A Tribalism Primer
Jul. 9th, 2012 12:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfsJohn Quiggan makes an excellent point today, when he deals with a debate between a "locavore" and a pair of libertarians; the first defends "eating and buying locally," the latter attack it.
Quiggan's point is an interesting one: the libertarians make a wonkish argument based on efficiency that has nothing to do with market preference. They're attacking locavorism for its inefficiencies. Their point may be one to seduce locavores out of their caves by pointing out that "eating locally" will not save the planet; it's a convincing argument, but they go off the rails when they claim that eating locally is "a marketing fad that severely distorts the environmental impacts of agricultural production."
But so what? Isn't the point of a free market to give the customer what he wants, the rest of the planet's arbitrary will be damned?
The locavore, on the other hand, makes the market argument, arguing that locavores make and eat what they want, and the economists should keep their meddling noses out of the conversation.
Neither side actually makes a point consistent with the ideology they begin with: both end with talking up their favorite marketing gimmick, regardless of ideology. Quiggan calls this "tribalism," and rightly so.
Quiggan's point is an interesting one: the libertarians make a wonkish argument based on efficiency that has nothing to do with market preference. They're attacking locavorism for its inefficiencies. Their point may be one to seduce locavores out of their caves by pointing out that "eating locally" will not save the planet; it's a convincing argument, but they go off the rails when they claim that eating locally is "a marketing fad that severely distorts the environmental impacts of agricultural production."
But so what? Isn't the point of a free market to give the customer what he wants, the rest of the planet's arbitrary will be damned?
The locavore, on the other hand, makes the market argument, arguing that locavores make and eat what they want, and the economists should keep their meddling noses out of the conversation.
Neither side actually makes a point consistent with the ideology they begin with: both end with talking up their favorite marketing gimmick, regardless of ideology. Quiggan calls this "tribalism," and rightly so.
