Marxist identity
To what extent do you agree with Marxist and later thinkers such as Slavoj Zizek that capitalism encourages people to try and buy their sense of identity "off the peg" through piling up possessions?
Search This Blog
This blog is exclusively for students on the Theorising Social Life module of the Sociology degree at West Suffolk College.
Capitalism can be seen as an economic system where a country's trade and industry are controlled by the private owners for their own profit rather by the state. Marx thought of the private land owners, factory owners and people of means as the 'bourgeoisie' and the factory workers and people who sold their labour as the 'proletariat'. This results in wealth inequality and no equal opportunities.
ReplyDeletePeople derive their identities and help to form themselves through their dress, decorating their home , hobbies and experiences. I think personally that Marx idea of capitalism does encourage people to buy their sense of identity. Buying more possessions could give a sense of 'being better' than their neighbour, rather than just keeping up with the Jones' as was more prevalent after the second world war where predominantly women needed to keep their houses as nice as their neighbours. More luxury goods , living in a better bigger house could give a sense of superiority , feeling more like the bourgeoisie than proletariat despite not being able to afford it.These possessions could also be irrelevant but trying to fill hole if linked to a mental health problem or something lacking in their personal life. Pamela Hobart from a Prindle Post article regarding Consumerism, Capitalism and Personal Identity stated that people can harm themselves in placing too much importance on material possessions . Consumerism destroys the potential for genuine individuality instead fosters it through manipulation by advertising. ' With the rise of social media platforms and advertising, behaviours can be detrimentally shaped by these forces. The French philosopher Denis Diderot believes that obtaining new things can create a spiral of consumption leading to wanting more new things. We would then end up buying things we didn't necessarily need, new earrings because of a new dress, new cushions because of a new settee. This was actually called the 'Diderot Effect'. He thought the only way to alleviate this was for consumer habits to be practiced as part of a balanced life.
Juliet Schor, a Sociology Professor , agreed that the pressure to upgrade our possessions is relentlessly undirectional, always ascending. The temptation to buy nice things through advertising or other peoples influence is great despite the fact people may not have the funds, this would then leave the consumer with debt and ultimately affect mental health and their whole well being may be at stake. Perhaps there is a need for the more lower or working class people to buy more possessions in order to feel a little like the land owners and more wealthy. Status consumption and want creation increase the buying without contributing to happiness. Adam Smith argues that lasting happiness is found in tranquility as opposed to consumption.
Maslow hierarchy of needs believes that humans 'need beautiful imagery or something new and aesthetically pleasing to continue up to self actualization'
In conclusion , i think Zizek and Marx are correct in thinking that capitalism encourages people to try and buy their sense of identity. Although most people know who they are. I think it is within our nature to want to possess lots of lovely things.
There is no doubt that we live in a culture of purchasing items to make us happy. Richard Denniss, author of Curing Affluenza, comments that to keep up with cultural and societal expectations and not appear out-of-date, requires participation. This is true, which leads to an argument against the statement that capitalism encourages people to buy their sense of identity but rather encourages people to fit in. It could even be said that buying items to fit in, particularly clothing, is a symptom of forced tribalism as per Appiah’s theories on modern identities.
ReplyDeleteA lot of today’s identities are encouraged by media, images in advertising, film, tv and social media; even films contain covert advertising to encourage the purchasing of items. At the root of all advertising is capitalism, for it is ultimately the owners of the large corporations that benefit the most. Advertising tells us that item a will make us youthful; item b will make us more attractive to the opposite sex and so on. They manipulate consumers into believing that to purchase their item will allow them to become a better version of themselves. I agree with the previous commentator that advertising can lead people to face financial difficulties through temptation, also through the belief that the items are needed in order to meet societal expectations.
In a world where identity is increasingly challenged, many find the way they both feel, and are perceived to be, very important. It could be said that any identity can be created; communities and families are increasingly fragmented at a time where individuality is encouraged, yet individuals yearn for belonging via social media. I think that to find a strong identity isn’t always negative, it could be that people find their confidence and sense of belonging by ‘buying their identity’.
So much can be bought, from clothing that is associated with certain hobbies, lifestyle or professions, to cosmetic procedures that enable the individual to feel or be perceived a certain way. This is Zizek’s argument: that, for example, buying organic food is done less as a health concern but more to find and show solidarity. The person’s identity is then as one who cares about nature, thus buying into an ideological stance. Whilst there is some truth to this, I find it to be rather too cynical a view, purchases are not all about fitting in with an ideology but doing what makes the individual feel content. Whilst psychology professor
Jordan Peterson says people should compare themselves to who they were yesterday, rather than who others are today, for many in a capitalist society, this is hard to achieve. Foucault’s term, subjectification, discusses how people become tied to their identities, which leads to them seeking to improve themselves based on what they understand about the identity. Going back to the organic shopper, she understands that to be an environmentally or dietary conscious person, she should purchase that food. This understanding of identity is not self-imagined, it is formed from the world the shopper is surrounded by: social media, mass media, literature, society and so on. To put it simply, to meet the norms and value of her identity, she feels compelled to engage in consumption of particular goods. This same argument can be used for what it is to be a young female, a mum, a businessperson, any identity. Purchasing goods increases the sense of the identity and supports their believed place in the world.
To return to the question, to consider Marxist views alongside those of Zizek and bringing in Foucault, I do think people try to buy their identity: they just don’t always realise it’s that they’re doing.