"Consumer Society" as an object of Philosophy study: essence and social context

Gurbanov Abdulla Gadzhievich Postgraduate student, Department of Philosophy, Astrakhan State University named after V.N. Tatishchev 414056, Russia, Astrakhan region, Astrakhan, Tatishcheva str., 20a, room 409 stars678@rambler.ru

          In the modern world, a social phenomenon called "consumer society" manifests itself quite vividly. Indeed, consumption at the beginning of the XXI century begins to play a serious role "... in the formation of value orientations and behavioral models, which ... thematizes the scientific understanding of consumption as a socio-cultural phenomenon" ^{[1, p. 149]}. In fact, the consumer society is a set of social relations with the leading role of individual consumption, in turn, mediated by the market. Hence the attitude to the concept of "HR–resources", because the way in which modern society forms its own members obliges them to fulfill, first of all, the roles of consumers.

          It must be admitted that individual consumption, like production, forms the basis of any modern society, but only at a certain stage of evolution it becomes subject to deep institutionalization, becoming one of the most important factors of subsequent economic development. However, according to the fair thought of V. I. Ilyin, society in such circumstances is increasingly mediated by the institution of the market, but at the same time, the very existence of the market without at least a little autonomous from individual consumption is impossible ^[2].

          The very concept of "consumer society" arose in the second half of the XX century in the USA as a term describing American society in new socio-economic conditions. In order for it to appear, it was necessary that the majority of the country's workers receive wages in an amount that allows them to fully cover the costs of basic needs: food, clothing, transport, training. And, moreover, they had such a part of their earnings that people could use to purchase goods and services of non-primary importance. The first researchers of the concept of "consumption" were representatives of economic scientific disciplines who understood this term as conditions and prerequisites for achieving certain production goals. In this direction, the named category was characterized mainly as the consumption of raw materials, materials and energy carriers for the production of goods, the purpose of which was to make a profit. But individual consumption begins to be studied a little later – and already by such sciences as sociology and marketing ^{[3, p. 189]}.

          It should be noted that since the second half of the XX century, the concept of "consumer society" is increasingly beginning to interest representatives of social sciences. So, in sociology, consumption is positioned for the first time as a socio-psychological phenomenon or a specific segment of socialization and the formation of values, norms, and culture associated with it. Sociologists pay special attention to the relations between people participating in the exchange, since social interaction is the focus of attention here. A little later, representatives of sociological science, as well as scientists and philosophers who joined them, attempt to determine and describe the levels of socio-economic development of developed countries in the context of capitalist relations. These studies have led humanities scientists to hypothesize that the systemic restructuring of the economy, as well as the achievement of certain indicators in the economy can have a positive impact on the formation of material well-being for society in the future.

          In modern philosophy, three main groups of theories have been formed that conceptualize the concept of "consumer society". First of all, these are sociological theories that consider consumption as an indicator of social stratification.  The second group of theories consider the category of consumption as a specific principle that allows building the foundation of sociality. Finally, third theories define consumption in close connection with the way of social communication ^{[1, p. 149]}.

          The first group of theories is most vividly represented by the concepts of T. Veblen and G. Simmel. These authors consider consumer practices to be the basis and, at the same time, the embodiment of social inequality. As for the term "consumption", it has a symbolic character in this interpretation, reflecting a set of socio-economic qualities of multi-level subjects of society. At the same time, it is also an instrument of stratification of society, effectively forming various classes of consumers. One of the first to be identified was a group of the so-called "new rich" in the USA in the 1880s-1890s, as well as residents of large European cities.  T. Veblen and G. Simmel closely followed this process. The first one singled out the term "concpicuous consumption" in relation to the category of "new rich" Americans, noting the significant role of imitation of European standards of luxury. But European citizens, according to G. Simmel's fair remark, actively developed consumption in order to resist psychologically overwhelming megacities, sought to "differ in order to be noticed" ^[4].

         Returning to Veblen's theory, we note that the fundamental principle of human life is the realization of constant rivalry. Through consumable things, an individual tries to reliably fix his position in society, which he occupies or seeks to conquer. Based on this, its inherent property is a permanent comparison of its consumer behavior with the consumption characteristics of the people around it. The sociologist notes that this goal of "favorable envious likening" to other consumers is exclusively an instrument of demonstrative consumption, that is, such consumption, which is focused primarily on confirming material success and high social status ^{[5, p. 197]}. G. Simmel complements his colleague, noting that one of the most important qualities of a person mimesis stands out – the desire to imitate. For the German thinker, this is the deep foundation of the culture of society. Simmel emphasizes that already at the early stages of social formation, man sought to imitate animals and natural forces, and somewhat later, as he was isolated from the natural environment, – and similar individuals. As an interesting example of such imitation, Simmel calls following fashion. The German sociologist attempted to comprehend fashion not only as a clash of passions and ambitions, but also as a kind of potential for socialization and communication in society. It is worth emphasizing that the specifics of the consumption of "fashionable" things in the modern era, in which G. Simmel lived and created, clearly shows the social structure of society, acting as a kind of marker of interaction rituals in a particular society. In addition, it is suggested that fashion is a way of popularizing and broadcasting the state expression of will, a kind of "language" with which the government comes into contact with the people.

         An independent group of theories are concepts that propose to study consumption as a kind of principle that is at the heart of the social order. Among the thinkers who adhere to such views, we note J. Cato, J. Galbraith, and J. Furastier. Despite the fact that they are usually referred to as "economic" schools of sociology, each of these authors sought to explain the nuances of the consumerism society not so much from socio-economic positions, but through the consideration of consumption in a broad cultural context. Thus, J. Katona was one of the first to interpret the meaning of consumption not from the standpoint of the ordinary purchase of goods, but as one of the most important principles of social structure, which makes it possible to interpret his views as economic and psychological. The American psychologist rightly argues that the behavior of individuals in the process of consumption can be explained not only from the point of view of economic, but also cultural and psychological justification. Thus, consumption for him is not only the purchase of a product or service, but also a complex behavioral act determined by a very significant body of personal psychological attitudes ^{[5, p.198]}.

         It is especially worth paying attention to the fact that Katona closely examines in his writings the impact of advertising slogans and messages on consumer behavior, arguing that the "consumer society" generates a special socio-cultural space for individuals, created and functioning only through advertising. And the latter, in turn, is able to cause a wide range of emotions in potential customers, and, therefore, to predetermine the choice of each person's own strategy of consumer behavior. Moreover, being in the advertising space significantly narrows a person's view of the real world, immersing him in the most comfortable, from the point of view of psychology, environment. As J. rightly emphasizes. Cato, it is precisely this "naive" belief that "everything is fine" that contributes to the growth of consumerism as a way of "forcible infantilization of human consciousness" ^{[6, p. 53]}.

         The philosopher-futurist J. Furastier continues to develop views on the consumer society from an optimistic position. His assessment of the industrial society, unable to solve the existing contradictions, remains critical, but the scientist believes that the achievements of science and technology will help overcome the impending crisis. Furastier notes that scientific and technological progress will be able to ensure the construction of a "scientific society" in which there will be no place for social, political and other conflicts. This society is presented as a definite outcome of the fight against consumerism from the point of view of a more perfect social order that can give people everything they need and make them happier. The most important elements of this order, according to the author, are mass production and mass consumption ^{[7, p. 5]}.

          Furastier's thoughts are developed by the American economist J. Galbraith. Being a supporter of institutionalism and Keynesianism, he adhered to the idea that the "consumer society" contributes to the maintenance of economic balance, which directly affects the social order. The scientist substantiates the connection between the "consumer society" and capitalism of the XX century with the emergence of corporations that change the very essence of the development of society. Galbraith notes that the main mechanisms of society management for corporations are advertising and other means of communication. Having put media resources at their service, corporations first subordinate people's consumer behavior to themselves, and then their whole life, forming and controlling desires and needs. Galbraith very timely warns society that gradually the dominance of corporations leads to the predominance of economic interests and goals over all others. The scientist identifies the main negative consequence of this: in the current system, a member of the "consumer society" loses its independence as an actor, since it is "programmed" for regular, out-of-control consumption of goods and services.

          Finally, representatives of the third group of theories, among which G. Marcuse, J. Baudriard and J. Deleuze, criticize the modern society. Consumption for these researchers is a form of symbolic exchange, which becomes the foundation of socio-cultural communication. The German-American social philosopher G. Marcuse combined the principles of Freudianism and neo-Marxism in his theory. For him, modern society is closely connected with such a characteristic of an individual as a "one-dimensional person". This concept arose as a response to the emergence of new forms of social control in the form of mass culture and advertising, which unite individuals around motives and values of behavior, thereby denoting new needs ^{[7, p. 7]}.

          Marcuse writes that modern Western society cannot be assessed as socialist or capitalist. It has become a system based on the almost hypnotic influence of mass communication media. Communication technologies enslave the consciousness of the individual, because the false needs of the cult of consumption are invested in it. Thus, on the one hand, technologies, developing, improve social control and, at the same time, unify the consciousness of members of society, on the other hand, this leads to an increase in the opportunities to meet the material needs of the largest part of the population. Because of this, among the main characteristics of the "one-dimensional man", G. Marcuse cites pragmatism and orientation to satisfying, first of all, material needs. Thus, an individual is "attached" to things that "symbolize" his status, belonging to a group or indicate a place in the structure of society.

          Thus, it is things that play the role of means and tools of socio-cultural identification, helping the individual to "fix" his place within the boundaries of a rapidly changing world. The philosopher believes that consumption unites people around itself through the formation of a specific social space, where the individual eventually "dissolves" into the world of things. Thus, G. Marcuse initiated a theoretical understanding of the problems of consumption as a symbolic cultural form. The conceptual tradition of the philosopher had a great influence on the subsequent philosophical work of many postmodernists ^{[7, p. 6]}.

           The views of the French poststructuralist philosopher Zh. Deleuze. In his works, he criticizes the consumer nature of contemporary society, this criticism looks especially prominent in the work "Anti-Oedipus", written in collaboration with the psychoanalyst F. Gattari. Scientists describe the negative aspects associated with capitalist society in the organization of consumption. Deleuze himself appears in the work as an ardent opponent of the established opinion about the "success" and "progressiveness" of the development of Western society. The French scientist's argument is made more convincing by his introduction of the term "desire machine", with the help of which the productive nature of needs in modern society is fixed. This concept is determined by the symbiosis of social and psychological suppression. Deleuze and Gattari also introduced the concept of "a body without organs", which shows the absence of attachment of desires to any individual intentions of people in a consumer society ^{[8, p. 19]}.

           According to Zh . Deleuze, the authorities seek to control the desires and pleasures of members of society, while capitalism appears in the form of a kind of mental organization that manages the desires of an individual using monetary economics. As a result, a person's life begins to be rigidly regulated by a system of signs and structures that are formed and spread through mass communication systems. In addition, Deleuze noted that the trends he considered signal that disciplinary societies of the industrial era, within which an individual moves from one "space of confinement" to another (for example, when entering a university from school, and when graduating from it – to a working collective), are gradually being replaced by a "society of control", which easily establishes its power using the mechanisms of "symbolic enslavement" ^{[8, p. 20]}. In these societies, the state no longer has real power, since it is unable to perform the functions of control. Power passes into the hands of corporations, which are beginning to outpace the government in this matter. The interaction of individuals in such a society is based, first of all, on a system of symbols, codes and ciphers that allow an individual to distinguish all kinds of subjects and objects on the principle of "friend-foe". This cannot but lead to the emergence of a "field of suspicion" in which true values and intentions turn into simulacra and false ideologems.

           J. Baudrillard expressed the postmodernist view of the "consumer society" most fully. He assumed that modern society, unlike the previous ones, surrounds people not so much with their own kind as with all sorts of things. Individuals are not so much interested in communicating with each other as in the desire to take possession of material goods that are constantly "flashing" in advertising. Every person's life, as Baudrillard rightly noted, now passes not surrounded by people, but in a stream of silent, disembodied forms that "whisper" to a person about supernatural power, limitless possibilities and "the absence of people for each other." As a result, people merge so much with things that they themselves begin to become functional ^{[9, p. 105]}.

           The conceptual foundations of the "consumer society" were formulated by J. Baudrillard in 1970 in the context of the tradition of its comprehension from the point of view of a conventional modern society, in which the dominant influence on a person is exerted by "false needs", which are the result of manipulation of human consciousness by the mass media. In addition, the philosopher offers the most critical, but also, in our opinion, an accurate definition of "consumer society" ^{[9, p. 105]}. Baudrillard, being a native of the neo-Marxist milieu, to some extent adopted the Sarkistic and critical approach to reality peculiar to the philosophy of K. Marx. A number of researchers consider Baudrillard's work "Consumer Society" to be the "Capital of the XX century". For the thinker, what is interesting here, first of all, is the nature of the influence exerted on people in everyday life and everyday life. And, if in the time of Marx life depended primarily on the economy, manifesting itself through social relations, then in the XX century. everyday life became completely dependent on technology, mass media and other mass phenomena, which was noticed by Baudrillard. Consequently, consumption was transformed from a means of survival into an instrument of alienation, loss of personality ^{[10, p. 123]}.

           In the light of the above, it is worth noting that the term "consumer society" was first used in scientific circulation by the German social philosopher E. Fromm. And Zh. Baudrillard addressed this problem already in the 1960s. It was his research calculations that made it possible to draw the most realistic picture of the "consumer society". In particular, it was suggested that consumption in the most general sense should be attributed to the nature of the unconscious as a purely psychological reaction, while the surpluses remaining from objects of consumption are imaginary abundance ^{[11, p. 229]}. At the same time, the consumer society, as Baudrillard believed, is a characteristic of such a society in which all interpersonal relationships and connections lose their original meaning, turning only into rituals and signs that determine social status and competition for its improvement. And this society, according to the scientist, practically led to the destruction of consumption in its traditional sense, that is, when people made a purchase only out of necessity, to meet needs. The French postmodernist managed to analyze in detail other consumption, which manifests itself when individuals buy products only because they are fashionable, actively advertised, or appear to be "new". This is a kind of way of feeling "on trend". This leads to the fact that the original purpose of the goods is often devalued even before they have time to purchase it, and manufacturers immediately begin to promote new, even more fashionable things through advertising.

           Another negative consequence of the "consumer society" is the deprivation of the meaning of communication between people. This is due to the fact that consumption becomes only a kind of conditional code regulating interactions between people: they almost always talk only about new purchases and give an assessment to another only by his ability to purchase a product or service. Things become tools and measures of comfort, status and prestige, and involvement in this vicious circle begins to be called "the triumph of the individual" and "freedom of choice" ^[12].

           As Zh . reasonably believed . Baudrillard, any consumption, first of all, is the consumption of symbols and signs that have lost the function of expressing the initial set of meanings. But a new meaning is formed within the boundaries of the sign-symbolic system itself, designed to attract the attention of the consumer. Thus, modern consumption has practically lost its connection with the satisfaction of a certain set of needs rooted in human physiology. Nowadays, it is a process in which the consumer is actively involved in order to create and maintain his identity ^{[1, p. 149]}. The French postmodernist believed that consumerism should not be viewed from the perspective of an activity that "stamps" consumers as a kind of passive mass; rather, it is a form of activity that effectively uses all kinds of symbolic constructions of both individual and collective identity.

           As for identity itself, according to Baudrillard, it should no longer be considered as defined by membership in any particular economic class or social group. An increasing number of people nowadays independently construct their identity through consumption. An individual in modern or postmodern capitalism is no longer identified as a "nice man" or "bright woman", because people in modern society strive to become who they themselves want to be, and in this they can be helped by the things they acquire that create or hold some idea of "themselves". Consequently, consumer goods mean that a person for himself and those who share the same sign system is X or Y.

           Thus, there is a conclusion that "consumption" is understood by J. Baudrillard not only as the consumption of things or material objects, but symbols and signs. Consequently, the buyer often experiences frustration after buying the coveted product for which he was saving up, that is, there is an assumption that the anticipation of the acquisition is very often experienced as a stronger feeling than the fact of acquiring the thing itself. This indicates that consumption has no limits, it cannot be satisfied with anything, as people tend to consume more and more. Such an obsessive desire is explained by the philosopher not by any psychological reasons or even by the power of imitation. Rather, it is something indomitable, completely ideal; a practice that has nothing to do with the modern realities of meeting needs ^[12].

           As a result, we can talk about the consumption of not things, but ideas. As for consumption, it is directly related to cultural symbols and the relationship between them. Since this is a kind of "ideal" practice, it does not have any finite, physical saturation. The social formation taking shape in the conditions of modern capitalism, individuals are literally doomed to continue to "want to consume". As for consumption itself, it is based on a shortage, but the desire to get what is missing. At the same time, no one denies that the modern consumer will never be able to be completely satisfied, because the more a person consumes, the more he wants not to stop there. Even in the conditions of an economic downturn, falling incomes, this desire will not disappear. However, to the extent that members of society participate in consumer relations, they will desire the unattainable: that all their desires be fulfilled ^[4].

           In the "consumer society", not only was the dependence of individuals and relations between them on objects of consumption formed, but things also became means of worship, without having any real meaning. Art becomes a commodity and a simulacrum at the same time. And the search for truth, the meaning of life and other axiological guidelines have been replaced in modern society by myths, which are both convenient and prestigious to use. At the same time, art and literature are being replaced by genres of mass culture, as well as tools of ideological manipulation. J. Baudrillard rightly notes that even culture in modern society is put on production line, produced according to certain patterns associated with the laws of consumption and demand. And people get into the habit of consuming specific trends, which negatively affects the perception of everything special, individual, what could be called the value orientations of society.

           The philosopher also criticizes the "consumer society" because, while promoting the values of equality and prosperity, it is, in fact, very far from these values. This path of development guarantees absolutely nothing to the individual either in the present or in the future. People are chasing new advertised trends and most of all they are afraid that they will not be able to buy another "fashionable thing". Classical values are replaced by imaginary, prestigious ones, which gradually leads to inequality, since an individual who has lost the opportunity to acquire new "simulacra signs" falls out of the cage of relationships in which the cult of success is the basis. Thus, Baudrillard argues that the "consumer society" is nothing but a society of self–deception, where even abundance appears as a consequence of carefully concealed market imperfections. It has true meaning only in terms of the survival of the currently existing world, but it makes it impossible for true feelings and genuine culture to exist. The main goal of such a society is to justify economic growth at any cost, even if its adverse consequences are obvious.

           Zh. Baudrillard has no doubt that the paradoxes of modern civilization lie in observing full control over consumption, manipulating it. And this is logical, because capitalism is not able to create stability and stability in production, although it is necessary to ensure it. However, there are ways to do this, however, since the planet's ecological resources are exhausted, the collapse of the consumption economy remains inevitable. Capitalism, according to the philosopher's prediction, is also not eternal, and therefore he notes that it will be replaced by a society that can intelligently use always limited resources ^[4].

           The framework of consumer society limits people's happiness by the fact that consumption is absolutized by principles and imposed by ideology. Thus, a person's faith in democracy is based on the thesis that the possession of the necessary set of consumer goods contributes to the elimination of class differences through the introduction into social psychology of the myth that equality of people on this basis is possible. In reality, according to Baudrillard, all of the above is just a disguise of the discrimination that exists in reality, which is the basis of bourgeois democracy. The thinker believed that consumer society demonstrates the similarity of the relationship between general culture and traditional with the ratio of fashion phenomena and consumer goods. At the same time, traditional values are becoming obsolete, and fashion is based on the obsolescence of consumer goods. It is also noted that mass culture begins to create works a priori not designed for long-term use ^{[13, p. 98]}.

           Zh. Baudrillard predicted that in the future, the lifestyle of a modern person is likely to change and the relationships between people will materialize and be "consumed" through things and in things. The philosopher was sure that in the "consumer society" people have a chance for self-realization only within the framework of consumption, which makes it possible to identify society as a society of deception, gradually dissolving reality in simulacra ^{[1, p. 153]}.

           Among other concepts of consumption in postmodern society, it is necessary to single out the theories of such researchers of the second half of the XX century as M. Featherstone, D. Lyon and S. Miles. All of them, on the whole, agree with Baudrillard and emphasize that postmodern society is distinguished by the strengthening of the "symbolism" of consumption, which acts as a link of a broader, "symbolic" exchange. As a result, almost all members of society are involved in it. In particular, such views were held by J. Ritzer, who considered such an exchange in relation to new means of consumption, for example, fast food restaurants, credit cards, supermarkets and other consumer objects that have become widespread in the last years of the XX century ^{[14, p. 31]}.

           The views of the American sociologist S. Miles are also of interest. Thus, he suggested that the most important reason for the increased interest in design in Western countries was precisely the increased role of consumption. For the average individual, it has become one of the most important ways of constructing their own "I". Thus, we can say that one of the most important motives for consumption can be the desire of an individual for self-actualization. It should be noted that the last two theories of the "consumer society" are even more pessimistic than Baudrillard's attitude to modern socio-cultural realities.

           In conclusion, it is worth saying that the problem of the "consumer society" attracts the attention of a significant number of modern Western philosophers who see in this society a dynamic, self-developing system, invariably reflected in various, often directly opposite, conceptual models of modernity. Together, they form a significant basis for developing alternative approaches to resolving issues related to the phenomenon of modern consumption. Separately, I would like to note that in modern concepts of "consumer society" it is possible to comprehend not only consumer behavior, but also the variety of problems of modern society, fixed with the help of the named concept. First of all, it is the manipulation of consumer consciousness, the ways of constructing identity, the socio-cultural significance of social reality, the role of mass communication bodies and others.