[zyklonix]

That’s a fair point, material abundance and consumer freedom have lifted billions out of hardship. What I found eye-opening in the essay, though, is that abundance can coexist with emptiness: when every decision is individual and transactional, we lose the shared meaning that once came from depending on one another. The argument isn’t against comfort or choice, but against mistaking options for connection.

[weitendorf]

I interpret it differently - the author is arguing that in becoming increasingly free of the hardship and consequences brought by lack of choice, we became increasingly disconnected from others because we didn't have to rely on them. But that doesn't have anything to do with milk, or mean we're not free. People actively exercise their freedom every time they choose personal convenience and optionality over other people.

It's not the lack of freedom, but an outcome of it that the author finds undesirable - same with their argument that the amount of choice is so overwhelming that it begets freedom. I've been to the grocery store enough to just get what I like and get it out - you either have to willfully participate in it to let something that unimportant overwhelm you, or think your inability to not get overwhelmed is universal or important enough to not realize that some people want those options more than you, or just are unbothered by it.

If you allow yourself to participate in something meaningful then you just won't care about having so many unimportant decision to make, because you'll choose to not think about them, even if it means you have to accept that there might be even worse outcomes than picking the wrong carton of milk. Personally, I believe that it's what might actually help the author get over whatever it is that causes them to point the finger at having too many options - find something where your decisions matter.