It was suggested that obesity is a byproduct of the accumulatory effort, rather than an intended consequence. I'd actually suggest that good health is contrary to accumulation. The moderation, the movement practices, the eating practices that constitute a healthy lifestyle are likely of little accumulatory potential. Unhealthy lifestyles, on the other hand, offer much possibility for gain. The actual topology of how ill-health contributes to the power (re)distribution among capital is ripe for exploration and the hunger-obesity dialectic are just the starting point.
Yes, well said. Was reading quite recently the thoughts of an apparently well monetarily-rewarded copywriter of successful advertizing, all things marketing. He also happens to be a vocal born again Christian, and is not shy to bring his religious beliefs and interpretations into his discussions on his work and business practices.
He expressed concern over whether his trade - convincing people to buy - was meritorious. Having read his blueprint for sales writing I know I have seen it in action on many sales pages for crappy, unscientific exercise products. His take away was that it could be used for evil or good - to manipulate people into doing things that may harm them or to introduce people to worthy products/services and convince people to make decisions that are good for them, though they may not realize it until they read his copy.
Capitalists I am sure get quite excited about combining potential profit with creating something the world needs. And when not, like our superprocess food manufacturers, they get quite excited about potential profit. But, wait, people enjoy
the processed snacks, so it's win-win afterall. The perennial sunshine of the capitalist mind.
It seems the buy-ins occur on other levels though, besides capital (where people have the choice to buy-in, vs the depressed, inner-city or food deserts). When you break it down to people's choices and expectations it begins to take on a perhaps slightly different form than simply capitalists/marketers driving the herds into the slaughter pens.
On the topic of obesity, or basically, general lack of physical health - ever observe some of the nonsense that typically occurs in a commercial gym? Or read the promises that attract buyers? This common-sense-shaving that capitalists are involved in to marry seamlessly enough their profit motives with their "solutions" seems to occur at the other end of the bargain, in order for the bargain to exist.
The peri-obesity issues occurring in food deserts - do they occur for the same reasons as the obesity elsewhere? Which is more important, politically?
The multi-billion $ sports supplement industry in the US is not being supported by the inner-cities or food deserts. The foils of capitalism and their legions of marketers should not be underestimated. They work. But only in tandem with the consumer. Once a person shuts that off the part I bolded above is likely true - capital loses influence, at least in that area. It is powerless to prevent that crack from forming.
It reminds of the quote CreOrder opens with, about finding the light every day and not letting it go out.