Despite the claim that consumerism leads to the politics of the market, consumerism actually leads to the politics of the state, and demands the extension of state regulations. It leads to the diminishing role of individual citizens, and a growing power of public authority and public expertise. Public commentators almost never discuss the way that consumer activism represents the triumph of the state over society. When you look at the objectives and the demands of consumerism, it is worth noting that, directly or indirectly, the campaigns of consumer activism lead to some particular demand upon the state to step in and to sort out the problems that individuals cannot resolve. For this reason, consumer activism acquires its most developed form in circumstances where the state and political system have lost their authority and legitimacy.
Consumer activism is associated with the withdrawal of the public from political life.
The consumerist movement is parasitical on social and political decay, and thrives on a society where individuals do not possess any political vision, or have any mechanisms to ensure their individual aspirations can be expressed. This explains why voter apathy is always the flip-side of consumer activism. The more active consumer movements are, the fewer people are likely to vote. This is not simply a coincidence - the two trends actually reinforce one another. An interesting paradox is that consumer activism develops in the context of the state losing its legitimacy, but at the same time it gives the state a new role.