Consumption vs. Consumerism (Final Part)

The following quote comes from David Cowan in Economic Parables: The Monetary Teaching of Jesus Christ. I almost jumped from my chair and shouted "YES!" when I came to this passage; it expresses my sentiments so well.

Economic life, in part, is about aspirations. How are we to balance our economic goals with our aspiration to be with Christ? We can't secure this using plastic – "gold," "platinum," or otherwise. We cannot allow ourselves to be seduced by slick marketing that seeks to offers us materialistic salvation. This is an aspect of the economy that we must battle with, but the battle is within ourselves. Other facets of our economic life are our work, mortgage, other debts, investments, and relationships with other economic agents. These are the day-to-day realities of living in the economy. We struggle with them, and we calculate and measure our daily life by them.

Those who would want to undermine the free-market system are escapists. They too have economic aspirations. This protest movement has its own style of dress, music, and language, branded and sold like any other commodity in the economic world. The celebrities who preach to us about the ills of free enterprise earn huge advertising contracts from major companies. They are, in effect, the chief executive officers of multi-million-dollar-a-year corporations, something along the line of "U2 Inc." and the "George Clooney Corporation." They are what they protest.

The crowds who gather to protest free enterprise and globalization warn us of environmental cynicism and poor stewardship and link these to poverty. Are they the crowds to be feared? I suggest not. The crowd Jesus faced was not a group of well-healed protestors in designer jeans, organized via the Internet. They did not cheer rock stars with wealth beyond their dreams at "poverty concerts." The crowds who gather to protest capitalism are what they protest. They fly to the protests using cheap Internet airline deals, seek the best hotel packages, and wear designer clothes. They seek identity in this economy, a cause that will set them apart, showing themselves to radically different from people in the business suits or doing an honest day's work. Where is the prophecy in that?

The protestors have become, in essence, "consumers of poverty," purchasing the feel-good factor of thinking that they have done something about the problem. Poverty is deeply troubling and complex, with many causes and with many barriers standing in the way of change. Many of the environmental problems are in poorer countries, which do not have the economic resources to tackle their difficulties. One effect of better economic management in these countries will be better environmental conditions. There are people in poor countries who can help themselves; they need the capital to invest and the know-how, not sympathy. (106-108)

Cowan says, "consumers of poverty." I might have said, "consumers of poverty activism." So much of what passes as social justice advocacy is little more than activist consumerism. Activists deride the Church for its consumerism. Churches are charged with offering ministries that merely cater to the felt needs of the congregants without calling for genuine transformation. What is being offered in its place?

Much of what is being trumpeted as emerging Christianity is precisely the same. Segments of the Church feel disaffected by the "product" and identity being offered by the Church they grew up with. New identity competitors have risen to meet the felt needs of these disaffected folks. These new suppliers cater to the felt need for activism and an identity that will distinguish the advocacy consumer from lesser evolved and out-of-style consumers of the old Christian consumerism. Populist events and online campaigns are organized so customers can have their identities reinforced by like-minded consumers. Idealistic leaders are molded for mass consumption through personal appearances, print, and electronic media. Enemies are identified and singled out (say, market economy sympathizers or U. N. skeptics) for either attack or marginalization. This, too, helps increase loyalty of advocacy consumers to advocacy products and their purveyors.

Meanwhile, precious few customers of this Christian advocacy product actually have seriously wrestled with the advocated issues. The willingness of people to polemically engage in economic issues, for instance, without ever having taken a class in economics or even making minimal effort to be acquainted with the most fundamental economic concepts, is pervasive. It should not be a surprise since the real issue is not about the poor but rather the felt needs of the advocacy consumer to advocate for justice. It is no different from the consumerism advocates deride in the "consumer Church" where discipleship is not truly about discipleship but about the customers' felt need to feel spiritual. In advocacy consumerism, the poor are made an object to satisfy the felt needs of consumers. So maybe Cowan is right after all. Perhaps they should be called "consumers of poverty."

The true pursuit of justice requires consumption. We must consume various ideas and experiences in the marketplace of ideas as we collectively seek God's wisdom. We must be vigilant in finding our identity in God and not in our systems of understanding. Regrettably, much of what represents itself as prophetic advocacy is not a healthy consumption of knowledge and wisdom but merely advocacy consumerism.

[Previous] [Index]


Comments

12 responses to “Consumption vs. Consumerism (Final Part)”

  1. Cowan may have a point, but his characterisation of “protestors” is simplistic stereotyping to say the least. I know people fighting for their homes in protest. I know other activists who embrace the lifestyle (albeit a little ‘hippy’ for my tastes) they think (rightly or wrongly) to be a ‘better’ way.
    While I agree there ARE those who chase the identity, we shouldn’t dismiss the movement just becasue it “got popular with the kids”.

  2. Cowan is clearly being polemic here. I suspect he appreciates he is overstating to drive home a point. I know I’m doing that. But I think the point does have wide application.

  3. Ha…Michael I had no idea you were doing writing about this – I just posted something yesterday on this very same topic..with almost the exact title!!! What the heck? 🙂
    I particularly like your comments about “emergent consumerism.” It is to an extent true. My only objection is re the consumption of “a variety of ideas and experiences” required in dealing with poverty. What if we as Christians are the creators of these ideas and experiences rather than the consumers? Would that not ultimately allow us to become the examples/creators before the world and be the leaders we should be? What are your thoughts on that?

  4. “I just posted something yesterday on this very same topic..with almost the exact title!!!”
    Well, you know what they say about great minds thinking alike. 🙂
    Your point is a good one. The context I had in mind was, for instance, what is the Christian response to poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa? There is plenty of ethical teaching in the Bible that touches on economic issues but there is no economic system provided. My thinking is that we have to hear and experience from a number of different angles in order to address problems. Not explicitly stated was my assumption that this knowledge and experience, coupled with God imparting his wisdom to us, would lead to fruitful acts whether they are new ideas or ancient ones. So, yes. I very much agree.
    Now I have to go read your post.

  5. Michael,
    I absolutely loved your first two posts on this topic. Very insightful and, I think, spot on!
    However, I must push back against this final post.
    “The real issue is not about the poor but rather the felt-needs of the advocacy consumer to be an advocate for justice.” Is this fair? Are we really equipped to be so accurate in our judgments of others’ hearts and intentions? What if many advocacy consumers really do just want to help the poor and the marginalized and, in doing so, make the world a little bit better place?
    That said, I agree with your statement here: “The willingness of people to polemically engage economic issues, for instance, without ever having taken a class in economics or even making minimal effort to be acquainted with the most fundamental economic concepts is pervasive.”
    I think this is the challenge for the emerging church (or anyone else who is trying to make a difference in the area of social justice). It is not enough to have good intentions; we must also have good information.

  6. “Is this fair? Are we really equipped to be so accurate in our judgments of others’ hearts and intentions?”
    The question you ask is a legitimate one. As I noted above, I’m being a bit hyperbolic to make a point. I was doing so in this post partly to parrot the same sort of rash statements that activists make in attributing motives to those they label as consumerists Christians. My intention was to show that consumerist thinking is not the sole playground of the mega-church world.
    I probably failed to strike a good balance of tone because I encounter so many who demonstrate they haven’t really confronted the issues and are closed to dialog, and that irritates me! 🙂
    Can’t get every post just right. I’ll work to do better next time.

  7. Dennis Sanders Avatar
    Dennis Sanders

    Michael,
    A very thoughtful post indeed. I think one of the things, that I have found a little odd is how some Christians will denounce our consumerist society, and then also talk about the latest piece of technology they have which is hardly cheap and how churches need to be more tech savvy. Being that I am tech savvy and my job is to use technology to further the work of the church, I would agree, but it just seems a bit hypocritical to say consumerism is bad, but then be talking about the lasted iPod or digital camera that you have your eyes on. Talk about logs in people’s eyes…
    Dennis

  8. Michael,
    “My intention was to show that consumerist thinking is not the sole playground of the mega-church world.”
    Yes, you make a great point here. I think your three posts on this topic are also a good push back against the idea that consumption is somehow evil.
    Consumption is not evil. It is the human heart that is evil because of sin. Therefore, we don’t need to get rid of consumption as a whole category but rather come to Jesus, and let him change our hearts and sanctify our consumer habits.

  9. “One effect of better economic management in these countries will be better environmental conditions.”
    I think there’s a viable debate as to what the best economic management policies are for developing countries. It does seem farcical to think of super rich folks championing ‘the cause of the poor’ but that doesn’t mean that the alternative Western free market option consists of a better way.
    For one thing corruption is a big problem almost throughout the developing world. A free economy with little real regulation fits in beautifully with the designs of the corrupt. The result is anything but a really free market, one sees hoarding, price fixing, monopolies and all sorts of nasty stuff that will effectively maintain and even increase the wealth gap between the masses of the poor and the few who wield their wealth and also exercise political power through this wealth – even in democracies like India.

  10. From what I’ve read, until the population gets above a certain per capita income the population has no environmental concern. As per captia income passes this level citizens begin to become more and more concerned about their environment. But citizens have to have effective means for making their concerns felt in government and in the courts for this to have an impact. Thus, you had rising per capita income in the U.S. in the late-20th with decreasing pollution per capita while you had increasing income but disastrous environmental impacts in the Soviet world.
    I agree. “Economic management” has to be framed inside a broader context and no two nations have exactly the same context.

  11. Yes Michael, particularly as far as the environment is concerned population density does play an important part. A good local Indian example is tribals living in small villages inside some of our few remaining protected forest zones. The forest to them looks to be overflowing with stuff to take and utilise.
    It is only when viewed from outside their microcosm that one could realise that each and every tree cut is actually irreplaceable. The impact of the overall explosion in world population has had effects that can now not be easily rectified.
    Industrialization did vast damage in the West, until suddenly folks realised that they were cutting their noses off to spite their faces. We have seen it happen, do we need to reenact the same scene again in the developing world? Why not put in place those same protections preemptively?
    I’m afraid that given the microeconomic myopia that holds us in thrall until it really is too late, the only way that that is going to happen is to heed history and allow (even encourage?) these governments to be a bit heavy handed with regulation.

Leave a Reply to samlcarrCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading