Consumption itself pulls nations together and promotes reforms and revolutions from different aspects, as I mentioned in my last post. However, it also makes history and defines the definition of reason in each era. The desire to discover and obtain initiated people to explore and reason. This desire changed the world entirely, as it helped fuel the Renaissance period. In the Renaissance period, traders traded with merchants from around the world to get a variety of products in order to fulfill their desires of exploring and obtaining "exotic" products from the ends of the Earth. Their curiosities helped shape the world; their desire also provided the foundation of capitalism. Desire gave birth to reason and consumption; they coexist, for as long as reason exists, consumption will always part of society.
In the modern world, where the dollar sign is an universal language, people reason and take their financial status in account when making decisions. For example, no one would buy a BMW when he/she is living under the poverty line even though he/she wants that particular car. Reason and consumption are two of the most important factors when making decisions and in each decision we make, we make history. Not only do we make history, we are making changes for the future generations. History, consumption and reason: they are all relative.
1 comment:
In your post, you state: "For example, no one would buy a BMW when he/she is living under the poverty line even though he/she wants that particular car." Are you sure about this?? I'll bet you could refute this claim by going to a BMW dealership and trying to have a car sold to you even though you don't have the income to pay for it. The notion of credit somewhat skews the schema that you outline. Also, I'm not convinced that you are grappling with the 'exhaustion' sense of consumption. How can consumption result in people wanting to "change the world into a better environment" when it involves the exhaustion of certain 'environments'? Finally, when you end by saying that the keywords we have looked at are all "relative," this threatens to sound terribly throw-away, as if you are claiming that we can't say anything precise about these terms *at all*. Clearly you don't think this, as your post shows. But then what do you mean by this term "relative"? I fear that this is a very loosely applied word. One more question: could a capitalist society exist outside of consumption? This would be a fascinating question to consider seriously.
Post a Comment