Effects Of Consumerism And Pollution

Companies are using environmentalism as a straw man for overconsumption. Coming straight out of writer Amy Westervelt’s article, “Can Recycling Be Bad for the Environment?”, Westervelt clearly sees through this ploy of emotional appeal, stating “American consumers

The wages and conditions of the work environment are good in relation to other opportunities the citizens of these countries have. Not only do these people now have a job that feeds their families, they are learning skills that may benefit them in the future. The companies may also argue that they are not violating any laws that the country has enacted. Without the use of cheap labor in foreign markets not only would the company and it’s stockholders lose profits, but the products being produced would be more expensive when entering the United States’ market. This in turn would adversely affect the American consumer.

Environmental inequality, contrary to what we may imagine, is a social and political problem rather than a simple environmental problem. Environmental inequalities are deeply tangled with political, economic structures and institutions; adding more problems to the social inequalities that already affect our daily lives (Brehm, 2013). So, what exactly is environmental inequality? It refers to the fact that low-income people and people of color are disproportionately likely to experience various environmental problems by living in high risk and polluted areas. If we look at this problem closely we realize “that black, white, and Hispanic households with similar incomes live in neighborhoods of dissimilar environmental quality” (Downey, 2008) and that most people who suffer the consequences of living in neighborhoods with high hazard levels are racial minorities. This allows us to conclude that environmental inequality it is also linked to racism.

When one discusses acts of racism, slander or the stereotyping of a group of people may come to mind. However, the concept of environmental racism is rarely considered. This form of racism positions dominant environmental framing as racially driven, in which people of color (i.e. minorities) are affected disproportionately by poor environmental practices. Communities of color throughout the United States have become the dumping grounds for our nation’s waste disposal, as well as home to agricultural and/or manufacturing industries that pollute the land. Government regulations and cultural practices have all contributed to environmental racism. The government’s policies have also negatively impacted low income groups as well as people of

My report is on Environmental Justice across Class and Race. Environmental Justice is the fair treatment and fair distribution of environmental protection. It is the meaningful involvement of all people regardless or face, color, sex, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. It is the civil right of all people to be able to enjoy equally high levels of environmental protection. Environmental justice supporters have shown that this is no accident. Those communities of African American and Latinos, which are often low income, are regularly target to host hazards facilities that have negative environmental impacts.

There are too many cases in which workers across the globe are subjected to horrific working conditions. Because of the laws in place in the United States, manufacturing jobs are not

This factory collapsed and killed over 1,000 workers (Abrams, Rachel). In addition US companies use child labor that never would be ok in the domestic market. GAP has been accused of using 8 year old workers and Apple 15 year olds (Lamarque,Hannah). Other companies work minors over 19 hours per day (Lamarque,Hannah ). Can you imagine the backlash if a US company tried these practices? Overall, if they guarantee these rights in their home markets, they should treat their employees and customers abroad with equal human rights protection.

In developed countries such as the United States, we do things like burn fossil fuels and other practices deemed unhealthy for the environment, while it is typically underdeveloped, third-world countries filled with people who aren’t white that feel the biggest impact of these actions. Additionally, it is the rich minority of people making these issues by harming the environment, and those who are impacted by it are the poor majority of the rest of the world.

The environment is constantly being sacrificed for food production, toxic dumps, wood distribution, military testing, and other things such as these. And as usual, the root lies in profit. The corporations can’t afford to be concerned with the future well being of the earth and it’s dwellers. Also, environmental pollution can be connected to racism and classism because it is the poor communities that are used for toxic dumps and prisons, and it’s the poor people who work in the factories that require having contact with harmful chemicals and technologies, and generally the poor communities consist of people of color.

Hazards and pollutants are apparent in a variety of outcomes. Possible outcomes include asthma, cancer and chemical poisoning (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Furthermore, “Although debated, the main hypothesis explaining these disparities is that disadvantaged communities encounter greater exposure to environmental toxins such as air pollution, pesticides, and lead” (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Therefore, disadvantaged groups, such as people of color and the poor, experience greater environmental risks. Additionally, “Blacks in particular are exposed to a disproportionate amount of pollution and suffer the highest levels of lead and pesticide poisoning and other associated health problems” (Jones and Rainey 2006: 474). People of color, essentially, compete to live healthily. For example, African-Americans and Africans alike, struggle with the negative affects of oil refineries and unresponsive governments. The same can be said for Hispanics in California and the natives of Ecuador, who are forced to cope with the pollution of the Texaco oil refineries (Bullard 2001: 4). Environmental racism not only exploits natural resources, it abuses and profits from the communities involved. Governments and polluting facilities will continue to capitalize on the economic susceptibilities of poor communities, states, nations and regions for their “unsound” and hazardous operations (Bullard 2001: 23).

The placement of companies deleterious to the environment and well-being of humans is something that prosperous communities are not quite familiar with; in contrast, it is something well-known to less affluent communities. The imbalance of classification shows a lack of environmental justice in low-income and minority communities. According to the EPA, or Environmental Protection Agency, “environmental justice is the fair treatment… of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies,” (EPA, n.d.). However, the environmental justice, the EPA mentions is not prevalent in communities of color, but rather its counterpart is: environmental injustice. Environmental injustice, or environmental racism, being the excessive placing of perilous waste and contaminating polluters near communities of color (Cha, 2016). Although often overlooked, environmental racism is an extensive problem that negatively affects minority communities in Southeast Los Angeles.

Consumerism often causes people to identify with a product or brand on a personal level. Certain products have come to represent different levels of society, with swankier products like muscle cars indicating high class and such products as generic “store brand” shampoo indicating low class. People feel that they have relationships with their favorite brands and products and define themselves by what they buy and own. The mass production of cheap products uses precious fossil fuels at an alarming rate. This has an obvious negative impact on the environment.

Additionally, many environmentalists argue that consumerism has severe affects on the environment and blame it for many issues society is currently facing. Some major concerns about consumerism are that it can cause pollution, land contamination, and forest degradation. The production and waste of products used in consumption is related to pollution. Industrial waste and automobiles are primary examples, as well as waste from industrial agriculture and individual consumer waste. A main issue that exists is the exporting of pollution and waste from developed countries to poorer countries, a process which is done due to the fact that poorer countries have lower standards or exempt from the emission reduction targets (Shah, 2010). Similarly, according to the Chief economist for the World Bank Larry Summers the World Bank should be encouraging more migration of dirty industries to less developed countries, ironically the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is perfect, however there are many countries in Africa that are vastly under-polluted. Their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low compared to city like, Los Angeles or Mexico City (Robbins, 1999). According to Larry Summers,

Living in a highly industrialized world that is ruled by capitalism, the concern for the environment often takes a back seat. Individuals or companies nowadays prioritize achieving optimal profit without putting into mind what their respective actions or productions may have an effect on the environment. They do not realize how important the role of our environment plays in the quality of human life. We can say that a good environment leads to a better quality life, while a bad environment could lead to a harmful and unproductive life. Now, it becomes unfair and unjust when the risks and costs of a company affect a certain group of people and on the opposite side of the spectrum another group of individuals enjoy the benefits without costs. The individuals that are affected badly are usually from Third World Countries where the distribution of risk and costs are not even (Low and Gleeson 1999). This is where Environmental Justice comes in. Environmental Justice mainly concerns the welfare of human beings (Low and Gleeson 1999). Talking about cities where capitalism surges from, it has been argued that these cities are ‘unfairly structured’ (Low and Gleeson 1999). Basically, what this is saying is that the wealthier you are, the better or cleaner the environment. On the other hand, if you are poor, then the environment around you will have more health risks. This kind of injustice or disparity is what adds fuel to the fire of environmental justice. In

The economy today runs on an antiquated ritual of exploiting, plundering, devastation, and manipulation of land for material wealth, profiting the wealthy and condemning the poor. This mindset is no more sophisticated than feudalism, a system so bad it had to be outlawed along with witchcraft. The idea that exploitation of land is justified has brought plastics to the ocean and leveled rainforests. Large corporations have grown larger by manufacturing and production, depleting the planet’s resources in the process. Now, companies must make a combined effort to put the environment first, before profit. Because of their harmful practices, consumers have the right to know where products come from, how they’re made, and the impact on the environment. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the large corporations to change their harmful practices, to make strides towards ending climate change and use clean, sustainable methods.