Declaration of Independents: Fighting Big Boxes
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 11. 8.06
No matter what keeps you awake at night—whether it’s the melting ice caps, peak oil, the threat of terrorism, the power of corporations, or the demise of civic engagement—the solution to all of these problems lies in rebuilding our local economies. Stacy Mitchell takes a stand much like Michael Shuman in the Small-Mart Revolution: "A much larger share of the dollars we spend at a locally owned store remains in the local area." Like Jim Kunstler in his latest post, where he says: "Driving a Prius might induce raptures of eco-moral superiority, but changing the zoning laws would produce a better outcome -- and that's just too hard." and George Monbiot says "ban and close out-of-town superstores." Stacy says: "Our hyper-mobility—as manifest in our sprawling, car-based settlement pattern and the distances that most of the goods we buy are transported—probably constitutes the greatest environmental threat we face. It certainly accounts for the bulk of the greenhouse gases we emit. .... Making incremental improvements to a inherently unsustainable economic system will not get us very far." All agree that the big box store exists because of the subsidy of cheap gas, and that we would all be better off with strong, vibrant and local shopping. Read the free PDF at ::Changethis
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Preparing for Peak Oil: Local Authorities and the Energy Crisis
- Arrr, Thar Be Oil Under Them Icebergs!
- Will the Next New Deal be Transit-Based? Three Plans to Rescue the Economy and the Earth with Public Transportation
- 5 Years From Now Peak Oil Pinch Could Devastate the UK Economy, New Report Warns
Fantastic, concerning but yet inspiring read. Thanks to the authors. Local business needs to be given renewed priority sooner than later.
As strange as this sounds, I think this is one of the most difficult issues in the world of socially responsible business.
I have shopped at Walmart occasionally, but can't say I'm a fan. Pay issues for employees and ethical concerns about how and where products are manufactured are the primary reasons.
On the other hand, I've seen businesses surrounding WalMart do well. In part, this is due to the customers the store draws to the area. I've also seen stores do well by being what WalMart isn't (delivering quality customer service), and catering to a niche market that WalMart can't serve.
Most SRB issues are black and white for me, but I see more grey in the issue of WalMart.
This article represents what's wrong with the Green movement. There are so many ways to promote a green lifestyle but fighting big box retailers is nothing more than disguised socialism.
You should concentrate your efforts on the promotion of hybrid cars, recycling, green architecture, etc. rather than getting the movement involved in this ugly debate. In fact, I would argue that only when the green movement embraces capitalism will real change begin to occur.
There are so many ways to promote a green lifestyle but fighting big box retailers is nothing more than disguised socialism.
How so? Or are you just playing the old Red Card?
In a capitalist society consumers have the freedom to choose where they shop and what they buy. Forcing consumers to go to locally owned stores to buy locally produced products, is not freedom.
On a side note, think of all the gas Walmart saves consumers by being able to buy all their needs under one roof at the lowest possible price.
But that's not why I posted my message. I'm simply saying that resources should be focused on causes that clearly demonstrate a movement towards a green lifestyle. Attacking Walmart is just the political agenda of the Blue Card.
In a capitalist society consumers have the freedom to choose where they shop and what they buy.
Not really, since the selection available to them is dependent on who provides the goods and services. Monopolies (like cable, water, and utility service) are quite common.
Forcing consumers to go to locally owned stores to buy locally produced products, is not freedom.
Is someone forcing them to not be able to drive to somewhere where they have the kind of stores they prefer? Is someone forcing them to not move to somewhere full of big box stores? You're describing authoritarian socialism - ie, forcing communities to accept things they don't necessarily want. Who are you to tell a community that they have to have big box stores? This is a democracy.
On a side note, think of all the gas Walmart saves consumers by being able to buy all their needs under one roof at the lowest possible price.
As opposed to walking a few blocks to a diversity of local merchants? Try again, sport.
But that's not why I posted my message. I'm simply saying that resources should be focused on causes that clearly demonstrate a movement towards a green lifestyle. Attacking Walmart is just the political agenda of the Blue Card.
Blue card? What is that? Stop making up broad brush, foolish labels and make your point.
Not really, since the selection available to them is dependent on who provides the goods and services. Monopolies (like cable, water, and utility service) are quite common.
Not really since as you mention no one is forcing another to shop at a certain location, they can always go somewhere else. Try again, sport.
As opposed to walking a few blocks to a diversity of local merchants?
Only if you are lucky enough to live near a town center or retail. Now here is where you might have less of a selection, but hardly a monopoly, kiddo.
Stop making up broad brush, foolish labels and make your point.
Exactly.
LOL, you accuse me of playing the Red Card and then accuse me of “making foolish labels” when I accuse you of playing the Blue Card. This stupid name calling is exactly what I want the green movement to avoid. Let’s focus on something like recycling not Walmart bashing or is recycling bad for the environment as well?
I’d love to make a point by point rebuttal but it will just digress to a bunch of Blue/Red differences of opinion. But there is one statement that I can’t avoid “As opposed to walking a few blocks to a diversity of local merchants?”
In the real world people drive cars. Furthermore, if people preferred to shop locally owned stores then Walmart wouldn’t do any business. Sorry sport, but if you prefer locally produced products, sold by locally owned stores then you should move to North Korea. In the meantime, if you think of away to end the utility monopolies, us Red Card people will be all for it.
Changing zoning IS the way to go. Freedom or not, zoning is approved by mostly local boards by local officials and residents. Governance requires participation.
An exmple of sustainable zoning is where I live- within walking distance of a supermarkert/grocery store, hardware store, auto parts store, movie store, pizza shop, chinese shop, ice cream shop. I can walk my purchases home usually. I realize my area is blessed; but my girlfriend's parents live in suburbia-DC. They can't walk to any service/store. And that's a failing of adequetely diversified zoning for residential/small business/agri. Huge tracks of land for only 1 purpose gives people no choice but to live in a development 6 miles across and they must drive to pick up anything. The same with the 'shopping strip', it's all stop and go traffic since the 36sq mile development has to all shop there.