ABSTRACT
Two competing discourses, those of critical gerontology (CG) and the anti-aging industry (AAI) that it opposes, offer to empower the old. Each responds to twentieth century forms of ageism, including the depictions of the old as passive dependents whose demands upon our economy and time comprise social problems. Where the AAI offers to erase the fact of old age, CG rejects both the notion ofthe old as an undue social burden and the capitalist ideals of "productivity" that exclude them. Critical gerontologists prefer their emphasis on political economy and collective responsibility to the age-phobic medicine ofthe anti-aging industry. However, self-reflexivity on the part of critical gerontologists requires that we reckon all that we share with the anti-aging industry, beginning with our common origins in the Global North and then our language of "empowerment." Focusing on U.S. history, we suggest how the combination of massive wealth, dense bureaucracy, and consumer capitalism has shaped both of these discourses, however opposed we might be ideologically. We conclude with what our Global North status might imply about our attempts to enhance the quality of life of old people worldwide.
