“Consumerism and spending habits, good or bad, do not determine collective wealth or economic strength. No community becomes rich, nor can one become poor, as a result of their spending.” What is the myth? That Black American “buying power” is an economic indicator of the overall health, well-being, and capability of the masses of Black people. What is the propaganda? That Black American “buying power” is the vehicle for transformative change, if only Black people just learned how to spend and use this “power” on the right things.
In the Myth and Propaganda of Black Buying Power, Dr. Jared Ball seeks to dispel the longstanding notion that Black Americans—collectively—have ~$1 trillion in “buying power,” the majority of which is spent on frivolous endeavors and conspicuous consumption. Dr. Ball further details how this mythology serves as propaganda for the white power structure, shifting blame onto Black people for their collective condition, rather than the social order’s systematic and deliberate extraction, exploitation, and exclusion of the masses of Black people.
As Dr. Ball details, the concept of buying power may have been initially rooted in working people and labor’s desire to determine whether their compensation met or exceeded the cost of living, but it was quickly co-opted by government and media and used to stifle resistance to the social order. It was first employed by the BLS to ascertain how much working people needed to be paid to be able to afford basic goods, while still ensuring corporate profitability. However, it was later used as a tool to shift blame onto the Black masses for their economic degradation, alongside a tool for Black media moguls to attract white investment.
While Dr. Ball does a really good job detailing how buying power isn’t what proponents say it is, he sometimes takes his argument off the rails by stripping away any and all economic connotations to the term. He glosses over the point that, initially and throughout its development (despite its co-optation), buying power did have to do with how much income a particular group had, even if it was only for the purpose of consuming products made available to them. Instead of dealing with this fact, he shifts focus to the notion that buying power doesn’t address income inequality, something its proponents never even claimed. The book would have been stronger if Dr. Ball provided a comprehensive economic analysis of the extent to which Black incomes or real wages has risen (or remained flat) overtime, so as to detail whether Black people in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s (and even today) were indeed able to purchase more necessary consumer goods. Also, the point about buying power not taking into account credit and indebtedness should have been given more attention.
What Dr. Ball makes clear is that buying power is not political power, and isn’t even entirely indicative of economic power because it ignores levels of wealth and indebtedness. Further buying “power” ignores the reality that consumer spending actually empowers the owners of capital (not merely the owners of businesses), and since Black people own little to know capital, and have little to no chance to become capitalists in America, buying power (i.e. consumer spending) will never be a vehicle for economic mobility or equality. Ultimately, this book is a valuable retort to the people who claim that all Black people need to do is become more “financially literate,”—and alter their spending habits—in order to collectively advance (and close vast economic disparities) as a people.