20% of the world's population consumes over 70% of its material resources, and although this global minority includes people in almost every country, it is mainly concentrated in the Westernized, consumerist nations. It is important to bear in mind that this minority does not simply consist of the super-rich citizens, but includes the majority of the citizens in these countries; in other words, the world's ‘consumer class’. This consumer class does not exclusively grow, supply, produce or create all of these resources - they are infact the product of the whole world's labor, and in order for the consumer class to live the way it does, the majority of the world have to go without, and this is one of the major causes of world poverty, albeit one that is largely ignored, unknown or denied.

This blunt fact is in sharp contrast to the traditional explanation of why the 'Third World’ is so poor. For instance, we are very accustomed to the belief that there is a global shortage of food. Yet the world already produces enough grain alone to supply every single person with over 2,500 calories per day. So what causes global hunger is not a shortage of resources, but the unequal distribution of those resources in favour of the rich. No solution to world poverty can ignore this basic fact: putting an end to it will inevitably involve a fairer distribution of the world's food, resources and wealth - but this is not compatible with the capitalist creed of ever-increasing consumption.

Increasing consumption is also responsible for the destruction of our natural environment and it is the wealthy of the world who are responsible for polluting it. For example, the consumer class is responsible for over 50% of greenhouse gases (those that induce climate change), 90% of its ozone-depleting CFC gases and 96% of its radioactive waste. No serious commentator can deny that the present levels of world pollution and rates of environmental degradation are a severe problem, and will need to be substantially curbed if we are to avoid irreversible damage to the global eco-system .

All the current solutions to these environmental problems assume that the industrial and economic activities of the impoverished 80% of the world's population will remain at a low, and therefore less environmentally damaging level. But we can now see countries such as China & India rapidly increasing their economic & industrial activity, and if the 2.5 billion inhabitants of these countries, along with the rest of the inhabitants of planet earth wish to attain a standard of living as we do now, then all present levels of global pollution and waste are going to more than quadruple - and the consequence of this would ultimately be cataclysmic.

Through the use of technological innovation to curb pollution and waste levels it may be possible to preserve and sustain a consumerist lifestyle for the few without endangering the environment for the many. But no amount of technology would be capable of bringing environmental damage under control if all of the world's citizens were to attain a standard of living even remotely comparable to that of the consumer class.

It is clearly evident that natural resources are limited, but as Gandhi once famously said: "There is enough on earth for everybody's need, but not for everyone's greed." Trying to convince people to reduce their consumption is not easy, but the arguments directed towards the consumer class are straight forward. The earth and its limited resources are being plundered in order to manufacture consumer products, and the environment is being polluted from both the manufacturing process and also from the accumulated waste when consumer products reach the end of their (short) life-span. If you care for the environment in which we all dwell and depend on - then think carefully about how you participate in the consumer system.

From a psychological perspective, consumerism also appears to be making many people miserable, precisely because it represents an inherently flawed means in which to try and find happiness, satisfaction and fulfillment. This is because, the multi-billion pound advertising industry, by its very nature, functions upon selling to us the idea that our life is incomplete and lacking in some way, and that our lives can be made more complete, and we can be made more happier and satisfied, by the acquisition of certain materialistic possessions, such as “the latest”; cars, clothes, and status products etc. In this way we can clearly see that the underlying effect of advertising is to literally make us suffer, in many different, clever and subtle ways, by making us feel dis-satisfied with what we've got or who we are.

Furthermore, citizens become trapped in the consumer cycle, and the money keeps flowing (out of our pockets), as consumer products are delivered in many different categories - to suit varying budgets, social classes and peer groups. However there is always a category above your means, to keep you desiring more than what you have, to keep you believing that if only you were to acquire just a "few" more items then your life would truly be complete.

However we are not reminded, we even forget our own experiences of this, that when we do acquire certain products and possessions, it does not present us with enduring satisfaction & fulfillment - but we are instead once again lured into the fresh lowlands of consumer anxiety and material desires, in the pursuit once more of materialistic gratification within the consumer cycle.

By living our whole life within this cycle, it is clear to see that consumerism is an inherently flawed means of finding happiness because citizens spend a lifetime in which they are never completely satisfied with what they've got, and therefore will never be content, happy, or fulfilled. In effect, satisfaction is a state that can never be attained through consumerism. The studies of psychologist Oliver James, support this assertion, when he stated that "the dominant values of Western Society are almost literally programming us to be unhappy".

Human nature is certainly a key factor in why we consume so much, and advertisers and marketers know this only to well. For example, people very rarely decide independently on an appropriate limit to anything, such as wealth and material possessions. Our choices are always arrived at by comparing our condition with others, or with our ‘peer’ group, and increasingly in the modern age through what we read and view in the mass-media in the form of consumerist propaganda and advertising, in which we are fed a constant diet of words and pictures showing us how we are meant to look, and what we should have. The human concern for status amongst our peers, particularly in adolescence, also means that pressure to conform to what we see in magazines, or on TV can be intolerably strong.

A major reason why we consume to the extent we do relates to how mass marketing and advertising promote a heavily distorted picture of what we really need, so that as a consequence we have whole sections of society who believe that they can’t brush their teeth without the help of an electronic gadget! But whilst our advertising-soaked culture makes it difficult for anyone to reject consumerism, it's naïve to claim that it is all forced on people, as consumerism undoubtedly brings greater comfort and convenience.

But as we have said, consumerism doesn't inevitably bring happiness, fulfillment, or quality of life - and the consumer system even decreases our chances of finding satisfaction and contentment. Many people express nagging doubts about it, hinting that life in a consumer society is somehow alienating, unsatisfying and shallow. Furthermore, in order to create even bigger profit margins, and to keep us wanting yet more of the same, consumerism demands a more alienated, self-centered society, whose citizens believe the illusion that the only way to be happy is through consumption.

The standard knee-jerk response to the notion that we should radically question and thus decrease our levels of consumption is to see it as having less, to see it as a sacrifice, automatically meaning a drop in our quality of life. But 'lowering' our material standard of living, moving away from a culture dominated by always wanting more, does not inevitably mean lowering our quality of life: it will probably even improve it. Quality of life is not an inevitable result of a having lots of ‘things’, but is relative, once our basic needs have been met. As Jean-Jacques Rousseau stated, "Every time we seek something that we cannot have, we grow poorer, whatever our resources. And every time we feel satisfied with what we have, we can be counted as rich, however little we may actually own. Therefore we may be happy with little when we have come to desire little. And we may be miserable with much when we have been taught to desire everything".

By undertaking a radical questioning of consumerism, based on the understanding that we are fundamentally damaging the planet and ourselves in the pursuit of material acquisition we can challenge many of the assumptions about what is needed in contemporary society. Hopefully this radical questioning will ultimately result in discovering different ways of living, trading and working so that we ‘live more lightly’ on the Earth in a completely sustainable manner, and be less dependent on buying things to feel good about ourselves’

So what can we all do to challenge the absurdity of the consumer system, and in doing so discover a more sustainable, satisfying and fulfilling existence?

a) Anti-consumerism
Quite simply the most effective response to rampant consumerism is to reject it outright through ‘buying nothing'. There have been several successful attempts and campaigns endorsing the notion of buying nothing in a consumer society, where individuals or groups have deliberately took this stance as a way of trying to provoke debate or inspire by example. However, unfortunately this is not an option for many people on a consistent basis, so this leads on to the next point,

b) Buy Less
If we are to have any chance of redressing the damage that rampant consumerism has inflicted on our planet, it is essential that we consume less. Ask your self what you really need - and you will find that you actually need very little - do you really need to replace your clothes every month - or is that what the fashion advertising industry tells you to do? Another way to avoid excessive consumption is to exchange with others those items that have outgrown their usefulness value for more useful items, or even share things that obviously have a high resource impact, such as cars, lawnmowers, deep freezers, etc. You can also produce less waste if you purchase goods which have little or no packaging or come in bulk. Finally avoid heavily advertised products to reject the act of consumer exploitation through advertising and manipulative marketing.

c) Ethical Consumption
Ethical consumption is where the products that we do need are selected because of their ethical soundness. This can involve supporting companies and products because of their environmental soundness and reduced ecological impact. More considered forms of ethical consumption can also support businesses and alternative trading organizations whose primarily focus is not on profit making but rather on providing sustainable, ethical and co-operative business structures, with some even aiming towards strengthening the livelihood's of disadvantaged people in developing countries. In this respect when consumers choose not to buy products that pollute and will not support companies with poor ethical records, those companies will be forced to change in order to survive.

Above all, our essential message is this; please consider the issues involved in consumerism - environmental, social & psychological, and if you do decide to consume, find out the implications of what you purchase.