Voluntary Simplicity Meets Modern Consumerism
INTRODUCTION
When people look at the modern world today the first thing they recognize is the evidence of humanity’s development of the world, how they harvested the needed environment for energy and rejoice in the modern technological advances that allow for a fantastic amount of convenience to many people’s everyday lives. However, many of these same human beings fail to consider the consequences, on many levels, that all of these developments and advances may lead to. Many argue that these advances and conveniences have led to an unhealthy kind of consumerism; ideologies that place a great deal of importance on having large bank accounts, the means to buy more “toys” and the attaining of success through accumulation of possessions. This leads to people judging their own success and individual value by the physical and economic wealth that they obtain (Schor 3). In a capitalist society, like the United States, there is a need for supply and demand, as well as, a sense of competition to benefit from that system. For many, particularly those at the top of the system, the system is not just functional, it is ideal. However, there are many other people who do not see the capitalist, consumerist and materialistic mindset as a positive aspect of the modern era. There are many who believe that stepping back from that mentality and eliminating the stresses of materialist expectations and the capitalist value system it possible to “simplify” their existence. This is the basis of the ideology behind “Voluntary Simplicity.” Voluntary Simplicity encourages people to step away from the modern world and it may include acts, like eliminating technology, providing for themselves as opposed to shopping at businesses and there are some who go as far as to adopt a lifestyle that would resemble how many people lived in the 1800s (Dolfsa 140-141). The Voluntary Simplicity movement does have a presence in this era and the two sides of the argument seldom see eye-to-eye. After reviewing the available information it becomes clear that the two sides both make valid and supported arguments. That being said there is no distinctly right or wrong verdict on this issue, but there is a need for compromise and balanced approaches in the future that will be far more beneficial in the United States and other nations all across the globe.
BACKGROUND
The ideals behind capitalism and consumerism are not specifically a child of the modern era; it has existed well into the past. The beginning of capitalism goes as far back as the 16th century for the Western world and even farther back into antiquity for others. The disparities between the wealthy and the poor have always existed (Simplicity Collective 1). Those that have money, property and possessions are more successful, more respected and more worthwhile members of society, while those who do not are considered unmotivated, lazy or simply “losers.” There have always been people who have opposed the ideologies behind the capitalist society. The encouragement of simpler living can also be traced back to philosophies like Buddhism, as well as, Christian denominations, like the Quakers. However in the 1850s, it was writer Henry Thoreau who dedicatedly believed in the ideals of voluntary simplicity. He believed that if people continued to compete for money, materials and fame, then they are missing opportunities to develop themselves as human beings (Thoreau1-2).
DISCUSSION
There are many today who would argue that modern society does not just consume, but “over-consumes” (Alexander and Ussher 66). Voluntary Simplicity is also referred to by many as " the simple life" and 'downshifting.” The Voluntary Simplicity movement also called the “quiet movement,’ which teaches that by separating themselves from the day-to-day consumerism and capitalist system they will no longer feel the strain and restraint of that system. Human beings can find the same meaning and significance without succumbing to the conformism of capitalism (Simplicity Collective 1). Taking themselves out of the modern world procedures and practices, they no longer have to judge themselves by the capitalist and consumerist standards. At the same time modern capitalists argue that such people are extreme and fanatical, in some cases, and are seen as subcultures, intentionally existing in contrast to the norms of society (Stearns 26). In order to understand the two sides of the argument better it is best to discuss them individually.
Social Implications: Again the focus on materialism and money within modern society has directly caused the disparities that exist between “the haves and have nots.” Capitalism teaches an unhealthy philosophy that one’s self value, source of happiness and life success is a matter money or material gain. Human beings, supporters of Voluntary Simplicity, argue that people do not need “things” to be happy and they can have a greater value as people, something that can only be truly discovered by releasing their attachments and protocols of modern consumerism (Simplicity Collective 1).
Ecology and Environmental Implications: Many supporters of the Voluntary Simplicity movement argue that the modern capitalist and consumerist society is not just responsible for ethical and social issues, but also environmental and ecological ones. There are few who do not know that human industry and progress has resulted in ecological and environmental damage that contributes to global warming, possible climate change and extinction of many plant and animal species. If more human beings moved away from modern society and embraced a Voluntary Simplicity perspective then much of that pollution, sapping of resources and the damage caused by human beings would lessen and modern societies negative impact on the environment would lessen (Alexander 12-13).
Progress Accountability: Accepting that humanity has a negative effect on aspects of nature is part of discovering how to change it. Simply put, human beings no longer just adapt to their environment they force their environments to adapt to them. By making an effort to embrace a life guided by Voluntary Simplicity, people will regain a better relationship with the natural world because they must rely on it more directly within their lives (Simplicity Collective 1).
What Voluntary Simplicity Is Not: Voluntary Simplicity argues that they do not encourage or glorify a life of poverty; it simply considers making alternatives that lessen their involvement in the consumer cycle. Voluntary Simplicity is not a “hippie” movement promoted by environmental extremists that use scare tactics to make people consider their perspective. Lastly, Voluntary Simplicity is not by nature anti-technology nor do they encourages a more “primitive lifestyle.” It simply considers that human beings can funnel their skills and technology into a more simple societal standard (Simplicity Collective 2).
The Cons of Voluntary Simplicity
Societal Stability: There are many who are proactive supporters and advocates of the progress and ideology behind capitalism and consumerism and see the societal stability that is gained through conforming to the standards and norms; anything else is, subcultural, separatist or somehow deviant in the actions (Barton 67-68). These people who take themselves “off grid” do not necessarily take into considerations that the same consumer system may still pay for these citizens who are living “in contrast” to society, in some area, for example healthcare. They are contributing to the instability of the society as a whole and they are not contributing to it.
Environmental Smoke Screen: Supporters of consumerism and the capitalist ideology consider that the supporters of Voluntary Simplicity system use environmental issues as a foundation for scare tactics. Most people are aware that human civilization has taken a toll on the environment, but that does not mean that the system that exists should be abandoned (Dolfsma 56). If environmental efforts need to be taken there are ways of doing so within the capitalist and consumerist system. Already environmentally friendly energy alternatives are being sold to the public to make effective change.
Voluntary Simplicity or Politics: There are many people today that argue that those who encourage or embrace the simplicity movement have motivations that are not philosophical, but political. Some people are not separating from capitalism because they believe that voluntary simplicity is ideal but because it suits their political propaganda. They use it to make a case for the difference in the rich and the poor, but they really care more about battling political points (Zamel, Sasson-Levy and Ben-Porat 119-120).
Capitalism is the Not Evil: In the arguments made against Capitalism and Consumerism it is presented as something that is innately bad. If one lives in a capitalist society it directly means that the rich will benefit while the innocent poor suffer. People who support Voluntary Simplicity are being presented to the disenfranchised as being their “knight in shining armor” that will make their lives better by eliminating “evil” Capitalism and making the line and the rich and poor disappear. This is not truth and is another form of propaganda that Voluntary Simplicists use to discredit the validity of capitalism and consumerism in the modern era (Dolfsma 134-135).
The reality is that both sides do make incredibly valid arguments. Both sides point out benefits and flaws that can be associated with either lifestyle, whether one embraces a capitalist and consumer lifestyle or options to live under the practices of Voluntary Simplicity, which may offer some people a better life. It is clear that many of the practices that have resulted from human growth and industry have caused there to be a division between the rich and poor. It has helped to cement the idea that success is made through the gain of money or goods, helped to ignore that resources are being diminished and proof has been produced that links human activities to the damage done to the natural environments around them (Alexander 5-6). This is something that needs to considered and efforts made to improve the system to meet those societal and global needs. These considerations are a “need” that must be considered (Frank 12). At the same time, many of the extreme believers in Voluntary Simplicity want to detach completely from society, no bills, no modern convenience, no industrialization and live nearly exclusively “off grid” lifestyles. This thinking is ridiculous to many modern Americans and others around the world. Not many people who are actively a part of capitalist society and consumerist thinking are going to be willing to give up too much of their conveniences; meaning that they may have to give up air conditioning, heat, electricity, technology and modern commerce all together (Dofsma 134-135). However, that does not mean that the two sides cannot compromise and find a happy medium. It is necessary for the environmental consequences of human civilization to be addressed. Alternatives to dwindling and damaging natural resource must be found or consumption must change. More effective ways to improve lives of the people who do not fare well in the capitalist system. At the same time, it would do people good to interact more with nature, to be more self-reliant and committed to improving humanity, not just economically, but socially as well (Simplicity Collective 2).
In diverse societies, like the United States, there are so many differing opinions, ideologies, philosophies and perspectives that it is inevitable that many different approaches would be proposed as the best possible solution. Early capitalists believed that capitalism and consumerism was the best way to allow people to earn a living and make legitimate profits on which to base their success (Dofsma 53). No one could have been aware that in the future that capitalism would go a bit awry and have such a significant impact on society’s views as a whole; a future that was not entirely beneficial overall. There is nothing wrong in evolving; to develop positive changes within the system, where benefits can be gained for all people at all levels of society. It might relieve the society from the excess reliance of monetary and material gain. The views of Voluntary Simplicity are valuable and do have a place. Again, there are ways for the needs and wants of the people to be balanced and successful compromises found.
CONCLUSION
Human beings all over the world enjoy the conveniences of modern advancements and technological understanding that exists today, but that same advancement and understanding has revealed flaws in the existing system. Again, the only way to eliminate the focus on wealth and materialism, lessen the gaps between the rich and poor and to ease off on environmentally unhealthy practices is to be willing to reform and adapt the existing system; but it should not require the complete abandonment of one system for the other, at least not at this time. As with so many things in a world of diversity the best ways to find acceptable actions is through genuine compromise. So much more could be gained via the two sides working together than continuing to oppose one another. So when asked the question, is capitalism or Voluntary Simplicity the better option for the future of the modern era, the answer is not a matter of neither or nor, but one that endorses the “pros” of both views and the potential to work together to better the “cons” that both can lead to.
WORK CITED
Alexander, Samuel. "A Voluntary Simplicity Movement: Reimagining the Good Life Beyond
Consumer Culture. “The International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, Economic & Social Sustainability. 7. (2011): 1-21
Alexander, S. and Ussher, Simon."The Voluntary Simplicity Movement: A Multi-National
Survey Analysis in Theoretical Context. Journal of Consumer Culture. 12.1. (2012): 66-86
Barton, Katherine M. "Listening to the Quiet Revolution: The Implications of Voluntary
Simplicity for a Sustainable Society. Claremont College. (2015): 1-89
Dolfsma, Wilfred. "Consuming Symbolic Goods: Identity and Commitment, Values and
Economics. Routledge. (2013): 1-168.
Frank, Robert H. "Chapter 1: Money Well Spent." Luxury Fever: Why Money Fails to Satisfy in
an Era of Excess. (2001): 1-8.
Schor, Julie B. “Overspent America.” Harper Perennial. (1999): 1-253.
Stearns, Peter N. “Chapter 3: The First Causes of Consumerism.” Themes in World History: The
Emergence of Consumerism in the West. Routledge (2002): 26-32.
Thoreau, Henry. “Excerpts of Walden.” (1954): 1-3
Zamwel, Einat, Sasson-Levy, O. and Ben-Porat, Guy. "Voluntary Simplifiers as Political
Consumers: Individuals practicing politics through reduced consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture. 1.2. (2014): 119-218.
The Simplicity Collective. "What is Voluntary Simplistic?" The Simplicity Collective. (2016): 1-
2. Web. <http://simplicitycollective.com/start-here/what-is-voluntary-simplicity-2>.
