Introduction

Living simply is the better choice for mental health, the environment, and society as a whole. Living simply can mean many things. It encompasses the rejection of consumerism, including the drive towards purchasing products as a means to show success and thereby achieve happiness. It also includes moving away from a culture of disposability and the practice of planned obsolescence, whereby the products we buy are not made to last or be passed down generationally, but are instead disposable and meant to be bought trashed and rebought again and again. Living simply also means being less wasteful and more environmentally conscious including the use of renewable energy sources and moving away from factory farming. Finally, all of these paths contribute to being more self-sufficient, sustainable, self-reliant, and autonomous overall, and ideally gaining a new sense of fulfillment and purpose. This essay will talk through each of these paths towards living simply in greater detail and give supporting evidence as to how it could improve mental health, the environment, and society as a whole.

Environment

Consumerism is a runaway system whose incentives run contrary to our own best interests as well as that of the environment. The incentivization of production and sales without regard for whether the items are necessary or even helpful drives a market that utilizes psychological warfare against its own customers, tricking them into spending their money on unneeded items. This can be at the expense of mental health, as in the marketing strategies for

many beauty products (more on that later), but also at the expense of the environment. The market demands to be fueled by jobs, production, and sales. This means that creating sustainable, long lasting products runs contrary the best interests of the system itself. Thereby creating a very dangerous situation for the environment. This reasoning continues with regards to renewable energy. There is little consumeristic incentive to develop self-sustaining or renewable energy, the financial incentive is in contrast to it. Therefore, it is important that we encourage these technologies as the benefits to the environment would be undeniable.

Although we may not, with current technologies, be able to prevent all harm to the environment from necessary industries, we can prevent excess harm caused by the creation of unnecessary products and planned obsolescence. For illustration: “The per capita consumption of energy, meat and lumber has, in fact, doubled since 1950; the use of plastic has increased five times; aluminium use has increased seven times, and the average airplane kilometres per person has jumped 33 times.” (Fangan. 2016) Some of this is unavoidable due to population increases, but not all. With any increase in disposable products such as furniture that only lasts a few years or food in throw away plastic or Styrofoam containers, the impact on the environment becomes more severe. This comes from not only the waste associated with the products themselves, but the products thrown away when replaced, the waste from the production of the product, the energy used in shipping, and the power needed to run the stores selling the items as well.

Another area of specific concern with regards to disposability and the environment is electronic waste. Many electronics such as cellular telephones and computers have flame retardant chemicals and lithium ion batteries, which if not recycled or disposed of safely can lead to mercury, lead, hexavalent chromium, cadmium, and other chemicals to leach into the soil and

groundwater. It is anecdotally well known and almost a running joke that iPhones have built in planned obsolescence. If true it becomes obvious how dangerous the impact of buying a new cell phone every couple of years could be on the environment. “It’s estimated that roughly 50 million tons of e-waste [electronic device waste] are generated globally every year, containing parts valued at approximately $55 billion.” (Gaia. 2018) With the increasing role of technology in our lives this problem will only continue to get worse if we don’t do something about it.

One helpful solution is to encourage the purchase of refurbished products, as well as encourage recycling and proper disposal of electronics. Consumers have the power to reject the idea that a new top of the line device must be purchased in order to keep up with the Jones’s, and can also choose to refuse to buy products with planned obsolescence. There is also the option to lobby for laws and regulations, or to place sanctions on companies that engage in these practices. I personally do not subscribe to the regulatory route, but instead to a complete culture change. Government involvement, even with the best of intentions, had a tendency to exacerbate issues instead of remedying them. Regulations often end up doing nothing but squeezing out competition as large corporations can lobby congress with campaign contributions to enable them to continue business how they see fit, and this crony capitalism is even worse in many respects than pure capitalism. Therefore, the best option is a cultural one, whereby the consumers and society as a whole reject consumerism and vote with their dollars so to speak to reverse this trend and prevent the destructive cycle of consumerism from continuing. This is not only for the sake of the environment, but for our own mental and physical health as well.

Health and Society

Both physical and mental health can be improved greatly by a move towards living simply. First and foremost, healthier more sustainable locally produced food can be better for your health. This doesn’t mean jumping on a fad diet or eating only organic. Simply eating less processed food with less preservatives and fillers would be a much healthier option. According to National Geographic, “Diets of highly processed food and the sedentary lifestyle that goes with heavy reliance on automobiles have led to a worldwide epidemic of obesity. In the United States, an estimated 65 percent of adults are overweight or obese, and the country has the highest rate of obesity among teenagers in the world. Soaring rates of heart disease and diabetes, surging health care costs, and a lower quality of day-to-day life are the result.” (Mayell. 2018) The number one cause of death in the US is from heart disease, causing almost one in four deaths. (Nichols. 2017) A leading cause of heart disease is diet and lack of exercise. Eating a diet that is low in salt, refined sugars, total fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol and high in fresh fruits and vegetables as well as exercising regularly are some of the main prevention techniques for preventing heart disease. (Nichols. 2017)

How does this tie into living simply? These changes would be directly in line with more local, smaller scale food production. This “farm to table” living promotes more individual gardening, raising personal animals, and not utilizing factory farming which have a huge negative impact on the environment both through waste and monocultures. It also promotes less waste of food in large scale grocery stores who throw out large quantities of food. It would also promote more personal responsibility and a deeper connection to the community and to nature. This is not an easy task, as the barrier to entry is high and more affluent people are able to make

this choice while less seriocomically inclined are given no choice. This is why it needs to be the result of an all-encompassing cultural move towards sustainable living.

Now on to advertising. As alluded to before with mention of the beauty industry, advertising can be toxic to mental health. Many students of psychology go on to work in the marketing departments of corporations, devising ways of “convincing” customers to purchase their products. This includes, as in the case of the beauty industry, creating a sense that without this product you will not be beautiful or loved or wanted. This is illustrated with products like deodorant, cologne, and makeup, the allusion of whose marketing implies not so subtly that you need their product to prevent social ostracization. Although body positivity is a new buzz word in these industries, the pressure to conform and adhere to standards can still be overwhelming, especially for young people.

The urge to fit in and have the best clothes and coolest stuff can be very strong. Advertisers capitalize on these human traits to help sell their products. This creates a toxic environment whereby people are inundated with advertising all throughout the day. From television, to the radio, internet and signs on the way to work, even in movies and television shows it’s nearly impossible to get away from. Instead of adds for well-made boots or leather jackets that could last years, or a solid kitchen table that can be passed down to the grandkids, the majority of the products sold will only last a few months to a year and are meant to be replaced with the new fad next season. This traps people in a cycle of never-ending purchases of which you can never escape. Especially lower income individuals, who can only afford the cheapest and most disposable of all products. This is contributing to the debt crisis in America and thereby affecting stress levels and mental health in this way. A meta-study published in Clinical

Psychology review finds that “Overall the results suggest that unsecured debt increases the risk of poor health, with some studies showing a dose–response effect with more severe debts being related to more severe health difficulties” (Richardson, Elliott, & Roberts. 2013) Now this evidence only shows a correlation, not causation, but the link is still significant.

With the establishment of consumerism as being detrimental to our health and happiness, what then would happen if it were rejected completely? As stated above, our economy and thus jobs are dependent upon it. Therefore, a full rejection and movement towards living simply could require a complete reworking of how we make money. I believe this to be an inevitable change, as more industries are automated with increasing technology the loss of jobs will require attention regardless of a potential rejection of consumerism. My answer to this is the idea of a universal basic income, or at least the automation of industries necessary for basic survival, the fruits of which would be freely given. This would not be a huge leap as the technology for automation is growing, therefore it would not require the theft of labor or communism/socialism to redistribute resources. Overall this would benefit society and free people up from an endless cycle of wage slavery to purchase unneeded items, and allow for more self-actualization. Working for wages to survive is exploitative at best and little better than slavery at its most extreme.

Conclusion

In conclusion, living simply is the better choice for mental health, the environment, and society as a whole. Living simply is a broad topic that encompasses the rejection of consumerism, including the drive towards purchasing products as a means to show success and thereby achieve happiness. It also includes moving away from a culture of disposability and the practice of planned obsolescence, whereby the products we buy are not made to last or be passed down generationally, but are instead disposable and meant to be bought trashed and rebought again and again. Living simply also means being less wasteful and more environmentally conscious including the use of renewable energy sources. Finally, all of these paths contribute to being more self-sufficient, sustainable, self-reliant, and autonomous overall, and ideally gaining a new sense of fulfillment and purpose. This essay has expounded upon each of these paths towards living simply in greater detail and given supporting evidence as to how it could improve mental health, the environment, and society as a whole. The overall thesis being that a move towards more simple living in all the ways stated above, and more, would be better for society as a whole even though it would require some real changes in how we live and work. Moving forward it is important we think critically about the systems we have in place and how to best reconcile human nature with our best interests and safeguard against our own mindlessness automation of thought.

Bibliography

Heller, N. (2018, August 03). Who Really Stands to Win from Universal Basic Income? Retrieved November 19, 2018, from https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/07/09/who-really-stands-to-win-from-universal-basic-income

Fagan, H. (2016). Islamic Iktisad (Frugality): Solution to Consumerism as the Root Cause of Environmental Destruction. Australian Journal of Islamic Studies,1(1), 65-80. Retrieved November 25, 2018.

Gaia Staff. (2018, March 7). Tech Companies Planned Obsolescence Is Destroying The Environment. Retrieved December 2, 2018, from https://www.gaia.com/article/how-is-planned-obsolescence-harmful-to-the-environment

Ideas For Living Off The Grid – The Benefits And Concerns. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://environmentalprofessionalsnetwork.com/237/

Jurin, R. (2008). The Illusion of Consumer Happiness – A Desperate Search for Spirituality? Conference Papers — North American Association of Environmental Education, 1. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.umuc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eih&AN=44855146&site=eds-live&scope=site

LÖWY, M. (2010). Advertising Is a “Serious Health Threat”–to the Environment. Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine, 61(8), 19. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.umuc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=47676802&site=eds-live&scope=site

Mayell, H. (2018, July 26). As Consumerism Spreads, Earth Suffers, Study Says. Retrieved November 30, 2018, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2004/01/consumerism-earth-suffers/

Nichols, H. (2017, February 23). The top 10 leading causes of death in the United States. Retrieved December 2, 2018, from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/282929.php

Philpott, B. (2016, January 25). Less is more – our generation’s move away from consumerism. Retrieved from http://www.thetribeonline.com/2016/01/less-is-more-our-generations-move-away-from-consumerism/

Richardson, T., Elliott, P., & Roberts, R. (2013). The relationship between personal unsecured debt and mental and physical health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 1148–1162. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.08.009

Slater, K. (2003). Effects on textiles of natural exposure. Environmental Impact of Textiles,115-138. doi:10.1533/9781855738645.115

The Psychology of Consumerism. (2015, May 08). Retrieved from http://rethinkingprosperity.org/the-psychology-of-consumerism/