Conspicuous consumption and its politics
The Political Pulpit
Tax time and the season of Lent. There are a lot of crosses for the faithful and the
shepherds to bear around this time of the year. The problem is that at least since the
1960s and the coming age of the Baby-Boom Generation, Americans have not done much
cross-bearing (except for the poor and the lower class people of the streets or for those
members of these classes who wind up fighting our wars for us). US Labor Department
statistics verify that unless you are in the top five percent of wage earners, your pay
increases have trailed inflation over the last three years. Rather than sacrificing in these
more challenging economic times for the American middle class, Americans still
continue to buy the big, gas-guzzling cars and larger homes with more property than they
could have had in the older suburbs in which many of them grew up. The result: We are
deeply in debt. Debt payments now consume over nineteen percent of the income of the
average American family, and 23 percent of families at the bottom two-fifths of the
income scale may devote as high as forty percent of their income to debt payment.
When you find yourself in that sort of financial bind, you don't save. Consequently, according to a research report of the Securities Industry Association, nearly half of American households are not saving at all, and two out of three families have not saved enough to retire comfortably. It is estimated that as many as twenty percent of the Baby Boomers will live in poverty after age 65, twice the number of impoverished seniors as today.
In my last column we reviewed how government policies under the old Republican Congress and our pro-business presidents (yes, Clinton was one of them) have contributed to the present precarious plight of middle-class and impoverished American families. The freezing of the minimum wage since 1997, Right-To-Work legislation, which makes it more difficult for labor unions to organize, and trade or tax policies which reward businesses that internationalize their labor force at the expense of American jobs, have all played a role in the American family's debt-crisis. But that is not the whole story. In a manner reminiscent of the ethos of the 1950s in which many of the first wave of the Baby Boomers were nurtured, we have become advocates of conspicuous consumption, to the detriment of our families and our nation.
Remember how SUVs were the cars to get until the gas hikes of the past couple of years? Throughout the 1990s and first years of our new century, these gas-guzzlers were what most every middle-class family with children bought or at least considered purchasing. Once memories of the gas shortages of the years of the Carter Presidency had faded, all the preoccupation with fuel-efficient cars and environmental protection went by the way in favor of the bigger-is-better mindset. If you were too upscale to settle for a bourgeoisie item like an SUV, you bought another big car that the neighbors or your colleagues would notice, like a Dodge Viper, Mercury Marauder, or the Cadillac, all with horsepower that could almost be enough to fly a plane during World War II.
We build our houses bigger, too. Middle-class families buy houses with more and more square footage, and more bedrooms than they could ever use, even if all the children from the blended families came for a weekend. Of course, you need more property for such a custom-built home. The old suburbs no longer do. Besides, these communities have become so unexclusive, populated more and more by ordinary working-class people, their schools have come to be more and more besieged by some of the same problems which plague our cities, that you will not enhance your social standing much with coworkers and other influential people you know if they learn where you live. Obviously, the thing to do is find a location further from the job or the metropolitan area. These conspicuous-consumption dynamics surely explain the growth of the so-called ex-urbs over the last decades since the Reagan Revolution. Of course, when you live further away from the job, you and your spouse, each with your own car, will need to commute further, to the detriment of the environment and your family budget. No matter: You do what you have to do to maintain your (visible) lifestyle.
Speaking of keeping up with the Joneses in its twenty-first-century mode, it is probably no accident that the number one gathering place in the ex-urbs and the suburbs is the shopping mall, where you can buy the latest must-have or exclusive, customized trinket. With spending patterns like these, it is no wonder that American families don't save much, and many are in debt.
Here's the political pay-off in these socio-economic dynamics. Exit polls based on the 2004 elections indicated that those who drive the big cars, live in the ex-urbs, and engage in long commutes, tended overwhelmingly to vote Republican (statistics reported in Kevin Phillips, American Theocracy, pp. 58-61). These connections make perfect, if not troubling, sense. A public committed to a lifestyle of privacy, to obtaining the very best customized products in order to impress peers, and not too concerned about the consequences for the common good or for the environment, is more likely going to support politicians who stress rugged individualism (individual responsibility) and small government, who debunk all the ecological crisis-mongering, and who support the interests of businesses which produce all the trinkets the electorate wants.
Exit poll data gleaned from the midterm elections last November indicate that little has changed, that the earlier electoral patterns noted are still relevant. The latest election, it seems, is not indicative of any seismic shift in electoral patterns. The pro-business and Religious Right base of the GOP held in the elections, with the erosion coming from those disgusted with Republican Congressional scandals, the war in Iraq, and, most significantly, concerned with the direction of the economy (Pew Research Center, "Centrists Deliver for Democrats," at http://pewresearch.org). Many of those who had moved into the Democratic column got there in virtue of the higher gas prices and other economic problems that were making a negative impact on their lifestyle. (These are the consumers who are no longer buying the SUVs, even though they'd still like to have one.)
Let's not forget that the Democrats most likely to be elected in the last election were moderates, legislators not that much more likely than the Republicans they replaced to lobby for the unions or support programs which aid the poor, especially if this comes at the expense of the business owners who have financed their campaigns. Our infatuation with conspicuous consumption (owning the things that people will notice and envy) has encouraged Americans to live beyond their means, and as long as they can still maintain their lifestyle, they will vote for and support the government policies that leave them alone; don't hassle them with more taxes or responsibilities for the impoverished.
Many of the texts in the lectionary for March and April invite your sharing these interrelationships with parishioners. The second lesson for March 4 (Philippians 3:17-- 4:1) laments that people make their bellies their god. The second lesson for March 16 (2 Corinthians 5:16-21) urges that we view no one from a human point of view, a direct critique of the dynamics of conspicuous consumption which drives us to define worth by what we have. Even the Palm Sunday theme of April 1 concerning Christ being humbled in order to be exalted is a reminder of how futile and empty it is to exalt yourself by ostentatious living. The April 15 first lesson (Acts 5:27-32) recounting the apostles' witness to the authorities of the day is a reminder that as Christians we, too, are called to witness against authoritative social trends like our conspicuous-consumption, live-for- today malaise.
Other pericopes assigned for these months remind us of the alternative to a lifestyle of conspicuous consumption. Instead of living just for oneself and the acclaim of those around us, the first lessons for March 1, March 11, and April 29 call us to the God who sets slaves free, feeds the hungry, and establishes a kingdom which is truly inclusive. Christians who believe these words will have a different lifestyle from the conspicuous- consumption crowd and their politics.
Share with your parishioners the interconnections between our conspicuous consumption tendencies, how they are getting too many of us to live beyond our means, plus the connection between this and politics with little interest in the poor and marginalized. Chet is correct to point out how the church as an institution has indulged and still indulges in conspicuous consumption. But to fail to see how certain political agendas exacerbate our desire to assert our "somebodiness" by what we own and to pretend that it is only the super-rich who engage in such spending patterns is to shut one's eyes to the data. When we look at all the data pointed out in this column in light of a number of lectionary texts for these months, by God's grace it might just lead America to a better way, one less concerned about what I have that can make you envious, but more concerned with what I can do for you and the common good. Wouldn't that be great politics?
Mark Ellingsen is a tenured associate professor on the faculty of the Interdenominational Theological Center in Atlanta and the author of hundreds of articles and thirteen books, including "Blessed Are the Cynical: How Original Sin Can Make America a Better Place," "The Integrity of Biblical Narrative: Story in Theology and Proclamation," and "The Richness of Augustine: His Contextual & Pastoral Theology" (Westminster/John Knox Press).
When you find yourself in that sort of financial bind, you don't save. Consequently, according to a research report of the Securities Industry Association, nearly half of American households are not saving at all, and two out of three families have not saved enough to retire comfortably. It is estimated that as many as twenty percent of the Baby Boomers will live in poverty after age 65, twice the number of impoverished seniors as today.
In my last column we reviewed how government policies under the old Republican Congress and our pro-business presidents (yes, Clinton was one of them) have contributed to the present precarious plight of middle-class and impoverished American families. The freezing of the minimum wage since 1997, Right-To-Work legislation, which makes it more difficult for labor unions to organize, and trade or tax policies which reward businesses that internationalize their labor force at the expense of American jobs, have all played a role in the American family's debt-crisis. But that is not the whole story. In a manner reminiscent of the ethos of the 1950s in which many of the first wave of the Baby Boomers were nurtured, we have become advocates of conspicuous consumption, to the detriment of our families and our nation.
Remember how SUVs were the cars to get until the gas hikes of the past couple of years? Throughout the 1990s and first years of our new century, these gas-guzzlers were what most every middle-class family with children bought or at least considered purchasing. Once memories of the gas shortages of the years of the Carter Presidency had faded, all the preoccupation with fuel-efficient cars and environmental protection went by the way in favor of the bigger-is-better mindset. If you were too upscale to settle for a bourgeoisie item like an SUV, you bought another big car that the neighbors or your colleagues would notice, like a Dodge Viper, Mercury Marauder, or the Cadillac, all with horsepower that could almost be enough to fly a plane during World War II.
We build our houses bigger, too. Middle-class families buy houses with more and more square footage, and more bedrooms than they could ever use, even if all the children from the blended families came for a weekend. Of course, you need more property for such a custom-built home. The old suburbs no longer do. Besides, these communities have become so unexclusive, populated more and more by ordinary working-class people, their schools have come to be more and more besieged by some of the same problems which plague our cities, that you will not enhance your social standing much with coworkers and other influential people you know if they learn where you live. Obviously, the thing to do is find a location further from the job or the metropolitan area. These conspicuous-consumption dynamics surely explain the growth of the so-called ex-urbs over the last decades since the Reagan Revolution. Of course, when you live further away from the job, you and your spouse, each with your own car, will need to commute further, to the detriment of the environment and your family budget. No matter: You do what you have to do to maintain your (visible) lifestyle.
Speaking of keeping up with the Joneses in its twenty-first-century mode, it is probably no accident that the number one gathering place in the ex-urbs and the suburbs is the shopping mall, where you can buy the latest must-have or exclusive, customized trinket. With spending patterns like these, it is no wonder that American families don't save much, and many are in debt.
Here's the political pay-off in these socio-economic dynamics. Exit polls based on the 2004 elections indicated that those who drive the big cars, live in the ex-urbs, and engage in long commutes, tended overwhelmingly to vote Republican (statistics reported in Kevin Phillips, American Theocracy, pp. 58-61). These connections make perfect, if not troubling, sense. A public committed to a lifestyle of privacy, to obtaining the very best customized products in order to impress peers, and not too concerned about the consequences for the common good or for the environment, is more likely going to support politicians who stress rugged individualism (individual responsibility) and small government, who debunk all the ecological crisis-mongering, and who support the interests of businesses which produce all the trinkets the electorate wants.
Exit poll data gleaned from the midterm elections last November indicate that little has changed, that the earlier electoral patterns noted are still relevant. The latest election, it seems, is not indicative of any seismic shift in electoral patterns. The pro-business and Religious Right base of the GOP held in the elections, with the erosion coming from those disgusted with Republican Congressional scandals, the war in Iraq, and, most significantly, concerned with the direction of the economy (Pew Research Center, "Centrists Deliver for Democrats," at http://pewresearch.org). Many of those who had moved into the Democratic column got there in virtue of the higher gas prices and other economic problems that were making a negative impact on their lifestyle. (These are the consumers who are no longer buying the SUVs, even though they'd still like to have one.)
Let's not forget that the Democrats most likely to be elected in the last election were moderates, legislators not that much more likely than the Republicans they replaced to lobby for the unions or support programs which aid the poor, especially if this comes at the expense of the business owners who have financed their campaigns. Our infatuation with conspicuous consumption (owning the things that people will notice and envy) has encouraged Americans to live beyond their means, and as long as they can still maintain their lifestyle, they will vote for and support the government policies that leave them alone; don't hassle them with more taxes or responsibilities for the impoverished.
Many of the texts in the lectionary for March and April invite your sharing these interrelationships with parishioners. The second lesson for March 4 (Philippians 3:17-- 4:1) laments that people make their bellies their god. The second lesson for March 16 (2 Corinthians 5:16-21) urges that we view no one from a human point of view, a direct critique of the dynamics of conspicuous consumption which drives us to define worth by what we have. Even the Palm Sunday theme of April 1 concerning Christ being humbled in order to be exalted is a reminder of how futile and empty it is to exalt yourself by ostentatious living. The April 15 first lesson (Acts 5:27-32) recounting the apostles' witness to the authorities of the day is a reminder that as Christians we, too, are called to witness against authoritative social trends like our conspicuous-consumption, live-for- today malaise.
Other pericopes assigned for these months remind us of the alternative to a lifestyle of conspicuous consumption. Instead of living just for oneself and the acclaim of those around us, the first lessons for March 1, March 11, and April 29 call us to the God who sets slaves free, feeds the hungry, and establishes a kingdom which is truly inclusive. Christians who believe these words will have a different lifestyle from the conspicuous- consumption crowd and their politics.
Share with your parishioners the interconnections between our conspicuous consumption tendencies, how they are getting too many of us to live beyond our means, plus the connection between this and politics with little interest in the poor and marginalized. Chet is correct to point out how the church as an institution has indulged and still indulges in conspicuous consumption. But to fail to see how certain political agendas exacerbate our desire to assert our "somebodiness" by what we own and to pretend that it is only the super-rich who engage in such spending patterns is to shut one's eyes to the data. When we look at all the data pointed out in this column in light of a number of lectionary texts for these months, by God's grace it might just lead America to a better way, one less concerned about what I have that can make you envious, but more concerned with what I can do for you and the common good. Wouldn't that be great politics?
Mark Ellingsen is a tenured associate professor on the faculty of the Interdenominational Theological Center in Atlanta and the author of hundreds of articles and thirteen books, including "Blessed Are the Cynical: How Original Sin Can Make America a Better Place," "The Integrity of Biblical Narrative: Story in Theology and Proclamation," and "The Richness of Augustine: His Contextual & Pastoral Theology" (Westminster/John Knox Press).