Chapter I: Nike Sponsors Me 🔥

Chapter II: We Just Can’t Stop Spending 💎

Nike, the Ethical Supervillain🌍

Nike, as you can see, sponsors Down to Earth.

But there’s a problem.

My brand promotes individuality, moderation, and the pursuit of human virtues like community.

Nike, as one of the world’s largest consumer-driven corporations, does not fit that bill.

And still, the company wants a part of what I’m building.

And why not?

I’m a young guy with a massive network of writers, athletes, organizers, politicians, entertainers, creatives, and above all, real people.

Since I’m sure Nike has done its research, it must know that I’m about people first.

And Nike has not done well by the people. You’ll read about that later.

On the other hand, Nike has inspired and motivated this same group it has kept down for so long.

It’s a storied athletic brand with a rich history of dominant athletes and influential leaders.

How could I not be proud to stand on the shoulders of these giants?

The eternally ambitious ‘Just do it’ mantra is one I live by when creating and executing plans.

Prior to making my decision, I was flooded with conflict, excitement, and worry.

“What will my readers think?” I wondered. “Does this make me a hypocrite?”

I even consulted my Instagram close friends story, curious if others could help to clarify my position.

After receiving mixed opinions, I realized only I can make the “right” choice.

There are decisions, and there are consequences.

And at the end of the day, it’s my brand.

I own both the decisions I make and the consequences that follow – something I’m familiar with as a leader.

Today, I’ve decided to accept Nike’s offer – with a condition.

While I am receiving the endorsement of a notoriously unjust corporation, (is there any other kind?) I’ll be using my platform to discuss how consumerism has impacted my community.

Let it also be clear that I am incredibly grateful for this opportunity.

If I can bridge tactful business decisions while upholding my ethical integrity, my job with this partnership is complete.

And that is what I hope to do in the piece below.

With thorough research and critical analysis, I’ve unveiled the extent of our relationships with mass-consumerist companies, and their techniques of influencing our spending habits – and even our psychological states.

I hope the post teaches you something. It is deeply informative – feel free to read it online, share the post, or save it for later.

Happy reading!

We Just Can’t Stop Spending 💎

As much as I would like to, I cannot, in any sense of the word, define myself as a minimalist.

Instead, I thoroughly enjoy the satisfaction and stimulation of purchasing superficial items. I like having things just to have them.

This is not limited to sneakers, clothes, and technology alike.

I find that these material items bring me momentary and long-term satisfaction and even validation from peers or society at large.

As I mature, I find that my money is too often spent on what probably isn’t necessary. 

This is common behavior for the average Westerner, especially those with inner-city upbringings. But it’s unsustainable and self-destructive.

It’s natural for humans to crave acquisition, and to flaunt what we’ve got.

It’s called social proof, and we’re conditioned to prove something to anyone these days.

Social proofing refers to the phenomenon where people display or purchase certain products, often high-end or well-known brands, to signal status, align with popular trends, or gain approval from others.

Seeing others flaunt these brands creates a perception that owning them is desirable or indicative of success, leading individuals to follow suit to fit in, boost their image, or feel part of an “in-group.” 

Monkey see, monkey do.

This is why logos, influencers, and visible brand endorsements (like myself, and this newsletter) play a powerful role in consumer behavior.

We understand social proofing, and we can recognize consumerism.

But why do these issues seem to affect the Black community disproportionately?

We seem to be more infatuated with brands and material acquisitions than other racial groups.

Is this unfair stereotyping, social conditioning, or deliberate targeting by large corporations like Nike?

I label consumerism as an issue because of the limited benefits one can draw from material possessions.

You can’t feed a family with a patent leather shoe, and you can’t build a community with a dri-fit hoodie.

Though there is no fault in rewarding oneself with a material item on an occasion, the obsession and dedication to spending and owning can ultimately deconstruct the fabric of a stable lifestyle.

Rampant consumerism also plagues financially unstable communities more directly.

A study published in the Journal of Consumer Research found that individuals in lower socioeconomic brackets are more likely to engage in conspicuous consumption to gain social acceptance and signal status, particularly when faced with social isolation.

Targeted marketing often amplifies this phenomenon.

Research has shown that advertisements for luxury goods and credit products are disproportionately aimed at economically vulnerable groups, further encouraging spending beyond their means.

Growing up in New York City, nearly every child in the Black and Latino community seemed to be perpetually up-to-date on trends in both clothing and technology, no matter how poverty-stricken.

Before I could open my eyes, I was cloaked in high-end designer clothes and sneakers, even though my financial situation was not congruent with the status this signaled.

To this day, I enjoy purchasing many of the same brands of clothes that I was raised with.

But perception is not reality.

A study by the University of Pennsylvania has found that there is no cultural link between minority communities and overspending on material possessions whatsoever.

The link manifests itself rather in the economic and social brackets of the poorer Black and Latino communities, and even within white communities.

In short, rampant consumerism is a disease of the poor, working class – not one of the colored.

To exemplify this, consider that Blacks and Latinos spend 16% and 30% less, on educational means than those of the white communities do, respectively.

They spend 50% less on health care than the White community does.

Conversely, data collected from the Consumer Expenditure Survey from 1986 to 2002 conducted by the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that Blacks and Latinos spend up to 30% more than whites of comparable income on visible goods like clothing, cars, and jewelry.

This suggests that poor people spend more money on things that are visibly and instantly gratifying, for social or status-based purposes.

In impoverished communities, one is less likely to spend money on something that is not immediately gratifying to their status.

A reference group is the immediate community surrounding an individual; in most cases, peers, neighbors, and employers encompass one’s reference group.

An individual’s reference group usually determines, or at the very least sways, an individual’s spending habits.

Because of this, both White and Black people spend the same amount on “visible” items when they are within the same reference group.

Consider that poorer individuals are not likely to spend an excessive or considerable amount on visible goods even when their reference group is of a much higher income.

Since spending on visible items is meant to improve status, the visible goods would do no good for social boosting in this situation – how is a poor person going to impress a rich person who knows they are poor?

So poorer individuals are less likely to display their wealth to their peers in this manner.

All this research only sorts out what many of us may already understand:

Blacks and Latinos are substantially poorer than Whites. They are thus more likely to be in reference groups with other poor people.

It’s arguable whether there are inherent issues with casual spending.

In any case, there is certainly an issue when spending is in excess – or when money is scarce to begin with.

If you have “extra” money, should that be spent? Shared? Invested?

The “right” decision is only yours to make.

Being a healthy consumer is a balance that we should all strive to strike; behavioral patterns linked to our social conditioning and evolutionary patterns are surely difficult to shed.

But don’t forget that ‘reference group‘ is just nerd speak for community.

You have the power to shape your community and its perception of status and belonging.

You possess the ability to break the cycles of consumerism and brand enslavement.

Monkey see, monkey do, right?

Now that you know the game, it’s up to you to Just Do It.