
2018年,免費(fèi)贈(zèng)物的想法吸引了雷蒙娜?蒙特羅斯,,于是她加入了洛杉磯當(dāng)?shù)氐摹盁o(wú)消費(fèi)”(Buy Nothing)小組,。她說(shuō):“賣(mài)東西是件麻煩事,我不想討價(jià)還價(jià),。” 她在 Facebook小組發(fā)布了不再使用的物品——孩子長(zhǎng)大后不再適合的衣服和鞋,、清理庭院時(shí)想處理掉的多肉植物——鄰居會(huì)在小組里認(rèn)領(lǐng),,然后順便來(lái)她家取走。
當(dāng)時(shí)小組只有40名成員,,蒙特羅斯很快就成了小組管理員,,負(fù)責(zé)確認(rèn)申請(qǐng)入組的成員住在規(guī)定的街區(qū)、清理垃圾貼文,,還有組織活動(dòng)和鼓勵(lì)人們互動(dòng),。小組保持著相對(duì)較小的規(guī)模,到2020年初成員增長(zhǎng)到約400名,。
接下來(lái),,新冠疫情爆發(fā)了。初期,,由于成員對(duì)病毒傳播問(wèn)題議論紛紛,,于是商量關(guān)閉小組。到最后,,他們決定寧愿在門(mén)廊或前廊與鄰居以物換物,,也不去商店購(gòu)物。蒙特羅斯認(rèn)為,,這么多人失業(yè),,經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況又不穩(wěn)定,保持“無(wú)消費(fèi)”感覺(jué)是一種道德義務(wù)。

成員間贈(zèng)予的玩具和童裝是大多數(shù)“無(wú)消費(fèi)”小組主要的交換物品,,但他們也交換疫情期間的必需品,,如酸面團(tuán)、口罩和手套,、氣泡膜和紙箱,。在附近克萊蒙特的一個(gè)小組,甚至出現(xiàn)了被用作打火器的干棉絮,,有些計(jì)劃在疫情期間露營(yíng)的人會(huì)來(lái)認(rèn)領(lǐng),。而在托蘭斯,一個(gè)生日快樂(lè)的草坪標(biāo)牌,,被發(fā)到蒙特羅斯朋友經(jīng)營(yíng)的小組里廣為傳閱,。蒙特羅斯說(shuō):“在最初的幾周里,疫情真的把大家聚集在一起,?!?/p>
一年后,這個(gè)由北好萊塢居民組成的小組已有1800多名成員,,新增了7名管理員才能管理發(fā)帖,。小組發(fā)展得如此之大,為避免變得過(guò)于臃腫,,小組最近被一分為二了(這在“無(wú)消費(fèi)”圈里被稱為“發(fā)芽”),。
需要清楚說(shuō)明地是,禮物經(jīng)濟(jì)的興起,,并不是洛杉磯的特有現(xiàn)象,。從2020年3月到2021年1月,被發(fā)起人稱為社會(huì)運(yùn)動(dòng)的“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)新增了150萬(wàn)名參與者,,成員總計(jì)達(dá)到了400萬(wàn),。在另一個(gè)理念相似的組織Freecycle,用戶發(fā)布的贈(zèng)物帖在疫情期間增加了一倍,。
當(dāng)人們被隔離而無(wú)法正常社交時(shí)做出的清理房間行為,,以及疫情帶來(lái)的經(jīng)濟(jì)不確定性,都在推動(dòng)這場(chǎng)運(yùn)動(dòng)發(fā)展,。但專家認(rèn)為,,在過(guò)去的一年半里,隨著人們坐在家中重新調(diào)整生活重心,,大家的集體心理也發(fā)生了更深層的變化,。研究消費(fèi)行為的波士頓學(xué)院社會(huì)學(xué)教授,、經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家朱麗葉?肖爾說(shuō):“人們對(duì)消費(fèi)文化及其運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)方式越來(lái)越不滿,對(duì)造成的浪費(fèi),,以及從購(gòu)買(mǎi)到丟棄的循環(huán)過(guò)程也越來(lái)越感到厭倦,。”她稱,,這是人們反思消費(fèi)主義時(shí)發(fā)生的“主流變化”,。
瑞貝卡?洛克菲勒是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)的聯(lián)合發(fā)起人,她認(rèn)為禮物經(jīng)濟(jì)的長(zhǎng)久存在是有道理的,?!斑@就是人類最初作為物種生存下來(lái)的方式。現(xiàn)在重新發(fā)現(xiàn)它的價(jià)值很有意義,,因?yàn)槲覀冋幱谏鐣?huì)發(fā)展的轉(zhuǎn)折點(diǎn)上,,如何朝著未來(lái)的方向前進(jìn),我們需要做出很多思考,,”她說(shuō),。
這種轉(zhuǎn)變?cè)谖业泥徖锷鐓^(qū)里也得到了體現(xiàn):疫情期間,鄰居們成立了自己的“無(wú)消費(fèi)”小組,。有成員貢獻(xiàn)自行車,、慢燉鍋和打印機(jī),也有人同樣樂(lè)于接收剩下的生日蛋糕,、外賣(mài)餐具,、塑料吸血鬼牙齒和使用了一部分的牙膏。去年5月,,社區(qū)里還出現(xiàn)了一個(gè)專門(mén)用來(lái)交換拼圖的本地Facebook群組——在當(dāng)時(shí),拼圖的需求旺盛,,而且很難找到,。我的公寓留言板上發(fā)布了各種贈(zèng)物信息,包括家具,、空調(diào)和在線購(gòu)買(mǎi)雜貨時(shí)誤訂的多余食物,。關(guān)注這些帖子讓我了解到身邊鄰居們正在發(fā)生的事,在很容易感到孤立無(wú)援的時(shí)候,,這些信息提供了一個(gè)了解別人生活的窗口,。看到同樣備受煎熬的人們都在做出貢獻(xiàn),,這讓我充滿希望——而這,,也是蒙特羅斯的經(jīng)歷。她說(shuō):“這讓你感到更安全,,感覺(jué)自己并不孤單,。這是一種安慰,。”
加埃勒?巴爾甘-達(dá)里格對(duì)此做了一項(xiàng)研究,,發(fā)現(xiàn)這種聯(lián)結(jié)感對(duì)“無(wú)消費(fèi)”成員來(lái)說(shuō)至關(guān)重要,。波士頓學(xué)院的肖爾建議巴爾甘-達(dá)里格從邁阿密搬到新英格蘭鉆研社會(huì)學(xué)的博士課程,研究方向是消費(fèi)和環(huán)境,。當(dāng)接受新鄰居建議去查看本地小組有什么物品能布置新家時(shí),,她對(duì)“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)產(chǎn)生了興趣——她為孩子挑選了物品,還有一把搖椅和布置陽(yáng)臺(tái)的家具,。
巴爾甘-達(dá)里格想了解人們?yōu)楹螘?huì)加入其中,,特別是在比較富裕的社區(qū)。對(duì)許多人來(lái)說(shuō),,主要是擔(dān)心浪費(fèi),,同時(shí)也希望避免扔掉有價(jià)值的東西;其他人則是擔(dān)心環(huán)境問(wèn)題,,或是有經(jīng)濟(jì)需要,。但當(dāng)聽(tīng)到人們談?wù)搹男〗M里獲得的主要價(jià)值時(shí),她驚訝不已,?!懊總€(gè)人都強(qiáng)調(diào),這種做法營(yíng)造了一種社區(qū)感,,一種鄰里之間的團(tuán)結(jié)感,。”
巴爾甘-達(dá)里格的研究里還有一個(gè)重要發(fā)現(xiàn),,那就是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”小組其實(shí)并沒(méi)有導(dǎo)致人們不消費(fèi),。盡管試圖限制和控制自己的消費(fèi),人們依然會(huì)購(gòu)買(mǎi)新物品,。
或許,,這正是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”的重點(diǎn),甚至是吸引力之所在,。幾十年來(lái),,主流消費(fèi)觀的替代方案總在文化中循環(huán)往復(fù)——比如自愿簡(jiǎn)化消費(fèi)、消費(fèi)降級(jí),、極簡(jiǎn)主義,、返璞歸真的生活方式。但“無(wú)消費(fèi)”理念更友好,,更不走極端,。參加這項(xiàng)活動(dòng)并不會(huì)強(qiáng)迫任何人改變與資本主義或物質(zhì)財(cái)富的關(guān)系,這有助于解釋為什么活動(dòng)能在早期核心成員以外發(fā)展起來(lái),。莉斯?fàn)?克拉克是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)的另一位聯(lián)合發(fā)起人,。她說(shuō):“你可以認(rèn)為這是考慮可持續(xù)性的良心消費(fèi),,但絕對(duì)也是一種消費(fèi)行為。我們只是在分享資源,,而不是一場(chǎng)節(jié)衣縮食的運(yùn)動(dòng),。”
克拉克和洛克菲勒于2013年在華盛頓州班布里奇島發(fā)起了“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng),,她們將其成長(zhǎng)壯大的原因歸功于代際轉(zhuǎn)變,。年輕的消費(fèi)者更有可能不把二手商品視為一種禁忌,而是認(rèn)為它們很酷且貨真價(jià)實(shí),。波士頓咨詢公司稱之為“轉(zhuǎn)售潮”,,也進(jìn)一步證明了這一點(diǎn)。該公司對(duì)轉(zhuǎn)售市場(chǎng)(如eBay,、Poshmark和Depop)的估值高達(dá)4000萬(wàn)美元,,并預(yù)計(jì)未來(lái)五年內(nèi),每年還將增長(zhǎng)20%,。
作為X世代,,洛克菲勒是意識(shí)到氣候變化迫在眉睫的第一代人。她說(shuō),,1970年代出生的嬉皮士后代所經(jīng)歷的環(huán)?;顒?dòng)通常認(rèn)為人們必須受苦,才能讓世界變得更好,?!斑@并非一條實(shí)現(xiàn)可持續(xù)變化的好路子,”她解釋說(shuō),?!凹?lì)人們改變與物質(zhì)關(guān)系的最好方法,是找到一種方式將人與人連接起來(lái),,并為整件事帶來(lái)歡樂(lè)和樂(lè)趣,。”
但也有人警告說(shuō),,當(dāng)蓬勃發(fā)展的禮物經(jīng)濟(jì)所需的聯(lián)結(jié)感變得過(guò)于狹隘時(shí),,就會(huì)出現(xiàn)問(wèn)題,。新澤西理工學(xué)院研究可持續(xù)發(fā)展的教授莫里?科恩認(rèn)為,,有些人一開(kāi)始愿意參與,可能只是因?yàn)樗麄兿朐谏鐣?huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)群體中進(jìn)行交流,。他說(shuō):“我們不能忽視社會(huì)階層分化的過(guò)程,。”
2018年,,波士頓牙買(mǎi)加平原社區(qū)的一個(gè)無(wú)消費(fèi)小組宣布將要“發(fā)芽”,。上述擔(dān)憂變成了非常重要的問(wèn)題,,并導(dǎo)致人們對(duì)一分為二時(shí)可能帶來(lái)的種族主義和階級(jí)主義發(fā)出了譴責(zé)。洛克菲勒和克拉克說(shuō),,這個(gè)“分水嶺時(shí)刻”讓她們開(kāi)始反思,,用硬性邊界分離社區(qū),可能會(huì)延續(xù)結(jié)構(gòu)性的種族主義,。此后,,她們建立了一個(gè)公平團(tuán)隊(duì),并給予本地社區(qū)更多自主權(quán),。當(dāng)蒙特羅斯的小組“萌芽”時(shí),,她和其他管理員對(duì)成員進(jìn)行了調(diào)查,并研究了人口數(shù)據(jù)和交通路線,。然后,,他們發(fā)布了全部信息供成員查看。
我問(wèn)蒙特羅斯,,隨著疫情進(jìn)入下一階段,,她的小組活動(dòng)是否會(huì)變少。她說(shuō):“我自己也在思考這個(gè)問(wèn)題,?!彼烙?jì)活動(dòng)可能會(huì)放緩,但不會(huì)完全消失,?!耙?yàn)樗呀?jīng)成為了人們生活的一部分?!?/p>
有經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家預(yù)測(cè),,傳統(tǒng)消費(fèi)在疫情之后將出現(xiàn)“反轉(zhuǎn)”,這可能會(huì)減弱人們對(duì)類似“無(wú)消費(fèi)”運(yùn)動(dòng)的熱情,。數(shù)據(jù)表明,,人們已經(jīng)在逐漸回歸原有習(xí)慣。消費(fèi)者在去年的支出下降了3.9%,,但此后已超過(guò)了疫情前水平,。印第安納大學(xué)威爾明頓分校的人類學(xué)榮譽(yù)教授理查德?威爾克說(shuō):“經(jīng)過(guò)很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間的禁止外出用餐、飲酒和聚會(huì)后,,人們通常會(huì)無(wú)節(jié)制地狂歡,。這在我們的文化里已經(jīng)存在幾百年了?!?/p>
但他認(rèn)為,,即便是狂歡,人們?nèi)缃褚矔?huì)在道德上保持克制,。他說(shuō):“美國(guó)人是烏托邦式的思考者,,也是狂野的派對(duì)動(dòng)物,。他們以一種奇怪的相互依賴關(guān)系走到一起。你無(wú)法離開(kāi)另一個(gè)人,?!保ㄘ?cái)富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:Emily
鄰里間通過(guò)疫情中興起的本地“無(wú)消費(fèi)”小組,彼此免費(fèi)贈(zèng)予和接受物品,。圖片版權(quán):GETTY IMAGES
2018年,,免費(fèi)贈(zèng)物的想法吸引了雷蒙娜?蒙特羅斯,于是她加入了洛杉磯當(dāng)?shù)氐摹盁o(wú)消費(fèi)”(Buy Nothing)小組,。她說(shuō):“賣(mài)東西是件麻煩事,,我不想討價(jià)還價(jià)?!?她在 Facebook小組發(fā)布了不再使用的物品——孩子長(zhǎng)大后不再適合的衣服和鞋,、清理庭院時(shí)想處理掉的多肉植物——鄰居會(huì)在小組里認(rèn)領(lǐng),然后順便來(lái)她家取走,。
當(dāng)時(shí)小組只有40名成員,,蒙特羅斯很快就成了小組管理員,負(fù)責(zé)確認(rèn)申請(qǐng)入組的成員住在規(guī)定的街區(qū),、清理垃圾貼文,,還有組織活動(dòng)和鼓勵(lì)人們互動(dòng)。小組保持著相對(duì)較小的規(guī)模,,到2020年初成員增長(zhǎng)到約400名,。
接下來(lái),新冠疫情爆發(fā)了,。初期,,由于成員對(duì)病毒傳播問(wèn)題議論紛紛,于是商量關(guān)閉小組,。到最后,,他們決定寧愿在門(mén)廊或前廊與鄰居以物換物,也不去商店購(gòu)物,。蒙特羅斯認(rèn)為,,這么多人失業(yè),經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況又不穩(wěn)定,,保持“無(wú)消費(fèi)”感覺(jué)是一種道德義務(wù),。
成員間贈(zèng)予的玩具和童裝是大多數(shù)“無(wú)消費(fèi)”小組主要的交換物品,但他們也交換疫情期間的必需品,,如酸面團(tuán),、口罩和手套,、氣泡膜和紙箱,。在附近克萊蒙特的一個(gè)小組,,甚至出現(xiàn)了被用作打火器的干棉絮,有些計(jì)劃在疫情期間露營(yíng)的人會(huì)來(lái)認(rèn)領(lǐng),。而在托蘭斯,,一個(gè)生日快樂(lè)的草坪標(biāo)牌,被發(fā)到蒙特羅斯朋友經(jīng)營(yíng)的小組里廣為傳閱,。蒙特羅斯說(shuō):“在最初的幾周里,,疫情真的把大家聚集在一起?!?/p>
一年后,,這個(gè)由北好萊塢居民組成的小組已有1800多名成員,新增了7名管理員才能管理發(fā)帖,。小組發(fā)展得如此之大,,為避免變得過(guò)于臃腫,小組最近被一分為二了(這在“無(wú)消費(fèi)”圈里被稱為“發(fā)芽”),。
需要清楚說(shuō)明地是,,禮物經(jīng)濟(jì)的興起,并不是洛杉磯的特有現(xiàn)象,。從2020年3月到2021年1月,,被發(fā)起人稱為社會(huì)運(yùn)動(dòng)的“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)新增了150萬(wàn)名參與者,成員總計(jì)達(dá)到了400萬(wàn),。在另一個(gè)理念相似的組織Freecycle,,用戶發(fā)布的贈(zèng)物帖在疫情期間增加了一倍。
當(dāng)人們被隔離而無(wú)法正常社交時(shí)做出的清理房間行為,,以及疫情帶來(lái)的經(jīng)濟(jì)不確定性,,都在推動(dòng)這場(chǎng)運(yùn)動(dòng)發(fā)展。但專家認(rèn)為,,在過(guò)去的一年半里,,隨著人們坐在家中重新調(diào)整生活重心,大家的集體心理也發(fā)生了更深層的變化,。研究消費(fèi)行為的波士頓學(xué)院社會(huì)學(xué)教授,、經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家朱麗葉?肖爾說(shuō):“人們對(duì)消費(fèi)文化及其運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)方式越來(lái)越不滿,對(duì)造成的浪費(fèi),,以及從購(gòu)買(mǎi)到丟棄的循環(huán)過(guò)程也越來(lái)越感到厭倦,。”她稱,,這是人們反思消費(fèi)主義時(shí)發(fā)生的“主流變化”,。
瑞貝卡?洛克菲勒是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)的聯(lián)合發(fā)起人,她認(rèn)為禮物經(jīng)濟(jì)的長(zhǎng)久存在是有道理的?!斑@就是人類最初作為物種生存下來(lái)的方式?,F(xiàn)在重新發(fā)現(xiàn)它的價(jià)值很有意義,因?yàn)槲覀冋幱谏鐣?huì)發(fā)展的轉(zhuǎn)折點(diǎn)上,,如何朝著未來(lái)的方向前進(jìn),,我們需要做出很多思考,”她說(shuō),。
這種轉(zhuǎn)變?cè)谖业泥徖锷鐓^(qū)里也得到了體現(xiàn):疫情期間,,鄰居們成立了自己的“無(wú)消費(fèi)”小組。有成員貢獻(xiàn)自行車,、慢燉鍋和打印機(jī),,也有人同樣樂(lè)于接收剩下的生日蛋糕、外賣(mài)餐具,、塑料吸血鬼牙齒和使用了一部分的牙膏,。去年5月,社區(qū)里還出現(xiàn)了一個(gè)專門(mén)用來(lái)交換拼圖的本地Facebook群組——在當(dāng)時(shí),,拼圖的需求旺盛,,而且很難找到。我的公寓留言板上發(fā)布了各種贈(zèng)物信息,,包括家具,、空調(diào)和在線購(gòu)買(mǎi)雜貨時(shí)誤訂的多余食物。關(guān)注這些帖子讓我了解到身邊鄰居們正在發(fā)生的事,,在很容易感到孤立無(wú)援的時(shí)候,,這些信息提供了一個(gè)了解別人生活的窗口??吹酵瑯觽涫芗灏镜娜藗兌荚谧龀鲐暙I(xiàn),,這讓我充滿希望——而這,也是蒙特羅斯的經(jīng)歷,。她說(shuō):“這讓你感到更安全,,感覺(jué)自己并不孤單。這是一種安慰,?!?/p>
加埃勒?巴爾甘-達(dá)里格對(duì)此做了一項(xiàng)研究,發(fā)現(xiàn)這種聯(lián)結(jié)感對(duì)“無(wú)消費(fèi)”成員來(lái)說(shuō)至關(guān)重要,。波士頓學(xué)院的肖爾建議巴爾甘-達(dá)里格從邁阿密搬到新英格蘭鉆研社會(huì)學(xué)的博士課程,,研究方向是消費(fèi)和環(huán)境。當(dāng)接受新鄰居建議去查看本地小組有什么物品能布置新家時(shí),,她對(duì)“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)產(chǎn)生了興趣——她為孩子挑選了物品,,還有一把搖椅和布置陽(yáng)臺(tái)的家具。
巴爾甘-達(dá)里格想了解人們?yōu)楹螘?huì)加入其中,特別是在比較富裕的社區(qū),。對(duì)許多人來(lái)說(shuō),,主要是擔(dān)心浪費(fèi),同時(shí)也希望避免扔掉有價(jià)值的東西,;其他人則是擔(dān)心環(huán)境問(wèn)題,或是有經(jīng)濟(jì)需要,。但當(dāng)聽(tīng)到人們談?wù)搹男〗M里獲得的主要價(jià)值時(shí),,她驚訝不已?!懊總€(gè)人都強(qiáng)調(diào),,這種做法營(yíng)造了一種社區(qū)感,一種鄰里之間的團(tuán)結(jié)感,?!?/p>
巴爾甘-達(dá)里格的研究里還有一個(gè)重要發(fā)現(xiàn),那就是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”小組其實(shí)并沒(méi)有導(dǎo)致人們不消費(fèi),。盡管試圖限制和控制自己的消費(fèi),,人們依然會(huì)購(gòu)買(mǎi)新物品。
或許,,這正是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”的重點(diǎn),,甚至是吸引力之所在。幾十年來(lái),,主流消費(fèi)觀的替代方案總在文化中循環(huán)往復(fù)——比如自愿簡(jiǎn)化消費(fèi),、消費(fèi)降級(jí)、極簡(jiǎn)主義,、返璞歸真的生活方式,。但“無(wú)消費(fèi)”理念更友好,更不走極端,。參加這項(xiàng)活動(dòng)并不會(huì)強(qiáng)迫任何人改變與資本主義或物質(zhì)財(cái)富的關(guān)系,,這有助于解釋為什么活動(dòng)能在早期核心成員以外發(fā)展起來(lái)。莉斯?fàn)?克拉克是“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng)的另一位聯(lián)合發(fā)起人,。她說(shuō):“你可以認(rèn)為這是考慮可持續(xù)性的良心消費(fèi),,但絕對(duì)也是一種消費(fèi)行為。我們只是在分享資源,,而不是一場(chǎng)節(jié)衣縮食的運(yùn)動(dòng),。”
克拉克和洛克菲勒于2013年在華盛頓州班布里奇島發(fā)起了“無(wú)消費(fèi)”活動(dòng),,她們將其成長(zhǎng)壯大的原因歸功于代際轉(zhuǎn)變,。年輕的消費(fèi)者更有可能不把二手商品視為一種禁忌,而是認(rèn)為它們很酷且貨真價(jià)實(shí)。波士頓咨詢公司稱之為“轉(zhuǎn)售潮”,,也進(jìn)一步證明了這一點(diǎn),。該公司對(duì)轉(zhuǎn)售市場(chǎng)(如eBay、Poshmark和Depop)的估值高達(dá)4000萬(wàn)美元,,并預(yù)計(jì)未來(lái)五年內(nèi),,每年還將增長(zhǎng)20%。
作為X世代,,洛克菲勒是意識(shí)到氣候變化迫在眉睫的第一代人,。她說(shuō),1970年代出生的嬉皮士后代所經(jīng)歷的環(huán)?;顒?dòng)通常認(rèn)為人們必須受苦,,才能讓世界變得更好?!斑@并非一條實(shí)現(xiàn)可持續(xù)變化的好路子,,”她解釋說(shuō)?!凹?lì)人們改變與物質(zhì)關(guān)系的最好方法,,是找到一種方式將人與人連接起來(lái),并為整件事帶來(lái)歡樂(lè)和樂(lè)趣,?!?/p>
但也有人警告說(shuō),當(dāng)蓬勃發(fā)展的禮物經(jīng)濟(jì)所需的聯(lián)結(jié)感變得過(guò)于狹隘時(shí),,就會(huì)出現(xiàn)問(wèn)題,。新澤西理工學(xué)院研究可持續(xù)發(fā)展的教授莫里?科恩認(rèn)為,有些人一開(kāi)始愿意參與,,可能只是因?yàn)樗麄兿朐谏鐣?huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)群體中進(jìn)行交流,。他說(shuō):“我們不能忽視社會(huì)階層分化的過(guò)程?!?/p>
2018年,,波士頓牙買(mǎi)加平原社區(qū)的一個(gè)無(wú)消費(fèi)小組宣布將要“發(fā)芽”。上述擔(dān)憂變成了非常重要的問(wèn)題,,并導(dǎo)致人們對(duì)一分為二時(shí)可能帶來(lái)的種族主義和階級(jí)主義發(fā)出了譴責(zé),。洛克菲勒和克拉克說(shuō),這個(gè)“分水嶺時(shí)刻”讓她們開(kāi)始反思,,用硬性邊界分離社區(qū),,可能會(huì)延續(xù)結(jié)構(gòu)性的種族主義。此后,,她們建立了一個(gè)公平團(tuán)隊(duì),,并給予本地社區(qū)更多自主權(quán),。當(dāng)蒙特羅斯的小組“萌芽”時(shí),她和其他管理員對(duì)成員進(jìn)行了調(diào)查,,并研究了人口數(shù)據(jù)和交通路線,。然后,他們發(fā)布了全部信息供成員查看,。
我問(wèn)蒙特羅斯,,隨著疫情進(jìn)入下一階段,她的小組活動(dòng)是否會(huì)變少,。她說(shuō):“我自己也在思考這個(gè)問(wèn)題,。”她估計(jì)活動(dòng)可能會(huì)放緩,,但不會(huì)完全消失,?!耙?yàn)樗呀?jīng)成為了人們生活的一部分,。”
有經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家預(yù)測(cè),,傳統(tǒng)消費(fèi)在疫情之后將出現(xiàn)“反轉(zhuǎn)”,,這可能會(huì)減弱人們對(duì)類似“無(wú)消費(fèi)”運(yùn)動(dòng)的熱情。數(shù)據(jù)表明,,人們已經(jīng)在逐漸回歸原有習(xí)慣,。消費(fèi)者在去年的支出下降了3.9%,但此后已超過(guò)了疫情前水平,。印第安納大學(xué)威爾明頓分校的人類學(xué)榮譽(yù)教授理查德?威爾克說(shuō):“經(jīng)過(guò)很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間的禁止外出用餐,、飲酒和聚會(huì)后,人們通常會(huì)無(wú)節(jié)制地狂歡,。這在我們的文化里已經(jīng)存在幾百年了,。”
但他認(rèn)為,,即便是狂歡,,人們?nèi)缃褚矔?huì)在道德上保持克制。他說(shuō):“美國(guó)人是烏托邦式的思考者,,也是狂野的派對(duì)動(dòng)物,。他們以一種奇怪的相互依賴關(guān)系走到一起。你無(wú)法離開(kāi)另一個(gè)人,?!保ㄘ?cái)富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:Emily
Ramona Monteros joined her local Buy Nothing group in Los Angeles in 2018, drawn to the idea of giving things away. “Selling is a hassle,” she says. “I didn’t want to deal with negotiations.” She’d post on the Facebook group’s message board items she no longer had use for—clothes and shoes that her kids had outgrown, succulents when she would thin out her yard—that her neighbors would claim and then swing by to pick up.
At the time, the group had just 40 members, and Monteros soon became its admin—making certain those requesting membership lived in the group’s defined neighborhood, ensuring spam didn’t get posted, and generally encouraging and stewarding the group. It stayed relatively small and mellow, growing to about 400 members by early 2020.
Then the pandemic hit. In its early days, as questions swirled over how the virus spread, members discussed shutting the group down. In the end, they decided they would rather exchange goods with their neighbors outside on a porch or front stoop rather than go into a store. Monteros says with so many people out of work and on shaky financial footing, continuing felt like a moral imperative.
Members gave and received the likes of toys and kids’ clothes, the bread and butter of most Buy Nothing groups. But they also exchanged staples of the pandemic—things like sourdough starter, masks and gloves, bubble wrap, and cardboard boxes. In a group in nearby Claremont, even dryer lint, used as fire starter, got claimed by would-be campers looking for a COVID-friendly vacation. In Torrance, a happy birthday lawn sign got passed around a group run by Monteros’s friend. “Something about the whole trauma of the first few weeks really brought everyone together,” says Monteros.
A year later, Monteros’s group made up of North Hollywood residents had catapulted to more than 1,800 members and added seven other admins to keep up with the volume of posts. The group grew so big that it recently split in two (called “sprouting” in Buy Nothing circles) to keep it from getting too unwieldy.
Let’s be clear—the rise of the so-called gift economy is no L.A. fad. Between March 2020 and January 2021, the Buy Nothing Project, described by its founders as a social movement rather than an organization or nonprofit, added 1.5 million participants to hit 4 million members. At Freecycle, a similar concept, posts by users looking to give away their stuff went up by 100% during the pandemic.
The collective cleaning out of closets that took place while people quarantined and socially isolated has fueled the movement, as has the economic uncertainty the pandemic wrought. But experts say there’s also something deeper within our collective psyche that shifted in the past year and a half as people sat at home and realigned their priorities. “There’s a growing dis-ease with consumer culture and the way it operates,” says Juliet Schor, an economist and Boston College sociology professor who studies consumption. “The wastefulness, the cycle of acquisition and discard, is increasingly unappealing to people.” She calls this a “mainstreaming change” in how people think about consumerism.
Rebecca Rockefeller, cofounder of the Buy Nothing Project, says the gift economy has been around forever for a reason. “This is how we originally survived as a species,” she says. “It makes sense that it’s something that we are rediscovering the value of now, because we’re at one of those inflection points in society where we have a lot of thinking to do about how we’re going to move forward if we're all going to make it.”
That shift was something that took hold in my neighborhood, which launched its own Buy Nothing group in the middle of the pandemic. People offered up bicycles and Crock-Pots and printers. But members just as eagerly claimed the leftover birthday cakes, takeout utensils, plastic vampire teeth, and partially used toothpaste. Last May, a local Facebook group popped up designed just for exchanging jigsaw puzzles at a time when they were in high demand and hard to find. My apartment building’s message board buzzed with offers of furniture, air conditioners, and extra food when online grocery orders had gone awry. Following the posts gave me a sense of what was happening with my neighbors and a window into their lives when it was easy to feel isolated. It kept me hopeful, seeing how people gave even while they also struggled. It was something Monteros experienced too. “It makes you feel more secure,” she says. “You’re not just by yourself out there. It’s comforting.”
Ga?lle Bargain-Darrigues has conducted research showing that sense of connection is key to Buy Nothing members. Bargain-Darrigues, whom Schor advises at Boston College, moved to New England from Miami to start a doctoral program in sociology with a focus on consumption and the environment. She got interested in the Buy Nothing Project when her new neighbors suggested she check out the local group to furnish her home—she picked up a few things for her kid, a rocking chair, and furniture for her balcony.
Bargain-Darrigues wanted to understand why participants joined, especially in neighborhoods where people were well-off. For many the motivation was a concern about waste and a desire to avoid throwing away anything with worth. Others were worried about the environment or had an economic need. But she was surprised to hear the main value people got out of the group: “Everyone highlighted that it really created a sense of community, a sense of solidarity among neighbors,” she says.
In another key finding, Bargain-Darrigues’s research showed that Buy Nothing groups did not actually lead people to buy nothing. People still purchased new things, even though they were trying to constrain and control their consumption.
That may be precisely the point and even the appeal of the Buy Nothing Project. Alternatives to mainstream consumption have cycled through our culture for decades—voluntary simplifiers, downshifters, minimalists, simplicity circles. But the Buy Nothing Project is a kinder, less extreme version by design. Participating doesn’t force anyone to shift their relationship with capitalism or material possessions all that much, which helps explain why it has spread beyond the hard-core early adopters. “You could say this is consumption with conscience, with sustainability in mind, but it is absolutely consumption. We’re just sharing the resources,” says Liesl Clark, Rockefeller’s Buy Nothing Project cofounder. “It’s not a movement of austerity.”
Clark and Rockefeller founded the Buy Nothing Project in 2013 in Bainbridge Island, Wash., and credit part of its growth to a generational shift. Younger consumers are more likely to view used goods as cool and authentic rather than taboo, further evidenced by what Boston Consulting Group calls the “resale boom.” The resale market (think eBay, Poshmark, and Depop) is valued at as much as $40 million by BCG and is expected to grow 20% annually for the next five years.
As a Gen Xer, Rockefeller is part of the first generation to grow up aware of the looming threat of climate change. The environmental activism she experienced as a child of hippies in the 1970s was based on the idea that people must suffer to make things better, she says. “That's not a great path to sustainable change,” she explains. “The best way to inspire people to shift their relationship with stuff was to find a way to connect people to each other and to bring some joy and a sense of fun to the whole thing.”
Some warn, however, that there’s a risk when the sense of connection needed for a thriving gift economy becomes too insular. Maurie Cohen, a professor of sustainability studies at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, says some may only be willing to participate in the first place because they are making exchanges within their socioeconomic group. “We can’t dismiss the process of stratification,” he says.
These concerns were front and center in a Buy Nothing group in Boston’s Jamaica Plain neighborhood in 2018 when it announced it would sprout, leading to accusations of racism and classism over how the split might happen. Rockefeller and Clark say the “watershed moment” led them to reflect on how separating neighborhoods through hard boundaries could perpetuate structural racism. They’ve since put together an equity team and given more autonomy to local communities. When Monteros’s group sprouted, she and the other admins polled members and examined demographic data and transportation routes. They then posted all the information they collected for members to see.
I asked Monteros whether she thinks activity in her group will wane as the pandemic enters its next phase. “I’ve been wondering that myself,” she told me. She predicts that it might slow down a little bit but that it won’t go away completely. “It has become part of people’s lives.”
Some economists are forecasting that post-pandemic there will be a “snap back” in traditional consumption, which could hinder the enthusiasm for movements like the Buy Nothing Project. The data suggests people are already returning to their old habits. Consumer spending declined 3.9% last year but has since surpassed pre-pandemic levels. “When people are forcibly restrained from eating, drinking, and partying for a long time, they have a wild binge,” says Richard Wilk, a professor emeritus in anthropology at Indiana University Wilmington. “That has been embedded in our culture for hundreds of years.”
But the other thing that happens during a binge, he says, is people moralize and plead restraint. “Americans are utopian thinkers as well as wild party animals,” he says, “and I think they go together in a strange mutual dependence. You can’t have one without the other.”