The world is swimming in stuff

In our extremely materialistic world, everyone is expected to own more. Our homes are filled with stuff we buy so much of—stuff that ends up in garbage bins, and eventually makes its way to the oceans, amounting to billions of tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere every year.

Surprisingly, despite such demand, the majority of this stuff is not necessary to live, and most often than not, it even makes us more miserable. So, why do we keep buying so much of it? Even more important, how do we put an end to this cycle of consumerism and capitalist growth?

More than ever, consumerism is rife in every part of the world, especially in first-world countries. Under capitalism, we’re all buying products we don’t need, only because they offer a sense of acceptance from, and belonging with, the people around us.

Whether it’s buying a new Tesla Model S or simply a pair of jeans, owning more for status, acceptance, or simply by the allure of ads, is a notion of well-being deeply ingrained in our mindsets.

Today, we’ll attempt to answer aforementioned questions and explore possible solutions to the ever-increasing problem of consumerism—ways to make life on earth a more ethical and fair one.

The double-dealing of ads

Our desire to buy a new piece of furniture or the latest model of a car isn’t one of our biological traits. This drive to earn more, own more, and be more—the endless race of consumerism—is the result of capitalism; it’s an economic system that relies on relentless overconsumption to create more profits.

For businesses to succeed under this system—to outdo competition and rake in more profits—it’s essential to grow. We encounter countless ads every day, promising smiles through gadgets, beauty through fairness creams, and even equating diamonds with a happy life—the root cause of this desire. 

The brainchild of this profit-growth imperative is so good at making new and unnecessary products—like that new iPhone, those Bose noise-cancellation headsets, and that limited edition handbag—look fresh and even necessary for a better life.

What ads actually achieve

Ads almost never tell you what the company’s products are. Rather, they focus on what you could be with those products. The products of the capitalist profit engine are thus thrust onto us, the customers, as life-changing goods that, in reality, have very little effect on our material conditions.

Capitalism needs to make more and more stuff to keep on generating profits, and corporations achieve this through ingenious marketing methods that transform their products from goods that don’t need to exist into necessities of our daily lives.

The aftermath

Though ads do achieve their goal of increasing consumption, their promise of happiness is almost never realized. The truth is that more money and consumption do not equal more happiness.

According to studies, once our basic material requirements are fulfilled, any additional consumption has little effect on our happiness and satisfaction in life. In fact, this phenomenon has its own name—The Easterlin Paradox.

Sadly, that’s only the tip of the iceberg. On top of the impact it has on an individual’s self-conception and mental health, capitalist overproduction and the subsequent overconsumption contribute colossal amounts of waste, emissions, and pollution into the environment.

Studies show that a country’s emissions are directly proportional to its GDP. The same applies to energy consumption and production as well. Such being the case, the capitalist growth model is incompatible with a zero-carbon world—a fact proven by the failures of decoupling strategies that try to use renewables and techno-fixes like band-aids over a gaping wound.

South Korea’s emission growth after their green growth initiative in 2009 is among the many examples that decoupling doesn’t work. Our fossil fuel capacity is the highest despite an all-time high renewable capacity, and our emission levels are higher than ever.

Decoupling strategies simply do not address the overwhelming scientific evidence that we must reduce emissions dramatically and fast if we are to stay below 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming. So, if a zero-carbon, environmentally ethical economy is incompatible with the capitalist growth-profit economy, what else can be done?

Degrowth as a solution

Many people with the privilege to do so are trying to stave off some of the misery caused by capitalist alienation through different lifestyle choices. Be it through minimalism, zero waste, or slow living—they acknowledge the effects capitalist consumption has on our lives and environment.

However, all these approaches make very little impact due to a lack of structure to identify the importance of individuals as well as the system—and that’s exactly the issue degrowth addresses.

Degrowth basically seeks to realign the economy away from overconsumption and “obsessive accumulation” toward commodities that meet actual needs such as housing, health, education, transportation, and the arts.

As Mark Whitehead, a professor of anthropogeography, puts it, degrowth is an anticapitalist framework that seeks the “downscaling of production and consumption” in a way “that increases human well-being and enhances ecological conditions and equity.”

The world population is expected to hit 10 billion by 2050. According to scientific models, the current capitalist system that’s in place across the world will not be able to sustain that many people, especially in poorer countries.

Using degrowth, the rich countries can significantly contract their impact on the planet (without a noticeable decrease in the quality of their life) to allow for a dramatic increase in well-being for those residing in the Third World countries.

Forget 2050 and 10 billion people. Even in the present day, we’re well past Earth’s carrying capacity. It takes the world 1 year and 8 months to generate the resources that we use in one year. A lion’s share of that consumption is by the richest 10% of the world.

For those of us in the first-world countries, degrowth requires us to change how we approach our purchasing decisions and life choices; for instance, it means buying only what we really need, repairing what we can instead of replacing it entirely, and reducing our meat consumption. But, at the same time, degrowth also goes beyond individual responsibility. 71% of all total carbon emissions are produced not by individuals, but by 100 of our biggest companies.

That’s why we need to take steps to emphasize and promote degrowth through policy-making. Government can subsidize housing retrofits, make laws requiring the biggest companies in the world to reduce or eliminate their energy emissions. We can redistribute our food waste instead of chucking it in the bin, eliminate unnecessary purchases and marketing, and increase availability of care-oriented jobs like educators, psychologists, social workers, therapists, and in-home nurses. These are just some of the practical steps that will improve our well-being across the globe while also reducing carbon emissions.

What degrowth entails

A lot of people oppose degrowth because, in their imagination, it requires them to go back to the living standards of the 15th century (or even older). That’s not true. The purpose of degrowth is to reduce carbon emissions and material consumption in the first-world countries while keeping the standard of life more or less the same.

In order to avoid the climate change threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius, we have to ditch consumerism. Instead of basing our buying decisions on wants and desires, maybe we should start basing them on our needs. Do you really need a new iPhone every year when they can easily last 4-5 years?

According to one study, people in rich countries can easily cut their energy consumption and carbon emissions by 95% while still living very comfortably. How? By simply adopting alternative, energy-efficient technologies and adjusting their lifestyle.

This study also found that a 60% reduction in energy consumption globally is easily possible while giving every single person on the planet a comfortable lifestyle. Of course, some of us will have to make a few sacrifices, but it’s nowhere near as drastic as living in caves. Implemented correctly, each person on earth would have the lifestyle of an average American in the 1960s. But this cannot happen under the current system.

The reason is that degrowth policies will be very similar to austerity measures. Under capitalism, enacting these policies will eventually result in recessions that’ll affect the working classes and the marginalized. In order to prevent that, we need something more.

The role of eco-socialism in degrowth

Eco-socialism is the missing piece of the puzzle when it comes to sustainably moving away from capitalism. Neither eco-socialism nor degrowth can work on their own. But, combined, they provide a very practical path towards a better future for everyone.

But what does eco-socialism mean? It means that the means of production in a society must be owned by the masses and the workplaces should be democratically governed. Production should be based on need and empowering the working class rather than profit, desires, and endless growth. 

However, if we’re not to fall into a draconian society that relies on economic suppression, the change that implements both ecosocialism and degrowth needs to occur from both top-down and bottom-up. The policies need to be enacted by the governments and the workplaces while people must also comply with them.

Conclusion

Let’s face it, things aren’t great under capitalism—every year, we’re burning 800 million gallons of gas to mow our lawns in the US alone; our lives are defined by how much we own; our appliances are easier to replace than repair.

That is to say, capitalist decoupling simply isn’t working when it comes to stopping the steady plummet of global consumption. The issue can only be curbed by opting for eco-socialist degrowth. 

Without the need for work to own more and be more, we can actually start living. Ask yourself, what better way to live than having more time to do the things you love and spend with your loved ones?