To Consume or Not to Consume?

You may already know about the "Buy Nothing Day" (BND). It's a day of informal protest against consumerism organized by environmental and social activists in North America and around the world on the Friday (or the weekend) after Thanksgiving. It has been going on since 1992, when the first BND was organized in Vancouver, Canada.

The Friday after Thanksgiving, known as the Black Friday, is the grand kickoff to the biggest shopping season of the year in North America. Hence, the symbolic importance of holding the BND on this day.

The ads and fliers of this movement draw people's attention to over-consumption in the developed countries. For example, they point out that the developed countries, which are only 20 percent of the world population, consume over 80 percent of earth's natural resources. An average North American consumes five times more than a Mexican, 10 times more than a Chinese person, and 30 times more than a person from India. Consumerism is causing huge environmental damage and socio-economic disparities.

On this day, the participants are asked to refrain from shopping for 24 hours. The organizers hope that this day would be a starting point. A day on which people in the developed countries reflect on their consuming habits and adopt a life style committed to consuming less and producing less waste. In the capitalistic economies, consumption is seen as a power through which consumers can influence the practices of corporations. Hence, the organizers also hope that this abstinence will force companies to adopt environment-friendly and fair-wage practices.

What I wonder though is that can we really address the problem of consumerism without addressing the larger phenomenon of materialism? As I see, consumerism is merely one facet of the broader 'matrix' of materialism. This matrix is the 'hegemony of materialism' in our lives, especially in the West. Materialism is the dominant norm. It surrounds us so powerfully that it has become invisible, like water for fish. Watch this clip (here) in which one of the founding organizers of the BND is interviewed by a CNN anchor. Again and again the CNN anchor asks the organizer, "but why shouldn't we?" Why shouldn't people spend money when they can? Why shouldn't people buy stuff what they wish to have? The BND organizer responds with many reasonable and persuasive answers. But, as obvious from the anchor’s repetition, it was hard for her to think above the standpoint of one's own needs and desires.

Hegemony of Materialism

I feel that we cannot effectively address the issue of consumerism if we isolate it from the broader matrix of materialism. Our public awareness campaigns should directly address this matrix in a systematic way. Because materialism is at the roots of how our so-called modern societies are structured. The free-market capitalist system wants you to compete with each other for materialistic accomplishments and gains, in your career, in your lifestyle, in your social relations. The capitalist system is accompanied by a dominant cultural temperament that values individualism and materialistic competition, and that places success and status in materialistic accomplishments. It seeks human happiness and quality of life in material possessions, in the gratification of human desires and wants, in having luxurious cars and big houses, in having lavish entertaining gadgets like tv, cell phones, stereo, computers, in going on cruise vacations, and in having a care-free, responsibility-free lifestyle. Materialism is a totalizing system, like the totalizing system depicted in the movie Matrix. Consumerism is but one facet of this broader matrix of materialism.

Where do we locate this matrix of materialism? Materialism is the economic structure surrounding us. Materialism is the outlook and values in our minds. It is grounded in our very materialistic needs and desires. It is a powerful social force that rewards those that obey it and punishes those that resist it. It seeks to suppress human spirituality and reduce human beings to mono-dimensional materialistic beings, as homo-economicus that are concerned only about maximizing their individual profits and that seek their happiness in only materialistic accomplishments. The materialistic outlook makes people think only about themselves, their own wants and desires, their own profits and gains. The resultant is the socio-economic disparity that we see in the world where over 80% of world resources are consumed by less than 20% of the population. In US alone, the top 20% own more than 80% of the wealth. And they all do it guilt-free because this is how it is supposed to be under the hegemony of materialism.

No wonder it was difficult for the CNN anchor to understand what the BND organizer was saying. So is the case with a majority of people in the North America. Many people that do understand the consequences of consumerism do not always do anything substantial to resist it because often they themselves are deep into materialism, in one way or another. Some of these people may hate Bill Gates and Donald Trump, but at the same time they want to become rich and famous like these two.

The particular form and hegemony of materialism that I am concerned about here developed within the particular historical experience of modernity in the West. Although the origins of this materialism is in the West, it is now being spread all over the world through the process of economic and cultural globalization. Materialism today is seeking to consolidate its hegemony all over the world. Even though my focus is on the materialistic tendencies in the West, I do not mean to imply that these tendencies do not exist in other countries. No they do exist, albeit with varying degress and forms. An important question here though is that why do people that do not directly benefit from materialism, the have-nots in the West and elsewhere, still support it, or, do not actively resist it? I will look into this question in some future post.

Now, I wonder about those certain classes in the US and elsewhere that champion the cause of poverty and social justice but are not willing to sacrifice their own materialistic lifestyle. They keep benefitting from the same unjust socio-economic disparities that they want to reform or change. I wonder if these people can really cure human suffering. Because the way materialism surrounds us, the way it has penetrated into our lives, the way it has become the norm, I feel that only by bringing radical changes to our lifestyle, to our consumption habits, to our materialistic ambitions and ideals can we truly make any substantial difference. Movements like the BND can be very useful in drawing attention toward the larger phenomenon of materialism. But a narrow focus on 'consumerism' cannot be an end in itself. That is, the movement cannot just focus on over-consumption, on the excesses, on merely encouraging restraint to certain classes and certain countries. That won't do much in my opinion. Movements like the BND need to target the broader hegemony of materialism and seek a qualitative change (not just quantitative abstinence) within ourselves and our societies.

Liberating the Hearts, Minds, and Bodies

An effective solution would first need to diagnose the causes and dynamics of the problem. Further, given the seductive and enormous power of materialism, the solution, the social movement would need to have a force more powerful than materialism. We need a powerful system of thought and social organization that could take people out of their indulgence in materialism. The solution needs to be comprehensive so it could liberate people's hearts, minds, and bodies from the confines of materialism. Confines that are shaped by nafsani khwahishaat (low desires of hearts), fikri ghulami (mental slavery of minds), and system kii zangerain (chains of the structure/system around our bodies). We need to diagnose and address materialism on all of these three connected but independent causal levels.

It should be obvious to the regular readers of this blog that I have Islam here in mind as that solution. I truly believe that it addresses this problem on all the three levels, and it is a force powerful enough to overcome materialism. Because it appeals to the very core of human nature (materialistic and spiritual), and exhorts both understanding and practice, ilm aur amal, starting from changing one's own nafs (self) to cause changes in the larger society. I wish to devote my next few posts to define and discuss the various facets/levels of materialism and their consequences, as well as to look at Islam as the alternative. Those who know me know that I am highly indebted to my Ustadh AMZ's research work on this topic and for that matter on all other topics and thoughts that I share on this blog.

---------
Click on the tag/label "Materialism" (right column on top) to find other related posts in this blog.

Civilize Them!

Take a glimpse at the muted history of the Native American experience of "progress" and "civilization' in the US.

A personal account from the book Lakota Woman by Mary Crow Dog and Richard Erdoes:

"Oddly enough, we owed our unspeakable boarding schools to the do-gooders, the white Indian-lovers. The schools were intended as an alternative to the outright extermination seriously advocated by generals Sherman and Sheridan, as well as by most settlers and prospectors overrunning our land. "you don't have to kill those poor benighted heathen," the do-gooders said, "in order to solve the Indian Problem. Just give us a chance to turn them into useful farmhands, laborers, and chambermaids who will break their backs for you at low wages." in that way the boarding schools were born. The kids were taken away from their villages and pueblos, in their blankets and moccasins, kept completely isolated from their families- sometimes for as long as ten years- suddenly coming back, their short hair slick with pomade, their necks raw from stiff, high collars, their thick jackets always short in the sleeves and pinching under the arms, their tight patent leather shoes giving them corns, the girls in starched white blouses and clumsy, high-buttoned boots - caricatures of white people. When they found out - and they found out quickly - that they were neither wanted by whites nor by Indians, they got good and drunk, many of them staying drunk for the rest of their lives. I still have a poster I found among my grandfather's stuff, given to him by the missionaries to tack up on his wall. It reads:

1. Let Jesus save you.

2. Come out of your blanket, cut your hair, and dress like a white man.

3. Have a Christian family with one wife for life only.

4. Live in a house like your white brother. Work hard and wash often.

5. Learn the value of a hard-earned dollar. Do not waste your money on giveaways. Be punctual.

6. Believe that property and wealth are signs of divine approval.

7. Keep away from saloons and strong spirits.

8. Speak the language of your white brother. Send your children to school to do likewise.

9. Go to church often and regularly.

10. Do not go to Indian dances or to the medicine men."

From Lakota Woman by Mary Crow Dog and Richard Erdoes. New York: Grove Weidenfeld. 1990, pp. 28 onwards.

A critical point to note here is that Colonialism was not separate from the project of European Enlightenment. Colonialism was not contradictory to the liberal ideals of political rights and self-determination. The very ideals of European Enlightenment, anchored in the notions of uni-linear progress of history and civilizations, the emphasis on particular modes of thought and reason, the importance on individual rights and private property as the means of self-actualization, and the difference between the "modern" and "backward", implied that Europeans see themselves as "different," "superior," and "civilized" in comparison to other unfamiliar cultures and peoples. Both John Locke and John Stuart Mill, the champions of Liberalism, supported and rationalized the practice of colonialism through these ideals. To them it was a "progressive force" that would civilize the indigenous people (sounds very familiar, huh?!). That is the "White Man's Burden". These ideals were also incorporated into particular versions of Christianity that were brought to the Americas by the European settlers, as exemplified in the above quoted text.

For more on this line of argument, albeit with a focus on India, see Uday Mehta's "Liberalism and Empire".

Here is a song dedicated to all of humanity, with a focus on the Native American colonial experience. The song wishes for peace and reconciliation in Truth and Justice: All My Relations.

The image caption reads: "The White Man's Burden".

See my previous post on Thanksgiving for a related discussion. Also, the posts entitled, "Orientalism, Then and Now" (here) and "Maps and Wests" (here). The animated movie Pocahontas also makes some effective points, especially in the song, Colors of the Wind (although I should warn that some slides in this clip may be a bit inappropriate for certain audience).

THANKSGIVING OR THANKS-TAKING: THE LESSONS

The impulse for writing today is the occasion of Thanksgiving which is observed in the US on the fourth Thursday of November each year.

Thanksgiving is a celebration. It is a national holiday. It is one of those few times in the year when American families make it a point to come together, to unite, no matter how close or far they may be living otherwise. Airports and shopping malls experience heavy traffic of people around this holiday season. Although the origins of Thanksgiving may have some religious basis, for a majority of people, it's just a national holiday. Just like the Christmas.

Thanksgiving is a family event, celebrated with the theme of "giving thanks" to each other and to God. The theme has its origins in a story that speaks of the cooperation between the English settlers and the Native Americans. The Native Americans helped the poor English settlers survive the harsh weather and new environment by teaching them how to catch fish and grow corn during the first year of their arrival. At the conclusion of the first harvest season, the English settlers, who are also called the Pilgrims, held a Thanksgiving celebration of food, feasting, and praising God. They also invited their Native American benefactors on the occasion, and fed and entertained them for three days. Or so the popular version of the story says.

Power, History, and Identity

What interests me about this story is its utility for the construction of the American identity and American self-perception. Let me make a general point here before I specifically look at Thanksgiving. All Nation-states actively seek to define their identities by tracing them back to certain mythical or historical origins. Often it is difficult to distinguish between the myth and the history. For example, in the history textbooks in Pakistan, the origin of the Muslim Pakistan is indirectly traced back to the arrival of Muhammad Bin Qasim in Sind. Bin Qasim was basically a Syrian General who came to Sind to protect the Umayyad maritime interests and capture the political opponents at large. The history textbooks and popular cultural discourse (like the PTV drama serial on Bin Qasim), however, have a different version of the story. They glorify Bin Qasim as the Muslim hero sent by Governor Hajjaj Bin Yusuf to rescue Muslim prisoners from Raja Dahir. Interpreted in a metaphysical way, Bin Qasim's victory is presented as the victory of Islam over non-believers and oppressors.

This victory is then connected to the existential foundation of Pakistan. Consider the following statement: "Pakistan was born when the first Muslim stepped on the Subcontinent's soil" (M.A. Jinnah). Or, for example, consider the title, 'Babul Islam' (the Gateway of Islam in South Asia), that is often given to the province of Sind (I remember reading it in my 'social studies' textbooks and being taught in the context of Bin Qasim's incursions in Sind). [However, I should also mention that both the above statement and the title can also refer to the traders and the sufi saints (including the mawali political opponents of the Umayyad) who might have come through Sind.]

What I would like my readers to consider is the need of the new nation-state to define Pakistan in "Islamic" terms, during the Pakistan movement and afterwards, especially during the Zia era, that required that certain heroes and stories are discovered in history which could define and distinguish Pakistan from other nations, particularly, and for obvious reasons, from India.

The point above is not to dwell into the politics of Pakistani identity. It is just to draw attention to the role that the present (present needs, interests, political expedience) often plays in the interpretation and re-interpretation of the past. Power, of course, has a lot to do in this process: The question of who defines the "heroes" and "villains," and who defines what is "success" and "failure." Reminds me of one of my favorite articles by Ali Shariati, On the Plight of the Oppressed People, that expresses this point very eloquently.

Often history is understood from the perspective of the "powerful" and the "victorious". Like Ali Shariati, my argument is that we need to question the dominant narratives of histories; we need to critically examine the processes that construct these narratives; and lastly, we need to understand history from the (objective) point of view of Truth and Justice. Just like Imam Ali recommended, 'Recognize the truth, and you shall recognize the people on the side of the truth".

By engaging in this critical project, we can recuperate the names and struggles of the oppressed people in the past and the present. This effort is the right thing to do in itself. That is, establishing Truth and Justice is 'valuable' and 'beautiful' in itself and requires no instrumental (means-to-end) justification.

But, there is also an instrumental value for this project. Some of the persistent problems of the world exist today because of either a) a wrong interpretation or mis-use of history (like the political use of the Holocaust to justify Zionist territorial expansionism. See, Norman Finkelstein's critical work on this), or, b) a historical amnesia of the wrong-doings in the past, which allows the repetition of the same injustices in the present. Thanksgiving is an example of this historical amnesia, as I will argue below.

The Power of Myths

One notices a number of founding myths that are part of the dominant cultural discourse in the US and that are produced and re-produced in the textbooks, on tv, in movies, by celebration of public holidays, and so on. These include the "manifest destiny", "city on the hill", "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", and "american dream" that seek to define the identity of the American people, that answer the questions: "who we are" and "what this nation is all about," and that bestow a sense of self-righteousness and shared glory to the people.

Now it is not necessary that all Americans believe in these foundational myths the same way. What is important here is that a certain version, a certain understanding of these ideals and myths are dominant in the American public discourse. That is the reason why the Columbus Day is celebrated as a holi-day in the US instead of an occasion of mourning, the day that resulted in the destruction of the great civilizations of Aztec, Inca, and Maya (See Eqbal Ahmad's "Culture of Imperialism.")

This historical amnesia plays a critical role in the project of imperialism. The historical amnesia is particularly about two very fundamental injustices on which America was founded and developed: a) Genocide of the Native Americans (about 150 million were exterminated directly by mass slaughter or indirectly by the diseases that the English settlers brought with them, which were hitherto unknown to the Natives), b) Slavery of the Black people.

Furthermore, the later history of the US is full of similar injustices by a certain group of people over others within the US and outside of the US. The Mexican-American War over the forceful annexation of Texas by the US is another example. Especially since the World War I, the US has been directly or indirectly involved in all over the world to advance its interests. One does not find these stories in the regular textbooks of American history. [There are of course exceptions, like Howard Zinn's A People's History. However, it is not the mainstream or dominant version of history; an average American does not learn this kind of critical history from the mass media and textbooks.]

The cost of this ignorance is aptly described by George Santayana, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." The American public has again and again been deceived in the name of self-defense, liberty, freedom, democracy, and progress. The latest examples are Afghanistan and Iraq. The invasion into Afghanistan is officially called "Operation Enduring Freedom". The reason for the war on Iraq was initially to destroy the WMDs. Now, since no such weapons were found in Iraq, the justification is framed in terms of 'liberating the Iraqi people' and 'establishing democracy'. I can imagine why some Americans get very perplexed when they see increasing anti-Americanism around the world, when all what they (their government) are doing is liberating the people from dictatorial regimes and spreading democracy. May be the Iraqi, the Afghani, the Somali, the Palestinian, the Pakistani people should throw annual Thanksgiving dinners in honor of the Bush Administration!

Thanksgiving or Thanks-taking!

What is the Native American side of the story? See, for example, this link that talks about how to teach a critical history of Thanksgiving.

A couple of passages from the above link: "The Puritans and the Pilgrims saw themselves as the "Chosen Elect" mentioned in the book of Revelation. They strove to "purify" first themselves and then everyone else of everything they did not accept in their own interpretation of scripture. Later New England Puritans used any means, including deceptions, treachery, torture, war, and genocide to achieve that end. (4) They saw themselves as fighting a holy war against Satan, and everyone who disagreed with them was the enemy. This rigid fundamentalism was transmitted to America by the Plymouth colonists, and it sheds a very different light on the "Pilgrim" image we have of them. This is best illustrated in the written text of the Thanksgiving sermon delivered at Plymouth in 1623 by "Mather the Elder." In it, Mather the Elder gave special thanks to God for the devastating plague of smallpox which wiped out the majority of the Wampanoag Indians who had been their benefactors. He praised God for destroying "chiefly young men and children, the very seeds of increase, thus clearing the forests to make way for a better growth", i.e., the Pilgrims. (5)"

Further, "The Wampanoag were actually invited to that Thanksgiving feast for the purpose of negotiating a treaty that would secure the lands of the Plymouth Plantation for the Pilgrims....A generation later, after the balance of power had indeed shifted, the Indian and White children of that Thanksgiving were striving to kill each other in the genocidal conflict known as King Philip's War. At the end of that conflict most of the New England Indians were either exterminated or refugees among the French in Canada, or they were sold into slavery in the Carolinas by the Puritans. So successful was this early trade in Indian slaves that several Puritan ship owners in Boston began the practice of raiding the Ivory Coast of Africa for black slaves to sell to the proprietary colonies of the South, thus founding the American-based slave trade. (10)"

As for the utility of the popular history of Thanksgiving, the abovementioned concerns are very eloquently articulated (better than I could have) by Judy Dow (Abenaki) and Beverly Slapin in these words:

"What is it about the story of “The First Thanksgiving” that makes it essential to be taught in virtually every grade from preschool through high school? What is it about the story that is so seductive? Why has it become an annual elementary school tradition to hold Thanksgiving pageants, with young children dressing up in paper-bag costumes and feather-duster headdresses and marching around the schoolyard? Why is it seen as necessary for fake “pilgrims” and fake “Indians” (portrayed by real children, many of whom are Indian) to sit down every year to a fake feast, acting out fake scenarios and reciting fake dialogue about friendship? And why do teachers all over the country continue (for the most part, unknowingly) to perpetuate this myth year after year after year?

Is it because as Americans we have a deep need to believe that the soil we live on and the country on which it is based was founded on integrity and cooperation? This belief would help contradict any feelings of guilt that could haunt us when we look at our role in more recent history in dealing with other indigenous peoples in other countries. If we dare to give up the “myth” we may have to take responsibility for our actions both concerning indigenous peoples of this land as well as those brought to this land in violation of everything that makes us human. The realization of these truths untold might crumble the foundation of what many believe is a true democracy. As good people, can we be strong enough to learn the truths of our collective past? Can we learn from our mistakes? This would be our hope."

Read the full text here: Deconstructing the Myths of “The First Thanksgiving”

For more information, visit here

The Lessons

The dominant cultural and political discourse in the US is very apt at historical amnesia. And, not without instrumental justifications, like 'why dig up the bitter past', 'what's the use of it', 'the past creates divisions and hatred', 'we need to look forward, rather than look backward.' With the George Santayana quote above, I have already outlined the need for remembering the past.

What I would like to add here is that there is a critical difference between the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and this active historical amnesia done for the 'good reasons'. The former recognizes the grave injustices of the past so that the plight of the oppressed is recognized (which is valuable in itself) and these injustices are not repeated again (the instrumental value of remembering history). This critical element is missing from the historical amnesia of the US, and not without consequences, as I describe above. Because history creates a certain consciousness and meaning in people. It creates identity, sense of self, sense of community and nation. And it informs their judgments and actions. It is for this reason, "He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future" (George Orwell).

For all of the above reasons, value-oriented and instrumental, the American people need to resist this historical amnesia. They should not let their political leaders deceive them in the name of false slogans. They should take charge of their history and its future!

Thanksgiving can be a very meaningful occasion, with full of lessons. Let's make it a day of self-reflection, and of a resolution: "Never Again!"

Let us ground our yearning for peace and reconciliation in truth and justice. I end this long post with a Native American Blessing:

“Let us walk softly on the Earth

With all living beings great and small,

Remembering as we go, that one God,

Kind and Wise, created all.”