Politics, Products, and Markets

Exploring Political Consumerism Past and Present

Frederick M. Wirt, Dietlind Stolle

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN:
  9781138530423
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351498098
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Marketing
• Index: Marketing

In contemporary life, the marketplace has emerged as an important arena for the practice of politics. Concerns about personal and family well-being as well as ethical or political assessment of favorable and unfavorable business and government practices become part and parcel of the marketplace of politics. This volume describes this phenomenon as political consumerism, reflecting an understanding of politics as a product embedded in a complex social and normative context. Politics, Products, and Markets is the first general study of political consumerism. It asks fundamental questions, including what is new and what is old about the phenomenon. The authors discuss the mediating role of political consumerism in the problematic relationship between markets and morality. They explore whether institutional arrangements have been developed to permit consumers and producers to assume ethical responsibility for their choices and behavior. They ask why political consumerism is presently on the rise. And they investigate the relationship between globalization and political consumerism. Part 1, "Making Money Morally," discusses how political consumerism challenges the perceived division between private interests pursued by private actors in the market and public interests pursued through political means. Part 2, "Consumer Choices and Setting of the Agenda of Politics," contains examples of how political consumerism sets the agenda of politics and discusses its democratic quality. Part 3, "Building Responsible Institutions in Multi-Risk Society," has as its central theme the development of new political consumer institutions. Part 4, "Politicizing Consumers and Change in Politics," studies the characteristics of political consumers and raises the question of whether political consumerism really is politics. This volume will be of interest to social scientists, social activists, and policy institutes.

Part I
Making Money Morally

Political Consumerism as Chance and Challenge

Andreas Follesdal

Introduction

Globalization affects the opportunity space, informational bases, and coordination capacities of states, multinational enterprises, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and citizens. With such changing resources come changing allocation of power and responsibilities—or so argue international NGOs and other vocal contributors to public debates. They challenge existing expectations and institutions and use terms such as “corporate citizenship,” “citizen-consumer,” and “ethical trade” to emphasize their point. The topic of these reflections is the responsibility of consumers in a global marketplace, committing acts of “political consumerism.” Traditionally, political participation has involved the relationship between citizens and their government, which in turn regulates the market. Political consumerism adds to this conception in that citizens turn directly to the market with a variety of political concerns. This phenomenon of political consumerism needs a political theory. We need a plausible account of consumer activism, which will allow us to identify and clarify its role within the political and economic global institutional order and provide criteria for its normative assessment.

The Need for Political Theory: Puzzles of Political Consumerism

Some scholars hail political consumerism as a practice within “civil society,” indeed within “global civil society.” Civil society steps up to global governance at a time when globalization threatens traditional structures of authority (Eide 1998, 631-32). The need for systematic reflection arises in part from what appears to be valid criticisms of political consumerism, especially as committed by individuals. Political consumer actions often seem counterproductive. Consider cases of objectionable company practices that worsen the situation for a local population, or that exploit and violate workers’ basic rights. Sometimes when political consumerism targets such a company, the action “works” in the sense that the company pulls out. But several unfortunate effects of company exit have been reported. Other, less sensitive, companies move in and continue the abuse. Sometimes, if no other employer moves in, the workers may be left even worse off, in unemployment or prostitution. Exploitation such as child labor, while an evil, may, thus, be the least foul alternative. Other critics denounce political consumerism as illegitimate insofar as the loose networks or organizations behind such protests should be democratic, transparent, and accountable, which some of them patently are not. Yet other criticisms charge that consumer action, on the basis of Western consumers’ own values, amounts to blatant disregard for the local culture and values: Political consumerism is cultural imperialism through market means.

These criticisms fail against several plausible conceptions of political consumerism. This response does not amount to denying the empirical claims, but instead draws on what we may think of as the political theory of political consumerism. At first glance, this label may seem inappropriate. Political theory is typically concerned with questions such as by what authority, and within what limits, political power may impose laws and practices with threats of sanction. Acts of political consumerism are not exercises of political power in this strict sense. It does not appear to be a collectively enforced, social arrangement, and hence does not restrict the legally regulated opportunity space of others. Yet, insofar as political consumerism is widely followed, it can effectively restrict the feasible options of companies, employees, and other consumers for better or worse. As with a wide range of practices that affect others, we may require that such practices be normatively justifiable. Moreover, through political consumerism citizens sometimes seek to build, reform, or improve institutions that have influence over our common well-being, regardless of whether these acts are part of the political order in the strict sense. Therefore, the phenomenon of political consumerism encourages scholars to rethink the function and meaning of political participation and authority.

The effectiveness of political consumerism can only be assessed on the basis of a clear understanding of its ends. In the next section, I identify and discuss five different conceptions of political consumerism. Many of them are not affected by the criticisms discussed above. However, the criticisms do challenge political consumerism, regarded as a practice aimed at institutional reform. These worries merit close attention and assessment, particularly under globalization, which is the topic of the second section of the chapter. The third section sketches a normative framework of the market that takes its point of departure in Adam Smith’s discourse on the subject for domestic markets. Then I explain why shifts in capacities among governments, business, and civil society may be thought to bolster the need for political consumerism or other non-traditional measures of political action. The fifth section identifies some of the challenges facing political consumerism as a mechanism for changing institutions and business practices towards international human rights standards.

Conceptions of Political Consumerism

At least five different conceptions of the role of political consumerism can be identified. They may not be exhaustive and are not mutually exclusive. I distinguish arguments based on consideration of what I call Agency, Expression of Self, Expression of Mutual Respect, Instruments for Reforming Wrong-doers, and Instruments for Reforming Business Practices.

Argument of Agency: Clean Hands

Boycott has long been regarded as a way to disassociate oneself from what are viewed as evil acts. The element of self-purification in Gandhian Satyagraha is an example. Boycott avoids complicity by seeking non-cooperation with evil, thus reducing the causal chain between one’s own acts and the immoral outcomes by avoiding personal participation and responsibility. Of course, negative consequences are important, but what also matters is whether evil comes about through one’s own agency. Such concerns have been defended and discussed among moral philosophers including Kant (Kant 1964), and more recently under the heading of “integrity” or “agent-relative reasons” (cf. Williams in Smart & Williams 1973; Hill 1979; Sen 1982; Mills 1996). Criticisms against such views include insistence that this is a case of moral self-indulgence, that considerations of responsibility matter little or as nothing as compared to the moral quality of outcomes in the world, and observations that it is impossible to extricate oneself completely from patterns of interaction anyway, which makes participation in corrupt trade practices unavoidable. Such criticisms notwithstanding, political consumer actions on this basis avoid some of the problems. Firstly, while morally relevant, whether the suffering abates is not decisive. Secondly, the grounds for action may arise from one’s personal moral view with no claim to be properly part of the common normative basis of society. Thirdly, such political consumerism need not be considered as an institutionalized practice, needing organizations, publicly defendable criteria, and the like.

Arguments of Identity: Expressing Self

Other conceptions of political consumerism regard it as a more active expression of one’s values. Such self-expressive conceptions may typically be part of what is often termed post-materialist values (Inglehart 2000). In societies where economic survival is taken for granted, younger generations give more priority to non-material values, such as making autonomous choices, spontaneous participation in political life, and environmental and gender issues, as discussed by Stolle and Hooghe in this book (see also Putnam 2000). Consider lifestyle preferences in general or Expressions of Self, where participants do not claim that all other citizens should so react, or that businesses should change their policies—except insofar as others happen to share these morally neutral values. An example may be political consumerism on the basis of aesthetic considerations, for instance, avoiding chain stores whose storefront ruins the smalltown neighborhood image. For our purposes, we may note that such reactions need not be institutionalized, especially since they are volatile in several senses. Individuals’ values may shift rapidly, and postmaterialists are also said to be wary of hierarchy and long-term organizations, preferring fluent networks.

Arguments of Identity: Expression of Mutual Respect

Other self-expressive actions may best be regarded as Expressions of Mutual Respect. They are undertaken on the basis of beliefs that certain companies violate fundamental normative constraints. In these cases, the values are thought to be not only optional preferences but legitimate standards for company behavior. Such cases may well arise for post-materialists, for even although their values tend to favor individualistic responses rather than collective, they are not egoistic or unduly self-interested. The high value given autonomy for oneself is often combined with respecting the autonomy of others, prizing individual liberties and social tolerance, and fostering civic participation—but in new social movements rather than in established organizations (Welzel, Inglehart, & Klingeman 2002). Spontaneous political consumerism may thus be a natural response to perceived abuse of workers or environmental degradation. Kant seems to have held such a view regarding disentangling oneself from immoral actors (Kant 1964; Hill 1979, 1991; Mills 1996). Political consumerism may express and foster a shared public understanding of what it means to be a responsible and fully human person (cf. Galston 1991).

Some features of these views may be noted. The central aim is not to change a practice or even to stop a particular case of abuse; “merely symbolic” action with no impact on the abuse may still serve the expressive purpose. Coordination dilemmas for the kind, “even if our company stops, the suffering will not stop,” do not affect expressive arguments. One’s self-image and values are important, but the general trustworthiness of any coordinating organization is not an issue, as long as the protester has trust in them. While detrimental effects by other companies may play a role in the decision, such effects are not part of the agent’s responsibility or expressive of identity in the same sense. Still, for Expressions of Mutual Respect, some such considerations of effects on the suffering may matter, for instance, insofar as the values include what John Rawls calls the natural duty of justice to “support and to comply with just institutions that exist and apply to us. It also constrains us to further just arrangements not yet established, at least when this can be done without too much cost to ourselves” (Rawls 1971, 115).

Instrumental Arguments: Re-Socializing Wrong-Doers

Some actions aim to re-socialize those who do wrong by shunning them, thus impressing on them the need to change their values. With such a change of heart, the unacceptable behavior should cease—for moral, rather than economic reasons, as pointed out in Friedman’s chapter. While such protests may often work, they can also backfire, causing hostility and suspicion rather than transformation, as Gandhi was well aware (Gandhi 1918).

Instrumental Arguments: Changing Business Practices

Other acts of political consumerism seek to reform business practices. Such social action at the domestic level has been somewhat successful in the case of labor, civil rights, and women’s rights. Again, a variety of ends can be distinguished. Political consumerism may be part of a concern to replace parliaments and national governments as sites of political power. This may draw on a radical denial of the need for centralized power for maintaining the political order (cf. Burnheim 1986; cf. Held & McGrew 2000, 412; Goodin 1992). Or actions can be regarded as supplementary to government action in several ways, as a permanent supplement to government’s coercive power or using extra-parliamentary means to get stricter government and intergovernmental regulation of business. Political consumerism can also be a stopgap measure until global structures are in place with sufficient enforcement power. The aim would be changes in domestic and global regulation, which should be restricted to such issues, properly regulated by state power rather than more contested issues. Among proper aims would then be fair trade, human rights, and human security. Protests may be directed against governments or against companies, that may pressure host governments to implement human rights and monitor compliance to avoid future boycotts (Spar 1998). Several features of these instrumental arguments are important. Their effect on desired change is highly relevant, although single cases of success or failure are not decisive when assessing the practice of political consumerism. The central issue is instead whether the practice of boycotting secures stable shifts in the values or expectations of businesses, and hence affects practices—recognizing that mishaps will still occur. Dilemmas may arise due to the need to reward good behavior by lifting the boycott, even if the business’ values may remain unchanged (Mills 1996). When political consumerism aims to change governments’ regulations or the practices of businesses, a number of issues of institutional design and assessment must be addressed. The most important of these are accountability of the organizations involved and their value basis. The remainder of this chapter addresses these institutional issues.

Of particular concern is political consumerism, interpreted narrowly as a practice involving consumers as a collective agent participating in the global governance of markets, supplementing states, intergovernmental bodies as the UN, NGOs, and multinational enterprises. One central aim of such political consumerism is to provide added incentives for compliance with, and the creation of, legitimate conditions on global trade, in circumstances of globalization with weak enforcement mechanisms. On this view, political consumerism is also a collective expression of mutual respect, of our individual and collective responsibility to protect the interests of those whom we can affect, and particularly of those who are dependent on our actions through international trade. Important issues concern “whose standards” to use, when assessing business behavior. For reasons of space, I must here simply suggest that some vital human needs may be regarded as such common factors, and that they are best secured by domestic legal orders that respect human rights—including political, civil, social, and economic rights. Such a normative basis for human rights is compatible with a broad range of religious and philosophical traditions, and these rights are part of international law, subscribed by a large majority of states and endorsed in documents as The European Monitoring Platform, OECD guidelines, and the UN Committee on Transnational Corporations under the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Such norms can be defended across a broad range of normative theories. While these premises are contested and contestable, I take them for granted for our purposes. Among the issues targeted are workers’ rights, the human rights’ violations of their sub-contractors, the plight of local communities affected by corporations, and the lax enforcement of human rights by host governments.

In the absence of global instruments of formal governance, citizens have come to use political consumerism to demand enforcement of existing international human rights norms. In this view, appropriate political consumerism must actually improve the plight of those suffering from the injustice, if not in this particular case, then at least by improving the practice in general, for instance by securing agreement among companies or if the host government enforces stricter standards or better options for workers.

In summary, this account of political consumerism would appear to fall clearly within the métier of normative political theory. Political consumerism forms part of governance—arrangements by which agents regulate some issue area by means of extra-institutional authority, involving non-public actors and without secure enforcement (Rosenau 1992; Commission on Global Governance 1995; Banchoff & Smith 1999, 15). We must ask similar questions of such forms of governance as of governments’ use of power: What are the grounds of such authority, what should be its institutionally circumscribed limits, and how should it be exercised within such limits when we seek to treat all affected individuals as moral equals? A legitimate conception of political consumerism must be consistent with—or may even be required by—the proper role of individuals in the market in a globalized world order. We turn first to consider why globalization matters for these normative arguments.

Globalization of Market Actors: Citizens of No Country, Cosmopolitan Consumers

The effects of globalization have important normative aspects for any normative theory insisting that practices should be defensible towards all affected parties. Insofar as globalization means that actions have global implications, the impact on foreigners must also be included in the normative justification of practices, such as global trade regimes. We are often said to be living in the era of globalization. As with most slogans, such claims are vague, perhaps essentially ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Politics, Products and Markets
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Part I: Making Money Morally
• Part II: Consumer Choices and Setting of the Agenda of Politics
• Part III: Building Responsible Institutions for Multi-Risk Global Society
• Part IV: Politicizing Consumers and Change in Politics
• Conclusion
• Contributors
• Index