A key problem we have explored this semester is the how to conceptualize or frame youth identity and hence track its ability to be subtly yet powerfully commodified under the influence of globalization and neo-liberal capitalism. In order to understand how specific youth identities are commodified, we must first dissect the complex yet crucial concept of youth identity and examine how the powerful forces operating under globalization and neo-liberal capitalism have come to commodify youth identity.

To lay the foundation of conceptualizing youth identity, we must first consider the impact of globalization and late capitalism in dealing with the concept of identity. In this current period of late capitalism and globalization, we have encountered what Stuart Hall describes as the “erosion of the nation-state” (Hall 25). Hall describes this unique intersection of globalization and nationalism by proposing the theory of a “Global Mass Culture” (Hall 27), which entails a “particular form of homogenization” (Hall 28) as it seeks to absorb differences in cultural representation in pursuit of an overarching global cultural framework. This results in the transnationalization of capitalism, wherein Global Mass Culture “crosses and re-crosses linguistic frontiers much more rapidly and more easily and… speaks across languages in a much more immediate way” (Hall 27). However, it is important to note that according to Hall, this process of homogenization is never fully realized. In fact, it intentionally does not seek complete homogenization. Rather, it is through these specificities that it is able to operate and hold together the overall framework of globalization. It is this very process of incompletion that actually nurtures the conditions in which neo-liberal capitalism can advance. For instance, this process of incompletion can be demonstrated by the regionalization of global culture. As Karatani Kûojin suggests, although transnational capitalism is “borderless,” this borderlessness consequently produces other kinds of borders (Ching 239), namely regional imaginaries. In fact, Leo Ching argues that regionalism is actually essential to globalism and that they are actually complementary processes (Ching 237-244). However, Ching disagrees with Hall in arguing that Global Mass Culture is not necessarily always primarily “Western” and that there is indeed the possibility of other regional mass cultures, such as the extension of a ‘Japanese mass culture’ (Ching 256).  

Consequently, globalization has in many ways contributed to a sense of uncertainty and fragmentation with regard to personal identity and identification, as well as national cultural identity. As David Buckingham asserts, the “traditional resources for identity formation are no longer so straightforward or so easily available” (Buckingham 1) and therefore capitalism is able to take advantage of this sense of uncertainty and fragmentation by placing a strong emphasis on lifestyle and identity. In doing so, the neo-liberal capitalist system is able to strategically equate an individual’s lifestyle and identity with his/her consumption practices/patterns. Yet at the same time, Buckingham argues that the formation of identity in the context of the neo-liberal capitalism inherently involves a process of “cognitive simplification” (Buckingham 6) wherein identity undergoes a process of stereotyping “that allows people to distinguish easily between self and other, and to define themselves and their group in positive ways” (Buckingham 6)— although perhaps distinguishing between self and other has become increasingly more difficult to accomplish, thus leading to a sense of instability about where self and other are. Nonetheless, identification still plays a crucial role in the conception of identity, especially concerning the commodification of identity. However, it is crucial to note that although neo-liberal capitalism emphasizes identity, we must not assume identity to be a singular, horizontal and linear entity. Rather, identity is fluid, malleable and can occupy multiple trajectories simultaneously, which is in fact more advantageous to capitalistic consumption and also coincides with self-creation under neoliberal ideology.

Furthermore, as globalization creates a somewhat “ambiguous cultural identity” and as neo-liberal capitalism emphasizes lifestyle and identity through consumption practices, youth becomes an ideal class for the neo-liberal capitalist world system to target as a consumer group. In fact, we must remember that the concept of “youth” itself is entirely socially constructed and was conceptualized synonymously with capitalism. As Buckingham maintains, the concept of youth identity has been positioned as a “critical period of identity formation,” (Buckingham 2) and has been popularly categorized as a period of uncertainty and instability. Hence, the ability of the neo-liberal capitalist system to attach these attributes to youth identity and the widespread acceptance of these attributes demonstrates that the idea that “youth is increasingly defined through the operations of the commercial market” (Buckingham 4). In addition, Pilkington and Johnson argue that in the face of globalization, young people are forging identities that are less based on traditional communities (such as locality, ethnicity, class, race) and more based on ‘taste communities’ or ‘lifestyle enclaves’ in which consumption is the central mode of practice (Pilkington & Johnson 265). Moreover, although the neo-liberal capitalist system suggests that individuals exercise more autonomy in making consumer decisions regarding their identity, one could make the Foucauldian argument that individuals are no more autonomous than they were before neo-liberal capitalism and globalization. That is, perhaps individuals are still subject to complex structures of power that dictate social judgment and control, and neo-liberal capitalism has only caused these dominating forces to seek subtler and more subversive forms of exerting this power. As Rebekah Willett argues, youth in particular are “being encouraged to construct identities in terms that are aligned with consumer culture: far from being able to “express themselves,” the forms of that expression are in fact being regulated in ever more subtle ways” (Buckingham 10). Hence, the formation of youth identity is one that is perpetually implicated in complex structures of power, “fighting for control of its meanings, investments and powers” (Latham 15) as well as “fighting to articulate and thereby construct its experiences, identities, discourses and social differences” (Latham 15). Thus, in this regard, one could consider the rise of globalization and neo-liberalist capitalism as resulting in a structural shift to leveraging a “softer” authority— one that operates in subtler and more subversive ways in order to encourage particular patterns of consumption and to reinforce hegemonic convictions.  

Accordingly, Kathy Davis’ sociological concept of ‘agency’ aligns with this discourse, which implies that ‘agency’ is often misconstrued as free choice, and what distinguishes ‘agency’ from free choice is that ‘agency’ is “always related to social structure but should not be understood as total determinism by the structure” (Karupiah 14). Davis’ concept of agency also suggests that although individuals are subject to increasingly subtle and subversive structures of power as a result of globalization and neo-liberal capitalism, the individual may still possess a degree of knowledge and understanding to a certain extent and perhaps should not be dismissed as completely incognizant. Nevertheless, Davis’ concept of agency prompts not only the question of how but also to what extent do globalization and neo-liberal capitalism influence the consumption of youth identity as a commodity? After all, we must consider these complex structures of power not only in relation to whom they are exerting power on (the consumer), but also in relation to whom they are competing against (other structures of power). 

Globalization and neo-liberal capitalism have shaped an overarching, variable and complex environment of youth culture— one that is conducive to and driven by neo-liberal capitalist motives. In doing so, youth becomes targeted as a stereotyped consumer class in which individuals are encouraged to exercise a perceived ‘free choice’ of self-expression in terms that can be aligned and regulated with consumer culture, and in which structural inequalities often get obscured in the process as dominant structures of power reinforce hegemonic notions in subtle and nuanced ways.

Sources

Buckingham, David. “Introducing Identity." Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Edited by David Buckingham. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 1–24.

Ching, Leo. “Globalizing the Regional, Regionalizing the Global: Mass Culture and Asianism in the Age of Late Capital,” Public Culture, Volume 12, Number 1, Winter 2000. 233-257. 

Hall, Stuart. “The Local and Global: Globalization and Identity” 1997.

Karupiah, Premalatha. "Modification of the Body: A Comparative Analysis of Views of Youths in Penang, Malaysia and Seoul, South Korea." Journal of Youth Studies 16.1 (2013): 1-16.

Latham, Robert. Consuming Youth, 2002. 21-31.

Pilkington, Hillary and Johnson, Richard. “Peripheral youth: Relations of identity and power in global/local context,” European Journal of Cultural Studies, 2005, Vol 6(3). 259–283.