But neither can we think that deliberately reducing our consumption could have any effect on the market. Without a shift in the fundamental economic and political patterns any change in consumption patterns can be turned to the advantage of those with power. It would just mean that demand for wood-pulp would fall and the market for cotton increase. Jobs might be lost in one place and gained in another, with very little overall change. But they would be mistaken.
Some lifestyles do cause more pollution and damage than others.
It makes sense to me to refuse aerosols and disposable goods, explaining why when I can, and to use recycled paper products and biodegradable cleaning materials. Travelling on foot or by bus, train or bike does diminish the demand for fossil fuels. Buying second-hand appliances, furniture and clothes gives a new life to what otherwise would be wastefully discarded. Eating seasonal and local food is also less exploitative. All these frugal measures are not of direct help to the poor.