The shades of green is a great metaphor. I think trying to get everyone to work towards shading green is where its at.

I try to be more green buying vintage instead of new, but I do feel guilty about the shipping. I guess they ship new items to the stores anyway, so it’s not a huge difference, but still…

(I know where you think I’m going with this, per our conversation earlier tonight, but I actually do have something to say!)

I’ve always been an environmentalist, albeit a lazy one, until recently.

When I began working at CFCA (www.cfcausa.org), I was overwhelmed by the magnitude of what this organization was doing. Sponsors across the U.S. sending $30 a month to someone in need in a developing nation, and this money was buying food, education and clothing. For a month!

My job really opened my eyes to the question you mention: Do I really need this? Many times the answer has been, “No.” I believe this has helped me improve myself in a number of ways, not the least of which is an overall simplification of my life as a consumer.

I love the notion of “dollars spent as a vote.” If I take only one thing away from this post it would be that. Not only does that dollar’s value increase significantly, but I think it also help raise a conscious awareness of what we buy and from whom we buy (read: support) it.

And finally, the term “green” has always bothered me a little. Hooray for the fact that it is easy to educate people about environmental consciousness by using this term. Boo because it is rigid. I would say that by some standards I am “green.” But, by other standards, I might be a lighter shade of green. To simplify what you and Jamie are talking about: I truly believe that consumers are never just one shade of green. The choices, both good and bad, that consumers make can move them around the green color spectrum. It seems only fair that if nature can produce many shades of green, consumers can shop in those same shades.

I’m glad you called me out on the term “green consumer”! A rough one, that is. But aside from the semantics, here’s where I’m coming from: Yes, buying nothing at all would be our greenest option. Buy nothing, consume nothing. I hope that I always make that point clear — particularly in posing the question of NEED versus WANT. But, in reality, there will come times when we need to buy new things. (Believe me, I have quite a conscience about it, but there are times I just have to.) So when we’ve established the need for something new, we should have somewhere to turn, right? And I don’t want to have to sacrifice design. When I need a formal dress, a pair of yoga pants or a pair of shoes, I want to know where I can get something that suits my style.

Also to the need-versus-want point — I certainly don’t mean for these ideas to apply only to fashion. Sure, fashion is superfluous — but groceries aren’t! It’s just as important, if not more so, to vote with those dollars we’re all spending on a daily basis. (One more metaphor — as I’ve said before, it’s like the argument of teaching sex ed to teenagers — abstinence-only is a great idea, but most are going to do it and need to know where to get a condom, right?)

Your distinction between “green” and “expanding ethical trade” is really interesting — I’m open to a really broad definition of “green,” and to me, expanding trade fits in. The much bigger question to me is how we determine WHEN we’re expanding trade, particularly when a “fair trade” label isn’t involved, like we’ve discussed. (I’m still planning to share that conversation of ours here on this blog sometime! It’s opened my eyes so much. And I’ve become a huge fan of Collier, myself!)

As for the common notion of green — be still my heart! But HOW? If you have suggestions, please share! My mind goes straight to product labeling — but back when I wished aloud for a time when garment labeling would be as strict as food labeling, you made the excellent point of labels actually diverting money from countries of “the bottom billion,” in Collier’s words. The closest I’ve seen so far is this “call for a green constitution” from Max Gladwell, http://www.maxgladwell.com/2009/04/call-green-constitutional-convention/. It’s a big proposal, but an exciting one. What do you think?