Please read her chapter, attached as a pdf here (and in an email to you). They really work, they have taken a long time to load at various times (on various computers) for me. Under the comments I have a link to an interview you can read if for some reason you can’t open this! Or feel free to just google her name and take a look around at things she’s said. Schor_New Politics of Consumption
-
Recent Posts
- You don’t have to read the Schor, but…
- I’m in 10-2.30 this week, also Monday.
- One more contest for philosophy papers…
- Professor Baker’s responses to review questions
- Final exam on the 14th!
- Please post your final assignment here.
- FYI: Paper contest for philosophy students in SC
- Online review, final assignment
- Class logistics and two links to view
- Juliet Schor is visiting campus Thursday
-
Top Posts & Pages
-
Blog Stats
- 10,161
This reading isn’t showing up on my computer.
I agree with Schor to some degree about consumerism being a problem. However, I don’t necessarily agree with her solutions via government intervention.
One particular example of this is her proposed tax on luxury and status goods. If the government began to tax goods they labeled as luxury goods, common sense would tell you that would not actually work. If the luxury of a good is what makes it appealing to consumers, it seems like labeling it a luxury and making it more expensive would simply make it more appealing as an expression of one’s relative wealth and status. Schor acknowledges that the problem is largely social, but her solution does not appear to be. Unless I am missing something important, instituting a tax on luxury goods does not do anything to end competitive consumption as a self reinforcing phenomenon or address the root social problem.
While a green tax might be effective, I also feel like increasing consumer credit regulation, regulating advertising, and attempting to encourage diversity fail to actually address the problem of consumerism, but rather they simply attempt to limit some of consumerism’s results.
45 minutes in my dorm room
Dr. Baker,
The reading is showing up as a blank pdf file, when I try to open it.
Dr. Jennifer Baker College of Charleston
I’m having the same problem, the file is showing up with just a bunch of blank pages.
I can’t open it either…
Try it through the email I sent? I’ll resend it right now. She also has this interview that is good: http://www.julietschor.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/interview-cultural-studies.pdf It is a very complex view, more complex than I expected. For example, in the interview above she explains how in some ways she is an old fashioned Marxist. Complex!
Dr. Jennifer Baker College of Charleston
Well, shoot. It opens fine for me from here. Have you guys tried opening it after you open Adobe Acrobat on your screen?
Again, the link to the interview can be reached through the web, so there is always that.
In the article, Schor says that people have been influenced by the changing social dynamics to aspire to different things in the consumer market. When the community was a more valued commodity then the people would only compare themselves to their neighbor hoods and the level of income which was represented there. But with the changing of time, including the introduction of the television, people spend less time in the community and more time with their television set, which only shows them not only the upper middle class which is represented by many TV shows, but also more advertising. I agree that people are aspiring for too much which is hurting the economy, instead of staying at a comfortable standard of living as opposed to luxuriuos. The classical way of thinking about consumerism includes all these stipulations which is similar to Holley’s view about purchasing, but these are too strict and often don’t consider human impulses, they assume that everything is reasonable and rational. Schor says that these are incorrect and I agree to some extent. I believe that some purchases are still thought about thoroughly and deliberated.
45 min dorm
I agree with most aspects of Juliet Schor’s account of consumerism. The social pressures mixed with ideological standards cause unnecessary stress to ordinary life. She says that everyone in the past wanted to be a part of the middle class, and it is clear that as time progressed, now people want to be part of the upper-middle class. In ten years, if consumerist attitudes don’t change, everyone will be clawing their way into the upper class, disregarding the economic, social, and environmental catastrophes it will leave behind. Her article is a bit antiquated, shown when she discusses the ‘current economic boom.’ However, our current economic crisis makes her essay more relevant because now is the time for reform and change. I agree that ‘competitive consumption,’ in other words, consumer fads, stimulate the economy, but cause harm at the same time. Stupid products, such as silly bands, are a waste of resources, especially when they are made at such a rapid pace to satisfy this short-lived fad. Ironically, the environmental fad is occuring simultaneously. The younger generations are starting to pay attention to what businesses are eco-friendly; however, it is difficult to distinguish the liars from actual environmental companies such as Patagonia, Inc. If consumers continue to demand reform from harmful companies, it is possible to create a movement that will impact the world. Still, we must be careful not to get sucked in to the advertising and simply buy products because the TV claims that they are natural or unharmful. Overall, Schor is correct that consumerism needs to change because if it doesn’t the global economy will fail, which at the moment is beginning to happen.
My favorite part of this whole article is when Schor makes comments about consumers being loyal to brands even if they don’t know why. This was particularly interesting and very true. I remember a few years ago when Pepsi did the pepsi challenge. The brand went around the country and subjected people to blind taste tests of pepsi and coke. In the end, pepsi proved to be more popular as far as taste are concerned yet more people are still loyal to coke. Schor also gave examples of beer testing in the 1960s and other ones as well. Another point I enjoyed in this article was Schor’s statement that consumers will buy what they want to buy. The market is free and capitalism works. The government could never regulate the market in the same way that consumers do. By buying what they want to buy, consumers act as a regulator. Consumers make somewhat rational decisions when shopping even if they are influenced by things such as advertising and product placement in the store. I never knew that consumers generally turn right after entering a store (even though I just realized that is exactly what I do) or that products near the entrance are 30% less likely to sell. She also explains that while adults can make more rational decisions, children cannot and that is why the government limits advertising to children. The whole article made many practical points and I enjoyed it.
1 hour in dorm
Although Juliet Schor addressed some very interesting ideas about anti-consumerism, I feel that her ideas are simply unrealistic just because we live in such a prevalent capitalistic market. The fact that our economy thrives on the consumers jealousy of their peers poses a significant problem for her thesis. For example, Juliet Schor believes that consumers do not need to buy expensive luxury items; however, our market needs consumers buying these luxury items because every consumer that sees their peer with high end items feels the need to buy higher quality items. As a direct result, our economy receives the benefit of the American consumers purchasing products within our market. With Juliet Schor’s reasoning, she believes that we need to simply our lifestyles, and prevent ourselves from buying luxury items because we simply do not need them. Juliet Schor’s ideas parallel those of Henry David Thoreau, where he remains completely against purchasing and owning unnecessary items. Controversially, if our country decided to take her advice and listen to her ideas, our economy would completely wither and essentially send our country into another Great Depression. My reasoning for this statement is that our country needs to buy luxury items, so that our economy can thrive, and by not purchasing expensive products, our consumers would have no desire to spend money at all. Even though I disagree with Juliet Schor, I still enjoyed reading her article.
What a great comment!
Dr. Jennifer Baker College of Charleston
Especially recently, I feel that what Schor discussed in her essay is a big topic in our country. As Americans, we are focused on trying to earn as much money as possible. We have this view that in order to be “successful”, we need to have a lot of money; this is because the quality of life is associated with having a lot of money. Schor calls this the “new consumerism” where all the attention is put on buying and spending. I agree with the seven points she makes on the basic elements of consumption at the very end of the essay (especially the first half of the list).
1hr
Dorm