Understanding Freedom/Consumerism relation

[guartz]

... In the Western World.


Quick argument, I just want to see who agrees and I want to hear the thoughts of those who disagree.

To understand consumerism in America and abroad, it is crucially important to understand the early world of democracy, the early 1900s in particular. The people were considered a wild herd that needed to be controlled, to preserve economical and civil stability, to mold secular crisis as it arises. The means of control were found, through consumerism. Consider this quote by Edward Bernays, who is arguable the pioneer of public relations (aka, propaganda) from that era:

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind."

What happened in the 1900s, was that many enterprises discovered that that can now sell products people didn't directly need by appealing to their subconscious desires in order to market the product. In other words, the idea that cars make you sexy/sporty/rough was directly an influence from the marketing elite. Consumerism was born. Prior to this, common people only purchased necessities.

This wasn't really a problem, the issue with this arises when the government picked up on the idea, and a philosophy was developed that true freedom is only available in the marketplace, and the freedom of choice can be fully realized by having different products to choose from. To me, this is an insult.

I just want to make it clear, that 1900s were very different from today. There are no longer few elites who hold influence in the trends and products. Instead, the market is given total reign. Evidence is all around you, if you look a bit closer. We are being sold this notion that we have the right to be perfectly content 100% of the time, that we have the right to be constantly entertained. Can't sleep? Buy sleeping pills. A little sad? Buy anti-depressants. Small dick? Buy a sports car. Majority of the population buys into this, the ends are the things you can buy. No small wonder why in United States cases of "existential vacuum" are rampant.

This works for the government, because they have virtual social control. Indirectly of course, I don't think it's even plausible to have direct control of today's market. However, one quote springs to mind: "Order out of Chaos." - G.W Bush ... actually, more commonly throughout the ages, it was "Through Chaos, Order" but I digress. The exact nature of the control is simply keeping the people docile, and creating weakness and dependence upon the structured society, where the opposite should be taken place. Not to sound new age, or anything, but amongst other things, this is pure anathema to spirituality.

The saddest part of this, is that Western World is inclined to export this notion of freedom. I won't be the first to say it, but today's conflicts are the direct result of the West's, particularly America's global ambitions for this philosophy. Were only these ambitions peaceful, perhaps we would be in a better world.

Instead we have one fanatic, fighting another;

“Oh American people, can you ask yourselves, why all this hate against America and against Israel, why?”
-Ayman Al-Zawahir

[Kuya]

What are you looking for exactly? Someone who disagrees with everything you just sead? I don't think there is anyone who would disagree at the existence of neoliberalism and consumerism. It's painfully obvious that certain methods are used to sell product, which include association with natural human needs.

[Correction]

This whiffs of a thinly-veiled attempt to get a review on a homework assignment before he turns it in.

C-, spelling and grammar issues abound, no citations given for assertions made in opening paragraph, etc. etc.

[Kuya]

This whiffs of a thinly-veiled attempt to get a review on a homework assignment before he turns it in.

C-, spelling and grammar issues abound, no citations given for assertions made in opening paragraph, etc. etc.

I'm going to give him a C+. NEEDS MOAR SOARCES

[Fhqwghads]

Can teachers give out Tea Ell/Dee Are grades these days?

[guartz]

haha, oh wow. No this isn't a school project. It's not even an essay, but more of a collection of thoughts. Also, how can I give you sources on my outlook on the world? Just to go back and research all the authors, documentaries and media events that could have influenced my thoughts regarding this subject would take weeks, if not months. I'm not writing a book here people.

Kuya, I wasn't thinking that anybody would deny the existence neoliberalisms or consumerism - my point was that this pattern is criminal and lazy. There are those who say this is natural progression and is, as it should be. Neoconservatives, for example.

I'm an idiot for picking this audience, though. I should have posted this on z forums or something.
Lesson learned.

[Kuya]

Kuya, I wasn't thinking that anybody would deny the existence neoliberalisms or consumerism - my point was that this pattern is criminal and lazy. There are those who say this is natural progression and is, as it should be. Neoconservatives, for example.

You weren't going to find any neocons on a FFXI board to disagree with you, or even provide you with an argument. You were preaching to the choir. Most of what you sead is easily obtainable knowledge in the first year of college.

in otherwords: the problem with your thread is, there's nothing to talk about

[guartz]

I know,

As I said, I'm an idiot for picking this audience.

[Mysterio]

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i2...bratorzone.jpg

pick unrelated, lol

[Charla]

What happened in the 1900s, was that many enterprises discovered that that can now sell products people didn't directly need by appealing to their subconscious desires in order to market the product. In other words, the idea that cars make you sexy/sporty/rough was directly an influence from the marketing elite. Consumerism was born. Prior to this, common people only purchased necessities.

This wasn't really a problem, the issue with this arises when the government picked up on the idea, and a philosophy was developed that true freedom is only available in the marketplace, and the freedom of choice can be fully realized by having different products to choose from. To me, this is an insult.

The idea that the government helped to further was not that freedom is only available in the marketplace, simply that it is most easialy available there. American society still encourages organized religion, as long as it happens to be one of the large and accepted religions (no Mithranists/Zoroastrianists/Rastafarians need apply). Society still encourages enlistment in the armed forces as a means to personal fulfilment and freedom. Consumerism is simply the default behavior for a middle or lower class person without the inclination or capability to give up consumerism in favor of something more difficult and more rewarding.

We are being sold this notion that we have the right to be perfectly content 100% of the time, that we have the right to be constantly entertained. Can't sleep? Buy sleeping pills. A little sad? Buy anti-depressants. Small dick? Buy a sports car. Majority of the population buys into this, the ends are the things you can buy. No small wonder why in United States cases of "existential vacuum" are rampant.

If that were the notion we were being sold, we would be told that we don't have to work. What we are being sold is the notion that "your money can make you happy right now". With enough money, we can have approximately anything we could ask for. And the reason it's convincing is that it's quite close to being true. Personally, I believe that I would be happy if only I didn't have to work, introducing a catch 22 into the whole situation that undermines society's messages and leading to my cynicism and discontent with my own inability to enjoy the prospect of spending the next 40 years doing something I don't particlarly want to. I can't speak for everyone, but my own spiritual and other emotional needs could be and are currently being met easialy enough through my own effort.

This works for the government, because they have virtual social control. Indirectly of course, I don't think it's even plausible to have direct control of today's market.

As you say, the decentralization of the decisions that shape American consumerism leads to the government having less direct control of the people's attitudes toward various things. The two-party system has served as a means of channeling the large number of differing opinions into those that do not contradict the overall outlook and intentions of those in power. By creating a direct competition between two supposedly opposed factions, two-party politics appeals to an instinct to choose sides, and anyone unwilling to choose sides is seen as opting out of the entire contest (hence the term "throwing your vote away"). What's more, it seems to me that this entire mechanism was unintentional, and the essential similarity between the two parties is the result of the essential similarity of people with enough money, power and ambition to become politicians. As such, the entrenchment of political power in America is more a matter of its own interia than of manipulation via widespread consumerism.

As for my own feelings on consumerism: As I indicated above, if it could be achieved without normal people having to work (perhaps through a situation like that in the Greg Bear novel Kiln People) it would be close enough to a utopia.

See? Who says he can't get a decent disagreement around here?

[guartz]

the entrenchment of political power in America is available through endorsement of corporations and lobbyists, who are in turn given power and money by people who falsely believe that they should be constantly happy. A centralized ideal with consumerism. The two party system, and essentially the one politika government we have is a direct result of consumerism. What consumerism ideology does apart from spreading this lie that we deserve to be constantly happy, is create a distraction and simultaneously breed dependence upon this system.

Marx talked about this alienation. Americans become dependent by identifying themselves with consumer goods, thus alienating their own identity and virtually becoming a cog in the machine. Just think of the people around you, how many people you know identify themselves by the type of clothes they wear, or the type of car they drive?

This isn't new to history.

The psychological evidence regarding the damage this system is causing is very clear. Just look how many people today experience existential vacuum? How widespread are these mid-life crisis?

Nobody wants to deal with pain anymore, nobody wants to deal with stress anymore. They see these things as enemies to their normal lives. Nothing further could be from the truth, stress and pain are essential to human existence! Dulling or avoiding them through medication or overdose of entertainment is lethal to humanity, in fact, a lot of people have become like sub-humans. Dependant, weak, and thoughtless. It's a new form of slavery.

What's NEW to history is this sort of clueless rebellion that's been happening that last 30 years or so. Specifically with teenagers. The punks, the goths. They might not understand what they are rebelling against, but who can blame them? What sane person would want to loose their personal identity within the trendiness of modern-day consumerism.

Take away prime-time tv shows, and there will be a labor movement unlike anything ever witnessed in the history of the planet.

[Correction]

existential vacuum

What the fuck does that even mean? And how do you know the hard number of people a) suffering from whatever the fuck it is and b) are taking drugs to avoid dealing with the problem?

You're blowing a lot of smoke. Back up what you say and don't make shit up. This whiffs of your '9/11 conspiracy' nonsense all over again.

[evilbau]

Funny enough, this has been covered in the movie Josie and the Pussycats (how often do you get to say that?).

[guartz]

existential vacuum

What the fuck does that even mean? And how do you know the hard number of people a) suffering from whatever the fuck it is and b) are taking drugs to avoid dealing with the problem?

You're blowing a lot of smoke. Back up what you say and don't make shit up. This whiffs of your '9/11 conspiracy' nonsense all over again.

aww, whattsa matter, can't google it?

Existential Vacuum, very simply put, a absence of meaning to life.

In 1940s-50s, there was a study done that showed 60% of American students suffered signs of this. This was compared to European students of whom 25% showed signs of existential vacuum.

We have drugs for that now, though. Like prozac. Haven't you seen the commercials for it? Where that little sad face was jumping around on a gray scaled background of wilted flowers and mooty clouds? Then it takes Zoloft and it's all colorful and bright again. Then it said something like, 20 million Americans take zoloft. Side effects may include dry mouth, nose bleeds and suicide tendencies. The cause is unknown, but we think it has something to do with imbalance of natural chemicals in your brain.

[BIGSTIC]

What's NEW to history is this sort of clueless rebellion that's been happening that last 30 years or so. Specifically with teenagers. The punks, the goths. They might not understand what they are rebelling against, but who can blame them? What sane person would want to loose their personal identity within the trendiness of modern-day consumerism.

How is this a NEW. Rebellion has been happening since the beginning of time. Hell America was started buy a bunch of people rebelling against the norm of the time. And Goth, Punk, and ect. rebellions going on atm are not clueless per say. Those people know what they are doing and have there reasons for rebelling.

If you ask me the problem isn't so much consumerism but with modern society not wanting to take responsibility for their actions. You want to drive a H2 like the rap stars....go get a job and SAVE money till you can afford it. Don't get a loan then find out you cant pay the note and you cry to your mommy who gives you a happy pill to make you forget how dumb you were. Stress is a part of life but People bring it on themselves cause to them "its someone else's fault". Just cause you qualify for the financing don't mean you can afford it.

[guartz]

hrmm? When I said New, I was specifically referring to the clueless rebellions we are witnessing today. Of course, rebellion itself is nothing new.

Ah yes, the fiat currency and the loan/interest system is a integral part of the consumerism, I agree.

[Charla]

the entrenchment of political power in America is available through endorsement of corporations and lobbyists, who are in turn given power and money by people who falsely believe that they should be constantly happy. A centralized ideal with consumerism. The two party system, and essentially the one politika government we have is a direct result of consumerism. What consumerism ideology does apart from spreading this lie that we deserve to be constantly happy, is create a distraction and simultaneously breed dependence upon this system.

I won't deny that lobbyists and campaign contributions keep mainstream politicians beholden to corporate interestes. That does not, however, imply that the politicians are also manipulating the corporations. If one or the other is the source of real power in this country, your argument obviously indicates that it is business and not government.

Marx talked about this alienation. Americans become dependent by identifying themselves with consumer goods, thus alienating their own identity and virtually becoming a cog in the machine. Just think of the people around you, how many people you know identify themselves by the type of clothes they wear, or the type of car they drive?

None, as far as I know. Last I checked my friends were male, and therefore couldn't even tell you what they were wearing without looking down. People like me and those I hang out with just don't care that much about consumer goods that aren't electronic. The closest we get to "defining ourselves by our posessions" is as PC people instead of Mac people, or PS2 people instead of Xbox people. And for me, that distinction is fading as all three major consoles become roughly equal and Windows continues to slowly run itself into the ground by becoming more bloated.

Nobody wants to deal with pain anymore, nobody wants to deal with stress anymore. They see these things as enemies to their normal lives. Nothing further could be from the truth, stress and pain are essential to human existence! Dulling or avoiding them through medication or overdose of entertainment is lethal to humanity, in fact, a lot of people have become like sub-humans. Dependant, weak, and thoughtless. It's a new form of slavery.

Well, that's a decent argument, but in my experience, I seem to become more sensitive to stress and unpleasantness when I manage to avoid it, rather than becoming weak and thoughtless. After I graduated from college and before I got a job, I spent almost all my time doing what I wanted to. The removal of the only significant source(s) of stress and unhappiness in my life didn't make me weak and thoughtless, or dependant on being a lazy bum. I just found new things to be unhappy about half of the time.

Your first post was definately more convincing than the second. It seems as though you're trying to ignore most of my arguments and come up with a slightly different position to rant about. Consumerism might be slowly destroying this country, but the bottom line is: you still have to work. As long as you have to work, it won't be 1984. And if someone comes up with a way for us to not have to work (again, Greg Bear's Slant and Kiln People provide decent examples of how to go about it), then I'll go willingly into opression. Screw your grandkids, I wanna be happy for the rest of my life.

[guartz]

I won't deny that lobbyists and campaign contributions keep mainstream politicians beholden to corporate interestes. That does not, however, imply that the politicians are also manipulating the corporations. If one or the other is the source of real power in this country, your argument obviously indicates that it is business and not government.

I don't know if the government is a subservant to the titans of the marketplace, or the other way around, however our government has no qualms about waging war over corporate interests. It's more likely that both have a dependence on each other. But the idea of government and corporations is really something intangible, government and corporations are just people - and really, it's the SAME people.

None, as far as I know. Last I checked my friends were male, and therefore couldn't even tell you what they were wearing without looking down. People like me and those I hang out with just don't care that much about consumer goods that aren't electronic. The closest we get to "defining ourselves by our posessions" is as PC people instead of Mac people, or PS2 people instead of Xbox people. And for me, that distinction is fading as all three major consoles become roughly equal and Windows continues to slowly run itself into the ground by becoming more bloated.

This is because you and your friend are smart enough to understand that the clothes, console preferences, etc are meaningless distinctions. Most people don't know this. If you want a better example, think of the diehard republicans/democrats. It's the same concept. Besides, you're acting like this is something unheard of. Walk into your local mall, and see if you can identify preps, goths, punks, skaters, etc. You can do this easily, because these people identify themselves by their clothes.

Well, that's a decent argument, but in my experience, I seem to become more sensitive to stress and unpleasantness when I manage to avoid it, rather than becoming weak and thoughtless. After I graduated from college and before I got a job, I spent almost all my time doing what I wanted to. The removal of the only significant source(s) of stress and unhappiness in my life didn't make me weak and thoughtless, or dependant on being a lazy bum. I just found new things to be unhappy about half of the time.

Well that's good. You didn't strike me as a person who would see their therapists for prescriptions because you had a pimple on prom night.

Your first post was definately more convincing than the second. It seems as though you're trying to ignore most of my arguments and come up with a slightly different position to rant about. Consumerism might be slowly destroying this country, but the bottom line is: you still have to work. As long as you have to work, it won't be 1984. And if someone comes up with a way for us to not have to work (again, Greg Bear's Slant and Kiln People provide decent examples of how to go about it), then I'll go willingly into opression. Screw your grandkids, I wanna be happy for the rest of my life.

I can't say if there is a better way,
and I won't say for certainty that this behavior will lead to something akin 1984
All I'm saying is if it looks and smells like shit, it probably is shit.
It's too late anyway to do anything about this anyway, imho.