What is "traditional" about devoting all of one's life to consuming commodities? Everything I have read says that such a way of life appeared only relatively recently and has only been practiced by a small percentage of people in a small percentage of places--most people's lives have been lived providing the cheap labor needed to make the commodities that the former live their lives consuming.

As long as global capitalism is a running system somebody will do the mass consuming--somebody will take the minimalists' place.

The only solution is to replace the entire system with something else.

As response to the original post: Minimalism is inadequate to serve as one's worldview, since once a person rids herself of all her extraneous possessions (and perhaps activities), fulfillment does not necessarily follow. Fulfillment might arise in the process of ridding herself of the extra things, but this is an effect of the psychological satisfaction of getting more organized and seemingly eliminating useless distractions. But once the minimalist state is attained, something else beyond the minimalist philosophy is necessarily to precipitate fulfillment in her life. For instance, she could still become lonely, dissatisfied, or bored due to the newfound emptiness in her life. All in all, minimalism is neither necessary nor sufficient for achieving happiness. An Aristotelian approach, stressing virtue, balance, friendships, and moderation, seems to be more adequate as a general philosophy/worldview.

What is your thoughts on this movement? Is it a useful tool in working towards happiness / the good life — Brian

I think of minimalism like i do with music. You can strip away all the frilly parts until you're left with something that sounds raw. Maybe just the drums, a piano and some bass for example, it sounds good! But take away the piano and the bass and now you're just listening to a drummer which will get boring quite quickly (unless they are rocking it!). It's about moderation, some people have found their lives so cluttered and messy that they need to bring it back to the bare bones for a while. But now and then it's good to throw in a trumpet and some tambourines. Hell, why not listen to an orchestra once in a while, just not all the time.

I would consider myself a minimalist, especially with technology. But it's all about how grounded you can be with all your 'stuff', and remembering how it would feel if you were to someday loose your entire CD collection.

These mavens of minimalism both have too much hair.

then Minimalism is essentially a tool to rid yourself of life’s excess in favor of focusing on what’s important—so you can find happiness, fulfillment, and freedom. — Brian

Minimalism isn't a new idea: voluntary poverty, simple living, Walden Pond, ascetic religious practices... It is highly likely that the only people who will try it are the prosperous. The poor have had minimalism handed to them on a paper plate.

Don't get me wrong: Trying to provide meaning by surrounding one's self with just more cargo is a failing strategy. "Stuff" and "keeping busy" carries little meaning, and can becomes burdensome. A better strategy is to differentiate perceptively between the useful and the useless (which is idiosyncratic), keeping the latter and ridding one's self of the former.

I've made a lot of mistakes with the "stuff" part of the problem. I thought that acquiring certain things would result in a better life -- more satisfaction. Not always. Sometimes I was right, however. I really enjoyed certain pieces of clothing (nice shirt, attractive comfortable shoes, good looking sweater, etc.), most of the records I bought, the computers, the house, the bicycles, and books.

I replaced the ugly 20 year old plastic mini-venetian-type blinds with wide, real wood blinds. Kind of pricey; was it worth it? Yes, it was. I really like and enjoy them, damn it. Fuck minimalism.

By the way, I've tried minimalism too. There is something to say for it. Reducing one's consumption can yield more free time. One has to work less. But reduced consumption and part time work can become an unpleasant scramble too.

I'm not a golfer, but I've heard about an approach to learning that makes a lot of sense to me. When you start learning, you get five clubs. As you get better, you can add more, but only when you can tell the difference.

Long ago, when I was a cabinetmaker, it struck me that it doesn't make sense to buy a bunch of fancy tools when you haven't learned how to use simple ones well. Once you have, you actually have a reason for adding more and more refined tools.

You don't discard what you have that you don't need, you start from a small, focused collection of basic possessions and add more as you learn to know what you need and the difference it makes. That way, you have a reason for adding to the collection.

And then, as Bitter Crank says, some things you just like. 25 years ago my wife bought me three Aloha shirts. I loved them and have bought more. I still have two of the original three. Rayon doesn't hold up forever and I can't even wear the two I have left. They would just fall apart, but I still love them. Five or six years ago, I was walking past a fancy luggage store and saw a beautiful, orange carry-on bag. I didn't buy it, but I still pine for it. $500. I would love to have it, but it would be too embarrassing. But if I had bought it, I would feel good every time I picked it up.