I was wondering if anyone has any Marxist literature related to this topic, if it exists at all. Talking about "treats" is very much a part of the site's culture, so I'm wondering if this part of hexbear has any grounding in the Marxist understanding of the world in the 21st century.
This is not a shitpost, I'm genuinely curious. Thanks! 
As far as I know the specific rhetoric comes from Matt Christman and is basically just updating the language used to critique consumerism and luxury commodities into something more vulgar and intuitive. The concept is definitely rooted in general Marxist discourse on luxuries and consumption although what's sticking out the most in my mind right now are pro-treat Marxist things like the quote about workers not only needing bread but also roses - that is, that luxuries without pragmatic use value are actually still necessary for morale and humanity - or how the Soviet Union did so many things that were just little "it would be nice for people to have this and we can provide it for them" shit like the carbonated water fountains.
I don't have any specific reading about the topic though.
Honestly it's just a modern take on the "bread & circus" concept that goes back to city-states of the ancient world. It's not unique to the US and is even something socialist governments must account for, but with the US it sure seems like an entire cultural identity has been built around consumption of treats. Just look at what happened in the US when COVID caused mass media entertainment (television, movies, novels) to be delayed indefinitely along with restaurants, bars, and themeparks closing down.
Other than treats citizens of the US often have nothing, living lives that can be quite hollow. Atomization. Freedom where to others they owe nothing and are owed nothing. No community, protestant religion centered around the individual, family is extremely shallow due to being limited to the so-called nuclear family that often abandons relationships when children turn 18, and suburban living where people often don't even know their immediate neighbors.
Yeah that seems right. Most countries have some level of commodity fetishization, but Amerikkka elevates it to the level of core national identity.
elevates it to the level of core national identity.
So much so that it invades the political discourse a lot. The nonsense "culture war" focuses heavily on treats most of the time.
We went from “women in the priesthood” as a cultural battleground to “women in my shitty live action service looter-shooter vidya”
Other than treats citizens of the US often have nothing, living lives that can be quite hollow. Atomization. Freedom where to others they owe nothing and are owed nothing. No community,
I don't have any specific reading about the topic though
Caviar with Champagne: Common Luxury and the Ideals of the Good Life in Stalin's Russia. By Jukka Gronow
"Let the people have treats, they want it, if we don't give them treat we will end up like Gorbatchev"
- Deng Xiaoping (paraphrasing) (I didn't make that up)
It's more or less the same thing as calling someone a first-worlder. It's an accusation that imperialism uses trinkets to distract and satiate first world subjects based on the labor of global South subjects.
That's not exactly what commodity fetishism is, but it's probably part of it. People often do value brand names in regards to their treats, regardless of the labor input.
Yeah I was going to say, it doesn't seem commodity fetishism explains "treats" fully.
Commodity fetishism doesn't mean a consumer going "damn I love commodities so much I want to fuck them", it means ignoring the social relationships inherent in the way goods are produced and consumed
you commiefornians will never ban my cheeseburger!
hmm that's one for the library, thanks comrade!
