Affluenza
Finished Affluenza, by Clive Hamilton and Richard Denniss of the Australia Institute, over the weekend.
The book is about the increase in the material expectations of the Australian population over the last twenty years ago. Without much ado it lays out the undesirable social consequences of skyrocketing consumer debt, the one-off transition in spending habits from "pre-saving" to "post-saving", and the prevalence of unrealistic expectations about acceptable levels of wealth and comfort among the population at large. It's also about the notable lack of any increase in average personal wellbeing commensurate with the vast increase we have seen in personal expenditure.
It was an interesting book for someone like me, with a decent sized mortgage and a carefully managed but ultimately unsatisfiable desire for more "stuff" (e.g. mp3 players, motorcycles and notebooks) to read. It distilled economic data into some forceful moral conclusions, made comments with specific reference to Australia that reflected both on my own life and the lives of nearly everyone I know, and provided plenty of food for thought.
Dennis and Hamilton claim somewhat unconvincingly not to be anti-consumption, but the book's self-flagellating morally disapprobatory tone, and its occasional digressions into Marxist discourse and ranting about caricatured social ills (such as SUVs on the road) give the lie to this to a large extent. My own point of view is that when the perceived problem is excessive or thoughtless consumption, an anti-consumption stance is inevitable and correct.
In a number of instances a strange contrast between Australians' views on themselves and on society at large is observed. While many people agree that Australian society as a whole is unduly materialistic, and that Australians are (by and large) overly self-indulgent, privileged and materialistic, the same people claim that they frequently suffer hardship simply getting by. A phenomenon which is aggressively supported by government propaganda that trivialises the plight of the genuinely poor whilst bemoaning the difficulties faced by the comfortable middle classes (tax cuts and more underhanded middle class welfare are on the way).
Affluenza stayed on message and made a powerful argument that significant social change will soon be required to mitigate and ultimately reverse the damage the current regime of over-acquisition of unneeded consumer items is causing.
And after I'd read it, I whipped out all the completely unnecessary and extraneous loot that Max and I received when we got married (including such necessities of life as slow cookers, extra cutlery sets, chef's knives, multiple fancy wooden chopping boards, special grater, and new white crockery) and made a delicious lamb korma from scratch. Whilst feeling unaccountably guilty.
EDIT: Justified Bladerunner glorification on my f-list resulted in me checking out the trailer for A Scanner Darkly. The unique look of Richard Linklater's digitally retouched live footage mixed in with an undergraduate level conversation about the meaning of reality (à la Waking Life) that actually has a plot? Count me in: looks awesome. Also, far better Keanu than Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford, Ben Affleck or Governor Schwarzenegger for the next Dick adaptation. Is it wrong to say he may actually be a better actor than the others, scary as (and as factually incorrect as) that thought may well be?
The book is about the increase in the material expectations of the Australian population over the last twenty years ago. Without much ado it lays out the undesirable social consequences of skyrocketing consumer debt, the one-off transition in spending habits from "pre-saving" to "post-saving", and the prevalence of unrealistic expectations about acceptable levels of wealth and comfort among the population at large. It's also about the notable lack of any increase in average personal wellbeing commensurate with the vast increase we have seen in personal expenditure.
It was an interesting book for someone like me, with a decent sized mortgage and a carefully managed but ultimately unsatisfiable desire for more "stuff" (e.g. mp3 players, motorcycles and notebooks) to read. It distilled economic data into some forceful moral conclusions, made comments with specific reference to Australia that reflected both on my own life and the lives of nearly everyone I know, and provided plenty of food for thought.
Dennis and Hamilton claim somewhat unconvincingly not to be anti-consumption, but the book's self-flagellating morally disapprobatory tone, and its occasional digressions into Marxist discourse and ranting about caricatured social ills (such as SUVs on the road) give the lie to this to a large extent. My own point of view is that when the perceived problem is excessive or thoughtless consumption, an anti-consumption stance is inevitable and correct.
In a number of instances a strange contrast between Australians' views on themselves and on society at large is observed. While many people agree that Australian society as a whole is unduly materialistic, and that Australians are (by and large) overly self-indulgent, privileged and materialistic, the same people claim that they frequently suffer hardship simply getting by. A phenomenon which is aggressively supported by government propaganda that trivialises the plight of the genuinely poor whilst bemoaning the difficulties faced by the comfortable middle classes (tax cuts and more underhanded middle class welfare are on the way).
Affluenza stayed on message and made a powerful argument that significant social change will soon be required to mitigate and ultimately reverse the damage the current regime of over-acquisition of unneeded consumer items is causing.
And after I'd read it, I whipped out all the completely unnecessary and extraneous loot that Max and I received when we got married (including such necessities of life as slow cookers, extra cutlery sets, chef's knives, multiple fancy wooden chopping boards, special grater, and new white crockery) and made a delicious lamb korma from scratch. Whilst feeling unaccountably guilty.
EDIT: Justified Bladerunner glorification on my f-list resulted in me checking out the trailer for A Scanner Darkly. The unique look of Richard Linklater's digitally retouched live footage mixed in with an undergraduate level conversation about the meaning of reality (à la Waking Life) that actually has a plot? Count me in: looks awesome. Also, far better Keanu than Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford, Ben Affleck or Governor Schwarzenegger for the next Dick adaptation. Is it wrong to say he may actually be a better actor than the others, scary as (and as factually incorrect as) that thought may well be?