Consumerism and the Slow Apocalypse


This article first appeared in Evangelicals Now in 1998.


"Consumerism is, obviously, profoundly materialistic. There is a strong argument which says that the idea that the physical universe is the only reality (philosophical materialism) inevitably leads a society which believes that, to slowly fall apart..."


At the end of the 20th century, there is a profound feeling in the West that somehow our civilisation is coming to an end.

It is interesting that this failing society is at the same time the consumer society. What are we to make of the fact that with wealth, production and choice honed to a pinnacle, somehow our society is decaying? What are the connections between these two great distinctive features of our times?
This is no doubt a subject which could properly deserve years of research and close thought. However, as Christians, such a connection should not surprise us at all. It is not the city of man but the city of God which remains. his alone is the eternal kingdom (Daniel 2.44; Mark 1.15).
Considering contemporary society, there are surely ways in which we can see connections between cultural decline and the assumptions of consumerism. We might say that consumerism has within it the seeds of its own destruction.

1. The earth's resources
At the level of the world's materials, the way in which consumer society is gobbling up our planet's resources makes such a society unsustainable in the long term. The statistics tell us that 20% of the world's population currently consume 80% of the world's resources. If we all want to live in a high energy, high pollution, throw-away society, there is no green technology that can cope. The Green movement through the world is doing a noble work in highlighting these facts and throwing down the gauntlet to the crass materialism which dominates the aspirations of mankind. Sadly, in our post-modern world of individualism, the warning may not be taken seriously. Perhaps the ultimate subjectivist would simply refuse to be concerned about the future of the planet. In the words of Groucho Marx, their mindset is probably: 'What's posterity ever done for me?'

2. The birth rate
Following on from the last remark, we should note that this desire for individual pleasure fostered by a consumer society does lead many people to turn away from the idea of having children and growing a family. Raising a family is just too much of a hassle for hedonists. Some would say that the individualised, consumer society treads a path therefore which, taken to its conclusion, leads to self-destruction. People are living with 'happiness now' as their primary goal in life. Writing in the early 1990s, A.H. Halsey said: 'Few women and fewer men would rationally choose to have children in a world of exclusively short-term egotistical calculation. The costs and foregone satisfactions are too high. Hence rich countries with the modern ethos have declining or incipiently declining populations. (For a stable population, there must be a total fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman; Britain has 1.8; West Germany has 1.6; Italy and Spain have 1.4 or even 1.2). The individualised, as distinct from socialised, country eventually and literally destroys itself.'

3. Destruction of morals
Consumerism is, obviously, profoundly materialistic. There is a strong argument which says that the idea that the physical universe is the only reality (philosophical materialism) inevitably leads a society which believes that, to slowly fall apart.
The argument goes something like this: in the early phases of a society in history, the force behind moral imperatives comes largely from a belief in God or other supernatural spirits. People keep the laws as they believe they are accountable to a higher being or beings. But the dynamic which promotes economic prosperity and higher standards of living arises largely from the conviction that the material world is of primary importance. This same dynamic, however, develops so as to attack belief in the supernatural and thereby undermine the authority of moral standards which have enabled the people in the society to work together and to function. This eventually leads to the destruction of the very security and prosperity on which the society was built in the first place.
One of the latest proponents of this argument is Anne Glyn-Jones, former Devon Research Fellow at the University of Exeter. In 1996, she published a book entitled Holding up a mirror: how civilisations decline in which she showed how this thesis has worked itself out already in the different civilisations of Greece, Rome and medieval Christendom and is now working itself out in our own Western culture.
A society which is fundamentally materialistic, Glyn-Jones calls a 'sensate' culture. In an interview she gave to a magazine, she said: 'I was surprised as I looked at different cultures that having a superior technology does not save a sensate culture from collapse. Greek technology was superior to Roman, and Roman technology was superior to that of the barbarians. But they all fell. And we can see a hint of that today in the way our Western, technically superior cultures have been expelled from Somaliland Afghanistan, Vietnam and so on. Despite considerably more advanced Western technology, our sensate cultures could not cope, obsessed with individualism as they are, with an enemy prepared to die for a greater good.' (The Therapist, Vol. 4, Number 1, 1996).

4. Majority silence
The vulnerability of the consumer society to decline is also caused by its concern for personal peace and security. The old saying tells us that all that is required for evil to triumph is that good men should keep quiet. Consumerism is the drug which causes ordinary people to fall into moral sleep and remain silent on all kinds of public matters. As long as their little world of peace and relative prosperity is not disturbed, they are happy not to get involved. It is against this background of consumer complacency that all kinds of moral relaxation can arise within a country.
The flip-side of this is that the consumer society is one which rewards disruptive elements within society. If people make a great fuss and cause much inconvenience or fear within a consumer society, there will be great pressure not to resist unless their demands directly threaten the material wellbeing of consumers. Rather than pursue a course of difficult confrontation with the disruptive element, the momentum of opinion will generally be along the lines of giving in to demands, buying off the vociferous protestors, so society can return to the serious business of enjoying itself. Questions tend no longer to be settled using ideas of what is right and what is wrong, but simply in terms of pragmatism with the goal of maintaining prosperity and peace
Highly motivated groups within society recognise this vulnerability and are encouraged to pursue ever more extreme forms of disruption until they get their way. Consumer society is one prepared to sacrifice its ethics on the altar of the material 'feel-good' factor. How long can such a society remain stable?

5. Taxes and government
It is taken as read that the idea of the possibility of increased taxes was what lost the Labour Party the 1992 election in the UK, while Tony Blair swept to power with Labour having promised consumers that there would be no increases in taxes.
Alongside this desire to keep taxes as low as possible, we have seen a general increase in the wealth of average wage-earners. But in his 1997 book Dark Heart: the shocking truth about hidden Britain (see review in July EN), the journalist Nick Davies has set out how this piece of superficially good news hides a terrible discrepancy. As wages and standards of living have generally increased, the able and gifted, brainwashed by the individualistic 'look after No. 1' philosophy of consumerism, have left the poorest in society way behind. Let me quote some of the statistics the book exposes.
'The rich have done best. By 1993/94, the wealthiest 5.5 million people in Britain (the richest 10%) were each enjoying a bonus of £650 income for every £1,000 they had been receiving in 1979. In other words, as a result of changes in salaries and taxes and benefits, they were 65% better off. This has nothing to do with inflation. These figures have been adjusted to take account of changes in prices. The very rich have simply become much richer.
It is true too of the mass of other people. By 1993/94, the population of Britain as a whole saw an increase in income of 40% since 1979 . . . it was only the poorest quarter - 13.7 million - who were left behind.
The Treasury's own figures show that by 1993/94, the 5.5 million people in Britain who had least money (the poorest 10%) were something like £11 a week worse off than they had been in 1979. This took account of all their spending, including housing, and again this had nothing to do with inflation . . . they were 14% poorer. For every £1,000 which had come their way in 1979, they now had only £860.'
What Nick Davies' book explores is the shocking lifestyle of abuse and crime in which many of the poorest people in our country are caught up. Here is the heart of desperate drug culture, of teenage prostitution and the violence of bored young men who see themselves as worthless. How are such problems to be tackled? Do we believe that central government has a responsibility for the wellbeing of the nation? If we do, then whether we believe the answer is in terms of increased education, increased policing, increased social security or increased opportunities for people to get into work, the obvious point is that whichever route a government decides to take, it will need money to invest in such schemes.
However, at the same time, as we know, the majority in the consumer society is extremely reluctant to allow the government to raise taxes to pay for these things. Any party which toys with the idea of increased taxation has very little chance of getting into power. This situation then leaves the consumer society in a very precarious position. Here is a deprived, depressed and potentially very violent underclass but, at the same time, politicians have their hands tied behind their backs through lack of finance to thoroughly address the problem. Again we see the consumer society as one which seems to carry within it the seeds of its own destruction.

Consumerism is extremely comfortable. It charms us and consoles us at every turn. It has the effect of putting us to sleep and telling us not to worry: 'You're all right, aren't you?' But for all its claims, the consumer society is peddling a false sense of security.
JEB

WITNESS TO THE WORD MENU

UK APOLOGETICS HOME

(Copyright Evangelicals Now. UK Apologetics has rights to occasionally feature Evangelicals Now archive articles according to a 2003 agreement between John Benton and Robin A. Brace).

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional