Lesser 1
Shayli Lesser
Prof. Jennifer Roudabush
UNIV 200
12 April 2015
Minimalism in A Consumerist Society
How much do you purchase on a monthly, weekly, or even daily basis? A quick take-out
lunch, a new lipstick, an umbrella because you forgot yours at home, a dinner or two out? Do
you know where your products come from? How they’re made? How quickly does it add up? In
a society where constant consumption is as easy as breathing, and just as automatic, minimalism
offers an alternative solution: a method of resistance against thoughtless consumerism that
allows people to actually focus on the things an individual deems important in their lives.
Minimalism faces criticism for its lack of accessibility and its privileged nature; however, the
minimalist movement has the potential to have a positive global impact on the way consumers
approach purchases, by enabling consumers to support ethically sourced products and encourage
companies to take into consideration the cost at which their goods are produced. This research
paper is an exploration of the nuances of modern minimalism: an analysis of instances when it
actually succeeds in its mission of simplicity, when minimalism itself becomes an extension of
Western consumerism, and the ways in which minimalism can positively impact the global
economy and environment.
The definition of minimalism, or simple living, changes based on whom you ask. Joshua
Becker of Becoming Minimalist does not “specifically define the word for you. Instead, [his
website] encourages each reader to discover their own journey” (Becker). Joshua Millburn and
Ryan Nicodemus, two prominent minimalists behind the website The Minimalists, also try to
Lesser 2
avoid simplifying the nuances of minimalism into a singular definition. In attempt to succinctly
describe the lifestyle, they say that, “minimalism is a lifestyle that helps people question what
things add value to their lives. By clearing the clutter from life’s path, we can all make room for
the most important aspects of life: health, relationships, growth, and contribution”
(“Minimalism”). The reluctance to declare a formal definition for this movement illustrates the
flexibility intended in the lifestyle. No one person’s life is exactly like another’s, and similarly
one person’s idea of what qualifies as minimalist and what doesn’t is unlikely to line up perfectly
with another person’s.
The journey varies, just as minimalism’s forms and uses vary: “The benefits of
minimalism depend in large part on where you start” (McCall qtd. in North). That is to say,
minimalism isn’t for everyone, and its level of usefulness can tend to be judged by how well it
works for “people who left high-powered, well-paid and benefited corporate careers for a simpler
life and now have plenty of savings to show for it” (McCall qtd. in North) rather than for the
average person. Minimalism often appeals more to financially secure people because it is a form
of privilege; it’s important not to “judge people who are barely getting by and drowning in
clutter” (“Can You”). Your life’s value does not depend on how few items you possess, nor how
many. Although minimalists reject the materialistic consumerist culture of the West that craves
more, more, more, there is an element of ‘keeping up with the Joneses’ that can be present in
minimalist culture as well. Seeing who can have less, instead of who can have more; it’s still all
just a matter of ‘who can have better’, which is a contest and a concept that goes against
minimalism at its core. Minimalism of the mind, as well as of one’s physical surroundings,
encourages individuals to focus on their own personal journey rather than how they compare to
Lesser 3
others around them. No two minimalists’ take on the movement will be the same; it is highly
individualized and personal, which, in my opinion, is one of the benefits.
In my personal experience with minimalism, I have found the focus on reducing the
waste I create in my life to be incredibly helpful. Before I move into a new apartment, for
instance, I take time to consider what I really need to bring with me. This might mean donating
some books in order to have one less heavy box to carry, or it might mean giving a friend some
clothes I no longer need. Because of this, I enter a new space with less clutter and fewer things
weighing me down. I also save money by not buying as many products as I used to. I can enter a
CVS without buying two new lipsticks (I couldn’t do that before, or at least, I didn’t want to do
that before). I can be content with fewer than ten pairs of shoes. I’m not saying that everyone
should have a miniscule capsule wardrobe, or never make impulse purchases that make them
happy. But for me, those impulse purchases only made me happy for a day or so, maybe a week
at most. I am happier when I use minimalist practices in my life. My examples were relatively
simple ways in which minimalism improves my life; with minimalism, not only do I decrease my
physical belongings, but I also decrease emotional turmoil in my life. I know many people
operate similarly: when I am in a cluttered space, I have trouble focusing or thinking straight.
The state of my physical surroundings really does have an effect on the state of my mind. By
creating clarity in the physical realm, minimalism helps me create invaluable mental clarity as
well.
After detailing the positive nature of my experience with minimalism, however, it is
necessary to acknowledge that I am very privileged to be able to focus on the minimalist lifestyle
and how it can work for me. Not everyone has that privilege. According to Sasha Abramsky,
author of The American Way of Poverty, How the Other Half Still Lives, “As long as the big-
Lesser 4
picture inequalities remain, a conversation about minimalism… is going to end up blaming poor
people when they stay poor” (Abramsky qtd. in White). Unfortunately, many popular minimalist
websites go down this route; it’s surprisingly easy to find fault in others for not succeeding
through use of the same methods you use, but that type of logic is flawed. Minimalism is a
privileged lifestyle choice. That doesn’t make it bad, nor does that make it good. What does
make it bad is when it casts judgments upon those who don’t follow its doctrines. Leo Babatua of
mnmlist.com has a positive experience of minimalism and poverty: “I’ve been deep in debt, and I
know the feeling of drowning with no way to get out… Minimalism helped me to get out of debt,
and to get out of poverty. It’s not just for the affluent anymore.” Like Babatua, I have had a
positive experience with the minimalist lifestyle even on a tight budget. I have been fortunate to
never have to climb out of debt, and I don’t have to support a family like Babatua does, but with
a minimalist mentality I can practice self-restraint in other areas that are necessary as a full-time
student working a part-time minimum wage job. I make fewer impulse purchases and really
consider what I need before I buy something. I buy fast food less often, which is beneficial not
only for my wallet, but for my health as well.
However, individuals aren’t the only ones to benefit from the rising trend of minimalism.
Some have criticized minimalism as “a modernist monastery where the religion is Apple itself”
(Svenonius qtd. in North). The design appeal of minimalist technology such as Apple produces
most certainly fits with the popular aesthetic view of minimalism. And such technology does
indeed make it easier for individuals to own fewer physical belongings, with a laptop or tablet
taking the place of potentially thousands of books, CDs, and movies. Whether this spells out a
conspiracy is up to you to decide, but the corresponding trends certainly don’t hurt tech
companies like Apple. The way in which companies have minimized the number of devices a
Lesser 5
consumer needs to access a broad variety of media allows these companies to tap into the
minimalist trend that appeals to many consumers. It’s so convenient to have an iPhone on which
you can store music, photographs, video footage, films, books, and essentially any other sort of
digitized media, that the iPhone (and technology like it) removes the need for separate devices
such as DVD players and DVDs (just watch it on Netflix!), CD players and CDs (does anyone
even use them anymore?), and video cameras. Cameras and physical books have been seemingly
less affected by this movement towards digitized media, possibly because they have a history
that dates far back, before the prevalence of digital media. Even with physical books maintaining
popularity, devices like the Nook and the Kindle are also very popular with consumers.
Companies haven’t hesitated in making the minimalist “living with less” trend work in their
favor.
Along with its appeal to tech companies, minimalism has been criticized for being
primarily accessible to wealthy, single, white men. The Minimalists point to various examples,
“none of whom are single, nor rich, nor white guys, and yet they all embrace a minimalist
lifestyle” (“Is Minimalism”). However, certain styles of minimalism can tend to be elitist and
cater to financially comfortable individuals. Specifically regarding money, many minimalists
justify ridding themselves of items because they know they can buy it later if they need to. But,
“how can I or anyone else tell someone not to play the ‘what if’ game when they live paycheck
to paycheck and aren’t able to repurchase cast-away items without significant stress?” (“Can
You”).
The elitism of minimalism has been debated from many angles. In several of the sources
I’ve found, prominent minimalists face criticism for the way their brand of minimalism caters to
the wealthy and refuses to acknowledge the privilege of wealth. In one source, NBC News’
Lesser 6
Martha C. White consults several experts on American poverty in an alternate look at the
minimalism style practiced by “The Minimalists,” Joshua Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus. In a
second source, a men’s lifestyle blog examines the exclusivity of modern minimalism to not only
the wealthy, but also to “philosopher bachelors” – a role which many prominent minimalists fit
(McKay and McKay). This source also discusses how minimalism hypocritically “makes stuff
the focus of your life” (McKay and McKay). Another source is a self-described minimalist’s
perspective on the subject. It discusses the freedom of options and provides a first-hand look at
the anxieties that can come from downsizing without the security net of a budget large enough to
replace something if the need arises.
In the NBC article, White invites Arne Kalleberg, sociology professor with a focus on
poverty from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, to respond to comments made by
“The Minimalists,” Millburn and Nicodemus. Millburn claims, “‘I think ultimately it’s about
decisions with the resources we do have…. I think people don’t realize how much is going out
the window’” (qtd. in White). To this, Kalleberg replies, “‘The poor people I’ve talked to, they
know exactly how much money is going out the window because they’re counting pennies’”
(qtd. in White). Meanwhile, the McKays’ article in the blog The Art of Manliness focuses on the
freedom that minimalism provides for the wealthy and single, looking at the status of “bachelor”
as another form of social privilege. “I could have my children sleep in a cardboard box and use a
twig as a teething toy,” McKay speculates, “but there are a good number of accouterments that
make rearing one’s rugrats infinitely easier.” The lifestyle as a minimalist is not always
achievable when other obligations, such as parenthood, take precedence. Children require a
certain amount of “clutter” that to many strident minimalists would seem unacceptable. Thus, the
Lesser 7
minimalism trend of today doesn’t seem to take into account anyone but the childless and single,
at least not in a practical way.
The writer of Mindful Riot shows us yet another perspective on minimalism and
privilege. A self-proclaimed minimalist, the writer talks her way through a better understanding
of minimalism and poverty through personal experience. She asks, “how can I or anyone else tell
someone not to play the ‘what if’ game when they live paycheck to paycheck and aren’t able to
repurchase cast-away items without significant stress? I’m experiencing this first-hand as I
consider selling my car” (Mindful Riot). While the writer is otherwise presumably middle class,
she is able to examine this particular situation of minimalism through a perspective outside of
her usual privilege. With an emphasis on compassion and awareness of oneself and of others,
minimalism can be a positive force in a person’s life. In fact, the writer of Mindful Riot’s
experience illustrates how awareness of and compassion for the struggles of others gives depth to
one’s own understanding of what it means to be privileged, and what it means to be minimalist.
Despite its myriad of issues of elitism and privilege, I see a great potential in the
minimalist movement. The desire to live with less promotes an examination of what we
consume, as individuals and as a society. By decreasing purchases made from big-box stores,
objects made with inexpensive materials and underpaid labor, minimalist consumers are able to
support more ethical modes of production. Recently, companies that utilize the labor of
disadvantaged sweatshop workers have come under scrutiny for the poor conditions in which the
workers are forced to spend their days. The Rana Plaza factory disaster in 2013, in which a
clothing factory in Bangladesh collapsed due to severely compromised structural integrity, killed
1,127 people (Alam and Hossain) and resulted in an international outcry against sweatshop labor
and derelict working conditions. Retailers such as H&M supported a legally binding safety plan
Lesser 8
to “establish an independent inspectorate to oversee factories, with powers to shut down unsafe
facilities and require renovations financed in part by Western retailers” (Alam and Hossain). This
can only be a step forward in making mass-production safer for those closest to its roots, and
without whom these companies would never be able to exist on such a large scale. These people
deserve safety and peace of mind - they deserve a lot more than has been given to them in the
past.
Child labor has long been a practice decried by the international community, but it occurs
with astonishing frequency in relation to inexpensive clothing retailers like J.C. Penney and WalMart (“Children Found”). A 2006 report by the National Labor Committee found that “an
estimated 200 children, some 11 years old or even younger, are sewing clothing for Hanes, WalMart, J.C. Penney, and Puma at the Harvest Rich factory in Bangladesh” (“Children Found”).
According to UNICEF, “In India, between 5% and 30% of the 340 million children under the age
of 16 are estimated to fall under the definition of child labour” (“Children Pay”). And the issue
isn’t exclusive to countries highlighted by the media for poor labor conditions and miniscule
wages; in the United States, an estimated 5.5 million children ages twelve through seventeen
were employed in 1993 (“Children Pay”). With the minimalism movement’s emphasis on
reducing waste and purchasing higher quality, longer lasting materials, individuals are less likely
to purchase from “fast fashion” stores that use sweatshop labor in the production of their
merchandise. If the minimalism trend continues to grow in popularity, this could help toward
eliminating child labor and underpaid, overworked laborers operating in dangerous conditions.
When minimalists choose to forgo mass-produced merchandise and buy second-hand,
they not only withhold support from companies that benefit from unethical manufacturing
processes, but they facilitate the recycling of objects that otherwise may have ended up polluting
Lesser 9
the environment. Reuse and recycling of products rather than purchasing new ones results in
multiple benefits. There are minimal transportation costs and fuel usages in the second-hand
market, as opposed to transporting newly made goods internationally. Whether buying secondhand or reducing spending altogether, the minimalist movement encourages corporate social
responsibility through its rejection of “fast fashion” and traditional consumerism.
Corporations, however, desperately want consumers to continue to love traditional
consumerism. It is, after all, what makes most companies money. There is hope, though:
companies are more likely to choose to do better when they think it will improve consumers’
opinions of them. Jiyun Kang and Gwendolyn Hustvedt agree in their article, “Building Trust
Between Consumers and Corporations: The Role of Consumer Perceptions of Transparency and
Social Responsibility,” published in the Journal of Business Ethics in 2013. They write: “One
powerful motivator to improve both the behavior of companies and their suppliers and the
willingness of companies to be transparent about their efforts could be the knowledge that
increasing transparency could improve their relationship with their consumers” (Kang and
Hustvedt). Companies, unexpectedly, are motivated by reputation and by profit. When conscious
and compassionate consumers make it imperative for companies to institute and comply with
ethical policies, those companies are likely to do it for fear of losing customers. “At the heart of
these social responsibility efforts is the idea that consumers have the right and power to influence
how companies conduct their business” (Kang and Hustvedt). Change only occurs when there is
a demand for it; minimalism creates this demand.
In Volume 10 of the Journal of Buddhist Ethics, the University of Toronto’s assistant
professor of philosophy Eric Sean Nelson discusses how both environmental and economic
minimalism can be beneficial to “a world facing increasing environmental degradation and
Lesser 10
decreasing quality of life” (Nelson). Now, it is necessary to specify that Nelson’s specific course
of discussion is Buddhist practice. However, he states that “Buddhism can be relevant to
economics and ecology precisely because of its minimalism. It is this minimalism which makes
Buddhism such a powerful response to the maximalism that directs contemporary life” (Nelson).
The term “maximalism” is an excellent way to describe Western consumerist society. We are a
society filled with desire for the things we don’t have, to the point where we ignore all the things,
both tangible and intangible, that we do have. In this sense, minimalism allows the individual to
reconnect with reality in a grounding way, and to acknowledge things the way they are. Nelson
writes:
Want cannot be satisfied if it is not fulfilled, and it is not fulfilled if there is
always more to want. Since desire is without end, the pursuit of desire can lead not only
to individual unhappiness but to a devastated world. Buddhism in general and western
Buddhism in particular, because of the social context, is thus called to serve the world
rather than itself by placing into question this destructive cycle. It can do so precisely by
unfolding and applying its insights into the nature of desire and consumption that
dominate modern life. (Nelson)
The minimalism promoted by Buddhist practice helps break this “destructive cycle” that Western
society has created. Many Westerners unfamiliar with Buddhism may interpret the ideology as
passive and ineffective, similarly to the way individuals may view minimalism itself. However,
“its activism and critique of destructive social institutions and practices are deeply rooted in the
Buddhist ideal of compassion” (Nelson). Compassion is the ultimate drive in the minimalist
movement, Buddhism-based and otherwise; compassion for oneself, for the environment, and for
society as a whole creates the drive with which we strive to do better. Nelson cites “the
constructive influence that Buddhism has had on Japanese economic policies and practices”
(68). He describes how “Buddhism does not condemn production or consumption but rather
pays close attention to how these are experienced” (68). Modern minimalism often follows a
similar path; instead of rejecting material belongings altogether, which is highly impractical for
Lesser 11
the average individual, minimalism encourages consumers to practice awareness and compassion
in their daily lives.
It has become clear that, while the minimalist movement has its flaws, it has great
positive potential in both individual and global well-being. Minimalism not only promotes
individual well-being through the simplification of physical surroundings and the diminishing of
mental stressors, but it also maximizes the time and energy one has to spend on productive
things, exciting things that create positivity in one’s life. Not only that, but minimalism has the
power to help the environment through collective action of those who decide to buy fewer massproduced products. It brings communities together as people look for local and more sustainable
ways to find the things they need and do the things they love. On a small scale, minimalism helps
individuals to be mindful of the ways in which they participate as consumers, shows how little
one’s material belongings really have to do with one’s happiness, and encourages people to
consider their acts with compassion and an emphasis on what they feel is important in their lives.
It creates communal effort and strength, and individual mindfulness and, in turn, peace of mind.
On a larger scale, minimalism takes power away from blind consumerism and capitalism by
creating an educated and aware public. Minimalism engages. It illuminates injustices that are too
often hidden out of sight of consumers, and it rejects those acts of injustice and works to replace
them with compassion. What minimalism truly promotes is awareness, both individual and
global.
Lesser 12
Works Cited
Alam, Julhas, and Farid Hossain. "Bangladesh Collapse Search Over; Death Toll 1,127." Yahoo!
News. Yahoo!, 13 May 2013. Web. 05 Apr. 2015.
Babatua, Leo. "Minimalism Isn’t Just for the Affluent." Mnmlist. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2015.
Becker, Joshua. "Becoming Minimalist: Start Here." Becoming Minimalist. N.p., 08 May 2012.
Web. 06 Mar. 2015.
“Can You Be a Minimalist If You’re Poor?” Mindful Riot. N.p., 13 July 2014. Web. 20 Feb.
2015.
"Children Found Sewing Clothing For Wal-Mart, Hanes & Other U.S. & European Companies."
The Labor and Worklife Program at Harvard Law School. Harvard University, n.d.
Web. 04 Apr. 2015.
"Children Pay High Price for Cheap Labour." Child Rights: The Progress of Nations. UNICEF,
n.d. Web. 06 Apr. 2015.
Kang, Jiyun, and Gwendolyn Hustvedt. "Building Trust Between Consumers and Corporations:
The Role of Consumer Perceptions of Transparency and Social Responsibility." Journal
of Business Ethics 10 (2013): n. pag. SpringerLink. Springer. 11 Oct. 2013. Web. 08
Apr. 2015.
McKay, Brett, and Kate McKay. "The Problem With Minimalism." The Art of Manliness. The
Art of Manliness, 31 July 2014. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.
Millburn, Joshua Fields, and Ryan Nicodemus. “Is Minimalism Just for Single, Rich, White
Guys?” The Minimalists. Asymmetrical, 25 July 2014. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.
Millburn, Joshua Fields, and Ryan Nicodemus. "Minimalism: An Elevator Pitch." The
Minimalists. Asymmetrical, 06 June 2014. Web. 06 Mar. 2015.
Lesser 13
Nelson, Eric Sean. "Mindfulness in the Marketplace." Journal of Buddhist Ethics 10 (2003): 6770. Digital Library & Museum of Buddhist Studies. National Taiwan University, 2003.
Web. 05 Apr. 2015.
North, Anna. "When It's Cool To Have Nothing." OpTalk. The New York Times, 28 July 2014.
Web. 05 Mar. 2015.
White, Martha C. "Middle Class Minimalist Message Sounds Off-Key for Poor." NBC News.
NBC, 9 June 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.