24/7 Customer Support


Anti-consumer movements and consumers rebelling against brands

Forex Email Lists Provide email database, email marketing databases, business email list, a Consumer email database, direct SMS marketing lead, telemarketing leads. However, Forex email list each and every Sales lead are double verified business email lead from worldwide countries. We have 300 B2B contact information and 400 million b2c contact information. Moreover, each and every business and consumer email database are opt-in and permission-based. We always provide you off-spam active lead because spam lead is west your time and money. 

Forex Email List also believed in 100% client satisfaction. Nowadays Forex Email List is one of the trustable sales lead providers. However, we have the newly updated opt-in business mailing lists for your marketing camping. You Can get here your targeted b2b and b2c email database with accurate contact information. We also have the decision-makers’ b2b data from your email marketing camping. We provide you b2b mailing list for your lead generation content marketing.

Anti-consumer movements and consumers rebelling against brands

There are many possible nightmare scenarios for a brand, as many as potential mistakes its managers can make and as many as possible responses from its consumers towards that mistake. But brands, today, must face a new danger, a different danger and in which what they have done or not done is not so important: consumers (a part of them at least) have rebelled, of entry, against the brands themselves. The latest to join this race is the normcore movement, an anti-hipster product born … in the same hipster world . What are hipsters ? Translated, we could say that they are poland telephone number format young people, who have become highly valued consumers by all brands thanks to a certain sybaritism in their consumption patterns. In front of previous generations and in front of other social groups, hipsters look for specific products, they bet on quality and they are willing to pay more for a specific thing if it responds to their demands. And that has created a whole consumer boom, pushing certain brands first among that market and then among others (hipsters are, at heart, the trendhunters of the rest of society).

When all those brands lose their discovery status and are no longer unique, hipsters have to seek their relief or, if they have taken the plunge and joined the normcore movement, they are simply swapped for something generic. The trend was born within a New York collective that opted to be like everyone else, that is, to dress like any average person like the new cool (one of those labels always used and that seem to mean nothing but actually say everything) . I molónnow it was mall-style, or what comes to be dressing in clothes that could have been bought anywhere. A pair of Carrefour jeans and a Lidl T-shirt are the new way to be trendy. It first took to the streets of New York’s hipster neighborhoods and then, in a rather ironic twist, to fashion editorials and the fashion firms’ own campaigns. “It’s a very simple look, clearly unpretentious, perhaps even ingeniously strange,” explained one of those trendy young people.


And although in the world of fashion it is seen as one more way to be up to date (whatever it may be when the latest is basically nothing), the movement has something a little deeper behind it. K-Hole, the New York collective that are its theorists, is committed to a detachment of brands and fashion trends to discover who you really are. That is, a rejection of brands to find the essence. And they point out that it is more a theory than a practice. But the normcore has already jumped to the internet, has made the Forex Email List tour ( The New York Times even asked if it was something serious or in fact one more joke of those that ends up creating the internet almost accidentally) and has added to the increasingly long list of movements and ideas that reject the empire of brands.

Anti-consumerism After all, rejecting brands is not so new. For years there have been those who defend it or do it, although without much success in the trend magazines because they had not gone through the laboratory of how trendy the modern New York is before. The anti-brand movements range from the global and rather politically and ideologically aware to the local and rather close to the problems of the citizens of a specific location. You just have to think about what happens every time a multinational wants to enter a place and makes its inhabitants feel threatened.

To give an example: university researchers analyzed the profound reasons why Coca-Cola had been rejected and attacked on its landing in a region of India. In the end, what had been the reason for their rejection was nothing more than the consideration that local products are no less better than distant ones, whatever the costs come from abroad. They are a few more, because in recent years many movements have begun to emerge that boycott not only a specific product but all in general, after reflecting and concluding that our society has been carried too far by the pressure of consumption. In fact, and although at the beginning of the 20th century it was thought that at the beginning of the following century workers would work less and enjoy life more, the reality has turned out very differently. You work harder than ever, and even in non-recessionary times few would be willing to give up a few hours of work. This has not always been the case: in the 1930s, during the Great Depression, Kelloggs workers beganto work for just six hours a day instead of the usual eight and the schedule was very popular, allowing workers to spend more time in their personal lives. This workday disappeared in the 80s.

But the big question would be, would anyone be willing to give up working hours today and the consequent drop in salary simply to have more time of their own even if that meant reducing their consumption patterns? I mean, would we want more free time if we couldn’t devote it to consuming? That is what many anti-consumer groups are wondering. And is that simply anti-capitalism, as many who have stayed on the pro-consumer side wonder? A terrible threat to brands? In Australia , a month was organized in which consumers were asked not to buy anything more than what was strictly necessary and to prefer renting, bartering, borrowing or second hand before getting something new. In the United States, The Compact was born , a movement that is committed to something like this but as a vital basis rather than something to do in a specific month and in the United Kingdom there is Enough , which proposes critical consumption. Buying Nothing Day is celebrated all over the world (which doesn’t need much explanation) and more and more people are giving up Christmas gifts for simply something different.

Or is it, as some believe, simply the new democracy? Knowcosters: “when you consume, you vote” The movements that want to change the way of consumption and, incidentally, something else have grown and increased over the years, appearing almost anywhere. One of them is that of the knowcosters, which becomes, by translating, the informed consumer. They ensure that every time a purchase is made, a decision is being made that goes beyond an acquisition. As they themselves indicate (in any conference where you can hear about the subject or in the book-manifesto that shapes them) “when you consume, you vote.” This ends local consumption and harms the economies where those consumers who buy low cost are, as well as other problems (the credit boom, forgetting the wisdom lessons of grandmother, the growth of indebtedness … ) have caused the welfare state to begin to crack. And the knowcosters offer not a solution but a new way to face the problem: they defend that the consumer is informed, that he knows where the product comes from and how it has been made (that is, is it the result of that wild economy that they denounce ?) so that the buyer can make an informed purchasing decision. It is not so much about ending all brands, but rather about forcing brands to be more transparent and involving new criteria when making purchases.

Consume close This is, on the other hand, the fundamental part of the growing consumer interest in local consumption and that has already reached the large multinationals. That Mercadona or Carrefour announce that the fish arrives from the fish markets that are 80 kilometers away does not indicate in the end more than an interest in satisfying that new need of consumers to obtain products from the vicinity. At the moment, of all the anti-brand or pro-change movements in the form of consumption that have emerged in recent years, this is the one that has achieved the greatest success. Consumers have put forward different reasons to promote local consumption (from environmental factors to issues of social conscience) and have made enough noise to reach brands and their distributors. The big question could be whether the other movements that have been born in the heat of anti-consumption will one day have such an impact.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.