For most of history economies were fighting against scarcity, working to produce as much as possible to keep people alive. It is only in the past 100 years that we have had a problem with too much productive capacity. The consumer economy you are describing is one way to solve that problem, in which increased supply stokes increased demand. However it appears to have been a fleeting solution. Number one, needless consumption is environmentally destructive. Number two, consumerism is hollow and a poor motivator compared to poverty. For the latter reason more than the former (although the former is more concerning), I believe many people are consciously choosing to shrink the population by having fewer children. And that is in many ways a completely sensible reaction to overcapacity and overpopulation.
There is no dictum that consumerism is the only way an economy can work. Consumerism is (not exclusively) a manifestation of mass affluent democracies, but I can imagine other systems. The economy ultimately is a mixture of social norms and economic laws. There's enough leeway that I don't think you need mass consumerism.
The devil is in the details, however, and the big question is: who will inherit the earth? Increasingly it's a question of motivation and not survival.
There is no dictum that consumerism is the only way an economy can work. Consumerism is (not exclusively) a manifestation of mass affluent democracies, but I can imagine other systems. The economy ultimately is a mixture of social norms and economic laws. There's enough leeway that I don't think you need mass consumerism.
The devil is in the details, however, and the big question is: who will inherit the earth? Increasingly it's a question of motivation and not survival.