Hipster culture consumerism questions its individualistic tenets

There has been a perceived dichotomy created between the alternative hipster lifestyle and mainstream consumer capitalism. I know what you’re thinking, and yes it’s true; I purposefully used the word “mainstream” there. We all know the hipster credo: Obscurity equates to individuality.

The reason why I assume you are all well-versed in this dogma is because of the fact that the hipster lifestyle has, whether you like it or not, made a huge mark on our generation, creating a thriving subculture in the process. And whether you have friends who are staunchly underground or you, yourself, have hipster tendencies, the culture has affected your life in some way, either personally or tangentially.

Hipsterism may have affected you directly, in that you may genuinely be a fan of the band Django Django, or it may have affected you indirectly, through the impact the culture has had on corporate consumerism. However, despite the perception that there’s a dichotomy between the two, the hipster movement actually plays a surprisingly positive role in our market economy, demonstrating just how much the U.S. consumerist culture manifests itself in our everyday lives.

Which, if true, would of course be incredibly ironic, seeing that the hipster movement tends to harshly criticize the act of “selling out,” or submitting to commercialization. For instance, a band may be immensely popular among the demographic for a time, but as soon as the band acquires a record deal, has its music played on commercials or begins to frequent top-20 stations, it becomes less popular among hipsters. The Black Keys happens to be an example of this very phenomenon. Then it’s on to the next small, unpublicized talent that arises.

Yet, despite this effort to distance itself from commercialization, the hipster movement is actually fueling a cycle that is essential to capitalism.

If one were to look at the sociological aspects of the movement itself, it’s seemingly about members within the group competing for placement through the use of products and brands as a means to do so. And consumers vying against each other is what turns the wheels of capitalism.

Take the historic “keeping-up-with-the-Joneses” mentality of middle-class suburbanites as an example of competitive consumerism. Say I have a perfectly functioning Honda Odyssey sitting in my driveway, but one day, I notice Mr. Jones pulling up in a brand new Lexus. Despite additional expenses, I go out and buy one anyway, because Mr. Jones is a benchmark to a social standard.

This sense of competition is evidently beneficial for producers, because it causes people to continuously buy things in order to keep up with one another. And the same sense of competition exists among the hipster crowd, except Mr. Jones is smoking an American Spirit cigarette or listening to music few are aware of. However, purchasing these products doesn’t individualize the hipster, since some of these products are either unwelcomed or anti-individualistic.

Actually, American Spirit cigarettes are a perfect example of something profiting off the hipster crowd. Owned by the R.J. Reynolds Corporation, the world’s second-largest tobacco company, the American Spirit brand is returning huge dividends to the company. Perhaps because they market themselves as being “organic” and “environmentally friendly” alternatives to their rivals — two terms the hipster community strives to associate itself with — they are more popular among hipsters as a way for them to maintain their image. Thus, this causes the brand’s sales to boom during this cultural hipster renaissance.

What is ironic, other than the point that hipsters are feeding one of the world’s largest tobacco conglomerates, is that American Spirit is neither organic nor environmentally friendly. The brand’s cigarette smoke still contains more than 7,000 carcinogenic chemicals, which contribute to the smoking-related deaths of over 400,000 Americans each year.

Despite this, the hipster subculture is the life-breath of companies such as this. Take Urban Outfitters as another example. The company sells the products needed to keep up with the retro trends of today’s youth. However, the company’s actions do not follow the individualistic ideology of the hipster movement at all. It’s merely a facade — in other words, good business. In reality, the company has a habit of funding politicians who are notorious for fighting for traditional conformism, such as Rick Santorum. Urban Outfitters President Richard Hayne donated $13,150 to Santorum’s campaign, which, of course, was rife with anti-gay rhetoric. And owing to the fact that the store quickly pulled “I Support Same Sex Marriage” T-shirts from their shelves after only a week, it should be clear that Urban Outfitters doesn’t support your individuality.

Expressing your individuality is dicey when you have to do so by buying things. Even if a T-shirt made with organic materials shows off at first glance your high ethical standards, unique personality and intuitive global awareness, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t made in a sweatshop.

As author David McRaney put it, “You sold out long ago in one way or another.”

Write Nick at njv10@pitt.edu.