consumer sovereignty is defined by the United States Supreme Court as “the right of every person to be free from excessive economic control by others in the interest of a monopolistic or other unreasonable transaction.
It’s a little confusing, so I’ll break it down. Consumer sovereignty isn’t about limiting freedom. It’s about limiting the power of others in the interest of a monopolistic or other unreasonable transaction. That is, it’s about the right to be free from excessive economic control. That’s why it’s the right of every person to make decisions regarding their own financial affairs without the power of others dictating to them on what they should or should not do.
The consumer sovereignty concept is a bit more complicated than that. In fact, the term originated in the United States, where it is often used to refer to a government that limits the power of its citizens in the interest of a monopoly. That is, a government that restricts the right of its citizens to make choices about their own economic affairs. Thats why the concept is often referred to as the “right to self-ownership.
This is the problem with the term consumer sovereignty. It’s also the problem with the term consumer rights. To explain why, we need to first take a step back and look at what the concept is and then take a deep dive into how the concept applies to the United States.
The premise of consumer sovereignty is that its citizens in the United States have the right to make choices about their own economic affairs. The problem with this premise is that the right to make choices about your own economic affairs (and the freedom to exercise your own economic liberty) is a right that doesn’t necessarily translate into a right to control your own economic affairs. This concept is more like the right to choose your own economic liberty, and that is where it could eventually conflict with the concept of consumer sovereignty.
Most people do not even realize they have a choice about how they should spend their money. To them, we could choose to spend it on whatever we want, and they would be perfectly okay with that. Well, if they want to spend their money on their own personal entertainment, that is a different matter. But once they make that decision, they have the right to exercise that freedom. The same is true in every other area of life.
I think it can be problematic for consumers to have the freedom to spend and then not have the freedom to change the decisions they make once they make them. We don’t always have the best intentions in how we spend our money. That is fine, but we have the right to make choices that benefit ourselves, our families, and our communities.
Yes, in our digital age it is easier to make purchases that don’t meet our needs, but the bottom line is that we are the ones who decide the “best” purchases and the “best” behaviors. It’s our choices that are ultimately responsible for the outcomes of our lives and our families.
We all have a right to participate in our own businesses. We all have a right to make choices that benefit our communities and our families, and we should not have to make those choices on our own.
The same goes with consumer sovereignty. We can make those choices for ourselves, or we can have a choice and do it on our own. It’s not for us to make the decisions for others, but we can make those decisions for ourselves. We can decide what is best for our families and our communities. We can decide what is best for our own selves.
