But I always try to add corporate economic growth to the picture too. When it’s defined as growth in the production and ultimate disposal of more stuff, it’s easy to see how it too is a major part of the environmental problem.

Anyway, good post. There isn’t much of any substance being written on this topic in the blogosphere.

Hong Kong? Canada? The United States? Australia? Singapore? Japan? All of these countries implemented free-market and free-trade economics, for the better. Indeed, African countries which have done likewise have also done comparatively well.

But I totally understand and can relate to what you said in your comment. In particular, I know how cool it is to have an object of some kind that only people ‘in the know’ will understand and be able to appreciate.

I don’t know what to make of it though, to be honest. I know the running theories tend to suggest that ‘we-the-people-who-like-commodities’ must be somehow brainwashed into believing we need these products, but I’m not sure that’s it. I, like you, know I don’t need to buy books or movies. I know I could just get them from the video store or the library to read. I also know I don’t need to own them at home for any sort of validation or whatnot. The status you speak of could probably be achieved if people simply knew you’d read those books, even if you didn’t own an extensive collection.

..but despite that, there’s something satisfying about coming home from the bookstore with a book you’re pleased with, or a movie you love. There’s something really satisfying about seeing your nice little collection of books.

That’s kinda what I meant in the original post, though I only briefly touched on it – commodities may be designed to force us to need and coerce us into buying them, but even so, it’s still satisfying to own [some of] them.

I mean, sure, there are plenty of examples of commodities that are satisfying precisely because of the function they offer us. When it’s cold out, a coat offers warmth, and regardless of how stylish it is, you’re happy for that when your ass is freezing off, but think of how many people (myself included, I assure you) consume things simply for the sake of consuming them. I don’t think of myself as particularly outside the norm when it comes to the ways that I spend my money and the things I buy. I have a couple of hobbies that I invest in, and I purchase things like clothing, music, and movies. Now, I’ll grant that I probably buy more movies than the average person does, but I’d bet I don’t spend much more on movies a month than most people do (I just buy mine used). That being said, there are movies that I still haven’t watched, even though I bought them. If I’m not watching them, why am I buying them? I think, in part, it’s the status of the movie in question. There’s a certain satisfaction in knowing that people will be impressed with the selection of movies, or the quality of books, or even the style of your shoes or whatever. That’s not to say that I buy movies that I know I don’t like- I don’t. But, the line between buying it because I’m going ot watch it enough times to make back my money, and owning it so that it can be seen or so that my taste can be appreciated is sometimes blurry. I don’t think it’s an intentional thing, either. I certainly don’t set out to buy movies that I think will impress other people- I buy movies that I like or that I’m interested in. But, I think that there is a point where we don’t even mean to do these things, but do anyway.

Plus, I can think of things I own that I feel mark me as an insider to certain groups. I have a jacket with symbols from a show on it- I know that only a few people will “get it.” They’ll recognize the markings, and it will sort of set us apart- In some way, it will raise my “status” with that person, because I have something relating to the show that *very* few people have, and that you’re unlikely to see in my area, and, at the same time, it creates a bond (even if transient) between us for a moment- it lets us knoww that we’re insiders to something. That is, that we “get” something that the people around us don’t.

I think I’ve strayed from the point, though. ;)

It’s true. People will be people and choose their own damn partners! :)

I guess the point is that we, as a society, shouldn’t regress to the place where we were banning interracial marriages. I’m with you – let people choose their own paths, and ‘natural selection’ will take it’s course.

That’s a wonderful sentiment – and I heartily support it – but I doubt we’ve got much of a say in the matter. I reckon it’s a case of we either die out or we all end up the same shade of grey. Natural selection in action.

Of course, I’ve been predicting the end of the world ten years running, so there’s a slim possibility I may be wrong!