Many consumerists claim that their projects are countercultural.
However, this is merely an illusion. By copying the attributes
of counterculture, they still do not embody it. The mindset
of a consumerist, unlike that of a counterculturist, is attributive.
It resembles a cargo cult in some ways, where only the external
attributes of an object are copied or imitated, without grasping
its essence.
For example, we are all familiar with the so-called "home punks"
who dress like nonconformists to attend their favorite band's
concert on a Friday night. Then, on Saturday morning, they return
to their bourgeois homes to their wives and children, only to don
a clerk's suit on their way to work on Monday. This is typical
hypocrisy inherent in modern consumer society.
Today, I want to discuss what counterculture truly means
in a broader sense. Counterculture is primarily the conflict
of individuality with society, but not the consumerist conflict
created for the sake of hype. Counterculture is fundamentally
a broad political anarchist environment that lives by its own
internal rules and compass. It is not counterculture that conflicts
with society; rather, society, being psychopathic, attacks
anarchists, thereby highlighting the uniqueness of such individual
experiences. Counterculturists live as they do because they want
to and can live that way. In contrast, the consumerist constantly
chases market trends of public morality. The conflict of the
consumerist appears as an attempt to provoke conflict with
others or social organizations by elevating their own ego.
By this criterion, we can clearly delineate the boundary between
consumerism and counterculture. The consumerist craves public
recognition through approval, while the counterculturist seeks
nothing but the realization of their own vision of the nature
of things or events. Many musical groups and computer
communities, having lost their core, have disintegrated under
the pressure of public morality. Being absolutely talented in
a specific area, counterculturists always become a source of social
conflict, as their very existence compels some to love them and
others to hate them. This individuality, which generates discourse
and evolutionary change, has never been accessible to consumerists.
They remain sincerely convinced that the artifacts surrounding
the life and death of such individuals are the source of their
conditional greatness. The truth, as always, is banal: counterculture
is hated for its talent and for the fact that counterculturists live
differently, without submitting to the artificial authority
of institutional hierarchies. It is well known that consumerists
experience a religious awe towards all these institutions, laws,
rules, and so on. A consumerist cannot stake their life on their
ideas and burn in the flames of their convictions. A consumerist
can only buy something that simulates a countercultural conflict,
which is essentially just a simulation of a full life. As I have
already stated, you do not automatically become a punk simply
by wearing certain clothing. To be a punk, you must live as punks
do. This is a rather obvious truth that remains inaccessible
to many, including sociology professors.
