Consumer Culture: Is It Making the World Too Homogeneous - Term Paper Example

Consumer Culture: Is it Making the World Too Homogeneous? Introduction To the hard-boiled economist, consumer spending is the motive force, the dynamics of development. The wider the consumer market unhinged by the economy, with more people buying non-essential and luxurious goods, the more advanced and viable that economy is. To the sociologist, however, the growth of the consumer market is a portentous phenomenon. In this contrary view, consumerism gives rise to a culture that promotes indolence, stifles individual initiative, de-humanizes and fouls up the environment. It seems disturbing in light of perceptions that this market action has unleashed a global culture of homogeneous consumers and commodities, a culture dispersing throughout the world with characteristics that are essentially alike. History and Growth The Lexicon Webster dictionary defines the act of consumption as “to destroy or expend by use; to destroy as by decomposition or burning.” Consumerism thus suggests a wasteful, unnecessary act that follows the use, and so spawned a culture that is based on luxury not need. The luxuries of consumer culture become more than simply goods but “appear as markers of social status or moral decay,” Stearns, P. (2001) observes. What bothers social and behavioral scientists is that consumerism is animated by exactly the same objects of luxury and non-essentials. This has characterized the movement of consumer culture from its origin in the West to its worldwide spread that matched the rapid pace of globalization. Many are therefore asking: Is consumerism making the world too homogeneous? From the beginning, consumerism grew in the West precisely out of the desire for luxury and vanity, not necessity. It is believed that aristocrats and noblemen in the old British empire, France and parts of Italy and Germany started it all as they sought ways to avoid the stench from markets and factories back in the18th century or earlier when public sanitation and garbage disposal systems were yet to be developed. When it was raining or the sun was ablaze, the old-world people wanted cover and comfort when they stepped outside. They then came up with the earliest specimens of consumer goods: bathroom soaps, perfumes, umbrellas, handkerchiefs. These came along with the earlier forms of consumerist leisure, notably restaurants, coffeehouses and resorts. The Americans later picked up the idea to set off what became known as the second stage of consumerism, giving birth to the department store as the new venue for consumption. As the department stores competed for the favors of the growing consumer market, advertising emerged as the chief apparatus of consumerism. With the advent of mass production and the free market concept in the early 20th century, consumerism really took off with the coming of new consumer goods (automobiles, bicycles, food) and consumer leisure (movies, spectator sports). Consumer culture also became an integral part of celebrations like holidays, birthdays. Stearns, P. (2001), who looks at the development of consumerism as one of the greatest changes in the human experience, puts forth the theory that the consumerist society came into being in the 18th century “through a complex web of factors, including an increase in wage earnings, a desire and opportunity to emulate the rich, and a need for goods of value to compensate for the coordinates of identity lost with the passing of a stable, rural way of life.” This jibes with the modern sociological view that man is by instinct a creation that desires to be in the swim of things, to look successful and lavish. As Western culture brought consumerism along in its spread to all parts of the world, consumers everywhere behave in basically the same manner: they buy goods that they don’t need for subsistence but as a means of “demonstrating modest achievement in new ways.” The goods themselves come from the same mold, identical in every way. The best example of this behavior is the increasing consumption of designer goods and fashion labels that have become status symbols and serve no practical purposes except to give the consumer the feeling of being unique and special, of “being in the swim.” Prestige fashion comes in the form of clothes, shoes, lingerie and accessories such as bags, belts and wristwatches. To consumers all over the world, the higher the price of designer clothes or fashion accessories, the loftier status, luxury and quality they represent. Consumer culture has become increasingly stylized and now provides an important context for everyday creativity and provides new ways of creating social and political identities (Lury,C., 1999). Signature clothes that bear the stratospheric price tags of Armani, Gucci, Prada, Dior, Louis Vuitton, Chanel may be no better than the suit sewn for you by the neighborhood seamstress (if you choose the best materials) but consumers go for these name brands because of the prestige attached to them. Notwithstanding the fact that a Gucci shirt, say, may be manufactured in the millions with exactly the same quality, material and design. We have shifted from a work-based to a consumer-based society in which people are identified more through their consumption and less by their occupation and citizenship, says Gordon, J. (2002). It engendered a single culture instead of many or mixed consumer cultures and such homogenization was brought about by Westernization and “McDonaldization.” McDonaldization The impact made by the fashion revolution on the global homogenization of consumer culture parallels that of McDonald which powered its way into the world market under the pretension of increasing “rational efficiency” (Ritzer, G., 1996) in our food consumption. In this activity, McDonald indeed introduced the new elements of efficiency, calculability, predictability and control. The whole setup, which is true for all multinational fast-food outfits, uses the chain mentality which offers convenience since we the customers no longer have to go to the chains; they come to us. Thus, McDonald outlets have become a ubiquitous presence. They are in the inner cities, in the suburbs, schools, malls, parks, airports – the same structure, service, menu, etc. McDonald is said to promote efficiency by ensuring that it prepares food the way customers wanted it, fast. This process is then reinforced by methods of preparation that standardizes the time required to cook and serve the food so that the customer can expect exactly when to be served, with food that always tastes the same anywhere, anytime. That’s calculability and predictability for you. As for the control element, this is made possible by such control gadgets as conveyor belts, fryers with timer and the computerized cash register. There seems to be nothing objectionable about all these. But sociologists took a closer look and found that the entire homogenized process also de-humanizes man, reducing him to a cog within a “vast rationalized machine that is intensely preoccupied with going nowhere (Ritzer, G., 1996).” These rationalized systems (of McDonald and other multinational fast-food companies) tend to turn against themselves, leading to irrational outcomes. Ritzer adds: “They deny the basic humanity, the human reason of the people who work within or those who are served by them.” Instead of providing convenience, for example, McDonald sometimes accomplishes the opposite as when queues are long at the store and its drive-thru outlets. What happens in this case is that the customer wastes time in the line and prevents him from doing more work. On the tools that McDonald use to ensure predictability and control of its operations, they also serve to restructure and control our lives and make us more dependent and subordinate to machines. This in effect denies everyone the opportunity for creative, imaginative decision making. The other negative implications of McDonaldization include the use of less nourishing ingredients such as flavor enhancers, stabilizers, fats, salts and sugar and the packaging system that yields tons of uncontrolled wastes daily. The latter pollutes the environment, such that scholars frown on consumerism as inimical to the environment. As for the use of food enhancers whose health benefits are suspect it is definitely an “anti-human” component since it contributes to society’s health problems (Ritzer, G., 1996). The fast-food industry as a whole is believed to have contributed immensely to the breakdown of family values. With more and more families eating out, the family ritual of cooking, eating together and sharing is fading. The solidarity and integrity of the family is centered around the family meal and if it is lost to us, we have to invent new ways that would replace it. Such pressures being brought to bear on the family are expected to mount as households around the world begin to consist of two or more wage earners. The free market concept is gaining wider and wider acceptance and the world economy continues to boom to empower more consumers. As a result, family life is increasingly revolving around consumer purchases and consumer leisure (Stearns, P., 2001). Woe unto those with modest means whose life becomes harder as they will be tempted to buy for leisure, less for necessity. One good effect of economic growth on consumerism is how it bridges the gap between the rich and the poor. In the past, consumerism drew a line between those with resources and those without. With globalization, businesses and manufacturers of consumer goods have to rationalize their operations to increase efficiency. This hit upon ways to bring the prices of goods and services down, such that TV sets, cars, telephones, dishwashers and microwave ovens are no longer exclusive to the rich but within everybody’s reach (Gordon, J., 2002). References 1. Lury, C. (1999). Consumer Culture. Polity Press, London 2. Klein, N. (2000). No Logo. Flamingo, London. 3. Ritzer, G. (1996). The McDonaldization of Society. Thousand Oaks; Pine Forge Press. 4. Stearns, P. (2001). Consumerism in World History: The Global Transformation of Desire. London and New York. Read More