Overall, my ethical shopping hasn’t been too problematic as fair trade and organic produce is becoming more and more main stream. Primark even have organic t-shirts but £4 they are hardly likely to be fair trade or anywhere near it. I have even seen TVs made of wood from sustainable forests for sale! So things are looking up. But it does seem that at Christmas all the environmental considerations seem to go out of the window. I know that I’m going to have to give in and buy a few things which wouldn’t normally fit in with my shopping rules but I don’t really have a choice. For once my morals are going to have to take a back seat whilst I buy stuff to make people happy. I’m sure I’ll be able to make up for it in the New Year. Maybe in the New Year I’ll extend my shopping rules to food. I have started to buy more organic and fair-trade food despite the huge price tags they carry so it is something I’m thinking about. Either way, I will definitely find a way to make up for my bad spending. Maybe I should spend a day without electricity and sit in the dark and think about what I have done.
Wednesday, 5 December 2007
Nightmare before Christmas shopping: an ethical dilemma
Green washing for a white Christmas
It amazing me how at this time of year the press like to jump on the eco bandwagon and talk about having a ‘green Christmas’ when in actual fact, this time of year is a nightmare for the environment. I’m not just talking about all the trees being cut down and covered in tacky bits of tin foil (although all that plastic and nasty chemicals can’t help), I’m not talking about the huge amounts of wasted energy powering the Christmas lights all over the world or the waste of wrapping paper that gets used once then dumped into landfill. I’m talking about all the money spent on useless presents that no one really wants. Parents spend up to £500 per child at Christmas. I’m not some scrooge who wants to cancel Christmas or anything but a little bit of sensibility would be nice. I’ve seen parents take their kids to toys-r-us with a trolley and say ‘what do you want?’ Now that’s not what Christmas is all about.
I know it would probably be a disaster to the economy but what would happen if people only bought presents for friends and family that they knew that person would really like? What if we stopped buying toiletries, perfume and DVDs and bought meaningful presents that people would treasure rather than add to the already dusty collection of stuff that will get used/watched once if you’re lucky? I hate Christmas shopping, not for the usual reasons but because seeing so many people milling around looking for something, some generic ‘that will do’ gift for some aunty they haven’t seen in years, is such a waste of time and money. I don’t know what has caused this need to spend either. Perhaps it’s just the commercialisation of Christmas these days; fifty years ago kids were pleased with an orange for Christmas. Whatever the reason, it has spoilt Christmas for me. For me, Christmas has never been about presents but has always been about having sausages and bacon and a turkey for lunch.
Sunday, 25 November 2007
Animal rights and human wrongs: ignorance to animal welfare
I’m currently reading an old book by Konrad Lorenz, one of the founders of the science of animal behaviour but I’m struggling with it. I’m not struggling with the content so much as I’m struggling to respect this great thinker due to what I suppose you could call ‘cultural differences’ or perhaps ‘ethical differences.’ You see, Lorenz kept a whole menagerie of animals in his house from song birds to lemurs and nowadays we would condemn such practise but in the 50’s issues of animal welfare were very much only beginning to be considered. In one chapter on pets he describes which birds are best bought from dealers or taken form nests to be kept as ‘interesting pets’. My edition of this book, printed in the 70s however, does contain a warning of the legality of the trade of some of the species he mentions. So it’s not all bad. At least in
The sad thing is, 55 years after this book was written we still have a trade in exotic pets. Even Lorenz comments that with higher species the trade is ‘ethically dubious’ and since then the
I wish I could end this rant on a lighter, positive note but I can’t. Even so called scientists aren’t doing us any favours. Recently a new pet cat called the ashera went on sale. The cat is a hybrid of the domestic cat and the serval. This dog sized cat is a beauty but how could any self respecting scientist believe it’s a good use of time and equipment to create a designer pet at the expense of genetic diversity of a rare cat? If only the time and research had been put into the conservation of this species instead of creating the feline equivalent of a prada bag.
Wednesday, 21 November 2007
Offsetting your guilty shopping
There are times when charity shops and ethical shopping don’t measure up and you end up in a chain store when you didn’t want to be. Things like pyjamas and underwear you just can’t get elsewhere (there are some ethical retailers such as Green Knickers but they tend to be a bit pricey). So every now and then these unethical purchases have to be made. (I’m sure there are hard core environmentalists who would argue that you can live without these things but personally, I’d rather not!). Anyway, I got thinking about these unavoidable purchases. If you can offset the guilt and carbon from flying, perhaps you can offset your unethical spendings with charity donations? For example, buying something that isn’t fair trade could be offset with donations to charities that promote fair trade and fight child labour. It’s just a case of working out how much. I spent £11 on new pyjamas yesterday, which if I was offsetting my carbon emissions from a flight would mean about a 20p donation which I think is far too little. I think between £5 and £11 is fairer, so I’ll find a charity online and make that donation today. I feel so much better now; I suppose that’s the major selling factor for these offsetting schemes!