I argue that the roots of consumptionism began with civilization itself and city-state colonialism. Humans invented cities to isolate themselves from the risks and responsibilities of the natural world’s resources. Money made a convenient go-between token so humans didn’t have to think about the actual payback required to acquire their life’s needs (Earth’s office supplies) from an externalized reality (or poorer people who don’t have guns).
Your argument is fine (The USDA 1958 yearbook is titled, “Consumers All”) up until the concept of perpetual anthropocentric growth and resource conversion without a feedback mechanism. All human political decisions are driven from purchase points, and when the real costs to the future are not visible at that point, humans become blind faith consumers making horrible decisions. All taxes, insurance (risk distribution) and disposal/recycling fees should be applied as sales taxes. Example: If the cost of pet euthanasia was escrowed at adoption or purchase of the animal, how many fluffy ‘free kittens’ would still be running up our debt-based economy?
Evil: an action taken based on an unquestioned belief.
Human: a primate that builds a model of the universe inside its brain, and upon physical maturity, moves a model of its self inside that model; avoiding reality at all costs.
Until the actual cost of being a living animal is visible at the purchase point, human children will fail to develop and understand our part in the universe because our growth, cheap goods and ‘profits’ (rape of the planet) look better in the Now than they actually are in the future.
Socialists would like to ‘redistribute’ humanity’s ill-gotten gains (feeding more people means more votes and collection plate coins) and Aristocrats work to keep their power of enslaving us to competitively kill each other and the planet for a deluded chance to be ‘rich’ (or at least richer than the poor slob in the street or on a (gasp!) farm.