Although the concept of commercialism insists that people need to buy things in order to be happy, it is often quite the opposite. An excess of objects that aren’t essential causes clutter and stress. “It’s almost as though it limits our freedoms to choose how we want to live,” said James MacKinnon, “and determines what our social role will be.” MacKinnon is the author of “The Day the World Stops Shopping: How Ending Consumerism Saves the Environment and Ourselves.” He noticed that this system constricts personal liberty to do what one truly wants and dictates social roles, pressuring people to spend their money for the status that comes with it. The wasting of money on unnecessary things is fueled, more often than not, by commercialism. This process is harmful because it not only uses money that many people cannot afford, but also “has the potential to become addictive” (Dr. Anna Lembke).  Marketing preys on those who are desperate for distraction, but it serves as a parasite, sucking up their money and making them reliant through addiction. People use shopping to distract themselves from their lives, which is wasteful, but also not productive. The time, energy, and finances expended on junk they are convinced they need could be put instead into relationships and experiences.

People argue that consumerism fuels the economy, and that weaning the emphasis on materialism would result in a disaster. However, it is not reasonable to ignore the current environmental crisis for the sake of the economy. “Continuous worldwide expansion in the levels of material consumption,” said Thomas Micheal Power, “seems incompatible with environmental stability and long-run human well-being” (Power). Considering the current economic system is dependent on ruining the environment and even people’s lives, it is essential that a new constant stream of money is employed that isn’t reliant on waste. Additionally, there are other options to stimulate the economy outside of buying unnecessary items. An economics professor at George Mason University, Alex Tabarrok, believes that an increase in purchasing used goods would encourage the production of higher-quality stock (Tabarrok). It is argued that a decrease in money spent on nonessential items would slow down the economy, however, investment in higher quality products and employing services to repair damaged items can serve as a replacement for new purchases. The encouragement of investing in clothes that are more expensive but will actually last not only continues to stimulate the economy, but also has environmental and psychological upsides.

Commercialism has a stark negative effect on people’s lives, and it is crucial that solutions to replace the current system of waste. Consumerism has a severe and terrible impact on the environment, and pressures people into spending they don’t have on objects they don’t need. This results in an abundance of clutter and stress, and even addiction. Commercialism takes advantage of people, convincing them it will cure their despair, but it instead wreaks havoc on both the environment and their mental health. Although some argue that America’s economy is reliant on commercialism, it is not a sustainable path to continue with its destructive nature. Additionally, the money spent on junk can instead be used on higher quality products and their repairs, along with services and experiences that enhance someone’s life, instead of adding chaos and a medley of things that people don’t truly need. This selfish structure imposed by corporate greed must be recognized and changed.

Obviously, this is not my normal format. I absolutely hate this. It’s just the way you have to write an essay, and I feel like I have to say things weirdly, like overdramatically, for my teacher to think I’m smart. Anyway. As you can see, this is an excerpt from my essay on consumerism, and this part focuses on the mental repercussions of materialism and a rebuttal defending my points. There is some overlap in this post and the last, but I think it would be weird to change this part from the original essay.

I’m really not sure what I’ll explore next. Possibly more nuclear physics, since we actually have a meeting scheduled next week, but I’m not sure. Stay turned to learn with me!

Koh, Christine. “Why you might be happier if you don’t buy anything in Cyber Week.” CNN Wire, 26 Nov. 2021, p. NA. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A683893795/OVIC?u=ante588&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=b9992fe9. Accessed 11 Nov. 2022.

Power, Thomas Michael. “Consumption.” Encyclopedia of Environmental Ethics and Philosophy, edited by J. Baird Callicott and Robert Frodeman, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2009, pp. 180-182. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3234100073/OVIC?u=ante588&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=96716364. Accessed 11 Nov. 2022.