Amerika

Recall (perhaps) that we are speaking allegedly of inversion: the process by which something that does well rejects what works and embraces distractions instead. When the individual sees himself as a goal, instead of reality, he replaces reality with symbols and rationalizes his desires as “good” by using those.

That in turn creates a society based on lies which promptly decays. The biggest lie it tells is that all people have equal souls, therefore the wealth must be divided up so that all are given something and are therefore happy, which creates false unity which is rationalized as the goal.

In fact, goals have been replaced by methods, and therefore, the society has removed its own ability to change. It calcifies and repeats the same failing things pathologically. As part of this, it turns each person into an economic agent only, because individualists cannot tolerate culture or reality and equality makes them all equally worthless, so they must labor to prove themselves worthy and pay for survival in a sea of parasites.

At this point, no employer has any loyalty to its employees, since it sees them as competitive forces which will subvert and sabotage it for their own advantage. This is why employees become disposable in such an age:

Over time, however, an employee’s public performance—measured by successful cases, profitable investments, or well-executed projects—reduces the firm’s informational advantage. As the informational gap shrinks, the firm needs to pay some employees more because clients are now able to observe an employee’s good performance and hence update their beliefs about the employee’s skills.

“At some point, the informational advantage becomes fairly small,” says Kaniel, “and the firm says, ‘Well, I will basically start to churn. I will let go of some employees, and by doing that, I can actually extract more from the remaining ones.'”

We see here the long term consequences of unions and other egalitarian ventures: the workers make themselves the enemy, and therefore business treats them as something which must be removed when it becomes too valuable.

Even worse, employers no longer view workers as something permanent. They are temporary means to an end, and for that reason, they must be used until they are expended, then tossed aside like any other depreciable asset.

Not surprisingly, most workers detest this arrangement, despite having created the conditions for its existence:

The latest research confirms a decline in general employee well-being since 2020. In 2024, employees reported the lowest well-being scores on record, as opposed to 2020, when employees reported the highest well-being scores.

“In some cases, the lower scores represent a reduction in employee flexibility for either flexible hours or remote work,” the latest research states. “In other cases, these scores could be related to challenges associated with greater economic shifts related to inflation or productivity needs.”

“What we’re seeing is a growing gap between how leaders and their teams experience the workplace,” said Smith. “Managers may feel a return to normalcy, but that doesn’t mean their employees do. Leaders must be cautious not to assume their own well-being reflects the broader workforce at their organization. The data shows a potential disconnect, and that’s a signal for action.”

Managers exist entirely independent from employees because managers are the organization, and the workers are simply tools the managers use to achieve the goals of the organization, which themselves are rationalized from what pleases the shareholders and stakeholders (which is different from profit alone).

Not entirely surprisingly, the managers view workers as a threat. The workers must be kept subjugated to a degree and fed pizza to fool them, but even more, they must be kept ignorant so they do not threaten the power structure. Like democracy, this system relies on deception and manipulation.

Workers in turn view themselves as the profit production engine of the company, forgetting that they are working tiny roles which are replaceable. The company does not need super performers; it needs loyal people who are so afraid of rocking the boat that they do whatever silly stuff it wants in order to get that next COLA increase.

As a result, over time, large corporations accumulate people who have no better options and drive away everyone else. The mediocre tend to rely on a system of self-pity in which they blame capitalism or the rich for their troubles:

[T]he systems that created our culture have their own needs in mind. Landlords don’t provide housing as a public service–they do it to make a profit. And the wedding-industrial complex makes happy brides as a byproduct of making a profit. They’re the side effect, not the point.

When it’s working as we hope, the system of systems produces possibility, civility and achievement. It increases health, connection and even joy.

But no one is in charge of these systems, and, especially as they become concentrated and powerful, they often fail to produce the outcomes we might be hoping for.

The actual system of systems is not that of profit, but of the organization protecting itself against the revolts of the have-nots. Like democracies, it is always aware of the danger of revolution, so it must create a loyal army of Communist-type zombies who do whatever it says without thinking.

The greed, contrary to public perception, comes from the have-nots. The haves do not have a need to exploit the have-nots, but they do recognize the threat of the have-nots, so they manage them as if they were contractors who will steal and use sabotage if given the choice.

If the have-nots had any brains, they would aim for loyalty by smashing down anyone who sabotaged the company. But they do not, so instead they scapegoat the wealthy and try to get “free stuff” (which someone has to pay for, passing down the costs) which turns them into an enemy which is treated as disposable.

Tags: capitalism, eat the rich, jobs, unions