Masterfoods caves into veggies!

[pembrokestephen]

Yes, but those are only tiny, barely noticable changes, they mean very little in the long term. Fairtrade is bollocks, anyway, total fucking fraud.

OK, so the rennet in mars bars thing is a tiny change, and now fairtrade is bollocks.

I'm beginning to detect a bit of a trend here...

*saves time*

 

[Dubversion]

Yes, but those are only tiny, barely noticable changes, they mean very little in the long term.

the existence of small changes doesn't in some way prove the impossibility of big changes.

 

[In Bloom]

the existence of small changes doesn't in some way prove the impossibility of big changes.

I'm talking about the limitations of ethical consumerism, not the possibility of big change altogether.

I'm a communist for fucks sake

 

[ChrisFilter]

All this means is that I'm going to have to keep dunking my Mars bars in gravy to get the meaty hit I crave.

Soft wankers..

 

[In Bloom]

All this means is that I'm going to have to keep dunking my Mars bars in gravy to get the meaty hit I crave.

Soft wankers..

Really? I prefer to fry mine in beef tallow

 

[Dubversion]

I'm a communist for fucks sake

i know, it's pitiful.

 

[In Bloom]

i know, it's pitiful.

You're not going to goad me into getting into a flame fest, you know. You don't have the wit.

Any actual response to my point about the limitations of ethical consumerism?

 

[pembrokestephen]

I'm a communist for fucks sake

Probably as good a reason to be a communist as any...

 

[pembrokestephen]

You're not going to goad me into getting into a flame fest, you know. You don't have the wit.

Any actual response to my point about the limitations of ethical consumerism?

There was a point to it?

 

[TAE]

Well yes, but you can only ever achieve these sort of minor, unimportant changes this way. You're not going to, for instance, force a company to stop sacking employees for joining a union or impersonating nurses so they can flog their dodgy milk substitutes.

The general public could, if they cared, but they don't.

That was this year's 1st May comic !

 

[Darios]

Ye gods......

I've seen some mind-numbing, ball-aching levels of moronity and stupidity on BBC Have Your Say before, but this........

I'm lost for words....

"This onces again seems to be a case of placating an overly vocal minority, there was, and is nothing stopping anyone eating a Mars bar, it is totally someones choice to be irrational and become a veggie, but the actions of an irrational few should never be allowed to effect the majority, that is how we eneded up with "animal rights" terrorists."

Matt R

"....Lots of ordinary people are tired of being lectured by holier than thou minorities like vegetarians. Normal people are also consumers and many like me will now be avoiding Mars products. Mars could well be reducing its market not expanding it."

Alan Trent
London

I thought these kinds of comments might be the exception, unfortunately looking through the others, they seem to be typical. And somehow the debate has morphed into Muslims and Immigration. WTF!?

This is the kind of stupidity that, if it is at all representative, makes me sincerely want to leave the country.

 

[JoePolitix]

Any actual response to my point about the limitations of ethical consumerism?

Yes ethical consumerism has its limits - it is not infinate.

But what the fuck has this thread got to do with ethical consumerism?

 

[In Bloom]

The general public could, if they cared, but they don't.

It's not nearly that simple though.

Should we be paying bosses a premium to fuck us all over a little less? I'm not interested in having any dialogue with Masterfoods that doesn't end in the words "or else"

 

[Dubversion]

You're not going to goad me into getting into a flame fest, you know. You don't have the wit.

hang on, you've been making wanky little comments about my personal appearance, and I'M trying to goad YOU? jesus, a hypocrite as well as a fool

Any actual response to my point about the limitations of ethical consumerism?

as others have said, this issue is nothing whatsoever to do with ethical consumerism, so it's irrelevant

 

[TAE]

Ethical consumerism is still consumerism - if the public does not like a product (and by product I include the whole image thing) then they will buy something else. So the kinds of products which end up on our shelves reflect the kind of priorities society has.

 

[pembrokestephen]

It's not nearly that simple though.

Should we be paying bosses a premium to fuck us all over a little less? I'm not interested in having any dialogue with Masterfoods that doesn't end in the words "or else"

Well, that's a grandiose and idealised position, isn't it?

It sounds like you're more interested in abstract debating postures than achieving some kind of pragmatic and realistic goal.

People protesting about rennet in their mars bars weren't interested in the overthrow of the global capitalist running dog hegemony, just mars bars that were vegetarian.

Perhaps there's a bit of a perspective problem here?

 

[Dubversion]

I knew some people involved in some far left group or other in the 80s. They opposed rape crisis centres because they were revisionist. In Bloom's position on things smacks of that kind of absurd absolutist attitude.

 

[In Bloom]

hang on, you've been making wanky little comments about my personal appearance, and I'M trying to goad YOU? jesus, a hypocrite as well as a fool

I think you'll find you're the one who started randomly attacking me for no reason before I said that. But don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

as others have said, this issue is nothing whatsoever to do with ethical consumerism, so it's irrelevant

Using market pressure to force a company to act in one way or another for "ethical" reasons has nothing whatsoever to do with ethical consumerism? If you like

 

[In Bloom]

Perhaps there's a bit of a perspective problem here?

I think there's a bit of a problem with you being a liberal dimwit who's incapable of engaging with what I've actually said.

I never said that making demands short of revolutionary change is a bad thing.

 

[JoePolitix]

Using market pressure to force a company to act in one way or another for "ethical" reasons has nothing whatsoever to do with ethical consumerism? If you like

No it doesn't. Its about consumers wanting products they like not containing ingredients that are incompatable with their diets. Ethics is a secondary issue.

Your point here presumably being - the proletariat is the real agency for social change. Fine - but the wrong thread Bloomy

 

[Dubversion]

precisely

 

[Dubversion]

I attacked you first, In Bloom? really? let's run through that again.

odd - you seemed quite keen to get into it a few posts ok, before you were made to look like an arse

So i said you'd been made to look like an arse - hardly savage stuff, is it?

*sigh*

What a surprise, in jumps dubversion. I only hope the floor can take the strain.

and you respond with that little gem.

You're a fool

 

[In Bloom]

No it doesn't. Its about consumers wanting products they like not containing ingredients that are incompatable with their diets. Ethics is a secondary issue.

How is it? Vegetarianism is, usually, a personal, ethical choice. If it was a simple matter of just not liking meat, why would you care whether or not Mars bars contained rennet derived from cows stomachs?

 

[In Bloom]

I attacked you first, In Bloom? really?

Well, yes, you did. Are you seriously saying that you weren't trying to pick a fight there? The feebleness of the attack isn't exactly the point.

 

[Dubversion]

How is it? Vegetarianism is, usually, a personal, ethical choice. If it was a simple matter of just not liking meat, why would you care whether or not Mars bars contained rennet derived from cows stomachs?

you're wrong. Ethical consumerism would be boycotting a product because of its origin, or the company's political or industrial profile, stuff like that. This is about actually not being able to eat a product because of its ingredient - not the same thing at all. Now the rennet issue is resolved, people will continue to eat the product. So the issue is a practical one resulting from what for some vegetarians - but far from all - is an ethical issue, rather than an issue of ethical consumerism in its own right

 

[In Bloom]

This is about actually not being able to eat a product because of its ingredient - not the same thing at all.

So vegetarians are physically unable to eat animal derived rennet?

 

[Dubversion]

that's not what i said, is it?

 

[In Bloom]

Well no, it's not, but the point I'm trying to make is that vegetarians who chose to avoid animal rennet are obviously doing so for a reason, and that reason almost always comes down to ethical or political issues.

 

[Dubversion]

yes. but that still doesn't make this issue an example of ethical consumerism. More a by-product.

It certainly doesn't tell us anything at all about the relationship of ethical consumerism to class struggle or whatever the hell else you're trying to pin on it.

 

[TAE]

Dubversion, are you saying it is not 'ethical consumerism' because the consumers are concerned with their own well being (not eating animal derived products) rather than the well being of others (say, workers in the 3rd world) ?