I am not going to make fun of the people in the New York Times story on dumpster diving – not dumpster diving due to imminent starvation or privation, but dumpster diving as an avocation:
…the small but growing subculture of anticonsumerists who call themselves freegans — the term derives from vegans, the vegetarians who forsake all animal products, as many freegans also do — is the closest thing their movement has to an official voice. And for those like Ms. Elia and Ms. Kalish, it serves as a guide to negotiating life, and making a home, in a world they see as hostile to their values.
Freegans are scavengers of the developed world, living off consumer waste in an effort to minimize their support of corporations and their impact on the planet, and to distance themselves from what they see as out-of-control consumerism. They forage through supermarket trash and eat the slightly bruised produce or just-expired canned goods that are routinely thrown out, and negotiate gifts of surplus food from sympathetic stores and restaurants.
They dress in castoff clothes and furnish their homes with items found on the street; at freecycle.org, where users post unwanted items; and at so-called freemeets, flea markets where no money is exchanged. Some claim to hold themselves to rigorous standards. “If a person chooses to live an ethical lifestyle it’s not enough to be vegan, they need to absent themselves from capitalism,” said Adam Weissman, 29, who started freegan.info four years ago and is the movement’s de facto spokesman.
Make fun of them? Perish the thought. This is a free country, man. That means that these “freegans” are free to spend their time rooting through New York dumpsters for half-eaten jars of peanut butter if that’s what they want to do. They really are. Now, this doesn’t stop me from pointing out that buying a nice, new jar of peanut butter is $2.39 or so (or a dollar-fifty, if you’re not picky about eating generic peanut butter, and if you’re eating it out of the dumpster, you cannot be that picky). I am not going to point out that $2.39 is about what a “freegan” can make from a half-hour of dull-but-air conditioned “honest” work, like busing tables or delivering Indian take-out or doing the inventory of patchouli oil and sunflower seeds at the health-food store. That doesn’t matter. This is America. If white middle-class New Yorkers want to spend their free time — and these people appear to have way, way too much free time — living like filthy bums and eating discarded organic veggie fries out of some trash bin, well, that is their Constitutional right. I would never dream of making fun of these people. Their position in society is just as valuable as mine; their vote counts just as much. (It’s not my fault that Republicans continually outpoll the Socialist Workers Party, even in off-years.)
No. I will not make fun of them. (And on one level, I can’t, not as long as there’s that microwave cart sitting in my storage facility that I got from out front of a dumpster in Austin back when I was an impoverished law student.) I will not even try to cheer myself up by telling myself on days when I’m depressed, well, at least you’re not squatting in some loft in SoHo, wearing hand-me-down Birkenstocks, sleeping on carpet remnants, and drinking soy milk that’s three days past its expiration date. It would be wrong.
But I will make fun of the New York Times, because, let’s face it, I’m a right-wing blogger, and that is what I do.
Here’s the thing. Under normal conditions, certis paribus, a story about Manhattan neo-hippies eating spoiled fruit out of dumpsters and begging for scraps is completely non-newsworthy. Who cares? Well, the only reason that the New York Times cares is because this particular breed of work-shy urban hoboes is motivated by leftist, anti-corporate sentiments. (Big shock.)
Still, like most freegans, she seems attuned to the ecological effects of her actions. In her house, for example, she has laid down a mosaic of freegan carpet parcels instead of replacing her aging wooden floor because, she said, “I’d have to take trees from the forest.”
I am waiting with bated breath for the New York Times to announce that they are going to start printing their newspapers on carpet remnants. And:
That year, while demonstrating against the Iraq war, she began to feel hypocritical, she said, explaining: “I thought, isn’t this safe? Here I am in my corporate job, going to protests every once in a while. And part of my job was to motivate the sales force to sell more stuff.”
After a year of progressively scaling back — no more shopping at Eileen Fisher, no more commuting by means other than a bike — Ms. Nelson, who had a two-bedroom apartment with a mortgage in Greenwich Village, quit her job in 2005 to devote herself full-time to political activism and freeganism.
This, I fear, is the message that the New York Times is trying to get across. If you have politically-correct opinions, you can do anything and be celebrated for it. If you’re against the war in Iraq, it’s okay — it’s admirable! — to quit your job and spend your days scavenging for free-range chicken nuggets. If you have even the vaguest pro-environmental sentiments, it’s laudable to spend all day long picking garbage instead of, you know, having a job and earning a salary.
Here’s the thing. We all know that one of the big problems with institutionalized liberalism is that there are “no enemies on the left” — that as long as Hugo Chavez, let’s say, keeps saying that GWB is a bad guy, it’s okay for him to imprison his political rivals and shut down opposition media outlets. Fidel Castro can jail all the librarians and dissidents he wants as long as he’s available to schmooze Michael Moore when he’s in town. Write one poem saying America is bad, and you go from being an imprisoned enemy combatant terrorist to having your work put out there by the University of Iowa Press. Everyone should be familiar with this sort of thing by now.
Okay, so having “defined deviancy down” for overseas dictators, the New York Times is doing the same for filthy hippies. Basically, the rule is — correct me if I’m wrong — you can do whatever the hell you want to do as long as you hate George W. Bush enough. Want to run around naked? As long as you have a “Chimpy McHitler” sign on you, you’re okay — not just okay, but protected by the First Amendment. (You could even take a whiz in the gutter because it wastes less water that way.) Want to spend your life eating garbage and running a website out of your parents’ basement? As long as you hate Halliburton enough, that’s cool — not just cool, but admirable. Want to raise money for “poverty” and then spend a good chunk of it on your own personal travel and making sure the staff for your 2008 campaign have jobs and don’t have to eat out of dumpsters for two years? Hey, we’re all friends here.
The worst part of this is that I don’t see where the limit is. Want to throw puppies off of high-rise buildings? If you can convince a gullible reporter that you’re doing it as a protest of tobacco companies, I bet you could throw a three-day-old golden retriever puppy out of a sixth-story window and get a positive write-up. (Not that I am advocating such a thing, but you could.) Arson? Murder? Hey, the New York Times has a fetish for the Weathermen, so you never know.
UPDATE: Apparently, it’s even okay to be Ann Coulter, as long as you call GWB silly names.
(It goes without saying that the opposite is true — if you’re a Republican, and you do something innocuous like wearing a silver ring with a Bible verse engraved on it, or wearing socks with sandals, you could very likely wind up condemned as a warmongering fascist by Paul Krugman.)
It’s still a free country, and the New York Times is still well within its rights to hold up feckless hippie freeloaders as paragons of virtue if it wants to do that. After all, everybody’s gotta eat.