Is the Minimalist an Enemy of Culture? An Objection to the Opinion “Waste is Culture”

The fact that minimalists are exposed on Japanese TV and the number of them are increasing. There was something to worry about opinions on that TV program.
That is,


“Waste creates culture, minimalist is its enemy.”

Discussions started on the theme of “Are minimalists who don’t have things happy?”
in the studio. Among them, facilitator broached that waste is the goodness of human beings and questioned the wisdom of minimalists. Then, Kitano Takeshi also said

“the necessity of waste” because “culture is useless.”

Root of Discomfort With Minimalist

The minimalist “I do not need this one”, “That’s a waste”. Minimalists will say so and give up things. There seems to be quite a lot of people who fear this.

If you think through the idea of ​​eliminating waste, you will reach the horrible idea that “human is unnecessary”. In fact, human beings carry a sad history where the massacre of socially vulnerable people such as the elderly and the disabled occurred in the way “to eliminate useless people for society”. Perhaps, I think that is a sense of discomfort as a fear of minimalists.


In addition, if you consider the point of view from the universe in birds-eye, there are no reasons such as human beings, insignificant, there is no meaning. That’s it. It means that there is no existence value not only for humans but for all things.
Still, if you want to obtain forgiveness about what exists, you can not do it unless you have the philosophy of “you can exist even if either meaningless or useless.”

However, “If you master minimalism, you will reach the abandonment of life”.
Some people may feel fear of minimalism because of this lol

Is Minimalism an Idea to Eliminate All Waste?

So, is minimalism an idea that does not tolerate useless things?

I do not think so.

I believe that minimalism is an idea that “private space does not need useless things” in the end. This “private space” is important. The minimalist is more pleased to have many things in the public space. Thanks to that there are convenience stores and Amazons, there are many people who can become a minimalist. (It seems there was a self-styled minimalist who went to a large store and said, “There are too many things and feel bad “, but it is impossible for me to understand)


So, the idea of ​​eliminating the waste of society, the public space, and the house of others is not in the minimalist’s mind (if they do, that person may be sick and let’s leave them alone). It’s only about their own space.

Is the minimalist an enemy of culture?

Behind this remark is the fact that buying things contributes to culture.
From this fact, some people accuse the minimalist as free riders who do not contribute to the development of culture, who does not buy things.


Enjoying culture without buying things is a free rider for others’ contributions?

If contributing to culture = buying things, you probably have only to answer YES to this question. Indeed, the only contribution that consumers can not afford to lend is that they “envy the fact that other people have things (to strengthen others’ superiority”).


But the minimalist is not envy of owning objects, so even this can not be done. Therefore, the minimalist is a free rider who can not make any contribution to culture.


However, it’s only if “contribution to culture = buying things” is correct.


“How to Contribute to Culture = Buying Things” ?

“It is not.”

Well, I want to deny vocally , but unfortunately, there are many genres that have become so.
Recently there seems to be a case of collecting funds in the form of cloud funding,
Even crowdfunding about animation production, in fact it is not possible to secure sufficient funds.


Also, as for entertainers, viewers do not give money directly to “comedy on TV”, but they pay money via advertisement. Since resources for advertising are generated from customer purchase of goods as well, if the viewer does not buy things, it will dry up.
It is natural that Kitano Takeshi says critical things to the minimalist seems to be a kind of position talk.


There are also some successful cases. For example, it is a smartphone.The revenue is the main charge for the application, and it makes a big profit without purchasing things.


Also, pachinko may be so. Indeed, these two are actually one method of contributing to TV talent without buying things, as TV commercials are so amazing.
However, it is difficult for society to point out that it is not easy to mention as only two successful cases.


How Can Minimalists Avoid Being Told That It Is a Free Rider of Culture?

Ultimately, it’s to donate money. Do it directly: less intermediate loss.
Unfortunately, the culture of donating in Japan is not rooted and there are few remittance ways.


For example, it is easiest if you can donate to a performer or an animation production company with PAYPAL. (This method is currently unavailable because it is against the law)


So, in order for minimalists to contribute to culture, there is only a radical way of buying things and discarding them. (And I do not want to do such things, I usually do not.
However, this is not a problem of minimalists but a problem of “culture producers” who can not build payment methods well.




· Minimalism is an idea that “useless things are unnecessary in private space”, so do not be afraid.
· The minimalist has a low level of cultural contribution but it is a problem of “cultural producers” who can not build payment methods well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s