Opinion

Capitalism’s appropriation of spirituality

NATASHA SHANTZ OPINION INTERN

From meditation apps to TikTok and Instagram in uencers giving virtual tarot card readings, spirituality has gone online.

While it has become massively popular as a result, many still harbour doubts about its authenticity. While it’s worth questioning the credibility and the maintenance of traditions when it comes to the online appropriation of spirituality, I also see so much personal value in it as well.

Spiritual practice, up until recently, has historically been intimately tied to religion. e di erence between the two can be vague, but generally, spirituality is concerned with an individual pursuit of satisfaction and purpose, while religion follows a speci c set of rules and is usually institutionalized.

Whether it is Christianity, Islam, Buddhism or any other major or minor religious group, all religions incorporate some ideas of personal growth to reach a higher state of being. Even pagan religions, those that don’t follow the beliefs of mainstream institutional religions, still have their own traditions related to speci c forms of worship and personal connections to their concepts of the divine.

In the past couple of centuries, this correlation between religion and spirituality has begun to fade as less people identify with institutional beliefs.

With atheism rising in popularity, practices like yoga or meditation that generally stem from religious traditions have become distinctly secular. So, if individuals in the 21st century feel a desire to develop their personal growth but do not have any religious a liations, they have many accessible tools online and fully within their reach.

Although the capitalist mindset of today has majorly pro ted o online forms of spirituality in this way, it nonetheless provides useful resources for many that may not have been able to reach them otherwise. I, for one, have bene ted massively from my go-to spirituality tools. Whether I’m using online meditation apps like Insight Timer, nding yoga and pilates channels on YouTube that have allowed me to work my body and feel like I’m mentally in a good space or looking up the meanings of crystals, whether for fun or for deeper research, I have found myself through online spirituality, as much as I hate to admit it.

Many genuine spirituality gurus would likely be disappointed by my view on this topic. While I see the many bene ts of accessing spirituality online, there are also many wellness in uencers that reek super ciality and have the bare minimum of knowledge about their pursuits instead of being credible sources. ey often gravitate towards practices like manifestation that don’t have a lot of o cial scienti c founding or guidelines. As a result, it can be very easy for attempted spirituality in uencers to sound as if they know what they are talking about. It may be a side hobby or a particular passion for them, but that is no way of con rming their credibility on the topic.

However, there is a lot of understated e ort that goes into truly understanding practices like manifestation, a kind of e ort that is generally ignored in favour of seeing it as an easy, wishy-washy way to spew self-invented theories.

I think that while exposure to ideas about manifestation and spirituality, although they may not always initially be fully accurate, still pave the way for people to explore their own spiritual desires and grow in a deep way.

If the discovery of a sketchy in uencer eventually leads to a thorough understanding and appreciation for the genuine roots of one’s spiritual practice, I don’t see this online discovery as wholly bad whatsoever.

As for ways to support mental health struggles, accessible spirituality resources are a godsend, once again providing support to those who may not have been able to nd it previously.

Struggles like anxiety and depression do not disappear with a singular 10-minute meditation, but I know from personal experience that these tools can still help in the process of coping. is doesn’t mean capitalism’s appropriation of spirituality is acceptable through-and-through. I could also go on and on about why capitalism pro ts unfairly o of age-old traditions. While this is fully true, it also has to be acknowledged that on a very personal level, accessibility to spirituality through online platforms has changed my life, and I know it has done the same for many others. at’s got to stand for something.

MARYAM AHRARI/CORD PHOTOGRAPHY

Cruelty of hostile architecture in Waterloo

AMAN KHAN

OPINION CONTRIBUTOR

e subtle cruelty of hostile architecture usually goes unnoticed.

As a fellow student, I have been guilty of unintentionally turning a blind eye myself, but once I learned about the story behind these ‘trendy’ pieces of architecture, it became impossible for me to even walk to school without seeing them. e use of hostile architecture, also known as ‘anti-homeless architecture’, is portrayed as a method of preventing crime, to discourage ‘anti-social’ behaviour, or as a ‘cool’ new architectural feature, but in reality, these features are merely a message to unhoused people that they are not welcome here. ese features, such as third armrests or dividers that make benches or chairs so uncomfortable, are done intentionally to prevent people experiencing homelessness from being able to sleep on them. ey are punished and scrutinized for simply existing and doing what they can to nd a place to rest. It is claimed to be a method of reducing crime, but since when is lying down or taking shade from the rain a crime?

Instead of addressing the causes of homelessness and working towards reducing it, the city is making these individuals’ lives harder than it already is.

By limiting their movement, the places they can take shelter and rest, these people are being

alienated from the community and made to feel as if they do not belong. It is so much more common than we might think; we see examples of it at parks uptown and at bus stops near McDonald’s.

Keep in mind, these are public areas, so there are no restrictions about who can occupy those spaces. at aspect of ‘allowing all’ does not apply to people experiencing homelessness. ey are kicked out of their encampments and then prevented from lying down on public benches.

What options does this leave them with, as they navigate keeping themselves adjusted to the elements? It seems that society just likes to cover up instances of ‘visible poverty’ by preventing unhoused people from resting in a public area on public property.

It is completely inhumane to treat people this way - especially people who are trying to survive and have a better quality of life.

Society’s ignorance of the barriers created by hostile architecture contributes to the di culties these individuals endure daily.

Some might not realize what it means when a bench has a hostile feature, but others may knowingly ignore it, as they want to avoid any form of interaction with unhoused people. ey want to limit the chances of having any sort of ‘upsetting’ or awkward encounters. Not everyone likes to be reminded of the privilege and luxuries they have.

They are punished and scruitinized for simply existing and doing what they can to find a place to rest.

-Aman Khan, Opinion contributor

SADIYA TEEPLE/CORD PHOTOGRAPHER