Liberals fully embracing the fascist “life is suffering and suffering is life” pseudo-mythological bullshit.
The writer here is being a massively rude piece of shit, but they are not necessarily an entirely wrong one either. It's 2/3rds the way through the article , but the actual point she's ostensibly trying to get across is summarized in these two paragraphs.
It may be the case that many personal infirmities can only be fully repaired in a repaired world, but this does not obviate the need to pull ourselves together as best we can in this broken one. Any serious attempt to topple capitalism would require more discipline, more courage, more endurance, more capability, not less.
When living “under capitalism” becomes a catch-all explanation for what you can’t manage — whether that’s getting on the metaphorical treadmill or stepping off it — it assumes the nature of a complaint to an adjudicating authority. Since capitalism has impressed such impossible conditions on us, we can’t reasonably be expected to deal with it until they improve. But in fact there is no one to adjudicate between you and capital, no one to say yes, that really is too much, let’s reassign this project. There is no political program that will release you from the necessity of doing more than you should have to or feel capable of doing, in politics as in every other part of life.
Mind you, this is basically also the nature & source of my own melancholy & frustration with engaging with politics (especially on this site). It doesn't matter how much I complain about my own social isolation, or inability to meet a lot of the basic necessities of living independently ("independently") given that I have ASD. Absolutely no-one from this goddamn website, or my personal life is gonna step up to be there if I can't manage "life under capitalism", and that just is the fact of the matter until people start deciding to act differently, and to help take on other people's burdens of their own accord; for the sake of building a fundamentally different world.
Many people on here have admitted exactly as much to me. What you're mad about is that it's being applied to you & your concerns now.
Until then all we can do is operate as the most efficiently optimized individuals that we can be until we are willing to take the time, indulgences, and personal autonomy out of our lives, and exert the discipline necessary to operate as a collective political entity. And even then that's gonna start, and is gonna have to start with those who are already the most materially & socially connected people among us.
One should keep in mind though, that she is not necessarily directing these statements to the Proletariat; she is in fact speaking to her fellows in the Liberal Intelligentsia; whom luckily have been spoken about around here recently.
And of course, there are more sinister possibilities than learned helplessness. Since under capitalism no one is really responsible for their actions, since we’d all be making better choices if the referees would just level the playing field, you can’t be blamed if you build weapons for Raytheon or AI for Facebook or write vacuous propaganda for the Washington Post, or climb to the top by betraying others . You’re not cravenly protecting your own interests at the expense of principle, you’re just participating in society somewhat. The totalizing nature of capital’s domination simultaneously excuses us both from revolutionary action and from an attempt at a life with honor within it.
However it is obvious here also that the Proletariat is, nevertheless, far from exempt from these basic realities.
Any serious attempt to topple capitalism would require more discipline, more courage, more endurance, more capability, not less.
Hard to argue with that point. There has to be a balance between helping people get through the difficulties caused by capitalism and being functional enough to get rid of capitalism altogether.
"Yes man" (or woman/person) is a very labor-aristocratic job. It's still based on actually doing something rather than ownership or arranging to extract labor value from others yourself.
Now, that "something" really leans into the "aristocratic" side in this case, it makes econ professors look like normal proles by comparison, but it's still a type of labor.
The writer here is being a massively rude piece of shit, but they are not necessarily an entirely wrong one either. It's 2/3rds the way through the article , but the actual point she's ostensibly trying to get across is summarized in these two paragraphs.
Mind you, this is basically also the nature & source of my own melancholy & frustration with engaging with politics (especially on this site). It doesn't matter how much I complain about my own social isolation, or inability to meet a lot of the basic necessities of living independently ("independently") given that I have ASD. Absolutely no-one from this goddamn website, or my personal life is gonna step up to be there if I can't manage "life under capitalism", and that just is the fact of the matter until people start deciding to act differently, and to help take on other people's burdens of their own accord; for the sake of building a fundamentally different world.
Many people on here have admitted exactly as much to me. What you're mad about is that it's being applied to you & your concerns now.
Until then all we can do is operate as the most efficiently optimized individuals that we can be until we are willing to take the time, indulgences, and personal autonomy out of our lives, and exert the discipline necessary to operate as a collective political entity. And even then that's gonna start, and is gonna have to start with those who are already the most materially & socially connected people among us.
One should keep in mind though, that she is not necessarily directing these statements to the Proletariat; she is in fact speaking to her fellows in the Liberal Intelligentsia; whom luckily have been spoken about around here recently.
However it is obvious here also that the Proletariat is, nevertheless, far from exempt from these basic realities.
Hard to argue with that point. There has to be a balance between helping people get through the difficulties caused by capitalism and being functional enough to get rid of capitalism altogether.
deleted by creator
You are generally correct, but is this person petite bourgeois or a labor aristocrat?
deleted by creator
"Yes man" (or woman/person) is a very labor-aristocratic job. It's still based on actually doing something rather than ownership or arranging to extract labor value from others yourself.
Now, that "something" really leans into the "aristocratic" side in this case, it makes econ professors look like normal proles by comparison, but it's still a type of labor.
deleted by creator