Having not broken my obsession with the print version of The New York Times, I was thrilled to greet Black Friday by opening to a full-page ad from Patagonia that urged readers “Don’t Buy This Jacket.”
To the best of my knowledge, Patagonia has never purchased a full-page ad in the Times, and for this, the first time that they did, they are urging consumers to buy less stuff. This exhibits both true leadership and untarnished truth about what it means to be sustainable.
The copy reads: Don’t buy what you don’t need. Think twice before you buy anything.
On Patagonia’s blog, The Cleanest Line, the company further states that: “It’s time for us as a company to address the issue of consumerism and do it head on. The most challenging, and important, element of the Common Threads Initiative is this: to lighten our environmental footprint, everyone needs to consume less. Businesses need to make fewer things but of higher quality. Customers need to think twice before they buy.”
We face an extremely difficult challenge: We’re depleting the environment of its essential life support systems as we produce ever more products — products that we often don’t really need. Yet, at the same time, the production of these un-needed products create the jobs needed to feed families and run a global economy — one that is addicted to making stuff.
While no single answer will resolve a complex system designed for destruction, what we decidedly need more of is companies willing to speak the truth and take bold positions on difficult issues.
I must wonder if Reverend Billy and the STOP Shopping Now Choir have been to Patagonia (?)
I can’t imagine that this fascist run country would EVER consider putting a SANE message like this out to the mindless consumers hell, ‘they’ have spent billions over the years manipulating and programing the people to consume NO-MATTER-WHAT!!
A mainstream message like this would be the ultimate gift, right up there with Population sanity, for Mother Earth.
thanks for sharing this message which is such a threat to corporate America.
To me, this means Patagonia is looking to educate the public about the difference between economic Growth and economic Development… which is fantastic!
Growth and Development are not the same thing. You can “grow” many things that are not healthy for the human family (or individual humans). But development is the leverage point for the future! It’s about working and living “smarter, not harder”…. about effectiveness… about increased capacity to do what needs to be done.
In this case, Patagonia recognizes that “buy more and more” is not a sustainable strategy for humanity. We need to develop smarter economies… not just let the ones we have now get (financially) larger.
I love this, it seems like they get it. People need to be able to earn a living without destroying the place they are living. It is going to be a difficult juggling act, and I believe many people are going to need to make cuts in pay and spending and using.
For example, it cost less to wash the dishes than to use paper plates. We use paper plates because they are easy and convenient, we never consider how much work we have to do to be able to afford the “convenient” product that is harmful to the environment.
The truth is simple and powerful. Use less stuff; not useless stuff. Or, to paraphrase something I heard a long time ago, buy as though to compel an answer from the world.
While I have great respect for Patagonia, its products, and its leadership, I also feel compelled to note that their products are exceedingly expensive. I can’t think of anyone in an underserved community who would wander into a Patagonia store and buy a t-shirt for $50. Or a down jacket for $200.
Patagonia has developed brand loyalty that is standard-setting. Their return policy changed the way many companies do business. I am a happy customer. I buy very few of their products because I simply cannot afford them.
It’s conflicting to know that a company that charges such high prices on their products will come out and say “buy less of our products.” The rules of basic economics means that their price point must stay exceptionally high in order for them to stay in business, making their products and their company appear elitist by design. I struggle with these realities while I applaud so much of what Patagonia does and stands for.