I sat across from an advertising major in my Communications 260 (News Writing) class last semester and listened to him explain why he wanted to pursue a career in propaganda.
The exercise was intended to give my classmates and I some experience interviewing. As I absent-mindedly scrawled my interpretation of the noises coming out his mouth, a perverted idea slithered its way through my ear canal.
I listened wide-eyed as he said he wanted to make ads because he thought it would be a good way to help people. Had he responded by saying, "I want to make lots of money by convincing children to purchase various carcinogens," his mission on Earth would have been acceptable to me.
But "help" people?
It's not that I was against doing so. I was aware that the practice known as "helping people" had advantages in certain situations, but for him to say that generating ads could help people was either the most insincere or the most shallow comment I had heard in quite a long time, which is saying a lot.
He went on to tell me that if people saw a really super ad for something, if that ad convinced them to want that product, and if they purchased that product, then they'd feel better about themselves as human beings.
Although people might feel more secure after buying a product, it is not the function of an ad to produce such a sensation. In fact, ads, believe it or not, are intended to make people feel dissatisfied with life and to convince the suckers that buying a hollow object will fill the void in their lives.
Ads can serve a noble purpose, though. Without them, newspapers would not exist, and this column would not be available to enlighten you. The evil is that people buy into consumerism, rather than ignoring ads.
Consumerism functions on the same level as an abusive relationship. The purpose of both is to guarantee control for the party in charge by altering the minds of those controlled. This is done by the constant assertion that the controlled are not good enough.
In an abusive relationship, the abused often makes up for shortcomings by playing an impeccable role as homemaker. In America, the bottom 90 percent of the economy makes up for its shortcomings by taking on roles as consumers, while the elite segment of society maintains control over our nation's capital.
The world spends $8 billion annually on cosmetics. It would take $6 billion a year to educate the entire population of Earth.
I'm not mentioning these numbers as a testament to feminism. I'm just stating a fact: There's too much useless crap on the market and too many ignorant people willing to buy it.
I have become increasingly jaded over the benefits of a consumerist system to the U. S.'s general populous, because while those who aren't in the top 10 percent continue to fear the prospects of retirement in the face of a receding economy, the solution our leaders present is: Buy more.
If you believe our president is representing the interests of his rich friends more than your own, I will suggest a few ways that could free you from the iron grasp of consumerism in the future.
We can all get a little more control in this perverse relationship by getting essential nutrients for free. This can be done in several ways, one of which is diving into dumpsters for leftovers.
You can also call companies to complain that the food you "bought" from them was stale or infested with parasites, in which case they'll probably send you some complimentary reimbursements to fend off a lawsuit.
Another method, which is harder to pull off, involves going to a restaurant, preferably a chain, and demanding
you should get your money back because you weren't satisfied. My grandmother's friend uses this method to much success, but it might be less successful when attempted by a college student.
The same goes for shoplifting. For some reason, if you're a senior citizen, it's a much easier to get away with. If you're going to buy an old wrinkly mask, and try these methods, just make sure you hit the most expensive stores.
