Marketing and commerce have destroyed culture and turned us all into zombies

It used to be that in the olden days, culture was driven by the arts and was meant to uplift the spirit, make men seek out eternal truths and seek to better themselves as human beings and citizens of the world.

Somewhere along the way, culture got lost in the shuffle and commerce and materialism became the driving forces in society. It was no longer important to be a good and honerable person; the only thing that matters in the modern world is what you could produce and how many cool shiny gadgets you had in you house.

We became objects of commerce, to be used up and discarded like all of the other throw-away products of the modern world.

Be Not Afraid—Even of Zombies

Here my thesis is very simple: culture has been subordinated to the needs of commerce, a commerce that has exhibited some rather peculiar and even demonic needs. Now, at many times in the past, the merchant has moved culture, and this was not always a bad arrangement. Commerce sought to ennoble itself with culture, and the merchant, through his patronage of the arts and the Church, sought to lift up his fellow citizens, ennoble his city, and obtain honor for himself.

But what is happening today is something quite different. Although something of the old spirit of patronage remains, in the main the vast engines of culture have been turned from uplifting the citizen to degrading him. Indeed, the whole point of the exercise is to turn each of us from being a citizen into being a pure consumer; that is, from being a person who takes responsibility for himself, his family, and his community, into being a person whose self-respect is invested only in what he buys, and who is directed only by unregulated and easily manipulated passions.

Marketing has displaced philosophy to become the preeminent integrative science of the modern age. At one time, we relied on the philosophers to put together all the knowledge that was, and to advise princes, merchants, and soldiers on the proper way of the world. But today, the philosophers have become second-class citizens—even within the academy—and it is advertisers who put together all the knowledge of the world for their own ends. That is, advertisers hire the best psychologists, sociologists, mathematicians, musicians, composers, writers, actors, and artists, and their work directs the engineer and the scientist to push the limits of product and surveillance technology. But this patronage of the arts and sciences has a quite different end from, say, the merchant dukes of Venice or Florence; marketing patronage seeks to destroy the intelligence and play on the vices. That is to say, it seeks to create zombies, people whose lives and brains have been destroyed, and whose only object is consumption.

The young have recognized that the marketeers have succeeded; this is why the image of the zombie, so silly on its face, resonates so much in popular culture. The young know, at some intuitive level, that we are already in the midst of the apocalypse, that the world wishes to strip them of their minds and their hearts and make them pure consumers, mindlessly but relentlessly pursuing one product—The advertiser's dream! They know, in their heart of hearts, that the world is out to get them, and means them no good. They have seen a deeper truth than anyone cares to admit.

The Remnant

It seems that commerce and marketing have taken over the instruments of culture and used them to destroy independent thinking and turn us all into consumers, only longing for the next, most up to date tech and to keep up with the Jones'.

We need to take back the instruments of culture and use them to bring back the value of the human person over and above all of the shiny products that modern day commerce brings us. Only when we come to the revelation that human life is of the greatest value in the world, not for what it can produce for the market but, what it can produce for the arts and philosophy and the cause of freedom for all mankind. Only then will we create a world worth passing along to our children.

reply to post by FortAnthem


A very accurate and succinct picture of how today's world works (at least within America). I commend you for getting the word out.

Today's philosophy is money. Any morals that do not contribute to the Machine are warped and reworked to suit the agenda of the Moneymen.

s&f

Its a shame but you are right. I love reducing things down. When I do so with this topic all I can come up with is:

Greed:
Greed is the inordinate desire to possess wealth, goods, or objects of abstract value with the intention to keep it for one's self, far beyond the dictates of basic survival and comfort. It is applied to a markedly high desire for and pursuit of wealth, status, and power. As a secular psychological concept, greed is, similarly, an inordinate desire to acquire or possess more than one needs or deserves. It is typically used to criticize those who seek excessive material wealth, although it may apply to the need to feel more excessively moral, social, or otherwise better than someone else.

From wiki

Has anyone seen this film called 'Thrive', it is well worth a watch, it shows how the controllers of the world want us to be zombies. And it shows how to change the world by making better choices.
youtu.be...

I think it is more than greed, though clearly that is a factor, the PR and marketing that goes into promoting products, into tapping into our insecurities and that magpie attraction for all that is shiny takes it to another level entirely. The use of psychological profiling enables the advertising to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and therefore to appeal to the 'mass'. We waste our money on the minor things that provide instant gratification, rather than saving for the major ones that provide security and therefore delayed gratification. All this leads to a never ending cycle of shopping, or consuming to fill the void that is left through not achieving 'life's goals'. Money, and things, therefore become equated with success and therefore happiness, whereas, in fact, they are placebos, or rather pacifiers for the real thing.

Great OP

Originally posted by Biliverdin
I think it is more than greed, though clearly that is a factor, the PR and marketing that goes into promoting products, into tapping into our insecurities and that magpie attraction for all that is shiny takes it to another level entirely. The use of psychological profiling enables the advertising to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and therefore to appeal to the 'mass'. We waste our money on the minor things that provide instant gratification, rather than saving for the major ones that provide security and therefore delayed gratification. All this leads to a never ending cycle of shopping, or consuming to fill the void that is left through not achieving 'life's goals'. Money, and things, therefore become equated with success and therefore happiness, whereas, in fact, they are placebos, or rather pacifiers for the real thing.

Great OP

So true, This is what happens when we deny the whole other half of ourselves. More and more I can see the validity of Taoist thinking, that is the yin and yang of everything. We focus entirely on the physical world and the gratification all things physical provide, while completely ignoring the value of our spiritual or true self. The side that recognizes that the most important things in life are not actually things at all.

Originally posted by sparrowstail
So true, This is what happens when we deny the whole other half of ourselves. More and more I can see the validity of Taoist thinking, that is the yin and yang of everything. We focus entirely on the physical world and the gratification all things physical provide, while completely ignoring the value of our spiritual or true self. The side that recognizes that the most important things in life are not actually things at all.

In many ways I think they bind us, hold us back from the self-discovery and expansion that you refer to. Like anchors preventing free flow, or only allowing us to go with the current, never against it, too scared to lose the things that we don't need.

You've made me think of something though, the Yin Yang in a way is a trap, an inadequate symbol, the Bon Po have a another one (BuddhaSystem did have it as his avatar) it is called the Gangkii or something like that, I can't get that to bring anything up, but either way, it represents a third element, the Primordial. And in a way, by denying this element of 'self', I think that we allow ourselves to be exploited or manipulated even further. It is this element, I think, that links us to the desire for 'shiny' things, and it is this element, that the PR, Advertisers and marketing people use to reel us in. It's a thought anyway...though not a very coherent one at this stage. Yin Yang may be the ideal to aspire to, or even a path to approach, but while we fail to recognise the primordial or primitive animal within us all, we are prone to failure in achieving the spiritual. Errr...maybe?

Originally posted by Biliverdin

Originally posted by sparrowstail

The Yin Yang in a way is a trap, an inadequate symbol, Yin Yang may be the ideal to aspire to, or even a path to approach, but while we fail to recognise the primordial or primitive animal within us all, we are prone to failure in achieving the spiritual. Errr...maybe?

edit on 27-4-2012 by Biliverdin because: (no reason given)

How is this a trap?, just curious.
I find it hard to believe that temperance of hate, anger, violence, selfishness, ego, etc. will retard our spiritual development. If that's the case boy have the Tibetan, Buddhist monks, Dali Lamas, Jesus', Ghandis, etc. got work to do. Perhaps you mean just having a broad understanding of all our human aspects, including the primal animal. Not sure though.

Originally posted by sparrowstail
How is this a trap?, just curious.
I find it hard to believe that temperance of hate, anger, violence, selfishness, ego, etc. will retard our spiritual development. If that's the case boy have the Tibetan, Buddhist monks, Dali Lamas, Jesus', Ghandis, etc. got work to do. Perhaps you mean just having a broad understanding of all our human aspects, including the primal animal. Not sure though.

Well, perhaps 'trap' wasn't the best choice of words to describe what I was trying to express, but in Tao, the Yin Yang represents, basically, the equality of opposites. Which is all very good, but if one then thinks of the mantra 'Om Ah Hum', for example, that recognises that in addition to the polarity of the opposites, there is a primal force that draws those opposites together to create the energy of life, or existence. It is this that the Bon Po symbolise with three, rather than two, interconnecting fields within a circle. The unknown element of existence is perhaps what it is expressing. I don't entirely know, but it is this force, the unknown, that can seem to alter the balance, create disharmony or unsettlement, both externally and internally, that then compels us, to attempt to control that balance for comforts sake, in preparedness, or a hoarding instinct.

So for example, we may plant our crop, watch it grow, harvest it, and begin the cycle again the next year. And we may do this for ten years, and then, nature, will change the weather, cause an earthquake or send a swarm of locusts to devour the crop. To the enlightened, balance will return one way or another, whether it costs lives in a famine or not, so the issue remains fundamentally black and white to them. But, what I am saying, is that most of us are not that enlightened, and most of us can easily be manipulated into storing food, buying insurance, massing material objects that may have some worth in trade, should the worst happen, though the worst is unlikely to ever happen or if it does, there is little that can really be done to prepare for it.

Therefore, while I agree and I think did state that Yin Yang was what we should aspire to, like Jesus said, we should consider the lilies of the field, what I was saying is that until we have achieved that state, the third element, fear, the primal, or primordial instinct of self-preservation, is open to manipulation. I wasn't for a minute saying that the triune wasn't baser, but more complaining that we fail to see it's ability to have force over us and therefore leave it open to others to push in the right electrodes that stimulate it.

Again...still working on that thought...so feel free to continue to pick holes

One of the symptoms of the takeover of corporate thinking of the culture is the chance from Personnel Departments to Human Resources departments. The very language of the change shows how they have depersonalized the employee and now view them as resources to be used for the company's benefit.

Personnel Management vs. Human Resource Management: What's the Difference?

Difference in Approach

The personnel management approach tends to attach much importance to norms, customs and established practices, whereas the human resource approach gives importance to values and mission.

The personnel management approach also concerns itself with establishing rules, policies, procedures, and contracts, and strives to monitor and enforce compliance to such regulations, with careful delineation of written contract. The human resource management approach remains impatient with rules and regulations, and tends to relax them based on business needs and exigencies, and aim to go by the spirit of the contract rather than the letter of the contract.

Human resources views the corporate goals as paramount and contracts with employees as flexible based on the needs of the corporation.

An illustration of this difference in approach lies in the treatment of employee motivation. The personnel management approach holds employee satisfaction as the key to keeping employees motivated, and institute compensation, bonuses, rewards, and work simplification initiatives as possible motivators. The human resource philosophy hold improved performance as the driver of employee satisfaction, and devise strategies such as work challenges, team work, and creativity to improve motivation.

Human Resources puts the cart before the horse. They believe that making bundles of money for the corporation is what makes the employees happy. Whether those employees earn a living wage or have healthcare for their families is of little importance.

Difference in Nature

Comparing personnel management vs human resource management, personnel management is a predominantly administrative record-keeping function that aims to establish and maintain equitable terms and conditions of employment, whereas human resource management integrates the traditional personnel management functions to corporate goals and strategies, and performs additional people centered organizational developmental activities.

Personnel management remains aloof from core organizational activities, functions independently, and takes a reactive approach to changes in corporate goals or strategy. Human resource management remains integrated with corporate strategy and takes a proactive approach to align the workforce toward achievement of corporate goals.

Bright Hub

The primary difference is that Personnel dealt with keeping the employees happy and ensuring that their rights were respected whereas HR is concerned with achieving the goals of the corporation first and helping the employees only a distant second.

They use fancy language to try to give the impression that they are trying to integrate the interests of the employee with those of the corporation but, in the end, the needs of the corporation always win out and the employees are left holding the short end of the stick.

If corporations weren't always so concerned with the bottom line and seeing their employees as liabilities and expenses to be limited in order to maximize profits, they might see that their employees are also their customers and well paid customers make for reliable customers.

By constantly cutting back on employees, their pay and benefits, corporations have ensured their own eventual downfall as they have created a world in which the great majority of the workers can no longer afford to buy their products.

Originally posted by Biliverdin

Originally posted by sparrowstail
How is this a trap?, just curious.
I find it hard to believe that temperance of hate, anger, violence, selfishness, ego, etc. will retard our spiritual development. If that's the case boy have the Tibetan, Buddhist monks, Dali Lamas, Jesus', Ghandis, etc. got work to do. Perhaps you mean just having a broad understanding of all our human aspects, including the primal animal. Not sure though.

Well, perhaps 'trap' wasn't the best choice of words to describe what I was trying to express, but in Tao, the Yin Yang represents, basically, the equality of opposites. Which is all very good, but if one then thinks of the mantra 'Om Ah Hum', for example, that recognises that in addition to the polarity of the opposites, there is a primal force that draws those opposites together to create the energy of life, or existence. It is this that the Bon Po symbolise with three, rather than two, interconnecting fields within a circle. The unknown element of existence is perhaps what it is expressing. I don't entirely know, but it is this force, the unknown, that can seem to alter the balance, create disharmony or unsettlement, both externally and internally, that then compels us, to attempt to control that balance for comforts sake, in preparedness, or a hoarding instinct.

So for example, we may plant our crop, watch it grow, harvest it, and begin the cycle again the next year. And we may do this for ten years, and then, nature, will change the weather, cause an earthquake or send a swarm of locusts to devour the crop. To the enlightened, balance will return one way or another, whether it costs lives in a famine or not, so the issue remains fundamentally black and white to them. But, what I am saying, is that most of us are not that enlightened, and most of us can easily be manipulated into storing food, buying insurance, massing material objects that may have some worth in trade, should the worst happen, though the worst is unlikely to ever happen or if it does, there is little that can really be done to prepare for it.

Therefore, while I agree and I think did state that Yin Yang was what we should aspire to, like Jesus said, we should consider the lilies of the field, what I was saying is that until we have achieved that state, the third element, fear, the primal, or primordial instinct of self-preservation, is open to manipulation. I wasn't for a minute saying that the triune wasn't baser, but more complaining that we fail to see it's ability to have force over us and therefore leave it open to others to push in the right electrodes that stimulate it.

Again...still working on that thought...so feel free to continue to pick holes

edit on 27-4-2012 by Biliverdin because: (no reason given)

Who are you so wise in the ways of science? Great answer. I think in terms of the primordial force you speak of the trick is to stay out of its way, through the application of non action. We try to manipulate this force when we act out of selfish pride, or ego, or aggression. The goal is to flow in accordance with and not counter this force. Is thiss where we get the concept of the Karma police perhaps.

"We have to stop consuming our culture, and we have to create culture." - Terence McKenna

reply to post by Biliverdin

You've made me think of something though, the Yin Yang in a way is a trap, an inadequate symbol

Not a trap just a bit simplistic, the only trap would be to think that the world and all of existence is that simplistic. For instance the yin yang is supposed to represent balance a complete of a whole in equality. But that is not what it means in fact it best be said that it represents tranquility and prosperity more so then balance, in the sense that most people think of such things as balancing two same sort of things on both sides equally.

That is to me the yin yang sounds more like tranquility then balance in tranquility there is little if any tension. In balance there can be lots of tension as long as it does not push the limits it wont break its overall composure and structure, but nothing in it will be safe or in equal tension free balance.

Two completely different things and concepts entirely.

Balance just basically means it works and hold together without going completely out of bounds breaking down colliding and all falling like a house of cards.

Were as the yin yang is supposed represent two half's equaling and completing each-other and if put on the scales they would balance and more importantly complete each-other perfectly or close enough. And were in nature have we ever seen something balance and complete each other wholly. You would have to look far and high and for a long time to even glimpse any such thing if it even exists.

But balance and nature can also mean what works withing the confines of the system and rules, it does not have to equal each-other it just has to not break certain bonds or go beyond certain lines. And that is what keeps nature always churning, bending, breaking, falling, restructuring.

For instance on a see saw if you wanted or engineered it you can balance all kinds of things unequally within the bounds and lines, were as both sides of the seesaw would not touch the ground but one would be way more higher off the ground, or one side would hold more weight and other be askew but both sides would not touch the ground, there by they would be balanced.

Basically a sort of unequal balance, were as the representation of the ying yang is an equal balance.

Cant quite explain it right now but here are some pictures to help visualize that better.











And how does this whole thing fit into commerce and marketing...Hrr way to much writing but lets just say that it does fit in, and its based on it.

There was an interesting thread yesterday that sadly seems to have been removed, but it reminded me of this thread and the points I made about how our failure to recognise our primordial instincts leaves them open to manipulation. The thread was about Foot Fetishes, but the thing that interested me is that one female poster made the comment that women do not usually have fetishes, which of course is ridiculous, women are far more festishistic than men, but because they are not directly linked to sex, they are seemingly unaware of that fact.

Festishes are gratification tools, and not necessarily of sexual gratification, that is a distortion, or trap that most fall into, so while most of the female posters claimed not to have foot fetishes, how many of those have a shoe 'fetish' and recieve gratification each time they purchase a new pair? Women have a greater tendency to normalise their festi#ic behaviour, and therefore fail to recognise the gratification and reward trap that they are falling into, as consumers. How many women insist on a colour theme, everything having to be 'pink' for example? Collections, of any kind, fall into this same reward system of fetishism.