the commodification of dissent

There is a certain unease for those who have at least been involved with progressive movements when icons and symbols of dissent are featured for commercial purposes. Thus there is a certain chill one's spine for a committed intellectual when the solidly determined face of Lenin with a stereo earphone comes with a slogan to 'Join The Revolution!' - an invitation to subscribe to broadband access. Other ads: 'Rebel for a cause' - an advertisement for some insurance company; Contribute to the worthiest cause of all -you. (or something like that). That's for another insurance firm. There's a Mao commercial restaurant, Mao caps, and more visibly the Che Guevara shirts. And so on.
Yet the companies that sponsor these do not believe one iota of it, may even be opposed to the principles and aims of what they're appropriating. Even if the advertisement people once believed in them, they're prostituting themselves (no insult to sex workers) to the groups and corporations that avail of their service. Which is what bastardizes the symbols.

It's also a trend for popular music. So that artists incorporate products into their songs' lyrics to expand their commercial market viability. Ironically, popular music has a long-standing history of being a rebellious and anti-authoritarian medium. It's not about expressing the soul anymore, it's a means for product positioning.
Oh, let's not talk about mainstream media for now, ie, movies.

All this can be digested when one understands that the marketing industry is trying to penetrate every nook and cranny to sell products and services and increase profits, along with the consumerist culture that comes with it; expand the market system if you will. Previously difficult to reach (and ideologically repulsive) markets can now be accessed. Since the threat of these symbols can now be effectively disassociated from real social movements, there is no danger in subsuming them to the cause of the all-pervasive consumer golden calf. People can only be atoms of consumption in the commercial ocean.


'Modern marketing is clearly the greatest concerted attempt at psychological manipulation in all of human history.' - MR

It is not just about giving people what they want. For that you have to have informed choice. Yet what choice is there if the range of options is limited to a narrow spectrum dictated by what produces more profits for monopolies or oligopolies? We're not there to choose between the specifications of different products but rather their brands, of 'saleable appearances.' Advertisement is a grand game of deceit, of misleading the public. What is the BIG difference between Colgate and Pepsodent, between San Mig and Gold Eagle (free advert here!) that they have to spend millions in advertisement fees?
People do not receive information on their TV, magazines, billboards, radio, newspapers, webpages; they buy into images of sleek men and sexy women, a lifestyle, an emotional attachment. It's everywhere! A whole world is being created right in front of their very eyes. With the force of advertisements, the present system that we have thus appears inevitable. It seems perfect, yet people find they crave for more. It takes a gargantuan effort to dislocate oneself from the wrapping bind of the consumerist market.

While progressives may berate the phenomenon of commodifying dissent, the resolution is of course in the restructuring of social relations and institutions.

---

Oh, there's this particular McDonald's ad that was especially repulsive to me. It made it look like it was in the indigenous peoples' way of living to be eating McDo (Mackers). That was in Baguio. It had this costume-clad man enjoying a McDonald's meal. I have indigenous roots you see. Indigenous communities have healthier diets, yet McDonald's represents an unhealthy lifestyle. The whole series of posters also made it look like McDonald's is a family tradition, which is the whole aim of the chain of restaurants.