People hang onto things – ideas as well as accumulation. I don’t like capitalism, I don’t like consumerism, and all the social training to buy more — both for yourself and gifts for others.
For my first ACM, I would have expected I’d be writing about antiwar, and I’ll get to that rant below. Earlier this year I read a Science News report about a psychology study that’s worth sharing.
"People add by default even when subtraction makes more sense" by Sujata Gupta
This tendency to think more is better could underlie modern-day excesses, experts say — Science News, published online April 7, 2021; a version also is included in the May 8, 2021, printed issue.
This article reports on the study below (I glanced through it a few months ago & now seems to be paywalled):
"People systematically overlook subtractive changes"
researchers report Nature. [published online on April 7, 2021, but accepted earlier, & presumably accessible to the Science News writer.]
The above Lego structure was a puzzle in the second round of experiments. Participants on a university quad were offered $1 to solve the problem of making the structure stable, so the roof wouldn’t fall on top of the paper “I”. It’s a wide pillar, with an even wider flat roof. The roof was resting on only one block, on the far corner opposite the piece of paper. Adding blocks had a cost but removing blocks was free, Despite this, the typical impulse was to add not take away.
A few quotes from the Science News article:
"It turns out that getting people to subtract — whether a Lego block, ingredients in a recipe or words in an essay — requires reminders and rewards, researchers report April 7 in Nature."
...
"participants had to stabilize a Lego roof over a figurine, represented by the piece of paper. Most people added pieces even though each piece cost 10 cents. Only when researchers specified that subtracting pieces was free did more people remove the destabilizing block and rest the roof on top of the wide pillar." [but 39 of 99 participants still added blocks.]
This is a strong scientific basis of the anecdotal reminders of "less is more" & "keep it simple", which one has to constantly remind one's self. We’re constantly trashing the planet, yet here’s a physical instance of the seeming necessity to hold everything you’ve “got”, even though it’s only “your” puzzle for the few minutes it’s your turn, then it “belongs” the next person to get paid $1 to ponder the puzzle while the researcher looks on. The mine,mine,mine was so strong the researchers were comfortable trying to encourage a contrary response, because
“researchers hypothesized that most participants defaulted to adding because they failed to even think about subtraction.”
After the 1st round of puzzles that confirmed a strong bias toward addition, the next round (including the pillar puzzle above) were specifically designed to try to “nudge” participants to subtract and determine what kind of nudges were or weren’t effective. There are disagreements between capitalists and socialists about whether it’s “human nature” to be cooperative vs. competitive. Could this study be an indication that it’s more psychology than ideology? Or is this an effect of capitalist advertising and the consumer culture?
My first thought was that this study could be a useful talking point when one is trying to patiently explain why socialism is a better system for living with each other – and better for dealing with climate change as well. If there’s some science to point to then it might be perceived as less “political” when one is trying to change the opinion of someone stuck on TINA (There Is No Alternative [to Capitalism]).
Ending the Science News article, the author quoted another researcher not involved in the study who commented that organizations/political leaders don’t want to make enemies by subtracting people & funds. I would point to CEOs doing layoffs and protests demanding “defund the police”; it matters who the potential friends & enemies are.
On the symptom of “modern-day excesses” I’ll get a bit personal to show how strong the social training can be. I had to throw multiple fits to stop Xmas & birthday gift exchanges with my husband. I guess I was giving him mixed signals when I have years-old cards & such still displayed, scattered around my office, but I didn’t need more souvenirs from him. Yes, I’m sentimental. No, they don’t need to be renewed or replaced: they haven’t worn out from me looking at them. No, I don’t want to put them in storage, I like looking them. Why put something in storage just to make room to spend money for something new to look at? It’s given me years of grief that there is such social pressure of gift giving, and advertising really pushes guilt. Advertisers (capitalists) want to train us to always be searching for the perfect gifts, and to be worried if it’s special enough. I'd think we’d mutually agreed on “no presents” ... but then he thought I wasn’t serious and he bought stuff anyway and I had bought him nothing. :-(
When there’s the PS to an announcement of “no gifts, please” – it’s not necessarily the person virtuous, but that’s how we react to it, right? It could very well be it’s for that person’s comfort. It’s possible to want – and need – less. There’s the caution about not letting yourself be possessed by your possessions. Less is More.
I have a friend who told me we have a small house. We have seven rooms (1920s style). Two restrooms with showers. Our house, long before we started renting, had been made into a duplex. After we bought it on contract we turned it back into a single. There’s no laundry room, which is a covid issue, – I’m still doing hand washes as I won’t go back to the laundromat. The spots that are crowded are because we have too much stuff. Less would definitely be More in my case: more room and less to keep track of.
On the more serious problem of militarism. USA has 500+ major military bases. That’s certainly too many! USA so-called “Defense” Dept always wants more and more weapons. Every perceived problem seems to have a military solution. Or people who are worried about their security keep wanting to add more police to a situation, instead of dealing with root causes. The cop & prison guard so-called “unions” sure support that! Most of us, from the polls, would rather have more safety net & infrastructure budget priorities.
Another thing we need less of is carbon in the atmosphere … and it’s such a sign of Profit Above All that in climate negotiations, military greenhouse gas emissions have been exempted. For the Kyoto treaty, USA made final-hour demands for that exemption, and the tradition has continued. Isn’t that special? It’s basically optional to begin with, still, emission from military is exempt. Disgusting.
Looking for a ballpark comparison, consider this blog post complaining about billionaires: ”Space tourism: environmental vandalism for the super-rich.” He points out that a flight from London to Hong Kong is 3.5 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in an economy seat. The space tourism flights are ballpark 25 times more. So what kind of multiplier for constant drone flights or fighter plane training?
Mostly I offer the above article and thoughts as a prompt for discussion. I’ve only scratched the surface of Less is More. I’m not a researcher in any field, but do you think capitalism/advertising have something to do with what the study found?
Do you think this might be a useful story to use when trying to change people’s minds about capitalism? Militarism? Consumerism?
Thanks for reading!
i