Can Shop Local Morph Into Something Ugly?
Philip Maher
There is a
simple truth in our world—we tend to naturally gravitate toward people like
ourselves. If you like hockey, you have a tribe. If you like ballet, that’s
your tribe. The mark of an enlightened society is that we fight the urge to play
only with people from our individual tribe, race, religion, etc. Although we
naturally gravitate toward folks who are like us, most of us have learned that everyone is valuable to society. This is
a simple explanation of why we fight discrimination. If true, is it possible
that the recent federal election was a diversion from this hallmark of an
enlightened society?
I
congratulate those who campaigned across the country making sacrifices to
support a democratic society. But I am less enthusiastic about how each party
tended to offer goodies that appealed to one specific tribe or another. Should
we be surprised that we are increasingly polarized? Maybe that is the way it has
to be to win. However, it does affirm if not validate the narrative that this
is about my individual needs as shown
by how provinces are more splintered than ever based on their common tribes.
On the same
topic, I’m troubled when asked at the checkout counter to make a donation when
the final convincing kicker is always “This goes to help organizations in OUR
community.” My hair stands on end. The implication is that you are giving, but
you are also getting. Think locally, act locally. Local charities do a great
job. But I’m bothered by this increasing sense that helping my community or
tribe is somehow nobler. There are great needs outside our city; do they not
also deserve help? Maybe even more? During the election, one party campaigned
on reducing foreign aid. A voter commented on television, “Why are we giving
money away when we have needs here at home?” I understand the comment, but reducing
poverty makes the world a safer and healthier place. Our international
assistance stands around 0.27 percent of our GDP. It’s a small sacrifice for a
rich country.
Let me make
another leap, but on the same topic. We are encouraged to “buy local.” It makes
sense that an apple from Ontario uses less transportation energy, and is
fresher than one transported from another country or province. Fair enough—it
saves the environment. But I wonder if buy local often morphs into kind of a soft,
convenient excuse to discriminate against outsiders? Though unintended, is it
possible that this philosophy subconsciously affirms that our tribe is of
higher value?
One of the
signs of an enlightened society is the ability to stand outside itself and look
in on what is happening. It is difficult for me to be self-critical of the
tribe to which I belong. It is true for all of us no matter your ethnic group
or political standing. The most
frustrating part of watching politics in Canada, The U.S.A., and the U.K.
these days is that it seems that all political clusters view the world in radically
different ways. They seem unable to see things from outside their political
group and don’t seem to see that the opposite party offers anything of value
to the process. There are many examples of how we sometimes morph things like buy
local, emotionally at least, to give unfair preference to our tribe without realizing
it.
Where
appropriate, it’s a good idea to buy local, support charities, and of course,
vote freely whatever your political bent. However, even if you disagree with
how I got here, I hope you agree with my conclusion that we need to be careful
to avoid becoming insular. Some local focus is good and some walls are
necessary, but I hope we understand how these things can become discriminatory blinders.
We are in danger of building echo chambers, only listening to those with whom
we agree. Slowly, we build walls around
our lives, our provinces and our country, and this degrades society.
The paradox is that we’ll build
walls and feel like we are doing the right, even the righteous thing.
United we stand, divided we
fall.
Comments
Post a Comment