Inspi(red)?

RED

I heard about this new endeavour to use our consumerism to get drugs for Africa.  Just imagine that people have a choice when they are shopping for everyday items and Christmas presents to purchase Red products.  The Gap is very involved by giving 50% of the profit of the sales to purchase the drugs.  The cloth they use for the t-shirts is actually from Africa and is sewn there to help support the local economy.  There's just something that isn't sitting right with me though.  I don't know.  It just seems odd to buy an ipod to help Aids in Africa - but then I think, there are thousands of people who are buying an ipod anyway - at least now they have a choice to purchase something that will do some good.  What do you guys think?  Is this a clever endeavour to raise money for the Global Fund or is this a way to soothe the conscience in our extreme extravagance? 

I personally think the idea is good and has been around for a while, just not on the mass market level like this campaign is.  Do I think we consume too much in our culture?  Do I think that needs to change?  Yes, absolutely.  But the reality is that this is what we live in, so instead of bemoaning it, we use it.  We use it, and turn the dial just a little to challenge people.  The change won't happen overnight, but now at least the average consumer may start thinking about the power of their purchase and who is on the receiving end of their money.   

Comments

[Jaci]

I think it's a great idea but I'm a bit torn over how the money should be used. I'm assuming it'll largely be for AIDS in Africa which comes with it a problem. Most of the cocktails for HIV (if not all of them) are so time sensitive, but so few of the people who need the drugs have the Timex to know exactly when to take them. So if we are providing drugs AND a watch, fabulous idea. If it's just the drugs, a lot of the money could be wasted which is sad. So I think it's a great idea I just hope that is taken into consideration. Thanks for bringing it to our attention though Jen!

[Krista]

I don't know what I think as I had never fully considered this. Kind of makes me think of Kevin's post recently about people donating the crappy computer parts. We buy these things for ourselves to ease our conscience knowing a portion goes to help AIDS. But are we giving just our leftovers or halfheartedly? Shouldn't we be giving above and beyond our means? Wouldn't the true meaning of Christmas say scarp the ipod and give the $$ to AIDS instead. Go without the latest gadget so another can live.

I don't know. I'm guilty of selfish consumerism if anyone is. Thinking now though....

[the hermit]

jen garner is in those gap ads...she's hot...

[Pernell]

Jen - I think it's okay, it's not a solution, but it's certainly better than nothing. Changing how people spend is huge. We can all learn a lesson about educating ourselves on where our money goes... how things are made, etc.

Great post.

[kaelyn koepke]

I worry.
I waiver back and forth.
I love shopping too so I love that I am wealthy enough to say buy fair trade and organic or red shirt.
But, not everyone is wealthy.... so people who can't afford that stuff are sort of excluded from North American popular humanitariansim... that's not fair.
Regardless, I worry because many of the global economic problems stem from consumer culture... Are we adapted our culture to ease guilt... are we transforming social activism to increase sales? Does that make it less revolutionary? I don't know, it is a catch 22 because consumerism will not end because we like it (I know my weakness is clothing and fashion) but activism via consumerism is likely to prevent further questioning of the problems... I could go on forever.

[kaelyn Koepke]

sorry for my grammar mistake: ****Have we**** instead of "are we"