Defenders of Consumerism? « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Politics

Defenders of Consumerism?

[60 posts] [11 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 9 months ago by ChrisSunami
Latest reply from TomOver

Tags:

No tags yet. Add them below.

12 3 Next »

ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

Hi CU,

In my blog, I'm currently doing a series of posts on the subject of Consumerism. Over the course of the coming month or so, I'm going to outline my best arguments about why I think Consumerism is both detrimental and doomed, why I think it needs to be replaced, and what I think should replace it.

But what good is an argument with only one side? I know there are a lot of people here on the boards who are staunch defenders of Consumerism. I happen to think my arguments are pretty good, but I'm sure there are a host of people who would be happy to tell me exactly why I'm wrong.

If so, I'd like to invite you to comment on my blog --devil's advocate so to speak. In the end, I think that will make my arguments stronger, and who knows, maybe I'll change your mind --or maybe you'll change mine.

http://yes.kitoba.com

Posted 9 months ago #
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM

How about some photos on ur site ? Maybe, I missed it, but I didn't see interviews of people. But perhaps that doesn't interest you.

Posted 9 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

*scratch head*

You sure you're not talking about materialism?

Posted 9 months ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

rus said:
*scratch head*

You sure you're not talking about materialism?

The part of the series where I zero in on Consumerism is scheduled for two weeks out, but this week and next week fill in the background.

Posted 9 months ago #
alexs
Limestone bluffs of the Scioto
Login to Send PM

I took a class in US history in the 1920s, it pointed out a lot of consumerism in the magazine advertisements. "Should Emily have a different color of Packard for every mood?"

Posted 9 months ago #
Tenzo
Chicago Lakeshore
Login to Send PM

So you think it's bad to "consume" things? Or catering to people who consume things?

The term "consumerism" was first used in 1915 to refer to "advocacy of the rights and interests of consumers"

The term "consumerism" is also used to refer to the consumerist movement, consumer protection or consumer activism, which seeks to protect and inform consumers by requiring such practices as honest packaging and advertising, product guarantees, and improved safety standards.

Well, like you said, there are two sides to every argument.

Posted 9 months ago #
cr0m
"Lower" Hilliard
Login to Send PM

Tenzo said:
So you think it's bad to "consume" things? Or catering to people who consume things?

The term "consumerism" was first used in 1915 to refer to "advocacy of the rights and interests of consumers"

The term "consumerism" is also used to refer to the consumerist movement, consumer protection or consumer activism, which seeks to protect and inform consumers by requiring such practices as honest packaging and advertising, product guarantees, and improved safety standards.

Well, like you said, there are two sides to every argument.

Awesome.

Posted 9 months ago #
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM

Chris, I think the absence of a commonly understood and accepted working definition of "consumerism" is going to keep people--pro and con--from having a reasoned discussion with you on this.

I saw your two posts on runaway debt and "pyramid schemes." No one is going to say that excess debt is good (though people would differ on where that dangerous threshold lies), and no one is going to defend Bernie Madoff. That doesn't mean that citing those things proves any points for any argument, though--particularly one with nebulously defined terms.

Posted 9 months ago #
JayR
OSU
Login to Send PM

Defining consumerism is going to be a key part of this argument.

In my eyes consumerism is the rabid use of goods in excess, excessive waste, planned obselesense, the notion that development must tied to growth. But then against, that's just me. You should define your terms before asking the question, or maybe that is what you are going for: a vague question.

Posted 9 months ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

These are good points. I did plan to offer my own definition of Consumerism in a future post, but since I've already opened a discussion on the topic, you are all correct that I do owe one now.

I define Consumerism as a system that stimulates employment through the production, distribution and marketing of consumer goods. While I'm definitely in agreement with JayR on where Consumerism leads, I'm trying to keep my base definition as fair and as neutral as possible.

Posted 9 months ago #
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM

Even that definition raises as many questions as it answers. The gaps in your phrasing mean that this phenomenon could be either potentially benign or malignant.

For example, unpacking "marketing:" Are we referring to a system that attempts (and succeeds) at fostering a culture in which people define their self worth by their material possessions? That would be definitely problematic. On the other hand, if we're simply talking about a system in which businesses go out and hawk what they have to offer, that hardly seems abnormal or suspicious. You'd hardly expect Apple not to want to tell the world about the iPhone 5, nor Jeni's to introduce a new flavor but not tell anyone about it.

To the extent that consumerism is defined--by any number of definitions--in such a way that it pressures people and institutions to routinely spend beyond their means for consumption-oriented purposes, then that's certainly problematic. On the flip side, as others noted earlier in the thread, there are other sides to consumerism as well.

Also, just in terms of the coherence of your series: I'll be interested to see how you actually tie in Bernie Madoff into your definition of consumerism. I think you've made a connection in your mind that you want to see, but isn't intrinsic to your definition. I see no particular connection between that and consumerism. His fraud was not consumer-oriented, it was investor-oriented, and was a service, not a product (notwithstanding how much modern consultant-speak seems to want to recharacterize all services as goods, as if you could pick them up and hold them). If you start conflating investments as consumption items, you've obliterated the fundamental definition of both terms. Likewise, if you see evidence of consumerism in every act motivated by material greed, then I think you're secretly working with a far, far broader definition of consumerism than the one you just stated.

Posted 9 months ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

The fact that it could be positive or negative is deliberate --I'd like to look at both sides. Unlike some, I don't think Consumerism is the devil. I think it can work, and has worked in the past, but that it's nearing the end of its viability.

As far as Madoff, the connection isn't a direct one. Rather, I'm suggesting that there are similarities between the Ponzi scheme structure where the new recruits pay off the first investors, and global industrialization.

Posted 9 months ago #
HeySquare
German Village
Login to Send PM

ChrisSunami said:
Unlike some, I don't think Consumerism is the devil. I think it can work, and has worked in the past, but that it's nearing the end of its viability.

I'd like to understand more about what you mean by "nearing the end of its viability."

When you look at some of the marketing tools out there... the Prizm market segmentation system is fascinating:
http://www.claritas.com/MyBestSegments/Default.jsp?ID=30&SubID=&pageName=Segment%2BLook-up
They have 67 distinct categories of market representation that Americans fall into... that depending on your wealth, location, age, etc. they can draw some interesting conclusions about what products and services you are likely to be attracted to.

We should not assume that all consumers demand or consume the same products, and we should not draw conclusions about one market segment based on what the others buy.

I do think that folks like Seth Godin and Sally Hogshead have some interesting things to say about decisions to purchase and marketing products.
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/
http://sallyhogshead.com/hog-blog/
I find Seth Godin particularly persuasive in his discussion about "Tribes". That social sturctures today are taking a huge role in how products get adopted... and that for many "tribes" the traditional methods of marketing or dissemination of information (i.e. newspaper or television) are no longer working.

To bring it back to the topic at hand... I think "consumerism" is a somewhat generic term, and in the absence of a context, can mean many things. Are we talking about the resurrection of the Apple brand, or the appeal of fast food?

Posted 9 months ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

HeySquare said:
To bring it back to the topic at hand... I think "consumerism" is a somewhat generic term, and in the absence of a context, can mean many things. Are we talking about the resurrection of the Apple brand, or the appeal of fast food?

Both. I'm looking at elective purchase of material goods as the foundation of our economy, and whether or not the myriad ways of keeping that system going are sustainable.

Posted 9 months ago #
HeySquare
German Village
Login to Send PM

ChrisSunami said:
Both. I'm looking at elective purchase of material goods as the foundation of our economy, and whether or not the myriad ways of keeping that system going are sustainable.

Well... that's a big topic. I guess I'm asking... what types of conclusions are you planning to draw from that? What data do you plan to use to support it?

Posted 9 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

This might be of interest to you, Chris:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/08/the-consumption-economy-is-dying-let-it-die/243628/

Posted 9 months ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

I thought that was a good article rus. I couldn't find much in it that I disagreed with. In fact, in partial answer to HeySquare's question, a shift in focus from consumption to production, such as the one advocated in the article, is one of the main things I intend to argue for.

As far as what data supports my position, the bulk of it is the fact of the current global economic collapse. Of course, that's very coarse-grained data, but I'm interested in the biggest overall trends, rather than the smaller ones.

Posted 9 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

ChrisSunami said:
I thought that was a good article rus. I couldn't find much in it that I disagreed with. In fact, in partial answer to HeySquare's question, a shift in focus from consumption to production, such as the one advocated in the article, is one of the main things I intend to argue for.

As far as what data supports my position, the bulk of it is the fact of the current global economic collapse. Of course, that's very coarse-grained data, but I'm interested in the biggest overall trends, rather than the smaller ones.

What caught my eye was this:

Second, Obama should come out in favor of countercyclical regulatory policy. We should accelerate the regulatory approval process during periods of economic weakness to boost corporate investment, just as countercyclical monetary and fiscal policy have been used to stimulate consumer spending. This is a message that has to be sent from the top to encourage regulators to consider the effects of their action on the economy.

Posted 9 months ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

rus said:
What caught my eye was this:

Second, Obama should come out in favor of countercyclical regulatory policy. We should accelerate the regulatory approval process during periods of economic weakness to boost corporate investment,

Thanks for pointing that out. I do disagree with that, at least if I'm interpreting it correctly as indicating we should relax environmental protections and so forth in pursuit of corporate investment. That's a cure worse than the disease.

Posted 9 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

ChrisSunami said:
Thanks for pointing that out. I do disagree with that, at least if I'm interpreting it correctly as indicating we should relax environmental protections and so forth in pursuit of corporate investment. That's a cure worse than the disease.

The author apparently works for something called the progressive policy institute. While he may be thinking of some environmental regulations, I don't think that's all the regulations he's thinking of:

http://progressivefix.com/more-regulatory-overreach-at-the-fcc
http://progressivefix.com/the-economist-red-tape-rising
http://progressivefix.com/where-regulation-did-and-did-not-intensify-2000-2010

Posted 9 months ago #