I was thinking a lot on the way to work this morning about how the language we use reinforces the ontology of consumerism. And how like, there is a consumerist ontology. It's the one we live under, where every action we take necessarily means the depletion of some abstract thing (often a constructed thing, which I'll get to in a second). The "consumption" of it. The catch-all phrase of "consuming media" that refers to everything from playing games to watching movies to reading books. Even though nothing is consumed there! Nothing was depleted! But because we so frequently use the word "consume" to describe this, the thing we "consumed" (which is just an experience we enjoyed) becomes a "product" that sombody else "owned." This justifies monetizing it, and it makes the unlicensed experience of it "theft." We're left with this idea that something has been stolen by our watching of a film or listening to of a song unlicensed, because we've been taught that this amounts to "consuming" something that belongs to someone else.
Even if you like, go to a bowling alley. And play a game of bowling there. You're still somehow a "consumer" in this scenario. Isn't that bizarre? You haven't consumed anything! All the materials you used to play bowling were perfectly reusable, and the space will be reused as well! There's this abstract "game of bowling" that was apparently Produced, and then Consumed here. We've constructed a Thing here out of the interaction--and particularly, a Product--so that we can call interaction with it Consumption, and justify monetization. This is what I mean when I refer to a "consumerist ontology." As I drove to work I thought about how the economists and businesspeople of the world would label me as a "consumer" of automobiles. Automobiles are consumer vehicles, after all, so natrually by driving one I must be a "consumer" of them. I am slowly "consuming" this vehicle with every mile I put on it, evidently. Vehicles that are built to last and readily repairable would be incompatible with this ontology, so we ensure they don't exist. The same goes for refrigerators and ovens and washing machines. It must be kept as inconceivable that machines could ever be designed for long-term reuse. We must enforce the consumability of microwaves and printers by making them as bad as possible.
And yeah. This a cohost post so. Here it comes. You know I have to bring Software into this somehow so now I'm gonna do it. Software is one of the most egregious examples of this ontology being forced onto something that does not belong to it. We call the users of paid or advertised software "consumers" of it, even though the idea of someone actually consuming software is outrageous. Software isn't even consumable. It's information, and there is no interaction you can have with information that even resembles consumption.
So. What I'm trying to say here is that we're not consumers naturally. We have all been made into consumers, and everything we interact with has been made into a product, and the way we interact with those products will always be labeled as "consumption." Our lives must as closely resemble an economy simulator as possible. So remember that consumerism isn't the practice of consuming--it's the model of the world under which everything is a form of consumption, and the philosophy of ensuring everything is as consumable as possible. I propose we try to use this word--"consumption"--more carefully, more narrowly, to fight back against this philosophy. The word should carry a negative connotation when used to describe anything other than like, food. The idea that we Consume electronics when we obtain and use them should disgust us. The ubiquity of Consumption As Such should be thought of as the grotesque result of everything being built as disposable as possible. And where the word does not apply, we should stop using it entirely. Do not grant the consumerists that you "consume" media. You do not. You watch movies, you read books, you play games. Nothing has been consumed and they cannot tell you otherwise if you do not let them. Fight back against this metaphysical framework where every object is a product and every action is a transaction.
