Seeking Satisfaction in a Materialistic Society (On Minimalism)

May 28

Today, the American Dream can be recognized as an individual’s ability to experience upward social mobility and a financially sound lifestyle. Success in America is no longer defined by one’s diligence but by one’s affluence, a standard that not only maintains the corruption of society, but also diminishes the general quality of life for much of the American population. According to a recent McClatchy-Marist public opinion poll, this very standard has led nearly a great deal of Americans to lose faith in the current state of society in relation to equal opportunity. In addition, the majority of the surveyed Americans recall encountering difficulties while maintaining their current standard of living. In order to ensure a desirable and acceptable standard of living for all American citizens, we as a society must reduce the value we place on our finances and possessions. By minimizing the importance of our monetary gains, we will begin to establish the foundation of a deliberate life, a life of serenity, physical well-being, genuine relationships, and the freedom to express oneself. Furthermore, we will allow ourselves to facilitate financial stability and promote environmental conservation. This concept of simple living, or minimalism, may appear to be inherently reserved for wealthier American citizens, namely the upper middle class and higher. However, minimalism bears benefits for all members of society, whether direct or indirect. Living in a world of “rampant materialism and manifold opportunities,” thousands of Americans are rediscovering their purpose by eliminating the excess in their lives (Brooks). Ultimately, reducing the value of wealth and material possessions in our lives will enhance the standard of living for all American citizens, in both practical and numerical terms.

Time and time again, the innate feeling of stress has been linked to the rampant consumption of material goods. In 2013, serial entrepreneur Graham Hill investigated a study published the previous year in which “researchers at U.C.L.A. observed 32 middle-class Los Angeles families and found that all of the mothers' stress hormones spiked during the time they spent dealing with their belongings.” In more recent years, similar observations have rapidly emerged. With this insight in mind, it becomes evident that by simply detaching ourselves from our possessions, we are guaranteed to improve our health by eliminating the mental strain we voluntarily place on ourselves. As a former consumerist himself who, at one point in time, experienced his zenith of success in the corporate world, Graham Hill expressed how, after letting go of his monetary desires, he felt as if he had “quit a dead-end job” (Hill). In addition to stress reduction, limiting the amount of time we sacrifice for financial prosperity will also preserve more time and energy for physically and mentally rewarding activities such as meditation or exercise. The practical benefits of physical activity are familiar to nearly all American citizens: weight control, prevention of health complications, and consequently, longer life. The benefits of meditation, on the other hand, have only recently been uncovered. As licensed yoga instructor Matt Bylis affirms in a recent The New York Times article, “Workers will likely be more focused, more energized and less stressed” after a successful session of meditation ("Practicing Mindfulness in the Workplace"). That being said, it is certain that workers across America who meditate regularly will rediscover a sense of passion and ambition within their monotonous work. If all American citizens opted to live the simple way—without the perpetual distractions of finances and possessions—everyone would be on their own journey towards a vigorous, deliberate, and relatively stress-free lifestyle.

However, there is more to “simple living” than you might anticipate. The immeasurable benefits of this lifestyle expand far beyond the realm of physical health. For one, streamlining our time and focus will create opportunities for the most vital aspects of life to arise: the experiences and relationships which constitute a meaningful life. With each year, it becomes clearer and clearer that happiness can only be obtained by “satisfying core economic needs, and then turning away from the economic to other realms of importance, whether they be religion, science, literature, service to others, or friends and family” (Segal). Segal’s assertion proves true for entrepreneur Jesse Jacobs, who, after disconnecting from his preoccupation of wealth and social status, professed, “I’m now surrounded by people who are inspired and creating massive social change and impact. The depth of profundity of my relationships is beyond anything I could have ever imagined” (D’Avella). As we continue to engage in genuine human connections, we, like Jacobs, will become certain that the sole ingredients constituting a meaningful life are not our possessions but rather our experiences and relationships. By understanding this, we automatically liberate ourselves from our rampant material cravings, from the hunger which we long to satisfy to feel adequate in the eyes of society. Most of us consume not for the practical function of the products themselves, but “for their symbolic meaning, for what they do to position us in the status system…” (D’Avella). We construct our entire existence around the false belief that consumption will cure the underlying discontent in our lives. If we waste our lives pursuing a flawed idea of success, we will be met with a lifetime of resentment, remorse, and lost opportunities. By devoting ourselves to a simpler lifestyle and utilizing our time deliberately, we will understand that consumption is not and never was the solution, and that the only solution is, in fact, intangible.

For some Americans, it may be the revival of originality and redemption of creativity that truly appeals to them. Today, advertisements and the media are saturated with archetypes of perfection that have an enormous influence on all American citizens, and especially on young families. As a mother of two lively, ambitious children, Kim Becker expresses how eliminating the “undercurrent” of consumerism in her home has “provided a safe environment where [the children] are able to become what they most want to be, rather than what the world will try to convince them to be” (D’Avella). By following similar tactics as Becker, young American families will not only be enriching their current home life, but also investing in the futures of the next generation. In a world of uniformity and monotony, the revival of ambition and individuality can only have positive effects on society and the lives of American citizens.

For most “minimalists,” it was the affordability and financial freedom that truly compelled them to adopt such a modest, temperate lifestyle. In terms of housing, it is advantageous to identify the benefits of a simple home environment, an environment created by abandoning the “bigger is better” philosophy. In most cases, that means eliminating unnecessary clutter, or, in some cases, downsizing. As the innovative home designer Jay Austin expresses, “I think there is this element of affordability, simplicity, and sustainability that just makes tiny houses seem like the perfect solution to a problem we haven’t yet figured out” (D’Avella). It is certain that downsizing to extreme measures in the form of “tiny houses” is not practical for all Americans, especially for families, but simplifying the home is surely worthwhile for all citizens to consider. In the broader outlook of things, it would be wise to recall the central causes of the 2008 financial crisis, essentially, that “after a few years of people buying houses that they weren’t actually buying, they were just hoping to buy someday, the entire housing market collapsed” (D’Avella). By simplifying or downsizing to the essentials of a home, Americans will be more apt to buy a home outright and—to some extent—be able to further prevent a similar financial crisis from taking place. With a smaller footprint comes a smaller mortgage, and with a smaller mortgage comes greater financial independence. In essence, when it comes to money, simple living is primarily about financial freedom, which film director Matt D’Avella defines as “the ability to wake up in the morning and spend one’s day as they see fit” (D’Avella).

With the current rapid rate of consumption in America, it is no surprise that our planet has consistently faced severe damage. Within the past few decades, the average global temperature has surpassed that of all previous decades. According to Congress, “[T]his temperature increase, as well as acidifying oceans, melting glaciers and Arctic Sea ice are ‘primarily driven by human activity’” (Hill). But there is far more to this incessant crisis that has yet to be addressed. According to Graham Hill, “Many experts believe consumerism and all that it entails -- from the extraction of resources to manufacturing to waste disposal -- plays a big part in pushing our planet to the brink” (Hill). The devastating effects are innumerable and unending. We as a society are continually seeking satisfaction at the expense of our planet’s health. The pattern of impulsive consumption evident in our nation today is the true and unfavorable root of the problem. If Americans no longer have a desire to consume, companies will have no motive for production. Therefore, our nation collectively will generate less material waste and pollution prevent future environmental destructions. But time is rapidly expiring, so we must act immediately to properly rescue our planet and its vital resources.

Inevitably, the concept of minimalism poses a very rational and recurrent objection: why should I support a movement that is solely reserved for the wealthy? Minimalism may very well seem centralized on well-educated, middle-class citizens, especially those with a steady income and a stable living situation. In the words of author Stephanie Land, “minimalism is a virtue only when it's a choice, and it's telling that its fan base is clustered in the well-off middle class.” Land’s assertion is unquestionably logical. When it comes to the impoverished citizens who struggle to find comfort in their homes, it is not false to observe that “[t]hey can't afford to do with less” (Land). Land is certainly not alone in her observation, as there appears to be a growing opposition to minimalism for similar reasons. There is no doubt that, in one way or another, wealthier citizens are met with ease when extracting useless items from their lives.

However, minimalism contains benefits for all members of society. Although wealthier Americans may seem to have an unethical advantage, it is exactly those individuals who have not only the ability but the obligation to “support raising the minimum wage, higher taxes for themselves, better healthcare for everyone, unemployment benefits, food stamps -- in short, a strong social security net” (“The Ethics of Wealth”). It is primarily the wealthy American citizens who will be able to expand the accessibility of reliable healthcare and stable employment for all of America. Therefore, it is worthwhile for all citizens to believe in the concept of minimalism, as its effects can benefit all members of society in inexplicable ways.

Ultimately, the most critical statement to understand is that a life with less—an “intentional” life—is “not a perfect life, and it’s not even an easy life. But a simple one” (D’Avella). A life with less is as far from perfect as any life, but it is acceptable and sustainable nonetheless. In a world of incessant commercialism, the first step in the formation of a brighter, healthier, and more balanced nation is for each citizen to simplify their lives to the essentials. I am fully convinced that lively, resilient citizens like you truly have the potential to provoke eternal change in our nation. It is no simple task, but with your steadfast resistance to the pitfall of consumerism, we will be able to establish a more desirable quality of life here in America. With that said, I invite you to examine your own life thoroughly. If you have ever defined your worth by your wealth or prestige, I urge you to renew your perspective. If you find yourself frequently returning to excessive consumption as a source of pleasure, I challenge you to search elsewhere. If you are currently overcome by heavy financial burdens, I wish you the best and I encourage you to do the one thing you are still able to do: to broadcast this message in any way possible to those who truly need it. If you remember nothing else from this exchange, I ask you to remember this: each and every one of you is capable of transforming the dynamic of our nation. No matter where you dwell in the eyes of society, you are here because you are seeking some form of change in your life, a change that will grant you a sense of purpose and direction. At the end of the day, what matters most is not the magnitude of our financial gains, but the significance and stability in and around our lives.

Annotated Bibliography

Primary Source:

D’Avella, Matt, director. Minimalism. Catalyst, 2016.

D’Avella’s film focuses on two former consumerist corporate workers, Joshua Fields Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus, and how the concept of simple living has revolutionized their lives. The film analyzes a variety of minimalists and assesses how living without clutter has made them both happier and healthier beings. Minimalism ultimately argues that purposeful living—living with only pure necessities—is the most rewarding way to live. Evidently, the film is subjective in that it was produced to promote this specific lifestyle. This film is noteworthy for its unique approach to the concept of obtaining happiness. For instance, it portrays consumerism as ironic in that it only functions to maintain our misery and dissatisfaction. The film is also valuable as it criticizes modern human tendencies and habits in a way that compels listeners to reflect on their own value of their possessions. The film is widely adaptable, but is especially relevant when justifying the argument that the American Dream has been corrupted by materialistic desires. The film allowed me to reflect on my own worldly tendencies and further examine the immense value we as a society place on our possessions.

Informational Sources (2):

Segal, Jerome M. "Simplicity and Simple Living." Ethics, Science, Technology, and Engineering: A Global Resource, edited by J. Britt Holbrook, 2nd ed., vol. 4, Macmillan Reference USA, 2015, pp. 157-158. Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3727600722/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=9bdb2d0e. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.

Segal’s essay outlines and analyzes the basics of minimalism, including the principal arguments within the concept paired with various reasons why one may or may not choose to become a minimalist. The short article is entirely objective as Segal simply provides a brief overview of “simple living” without disclosing his personal sentiments on the topic. “Simplicity and Simple Living” is valuable as Segal frequently and impartially references the works of historical figures. In addition, Segal’s essay is significant as he consistently presents abstract ideas and information in a clear, concise manner. The article would prove to be vital for offering effective background on the concept of minimalism in preparation for the introduction of a substantial claim. Impartial delivery of fact-based information is often considered essential to any effective argument.

Brooks, David. "The Evolution of Simplicity." New York Times, 3 Nov. 2015, p. A29(L). Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A433467355/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=d53c35b0. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.

Brooks’s essay opens with an evaluation of the behaviors of today’s consumerist society and later analyzes the growth and progression of American simplicity movements. The essay critically examines the tendencies of these movements while also measuring them in contrast to similar movements in the past. The essay is predominantly objective because it displays contrasting opinions on simplicity movements. “The Evolution of Simplicity” is valuable for its unique opposing observations on the rise and development of minimalism. Brooks’s essay serves a variety of general purposes in terms of the construction and support of an argument and counterargument. Primarily, the essay will be able to strengthen and supply the forthcoming claim with adequate evidence.

Supporting Sources (3):

Hill, Graham. "Living with less. A lot less." New York Times, 10 Mar. 2013, p. 1(L). Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A321708648/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=e103b4ba. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.

Hill’s essay focuses on his shift from extravagance to simplicity in terms of lifestyle and how that shift has transformed his perspective on life as a whole. He emphasizes ideas such as happiness and meaningful relationships and how material possessions are incapable of strengthening and sustaining those ideas. The essay is entirely subjective in support of the simple living lifestyle. Hill’s frequent recounting of personal experience establishes his credibility as a writer and further validates his argument. In addition, the essay is valuable as it logically and effectively criticizes the materialistic tendencies of today’s society with scientific and factual evidence. Hill’s rational claims and valuable evidence in his essay holds relevance in relation to the claim that only a simple lifestyle can incite true happiness, greater health, and equal opportunities, as opposed to tangible items.

"Minimalist family life has its own joys." Age [Melbourne, Australia], 24 Sept. 2018, p. 23. Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A555288628/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=4774b319. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.

Cusack’s “Minimalist family life has its own joys” explores the benefits of the author’s modest lifestyle of living in a one-bedroom apartment with her husband and active toddler. The essay provides detailed accounts of these benefits, which include healthier, harmonious relationships, a greater sense of community, and increased overall productivity. Cusack’s essay is primarily biased in support of minimalism and its extensive benefits. The essay is notable for its direct juxtaposition of conventional, materialistic lifestyles and simple, minimalist lifestyles. Through this coherent contrast, the essay draws greater attention to each specific asset to simple living. Cusack’s essay could be incorporated into various arguments in support of simplicity, but the piece works most accordingly with the argument that simple living promotes a broader and healthier engagement in community.

"Wealthier and unhappier." Age [Melbourne, Australia], 30 Jan. 2019, p. 20. Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A571513838/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=5ae05248. Accessed 25 Apr. 2019.

Gittins’s essay analyzes how the increasingly materialistic desires of modern Australian society have led to detrimental social and health problems. With substantial evidence, the essay asserts that high material living standards have adverse effects on society, increasing competition, loneliness, anxiety, and stress. Throughout the essay, Gittins emphasizes the idea that although Australian citizens are consuming more, there is abundant evidence that they are, ironically, enjoying it less. Gittins’s essay is subjective in that it cautiously criticizes modern perceptions of happiness and success in today’s society. “Wealthier and unhappier” is significant because it consistently returns to the potential objections and presents valid refutations. The essay is vital in emphasizing and supporting the claim that materialism is not only a tremendous American issue, but a massive global issue as well. However, Gittins’s essay is especially relevant when asserting that material possessions are incapable of being a sustainable source of happiness.

Opposing Sources (2):

Land, Stephanie. "The Class Politics of Decluttering." New York Times, 18 July 2016, p. A25(L). Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A458540165/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=77e36f61. Accessed 23 Apr. 2019.

Land’s “The Class Politics of Decluttering” dissects the ethics of minimalism and criticizes the concept’s common beliefs. For instance, the author defends her possessions by deeming them valuable as they held significant meaning in her life. Land also argues that minimalism is involuntary for the impoverished because of their harsh, threatening conditions. Ultimately, Land’s essay asserts that the common beliefs behind minimalism are unethical and unable to provide an adequate and sustainable amount of happiness in a person’s life. Land’s essay is distinctly subjective as it offers an extensive contradiction to the value of minimalism. The essay is noteworthy for its development of an ethical appeal through detailed anecdotes and a logical perception of the opposing view. Land’s essay will be able to provide strong support for and demonstration of the opposing argument of this project, which identifies and observes the inefficiency of a minimalist lifestyle.

"Minimalism be damned: I refuse to feel guilty about my junk; What if having a house crammed full of oddities and amusing but useless artifacts is my joy?" Globe & Mail [Toronto, Canada], 9 Mar. 2019, p. O2. Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A577665459/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=03f35bb6. Accessed 23 Apr. 2019.

R.M. Vaughan’s newspaper article offers unique objections to the concept of minimalism. The author primarily expands upon the joy he experiences within his collection of items, the potential guilt for his possession of useless items, and the exclusivity of minimalism to affluent homeowners. Using an abundance of anecdotes and observations, Vaughan insists that minimalism is impractical, outwardly pretentious, and perhaps even ironic. Vaughan’s article is strictly subjective as its primary purpose is to illustrate the defects of living a simple, clutterless lifestyle. The article is especially notable for the logic and coherence behind its biased objections to minimalism. Because of its vigorous, compelling criticism of the power of minimalism, Vaughan’s essay will likely be beneficial in demonstrating the opposing argument in this research-based project. Here, the counter argument will oppose the claim that minimalism has the ability to redesign an ideal as broad as the American Dream.

Works Cited

"American Dream Perceived as Out of Reach." Tribune Content Agency Graphics, 2014. Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CT3294261323/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=661cd00f. Accessed 25 Apr. 2019.

D’Avella, Matt, director. Minimalism. Catalyst, 2016.

"The Ethics of Wealth." New York Times, 21 Dec. 2014, p. 8(L). Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A394223150/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=73097e7c. Accessed 22 May 2019.

"Practicing Mindfulness in the Workplace." New York Times, 2 July 2018, p. A22(L). Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A545002473/GIC?u=mlin_n_lynnfhs&sid=GIC&xid=8e8e1b7d. Accessed 21 May 2019.

Mia Ichimura

Seeking Satisfaction in a Materialistic Society (On Minimalism)

Why You Should Take a Break From Social Media