Comments on: Misguided consumer “patriotism”

By: harveyg

harveyg — Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:08:28 +0000

Your observations and the philosophy of individualism as they apply to the free market make perfect sense.

Ayn Rand’s logic has always been an undercurrent in my thinking and I totally agree with Michael when he said: “It is great to see there are still thinkers out in the world. Thanks for being there and speaking out. “

By: Pedro Timóteo

Pedro Timóteo — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 17:15:54 +0000

I agree with that one, although I think it’s a completely separate subject.

I have, myself, “boycotted” evil companies in the past.

By: Elektra

Elektra — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 16:50:04 +0000

Although I agree with you at the point that “the consumer should always choose the best product, that with the best quality/price ratio”, and that it is in your interest to reward smartness, ambition, and productivity, not stupidity, laziness or incompetence in the name of that called “patriotism”, there are factors to take into account other than “buying the best, wherever it may be found”.

Many multinational companies exploit workers; many of them children, in poor countries by paying lower wages than they would pay in their home countries. That is how they come to extremely low prices at high quality standards.

My opinion is by the best despite being national or not but… do not reward exploiters that take advantage of misery and disrespect UNICEF “convention on the rights of the child”.

By: velvetsatine

velvetsatine — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:42:30 +0000

I totally agree with you on this one.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:19:42 +0000

I have been out of touch with philosophy for a while. It is great to see there are still thinkers out in the world.
Thanks for being there and speaking out.

By: Pedro Timóteo

Pedro Timóteo — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:56:13 +0000

I have to add here an excerpt from the linked article, which is, IMO, brilliant:

Collectivism reflects the notion that life is “a zero sum game,” that we live in a dog-eat-dog world, where one man’s gain is another man’s loss. On this premise, everyone has to cling to his own herd and fight all the other herds for a share of a fixed, static, supply of goods. And that is exactly the premise of the “Buy American” campaign. “It’s Japan or us,” is the implication. If Japan is getting richer, then we must be getting poorer.

But individualism recognizes that wealth is produced, not merely appropriated, and that man’s rise from the cave to the skyscraper demonstrates that life is not a zero-sum game—not where men are free to seek progress.

Accordingly, individualism holds that the interests of men do not conflict—provided we are speaking of self-supporting individuals who pay for what they get. Where there is free trade, the exchange of value for value, one man’s gain is another man’s gain.