Personal Changes Doesn't Equal Political Change

Derrick Jensen comes right out of the gate mentioning Hitler (as opposed to later as per Godwin's Law) in "Taking Shorter Showers Doesn't Cut it: Personal Change Does Not Equal Political Change," which might annoy some people. But what's more annoying is the reality that the personal choices we make and hold so dear, that we're so convinced are going to change the world, might not really be working as effectively as we would like.

Here are some highlights, just from the article (the comments are a bit of a maze, but if you can negotiate them I think they're worth reading through). They are all Jensen's words exactly, except what's in brackets (not parenthesis-they're him too).

• Consumer culture and the capitalist mindset have taught us to substitute acts of personal consumption (or enlightenment) for organized political resistance.
• People (both human people and fish people) aren’t dying because the world is running out of water. They’re dying because the water is being stolen.
• I don’t pretend that not buying much (or not driving much, or not having kids) is a powerful political act, or that it’s deeply revolutionary. It’s not. Personal change doesn’t equal social change.
• If we choose the “alternative” option of living more simply, thus causing less harm, but still not stopping the industrial economy from killing the planet, we may in the short term think we win because we get to feel pure, and we didn’t even have to give up all of our empathy (just enough to justify not stopping the horrors), but once again we really lose because industrial civilization is still killing the planet, which means everyone still loses. 
• Simple living as a political act consists solely of harm reduction, ignoring the fact that humans can help the Earth as well as harm it. [And by the way, I would not have said that, necessarily, and perhaps this is a language issue here.]
• [Neo-Luddite] Kirkpatrick Sale . . . : “The whole individualist what-you-can-do-to-save-the-earth guilt trip is a myth. We, as individuals, are not creating the crises, and we can’t solve them.”
• [Capitalism] redefines us from citizens to consumers. By accepting this redefinition, we reduce our potential forms of resistance to consuming and not consuming.
• We can follow the example of those who remembered that the role of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems.

It's posts like this that make me feel like an ineffectual white, suburban elitist. I have such a difficult time giving up the notion that I can buy or not buy my way out of a problem, and that my one vote to buy or not buy really does count because if more people did it we'd develop the mythical critical mass that would indeed change the way things are or are done.

While I go to bed in my cushy home each night after a long day of blogging, reading, writing, working, baking vegan cookies, buying local, organic and vegan foodstuffs, recycling, taking short showers, driving very little, volunteering a lot, taking care of the creatures, wearing the same "Life is Good" T-shirts and flip-flops and trying to buy only what I need, and feeling like with each of those decisions--my decisions--the world gets better, I must admit that that last part just might be an illusion. It might be a lie I tell myself to make me feel like I have power to change the world and am changing it with my choices.

What are your thoughts?

Comments

[Kristen]

But if everyone said I'm just one person I can't change the world and therefore never does anything about it, then of course it would never change - but one person changing might eventually equal two (your spouse or friend) which might equal four (their coworkers or parents), etc. etc. So I say - continue to be responsible, vote with your money, you will eventually influence others to do the same. Knowledge is power the more that people know the more they are willing to change what they don't like. There is a reason why so many companies are "going green" because money talks. So I will continue to purchase green products, recycle, etc. because it is the responsible thing to do, even if my actions don't end up saving the world, at least I tried.

Ps. This is the same argument that people use about not going vegan – “why bother the entire world isn’t going to go vegan so why should I?” – but guess what there are probably twice as many vegans now then there were 10 years ago because people ignored that statement and continued to do the right thing – and while the world may never go completely vegan – the more that do the more lives we end up saving.

[mary]

Kristen,
Just to be clear, I do the right thing because it's the right thing, and that's not going to stop. Just because most people aren't going vegan anytime soon doesn't faze me. However, what I question is the notion that my personal habits will create a political shift, rather than simply a shift in the type of products available for consumption.

[Ian Smith]

Kristen - Jensen isn't saying that one person can't make a difference, he is just saying that lifestyle changes and consumer decisions are not the most effective way for a person to make a difference...furthermore if that is all one is doing then he/she is fooling themselves as to the significant of their decisions.

I think Jenen's point is an important one...but at the same time taking the point too far allows one to make excuses for all sorts of behavior (for example, Jensen eats animals).

Finally, Mary, many of the activities that you engage in--blogging, reading, writing, volunteering--seems to be in accordance with what Jensen might advise. Education, community building, etc seem to be highly endorsed by Jensen.

[Brandon Becker]

Love it. Thanks for posting this!

In regards to the exploitation of other animals, some advocates make it seem like consumer demand is just there - that animal-oppressing corporations do nothing but just meet this demand. Individualism can blind one from seeing the structural factors at work. These corporations aggressively market their products (flesh, cow milk, eggs, furred-animal pelts, cow skin, sheep hair, etc), lobby the government for handouts and deregulation, and work with the USDA to maximize profits. Creating, sustaining, and increasing demand are fundamental parts of running a capitalist corporation. These corporations are not amoral, they are immoral.

[Mike Grieco]

I once read: "If you want to change the world, change yourself."

Let's look at the creatures we care for. Aren't they better off because of compassion? Because of our decisions? Of course they are.

Time will tell if humans can continue to abuse our obligation to this planet...time will definitely show how we chose to live.

Live and let live.

[Brandon Becker]

Changing ourselves is the starting point. After becoming vegan (a moral obligation), we should get active to encourage others to make this change. We should unequivocally demand an end to speciesist explotation and advocate basic rights to life and liberty for all sentient beings. We must be the change AND work for social and political change.

[Kris Sulzberger]

Wow. Mary Martin's summary and response to the article by Derrick Jensen is powerful. Like one commenter said, I try to do the right thing because it is the right thing to do, and regardless of the political impact my actions may or may have, I'll continue to do the right thing. I don't think Martin is advising us to stop what we're doing because it's politically ineffectual, but rather to do *more*. And I would love to do more, to be more of an activist to help change the world. My personality does not lend itself to leaving my job (not economically feasible for me) and picketing corporate icons of environmental destruction. Personally, I don't see how getting arrested for a cause will cause political change...it would only cause me stress. I can figure out who my representatives are and write them, of course (although from the generic replies I've seen to constituent letters in the past, I highly doubt that does much good). But what else can I do to evoke political change? I'm a willing soul, but I need suggestions that work for the average, blue-collar Jill. Mary? Commenters?

[Brandon Becker]

Kris, check out this article by David Cantor:

"Get Political for Animals: What Does That Mean?"
http://www.animalsvoice.com/edits/editorial/essays/misc/get_political1.html

[All Means Justifiable]

People will listen to him (Jensen) much more if he will "prove" he's on their side.

I very much agree with Ian on this:
"I think Jenen's point is an important one...but at the same time taking the point too far allows one to make excuses for all sorts of behavior (for example, Jensen eats animals)."