Consumerism isn't evil 

This is how JJ announces he’s starting a merch line.

Seeing JJ draw wojaks is like seeing Eve eat the forbidden fruit. Such knowledge casted JJ from some metaphorical paradise.

Perhaps an approach such as "thoughtful consumerism" as opposed to "mindless consumerism" would help with fostering more gratitude.

Sounds like something a consumerism would say….

Man sitting in front of hundreds of random objects thinks consumerism is pretty nice actually

I wouldn't dismiss greenwashing as it definitely does happen. The worst cases are the waste disposal companies

This made me realize there's something strange about the phrase "guilty pleasure". It's like we have to preface consuming something lowbrow, mainstream, or unhealthy by pointing out that we aren't one of those "mindless consumers"

This reminds me of that comic panel from Calvin where his mom gives the typical “It could be a lot worse.” And he rebuttals with “It could be a lot better too!”

"Making anything except babies" is quite the sentence I never thought I'd hear lmao

It’s funny for JJ to deliver this message while sitting against a background of trinkets

J.J I have Several issues I have with this video so please hear me out even though you probably won’t listen. 1. The mere way that products are produced is only part of the issue with over consumerism but rather how much is being produced. Many products made today are intentionally made to break after a few uses so you need to buy another one. 2. Yes many products we consume are made using well paid and compensated workers. Do any amount of research on the horrible things major chocolate companies do in Africa for example to see what I’m talking about. Or any research on clothing companies in bengal and Vietnam, or fruit companies in Latin America, etc. 3. The biggest problem many 1st worlders have with consumerism is that things that people derive meaning from IE: Art, craftsmanship, parenthood are increasingly being replaced by the simple instant gratification of consuming. Actually committing yourself to something instead of just consuming more often than not does wonders for someone’s mental state. (That’s why the best thing you can do to get out of depression is to literally just get a pet.) 4. Reducing plastics being used doesn’t mean anything when plastic doesn’t degrade in waste yards or the ocean. If they actually cared they would stop using plastic all together instead of making their cups thinner or something. Thank you for reading.

A company will proudly advertise how they did XYZ to reduce pollution or waste, but will not mention how it is usually a drop in the bucket compared to the total amount in the whole supply chain. At Amazon for example when pallets of packages are transferred from a fulfillment center to a distribution center, the whole thing is wrapped in plastic wrap which is then unwrapped at the distribution center and thrown away. When I worked there I was astounded at how fast the dumpsters willed up with that plastic sometimes. But the customer would never hear about that and as such Amazon doesn't have that as a priority to change, even though it would have a huge environmental impact. Companies will be more than happy to use thinner packaging, stop providing straws, and do other things which are actually good for their bottom line and market it as environmentalism. As soon as it isn't something the customer actually sees, there is much less interest in it

The reason why JW individuals don't want birthday or Christmas gifts is not really because they are anti-materialistic or are against consumerism. It is because they don't recognize any one day as being different from any other day, and do not celebrate holidays---and this is due to their interpretation of Biblical scripture. (I am not a member of this group myself). Some Seventh Day Adventists have similar beliefs.

I say moderation in all things is key. Healthy consumerism is a great way to put it, J.J. Thanks for your thoughts!😊✌️

Controversial opinion: Excessive consumption and its idealization in culture is harmful in a planet with finite resources

I think like all things, consumerism in moderation is probably the best system. Take it too far on either end and you get something quite unpleasant!

JJ I just want to say I love your channel and (respectfully) completely disagree with your opinion, but the drawing and sound effect combo at 10:06 actually made me laugh out loud. Thank you.

Anticonsumerism is so common that even companies participate in it. Marketing loves describing how their product is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than their competitors, as theirs is made by small independent like-minded indevisuals, and the other company is some shadowy hyper corperate dystopia that only exists to make life less efficient for their own benifit. In some ways, the true anticorperate move is to buy things that are the best deal for you. You should probably be doing anyway

Oil companies pitched consumer choice as the reason behind all of their evil ways, and so when people say “there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism” … I think it comes from a bitterness of having tried and failed to consume ethically. I think the real issue of consumerism is weaponized ignorance. Chocolate is a good example. It’s a wonderful consumer product given as gifts for basically every major American holiday. However, it’s undeniably made with child slave labor despite the industry’s best efforts to end it. Most people are ignorant of that when they buy an Easter basket. And buying Tony’s chocolate (“voting with your dollar”) won’t be enough to fix the problem. The chocolate industry is banking on consumer ignorance so that they don’t have to invest in fixing the problem. I absolutely love the omega mart installation in Las Vegas because it parodies the consumerism of a basic grocery store in such a fun way … while also selling merch of those parodies. Another great place for consumerism is craft fairs and Ren Faires, where you get to meet and shake the hands of the person who created the product. I think that is just some harmless good fun on the whole. No one is weaponizing my ignorance to hurt other people in those settings for the most part.

I think it's about balance. And also knowing that we're changing so just a little bit more self-aware. I'm not trying to guilt ourselves. I'm biassed off when you need it. But everybody deserves a treat

I think with the internet we're just constantly rapid fire having our trust broken with various stories of companies doing maximally evil things all the time. I don't think that would stop if we changed out for a different type of system though since there will always be those people who will do whatever it takes to get ahead. Just be conscientious about what you buy I guess, we're all just doing our best.

I feel mixed on feedback about how green/zero carbon a company is. There are companies that have lived up doing well for our planet and societies. On the other hand, far too often these claims don't hold up to audit by a legit third party source. And far too many companies phrase their success in such a way that make it seem far greater than it is (e.g., have reduced blank by up to x% rarely means that the company is any where near that cross their products/processes). Let's set the words of these companies aside and look at the amount of plastic and oil that is being used by companies from North America. Providing links in comments usually gets my post deleted, so just go look up how much plastic and fossil fuels North American companies are using per year. It is still going up every year and going up faster than previously. If all of these companies are reducing their plastic and fossil fuel use, then how can these companies be using more of these things than ever before? The fertility rate in the US and CA is not exploding. It is just above replacement with immigration factored in. In other words, the increase represents a per capital increase. I will end with saying that my statements having nothing to do with consumerism. Nothing is perfect, including consumerism. The overwhelming majority of companies follow the laws of the countries they operate in. People, not companies, use these laws as guidelines for what is good and bad. Most countries, especially the US, have big opportunities to improve the practicality of their regulations. At the same time, counties also have an opportunity to reconsider how they use the carrot, not just the stick. The US is still providing massive subsidizing towards fossil fuels. Government investment in renewables is on the increase, but we as a society have not been putting our money where our collective mouths are. We're starting to see many green/renewable technologies reach or pass price parity with fossil fuel technologies - even with fossil fuels receiving more subsidies. So we will naturally see most companies slowly switch to these technologies, but we could dramatically improve this with proper regulations and subsidies.

respectfully I wouldn't pick the guy with the End of Evangelion poster as being a stereotypically happy person

I've been living in Finland for the past 5 years, but I go back home about annually to visit family in the US. I've had a lot of observations on these small nuances in consumerism between the US and Finland (I won't speak for all of Europe cause I don't think that's fair, but it likely still applies). The products available in stores are virtually the same: a pint of Ben & Jerry's is just double the price in Helsinki and Apple electronics are still readily available. Amazon hasn't yet entered the market so there's a local competitor. The delivery system is also a bit different in Helsinki, where when you order a package, if it's too large it doesn't come by post and you have to pick it up in person. So that style of on-demand online shopping hasn't really caught on here, at least not based on my anecdotal evidence. Online orders are usually done for a necessity or if it is much cheaper on the website. Overall though, these consumption patterns of goods really aren't that different on the surface level, unless you include cars and trucks, which aren't exactly everyday purchases even in the US. My main observation in terms of middle class consumption is for household services. In the US people seem willing to spend money on landscaping, housekeeping, pool cleaning, snowplowing, etc., things of that nature. In Finland, these services are reserved for the wealthiest, and I don't personally know anyone who operates these types of businesses. I often had landscaping jobs growing up in the US and knew tons of people in my middle class upringing who had these kinds of businesses. This is obviously a different form of consumerism that doesn't rely so heavily on global supply chains as much, and much of it could be attributed to a difference between suburban lifestyles between the two countries. Middle class Finns also on average have much smaller expendable incomes than their American counterparts. On my last visit to the US, I saw advertizements for a new type of household service I'd never seen before --- setting up outdoor Christmas decorations and storing them once the holiday season ends. There's a part of me that falls into these 'late-stage capitalism' cynical arguments about how wild it is that such a service exists. I understand that setting up mass-produced Christmas decorations is a pain in the ass, but it seems like a quintessential part of Americana, just like mowing the lawn and raking leaves. I think that it's removing a cultural hallmark from the collective cultural experience, will National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation resonate with future generations? The yearly pilgrimage up to the attic to throw down and untangle lights is right up there with apple pie on Thanksgiving in my opinion. On the other hand, there is obviously a market need for this, otherwise these businesses wouldn't be advertizing and it does allow someone the flexibility to make an income on their own terms by exploiting the market need. When I came back to Finland I conducted a very informal poll amongst my friends and relatives. All of them kind of scoffed at the idea and most of them said they found it novel that the outsides of houses were so ornately decorated. Finland does Christmas trees and interior decorations at home and Finnish cities are covered in Christmas lights, but not really to the scale of Christmas lights on private homes in the US. Some in Finland had seen the American-style lights before, but others were shocked, some thought it cool, others grotesque, particularly the big blow up Santa dolls. This tirade doesn't really have a point, just kind of a rumination on how I've viewed consumerism on both sides. I don't necessarily agree with JJ on all the points he made, but I do think there is a lack of gratitude on lots of accounts for our modern economy. The other aspect of the anti-consumerist argument, though, is that products themselves have gotten worse and worse in the past few decades as a combined result of offshoring manufacturing, cutting corners and controlled obsolescence. This makes it even tougher to know that the product you buy is quality unless you do some prior research and scrutinizing. It would be great if these corporations were held more accountable for these practices i.e., fast fashion, tools made from Chinesium, and software not letting farmers perform their own repairs on their tractors. Anyway, rant over.

Wow. You getting us ready for a Temu promo?

child labor but i get to have iphone😂❤🎉😊

I think there is a sect of "Anti-Consumerism" that you missed, the "things aren't made like they use to" crowd. Anecdotally, I encounter this group far more often then the other kind of anti-consumerism. It's almost conspiratorial at this point, the idea that things are purposefully engineered to fail so you must purchase another one, or have a specific manufacturing technique that requires any repair to be done by the company itself of an increased cost to the consumer.

If we think about the cost of consumer goods as a percentage of anyone's income, we might arrive at a more nuanced view of economic responsibility. I suspect that the average person bears the burden of keeping the economy growing by making consumerist purchases, and has less money to spare to meet that burden. That is my biggest concern with consumerism.

I am so tired of hearing people call our society "late stage capitalism" when people in other time periods and countries would give their left arm to be where we are today. The problem is not consumerism, the problem is greed and entitlement. Being grateful=being happy. Thanks for this JJ!

This is probally the first time ive disagreed with one of JJ's takes. Consumerism isnt fundamentally bad, like he said in the video its pretty much just a part of human instinct. And theres nothing wrong with enjoying things made purely for consumerism in moderation. But I think that we can/should acknowledge that modern consumerism has become over indulgent. And that a majority of corporate climate intiatives is in fact green washing or bare minimum changes meant to avoid legislation from either being created or enforced on a larger scale. Also theres nothing wrong with criticising a system/practice you partake in. Would you consider an alcoholic talking about the dangers of alcohol hypocritical?

i think the reason so much art is so bitter towards consumerism is that any appraisal of something flawed is often seen as a complete endorsement and defense. you cant both appreciate AND have serious critiques of something in the eyes of many

Something this kind of reminds me of is how some on the ideological left and right will criticize things about modern consumer capitalism that are more related to the human condition or scarcity rather than modern consumer capitalism itself. For example, the broader anti-work-osphere of people who believe that people should not have to work in order to survive, or that things like low-level service positions exist as a sort of wage slavery. And to a certain extent I can sympathize with the underlying philosophy that, in a society as wealthy and prosperous as the United States, people should not have to struggle endlessly for things like basic accommodations, food, or healthcare. But, I think they fail to go two steps forward and think about the tradeoffs of certain policy proposals. We should have a universal floor of things like housing, food, and healthcare: great! How do we pay for these things? If workers have increased protections, we'll have to pay more for labor costs, materials, etc. We will have to create comprehensive systems that get food surpluses to hungry people. We will have to hire more doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals, all the while building new hospitals, and clinics. And people will have to *work* to get these things done. Society can't really function on the back of people who do jobs for the goodness of our hearts; part of the social contract is doing stuff you don't want to do because it enables society to swim instead of drown. This isn't because of capitalism or neoliberalism or whatever bogeyman comes up. It's simply a fact in a world of scarce resources that sometimes you will have to do things you don't want to do in order to obtain things. You don't want to work at Amazon, and don't think anyone should have to work through uncomfortable conditions to maneuver a warehouse or deliver packages? Ok, but I hope you're willing to stop ordering things and forgo the convenience that Amazon provides. You want the working conditions and wages to improve at Walmart? Ok, awesome! But I hope you understand that you yourself will have to pay more for things to make that kind of thing possible. Businesses like that are expensive to run, and you can't sustain the current low prices while treating workers better off the increased revenues from salary caps alone. Same with healthcare. Do you want a universal healthcare system a la much of the rest of the industrialized world? Well, you better be prepared to wait longer for care and pay more in taxes. Maybe these tradeoffs are worth it to you, but I think a lot of people think we can reach some sort of workers-rights, kumbaya paradise without sacrifice or tradeoffs, or that in a world following their policy proposals there would be no drudgery. And it's just... nonsense.

and easy to say that when you live in the North American continent but for the rest of the world it's another story.

You dodge the key contradiction in your argument: Despite anti-consumerism (apparently) being culturally dominant, our society is consumerist by habit. How could this circumstance arise? If anti-consumerism were really an "overly cynical, miserable, and hypocritical" position, why would so many people tow its line? Let me suggest something your analysis misses: People feel that consumerism hurts them, whether culturally or pollution or where-ever. It's reasonable that one would develop nascent anti-consumerist sentiments simply by noticing the obvious, that there are disadvantages to that pillar of one's society. But, one has very little ability to make change, because consumerism is necessarily enforced by the system one inhabits. (One simply must purchase things to live, and has learned to purchase things for pleasure. When they try to avoid it, as you point out, they find themselves surrounded on all sides and fail to escape their own society's habits.) So, they grow cynical, miserable, and for no fault of their own, hypocritical. You must be sympathetic to your opposition if you want to convince them of your argument. I think your video fails in this respect.

While i agree that Consumerism at its core is not inherently evil or gluttonous, there is a particular flavor of consumerism that I, and many others, believe is pointless at best and harmful at worst. Probably the most comment example that most people will be familiar with is the urge/pressure some people have to buy a new smartphone every year or every 2 years. Most commonly I see this idea embraced specifically by those who use iPhones and other Apple products, almost everyone I know (anectodal evidence warning ⚠️) has the newest generation iPhone, or maybe has the previous year's edition. Realistically, very few people need a phone with a 16+ megapixel camera, or half a terabyte of storage, or the processing power to run mobile games at 120 fps (to be honest, im so disinterested in the whole "new phone every year" thing that im not even familiar with how excessively powerful new phones have gotten). Most people can function perfectly fine with a $300 android phone, yet the brand name and shiney new colors have somehow sucked people into Brand Loyalty™ and normalized the practice of getting a new $1000 phone like it's a new pair of jeans. You could even argue that tech companies, not just Apple, releasing new versions of the same product year after year is by itself a harmful consumerist practice. Another example would be the yearly cycle of Trendy Water Bottle. Stanley cups, Yeti bottles, Hydro Flask, the trend has repeated itself at least 5-7 times over the last decade alone, leaving many people with this flavor of consumerism with either a cabinet of a dozen metal water bottles, or throwing away perfectly good products for the sake of buying what's popular. I could go on with examples that apply to different demographics, age groups, etc, but i think the point is clear. Consumption is not even in a vacuum, but there are certainly levels of consumerism that border on the absurd. THAT is the behavior people don't like and of which we would like the see the cycle broken. I agree with lots of your points in this video, and as always i love your illustrations and the way you present yourself, but personally i think this has been one of your weakest arguments lately. Regardless, I always appreciate the addition perspective you bring ❤

Ironically I think pessimism and cynicism are the fast food of thinking. Criticism without creating anything or giving a better solution.

"Do NOT make fun of my funko pops" the video...

I think a lot of radical anti-consumerist thinking is in the same vein of "economic growth is damaging to the environment and thus bad, we have enough already" that is so commonly espoused by my upper middle class friends. The reality is that YOU have enough already, an enormous amount of people have very little economic mobility or freedom, barely get by, and some, sadly, live in horrific poverty. It's really easy for you to support the status quo when that status quo allows you to live a life billions would love to have. Rather than slamming the door behind you, the solution is to provide resources so that the rise of the middle class in the developing world is supported by sustainable energy sources and practices.

The more far-right branch of anticonsumerism seems to me to be not about the problems of people owning things but about the wrong people being able to own things and the way the choose the wrong things to own. There is an authoritarian/aristocratic assumption that the rich must be made up of classically cultured consumers who value craftsmanship and land over the mass produced and popular against what they would see as a mass of low IQ proles who should ideally be too poor to own anything or be anything of influence due to the fact that the vulgarise society. In that sense it is quite different to left-wing anticonsumerism and in someways a more fundamental critique in that left wing versions just seem to often want a more equalised consumerism.

I generally feel, if we went through the effort to do something, there is usually some reason we did it. Happiness is a natural human goal, and the reason we make a lot of this stuff is to make things that make us happy. For different people different things make them happy but there is a lot of overlap, and I feel the fact consumerism has stuck around for at least 70 years is probably a sign that there is something there that is being done right.

JJ, as an anti-consumerist myself. The problem I have with consumerism is that it encourages a hedonistic attitude towards people and things. I believe in fundamentally in the deliberate care and responsibility for the things your own. And to buy a new shirt because it is cool is fine but one must do so with purpose and deliberate intention aka purchase things that are going to last your life time and that you are genuinely going to derive long term value from. In other words stop buying shit from SHEIN.

My favorite example of this is when more informed friends tell me about all of Amazons evil practices, but then ends their spiel with "but its so more cheap and convenient!"

As a guy who has a general distaste for the prevalence of wojacks in internet culture, I greatly appreciate your creativity in drawing them! 9:32 LOL!

Seems a bit odd to take your info from the companies own websites which are essentially an extension of their marketing. It makes me think of John Oliver's episode on carbon offsets, where several companies that claimed to be eco-friendly were actually just pretending to be.

I was so happy to see paper bags return to some of my favourite stores. The paper is biodegradable and can even be used as a fire starter if you still have a wood burning stove. The oil that would have been used to make that plastic bag can go where it belongs, in my gas tank.

Hey JJ, thanks for the great videos and inspiring Lucas Bender to make a German version of your political tribes video! I enjoyed it a lot. Best Wishes from Hessen, Germany

I think big companies are only environmentally friendly in countries that care about the environment. If you get McDonald’s in south east Asia you will still get plastic containers, plastic straws, plastic spoons and plastic bags

No one is free until everyone is free

Great video! I've thought similar things, not particularly about gratitude, but about consumerism not really being all that bad; so many anti-consumerists seem to think that anyone that disagrees with them are brainwashed or something, talking to them is exhausting

JJ is the only person for whom I would think “too moderate to offend anyone” is a positive. Great video!

You're giving these big corporations too much credit.

Who let this dude cook

My main fear is the power that is gained by companies which will be used only to make more money and to become more powerful which comes before the rights and feelings of the people.

Such a needed voice in today's rhetorical soup!

Honestly probably one of my favourite videos by you. Manages to be cover a lot too!!! People seem to have just become too comfortable, and lack the gratitude. It’s easy to say we have too much stuff, and care too much about material goods but when we don’t have anything, the pendulum swings the other way. Possessions should make one’s life easier, and more enjoyable; if someone feels their life has no meaning and they feel a void inside themselves, that’s not because of consumerism, that’s because of something else. Getting rid of the culture of consumerism isn’t gonna make that any better. Edit:idk what that “something else” is. lol.

9:37 "As the right comes to steal anti-science from the left" What part of your soul did you have to lock away to say that with a straight face 😂

Powerful video jj Just ordered a pizza via phone call which I will pick up at my local pizzeria on my way from the pub all on my iPhone something pro max which il pay off in October I wouldn’t have it any other way Consumerism is kwel

I think that consumerism itself is fine and is just part of civilization,it’s just more common now because of how many more people can afford to participate in it than ever before,buying things you like or that bring happiness to you isn’t a problem at all On the other hand buying something simply because it’s trendy or buying a new version of something that’s the same as the old one that just has a new coat of paint is bad and should be called outbecause then you waste money and either forget about it or throw it away for the newest version(like people do with phones and other things) In my opinion there’s a balance,you can buy anything as long as you actually like it and will use it but shouldn’t buy something just because it’s popular or because you feel pressured to

It's pretty obvious from your backdrop that you're a consumerist, and I watch your channel in spite of it. But no intellectually honest analysis supports the corporate greenwashing propaganda. Serious study reveals that corporation and capitalists don't deliver on environmental promises unless it increases profits. I'm speaking as a degreed sustainability analyst with an ecosystem focus. I understand wanting to believe corporate greenwashing PR. That's why it works. They say what people want to believe. It's nearly universal that they tell half-truths, make far-off promises, don't actually follow through, but just make new promises in the future. Everything corporations do is to increase profits. They have no choice. Their only goal is to grow capital, otherwise their leadership is replaced or they lose market share and ultimately fail. It's not that they're evil, it's the systemic design of corporate capitalism. Why would corporations do anything more than greenwash so customers feel good about buying their products? It's not that people working for corporations don't care,.. they can't care. Those that care to much quit or are replaced. Corporations spend more on marketing green initiatives than they spend on the actual initiatives. They sell sustainable products at a cost premium because it makes more money. They still continue to sell just as much of the unsustainable products. Certified "green products" just serve an additional market segment to a growth market. As a consumer, our buying choices have no effect because they don't remove the unsustainable products. The most successful "green" products only bring unsustainable products' price down by shifting demand away from them. So poor people buy cheaper unsustainable products, while the wealthy can feel good buying healthier, more expensive products. This is particularly a problem in Canada, where wages are low relative to the cost of housing and food. Consumers buy the lowest-cost items with little knowledge of where it came from or the environmental costs. Meat consumption is a good example of this. Consumers aren't meant to know where it comes from or what's involved, and they don't want to. Consumption and waste generation have only accelerated since the start of the industrial revolution. The forms of energy have grown from coal to oil to gas, but that only brought more sources on-line. They're still burning coal and oil and gas. In some cases, environmental regulations cleaned it up, but they just added wind, solar, hydro and nuclear to the mix. It's always balanced based on what is most profitable. There's no other option because traditional economics only accepts growth. We'll keep using fossil fuels until they're used up or too expensive relative to other options. There's no other option. Society has made great progress on access to healthcare, education, food and housing availability. This has been in spite of capitalists who want basic needs to be market-driven, denied to the poor. We only made progress by increasing energy consumption and waste generation and externalizing environmental costs. The economy can keep growing for now, but we're destroying the ecosystems that allowed us to thrive. In addition to environmental destruction, we're experiencing loss of mental health, drug addiction, poverty traps, growth in populist and far right ideologies, ongoing destruction of wildlife habitat and biodiversity. Consumerism is not good. We have little choice, but you're lying to yourself and your viewers saying consumerism is anything but evil. They spend billions on corporate greenwashing. They don't need volunteer cheerleaders. The only ethical thing a responsible consumer can do is reduce consumption. I understand that clashes with our culture and the brand of your channel, but it's the truth. The positive things we can do for the world fall outside of capitalism, such as planting trees, volunteer time, promoting education, supporting sustainable governmental initiatives to assure accountability for environmental damage. Anything we do within capitalism to support sustainability gets perverted by the profit motive.

Agree with most of this but let’s not call Steve Jobs and ‘inventor’. He was head of a corporation with lots of engineers who invented things.

This video is pretty garbage, going specifically off the story of stuff you don’t really engage with the arguments made, you don’t discuss how consumerism was defined in the video as an endlessly accelerating cycle. The entire video is just you constructing a straw man who says any and all consumption is bad, when I doubt even most hippies wouldn’t even say that. You acknowledge that there are problems but don’t seem to understand the fundamental issue that the change happening is too little too late. Corporations may remove the plastic from their packaging but that doesn’t change the fundamental problem of Walmart peddling plastic crap that’s just beyond what is necessary, or pushing you to buy electronics replacing something that was perfectly adequate out of some implanted need for improvement. This is the true essence of consumerism, it’s not merely industrial production but it’s the constant push by corporations to ensure that you are never satisfied even when all your material needs are met. Like the difference between buying a real thoughtful gift for someone versus ordering stuff on Amazon out of some impulse that never materializes beyond the product that the world produces and you don’t use.

JJ is a middle aged guy who collects a lot of stuff - no wonder he's so jolly!

Hey JJ if you in comments on reading this what would you say your opinion on planned obsolescence?

Gratitude is essential JJ. You’re absolutely right, but it’s also necessary to remind ourselves that material abundance has never been permanent historically. What happens when the prospect of prosperity becomes more tenuous. As a society we need to remind ourselves why material possessions are counted as good in the first place. Only then will we be able to push the market in better directions. True gratitude means embracing the intrinsic goodness of life irrespective of possessions-LOVING instead of grasping at matter. Anything we happen to be entrusted with should serve the humankind’s highest purpose and not serve the avarice of consumerism as its own endpoint. Peace. AMDG.

12:42 NOT THE BISEXUAL LIGHTING LOL

Just like anything else, there are pros and cons to consumerism. Like growing up in the Midwest US, it is nice that fresh produce can only be grown year-round thousands of miles away can be available fresh any time of the year, though you could also say that led to unethical farming practices that is bad for the planet. Another example is if I want a chair, I can just buy one with money I made doing something I like to do instead of wasting time making a chair when I could be doing something I like to do instead. On the other hand, some people would throw out a perfectly fine chair because they just dropped chair 2.0 and they would rather have that. I guess in my mind, as long as both the people buying and the people who are selling goods both are mindful about their products, I have no problem with consumerism.

this is based on my anecdotal experience but what you said at 17:10 “almost no one seems to genuinely believe this” combined with the fact that i personally rarely see anyone say consumerism is 100% bad all the time leads me to wonder if you’re not giving people enough credit and they’re usually talking about mindless consumerism or over consumption or valuing material things above people and relationships. i don’t personally know of anyone who truly believes we should never consume anything or says that we shouldn’t, just that we shouldn’t let it run our lives or be the only/main way we get pleasure

I really appreciate the underlying theme of gratitude in this video. Thanks for the reminder JJ

Another middle class banger

I think your analysis is quite shallow, especially compared to the majority of your videos (I've been a huge fan for at least 5 years). I'll summarize my understanding of your arguments first. The main critique of consumerism is: Our consumerist culture enables and encourages a system of ever-expanding production, which requires increasing exploitation of workers (especially in the third world) and environmental degradation. The incentive structure of that production also means that the goods being produced are done to make a profit, so where possible, producers will prioritize profits over the wellbeing of consumers. It also encourages people to spend more of their time and energy on using those consumer goods, buying them, and working to make the money to buy them, which detracts from other aspects of society which we find valuable, such as family, friendship, spirituality, and any kind of creation outside of one's job. - You bring attention to how this critique is made by both the left and the right, where the left mostly focuses on the exploitation of workers and the environment, and the impact of consumerism on friendship and creation outside one's job, while the right mostly focuses on how producers prioritize profits over consumer wellbeing, and the impact of consumerism on family and spirituality. You respond to some, but not all of the points in that argument. 1. You don't respond to the point about the exploitation of workers (especially in the third world), which I think is probably the most important critique from the left (See Neocolonialism) 2. You acknowledge the environmental degradation point, but argue that critics make too much of a fuss about this considering that corporations are doing more for the sake of the environment than ever before. I find this point unconvincing, because even though some amount of progress is being made, the argument from critics is that more needs to be done, and corporations regularly push back on calls for more progress when they think it will harm profits (check out Rollie Williams' videos on climate town for some blatant examples of this). It's especially unconvincing considering that most of the evidence you give for that progress comes from what corporations say they are doing, rather than any actual analysis of what they have done. 3. You rejects claims that corporations prioritize profits over human wellbeing by only focusing on the anti-science right who talk about toxins and testesterone and whatever, but don't make any mention of actual cases where corporations encourage consumption of products that are bad for our health (I can't think of a single concept to point to, but consider industries like tobacco, fast food, pesticides, etc) 4. You reject claims that consumerism detracts from family and spirituality, essentially by claiming that consumption is more important than those things, or part of those things. There is quite a bit that I disagree with you on this, but I'll at least say that I think your comments about the relationship between spirituality and consumerism are quite misguided. All major spiritual traditions have anticonsumerism as one of, if not their main point. Essentially every spiritual tradition teaches that people should avoid focussing on material possessions in favour of being a good/pious person. Your example of jehovah's witnesses is particularly odd, since Jehovah's witnesses aren't opposed to giving birthday presents as an expression of anti-consumerism, it's because they are opposed to the idea of celebrating birthdays, they still give gifts for other types of celebration/appreciation. I also find your calling of it being "anti-human" quite strange, considering that American culture is quite unique in how much gift-giving is a part of our relationships (you even touch on the history of this in your video about christmas/halloween traditions). You generally reject claims (by those spiritual traditions, and by secular critiques of spirituality) that it does more harm than good for people to reject material possessions in favour of other things, and use the example of how video essayists are less jolly than people who make videos about collection possessions. I find this unconvincing, since of course the people who make videos about things that they think are bad would be less jolly than people making videos that they think are good. Consider the counterexample of depressed gamer-types who spend most of their free time with consumer products, but otherwise feel that their life lacks meaning. 5. You don't respond to critiques of how consumerism detracts from other things that are important to people Overall, the gist of the video is essentially, "People are unhappy with how our culture values material possessions over other aspects of human life (including the desire to live a life that is sustainable and just), but they should instead simply value material possessions over those things (by being grateful for them)". I don't see how this could be convincing to anyone, since the main point of their critique stems from the fact that they value those other things. I think the argument that you mean to make is "People are unhappy with how our culture values material possessions over other aspects of human life, but they exaggerate how much it actually detracts from those other aspects", but you don't make that point is a very satisfying way.

I remember the magazine Ad Busters. The anti consumerist message was so overwrought it was comical.

JJ acts like Corporations are environmentally friendly today because they choose to be. They are only doing it because of social pressure from the working class if not they wouldn’t. More pressure people

12:41 was definitely calling out Second Thought

I absolutely agree with you on this point. Consumerism definitely has it's downsides, and the worship of material things is certainly spiritually dangerous. But if you study a little bit of history, I would certainly take a society where consumerism is possible than one where most people live in poverty, which is how most people lived in most of human history.

Your persuasive essays are fantastic, J.J. Even when I don't agree with your conclusion on something, you always give me another perspective to see it by and understand it a lot better, and you always have a valid point you're trying to argue. Whether or not we each agree individually is a different story, but I think from an argument's standpoint these are very fantastic and give me, and the rest of us, a lot to think about.

I could carry every item I own that doesn't have a specific, non-recreational function on my back even though I've had decades to accumulate wealth, and I'm comfortable leaving the rest behind to live or work somewhere else, so I think I can stand as an example of someone who genuinely isn't into materialism. I do think my attitude is more than "natural", too, because before the agricultural revolution everyone had the same relationship toward their posessions that I have because everyone was nomadic and had to carry everything they owned on their back and travel seasonally. I recognize that this is mainly because other people with more wealth and more of a tendency to accumulate and become attached to so many objects they cease to be portable tend to be privileged enough to own their own house or set down roots in one place indefinitely, whereas I had to uproot myself and move over and over due to my parents work. Still, I think the lessons I learned from that were good ones, especially compared to the ones my parents learned, which left them with the habit of spending money for fun on things they'd replace before they got they got the value they put in out of them (or that never would have provided a return in the first place after the initial sense of pleasure).

I think the constant criticism (with varying intensity) of established social / political / cultural / etc. structures is actually what made North America so successful compared to Europe actually. This is the one thing the US and Canada are undoubtedly better at than Europe: responding to change. If there was never any ungreatfulness and dissatisfaction with the established social order, then what'd drive it?

Great video as always JJ! I am always a live-and-let-live kind of person, so if you want your your Furby, that's totally fine. I think my only issue with modern consumerism is this rise of ultra cheap goods that are coming from sources like Temu or Ali Express. You know, goods that are ridiculously cheap, that you buy and only use for a couple of months before it breaks or you don't use at all because it is not at all what was advertised. So it all just goes in the trash because throwing away $10 is easier than throwing away the $100 version of what this cheap thing represents. And of course, we have to think of the worker exploitation that led to products being so cheap. I think this market really incorporates the complaints from anticonsumerists, from being a waste of resources to being completely useless items. Of course, I think this new rise in ultra cheap goods has some interesting implications of our current society and would make for an interesting video. And of course, I think that bashing consumer culture because of this is unfair. But it's probably the only thing I really see as a problem with modern consumerism.

Loved the conversation with Destiny! I felt like I got to see a different side to you that I normally don't! 😊

Commies big mad about free markets

I absolutely find you persuasive. I know people who, having been extremely frivolous in their younger years, now derive guilt from doing what consumer shopping they really have to do (eg. getting a new vacuum cleaner). I think getting them to watch this video and thinking on it will be of immense benefit to their wellbeing.

Consuming things that long term make you happy is not bad. For instant, I like collecting CDs because I love music and always will. I buy a decent amount of clothes (that I know I will wear for a long time) because I enjoy fashion. Many things I buy I make sure it’s something I will like for a long time and maybe be able to give to someone else when I don’t want it anymore. This kind of consumerism I think is fine.

I love stuff!

I would draw an important line between materialism and consumerism, which I think get interchanged for each other a bit in this video Materialism is focused on improving your IRL life, rather than achieving some sort of spritiual or ethical enlightenment at the expense of it. While not my cup of tea (no religious or political reason; I just prefer a level of simplicity that those around me think is weird), I can see why someone would be materialist Consumerism is the idea that you actively try to buy more things for the sake of owning things, rather than improving your life. This undeniably creates clutter and waste; why...just...why?

“Providing overwhelming positive results for that society” yeah JJ but the slaves required to produce many of these consumer goods don’t really benefit much do they. How much upward mobility does a job at a textile plant provide the Nicaraguan teens making the tshirts at target? It reminds me of the Sam O Nella video on the banana republics. The average Honduran Jose’s life working at the plantation was not made better by the increased affordability of bananas in the US. I would hope consumers don’t just blindly revere their consumption habits when they learn that their goods are made with slave labor. Not saying that consuming things or buying treats is bad inherently but let’s not pretend it’s some “overwhelmingly” positive thing.

I think I vaguely empathize with the anti consumerist people in the following sense: the amount of ads and the nature of those ads that seep into every part of our everyday life is deafening, it's a constant scream that shouts "Buy buy buy buy". Ad blockers and piracy are mental hygienic necessities. I understand that without ads RU-vid can not exist in it's current form, however, I think this doesn't invalidate the feeling of mental tiredness from so many ads in our lifes and wanting to reduce their part in our life.

The progress of consumerism he highlights strike me as the direct result of the critique he doesn't like. I am grateful for my stuff. I don't want to live an austere life. But learning something like a significant amount of clothes go directly to landfill without being worn appears like evidence of a broken system. It appears like the system, itself, lacks the gratitude he promotes. Being anti-consumerist doesn't require you to be anti-consumption. It's not about your personal stuff.

I'm an economics major and watch a fair bit of economics content on youtube, whenever I see a youtube video complaining about consumerism I know there's a 95% chance that it's going to be mindless "look I don't like the status quo, I'm so edgy" and the 5% isn't worth giving any of them a chance

I hate the "we work two jobs to buy stuff". The rate of people having more than one job is at the lowest rate it has ever been. But again, you can never appreciate what you have and the general better wellbeing of people in the (best way I can describe it) first world.

It's also important to point out that you don't *have* to consume. In a free country you can very easily live without buying every new product and make an impact on corporate decisions, but in a command economy, good luck getting the state's product quotas or subsidy grants any lower

5:44 this is part of the issue. Corperations NOW are more sustainable than ever, and yet it’s STILL… NOT… ENOUGH. Our planet is on a track for famine and mass death and we’re “working on our pollution output within the next 40 years”

Biggest issue I see from consumerisum is the general acceptance of it, and how a lot of people see it as the only way to do things. I guess convienience-isum? From just cooking your own food, to sewing a hole in a hoodie, doing things independently has gotten more uncommon, in favor of 'convenience'.

Well said. It's funny when the balanced more central position is the contrarian view that needs to be heard. Reminds me of Plato's golden mean.

Will this be the video more controversial than the Wiki one ?! I do agree though. We're pretty fortunate, and being ungrateful isn't cool.

I think there has been this fetishization of "authenticity" in recent years. People want "authentic" food, "authentic" products and "authentic" experiences, and "authentic" seems to be nebulously defined as something not borne of a consumerist mindset, something rooted in tradition and some nostalgic before times before the homogenising blandness of consumerism took hold. The problem is, of course, is that many of these "authentic" things are just as rooted in consumerism as anything else, they've been standardized and are mass produced and sold to millions of people just like you every year. So really you're not rejecting consumerism by pursuing some vague notion of "authenticity".

Brother talked to Destiny for 5 minutes and came back to us “corporations are cool” 😭 😭

I was waiting for JJ to make a joke about how he’s making a case for consumerism while surrounded by souvenirs.

It would be interesting to see JJ do a video on things we buy in consumerist societies that disappear as soon as they are bought. Thinking foods, medicines, etc. I’m only a few minutes in, though, so I apologize if that comes up in this video.

Well, i guess our goal in this society, regarding consumerism, should be to say "I want it to be better." Instead preaching abstinence. Because abstinence really helped during the prohibition era. Or repressing the most natural of human instincts: procreation. Because it is addictive, but if you can be aware of it, it shouldn't just be forbidden.

There is a lot of material abundance and a lot of prosperity has been achieved, but I think that even if you're not an anti-consumerist, these two ideas aren't as commonly coupled together on a personal level lately, depending on what a person defines prosperity as. As in, people in the 25-35 range might be uniquely more capable of acquiring even relatively expensive material goods than they are able to confidently put a down payment on even a small condo, because that means more than just the down payment, it means long term you're able to tolerate that debt and ongoing financial commitment after devoting an astronomical amount of capital compared to trendlines in earnings. If you feel like the stuff you can access is sufficiently fulfilling your entire capacity to derive value from the external environment, then that's not a problem, but if you don't feel that way, it can be deeply hollowing to the point of creating that cynicism toward material things that should be anciliary.