Critique of Subpolitics
It is evident in realistic and critical attitudes that the potential for consumer sovereignty is given provided consumers do not rely on the state or other formal institutions for responsibility (cf. vanBömmel 2003), but it does not describe the conditions under which it may be successful. Does it make sense to make a difference between status-oriented, conspicuous, but politically indifferent forms of vinyl consumption and those that amount to an attempt to alter the rules of the larger game? At what point does consumption become critical? When deciding what or where to buy? In the meaning that is attributed to and transferred onto the more durable things we consume?
The problem of defining critique as a conscious effort opposed to subconscious dispositions remains. How far into the field of commodity consumption can the tools of positive or negative ideology take inquiries? Is pragmatic and utilitarian consumption still a critique? White claims so, but indicates the limits by remarking that nowadays everyone knows about 'dodgy' connections between politics and economy, but since we are all invariably part of these connections, our political efforts tend to be undermined by our economic requirements:

(257)
White: Definitely, but this principle, this mechanism which is at work here, it's just / as soon as I / buy something I simply take part in it. / You know, it's a clear issue, I buy something, I'm part of it. / If I step out of the system somehow, as / self-sufficient farmer, as a hermit, living in the deepest province, then I can sort of make a distinction, but as soon as I / buy, I'm part of the whole thing.
(…)
that everything is so tied up economically, I think / there's nothing you can do against that.
(…) you simply can't change the market.
(…)
White: No, I think people don't give a fuck, Mercedes also // they produce weapons and still it's the most sold car.

Recent developments in the music market shows that consumers can make a difference; "for many years the music business has been greedy, short-sighted and manipulative, inflating prices because it knew the consumer had no alternative. Now, led by the pirates, the customer finally has the upper hand" (Lynskey 2003). Universal has now resorted to cutting CD prices by almost a third, portraying themselves as "the brave white knight" and resulting in an instant rise in sales. Consequently, "EMI and Warner are keeping a close eye on their rival, and both are understood to be contemplating similar tactics." (Lawson 2003). The music industry is frequently accused of price-fixing; as noted before, the price of a CD at the time of its introduction was arbitrarily determined (cf. Red 208) and has not been lowered since. "Two decades and four presidents is a long time to wait for a single price cut on what became a mass market good", as Ashlee (2003) comments on Register, a homepage (URL) critical of the information technology industry that, most interestingly, has an online store for wireless and mobile equipment, illustrating once more the linkages between techno- and financescapes and the conflicting ideoscapes therein.
Further apparent contradictions are Orange and Green's hardcore band, which has now resorted to basing the release of the CD edition of their second album on a written contract. The reported reason for selling the rights to their music is the possibility of a wider distribution by a larger, but still relatively independent network (113). At times, Orange reveals aspirations to attain major status, justified by their having been in the 'small game' long enough and by the pragmatic (or wishful) approach that they might exploit the system as has been done by artists who only used major contracts to build their own foundations in terms of own labels (Red, Orange & Green). Purple exposes this as the fantasy of counter-exploitation, based on his own experiences within the music business as futile (275). British artist The Streets, quoted at the beginning of this chapter, is according to RIAA Radar (URL) 'unsafe' to buy since the album is released or distributed by Warner (WEA). Even 'independent' artists have to rely on Majors for distribution beyond the informal micro-economy. Between the song lyrics quoted at the beginning of these chapters lie more than 20 years of music history which reflect nicely the shift from the Sex Pistol's verbal attacks on the music industry, to laying the responsibility into the consumer's hands. These cases illustrate the linkages between mainstream and underground in the form of corporate and informal economies, the penetration of ethnoscapes, for instance of punk-ideology-adherent collectors, by inevitable links to techno- and financescapes of negative corporate ideology that is seen to lead to the "dictatorship of the conformists" (Behrens 2003).
The cycles in fashions probably illustrate best that this penetration is not as one-sided as often portrayed by critical voices (cf. German 'pop criticism' as in Spex URL; Behrens 2003, Büsser 1998, Holert & Terkessidis 1997, Neumann-Braun et al. 2003). Mainstream corporations need the underground and vice versa. Retro-booms in mainstream music (now the revamping of garage rock in bands like The Strokes, The Vines, etc.; cf. Hollow Earth weblog 2003) are clearly a manufacturing of trends by the culture industry with subcultural capital drawn from undergrounds. This subcultural capital is in the process diminished in its own terms and transformed into popular cultural capital that is more widely distributed and more easily attainable, resulting in a withdrawal and reformation of subcultures around the remaining hard cores. Thus, in regular intervals, we experience renaissances of fashions believed long dead. The industry feeds from this capital, but undergrounds would not exist if there was no other side to which differences could be established that create micro-ideoscapes of authenticity.
The contradiction between the IFPI's litigation of copyright infringement and Sony selling the means of reproduction in CD-Rom burners pointed out by Green (108) shifts the perspective. The dominant macro-ideoscape of intellectual property rights and freedom of expression subsumable under discourses of democracy is reinterpreted by market forces to fit their respective needs. The piracy debate has shown that it can be used to guarantee market presence of corporations as well as it can be used to counter this encompassing presence by critical voices that inform consumers. In fact, mainstream mediation and motion co-create the problem that is simplified by the rhetoric against copyright pirates. On the other hand, consumers enjoy digital technology, but argue against the producers. Because digital technology as such is inherently neutral, it democratises in the same manner as it homogenises (cf. DuGay 1997, Jackson et al. 2000). The conflicts between homo- and heterogenising tendencies became instantly apparent once I started following links from both industry and 'counter-industry' homepages. Many contemporary artists find themselves in situations where they have to try to avoid siding with anyone in order to remain 'believable' and 'authentic'. A recent example is the latest album of German Punk/Pop band Die Ärzte, released both on vinyl and CD. The interesting point is that the CD is designed to look like a record, similarly, blank CD-Roms that look like vinyl are also available in shops: Considering their anti-corporate attitude, coupled with the fact that they are distributed and sold by Majors, it becomes questionable whether they intended it as a message or a commercial 'rip-off'. Whatever the case may be, both options are possible. In late modernity, and especially in the field of popular music consumption, we are always dealing with overcrossing and antagonistic discourses, ideologies and practices.