It is the political task of the social scientist… to continually translate personal troubles into public issues and public issues in terms of their human meaning for various individuals. (Wright Mills, 1959, p.187). This report directly links cuts to public services with mental health problems. Well-established psychological research that explains these links already exists. However, this knowledge has been missing from the debate on austerity so far. Psychologists are often able to see the effects of social and economic changes on people. We also occupy a relatively powerful position as professionals and therefore have an ethical responsibility to speak out about these effects. It is high time you introduce your own austerity measure in order to maintain your sanity.
What Is Austerity?
The term austerity refers to a set of economic policies that a government implements in order to control public sector debt. Governments put austerity measures in place when their public debt is so large that the risk of default or the inability to service the required payments on its obligations becomes a real possibility.
The goal of austerity is to improve a government’s financial health. Default risk can spiral out of control quickly and, as an individual, company, or country slips further into debt, lenders will charge a higher rate of return for future loans, making it more difficult for the borrower to raise capital.
Community psychologists are never in any doubt that austerity is a psychological issue. Some may need clarification, fearing the danger of crossing onto political territory and losing objectivity. Others may find the domain overly social and insufficiently psychological. The community psychology position is that psychological functioning can only be fully understood by appreciating its social context and that one crucial aim of psychology is to bring critical attention to how distress may be compounded by blaming individuals, families, and communities for problems that are in large part a consequence of the way society is arranged (Kagan et al., 2011; Orford, 2008; Walker et al., 2012).
Choose to be agents of change, not just victims.
The people this punishes above all are people experiencing poverty, those at the bottom of the pile regarding social and economic status and power. Their income is reduced, and they are either denied services altogether or maintained on minimal support packages that leave them desperately lonely and at risk of exploitation and harm. The impact of these developments is seen in increased rates of disability and physical and psychological ill-health. People’s self-perception and sense of identity are undermined on all fronts.
Austerity policies have damaging psychological costs. Mental health problems are being created, and further issues are being stored for the future. We have identified five ‘Austerity Ailments.’ These are specific ways in which austerity policies impact mental health:
- Humiliation and shame
- Fear and distrust
- Instability and insecurity
- Isolation and loneliness
- Being trapped and powerless
These experiences have been shown to increase mental health problems. Prolonged humiliation following a severe loss trebles the chance of being diagnosed with clinical depression. Job insecurity is as damaging to mental health as unemployment. Feeling trapped over the long term nearly trebles the chances of being diagnosed with anxiety and depression. Low levels of trust increase the likelihood of being diagnosed with depression by almost 50 percent.
These five ‘ailments’ are indicators of societal problems, poisonous public policy, weakness of social cohesion, and inequalities in power and wealth. We also know what kind of society promotes good health. Key markers are that societies are equal, participatory, and cohesive. Some critical indicators of a psychologically healthy community are:
- Agency
- Security
- Connection
- Meaning
- Trust
Mental health isn’t just an individual issue. To create resilience and promote well-being, we need to look at the entirety of the social and economic conditions in which people live.
The Virtues of Austerity and Minimalism
Living with austerity and living by minimalism is not popular in today’s world.
Most people today want it all – or have it all – and aren’t willing to give that up.
I am no different.
In my early twenties, I moved to San Francisco and started a performance marketing company.
It was successful – my first tax bill was a nice multiple of most people’s annual salary.
You can imagine what followed.
First-class flights. Five-star hotels. Putting up my friends in five-star hotels. Twelve trips to Vegas in as many months. More tech gear than I knew what to do with.
Sitting in my downtown apartment, I asked myself, “Hmmm, what else can I buy this week?”
It goes without saying that all the excessive consumption was not healthy for me on a financial or psychological level.
Over the years, a combination of observing friends who are much smarter than me and some common sense made me rethink how I was living, and that has evolved into a sense of austerity and minimalism.
Here’s how I look at it now.
Austerity or Minimalism?
Austerity and minimalism are two sides of the same coin. The same thing is seen through a different lens.
Austerity is the glass-half-empty version. When people think of austerity, they think of harsh economic conditions. It sounds severe and a little scary.
It is also commonly linked to being ascetic 1, but as you will see, it doesn’t have to be that extreme.
Minimalism is the glass-half-full version. It is cool to be minimalist, have less stuff, and declutter. It’s about having and using what you need and not worrying about the rest.
Austerity or minimalism – pick the term you prefer and live by that.
Why Be Austere or Minimalist?
The only real reason to live by minimalism (or austerity) is if you choose to.
For me, the trigger was the realization that my life was becoming ridiculous with the accumulation of “stuff” that I didn’t use frequently. Extravagance is nice, but because of hedonic adaptation, it became old fast.
Over the years, I have developed some reasons to support the decision to live a more austere and minimalist lifestyle:2
- The internal frame of reference.A little hardship and suffering is one way to build a more robust inner frame of reference.
- Wanting to be independent of my stuff and the need for it.3
- Periodic discomfort.4 This serves as a reminder that things could be much worse… or better.
- People are happier when they own less stuff, including others. This also counters hedonic adaptation.
- Less psychological stimulation means fewer things to think about. This fits nicely with living with simplicity, which is also a virtue.
Defining Austerity and Minimalism
Is this just about material stuff?
The terms austerity and minimalism usually refer to material possessions.
Money is one part of that, stuff is another, and psychological stimulation is yet another.
Any of the resources that make up our productivity stack are things that we have finite amounts of and spend on.
Being minimalist means being austere with all those resources, not just money or attention. This ends up being expressed as self-discipline, plainness, simplicity, and minimalist living.
Can’t I have nice things?