De-romanticising critical marketing theory: capitalist corruption as the Left’s Žižekean fantasy

Abstract

Critical scholars have applied Žižekean thinking to interrogate the ideologies of sustainability and ethics as an area of marketing discourse and practice, as well as other marketing topics. This paper builds on these precedents but contributes by turning the Žižekean interrogation onto critical marketing scholars. When it comes to sustainability, critical marketing scholars reject the fetishistic fantasy of consumption-driven solutions provided by market mechanisms, and call instead for systemic changes through political action and socioeconomic experimentation instead. This paper asks whether critical scholars are not being taken in by another fetish. Do critical marketing scholars displace marketcentric fantasies like the ethical consumption gap, business sustainability, or market-based progress, only to replace them with another critical fantasy -that of capitalism corrupting otherwise benign human subjects? Inspired by the terminology of this special issue, it is proposed that taking a less romantic view of critical scholarship may actually produce a more realistic 'blemishes and all' perspective that make critical projects more likely to be realised.By accepting the psychoanalytic-Marxist premise that capitalism is a pressing issue, but one that works in tandem with the extra-capitalistic tendencies of the human unconscious, critical scholars may be able to contribute to deconstructing capitalism and preparing for postcapitalist problems in advance. In short, this paper seeks to help critical marketing scholars remove the rose-tinted glasses of their conceptual fetishes and craft new lenses through which to see, if not entirely free of ideology, with a little less fantasy.

Bleak signs of our times: Descent into ‘Terminal Marketing’

“…TM rejects the centrality and finality of meaning, but needs not to eschew of be ignorant of how it is constructed. Indeed, TM argues that the unconscious readily misattributes meaning to mask the repressed content of the consumption act and to protect the conscious ego of consumers (Bradshaw and Zwick, 2016; Cluley, 2015; Cluley and Dunne, 2012; Gabriel, 2015), not to mention those of marketers (Zwick and Bradshaw, 2016), and marketing theorists or consumer researchers (Coffin and Egan-Wyer, 2021). TM thus also challenges the extent that critical approaches such as CMS and TCR are able to understand and then alter consumption contexts on the basis of meaning that would coherently ‘raise awareness’ and create systemic change.…”

The ethical consumption cap and mean market morality

“…Casey, Lichrou, and O’Malley, 2020; Chatzidakis et al, 2021), mobilising the morality of markets may significantly reduce harm in the chain of economic activity (Polonosky et al, 2003), or at least buy more time for postcapitalist possibilities to emerge over the horizon (Cova et al, 2013). Our argument, in short, is that the human condition combines with contemporary consumer culture to make the ideal of a consistently ethical lifestyle almost impossible to achieve (Coffin and Egan-Wyer, 2021; Lambert, 2019). The solution, therefore, is to seek consistency in the relational duties that exist between multiple market actors.…”

“…Taken together, these studies suggest it is increasingly unlikely that critical subjects, those who might mount a sustained and significant challenge to the unsustainable status quo, will emerge from within consumer culture (Lambert, 2019). Such perspectives hold out the hope that critical thoughts and actions may emerge from a serendipitous coalescence of forces within and between bodies (Coffin, 2021), but critical marketing theorists may wish to do more than hope (Coffin and Egan-Wyer, 2021).…”

“…While it may be possible to work within the current system towards more ethical ends, these will be capped by the ‘post-politics’ of capitalism unless political demands move societies toward alternative socioeconomic systems (Chatzidakis et al, 2012; Cronin and Fitchett, 2020). Although one should be wary of scapegoating capitalism at the expense of other forces (Coffin and Egan-Wyer, 2021), it can still be asserted that the potential of the ethical consumption cap is itself capped by an eponymous emphasis on consumption. As such, it may benefit from being complemented by another conceptualisation that moves the focus of thinking elsewhere, onto the market systems that generate ethical consumption condundrums in the first instance.…”

“…Unfortunately for the advocates of anticapitalism, empirical evidence from these studies demonstrates that alternative socioeconomic systems are difficult to scale (Hoelscher and Chatzidakis, 2020) and sustain (Chatzidakis et al, 2021). Furthermore, many forces that contribute to the ethical consumption cap are not entirely derived from capitalism, but rather biological and psychological aspects of the human condition that precede and exceed this socioeconomic system (Coffin and Egan-Wyer, 2021)…”