Search results

AbstractIdeology plays a central role in consumer decisions, actions, and practices. While there have been numerous studies of ideological formations in specific consumption contexts, an integrative theoretical framework on consumption ideology has been missing. The theoretical framework presented in this article integrates systemic, social group, and social reality perspectives from social theory with prior consumer research to conceptualize consumption ideology as ideas and ideals that are related to consumerism and manifested in consumer behavior. Consumption ideology originates from conflicts between consumer desires and the system of consumerism. It is reflected in consumers' lived experiences and expressed in social representations and communicative actions related to status-based consumption, brand affinity and antipathy, performed practices, and political consumption. By adapting to the market, consumers confirm the system, but when they resist, they accelerate conflicts in consumer experiences unless resistance is ideologically co-opted by the market. Three illustrative cases—upcycling, Zoom backgrounds, and the commercialization of TikTok—exemplify how the framework may be used to analyze consumption ideology and generate new research questions. The article concludes with future research programs that move beyond micro-theorizations to illuminate the broader role of ideology in contemporary consumerist society.

The article explores the discursive means of expressing ideologies. It is postu­lated that a person in the conditions of a changing political situation is at the same time able to hide his ideological preferences, but find means to express them. A distinction is made between the use of rational constructs, which is changed under the influence of political conjuncture, and an emotionally colored assessment of facts. It is argued that ideology is more often transmitted through emotionally expressed communication. The concepts of "quasi-science" and "quasi-religion" are introduced, which complete the completeness of the ideo­logical discourse in the communicative space. A formal method is introduced to identify four modern ideologies. It is fixed that the main goal of ideology is to encourage joint social action. The conditions under which the change of ideo­logical constructs takes place are described. The ideas about the ideology of modern Russian politicians are analyzed. It is shown how the ideological support of a special military operation changes during the year. Conclusions are drawn about the dependence of the concept of war on the social stratum of a person in modern Russian society.

The field of U.S. history today is characterized by a mania for management. The "new" history of capitalism has focused its attention on the creation and daily reanimation of the grand abstraction from which it draws its title: the mid-level market makers who take capital and transform it into capitalism. In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, increasing numbers of historians have turned their attention to the histories of powerful historical actors we have too long ignored or dismissed as "dead white men" unworthy of the attention of the properly progressive historian: financiers, bankers, and businessmen of all kinds. Despite the obvious importance of the task and the avowedly critical purpose of the turn towards the study of the mechanisms of market practice, however, some of the bolder claims that have been used to mark out the novelty of this "new" history seem unwarranted, perhaps even misguided.