I love handbags

[antigone382]

99. I dismiss neither the racism directed at Oprah nor the horror of global class disparity.

And as a matter of fact I have questioned the over the top purchases of the fabulously wealthy, including the white ones; I recall years ago hearing about an $8,000 pair of cargo pants owned by Jennifer Anniston and being deeply resentful. I do indeed question the right of any individual to hold that degree of wealth, and I question it very deeply and very broadly. The extreme degree of consumerism that engrosses society at present is a very great evil, one that is perpetuating poverty and environmental destruction on a scale that portends disaster. I do believe quite strongly that the global elites (which encompasses all of us in the core nations, myself included) have an obligation to deeply consider what we buy--where it comes from, how it is produced, who produces it, and what will become of it after we are done with it. We have a duty to consider how we earn our living, how much we take in in terms of global resources, and how much we put out. First World Privilege is the great invisible privilege of our time, and I do believe it evident in the purchase of fancy handbags while people starve. I apologize if that offends you, but it is my honest opinion.

To clarify, my resentment is not directed at any wealthy individuals themselves, but at a system that allows the accumulation of this kind of wealth. Neither does an individual's capacity for charity absolve the problem as I see it. The fates of billions who live on what a single dollar a day can provide (and that is adjusting for exchange values in their individual countries) should not rest on the charitable impulses of individual billionaires. For every Oprah there is at least one Koch Brother, and probably more. I am not convinced that such a class should exist.

You seem to ignore that being at a class level where even a lower end hand bag is a possibility for you is also a privilege--and not one that I have really known for most of my life. I have lived without running water; I have rationed rice in order to feed my dogs; I have gone without medical care to the extent that I have likely caused myself permanent physical damage prior to the age of thirty, because I had no other choice. I have also been lucky enough to travel to some of the poorest countries of the world--not on my own dime, and not for vacations, but either working (as a nanny in Jamaica) or doing service projects (on an appropriate technology project in Honduras). I have also been lectured by the wealthy for even *seeming* to judge them on million dollar home renovations while I battled the decay of my mother's rotting home without a functioning toilet. Was that not privilege? Will you really tell me I have no right to resent seeing amounts of money that could have changed my life spent on trinkets?

Now, to apply this to my own choices, I will say this: I obtain all of my clothes (except underwear and socks) for free or secondhand. I have lived in a tent for two months, and just recently upgraded to a camper available to me through an Americorps position on local agriculture which I am working for minimum wage (I still feel guilty about having regular access to heated water). I suppose my purchase of coffee and sugar are luxuries, but I minimize my use of both and only purchase either if I know them to be ethically sourced. I spent a year debating the purchase of a cell phone, but the utility of the device in potential times of need outweighed my misgivings about its production. I still question whether that was the right choice. I do invest in high quality shoes, jackets, and tools, because I need these things to be functional. Overall, I believe in an ethic wherein a purchase derived from exploitation, a purchase which does not serve some higher good, and/or a purchase that does not need to be made is wrong. To believe this I do not need to negate the reality of Oprah's pain and humiliation in her treatment by a racist shopgirl. But there are multiple dimensions of privilege and oppression in this story, and you ought not deny the way a tale of a $38,000 accessory touches on the poor.