Combining ideas on Capitalism and Consumption from Sahlins Cosmologies of Capitalism and Mintz’s Sugar, Sweetness and Power.
I advocate for the thought that parallels cultural theory,
supposing that people’s conceptions are a function of their material circumstances.
How does this relate to the modern conception of the wealth/poverty gap? With
this perception of a middle class, and the mass consumption of products at
every level of socio-economics?
When considering the general notion of local histories as unrelieved
chronicles of cultural corruption, we must be careful to dually note that
exploitation by the world system may well be an enrichment of the local system,
as the strongest community may exist in the logic of the cultural change.
Cultural persistence and growth come from what challenges and what new
materials and processes are introduced. As a side note, environmental activism
too sometimes takes on a Western skew, that new developments are ruining what
is natural, but nature is not static.
So how have indigenous and rural
societies that are rooted in the land shaped capitalism?
The capacity to reduce social properties to market values is
what allows capitalism to master the cultural order.
Back to what drives the modern capitalist versus what drives
the modern consumer. Blind faith in the market versus blind spending.
In current times, the act of buying is not about the product
at hand, or its use value; its importance is in the ritual of shopping.
Work and pleasure.
Producers respond to demand, but how can demand even be
measured when there are so many products of things that we don’t need? We are
not going into the store with the intent of buying that item. We mindlessly
shop and, by chance, see the particular product and think, “what the hell, I
could use this”. So then how is this demand even created? We have so many
choices, the demand is in the ritual. No one would go leisure shop if there
were only two aisle in the store and it was actually stuff that we needed. That
would just be a reminder of reality—toilet paper, laundry detergent, paper
towels, diapers, milk, rain boots, thermal gloves—that’s depressing, I don’t
have money for all that stuff that I need. Id rather go somewhere with hundreds
of choices of stuff that I don’t need, and spend money I don’t have on those
things, because if they don’t really have a use value in my practical life,
then I can just store it in my closet and not have to think about the money
that I spent.
So 21st century consumption is a cultural ritual
that symbolizes leisure. When we are not participating in the 50 hour work
week, we are browsing the local department stores as an act of fun. It is not
about wealth or power, as the truly wealthy and powerful probably do still participate
in normal leisure activities, it is the “middle-class” that has transformed
leisure into shopping. It’s as if we shop as a way of informing ourselves about
the evolution of products, to be in the know about what products are out there,
to be a participant in this new light speed generation of product obsolescence.
I feel that Generation is determined by the notion of
economic impacts and cultural reaction. In the time of the Great Depression, no
one spent money and people hoarded whatever they could, getting the ultimate
use value out of each product. In 2008 during another economic crisis,
consumers were forced to think about their investments and their current job
standing. In this 21st century generation, what are some key visible
cultural reactions to current economic impacts? What are some current economic
impacts?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.