessening the
need for individual fulfillment alongside
the increase of global product accessibil-
ity. For enslaved people now free, con-
sumerism was a symbol of that liberation
through which they could provide them-
selves with their own shelter, wardrobe
and way of life.
Similarly, in societies with a strictly
established caste system, consumerism
allows for the dispelling of clear barri-
ers between those casted communities.
Civilians of considerably lower caste
can assert themselves and their worth
through what they buy and how they
dress, instead of being forced into a cer-
tain profession or way of life. This all
feeds into the notion that consumerism
gives an individual immense power we
often do not recognize. If we continue
to ignore this power, we continue to
feed the system oppressing us and our
communities. If we hone in on this
power, unite beneath it and urge com-
panies to revolutionize the way they
satisfy the consumer with ethical prac-
tices, we take one step closer toward
the revolution. We take one step closer
to freedom for all.
A revolution of our current social
system, an economic revolution and
even a personal revolution cannot occur
without steady intention and planning.
If the everyday consumer and civilian
cannot first recognize the value of all of
humanity, not just those like them, they
will not feel a need to demand a change
of system. If we are compassionate, we
do our research, we understand where
our products come from and who cre-
ates them, we have understanding. If
we do all of this, and then stop feeding
those companies who do not meet the
criteria society demands of them, we
have progress.
N
ike — a brand comfortable
affiliating itself with social jus-
tice movements — was among
the first to post on social media platforms,
which likely encouraged other compa-
nies to follow suit: Netflix tweeted, “To
be silent is to be complicit. Black lives mat-
ter;” Disney tweeted, “We stand against
racism. We stand for inclusion;” Ben &
Jerry’s — also very comfortable with
being political — tweeted, “4 years ago, in
the wake of Ferguson, we felt compelled
to support the #BlackLivesMatter move-
ment. We’re heartbroken those words are
just as relevant today. These racist and bru-
tal attacks against our Black brothers and
sisters must end.” However, many ask what
tangible impact might come from these
online posts and what quantitative support
they’ll provide in the enduring fight against
systemic racism and oppression.
Publicly voicing support for the Black
Lives Matter movement and pursuing
anti-racist action is an acceptable first
step, but allyship must extend far beyond
online performativism or statements of
solidarity. Cephas Williams, founder of
56 Black Men, states, “Now is not the time
to be silent, neither is it the time to jump
on a bandwagon. It’s a time for real reflec-
tion and care with regards to how a brand
and its leaders stand by the Black com-
munity at this time and move forward
with real steps to end racism and injustice
globally and not only on the streets but
in their organizations too.” These verbal
promises and public recitations need to
translate into actual change within com-
panies and communities, the first step of
which can be examining harmful envi-
ronments and systems. Taking care of
employees who have been harmed from
these structures, offering reparations and
advocating for their financial, physical
and mental well-being is the next step.
Contemporary
marketing
theories
implore brands to associate themselves
with current topics and movements that
people care about. This means creating
space for themselves where individuals
commonly congregate on social media
platforms, keeping up with trends and
engaging in societal chatter. Even in times
of tragedy, where companies undoubt-
edly have larger influence and resources
than civilians, brands post the same cap-
tions and images as the rest of the social
media population, filling feeds with black
squares or graphics now seen hundreds
of thousands of times. This templated
action among brands rushing to show
where they stand, without enacting long-
term solutions or staying involved, cre-
ates uncertainty for consumers beyond a
slightly greater recognition of a progres-
sive presence and a lingering sense of
virtue. As consumers, we have a certain
responsibility to wield our spending power
for the greater good of society. This looks
like spending our money with intention.
The average individual does not prop-
erly understand — because it is designed
this way — the magnitude of control that
capitalism and consumerism have on our
nation. This uncertainty consequently
feeds capitalist power; when we are
unaware, and therefore dismissive, of the
impact of our dollars, they fail to benefit us
and in many ways, they begin to oppress
us. When the companies who rely on our
dollars stop receiving them, it can inspire
a great period of reflection, demand and
readjustment in the way our economy,
environment and society function. These
companies build their success off of cater-
ing to the consumer, so when the con-
sumer remains complicit in a company’s
participation in the use of prison or child
labor, underpaying employees, donating
to ethically-disturbed organizations or
people, or involvement in other oppressive
or dehumanizing systems, it is our respon-
sibility to not feed that company anymore.
Similarly, if a company’s infrastructure
is void of cultural, age-based, race and
gender-based diversity, but benefits from
these same people, it is our responsibility
to not feed that company anymore. Clos-
ing the racial wealth gap demands creat-
ing and ensuring opportunities for Black
individuals to enter and gain traction
within industries that have been heav-
ily and disproportionately dominated by
white people. However, if we — the con-
sumer — are not disturbed by the dis-
proportionately white environment, and
we remain seemingly satisfied with the
way the company functions, change will
not occur. This has been proven to us.
Slavery is a conversation often
assumed to be spoken on with historical
From The Daily: On consumerism
W
ith the death of George Floyd on May 25 and the coinciding protests
across the nation, came a rather desperate leap from companies to align
themselves with the Black liberation movement. Sporting hashtags including
#BlackLivesMatter and #JusticeForFloyd, many large brands or organizations
responded to the collective unrest of the nation by posting messages of solidarity.
Read more at MichiganDaily.com