The Myth of Consumption Society and Capitalism

In his famous book, "The Society of Consumption", Jean Baudrillard claimed his famous theory that consumption as such is a sign. It isn't made for the utility which it is alleged to bring, but for escalation of the social class. We can't really enjoy consumption because we are forced to pretend to enjoy it. The utitliy of it is simply an illusion. The consumption is the comsumption of signs rather than goods and services. He finds no relation between price and utility, nor exchange value and use value. According to him, all goods and services have their symbolic meaning, that is the purpose of consumption. And there are only exchange values. They make supply and demand. The exchange values are determined structually. We can't escape from the system of exchange values because they are deeply implanted in ourselves. It is a kind of ideology. So we can't feel our consumption is enforced. They shape our criterion of behavior or way to see the entire world through the aquisition of language. We can't dispute against him because we can't explain the utility definitely nor measue it. It is simply a subjective notion. So if someone claims that it comes from somewhat, not from personal satisfaction, we can't controvert against him. The only one thing which we can do is to give him no agreement. There are, however, relations which don't depend on such subjectivity. That is the technical relation. All goods and services depend each other substitutely or complementary. Such relations come from not only utility but also technical (physical) conditions. And they give rise to competition in capitalist countries that negate any illusion each other. Baudrillard puts emphasis on advertising, but it is not omnipotent. Even if producers often deceit consumers through advertising, the former can't deceive the latter eternally. Baudrillard denies people of the subjectivity, that is the ability of decision making. People always depend someone else. In the event his claim leads us to a nihilism. His theory contains a self-reference. Such theory is indisputable but indeterminant as well. And it is not a scientific hypothesis by the Popper's criterion. So it is inadequate to apply his theory to our economic life.5KJ00005057541論文Articledepartmental bulletin pape