I’ve been thinking about my identity recently. Who or what would I be, if it were not for the influences of my environment. Who or what would I be if I were somehow not situated, in Simone de Beauvoir‘s understanding of situation. I almost always come to the same conclusion each time: I would not exist.

Every day, I notice something else that has had a profound effect on myself and on the world I inhabit. A few days ago, that thing was Santa Claus. I had known for a very long time that the story of Santa Claus was a consumerist story, designed to sell products and get countless families out to the stores. What I realized, however, was how much the story seemed to insidiously form the foundation of consumerism as a whole.

What do you want? This is the question asked by the shadows in the 90s television series Babylon 5. For the shadows, it is a prompt to action. A call for races to fight for the things they desire. I imagine they would be quite happy if we spent all our time fighting with each other in our deluded attempts to acquire everything our hearts desired.

Ironically, this is the same question Santa asks. However, when Santa asks this question, it is not a prompt to action. Instead, it is held in front of the individual as a reward for good behavior. It is a call for individuals to conform and comply with the establishment. Be good, and Santa will give you what you want for Christmas. In fact, an individual who fights for what they want would be considered very naughty, and thus could expect coal in their stockings.

The heart of this transaction is obedience for a reward (often a material reward). Like Pavlov’s dogs, individuals are conditioned: when the bell rings, the dog becomes hungry, just as when Christmas time approaches, the children become expectant for their reward. It becomes an integral part of the individual’s behavior, just as it does for the dogs, manifesting itself in curious ways and causing potential harm.

But now imagine a world without these things. Specifically, imagine a world without Santa Claus, once a year granting everyone’s wish for the thing they most desire. For some, this will be easy. For other’s nearly impossible. For those who say it is easy, they will likely tell a story about how Santa is simply a myth. Of course a world without Santa can exist; it is the world we currently inhabit. To them, I ask if they are so certain…

Those who cannot imagine such a world, I suspect, are facing the same dilemma I face. Without those dangling rewards, without “proper” motivation, what ought I do with myself? This is the capitalist dogma, where the incentive of wealth and accumulation of property is the prime motivator to action. Santa Claus may be fictitious, but his face is the face of capitalism and consumerism.

I sometimes end up in discussions regarding universal basic income. My opponents suggest that if such a thing existed, people would lazily remain at home doing nothing indefinitely. They believe that without the motivation of money, nothing would get done and our societies would collapse. They often cite the former Soviet Union as proof of their claim. Unfortunately, the Soviet Union exhibited capitalist dogma better than the United States ever did, which led to its accelerated collapse; the Americans are well on their way to a similar outcome presently.

I keep beating around the topic. It is time I focus. All of this, as I see it, is for one purpose: purpose. Meaning. To direct large numbers of people in a direction. To motivate them to action. But not just any action. To the action that is deemed most beneficial to those decision makers in our world. This is why we are called “consumers.”

We don’t have to be though. For the nihilist, the world is without meaning or purpose. Period. No action is any better than any other action, because in a world devoid of value, all actions are truly equal. A world full of nihilists would never accomplish anything. But then again, they wouldn’t really care either, would they.

For the existentialist, there is no inherent meaning or purpose in the world. That is, there is no outside force or influence that has the privileged position of applying meaning to things. Instead, we all have that power within ourselves. It is our freedom. We choose the purpose and meaning in things. So things can have value, but only because we decide that things have that value. There are certainly better actions than others; generally the better actions are those that lead us to the things we value. But a world full of existentialists tends to have the same problem as the world of nihilists; each individual exercising their freedom is still an individual, and the actions they follow will not necessarily avoid conflict with the other individuals. Accomplishing of larger projects can be challenging.

The seemingly best option is to have an authority that establishes meaning and purpose for all. A single authority applying value to things guarantees that all individuals will agree to the value of those things. And where there is agreement, there is shared motivation toward common goals. No more pesky wasting energy assessing value on their own. No more fighting with others regarding the value of things. No, that energy can now be better spent on more important things, like innovation and progress and the accumulation of wealth.

Some will say that God is that external authority. Only God can establish the value of things. It is His will after all. In this, I will suggest that those of shared belief system will share an agreement. However, this is not the observance. Unfortunately, even those of the same faith cannot always agree on the same interpretation of that faith.

But there is still Santa Claus to save the day. Keeping all the little girls and boys highly motivated to behave in order to receive their reward. Their hearts’ greatest desires fulfilled at the flick of his nose. What better training could you hope for, for the future’s well grounded consumers.