3 Comments:

 Anonymous commented at 1:26 PM~  

QUESTION: Which is more admirable?

1. Stop consuming or significantly reduce consumption (e.g. thriftstores for clothes, home gardens for food, bikes instead of cars)... but make zero positive impact on the suffering people in the world... essentially you only stop adding to the negative by extricating yourself from the factors that persist the suffering.

2. Or be a responsible consumer who spends your money prudently and targets your purchases toward charities/organization/causes who then redirect the resulting revenue into making a difference for suffering people in the world... although you would still be perceived as a "consumer".

Is consumption really the problem here? I tend to think it's the lack of responsibility in our consumption that allows victimization to go unchecked. I think that's the mentality Bono & others are trying to change...

 Steve commented at 2:41 PM~  

These are good points, although I'd question whether these two items are mutually exclusive. I think it's possible to do both.

 Anonymous commented at 12:00 AM~  

i saw bono on larry king and he basically believes people won't stop consuming and he can't change them, so why not try and get some good things happening from consumers. over consumoing is bad, but at least some good will come from this since people will consume anyways. bono also said povert will always be around but we must stop stupid poverty. ok, my 2 cents worth! Adele

Want to Post a Comment?

back to main page