Consumer society - the path to inhumanity
Many philosophers and sociologists of the twentieth century have triedto determine and describe the level of development achieved by the most successful countries in the economy. He was called both a developed industrial and a postindustrial society, believing that the systemic restructuring of the economy and the attainment of abundance would bring benefits to humanity. But the most critical and at the same time the exact description of such a society was proposed back in 1970 by the French philosopher-postmodernist, sociologist and culturologist Jean Baudrillard. "Consumer society" - since then this term has firmly entered our language, having turned into something like a label. However, although there has been enough time since the 1970s, the criticism of this ironic intellectual has not lost either its significance or its relevance.
At one time, this famous philosopher came fromneo-Marxist milieu, and to some extent took over the analytical, lively and critical approach peculiar to Marx. You can say that his book "Consumer Society" is a kind of "Capital" of the twentieth century, only it is written in a different paradigm. The philosopher is interested not so much in the background of economic and social interrelations, as the influence on people of everyday life and everyday life. After all, if in the days of Marx the everyday life of people depended on the economy through social relations, now it began to depend on technology, the media and other mass regulators that penetrate our life and control it. Actually, this and the transformation of consumption from the means of survival into a means of dehumanization and dedicates his book to Baudrillard.
Consumption society is a characteristic of the newsociety, where all human relations lose meaning, turning into ritual schemes, signs of defining a hierarchical status, or degenerating into a competitive struggle. This "brave new world" practically destroyed the old, traditional consumption, when people bought any goods because they needed them, because they satisfied their needs. He analyzes a completely different, "sign" consumption, when a commodity is bought because it is fashionable, because it is advertised, because it is a novelty. Thus, the thing loses its meaning, becoming obsolete even before it is bought, because advertising will immediately offer a new, even more fashionable thing.
In addition, the consumption society makes no sense andcommunication between people, because it makes the purchasing process ostentatious. Consumption becomes, as it were, code that regulates communication, because people not only prefer to talk about new purchases, but also evaluate each other if possible to buy this or that object. This is a kind of game, not based on any natural reality, but only on its own. Things dominate people, they are determined not only by convenience and comfort, but also by prestige, and involvement in this vicious circle is declared the freedom of choice and the triumph of the individual.
The consumer society not only delivered a personand his feelings in dependence on things, and things brought to the level of signs that have no real meaning (simulacra), it also turned art into the same commodity, thing and simulacrum. The search for truth is supplanted by myths that are convenient to consume, serious literature and art are replaced by entertaining genres. Manipulation of these genres has become a driving belt of power mechanisms and their ideology. In fact, human culture is also put on the conveyor, it is produced according to the template, it also depends on demand and consumption. Mankind has become accustomed to consuming certain signs and has ceased to perceive something original and truly individual.
The philosopher criticizes the consumption society also forthat it is only in appearance a society of abundance and equality. This society and the simulacra produced by it do not give the person any certainty; on the contrary, he is constantly in the race for new and new brands and signs and is afraid that he will not have time and will not be able to purchase another prestigious simulacrum. The dominance of simulacre signs leads to inequality too, because a person who is not able to acquire all new signs of prestige is thrown out of the circle of relationships where success is cultivated, as a loser. Despite the fact that this book was written several decades ago, it shows that Jean Baudrillard actually predicted the main trends in the development of modern society.
