Consumerism: A Double-Edged Sword
A colleague sent me an email explaining the “Centennial light,” noting, “They used to make bulbs that lasted forever, but they conspired to downgrade.” He went on to describe “The Phoebus cartel,” comprised by, among others, Osram, Philips, and General Electric that existed to control the manufacture of light bulbs. I responded:
Here’s a similar story in the automobile industry. Until 1985, Mercedes built an engine that would run literally millions of miles. They’d mail out stickers for their happy owners to display proudly on their bumpers when the cars hit 500K, 1 million, 1.5 million, etc. Of course, they realized that planned obsolescence would have been more profitable, but their sense of personal ethics wouldn’t permit it. Until 1985, that is, when they buckled to the pressure and started using an alloy that wouldn’t last more than about 300K miles. The rest is history.
Literally every consumer product is either a) built to fall apart at a point in time when the average customer will not be so enraged as to boycott the company, b) engineered to lose its utility, e.g., electronics, or c) built to look old soon, making its owner look like a loser.
There are people, of course, who celebrate all this because, they say, consumerism drives the economy, and they have a point. But they’re missing two important ingredients:
• All this (resource consumption, manufacturing processes, energy use, etc.) is rapidly destroying the environment. Consumerism is the ultimate unsustainable aspect of our world. There is nothing new in this notion, of course; there have been conservationists throughout human history, though it’s been only in the last 50 years that environmentalism has begun to take hold; the seminal events include the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (1962) and Donella Meadows’ Limits to Growth (1972).
As we look around us, we see this movement growing daily, perhaps in part as a reaction to an administration here in the U.S. that is hellbent on pulling back on environmental regulation to enable the rich to get richer. Again, there is absolutely nothing sustainable about any aspect of our current course here. To take a recent example, the Trump budget proposal will eliminate the Energy Star program, which, over the last 25 years has reduced consumers’ energy bills by $430 billion and lowered greenhouse gas emissions to the tune of 6 trillion pounds of CO2 (not to mention enormous quantities of methane, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, cadmium, arsenic, selenium, mercury, and an array of radioactive isotopes).
• Consumerism promotes (some would say “requires”) human exploitation: child labor, work in unsafe and inhumane conditions, starvation wages, and slavery. It is estimated that there are 30 million slaves on Earth at this moment (which is why I don’t buy seafood from Southeast Asia, where shrimp and scallops are processed almost exclusively by slaves). Of the 1.2 million children who are trafficked every year, about one-third are sold into slavery. (One-third are forced into sex work, and the other third are killed and their bodies dissected to support the lucrative body parts industry.)
Ironically, none of this “stuff” makes us happy anyway. Numerous studies have shown that people who are hooked on buying the latest and greatest things are far less happy than people who don’t care about this and simply enjoy life, taking pleasure in it for what it is.
Good topic to bring to our attention. Around 50% of our individual carbon footprint is from stuff, so it is vital to cut our purchasing of new stuff – everything from clothes, shoes, new kitchens, new TVs and other electrical appliances etc. Time to stop if we are serious about surviving climate change.
We need to move to enjoying long life items, exploring second hand stuff – furniture, clothes etc and making re-purposing trendy.
The ponzi of per capita growth at rates above repleneshment and its twin sister consumerism, might be a natural state of being. I’m not sure. I am, however, certain that unending growth is self-destructive in the same fashion as life is self-destructive through its own prosperity. It destroys its own environment, and then in some number of cycles ultimately dies. Because of all things being finite, including the entire planet, unending growth does have to end, and usually in a pretty toxic fashion. It might be why a number of us intuit that humankind must leave the planet – the knowledge that there is no good end to this.
VERY interesting point about the Energy Star program Craig!
It’s the perfect answer to the Trumps of this world who think that all govt expenditure on social goods is frivolous; and that govt doesn’t know how to lead.
I think it would be a good idea to fill in more details of the Energy Star program, and get it out there so more people can see that govt sometimes has a vital role in looking at the big picture.
Craig serious topic and deserving of much discussions. It parallels your other on the Pain and Suffering in the Globe due to environmental challenges etc. it is Intersectional for sure.
Most of the serious economists and Social thought leaders all seem to say the frenzied form of mega capitalism are now Toxic and actually beginning to cannibalize itself…in both direct and indirect ways.
People like T Piketty and Dr R Wolf to name a few all cast out strong examples of the internalized conflicts within the capitalistic system and a system that is addicted to continued growth that is not able to sustain itself.
There are limits to Growth we just fail to recognize them. Or Dare not to !
Arlene and Charmian get it and offer some constructive insights
take care
Winners of the game Monopoly want to eliminate the losers. Short term thinking is predominate. Donald is the ultimate Monopolist and wants to crush all others.
He will not live much longer, fortunately.
Craig,
I have to disagree with you about your paragraph stating that all consumer products are designed to fail, fall apart, lose utility, or look old too soon. Having been in the design and development of electronic circuits in the test & measurement, automotive, and medical industries for 36 years, I can honestly say that all products that I have been involved with are designed to provide reliable operation commensurate with the market they are targeting.
I can assure you, electronics are not designed to lose utility over a period of time. In fact, the electronics within the product is usually the most reliable part of the design. What most often fails first are the connection interfaces to the electronics, due to extreme operating environments, repetitive motions that cause mechanical failures at a connection interface, or in some cases customer abuse.
One specific example that comes to mind is the failure of electric clothing irons that seem to fail well before they should. It is not the electronics that are failing, but the AC wiring connection at the point where the AC cord is bent and twisted just before it goes into the iron. Even though stress relief rubber parts have been added to relieve the strain on the AC cord, the cord still fails at the end of the stress relief part.
Be careful making such blanket statements that consumer products are designed to fail; that statement is simply not true, and presents a very naïve understanding of how products are designed, developed, and produced.
Best Regards,
James F.
James: I appreciate this, but it certainly flies in the teeth of both:
Our common experience. My parents got a toaster as a wedding gift in 1947 that they threw away 50 years later. They lived to regret that decision, however, because they had to get a new one over 2 – 3 years from then on, when each successive one would fail in some way. My current toaster blackens one side of the bread, while turning the other side the (desired) golden brown. Whether there is actual malfeasance in the design or mere incompetence can be disputed, but there’s something that consumers don’t want; you’ll have a tough time convincing me otherwise.
Research into terms like “planned obsolescence,” and “products are designed to break,” the latter of which get 111 million hits on Google.
I try my best to be the worst consumer possible. I fix everything I can. Most of what I own is other people’s broken stuff.
I just watched this movie on Friday night.
http://minimalismfilm.com/watch/
Brian you are on a good path and will have more of your bounty from your hard work saved for your self.
There seems to be a growing movement in this area as folks strive to regain some control over their personal lifes and economics. etc. Good wishes
Excellent post and comment, Craig! Bravo!