Part One - What is materialism – its causes and consequences?

 Materialism is simply an obsession with materialistic values at the expense of non-materialistic values. It involves an ongoing materialistic orientation towards   

1. body image and appearance,
2. private property and finance,
3. public recognition and success,

at the expense of an ongoing non-materialistic orientation towards 

1. personal acceptance and development
2. social relationships and responsibilities,
3. communal connections and contributions.

 We need to note: being materialistic is not ‘being rich’ – but ‘wanting to be rich!’

 The proportion of the population believing its ‘essential’ that they become ‘very well-off financially’ in countries like ours rose from 39% in 1970 to 74% in 1990.[1]

 Ross Gittens says, in annual surveys, students in the U.S. were asked their reas-ons for going to college. In 1971 half of them said their reason was ‘to make more money’ but by 1990 almost three-quarters said their reason was ‘to make more money’. Over the same period, he says, the proportion who began college hoping to “develop a meaningful philosophy of life” slumped from 76 per cent to 43 per cent’. Gittens says that these trends have ‘stayed unchanged.‘ And, the Sydney Morning Herald journalist says that ‘I don’t doubt its true of us too’.  [2]     

What are the causes of materialism?

Clive Hamilton suggests that the ideology of progress and the role of advertising are two of the basic reasons that our society is obsessed with materialism.

Hamilton says ‘the idea of progress is perhaps only 200 years old’.  But it ‘has established itself in such a way that it is no longer contested by anyone’.[1]  He says that ‘it was given substance by leaps in applied science and technology that were suggestive of infinite inventiveness.’[2]

Hamilton’s research shows that ‘countries rate progress against others by their income per person, which can only rise through faster growth’.[3] ‘Every news-paper every day quotes a political leader arguing that we need more economic growth.’[4] ‘Parties may differ on social policy, but there is an unchallengeable consensus that the overriding objective of government must be the growth of the economy.’[5] Our ideology of progress is like the ‘cargo cult’ in New Guinea.[6]

Hamilton says that the advertising industry is ‘the primary agent’ promoting the ‘cargo cult’ of material progress in our culture[7]. And asserts ‘the search for a marketing edge has meant the colonisation of all (our) cultural forms’ – from our city squares to our sports stadiums, from our art galleries to our homes.[8]      

However, Tim Kasser would argue that while advertising may be all pervasive it is not always persuasive. He says different people have different responses to the same marketing stimulus – depending on personal rather than political factors.

Tim Kasser suggests that high levels of insecurity and low levels of self esteem are two of the key reasons that our society is obsessed with materialism. [9]

Kasser’s research shows materialism can be induced by a high level of insecurity brought about by -

1. a divided family [10]

2. a less nurturing parent [11]

3. a low socio-economic background. [12]

4. a near-death experience or death of a near-relation.[13]

And Kasser’s research shows materialism can be induced by a low level of self-esteem brought about by -

1. an experience of being ignored, neglected, and/or rejected.[14] 
2. the development of a negative, rather than positive, self-image[15]
3. the manipulation of a fragile, unstable, impressionable, contingent self-image that is at the mercy of the trendsetters and pace-makers. [16] 

 Alain in de Botton suggests three other reasons that may drive our materialism. 

de  Botton suggests that two of our fundamental drivers may be envy and equality.

‘Our sense of an appropriate limit to anything – for example, to wealth – is never decided independently. It is arrived at by comparing our condition with that of a reference group, with that of people we consider to be our equals. We will take ourselves to be fortunate only when we have as much as, or a little more than, the people we grow up with, work alongside, have as friends and identify with.’ [17]

‘It is the feeling that we might be something other than what we are – a feeling transmitted by the superior achievements of those we take to be our equals - that generates anxiety. If we are small and live among people who are all of our   own height, we will not be unduly troubled by questions of size’.[18]

 ‘But if others in our group grow so much as a little taller, we are liable to feel sudden unease and envy – even though we have not diminished in size by even a millimetre’. [19]

 David Hume in a Treatise on Human Nature (Edinburgh,1739) says ‘It is not a great disproportion between ourselves and others that produces envy, but on the contrary, a proximity. A great disproportion cuts off the relation, and either keeps us from comparing ourselves with what is remote to us, or diminishes the effects of the comparison.’ ‘We envy only those whom we feel ourselves to be like; we envy only members of our reference group. There are few successes more unendurab-le than those of our close friends.’ ‘It follows that the more people we take to be our equals and compare ourselves to, the more people there are to envy.’ [20]

‘For most of history inequality and low expectations had been viewed as norm-al.’ [21] ‘But the American Revolution of 1776, perhaps more than any other event in Western history’ brought about a society where, according to geographer Jedidiah Morse, high expectations were normative, because “every man thinks himself as good as his neighbours, and believes that all mankind have, or ought to possess, equal rights”.’ [22] 

 In Democracy in America (1835), Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: “In America I never met a citizen too poor to cast a glance of envy towards the pleasures of the rich.” [23] And the same may be said people in Australia today!

The third of the three reasons, de Botton suggests, drives our materialism is love.

 de Botton states ‘there are common assumptions about which motives drive us to seek ”high” status; among them a longing for money, fame, and influence.’ He suggests ‘alternatively’ – and, one must concede, ‘counter-intuitively’ – that, ‘it might be more accurate to sum up what we searching for as: ”love”.’ [24]

 de Botton says ‘Our “ego” could be pictured as a leaking balloon, vulnerable to the smallest pricks of neglect, forever requiring the helium of external love to remain inflated.’ [25] He says that ‘to be shown love is to feel ourselves the object of concern.’ If our status is “high”, we are ‘‘somebodies’’, and we get lots of attention. But if our status is ‘‘low’’, we are ‘’nobodies’’, and we may get com-paratively no attention at all’. Therefore, he goes on to say, in a society which values money, fame and influence, ‘money, fame and influence may be valued more a means to love, rather than as ends in themselves.’ [26]

 Adam Smith, the famous author of The Wealth Of Nations, said in The Theory Of Moral Sentiment (Edinburgh 1759), ‘The rich man glories in his riches because he feels they naturally draw upon him the attention of the world. The poor man on the contrary is ashamed of his poverty (because) he feels it places him out of the sight of mankind – he goes out and comes in unheeded.’ [27]

 In today’s society ‘the successful person comprises both men and women of any race who have been able to accumulate money, power, and renown thro-ugh their own activities in the commercial world (including sport, art and science)’[28] ‘The ability to accumulate wealth is prized for reflecting the presence of at least four cardinal virtues: creativity, courage, intelligence and stamina.’[29] ‘According-ly, the possession of a great many goods becomes necessary, not principally because these goods yield pleasure, (though they do this too,) but because they confer honour’. [30]

 What are the consequences of materialism?

 The obvious consequence of obsession with material progress is material progress. We may cry ‘poor’, but most of us actually enjoy a life of unparalleled luxury.

 In Australia, over the last fifty years, the majority of the population have doub-led the level of their personal incomes. In the last decade of the last century more Australians became millionaires than during any decade in history. As part of the top 20% of the world’s population, we have more than 80% of the world’s total income. And we are so well off by world standards – even those  on the bottom of our society, living on social security – are in the top 50% of the global population – with incomparable access to world-class social, educat-ional, and medical services.   

 However, material wealth has not delivered the wellbeing we thought that it might.

Clive Hamilton says ‘If rising incomes result in increased happiness then we would expect: people in richer countries will be happier than people in poorer countries; within each country, rich people will be happier than poor people; and as people become richer they will become happier.’[31]

 1. Are people in richer countries happier than people in poorer countries?

 On the surface ‘there is a weak positive correlation between a country’s income and self-reported life satisfaction.’ But this may be due to factors other than national income ‘such as the presence of political freedom and  the tolerance of difference.’[32]  

 ‘Some evidence suggests a negative relationship between income and happi-ness. For example, within Asia, residents of wealthy countries such as Japan and Taiwan regularly report the highest proportion of unhappy people, while the countries with the lowest incomes, such as the Philippines, report the highest number of happy people.’ [33]

 2. Within each country, are rich people happier than poor people?

 ‘In poor countries such as Bangladesh wealthier people have higher levels of well-being than poor people. But in rich countries, having more income makes surprisingly little difference.[34] 

 ‘There is a threshold of around US$10,000 above which a higher average income makes no difference to a population’s reported life satisfaction.’ [35]

 ‘If we take the top 17 ranked countries, with per capita incomes ranging from $16,000 to $34,000, there is no relationship at all between higher incomes and higher report-ed appreciation of life.’[36]

 3. As people become richer do they become happier?

 ‘Despite sustained levels of economic growth over 50 years the mass of people are no more satisfied with their lives now than they were then.’[37]

 Over 40 year period in the US most peoples income doubled – but their level of satisfaction stayed the same! [38]

 ‘In the United States, where surveys have been conducted since 1946, real incomes have increased by 400 per cent, yet there has been no increase in reported levels of wellbeing. The proportion of Americans reporting them-selves “very happy” declined from 35 per cent in1957 to 30 per cent in 1988.’[39]

‘Depression has increased tenfold among Americans born since World War II.’[40]

 And according to Hugh Mackay in his book Turning Points the situation in Australia is much the same. We’ve never been ‘better off’, but don’t feel any better.

 Depression is endemic.

• There is a ‘record rate of consumption of antidepressants.’ 
• And each year about 40,000 young Australians between the age of 15 and 24 try to commit suicide.[41]  

 According to Tim Kasser the results of the research, with samples of people ranging from Americans to Russians, Germans, Turks, Indians, Chinese and Australians, from adolescents to the elderly, and from wealthy to the poor, indicate that ‘the more materialistic values are at the centre of our lives, the more the quality of our life is diminished’. [42]

 

---

[1] p98 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, 2003                     

[2] p99 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[3] p1 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish

[4] p1 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                     

[5] p2 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[6] p4 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[7] p89 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                    

         [8] p87 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[9]Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism A Bradford Book London England 2002

[10] p32 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[11] p31 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[12] p33/35 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[13] p39-41 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[14] p48 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[15] p48 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[16] p49-50 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[17] p45 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety Penguin Camberwell 2004

[18] p46 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[19] p46 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[20] p47 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[21] p47 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[22] p51 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[23] p54 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[24] p11 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[25] p16 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[26] p11-12 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[27] p13 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[28] p193 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[29] p193 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[30] p195 Alain de Botton Status Anxiety

[31] p23 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[32] p24 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[33] p24 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[34] p28 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[35] p26 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[36] p26 Clive Hamilton Growth Fetish                      

[37] p3 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[38] p24 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[39] p30 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[40] p40 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

[41] p254 Hugh Mackay Turning Points Macmillan Sydney 1999

[42] p14 Tim Kasser The High Price Of Materialism

 

---

[1] R.Gittens ‘Getting to the root of modern evil’. Sydney Morning Herald  27/08/2002 

[2] R.Gittens ‘Getting to the root of modern evil’