There’s lots of talk floating about about consumerism being a great evil that needs to be subverted and overthrown. What there is much less of is intelligent discussion of what consumerism actually is, and particularly what it is that drives it and sustains it. In that vein, I’m reading The Rebel Sell (which is now published as A Nation of Rebels), which attempts to go beyond the Adbusters and No Logo-type indictments of consumer culture for something much more rigorous. Here’s a sample:
Say the word “consumerism,” and what image comes to mind? Most people think, once again, of the classic ’50s suburb. They see shiny Buick tail fins, white picket fences, cookie-cutter homes, men in gray flannel suits and skinny ties. They think of people trying to “keep up with the Joneses,” trying to impress the neighbors with the latest gadget, parking their shiny new cars in the driveway and obsessing over their status in the community. Above all, they imagine a society of compulsive conformists, a herd of sheep, subject to eternal manipulation by advertisers and corporations.
Yet the idea that consumerism is driven by a desire to conform is not obvious. Kids sometimes demand a particular style of jeans or a given brand of sneakers, on the grounds that “all the other kids have them.” They want to fit in, to be accepted. But how many adults act this way? Most people spend the big money not on things that help them to fit in, but on things that allow them to stand out from the crowd. They spend their money on goods that confer distinction. People buy what makes them feel superior, whether by showing they are cooler (Nike shoes), better connected (Cuban cigars), better informed (single-malt Scotch), more discerning (Starbucks espresso), morally superior (Body Shop cosmetics) or just plain richer (Louis Vuitton bags).
Consumerism, in other words, would appear to be a product of consumers trying to outdo one another. It is competitive consumption that creates the problem, not conformity. If consumers were just conformists, then they would all go out and buy exactly the same stuff, and everyone would be happy. Furthermore, there would be no reason to go out and buy anything new. Thus the desire to conform fails to explain the compulsive character of consumer behavior—why people keep spending more and more even though they are overextended, and even though it brings them no happiness in the long run.
Heath and Potter, The Rebel Sell, 102-3.
4 responses to “Competitive Consumerism”
[…] About « Competitive Consumerism […]
I can’t help but think this is a very shallow definition of consumerism.
There are as many reasons for consumer purchases as there are psychological drivers of all human behavior.
The mistake is to try and separate consumerism from any other aspect of human behavior, simply because (in evolutionary terms) it is a recent phenomenon. Instead it is a progression of our evolution.
It’s not as if someone sat down one day and said, let’s create a trade of goods.
Yes, people do spend for status (an important evolutionary drive), but they also spend to connect to others and to collect things for the sake of collecting them.
I won’t list all the drives hear, but suffice it to say, “distinction” isn’t the only one, nor would I say it is the most significant.
Interesting subject for discussion, thanks for posting it.
Philip Graves (Consumer Behavior Consultant)
Does competitive consumerism have any impact on people and the environment? if there is can you tell me what it is?
@Lucia Yes, it has an impact, and I’d say it’s almost entirely negative. When we’re driven to out-do each other in terms of our consumption, we live a life that is always unfulfilled, as there will always be yet another consumer good that we are lacking. And this type of life makes demands on the natural environment that are simply unsustainable: we would need several planet Earths to keep consuming at our current pace.