I embrace ‘cannotaffordconsumptioncore’
Depending on how freely that decision was taken, that is just the most radical version of it.
Good for them for taking a stand against consumerism, but their personal shopping habits (even collectively, they equal less than a drop in an ocean) aren’t going to change neither climate change, nor inflation.
This idea that “every little helps” is just more of the same “personal responsibility” those who are actually responsible but refuse to be held accountable push on to the rest of the population to distract us from their own actions.
The only way to fight climate change (and be rid of the artificial concept that is inflation, which is there solely to make the rich richer) is by removing the cancer, rather than continue to apply band aids to it, and abolishing capitalism.
They do not care about one person doing this, however when all people do it or just a large group they do care.
The simple truth is that abolishing capitalism is not going to solve the climate crisis alone. Just due to all companies becoming cooperatives, does not mean everybody can just drive around in monster trucks, eat steak all day and live in giant mansions. As a matter of fact to solve the climate crisis, abolishing consumerism is a necessity. The way to stop that, is just very simply to consume less. Obviously that has to be done partly by laws like banning business jets for example, but those laws require a cultural shift. That means some people have to go ahead and be an example.
This “the big guys up top, have to solve the crisis” is just a way to deny any sort of responsiblilty and therefore ends up without any sort of action.
The people seem to have forgotten that their capitalist overlords can only overlord because of the money we give them and let’s be fair, most of those purchases are stupid crap to give us a seratonin boost. All I’m tryin ta say is I also get a seratonin boost every time their stocks crash because of a poor earnings report, so let’s all just not buy stuff for awhile.
Instead of No Nut November let’s try a No Sales September or something
It’s actually not that difficult only buying food and hygiene products for one month. It isn’t sustainable (for my household) since many things like electronic devices or clothing have a “shelf life” and will break sooner or later.
Still I love the idea and I think it would help many people to save money, use less resources and think about what really makes them happy.
In September I will start making memes about it 🥳
I love this! Looking forward to September =)
Wow… this movement has just doubled in size. Continuing this exponential growth, the movement will have around 137,438,953,472 participants on September 1st, and thereby will have a profound if not catastrophic impact on the global economy. 🥳🥳
Just due to all companies becoming cooperatives, does not mean everybody can just drive around in monster trucks, eat steak all day and live in giant mansions.
So your only argument is a strawman? (I never said anything like that, nor do you seem to have a grasp on the impacts capitalism actually has or what the aims of abolishing it are)
This “the big guys up top, have to solve the crisis” is just a way to deny any sort of responsiblilty and therefore ends up without any sort of action.
You keep believing that, and continue to be completely non critical of who is promoting that notion to you and why (also another strawman, because not buying in to these useless distraction campaigns in no way shape or form means inaction, if anything, it’s usually the opposite, anti capitalists aim at the core of the issue, while tokenistic behaviour makes you feel like you’ve contributed when in reality you’ve impacted literally fuck all but your own ego - there’s a reason my comment made you defensive)…
How is it a strawman you clearly said that consumerism has no impact on climate change here:
Good for them for taking a stand against consumerism, personal shopping habits (even collectively, they equal less than a drop in an ocean) aren’t going to change neither climate change, nor inflation.
You probably did not mean it, but I thought I have to clear that up.
This “the big guys up top, have to solve the crisis” is just a way to deny any sort of responsiblilty and therefore ends up without any sort of action.
As for that, I have seen that way to often. Classic alternative to “but China”.
Just look at some research. So when you want more solar panels in your community, a good idea is to install solar on your roof first. That makes you 63% more likely to convince others to do the same. This can lead to tipping points being reached, which have a much wider impact. At this point the movement can be used to change the underlying system.
You keep believing that, and continue to be completely non critical of who is promoting that notion to you and why
This is were it becomes important to look at what the campaigns actually try to do. BPs famous carbon footprint did try to make everybody understand that the y use fossil fuels. It did not lobby to stop driving and take public transport instead. Same story with many recycling campaigns. They go for throw it in the bin, rather then show you how to not use as much plastic. The key in those campaigns is not to show a viable alternative, but to make people feel helpless. After all, when there is a working individual action, people might lobby to make it mandatory and that destroys their business. BP does not run ads to buy EVs instead of ICEs today. That would be a viable alternative. So they promote the red hering of hydrogen powered cars. After all the individual action of buying an EV instead of an ICE can easily be scaled, by making selling ICEs illegal.
If enough people stopped buying crap that would be good start on abolishing capitalism. In order to change society you need people to take responsibility and change their habits. I find it very suspect tbat so many like you try so vehemently to discourage people from making any changes.
so vehemently to discourage people from making any changes.
Literally never happened, but sure…
Leftist: take the problem more seriously, we require systemic solutions to make systemic change (E: and literally saying good for these people for consuming less ffs)
Lib, with their fingers in their ears: sToP tEllInG pEoPlE nOt tO Do aNyThinG!!12
Inflation doesn’t exist to make the rich richer.
The main reason for some a little inflation is so that people won’t hoard money and instead invest it in stuff which is good for the economy.
If every rich asshole only sat on their money for eternity everyone would be worse off.
If every rich asshole only sat on their money for eternity everyone would be worse off.
Have you had a look around recently?
Yeah, and as far as I can tell it’s mostly invested
Unrelated but can everyone stop calling every god damn thing/phenomenon “core”. Just call it what it is. Undercomsumption.
sickofthecoresuffixcore
bro is so sickofthesuffixcore core 🤙
That’s Millennials/Gen Z for ya. XD
I want to disagree but… Yes… This is us
Adeline Um, a 27-year-old living Boston musician, has recommitted to using every ounce of skincare products from their bottles, as well as continuing to use scruffed-up but functional makeup brushes and wearing 15-year-old clothes.
“I really dislike throwing away food or like when food is rotting. I just feel so guilty about that.”
“You don’t need to buy a new set of hair straighteners just because your current ones are crusty,” she said. “If it still works, it still works. For me, it’s actually been a great reminder.”
Aren’t all of these absolutely normal behaviors?
Yeah, I like to throw bottles of lotion away when they’re half full because I feel compelled to fulfil the perception that my generation is wasteful.
WTF is underconsumption? That term would suggest missing basic needs. The article talks about budgets and not treating belongings as disposable.
When some CEO or economist goes on the evening news claiming that young people are deliberately sabotaging the economy (and their profits) by not consuming as much as previous generations, that’s the ‘under’ in underconsuming.
I just don’t understand the goal other than reinforcing class lines and demonizing the poor. It’s like they’re convincing business constituents that there’s still a wealth of untapped capital just hiding in people’s (especially younger people’s) savings accounts. Are they grifting other business people or pushing policy?
Eh… Not like it’s anything new…
I think it’s just reinforcing endless consumption as normal/good and blaming the youngest adult generation for whatever problems are happening.
At the very last it’s an attempt to invalidate the experience if people who are struggling. But yeah. It makes sense they could just be contributing to the propaganda stream. It seems to work pretty well on the stereotypical “middle class boomer”, though that’s anecdotal from my conversations with brick walls.
No. They know there isn’t any more.
That’s why the consumer loan industry is booming. They’re literally lending people money so they can keep selling more and more.
I was suggesting their claims are bs whether or not they know. It’s possible they’re literally that out of touch but more likely it’s just irrelevant to the greed motivating them to say this.
Payday and micro loans have been a huge issue putting people into poverty for almost a couple decades now. It’s a big reason for companies doing credit checks on new hires(also dumb and evil). Though i’m sure it’s ramped up in the last several years. All evil built into a system.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
They rebranded minimalism.
They rebranded poverty.
“The children will solve our problems”
“NO NOT LIKE THAT!!!”
Summary:
Underconsumptioncore is a trend on TikTok where young people are choosing to buy less and focus on using what they already have. This is a reaction to the overwhelming pressure to consume that is often seen on social media. Gen Z, the generation that has grown up during a time of economic anxiety and environmental concern, is particularly receptive to this message.
For some, underconsumptioncore is a way to save money. But for others, it’s more about rejecting the idea that they need to constantly buy new things in order to be happy or successful. This trend is part of a larger movement among Gen Z to be more mindful of their spending and their impact on the world.
27, that’s gen Z?
27 would be born 1997, which is generally speaking old Gen Z. It generally starts with birth dates between 1995-97 or so.
I’m 1997. I’ve learned the cutoff for generations is major societal/cultural impacts, like whether one remembers 9/11 or not makes you a late millennial or early gen Z. I’ve met people within a year of my age who remember it and consider themselves millennials, while I have no recollection so I’ve always considered myself a gen Z.
Face it. You’re old now
deleted by creator
This was my thought as well lol thought there were a few more years in there between me (34) and the end of millenials
