It’s always bothered me that anyone would refer to other people as “consumers,” as though we’re simply herd animals – stupidly waiting to be fed, existing for no other purpose.
It seems a silly thing to get all tense about doesn’t it? After all, we do seem to “consume” a lot. But is that really sufficient to define people – even in the marketplace? Considering all the talk in social media circles about how the marketing game is changing, I figure the language ought to change, too.
So why do we still use this term?
It seems that, as we use it in this economic context, it’s a remnant of that “old media” paradigm, where the message is blasted in our direction with very little regard for the fact that we are people with minds, not simply all-consuming automatons. But it’s all about reach and numbers, right? And why shouldn’t it be?
Indeed, this paradigm is centered upon the very fact of consumerism. “Hey, if they weren’t buying, we wouldn’t be selling!” they say. Yet the overlooked consequence of this acceptance is that we are dehumanized; we are reduced to a vast, collective maw, open wide to the advertisers who happily shovel message after message over and through us until we’re quite numb and blindly accept the deluge into our waiting gullets (and out through the checkbook).
It has changed us. We’ve allowed ourselves to be turned into what overzealous marketers needed us to be. We buy things we don’t need; we live beyond our means. We work ourselves stupid for more money to buy more things – not because we need them, but because it’s what we’ve trained ourselves to do. We’ve convinced ourselves that more is better; that we’re somehow entitled to it, and MUST strive for it.
Wow. We really are consumers, aren’t we? We must think so, and that’s why we still use the word.
And *that* is tragic.
So what?
A video was recently brought to my attention (h/t Josh Klein) in which James H Kunstler, in the closing 45 seconds, argues against the word “consumer”. The entire video is well worth the watch, but here’s the bit I’m referring to:
Please stop referring to yourselves as “consumers,” OK. “Consumers” are different than citizens. “Consumers” do not have obligations, responsibilities and duties to their fellow human beings. And as long as you are using that word “consumer” in the public discussion you will be degrading the quality of the discussion we are having, and we’re gonna continue being clueless going into this very difficult future that we face.
Kunstler’s argument speaks well from the political realm, but he doesn’t go far enough – perhaps for lack of time. In fact, “consumers” as people do not exist in any realm but that of appetite, or taste. Consumers have no moral obligations to their fellows. They have no practical concerns. They do not love. They do not appreciate beauty, they do not create. They have no beliefs, nor do they have legal concerns. In short, consumers do not think; they have no minds.
Yet persons do. We participate in all the realms listed above, and our values in each area affect the way we participate in the marketplace. We are people. We do not consume – we reason, we decide, we act.
I would eliminate the word “consumer” from my vocabulary altogether, except that you continue to use it. Why?
–
[photo credit: nick saltmarsh]
No related posts.
Comments on this entry are closed.