Follow your passion: hustle culture vs anti-work movement.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ธ.ค. 2021
- Bonjour ✨
Last video before my little break!! Today we're exploring the meaning of the phrase follow your passion on the internet from hustle culture to the anti-work movement. Feel free to contribute to the discussion by commenting below. I'm super curious about your opinion on the topic :)
SOURCES/RESSOURCES 📚
Graeber, David. Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. , 2018.
Can We Fix Capitalism? Yanis Varoufakis vs Gillian Tett: • Can we Fix Capitalism?...
Antiwork reddit: / antiwork
Mark, Fisher. Capitalist realism : is there no alternative?, Winchester, UK: Zero Books, 2009.
Nat's video on the rise of the anti-work movement: • the rise of antiwork |...
MUSIC 🎶
alfredo - Vapor County - thmatc.co/?l=E9D9C7E7
SOCIALS 👩💻
Storygraph: @alicecappelle
Instagram: / aliceoverall
Enquiries: alice.cappelleyt@gmail.com
Salut !
I was a security guard once. It was by far the most BS job i have ever worked. I worked at one place where my sole responsibility was to listen for an alarm, and if i heard it i needed to go run over to the manager and tell them the alarm is going off. The managers office was right next to the alarm. So they would hear it too. So, in fact my only responsibility was to show up and look professional. But businesses need security guards on site as a way to appease insurance companies, so every morning i had to put my clown makeup on and show up to work even though i was a completely useless employee and pretend i was making a difference. It was honestly humiliating.
This means you should not take your job seriously and start a side hustle or start using work time to build a new career. Dont let them waste your life, if your job is bullshit then take that time to get real work done for yourself. Just make sure to maintain appearances since thats literally all they care about.
@Queen Christopher The Merciful glad you're still around and that you are better after everything happened
I know someone who also works as a security guard in the US. He says the condition are the same like yours. So, what does he spend his mostly free time during the shift? Watching Vtuber.
No joke.
Don't build your self image or worth on your employment. You'll feel better. Jobs of any kind are temporary at worst and at the end of the day, it's just a job.
Get a remote job during your job
"It's like 'there is no society, there are only individuals so don't expect the state to support you in any way,' but as soon as you hint that you don't wanna work anymore. You want to relax. 'well there IS a society, and you HAVE to contribute to its growth'"
lol this statement is so true. This irritates me so much about that narrative of the iNdIviDuAL
Which western individualist societies don't support you in any way? I'm struggling to think of any, so it seems like a huge straw man.
From the people who did the work in the past and hoped for a better future. The better future came but it’s still bent on the idea that you must work in order to have value. That’s the problem. We need to understand every generation lessens a load for the next. There will be people that will have virtually nothing to do besides live. That is good! You living is enough, use your mind to create, explore do human things, not waste your gods potential at minimum wage job for years of your life to serve an overlord ceo that dictates your life. otherwise you are on the streets. We have so much abundance in this society and it’s arbitrarily being exploited towards the demands of business tycoons. We should be striving for living standards of all people to have life’s essentials, food, water, and a place to sleep. No matter if you work or not. Miss me with the “you don’t need to live here to do that”. There is no place that doesn’t function without capitalism handicapping it in some manner. Governments own all the land that isn’t already owned. So there is no just live in the woods scenario. Been tried. When are we going to realize everyone wants a better tomorrow and we are all stuck on the same rock. We should be working together for our futures sake and create heaven on earth. There are no enemies, competition, hatred. We made it up! Lets be intelligent with our time, otherwise we are no different than the cows on the field eating whats given to them with no chance to change its circumstances. The whole idea of getting to “choose” is funny too. You don’t get to choose what’s in the stores and what they feed you. You didn’t choose where you live. But we can choose to put are guard down and willingly help each other to reach an earth where we don’t give in to the idea that one’s value is the amount of ‘production’ one makes and treating humans as commodities/transactions.
It's part of the system control. To promote individualism
@@17michaelboyd It isn't a strawman argument, moreso it points to the hypocrisy of the political system. In the US the conservative right wingers have spent 30 years trying to dismantle public education and low income supports such as subsidized housing under the guise of promoting individualism and self sufficiency. At the same time, their leaders provide financial subsidies to corporate share holders and have resisted all attempts to overhaul the social security system. The regions of the US that most spout the nonsense of individualism are also the regions that are most dependant on federal handouts.
Individualism is the biggest lie of all. They have trained people en masse to be sociopaths at best and psychopaths at worst
Not to mention being involuntarily homeless is massively more stressful and mentally taxing than his stunt. He was never truly homeless in the first place and could have pulled the plug on his little skit at any time. Performing a skit for TH-cam and being truly homeless are entirely different worlds. There were many other advantages he didn't consider in his "rules" page, etc. as well.
yeah. being genuinely homeless would mean he has to be on drugs, an alcoholic, deep in debt from shitty past decisions, have a criminal record, and/or bum on the street corner of an active strip mall. all while touting conspiracies to random passerbys at the gas station where he's picking up cigarettes from his 'earnings'
@@Kuzey457 Ok, sociopathic AI Bot acting like an edgelord in Mom's basement.
The people who complain about "who will do the gross jobs?" have never had to muck out a house or clean a bathroom. You just put on rubber gloves and do it, it's not that big a deal. I'd be more than happy to take a shift doing a gross job 15 hours a month or whatever if it meant living in a humane society.
Edit: 1. For those questioning my "gross job" credentials, I mucked out houses in Biloxi, MS within a month of Katrina, and the five months following. As in, clearing sludge from houses that had been flooded for weeks in 70+ F temperatures. That's "throw bleach on it" level grossness, and there were times when we did that. 2. I calculated the work hours to population for water treatment in the major US city where I live, and 500 people could cover that job in 15 hours a week, out of a population of 700k. That is minuscule. Sure, that's only one part of sanitation, etc., but still, .0007% of the population could cover 24/7 water treatment responsibilities at the current level, at 15 hours a week. 3. We could take care of each other and our communities for a fraction of the work hours we currently devote to generating more money for rich assholes.
I worked for a funeral home before transporting deceased for a short while. I didn't love it, and I like desk jobs much more, but if I had a choice between transporting deceased for 20 hours a week and a desk job for 40 hours a week with the same pay, I'd pick the transport option. But in both cases, I did the best I could with both jobs and looking back on it I'm proud of the care I took in transporting the deceased with as much dignity as I could. There is an element of pride in doing something worthwhile that a lot of other people find uncomfortable. But I think my desk job is still worthwhile also so I'll probably stick with that as long as the pay is good.
Recycling toilet paper
@@theboombody sounds like a fun gig
You have a good heart, and I would like to think that me and my loved ones do as well. The problem is that most people won't volunteer for it, there needs to be some kind of compensation for it. I had a conversation about this with a coworker who advocated the "I don't dream of labor" idea, and when we got to the topic of "how a cashless society would be able to incentivise people to do undesirable but necessary, work", she had no answers. The only ways to make enough people do the work that we need is money or force. And personally, I'd rather a capitalist society in which we at least compensate people for their efforts toward the greater good over a system in which the government, or individuals, force people with violence to do things they don't want to do
what about plumbing
It's so bizzare how becoming a "millionaire" has been fetishized. Almost as if we're working backwards conceptually. Rather than aiming towards financial independence/sustainability for yourself and your loved ones (which is what most people want, I believe), getting to the "high dollar money number" _becomes_ the goal. I understand why that's the case - but wealth for wealth's sake seems ... pointless. Money past a certain point just becomes so arbitrary.
Anyways, great video as always Alice!
Hadn't thought of this, but I agree... Capitalism is such a weird thing. For me a good a example of this is how NFTs became a thing. Basically, consumerism got to such an extreme that, in search of more things to buy, people are now buying nothing.
@@gabidois NFTs are so weird. There are some concepts in the crypto-space that I can get behind "in theory", but the way it's been utilized as one big money making speculative asset has been bleh ...
As others have stated here in the comments, meritocracy is a dangerous myth. I'm so glad I got to know your channel, your observations are so great.
Much love from Brazil!
Ludo, meu querido, vc por aqui o❤
its somewhat true though, in western countries
I don't think it's a myth in as much as it's something of a dead value in society. When someone can really prove themselves, people will depend on them, and they'll find opportunity. However, it's difficult to prove yourself when everything has devolved into nepotism and a bureaucratic numbers game that gatekeeps new workers out of the workforce, only to completely demotivate and demoralize them after they finally get entry.
@@deon6045 and why that happens?
@@retrigger_ because there is injustice in the world, and people have only added to the problem by throwing away empathy?
When I find myself stuck in the idea that "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism", I like to revisit this Ursula Le Guin quote:
“We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.”
Change comes from within. Tale old as time. Your thoughts become actions n so on. If people were given the right thoughts their actions may change to create a better world. Art is self expression. Express yourself.
That quote is beautiful
Capitalism is the most successful system humans have ever developed. Today the freest, wealthiest, healthiest, happiest countries are capitalist. Every other system, like feudalism, or it’s sister socialism, is worse, they have all failed.
So the reason it’s unimaginable to do away with capitalism is the same reason it’s unimaginable to remove your own eyes - simply life would be worse.
This is Glorious! 👏🏽👏🏽
@@redrkstone clearly not true. you can make anything sound great on paper, but get real. even if everything else you said was true, as far as the US goes, we are not free OR happy.
‘Technofeudalism’ sounds like a brilliant term! It encapsulates what’s going on perfectly. ‘F-A-A-N-G’ (Facebook/Meta, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google) fall under this. I could be wrong.
you can live without all of them if you choose - so it's not feudalism you are not being forced to serve any of these companies -- it's a choice to buy an Apple phone, subscribe to Netflix, etc...
@@sterlingmarshel6299 So you gonna work a job and live a normal social life, without buying a PC, laptop or mobilephone ever?
Sure bud.
Don’t forget Microsoft (I mean it makes the acronym sound less cool but still I think it counts?)
@@d.h-b7427 Yes, Microsoft is a major part too!
@@lilnoir4213 some days i spend hours thinking about how can i found a job or carrer that doesn't need to work with a computer or smartphone for 8 hours per day. And i keep falling. Even if you're an artist, writter, etc... you most likely to need to promotr yourself in social media.
Knowing what I know now, i don’t believe in anything such as a “dream” job or “career”.
Most work sucks and it’s just the truth, but people will cope with it by exaggerating how “great there job is!”
Work to me now is just a tool to get the money to support what i do outside of it, once you realize most of us are replaceable then you start to truly realize your own value and focus on yourself more and make time for other things and not just working all the time.
Don’t get so busy trying to create a life that you also forget to live it.
I mean, I’m a professional singer and cat sitter. I’m also a full time student and I’m not self sufficient at the moment but I absolutely have dream jobs.
@@manyagaver1946 You're proving their overall point. Very well.
From what I see, Engineering is seen as such an aspiration and the success stories it has produced has compelled people to pursue it although it’s not what many people didn’t want to. The ‘Arts’ are always seen as a cute hobby to have on the side.
I'm becoming more comfortable with doing accounting as a career and math and science as a hobby on the side. Math and science as a profession I'm not really interested in because most math and science I'm interested in is well over 100 years old, and that won't get you far career-wise. My interest in math and science that old could be due to the limitations of my intellect, but that's fine. We don't always have to look at the glass half empty. It can be half full too.
@@tashatylo "Bullshit" jobs are needed, nobody would be paying for them if they werent, of course the motives of these needs are completely subjective. The issue of low payed but apprently essential work is like the historical paradox on the price of water. Water seems to be more essential to life than gold, but the price of gold is always infinitely higher. This is because water is abundant and gold isnt, the same happens with work. The more people can do certain job the less will be its pay and that is just how our brains value certain activities.
Tbf I’m doing an arts degree and it’s pretty clear how engineering students graduate with much more employable skills when I’m stuck writing formulaic essays on papers and books no one outside of my course cares about.
You guys are off the mark a little bit. Let me explain. There has never been a shortage of STEM labor (maybe at the start of the cold war). For decades now a sizeable chunk of STEM majors end up in unrelated jobs. This explains why talking heads (we all know they get their talking points from pro-Capitalists think thanks) have made a point to disparage Social Studies degrees in favor of the "prestigious" STEM majors. Just like the current labor shortage, there never was a shortage of STEM workers; Capitalists just wanted to drive down the salaries of STEM graduates.
It is not so much that people pick the wrong major, rather that STEM is the last sector where Capitalists still don't have full leverage to drive down wages. Rest assured though, they have been working hard at making people get such degrees for a while now.
@@A_Box oh boy, show can you be so wrong. First of all social study is not science. Try getting a job with theology degree. The same thing.
Second: there is shortage of stem workers. That's why they're getting paid as much as they do. That's the way market manages shortages- whoever pays the most is not probe to the shortage. And it's good for the employees, because they can see for themselves what skill holds high value and pursue it. I think that a very small fraction of social science students could learn engineering and I'm sure that majority of engineering students could learn social sciences. That's why stem are getting paid and social studies majors are not.
And about automation. Boy, it's all about automation. An an engineer I have developed this year a script that saved me 2 months of my work. I have introduced a tool that saved me additional two months. Company saved my time, my work has become more valuable, I can focus on less braindead tasks and I got a raise. That's what automation is all about, it's good for you. Unless you like doing low paid braindead work.
"the answer to my question, is the question itself."
S o c i e t y
😂😂
no but great vid as always Alice 😄 i love the connection to capitalist realism. good to see more and more people referencing Fisher's work on youtube
@@AliceCappelle Did you ever read the book "the confidence Gap"? its a really good book I think you would like
Joker was right all along
I agree. The only reason he made 1M dollars was because of his physical appearance and presentation, and previous experience in building wealth. Most poor people stay poor because of their appearance, presentation, and experience. They are in survival mode, trying to get their next meal, their next sleep spot that hopefully doesn’t end in their demise due to horrible, malicious people out there. They lose hope, and give up. The TH-camr was and is privileged before, during, and after being “homeless.” I don’t even consider himself being homeless due to all the luxuries he had in hand that homeless people don’t have access to. It’s a bit redundant to preach that he made 1M$ in one year while being homeless when he had tools that helped him achieve that. Tools that the lower/poor class has no access to unless at the library.
Also to add on how to create a socioeconomic society where an individual can pursue (or not pursue) a career/passion is by making necessities FREE. Housing, food, public transits. Anything that aids to the human survival. Before anyone comes for me to the food option and how all food would be gone, that’s why we should have foods (of a certain amount depending on the size of the family) that should last them two weeks and so on so forth. As for luxuries foods that don’t pertain to the humans survival, should cost money as it is a luxury and not a need. Feel free to disagree or give a better idea!
This is a good reason why most middle class kids should listen to their parents. If you have parents that have some sort of decent income, you already have a head start. Don't throw it away on booze and drugs. But it still happens, despite all the warnings.
Despite the media,book,film portrayal of the nasty,mean,horrid old Scrooge/JR Ewing businessmen getting rich by screwing everyone around him in fact most people who make money at all have an engaging personality,personal charm and a degree of charisma. I make beautiful patchwork tote bags but I can't sell them because....well because I'm grim,lol....but my friend Mandy can,for her charity.becayse she smiles all the time she's joyfully,she has got an engaging personality. Any youtuber who wants to make a living at it needs an engaging personality and a degree of charisma helps too.
> his physical appearance and presentation, and previous experience
His physical appearance is merely a hoodie and backwards cap, a cheap and affordable costume that a lot of losers can be found wearing, too. But it plays into the presentation "I'm so driven to succeed that I can't even be bothered to dress well."
@@andrewflanders262 I think she's referring to the fact that he is a decently groomed, healthy white guy
Already have the answers, not hard. Let's cut the B.S he wasn't homeless, he literally cried the first night he thought he was going to sleep on a bench, and then got bailed out by that guy with the trailer. You have to spend atleast 24 hrs of no home to be counted as homeless
This is interesting from a perspective of someone who is literally an economic parasite. Recently and quickly disabled because of a neurodegenerative disorder, I rely on the people doing low paid work; their work is immensely valuable to me but neither the State nor capitalist companies feel the work is valuable and, hence, do not compensate them fairly. It is weird; I read Graeber's work and I watch people doing very important jobs that are literally s---- work, not BS jobs but work disrespected because it's s--- work, and I wonder in an age of technofeudalism that is also dominated by old people, if we realize that technology may not be where change is coming from. Like your videos, and food for thought.
You ain't no parasite
I never understood why people disrespect cleaners or carers. their jobs are hard enough already physically and socially since you're working with people (and not everyone will be nice to you).
I hope you don’t mind me asking
What’s your neurological issue? :/
It's the market that decides on prices. I.e. in my region software developers earn lots of money. Electronic engineers not so much. So guess what? Electronic engineers can rather easily learn to code and they do that to earn more money. So there's gradually less and less electronic engineers in the region and their price goes up too.
So why low skilled workers doing important jobs are paid peanuts? Because there's a lot of people able to do that and there's a lot of people willing to do that.
We all rely on people doing low-wage work. How many of us grow our own food, generate our own power, or ship our own goods? Being part of a modern economy means having a division of labour where none of us are self-reliant.
I don't think I've english enough to express how well written your videos are. Valid thoughts, respectful point of view, references and honest arguments. You truly are a gem in TH-cam Alice! Thanks for your beautiful work!
Under a UBI, the wages for those low paid, 'menial' jobs will go up until someone is willing to do them. The fact we can't imagine someone freely choosing to do them now just shows how underpaid those employees are and how they're being forced into those roles and exploited.
Also if the social stigma surrounding those jobs went away people wouldnt be so hesitant to get them
Like "oh you dont want to be a garbage man or a cleaning lady cause those are *dirty* jobs and you dont want a *dirty* job you want a nice *clean* job"
inflation is still a thing no matter how much you rant about UBI.
@@bloodontheblade7988You mind me asking if you think UBI will cause inflation to be worst?
@@donaldlyons17 ubi will require even more money printing than currently. Its as simple as that. End of discussion.
@@bloodontheblade7988 well it doesnt really all it requires is for politicians to not get paid 200k a year
When I heard the term "technofeudalism" I actually thought of the current system we have now of people either working highly paid, prestigious jobs in the "information economy" or the people who serve those who have those jobs in the service sector. Living in Chicago, I see this everywhere. Do you work in the Loop at a tech consulting firm or do you work at the chipotle down the block who serves those people when it's time for lunch? One group has plenty of money, benefits and economic security and the other does not. And it seems to be getting worse with Covid, in which one group could safely work from home and the other had to put their literal lives at risk to get those people food. I'm not sure what the answer is to bridging this gap, but I know we need to figure it out soon or people are just going to get more and more frustrated
Bro their lives at risk don't the varus got 99.8% survival rate or sumn? Or do you mean because it's Chicago they're liable to get shot in their commute
Ah, the sad emotional whine of wanting equal _outcomes_ from differing _inputs._
@A B ALSO you end up with tons of jobs _available_ but nobody _qualified_ to fill them as those who lost their "punch this metal part out all day" jobs can't move on to "this is going to require you to _think!"_ jobs.
@@snap-off5383 Now to be fare, the people that benefit almost always come from better and richer familes that the parents already worked in the field, on the other hand the retail worker pretty much can come from a broken family with the alcoholic mother. No one is saying that they should make billions, but a decent pay, at least to get a house, and respect will be enough. They are important to the society, litteraly we got so acustome to them that we do not ever stop and think how it will be without them.
@@ogfridgeman5546 That survival rate is not %100 so if 1000 people get it 2 will die at the very least and there are still lifelong detrimental side effects. It’s not necessary to live an awful life and it’s not the fault of those who suffer.
Honestly I find the concept of "follow your passion" confusing. I know it's supposed to be liberating, you get to do what you love and all, but it puts an unbelievable strain on something that's supposed to be fun and even makes you feel guilty when you don't feel like you're really passionate about what you do. The link between hustle culture and antiwork movement really helped make sense of it, great video.
I think the question is that fulfillment, in that "doing what you love" way ought to be decoupled from "productive" work, but not in the exact way it happens now; otherwise we'll be running out in circles. Shorter workweeks, automation, redistribution, etc. ought to help with that.
The problem I see with the "creative" or entrepreneurial way of dealing with that is that it seems to imply that "someone else" will do the "other" jobs, the unfulfilling, hard, laborious, dangerous, "non-rewarding" work. In that sense, it still kind of reserves meaning and fulfillment to the "deserving", the ones who have the "talent" or "will", the ~special~ ones, who will be freed to heed their call to greatness without restraint. As a saying here goes, "muito cacique pra pouco índio", "too many chiefs too few indians"; it's old and more than a bit insensitive, sorry, but you get the gist - everyone wants to be "their own boss" but okay, that often entails being someone else's boss too; if there's only "bosses", who's doing the working?
That view still seems to fuse work, as in "what you do most of the time", identity, autonomy and meaning so tightly in a clump that it becomes hard to admit that there are unfulfilling, hard, tedious jobs that will have to be done nevertheless. What if instead of that we organized work in such a way that yes, one might have to do something they'd rather not HAVE to do, but wouldn't have to be doing it for 50% of their time awake, and it'd serve their community and help it function? So that I might be a clerk or plumber or sewer technician for say, 5h a day or a bit more in emergencies, or for a few days a week and for a few years, and still have time to be a woodworker, baker, gardener, historian or astrophysicist in the spare time?
I think the fantasy of "never having to do ONE chore/boring job/anything I don't LOVE ever again because I'm destined to BETTER, more creative things" holds many visions of the future back, and indirectly devalues a lot of the work that goes into caring for people, things and the environment.
This is NOT a criticism towards Alice, or anybody specific; not calling anybody out, but that blind spot on driven, "I have a goal", "follow your passion" types irks me to no end.
BTW, been reading "The Dawn of Everything" by Davids Graeber and Wengrow. It has some ideas on how to deal with that, or at least a vision of the myriad forms societies might have organized, many without the need for the gross inequality and cult of hierarchies ours deem "unescapable".
Sounds very much like the society in the book ‘Walden Two’
@@Acehigh-Jenkins Did not know about it, going to take a look at it! :)
Also the society in Anarres (ULKG's "The Dispossessed") works a bit like this, with people drawing lots to decide who ought to do the dangerous job of radiation cleaning of something, iirc
As long as you have a decent amount of spare time to work with, you should be able to work out the rest of the details on your own. I got a degree in accounting in my spare time while I was watching pro-wrestling.
Trouble is there is no job that involves eating chocolate and watching TV.
To answer your question about who would do the jobs no one wants. Jared from wisecrack is living now in Finland and he tries to compare these countries on his personal channel. He compares the cab driver in America for whom this job is temporary. For him it is just a phase between unemployment and the "real job". He needs a ''real job'' that will earn him enough to live in elderly age without the need. So he don't care about his cab job and it results in not so great service sometimes. Cab in Finland on the other hand does not need to care about this. He is paying taxes that will leave him a pleasant pension. So he doesn't need to hustle to grind up top so he won't go bankrupt when he is old. And you can feel it sometimes in the cab, the result of this kinda system in Finland.
Maybe there are better systems already existing and still in the progress of improvement. It would be nice to tackle the efficacy of tried alternatives (universal income) and to systematically predict other alternatives that were only proposed and not been tried before.
Finland is a small country of 5 million people, the equivalent to a rural state in the US. The system it embraces is Social Democracy. While it sounds nice it wouldn't really scale up. Just took a look at any large country. America, Brazil, Russia, China, India. It just seems to me the larger a country is the harder it is to manage. The Welfare State hasn't or wouldn't work in these countries either due to corruption or some other socio-economic factor. Not to say improvements could be made, but still this idea that their model of governance would be just as effective abroad is naïve.
@@geraldfreibrun3041 None of the countries you've mentioned have even attempted a social democracy. There is no evidence whatsoever that "it wouldn't really scale up." You provided no sources and no actual argument beyond "I'm saying what I believe to be true."
I've had a cool time discovering your videos over the past few days. As somebody who joined "The Great Resignation" about two months ago, I find myself reflecting on my jobs, which have honestly been quite interesting, even non-alienating (albeit fairly proletariat, salary-wise). Out of college, I worked at a book bindery making artisanal wedding albums from scratch (we did Zuckerberg's album, actually), then conducted historic research on old homes that might need to be protected from demolition. After that, I worked for a social enterprise with a double bottom line, where we helped women experiencing homelessness gain production job experience. At 30, however, I'm exasperated by low wages and feel somewhat alarmed by my desperation for a cushy tech job. As somebody who pursues an indie music project (we're called rincs!) "outside of the office", it's also interesting that certain "art forms" are actually professionally unacceptable to "creative class jobs". I always feel like a bright red flag if I mention that I front an indie band during an interview...even at music tech companies! Anyhow, you have a fan here in Los Angeles; look forward to your next video:)
wonderful to see young people engaging with these ideas, questioning materialistic values, not being reflexively ironic, remaining cynical about technology and hustle culture. Bravo!
As a final year Law student, I find that the issue with our system isn't capitalism, but corporate personality. That a company is a separate legal person that generates profits for its shareholders does untold damage to our society. Throughout history, you worked to feed yourself, and traded excess creations for what you lacked.
In Ancient Greece, if you were not working for yourself but for others, you were a 'private' person which was akin to being a slave (and most private persons were slaves; private comes from to be 'deprived' of something - in Ancient Greece, it was to be deprived of contributing to the polis/ the public) The underlying concept is that those people worked for someone else - and hence had no control over their fate.
Corporates today have 'separate legal personality' meaning that they are legal persons who have rights and responsibilities, and can own property and land. When you work for a company - and everyone works for a company - you work for that legal person. This is true for even high paying jobs like directors, who often have to make risky business decisions and lower employee salaries to generate profits for the shareholders - who would otherwise replace them.
Shareholder however, are not liable for their companies' actions except to the extent of their initial investment; hence a companies are often 'limited liability companies (LLC)'. It is interesting to note that Adam Smith was vehemently opposed to the formation of limited liability companies at his time (joint stock companies, often formed for colonial ventures).
It isn't capitalism that we cannot 'not imagine ourselves without', but a life without corporations - that really exist as kingdoms in and of themselves. I reckon many of society's issues with wealth inequality would be solved if the average joe made a living through his creations, and not a salary for working for another person. Such 'creations' do not need to be tangible either; people don't need to become farmers or blacksmiths. Many people who work 9-5 in an office are creating intellectual property (contracts, computer programs, advertising communications, etc...) and offer it freely to their employer as virtue of their contract of employment.
Please see 'The Corporate Criminal: Why Corporations Must Be Abolished' by David Whyte.
Yeah I can agree on that a focus on shareholder priority isn't a great theory for social helping (I forgot the word) but implementing a stakeholder theory could mean that the economy take a hit and companies would lose massive profit if every company would take this route. So I still think that there would be a shareholder priority although I do agree that many who work on new IP just give it away to the company is depressing when they could have created their own wealth but some rather comfortability rather than risking their lives to push an idea where there is many great incentives to sell their ideas to companies that have more power than a sole person that came out of a 9 to 5. Not only that there are jobs that aren't about creativity such as a corporate lawyer or a paralegal, truck driver and other jobs. Therefore these jobs became a salary based jobs since it was an easy way out a "fair" however I hope that we all can get paid what we should be getting paid and yes not on a salary but making our money throughout our creativity althought realistically I doubt that there would be that kind of world. Il read the article too since that could also be a great reference for my essay.
The problem of the average joe making a living through his creations is that once you go freelance, you have to take care of everything - networking, making contracts, all sorts of legal issues, etc. Having seen what running a small startup takes and how precarious existence it is, I can see quite a lot of value in being able to just clock in, do my job for X hours and than go home with a clear head while my enterpreneur friend is losing another night of sleep over some project with a difficult client.
Simply put, if you're not a part of a company with sales department, legal department and project management, you have to become you own salesman, lawyer and manager.
I'm not saying that mega corporations with questionable practices like Amazon are cool but there always needs to be some mechanism of connecting the supply with the demand, and that facilitation is a job in itself.
That is so extremely naive. Corporatism is capitalism, my friend. It is an inevitable outgrowth of capitalism. You can't have a system where profit and competition are core dynamics, and then get surprised by businesses growing to insane levels in order to hoard more wealth.
In India, the conversation about ‘meritocracy’ comes up a lot. People don’t understand it’s a term used ironically but use it to defend systemic exclusion of marginalised people. And there are who oppose the reservation of marginalised groups by taking advantage of quotas or affirmative action outside India. It took me some time to move away from the conditioning and come to the conclusion that I can turn my social capital into economic capital but so many people don’t have that.
I'm from south america and the situation you're describing is very similar here.
@@monjeanarquista3893 Yes, the exclusion of people is equally severe there, I presume?
Bollywood is the main reason why skin bleaching is a billion dollar industry in India. No matter how talented you are, if your skin is too dark, you won't ever be cast in a movie. And that's just the entertainment industry.
@@PokhrajRoy. yeah, it mostly depends on wheter you have a lot of social connections or born in a rich family with foreign last names.
Aye I agree with you but shouldn’t the correct course of action be to empower the marginalised groups to be able to climb up the social ladder? By focusing on public education and welfare so that the poorest of the children have the ability to climb the social ladder. There is no reason that >50% of the seats in government jobs and educational institutions be reserved. The poor lower caste person won’t have the abilities to pass the exams or do his job properly, because they didn’t have access to good education, same for the poor upper caste, while the middle and upper class has to suffer from less available seats and incompetent people in institutions. Reservation is helping nobody but politicians who wanna get some votes and look like they’re doing something. It is just driving away capable people from our country, and doing nothing to help the marginalised.
Great video as always, Alice!
As time has passed by and I’ve worked for longer, in my opinion, the I don’t dream of labor movement’s core is freedom and owning back our lives. I realize I spend way too many hours in traffic, and when I’m back home I’m usually too tired to pursue my hobbies.
To me this movement speaks about longing doing whatever you want with your life, spending time as you want, and it being fine. No good or bad option, just options free of judgement.
Life lately feels like it belongs less and less to us, and more to the corporations we work for, so it makes sense to me to want that freedom back, to not dream of labour.
I feel quite conflicted about the idea of hustle culture... On one hand, I do firmly believe in the individual and in making the best of oneself and one's situation, but on the other hand, I don't think making money should ever be the primary motivation. Sure, you need money to survive, but having seen many people that have lots of money but are miserable and horrible people, I'd pick individual fulfillment and growth of character over having millions in the bank every day. Being able to combine the two - developing something that you love doing and making huge money from it - is a luxury that I don't think many people can achieve. If you do, that's great and all, but the homeless experiment is a bit misleading in that regard. Try again with an IQ of 80, a drug addiction and no access or understanding of the internet.
I am going to hustle,
but I am going to hustle my mental health and life's meaningful things
You got it right. Read the Bhagavad Gira or Stoics and you'll see they discovered this thousands of years ago
We need money to survive because that's what this technofeudalistic society has made for us. We just need food, water and good climate conditions. Education and love are also essential for our full development.
Since humanity is so deep buried in misery I think we should just go against the concept of money itself (of course capitalism too but at these point we ought to be more radical). It was created in ancient times to serve people due to inability to transport things easily. But that's not true anymore. I always think about that but people might think I'm crazy but even that once again proves the saying "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism".
Yeah, it's kinda cute to do when SOMEONE does it, but I really don't like the trend. It makes it feel like EVERYTHING is suddenly an icky and gross advertisement. I don't want to be advertised your art, I want to look at beautiful art someone made for the sake of making it and if I want to buy some, I will come to YOU to ask if I can commission or buy some. Saying you do commissions or sell it is fine, but not everyone needs to actively be a brand. Along with that, I may be pretty smart according to people around me... I am NOT a very independent person. I need to be taught shit one-on-one and thenIcando it really well. I have given up on branding myself (I'm wasn't even interested in the fist place) because I am not independent enough to know how to do that. Not only am I too stupid to do it, it also just depends on luck. If you don't have it, you may NEVER be recognized and won't even earn anything, let alone enough to live off of. I hate how this stuff gets fetishized nowadays.
@@chamberv5261 on the other side... You would become a massive hoarder so you can always trade shit and you may have trouble finding that one guy who happens to need your 5 eggs and also HAPPENS to have 2 spare steaks he needs to get rid of which HAPPENS to be exactly what you wanted to have
My side is that I follow the Anti-Work Subreddit for occasional inspiration while realising that it may not be sustainable and hustling is not as exciting as it sounds.
I recently read the book 'The Dispossessed' and they had a fascinating solution to 'who will do the bad jobs?'. The solution is that everyone is asked to do these jobs for a week or two every year. If an individual actually enjoys that job, then they are able to spend all of their time doing it. It is a simple and elegant solution. Workers often reflect on how nice the change of pace is from their normal day to day.
Alice's videos has more information than the lectures I attend in Uni. Thanks for educating us Alice.
My beloved standard go-to imagined society/community has been for decades the anarchist vision of Mattapoisett from the novel Woman on the Edge of Time by Marge Piercy. It’s truly aspirational, and was literally life changing for me from my first encounter with it.
Looks like an interesting book, thanks for the tip!
We Americans tend to see ourselves as all "temporarily embarrassed millionaires."
tldr: Sacred Economics by Charles Eisenstein. A must read!
Really loved how you've woven seemingly opposite phenomena together into the narrative that questions the system that produces them both. I cannot recommend enough Sacred Economics by Charles Eisenstein. It is a remarkably thoughtful journey into these very questions you present. The book starts with the ubiquity of money, where any socioeconomic transformation must actually start with changing the money system. So it focuses on money rather than ideology or politics. It charts out a different kind of money that is aligned with the natural world and totally removes the inescapable exponential growth inherent in usury money in capitalism.
Explain the last sentence
@@keylanoslokj1806 The driver of the modern capitalist economy is interest-bearing money. Basically, whenever money is created in someone's bank account, it is loaned into existence, and that loan bears interest. Consequently, the whole economy has no option but to grow in order to cover this debt. Otherwise, the system would crumble under huge default rates.
That's why banks seek to lend the individuals or firms that might have the highest probability of creating more money.
That is why economic growth is a necessity in the modern economy, even (and especially) in times of health or social crisis. This kind of exponential growth did raise quality of life in western countries in the twentieth century, but most of the commons were still preserved. But it never stops, because it can't, so the capitalist machine started eating away at the all other types of commons, cultural commons (DRM/brutal copyrights), knowledge commons(paywalled scientific research), social commons (weaker social ties due to commodifying all services that used to be provided as gifts, rise of individualism and isolation, exploitative aspects of social media) and of course the environmental commons.
It's a huge topic. Essentially, this never stops, more of the commons is being turned into commodity, into something as generic and disposable as money.
The book is an eye-opening journey into the true essence of money as an embodiment of a society's values and the vehicle that furthers them. And he dives into a number of ideas (old and new) that transform the nature of money to align it with the real purpose. For instance, negative interest and internalization of social and environmental costs.
Good video Alice! I’d also say that the reason why tech seems like the only way to get rich fast is because software, once written, doesn’t need to be rebuilt again and again. If you sell coffee, you need a lot of time to prepare 100 cups. If you sell apps, once written, you only need to maintain it. Each extra coffee requires work, each extra app download doesn’t.
🤌🏽🤌🏽👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾Good observation !!! Amazing analysis really impressed with what you just said and yeah it blew my mind!!
@@AG-vh3lx 😳
The whole "realistic solution" thing really irks me when people ask it. Capitalist realism is a helluva drug. If the house you're in is burning down around you, getting outside of it is likely going to improve your situation. I don't think the unknown or even the unreal are more harmful than the omnicidal status quo. Graeber's books definitely got me asking different questions as well, glad you mentioned them.
If the house is burning down around you, walking into another burning house is not much of an improvement. Mixed market economies are the only way.
I’m planning to quit my 100k/year job for better mental health. This video inspired me to create a video about the great resignation. It took me about 6 months to create this on top of my full-time job, setting aside at least 4x of 1 hr workout per week, cooking healthy foods that take hours to prepare, rejecting so many night outs just to spend more time pursuing my passion while having so many people discourage me from creating meaningful videos online like this channel.
As you can tell, personal development isn’t a joke because there are so many sacrifices to be made, which are often uncomfortable but knowing that there are also so many like-minded individuals who have passion for becoming a better version of themselves each day and who are willing to show support makes me more motivated to keep pursuing my passion for creativity and intense desire to provide as much value as I could.
When I was a kid, all I wanted was to have a career that pays well so I can buy whatever I want but now that I’m grown up and went through tons of setbacks from losing tons of people in my life, getting lost in the world with full of life traps, being ridiculed for pursuing my dreams, having so many people tell me that I’m merely wasting my time creating a meaningful content online, and so on, I can say that long-lasting happiness can’t be bought or earned because it comes from within us.
The Wengrow Graeber book offers us the hope that these conversations we are having are society defining. We are currently having a global debate on whether we want to continue with capitalism. It may not seem like much now. But compared to the era of neoliberalism from the mid-70s onwards, in which such debate was almost absent from the popular sphere, this is a big deal.
On our side we have an unanswerable argument of the flaws of capitalism, the unethical nature of capitalism, the more democratic alternatives that can exist. But it's uphill against the debunked myths of capitalism because capitalism currently has all the power - which makes aligning with it rewarding despite its lack of moral or technical legitimacy.
Alice, with regard to who will do all the unpleasant jobs, I'd love to see you do a vid answering that question. Who _does_ do those jobs in worker-owned companies? Who does them in non-heirarchical organisations such as certain kinds of social, sports, or hobby clubs?
What ? in the 20th century 1/3 of the world was socialist or going towards socialism (more countries exist then western ones, i know its hard for u to understand) and all of them failed/collapsed or switched to capitalism. And no u don't have "unanswerable argument of the flaws of capitalism" i know marxists think they are smart but ur arguments easily can be deconstructed.
I’m grateful this popped up in my recommended. I’m lucky enough to have landed a remote job that pays extremely well, and I’m having to understand what effect this is having on my way of thinking in regards to my time. It’s great, but surreal. I’m paying more attention to money than I ever have but I don’t want to slide into an asshole’s way of thinking. This channel has opened up for me and I’ll be doing more watching me reading
hey, whats your job?
@@nisaeylulk I’m a graphic designer, but it’s for a big company, so I’m gratefully getting paid more than I ever have at the moment
One thing people fail to realize is that going from 0 to 1 is incredibly harder than going to 10 to 11. This is basically how wealth is built.
I've worked my ass off for years and have had good times and bad, highs and lows, etc. I've changed my line of work multiple times as well, for better or worse.
I do believe in hard work but the whole "hustle culture" is heavy on the BS (I mean just look at Gary Vee or Grant Cardone.)
I also think that the largest working generation in America, of which I'm apart of (millennials) has been sold a lie on top of multiple horrific economic shifts, from insanely inflated tuition, to multiple downturns in the markets, as well as some level of brainwashing in the universities that led us to believe that turning a wrench or not being a corporate lawyer or some sort of tech entrepreneur would mean we weren't "successful."
I've also noticed that learning about wealth, like owning property or having a real business (not an amazon affiliate account or something) was never really taught at all, and instead, you should just go to college because that's the only possible way you'll ever make it in life.
I succumbed to the myth of anything outside of computer science/business/engineering to be a useless endeavor. I work in IT in Big Tech, and gave up the starving artist life because, yeah, ultimately money does rule everything around me. I think artists are necessary, though... they provide us substance for this hollow existence. Art provides meaning where there is none.... because let's be real... life has no meaning, essentially. It is about what we choose to make of our finite existence on this earth. So if people think we should have more skills that contribute to modern society, then I hope people realize that the arts is more than just sitting around finger painting or whatever Ben Shapiro said (sorry, Ben). It provides means of coping with life and preserving what is left of the humanities. Civilizations would not be where there are today without it. Ok I'm done:)
Thank You!
life has no meaning when it's your life
I already commented this but repeating because I think this is relevant.
There has never been a shortage of STEM labor (maybe at the start of the cold war). For decades now a sizeable chunk of STEM majors end up in unrelated jobs. This explains why talking heads (we all know they get their talking points from pro-Capitalists think thanks) have made a point to disparage Social Studies degrees in favor of the "prestigious" STEM majors. Just like the current labor shortage, there never was a shortage of STEM workers; Capitalists just wanted to drive down the salaries of STEM graduates.
It is not so much that people pick the wrong major, rather that STEM is the last sector where Capitalists still don't have full leverage to drive down wages. Rest assured though, they have been working hard at making people get such degrees for a while now.
@@A_Box surely there is a corporate interest in getting people to major in stem, i can't argue that, but surely you understand that there are many more reasons why stem is seen as preferable to studying some humanities in university, right?
@@xenonsan3110 Ok, you've found one niche application. It still doesn't disprove the fact that there hasn't been a STEM shortage for a while now.
The entrepreneur culture is being promoted to distract from the fact that there are fewer and fewer viable jobs--which could be okay if we were still taken care of, but the big tech leaders are basically replacing workers with AI and investing in a culture to condition us to accept in instead of demanding proper adaptations (like UBI for an example)
Thank you for your thought-provoking videos! I just finished reading the Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin and maybe the anarchist society that she describes in there could be a partial solution! In this society, people mostly do the jobs they're passionate about but there is a rotation system for jobs that are necessary but painful. So everyone gets to do both basically. It's more subtle and interesting than that though, the book explains it better of course :)
I have a very hard time pursuing a career in playing and creating music because I am constantly worried that all my work will amount to me not being able to survive doing what I love. And I have much less time to pursue my passion because I am having to work a bullshit job at the same time. Worrying about survival massively kills my creativity, hope, and happiness. Feeling like I will never be able to fit into society the way I want to, doing what I love and am very good at, is terrifying and has driven me to suicidal ideation and plans many times. I think free education and a universal income (which we can definitely afford in my home country, the USA) would actually save me from a miserable life and possibly death because I would finally have the freedom to pour my heart and soul into the creation of music and art.
I recommend anyone interested in this to read a bit about the degrowth movement (there's a page for it that has some easy starting material/definitions). It has a lot to say on these topics and ultimately seeks to ask people/societies what we want out of our life/society.
Lol degrowth is bs u can still grow gdp and at the same time lower emissions. Also Eastern countries like China will just obliterate the west if u try to "degrowth"
i always love your insights, thank you for sharing them with us, hope you'll have a lovely break!
I know I have to work to feel mentally okay, but I also know when I work a job it feels like I'm being set on fire. Been feeling very down and out about the world lately. I think ultimately we'll figure it out, but I don't think it will be soon unfortunately
Chère Alice. I really enjoyed this video. My idea for a better world would be to encourage part-time jobs for as many people as possible. Not enforcing them, as this normally imposes hidden costs on workers, but supporting companies in offering part-time even for high positions. Digitalisation supports this with time-tracking, asymmetrical communication and shared calendars… and it would greatly help young parents in staying in the work-market.
I look at things such as the ideas everyone following their passion what really doesn't go through for me is who would build the houses and do the upkeep on the houses? I don't think a lot of the world would actually become seamstresses and tailors. Would that mean se resort to have small quantities of clothes and make our own? would we get rid of fashion? What about people who work in waste management, os there anyone who would do that? Well is there anyone who's going to work in the factories that produce plastics?
It's a very complicated idea to think of because so much of our daily lives are supported by things that people don't exactly have a passion for.
It's a reasonable concern, I can think of two possible solutions:
- financial incentive, when everyone receives a basic income the less popular jobs can be subsidised with a monetary bonus for those who'd like more luxury. For example, when there's shortages in certain professions in the Netherlands the government will sometimes offer a discount on tuition fees for specific study programs to promote enrolment.
- volunteering/duty, there is a Dutch saying that can be translated to "many hands create less labour" so with a large population only a minimal contribution would be required by the individual. It can be implemented in a way comparable to jury duty in the US, where participating in supportive labour is part of the 'social contract' you implicitly sign by living in an area/country (like the theory from Rousseau I think)
This is a good point, and I mean, I think capitalism has made it so we are all extremely severed from community ties, because the undesirable jobs that we all need are punted to the most economically desperate. Therefore, those jobs pay way less than a living wage for the most part. I for one would love to contribute more to my community and feel like I'm giving back and helping people, but when those opportunities are unpaid or paid very low, I simply don't have the bandwidth to do them because I am fighting tooth and nail to simply make enough money to survive. I think a lot of people wish to feel more connected to their communities, but don't want to go into poverty or give up precious hours of limited free time to do it. I would love to spend my entire life being a social worker, but it just doesn't pay enough for the emotional labor it requires. If we divided this labor up more equitably or offered more money for the work that actually makes the world run, I think people would love the opportunity to help their communities in a tangible and needed way that doesn't drain them of all their economic, emotional, and physical resources. I think that's the kind of society we should be striving for.
For the jobs that no one wants to do, we could give some sort of perks to people who volunteer to perform those tasks. Or it could be similar to mandatory military service where everyone must be a janitor (or whatever other unglamorous job) for one year of their life, but once they finish they can do whatever they want.
That's literally how Soviet union worked
I think David Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage is one reason why this isn't a thing.
I think of it on a small scale like a kibbutz or commune. Everyone who chooses to join a particular community has to give back labor in some form to that community for so many hours/week or per month and in return they get universal basic income to cover their expenses. They can choose what they do aside from those community work hours, they could have a job or explore creative pursuits or raise their children, whatever. The community work hours covers a lot of these jobs that people don't necessarily want to do. What if no one was the full time garbage collector but everyone did it for a few hours/month? Obviously for things that need training like plumbing we'd need people to specialize. It's just about who organizes the work assignments, how much choice you have in your work assignments, making sure there isn't bias in these assignments, everyone has to do unpleasant stuff and stuff they might not mind so much so it is distributed. I think about how in Japan there are no school custodians, the kids spend part of each day cleaning their school. They feel ownership over their school and want to keep it nice for themselves to learn in. It is applying that concept to larger scale communities. If everyone has to deal with the garbage they might not litter, they might recycle, reuse, compost, etc. There's a lot to be worked out in this but I think it is possible, at least small community by small community.
Lmao commie Mfs really gonna make mandatory service to clean toilets. USSR2.0
8:13 The idea of giving people the opportunity to be able to follow a passion is something I wondered about.
I'm a musical person and can play the harpsichord, pipe organ, and bassoon. I've started to become a bit frustrated with being a musician because I see it as being just an expensive hobby.
Even if I took up more main stream instruments (such as the clarinet, and piano) it's near to impossible to make a career out of playing an instrument. The organ has at least given me some part time work as being a church organist but it's still not something I could make a living off of.
On a side note I also have a pretty big ambition to create a pipe organ that is transportable.
The point is to help create more of a life for the pipe organ out side of the church, but downside is that it's not the sort of project that would make enough money to live off of even if it did fulfill its purpose.
pipe organs are amazing. your talent is valuable. its a difficult time period for the creative artist.
I told someone I made art the other day, and they assumed immediately that is was digital.
"On a side note I also have a pretty big ambition to create a pipe organ that is transportable."
See to it, do it, it's worth a shot, even if it pays shit
That's a neat idea that might appeal to a certain niche
@@1234567890noone Yeah, it's gradually becoming a thing, mainly in France. There's also quite a few portable carillons around, and even some carillon players with touring carillons.
What do you propose to be a solution to the issue of people that have artistic talent and passion, but cannot work with their passion because of money? Some countries have "arts grants". But this raises issues. These grants come from taxpayer money. Many people don't want to bank other people's artistic talents. Maybe creating an arts tax where people can opt in or out would solve this? Another issue is that *many* people have an artistic passion, but no talent. Maybe creating an eligibility test would solve this. Though this would require a "artistic talent evaluation institution", which also takes taxpayer money...
On a less serious note, open a GoFundMe dude. And try to divulge your idea somehow (i.e. through social media).
@@bva0 I remember video I watched a few weeks ago which was about organisation in Germany that promoted very modern experimental music. it was originally tax payer funded but there were a lot of people who despised this organisation as being unmusical and a waste of tax payer money.
Regarding crowd funding, I have thought about one day setting up something like a GoFundMe as even if I was to try and build the organ myself I would still need money for the materials.
My main problem at the moment is creating a design. I have some idea of what the organ will look like, but i need to create an actual technical drawings of the organ which I'm not able to do. I'd love to speak to an organ builder about creating a design, but I'm unsure as I probably couldn't afford to commission a design.
The EU has a few places with good systems. The best would be Finland for education and Denmark for following your dreams. Denmark encourages their people to pursue their dreams including going into gaming, music, and creative fields. It's a legitimate option they can safely take. There is no penalty for trying it and going to school after if it doesn't work and it's encouraged. I forget the specifics of it but it's why a lot of pro gamers come out of eSports. PewDiePie is another example out of this system. When trying your passions without fear becomes common place and doesn't have repercussions or giving up livelihood, a lot more can happen especially creatively.
Pewdiepie is from Sweden but is also a bad example bc he benefits from generational wealth. Both his parents are corporate executives in sweden.
Just found and binged about 10 of your videosl, keep it coming, you say what ive been feeling for so long with elegance.
subbed
One of the ancient Greek philosophers characterized the political systems of his time as a function of military power. Athens was a democracy because it depended on its rowers to enforce its power, and they got a say in where they rowed. Sparta was an oligarchy because that system was best for producing heavy infantry. Persia was an aristocratic empire because that's the best way to produce cavalry--and interestingly, that does seem to repeat in the Middle Ages, when feudalism and the rule of large landowners takes over to produce mailed knights (reaching its most extreme expression in Eastern Europe, where cavalry armies survived much longer, and where peasants had the fewest legal protections). The development of capitalism and liberal democracy went hand-in-hand with the turn away from noble armies and toward mass infantry and mercantile naval warfare.
I don't think it's mere coincidence that "technofeudalism" arises at the same time that the most advanced economies turn away from mass mobilization and back toward small, professional armies with specialized, very expensive weapons, whereas the high-water mark of both socialism and social democracy was during the age of mass mobilization, from the Levee en Masse to the million-man armies of the second world war. The power of the state is no longer dependent on convincing the citizen he has a stake in it, but on cultivating the most advanced high-tech sector to make the best high-tech weapons.
"The strong do what they can. The weak endure what they must." When push comes to shove, I believe technofeudalism is more or less inevitable as drone warfare undoes the gunpowder revolution. The drone is the new knight-with-lance, an arm that will never tire of scything down rebellious peasants.
I would like to read more about this. Could you please give me the name of the philosopher?
@@lylia3413 I think it was Aristotle, but I'm going off second-hand information--it was referenced in a lecture by Kenneth Harl (Tulane University) on the Peloponnesian War.
Also, Xenophon, Constitution of the Athenians:
"My first point is that it is right that the poor and the ordinary people there should have more power than the noble and the rich, because it is the ordinary people who man the fleet and bring the city her power; they provide the helmsmen, the boatswains, the junior officers, the look-outs and the shipwrights; it is these people who make the city powerful much more than the hoplites and the noble and respectable citizens. This being so, it seems just that all should share in public office by lot and by election, and that any citizen who wishes should be able to speak in the Assembly."
One can see, then, the logic of those who link the Athenian navy to the growth of democracy, and my own suggestion that the reverse can hold true--in a system where military power ceases to depend on the investment of the common people, some form of aristocracy will emerge, because the "noble and respectable citizens" become the true holders of power.
Polemos pater panton, it's a quote by heraklitos (war is the father of all things)
Quote of the Day: “Let us do commentary videos from the comfort of our bedroom, thank you.”
Some people make commentary videos, I just made it to comment 😂
I think it is my first comment on your channel, Alice, even though I watch all the videos and thiiiiink. The idea that came up to my mind was about who will do stuff nobody wants to do? And it was about the metaphor of parenting. I have a 5yo and many questions to the world. But if there is anything that I learnt during these 5 years is that having a baby brings you lots of love, gratitude, purpose and personal growth, which mostly is very good. But it kinda teaches you to do A LOT OF stuff you don't really want to do. Some of these things are about physical pain, some about dealing with unpleasant smells (sorry), some about saying no to your desires, etc. So what I mean is that you cannot have parenthood with only good stuff, questionable stuff goes in a bundle. But people generally want the good stuff, no nasty stuff please - capitalists or lefts - which is pretty understandable. But unreachable. Yeah, I am bad in communicating my thoughts. But I hope I expressed myself. I adore how commentary youtubers do it. Thank you, Alice, for bringing food for thought. And Merry Christmas!
I think one solution about the jobs no one wants to do is to just make people get involved for free. Just because the world needs too. People who collect trash for exemple, we could make a rotating of people doing that. A team of like 10 random people every week, collecting trash bags from their town. It would demand organisation but I think it could work. We are many, maybe too many but we could definitely use it. We could also organize things with teenagers in schools. Everyday, a few classes would go cleaning hospitals or institutions (not always the same classes of course, it would also be a rotating). With 100 teenagers on the task it would take maybe 4 hours to clean it all. Then they would spend the rest of the day talking and hanging out with the people who live there, humans to humans. It would make much more sense than sitting in a class all day, everyday. I don't know if it could work, but maybe it could... 🌱
This is possible! Organizational challenges don't even compare to the ones humans have already solved quite effectively in firms, governments or non-profits over the last century.
Those manual repetitive jobs actually provide one with fulfillment if done primarily as community service and if done sparsely; they only become soulless when done full-time, for they then completely sabotage the deeper human gifts of the worker.
Capitalism has engineered society into such levels of specialization that have turned unhealthy to the individual (boring work and no time for other learnings or experiences) and to society (professionals are consumed in their respective markets, almost unaware of the collective destination, for there is no one other than short-term profit).
Hell Naw. Count me out
A funny thing with the 'I don't dream of labor' movement and any successes they gain, it goes back to something Andrew Yang was talking about this week in one of his Foreword clips after attending a technology summit, that gaps between employer demand and available labor will speed up automation. When I think about it - in a way for people who hate their jobs but do it anyway and it's something repetitive - in a way they're delaying the speed with which automation catches up. What's genuinely scary - we really don't know what will happen when it's a consensus understanding that people can't reliably get a job, particularly when it's only narrow bands of the labor economy remaining and many of these jobs being of the kind that most people just aren't cut out for. That raises the issues of whether UBI actually offers incredible amount of top-down social control (the conniving apes we are I'd think being able to pull the strings on that would be any ideologues goal), and then you just have the general Malthusian background where misanthropy seems to be baked into the kind of competition we do at a lot of levels, meaning it will be incredibly difficult to come up with a post-labor system that isn't either dropping the majority off a cliff or making them sing whatever song or salute whatever flag which will keep their monthly check coming.
the saying of a meritocracy was originally a portmanteau of merit aristocracy. basically, only the talented got to be treated decently enough in society as a tyrannical aristocracy, and those unable to be talented would be treated horribly. the idea was resoundingly mocked during it's time, and only after it's time was it used unironically. the idea that you have to be the best at making money to be treated anything like human is something that I honestly wouldn't be surprised to hear out of 1930's Italy. those unlucky to be born with a physical disability or mental disability, well, they needed to be treated like shit, because they haven't "earned" being treated with the dignity of a person, because it's not longer the bronze age. you know, the time that they actually took care of their disabled and didn't treat them like cattle shit.
Hey, I really like your videos. they are well researched, writen and edited. thanks for breaking down a complex topic like anti-work and basic income and making easier to understand
The hustle culture and the anti-work movement are two sides of the same coin, the tech-industrial system trying to find a way to look appealing now that people are getting more and more aware of how soul-crushing and meaningless modern life has become. "You can become a millionaire in a year thanks to big tech" and "You can pursue your passions without worrying about a job thanks to big tech" are more similar than it appears. Both are proposed antidotes to the lack of purpose in most people's lives. Surrogate goals, if you will. I don't believe more technology is the solution, since it was technology's increasingly large role in our lives that brought us to this point.
Your videos are always food for thought, thank you Alice
I work with health and it's really stressful to think that in five years or less my work will be done by a machine, I mean, what will I do when that happens? Honestly, my work is kinda of a bs job but I still need it. Now it's like a race against time where you have to be in a job that a machine can't do so you won't lose it, so I understand a bit about that hustle culture
I work in small business accounting. Half of my job is tedious data entry and I think I'll be more than glad when it's automated. I learned so much more in school than I'm able to do on the job because I have to spend so much time on routine tasks. But it's tough to switch jobs because I have a good commute with a good boss, good hours, and good income. So I just beef up my skills more in my spare time so when I'm forced to change I'll be ready. I feel much, much more confident than I did 10 years ago when I hadn't even taken an accounting class. Now I've taken like 15 of them. And I went slow and steady so I wouldn't wear myself out. Some people could have done what I did in 3 years instead of 10, but they wouldn't have had any fun doing so.
@@theboombody Oh no, don't get me wrong, I understand why my job will be replaced by a machine and I even welcome it, but the situation in my country right now is not good and finding a fullfiling job that I can use all the knowladge that I gained in the uni is hard, I'm just in the beginning of my career but the future is bleak... So I don't want to be replaced yet
@@bibiplaystation Well, health is as stable of a field as it gets I'm sure. So if you're bad off, then everyone else will be bad off too. Can't help that.
I have always thought that the hustle culture is a temporal representation of a personality who loves to takes risks and is very ambitious - previously coined as enterprenours or yuppies etc. Contrasting with basic income or anti-work movement, I feel that that kind of a mindset justifies itself as the driving force behind progress in capitalism. More specifically, if we had basic income, then no one would be motivated to take risks and thus nothing would get done. Ironically, even though the hustle-culture icons are often with no doubt hardworking and successful, then the basis of their success comes from profiting off extreme consumerism or incentivizing non-productive tasks (ala "its not a product, its a lifestyle"). From my point of view, with such sources of income, they "generate less progress" than for example inventing new ways to generate energy from fusion, and they make more money while at it. So, for me, it boils down to the existential question: "what is *money* worth/what does it represent in a society?".
As a recent CS graduate deciding between continuing to work in bioinformatics or going full-on data scientist for some random company with seemingly higher pay for less work, thanks for activating another existential crisis!
Jokes aside (help me), I love content that provides eventually more value than the time and attention required to just consume it. Your channel has become a reliable source for that kind of content. Happy holidays!
I'm pursuing a chemical engineering degree and I'm in the same boat over here. I can either go full-on oil and gas tycoon servent and make money with great promotion prospects, or I could pursue research into fusion, cultured meat, Bioplastic, etc., and make less money (like 70k instead of 90k) and fewer career growth options. Just so you have another person's insight, I'll probably end up in Oil and Gas... what matters more to me is the kind of people I'm with and getting to work together. Both paths allow for that, and Oil and Gas is way easier to get into than MIT nuclear engineering graduate school.
As for your issues with the incongruity of payment and progress, I 100% agree what you're saying is true in every field.
The way I answer that issue is that I vote for the society I want and work in the society I live in ( the Oil and Gas job).
There is a part of me that says "I'll be making more than most people no matter the choice so go for research", but money and a need for security aren't as logical as the rest of me. A need for financial security is a real motivator for me.
I’ve been waiting to see a TH-cam video about Yanis Varoufakis’ idea about technofeudalism, then once Mark Fisher got added, I knew I was sold. I’ve been reading Heidegger’s “The Question Concerning Technology” a bunch lately, and it offers quite a lot in terms of understanding our willingness to become subservient to tech and our belief that somehow it will save us once we “‘get’ technology ‘spiritually in hand’”
Speaking about the so called BS Jobs, it will never be removed because they give something that people want. For example, we need lawyers to solve the legal disputes, we need bankers to save and invest our money, and so on.
Speaking about Capitalism, there are multiple forms of Capitalism such as French Dirigisme, German Social Market, State Capitalism, and so on. Then, we can find the most applicable version of Capitalism that will reduce inequalities
Hello. I´ve been binging a couple of your videos lately and found them a charming antidote to "hustle culture". We seem to consume some of the same theory. However, it always surprises me how people don't take geopolitics into account when trying to think about other systems of socio economic organization. Im saying this because studying only a little geopolitics makes you understand how hard countries compete against eachother. This makes each country very dependent on international capital flowing their way, which is why countries with expensive labour (people working less and earning more, protected workers etc.) will have a harder time. Every time someone suggests raising wages or reducing work hours, the argument that this will reduce competitive power internationally is brought up. And it is a strong argument. Now, as China is projected to outpace the United States in certain technologies, NATO have already starte to tremble about the implications this will give. My point is: whatever Zizek or Varoufakis say, the problem with capitalism is not just that it disadvantages some people. It's that it actually works to well, in converging capital to those places who welcome it in.
An interesting book trying to imagine a post-capitalist society is “Post-scarcity Anarchism” by Murray Bookchin. It describes how communes could organise production, work and daily life in a way that minimises work, while having social ecology as a guiding principle.
As for fiction, I’d recommend “Ecotopia” by Ernest Callenbach. Basically it’s about a journalist who visits Ecotopia - an ecosocialist country comprised of the former US states of California, Oregon and Washington and that have seceded from the US. Also, Star Trek (especially Star Trek: TNG) offers an interesting vision of what we might call “Fully automated space communism”. Anyways, great video as usual!
Great video, comrade. I've only heard of Graeber's work posthumously but the interviews I've watched have all been incredible. We have produced enough across the world to satisfy a great value of life but it's disproportionately distributed. Anti-work is the complete abolishment of work and is a direct antithesis to capitalism.
The job market being more about self-marketing than skill has always been a thing.
Finding incompetent people being overpaid for jobs they are bad at because they are good at selling themselves and managing up (being able to make themselves look good to their bosses even when things go wrong) is super common and it has always been.
I think we should think about the world as a house - we should all have some chores and time for pleasure. With this thinking shorter work weeks and more flexible schedules seem to be the most reasonable solutions.
And we are at a point in technology and automation in which there are very few chores for us to do compared to the amount of people, which would let us more free than most people think :)
I think it's important to keep intersectionnality in mind when we try to think about a post-capitalist society. The reason why it's so hard to imagine it is because capitalism is intertwined with colonialism, systemic racism, heterosexism, heterocisnormativity, etc. In order to fight against capitalism, we also have to fight against all kinds of systems, structures and norms. For example, in "Decolonizing Sex" from the All My Relations Podcast, Dr. Kim Tallbear explains how decolonial polyamorous studies develops new ways of thinking about ownership : how we own each other's bodies, how we own land and how we own non-human organisms. So the current system of heterosexuality and colonialism upholds capitalist-oriented understandings of ownership. So how can we think outside of every power structure imaginable? Well of course it's impossible. What would a world look like without gender and sexuality? Would everyone be queer ? Non-binary? Agender? Or would we get rid of all these labels altogether? Same goes for racism, colonialism, ableism, etc.
Systems of power are deeply encoded within our language, and since we need this language to think, we literally cannot think outside of power. This is why post-structuralists conceive subversion as resistance rather than revolution, meaning a constant, progressive, incremental fight against oppressive power. As we develop new ways of thinking and new language, we'll also develop new economic systems. For now, post-capitalism is a sort of utopia : something we cannot begin to imagine, but which we can still aim for, something that motivates us to change the world.
i sort of push back on the notion of post capitalism being utopian. it can also be dystopian, in that regressive forces bring back prior modes of subjugation, or bring new types of slavery into existence. however, utopian also connotates that their either is a nonscientific basis to these things, or even that science can't put forth viable options, so that it is idealistic instead of empirical. i don't think that's what you meant, but i really do think we need to get past the notion of something that can't be brought into reality, but that can be brought into reality. and yes, that even means now. i think that working class scientists can articulate the class interests of the ruling class of workers. that the material conditions of the world can move beyond the ruling class of capitalists, and that there can be a scientific/logical foundation laid for the ruling class of workers. and in fact their is a stronger empirical basis for the world of post capitalism than the current one. that the current world is inlaid with superstition/mythology/irrationality and is incompetent not only in improving society, but even merely in maintaining it. that current capitalism is utopian/dystopian in it's objectives and legitimizations, has less empirical justification for it than at first blush, and a more scientific system than capitalism is communism.
how is heterosexuality a system? people breeding is fundamental to life. it's not some made up human construct, it's how things naturally are.
@@rizzorepulsive7704 I agree.
Sounds like commie bs. Demonizing normal human mechanisms is dumb
@@rizzorepulsive7704 that's the insanity of marxism and radical feminism for you. They turn natural laws into "oppressing systems"... .
Happy holidays, Alice!! take care of yourself and enjoy your break :) we'll miss you till then!
WOW it's so good to see people talking about that! I'm 100% with you and share the same doubts.
A friend of mine recommended this video and I'm already recommending it to other people as well! Also, already subscribed!
Hey, it's good to see another upload from you Alice. I was genuinely excited to see that you actively want to make your audience feel heard, i really respect and appreciate that. I'm actually a fully converted socialist at this point in time, but when i started to dip my toes into the realm of socialist youtube and challenging the way i think about the world (and how maybe capitalism isn't as good as people say it is), i asked the EXACT same questions that you raised with us viewers. These are my personal answers to a couple of those, and anyone reading this, PLEASE feel free to add anything or counter these arguments. Feedback is always appreciated.
1) What do we do about BS jobs and underpaid workers?
This isn't gonna be easy to hear, but there's not a thing that we can do anything about it. I personally believe that the creation of so many busllhit jobs (typing it that way so it doesn't get censored) is a direct result of capitalism beginning to collapse on itself. It's unstable, anyone who has read Marx knows this, and these busllhit jobs are a sort of compensatory strategy for the economy to keep up with itself. Marx also said that as long as profit in a company increases, the average worker will make less and less in comparison to the CEO by the same proportion. In other words, sure, we could rise the minimum wage in the short-term, but the elite will just keep accumulating a disproportionate amount of wealth anyway so it won't actually fix anything. Underpaid workers will not survive in the long-term, which is why a revolution is absolutely necessary, and that goes for every single one of these points. Bringing about small, short-term changes will not fix anything, especially within the framework of capitalism.
1A) Where did all the money that was used to bail out banks since the first economic crisis in the 20th century come from?
DAMN YOU GO GIRL
2) What about the jobs that no one wants to do, the jobs that won't be replaced? How about those that will be replaced, despite being passionate about them?
This is a really good one. I believe that the human experience is incredibly diverse, and there is no such thing as a job that "no one" wants to do. Even if there is, you can find a way around it, and that is with automation! Say for example that i was hired to be a vet, but i don't want to do that. It's the most boring thing in the world. But, i am incredibly good at programming and building things that solve problems, so i could very easily write a program that does the work for me. Again, that leads into the whole automation thing, but the point is that people are creative and we'll get around it. The second part of that question is a little trickier and resonates with me as an autistic person, because i actually LOVE jobs that people call "boring and repetitive". I love repetition and routine, it works very well with how my brain is structured. I am very aware that these kinds of jobs are already very much being replaced, but one thing that people don't realise when they raise these automation arguments is that us people are ALREADY very much working alongside automation, not against it.
This is another capitalist construct that makes us believe "automation will make people lazy and make everyone go out of work", but in a socialist society, we can use it to our advantage and it will give us more leisure time to focus on our hobbies and spend time with our families. It's just hard to look at it from that perspective because in our current economic system, it is seen as a threat and we don't know how to think outside of that line of reasoning. More importantly, it will give us a choice between putting in the hard work ourselves, for those who so choose for whatever reason, or you can use automation to further assist you in doing the work for you.
In my ideal socialist society, the absolute essentials (food, water etc.) will be supplied to us by a decentralised network of programmed robots which will give us the freedom to work on our hobbies and people will be encouraged to discover themselves in their everyday lives. Yes, that obviously has it's own set of problems and it's not perfect, but it's definitely a lot better than what we have now. By each passing day, the system is collapsing more and more and more, which is why I hope that we can start collectively organising what we want our plans for the future to be and how we can take action, so for anyone that's interested, please reply to this and i'll send you to the link to my socialist Discord server if you ask for it
Thanks for reading and have a good day y'all
fully automated luxury gay space communism?
"a decentralized network or programmed robots" my goodness that sounds like a nightmare to a lot of people and i could mention a few groups that would rather die than live in a world like that. I hope you can understand how idealistic and very demeaning this prospect is to a lot of what makes humans humans. Socialism is just another system for humans to absolutely ravage to the ground and thats my issue with all this. HOW WEAK DO YOU THINK HUMANS ARE AS TO REACH A POINT WHERE WE SUCCUMB TO ROBOTS GIVING US RATIONED FOOD.
@@kaleb5926 I don't think humans are necessarily weak for thinking that we are entitled to things like food, water and shelter, the things that we need to survive free of any cost? Also bro, if you're so against socialism, then just stop watching anti-capitalist content. You have an infinite amount of resources out on the internet and you choose to spend your time watching stuff you hate. Literally just watch something else
@@drywall4310 Huge misunderstanding and something leftists love to do. Let me clarify, I said you think humans are weak because they would live in a world where rations are given out by robots. I am a technocratic socialist, but anyone that says anything against you is a capitalist eh? You need to rethink your fairy tale idea of socialism, especially if you actually care about providing people with basic necessities. "Muh robots will give out food and I can spend the rest of my days painting"
@@kaleb5926 dude i assumed that you were a capitalist because you literally said "socialism is just another system for humans to absolutely ravage to the ground", which doesn't sound like something a socialist would say at all lmao. It's like saying "yeah, capitalism causes wealth inequality and monopolisation but i'm also in full support of it!" Which makes no sense.
And I don't see why robots can't provide us with our basic necessities while we do shit that we actually want to do instead of slaving away for the majority of our days while our bosses earn more than we ever will in our entire lives. I even said in the original comment, yes it's not a perfect idea and has some flaws but it's a better alternative to what we have now. And i would even say that it's better than centralised planning because the people themselves are in control of it, rather than a central entity that probably have no idea what the needs of their people even are.
In places like México, that argument about people that can’t quit their job it’s true, in a way it’s too hard more if you already have time working on that job, to relocate, to have a new job, implies a lot of things, such as, if you have kids in home or school, public transport sucks, violence it’s out of control (narco and robbery). Great video btw.
I'm mexican, i studied fine arts, i'm from a city of underpaid factory workers. It's all true, está bien cabrón.
@@alexisestrada5221 saludos desde Tijuana!
I hadn't heard of the millionaire goes homeless video but it reminds me of an old 1940's movie called "Sullivan's Travels." The plot of that movie is a massively successful movie actor gets a role playing a homeless person, but since he is wealthy and has no experience being homeless, he decides to try out being homeless to prepare for his upcoming role. A big point of contention in the movie (as well as the meta-narrative of the movie that the movie comments on) is the exploitative nature of pretending to be homeless when you aren't homeless. The main actor can't know what it's really like because he can always go back to his privileged life. There are some twists and turns to the plot that make it interesting that I don't want to spoil, but I recommend checking it out if you haven't.
I'm in the lunchroom at work with headphones on and you speak so softly I can here everyone around me over you.
mhm 🤔.
oscar wilde’s essay ‘the soul of man under capitalism’ touched on the potential of machines replacing humans working in ‘tedious, soulless’ jobs like administrative work and construction work. that was published in 1891 lol. and he was certain individualism + socialism would solve the dread and dystopia we are living under capitalism. it makes you wonder how then would these people replaced by machines survive? what if they do not know what they’re passionate about therefore can’t pursue it? what if it would be counterproductive to have that much free time on their hands bc they don’t know what to do with it? perhaps the universal basic income would help combat that? perhaps i’m undermining what these individuals are capable of and they can actually figure it out but it’s my genuine concern as I’m exposed to a number of people who do not know what to do with their lives. and these are my peers, I’m 24. ofc this is surface level observation from my side and it would require unpacking by people better equipped to do so.
idk. maybe i’m talking out of my ass but one piece of work that I believe outlines sounding solutions to the issue of pervasive capitalism is ‘how to be a anticapitalist in the 21st century’ by erik wright. it is quite dense for me (my last brain cell refuses to cooperate) so Im struggling to finish it. but I think you might find it worthwhile if you haven’t read it yet.
thank you for the video btw!
Well, I'm a 21 year old and I don't know what I'm gonna do when I gradutate uni. But that's because I need a job that allows me to pay the bills, secure housing, care for my disabled sibling, and not have to work until I'm 80 or be unable to afford my own medical bills when I'm older. If the majority of jobs are automated and there's a universal UBI (and maybe free healthcare) there's a million things I would want to do, including but not limited to: doing a Masters Degree, learning how to garden and cook for myself and my family, be a journalist, write a book. But I will likely never or only accomplish some of these things because I gotta work that 9 to 5 for the majority of my time on Earth.
There are already many jobs that need to be done that no one does because there's very little financial incentive if any for example replication of scientific experiments. The tech firms are taking advantage of an existing flaw where private businesses are allowed to become monopolies so long as they provide a cheaper service or product. Access to education and healthcare will make it possible for people to pursue their passions and reduce the kind of dependence that makes us vulnerable to exploitative work.
Really enjoyed this one! Added pretty much all of your sources here to my to-read list 👀
The algorithm recommended this video to me. I watched it, then checked other videos and realized that I'd found an underrated channel. I subscribed to it.
Always like it when Alice uploads.
Really great discussion! thank you for the video, Alice :)
Let me introduce a humble contribution. I am currently working on the final thesis of my BA on the left-wing accelerationism of Srnircek and Williams. In their book "Inventing the future: a world without work" they also talk about the demands for automation and a Universal Basic Income. Apart from their optimistic approach to technology (while the traditional left has fleed and left the terrain for a hegemony of the right and neoliberalism), I think their most interesting point is that they say that 'big tech' should not have control over these new technologies and that, instead, their benefits (and, of course, means of production) should be nationalized, because they rely on the data of thousands of users.
The point is that maybe we should be thinking about alternatives such as the "Fully automated luxury communism" that Aaron Bastani talked about because technology is here to stay. But at the end of the day I the problem is always the same: inequality. What left-wing accelerationism brings again to the table is the discussion of a post-growth society where 1) people from rich countries have a lifestyle where they consume much less and 2) a world where technology can produce resources that are enough for the population to live from. Basically, a new Eden.
But then the question revolves around our very human nature: if we could have machines that would be able to produce enough food/resources for all of us to live, don't you think that some people would try to fight over them? I think that here is where things should change: it is in our hands to create a more thoughtful society...
Of course, I still have plenty of things I'm thinking about but I prefer to keep it short and keep the discussion going, but I hope I made you discover new interesting authors! Merci
Very thought provoking, and one of those rare YT channels that keeps away from the superficial. Yes there are serious problems, and the solutions are not obvious.
Our favourite homeless man just solved the biggest problem of homelessness, by getting a permanent place to live in the first night.
And then the dude who gives him a place to live is also nice enough to give him a car.
Really good how he used he used his purse "entrepreneurial skill" to magicly get all of his problems successfully solved for him.
And he also gets a cosigner etc.
Even if we believe him it would all come down to luck and not to his "entrepreneurial skill".
This video proves more the point, that the solution to homelessness is not picking your self up by the boot straps and more that we just fucking give homeless people homes the permanently live in, because then they can at least work them self's up a bit (because if you didn't know social mobility is most determined by your parents wealth and other factors of your surroundings and it's really really unusual that you can go from the lowest social class to one of the higher classes and certainly not to the top 1%).
"Just think what kind of culture, music, science, ideas might result if people were liberated to do things they actually thought were important."
We already got plenty of good music and science. We have an awful culture though because of Hollywood and its excessive pushing of "mature" topics into minor brains. I tend to like music from the 50's and 80's. And science from the 1800's. Tremendous strides were made in science during that time, and a lot of it is far beyond the layperson's understanding.
@@WindofChange2023 When your area is cleaned for you, it's hard to think that it's important to keep it clean.
I think it's very important that you mentioned how Mike looks quite employable, because indeed he is an able bodied white man in a rich country with burgeoning industries. Yet that narrative potentially excludes a huge proportion of people who may not "look employable", who have incapacitating physical and mental conditions or who just don't live in a country able to offer the same opportunities on a societal level.
The point (that often gets lost) of the "privilege" discourse is not to shame on anyone for having qualities that can make them really successful in today's capitalist society, but to stop expecting/demanding that success from everyone to just live. You should be able to pursue your passion even if it is making money, but the alternative shouldn't be starvation when we could take care of the basic needs of those who need it the most (e.g. having the resources to provide universal healthcare in the US, the condition of Mike's dad doesn't have to and shouldn't impose a financial strain on his son's career).
I really love your videos!
I wanted to add one thought to your statement that a shorter work week would not do much by now: I think it would actually be one very important step in the right direction as giving people more free time on such a large scale inevitably frees them of the urge to consume as much as currently as a way of fulfillment. This would then entail a big set of changes in general, I think there is much potential in the shortening of working hours!
This week in México we had a Twitter debate on universal scholarships for elementary level children; which were at first for "prodigy kids". Many opinions relied on this meritocracy that in my opinion it's soo harmful. But the debate was around a society within the capitalist system. So I agree with you that thinking of a greener world or a world where one can pursue their passion outside capitalism is quite hard since capitalism is what brought us to the climate, political, social and economic crisis we are in. The presumption of capitalism implies crisis; its the only way it has shown it "works".
I love your videos you always make me think and deconstruct what I know. Keep it up
I'm a simple guy, I see a new video by Alice I click and like instantly
For jobs that people don’t want, the pay will increase. We are already seeing that. You can go to cities where there are not enough plumbers, which makes the plumbers that do work earn more- like six figures.
Your channel is a goldmine, extremely refreshing and interesting videos. Thanks for sharing!!
Hi Alice! love this video. what really triggered me was the moment you said "who would do the not so cool work, if everybody was pursuing their passion" It really made me think how we reeally cannot imagine life beyond capitalism. In a different society (without capitalism) the social structures and life in general or how we conceive our everyday reality would be so different that i suppose tis "unwanted jobs" would not exist. If everyone had a minimum standard wage to go on with his life and do something he really liked, not having to worry about food or a house, then things would be dramatically different. People would probably go back to a more "archaic" model of social structure, based in connection, human relationship, mutual help and solidarity. Without having to struggle for the basics, I assume (and hope) that things would be indeed very different. The anti-work movement is really promising, I hope it will lead to a positive outcome, even if that is just a settlement in a 4-day work week ! (wich is maybe more realistic ) and it c an deffinitely happen
This is an amazing discussion a brave new world is being born right in front of us and we are apart of shaping it
The part about jobs that noone wants to do feels like a reach for me. These undesirable jobs not only exist because of capitalism. I think it has a much deeper problem. Why do we need cleaners? Because people are used to having their toilets clean as a service in a restaurant or hotel. Why do we need bodyguards/cops? Because public and private spaces can be damaged by people with or without justification (some people just vandalize stuff while others need to steal food). Not just the jobs are bs. The expectations about services and way of thinking of people in order to get by in the system are also ruined by capitalism. A different system not only has to provide resources and opportunities, but it also has to educate people to live their lives with more communal responsibility.
Exactly this, well said! When someone asks the question "Who is going to do all these jobs?" they are plain assuming that a) nobody at all would at any point in their life do that job, b) that the job could never be eliminated or replaced, c) there have to be people desperate enough to perform such a hard-to-do task, and d) we cannot even consider to pay more for these jobs so that people are incentivised to take them up. All four assumptions very arguable.
That's a great point I hadn't considered in this context. I read about the Gandhian Economics idea of Duties as opposed to Rights, but hadn't considered applying it to the argument of "who will do these jobs?"
Liberals would have wiped conservatives out of existence a long time ago if capitalism and racism were the only things driving inequality.
Mf wants a shit covered toilet when goes to a public bathroom
@@theboombody That's. . . such a wild assumption. You could also say the reverse: "Conservatives would've wiped liberals out of existence a long time ago if the 2nd or 13th amendments needed abolishing/revisting." It's almost like there can be enough people who uphold shitty things enough to continually perpetuate them without it meaning those shitty things aren't actually shitty.
Tom Nicholas did a really interesting video a few days ago exploring what sounds like technofeudalism. He calls it platform monopoly. He doesn't provide any answers, but it's an interesting deep dive on how we got here and where we are headed...which is scary to say the least.
Great video with a lot to think about as always! Thanks for "following your passion"!
I imagine a world with volunteer garbage truck drivers. I'm not a big fan of uber, but I think that's a pretty powerful model for sort of crowd sourced labor, and I see a lot of industries adopting a similar model. What I really want to see is a world where there are garbage truck training institutions that are state funded, where anyone can go and easily get some certification for being a garbage truck driver, and they can schedule a time to do the job whenever they feel like it, and they get paid a small portion of what a full-time garbage truck driver would make. It might be fun to drive a garbage truck for a week every once in a while. I don't know if this system could exist in society, but I think it would be really cool. I'd love to learn all sorts of jobs and bounce around between them without too many strings.
As technology progresses, the fullfilment of basic needs will become cheaper. That is whats been happening in the last centuries. Food producing, shelter producing. Jobs have become more specialized in fields that arent directly related to those basic needs, enabling developments in culture and science. Entertainment industries are bigger than ever because one has to spend less time pursuing the fulfillment of basic needs. Of course this is still not perfect and the distribution is not homogeneous, but the direction is clear. I tend to have a positive view on these topics.
I've had to unsubscribe from the anti-work subreddit because it was affecting my mental health pretty heavily. Every time I saw a new post I got a little more depressed and hopeless about the future. It's been a couple of weeks since I've last viewed it and I definitely feel better. So if you're just finding this movement/subreddit I would advise you to stop looking at it its not worth it.
same here, my mental health and overall satisfaction in everyday life has been much better ever since i left that subreddit. looking at its posts daily got to a point where i started loathing whatever happiness i got out of 'products of capitalism' such as eating outside, buying things i like, etc, idk it just wired my mind to hate literally every aspect of capitalism. so glad i left it and can find joy in things in life again
Being productive is fun. How people can hate work is beyond me.
@@andrewharris3900 it is fun! when you’re getting payed accordingly. Most people who are leaning or seeking sanctuary/hope in anti work are mostly people sick of being screwed over by their employers and government (and I speak from personal experience). I’m not saying this is truth, just my opinion and take on it. What created the anti work movement was the pandemic. People actually had free time, had time to self reflect and enjoy things that they put in the back burner because their job didn’t allow time for it. So now that people had a taste of what “freedom” was and I use loosely due to the circumstances that we were put in by the pandemic which most won’t consider freedom. But it definitely made people realize that work isn’t everything and that there’s more to life. They found their worth and want more but the government and employers don’t want that. They want to continue exploiting people for minimum wages (which is supposed to be sustain our lives but does not) and overworked hours. The people won’t stand for it any longer.
@@andrewharris3900 king shit. Lazy redditors just want to watch p*rn, play games and do nothing
Because mqnu of us need our "jobs" to survive and unemployment has made me depressed. At least those people have money or a wealthy spouse to leach off of. I want to sustain myself and fix my mental health issues and support my mom. Laying around not working without a sugar daddy doesn't do shit but make me wish I were dead
Once again our incisive and beautiful hostess gets to the heart of the matter and gives us a clear context on an important subject. She would definitely need her own BBC news analysis segment, IF TH-cam had not long ago eclipsed television in importance...
Wow Alice, such strong words. Great video, while watching it, for all of the almost 15 minutes of it, I thought to myself "wow, she's so correct" you are my favorite commentary TH-camr. Your rhethorics, research and presenting skills are very showing, and I think that this is *your* contribution to the world. I appreciate that although being Anti-Capitalist, you never mention the S word (Socialism) or the C-word (Communism) etc... (I'm joking) but you're just laying the thought basis for *any* alternative for Capitalism, and letting us, the viewers, to answer for ourselves maybe, what is our solution, or idea.
Thank you for that, Sean.
Also feel that it's much "easier" to be "anticapitalist" now than claiming communist as the viable project alternative
@@masterculturedunkerque7918 yeah, it's a much broader definition that fits to much more audience
Your video echoes the ideas I believe are in a book I haven't yet read, 'How to be an anti-capitalist in the 21st century'. If you've read it, please share your thoughts!
As for me personally, I kind of feel in between both types of work forces, because on the one hand I want to find a job with purpose but on the other I don't want to depend on anyone for a living... it can be difficult to find the right balance.