Conferences Series Events
SPACE   |   EVOLUTION   |   PHYSICS   |   SOCIAL SCIENCES   |   NATURAL SCIENCES   |   DNA   |   PSYCHOLOGY   |   BIOTECH   |   MEDICINE   |   ANTHROPOLOGY   |   ASTRONOMY
INTERNET   |   NEW MEDIA   |   START-UPS   |   PERSONAL TECHNOLOGY   |   WIRELESS   |   COMPUTING   |   ENGINEERING   |   CEOS
RELIGION   |   GAMING   |   FILM   |   FASHION   |   SEX   |   PHILOSOPHY   |   EDUCATION   |   HISTORY   |   ARTS   |   MUSIC   |   TRAVEL   |   PHOTOGRAPHY
Watch Now

Cindy Gallop: Lucrative Luxury Brands of the 22nd Century

3
Likes
0
Dislikes
RATE
7,850 Views

  • Info
  • Bio
  • Chapters
  • Highlights
  • Transcript
  • Download
  • More
Please or register to post a comment.

Invictus_88 Avatar
Invictus_88
Posts: 92
Posted: 07.12.10, 04:03 AM
A lot of the comments here are pretty relevant to an exam question we faced in our final year Applied Ethics examinations;

"Is it morally defensible to spend money on luxuries in a world in which there is absolute poverty."

In fact, when one carefully pulls apart the situation to examine the real underlying structures, there is no incompatibility between luxury and social conscience.
cindygallop Avatar
cindygallop
Posts: 19
Posted: 02.28.10, 07:28 PM
@dmathew1 Thank you for your feedback. I should just point out that my speech here was not given with the objective of 'encouraging frivolous spending and a wasteful lifestyle', but because I was asked by the LuxuryLab Innovation Forum to advise luxury brand marketers on more effective and meaningful ways of managing their business.

You clearly feel very strongly about the future of our planet. I would love to know what initiatives you are currently undertaking to address the challenges and problems you talk about - specifically because you might be interested in using my venture www.ifwerantheworld.com to help the action you are engaged in to address the issues you highlight. Please do email me at cindy@ifwerantheworld.com to discuss further - many thanks.
dmathew1 Avatar
dmathew1
Posts: 1
Posted: 02.06.10, 02:41 PM
Does Cindy Gallop understand that we happen to share a planet with 6+ billion people, soon to become 9+ billion people, and that the planet's resources are becoming depleted, climate change is accelerating, billions are already suffering, and the global economy is poised to collapse in a terminal decline which won't end until technological civilizaton has joined all of the previous civilizations in the dust?

Encouraging frivolous spending and a wasteful lifestyle is contrary to the best interests of the species ... and in this case when I say "best interests" which I mean is the long term survival of humankind on the Earth.

Money and possessions won't mean much in the centuries ahead. Humankind is very quickly running out of time. The horrors of the 20th century will seem like a Sunday picnic compared to the horrors of the 21st century.

What happens on a planet with 9 billion people when there is only enough food for 8 billion?

Wait around for a handful of decades and you'll discover the answer to that question with your own eyes.

Humankind really needs to grow up. Destroying the Earth for profits is a dead-end. Extinction happens. Does humankind really want to find out exactly how bad things can get?

But humankind cannot survive. The species has already damaged and polluted the Earth sufficiently to generate hellishly inhospitable conditions in the centuries ahead. Humankind hasn't experienced Nature in one of her really bad moods yet. Humankind will.

Yet the frivolous will keep on shopping, the wealthy will keep on spending, and the polluters will keep on polluting until all of these things become impossible ... and it is at that point that life itself will become an impossibility for billions of humans.
cindygallop Avatar
cindygallop
Posts: 19
Posted: 11.22.09, 06:55 PM
cp53xx - thank you for your comment and I do welcome your specific feedback. Please do email me at cindy@ifwerantheworld.com - I'd love to hear what you felt was disturbing and to be able to respond. Many thanks.

Cindy Gallop
http://ifwerantheworld.com
cindygallop Avatar
cindygallop
Posts: 19
Posted: 11.22.09, 06:53 PM
MrLami - thank you for your comment. I hasten to clarify that further to reading a blog posting asking why there were not more luxury brands present in virtual worlds, I was suggesting luxury brands consider a presence and availability for those that might be interested, rather than base large amounts of their business on that premise (which obviously, as you say, would not be feasible!).

Cindy Gallop
http://ifwerantheworld.com
cp53xx Avatar
cp53xx
Posts: 2
Posted: 11.22.09, 10:32 AM
I real would NOT want to live in a world where Gallop's
ideology took root.
Very disturbing.
mrlami Avatar
mrlami +
Posts: 3
Posted: 11.22.09, 08:16 AM
1M in a virtual world is not equivalent to 1M in the country one resides in. People go on virtual worlds because they are virtual, majority of them don't have money to spend like Cindy Gallop thinks.
Advertisement
NO ADS + DOWNLOADS + HQ VIEWING
UPGRADE TO FORA.tv PLUS
Advertisement