Whichever part of the world you may primarily reside in, it is difficult to claim that you haven't been influenced by the global force that is capitalism. Whether it is a good thing or a bad one is not the focus of this article but what we will be discussing today are the theories which prompt us to realise how little power do we really have to do something about it and how despite there being such pessimistic views, what can we do to lead a good life?

While this may seem like an overarching goal to achieve in a brief memesletter, the ideas which I will introduce are quite profound and merit additional reading and thought so be sure to go through the reading section to really understand the scale of the problem that philosophers like Mark Fisher were takling.

Mark Fisher believes that you may have differing political views but what is undeniably true is that capitalist regimes are here to stay as a part of societies around the world. He expresses that not only is capitalism the only viable economic and political system but also that it is incredibly difficult to imagine an alternative to it. As Slavoj Žizek and Fredric Jameson like to say, it's easier to imagine the end of the world through a cosmic accident, an AI uprising, or any other means (discussed in The Precipice by Toby Ord) than imagining a plausible and coherent alternative to capitalism.

Most people who favor capitalism are those who are yet to critically analyze the system and often have the associated connotation that capitalism may not be the ideal system but at the very least it is not totalitarianism. The acceptance and continuation of a capitalist system heavily relies on being just as good enough as the other systems we have experimented with so far. What is one of the major concerns is that this spirit of experimentation has now been abandoned. It is incredibly difficult to imagine a revolution that takes away the throne from the omnipotent emperor that is capitalism. The chances of a global change are slim unlike they were in the times of famous events like the French Revolution which we now study in our History textbooks.

To Fisher, this hiatus in experimentation points towards the fact that capitalism as a system is very good at always keeping people on their toes, wanting more. You don't raise your voice against capitalism because you always have work to do at the office because you always have that new phone to buy. 

Capitalism as a system is designed in alignment with meritocracy such that it keeps those who keep "winning" busy along with utilizing surplus enjoyment to keep on sedating those who are just living a surface-level existence filled with distractions. To explain the notion of surplus enjoyment, I would like to iterate an example in Žižek's book on the subject. He explains how newly impoverished people (fallen in the meritocratic societal ranking) are responsible for a unique phenomenon at shopping centers. They walk through the store, select the products they want, and take a full shopping cart with them, only to leave it at the end of the aisle before leaving the store. This pleasure from repeating the action without gaining anything of value is the surplus enjoyment. It is quite like a baby with a pacifier who keeps on sucking even if the pacifier is empty and gains a sense of pleasure merely by repeating the action. The only lie in the story Žižek tells is that this phenomenon is not unique. You may sometimes browse online for the perfect t-shirt, only to never buy it, but you would have to agree that going through the process -- finding the perfect design and size would have given you some pleasure.

An even more extreme example is a man who works from 9 to 5, 5 days a week throughout his entire middle age. Everytime that you meet him, he talks of his dream vacation in Italy, which he will take about 15 years later once he retires. Let's say you come up to him one day and simply tell him that you have booked his tickets to Milan for the next flight out tomorrow morning. In a way, he will feel robbed of his duties. He wouldn't have a purpose to go to work. You would have robbed him of his surplus enjoyment. This is precisely why capitalism works. Capitalism is successful because you need people to do their job. It is a remarkable system but it has been centred on the aim of maximizing the production but not the wellbeing of the people. It may have been better suited to the times when our production was insufficient to meet our needs, but now it is there to captivate people and make them work for the things they want and not necessarily require.

Should you keep working and live a surface-level existence?

No! You shouldn't. Although the meritocratic system is not ideal, being born into it you only have limited choices. You can either work your way up or you could live a surface-level existence, numbing yourself so that you never care too much to contribute. This is the reason why Žižek says he has never been drunk in his life. If you numb yourself, you will end up being the person whom this competitive environment exploits. 

Should you then go outcompete everyone and stop enjoying life at all?

The meritocracy is contingent on a certain kind of antagonism in which you can only go up the ranks if someone else comes down (this is reminiscent of the movie: Platform). That's a major flaw in this system, but when you're born into it, you can't always be off your guard and live your life as a consumer. You have to keep your guard up and save yourself from being exploited.

So, how should I live?

To answer this, we need to talk about philosophy of life. Why should you require one?

One of my favorite books, A Guide to the Good Life by William Irvine, explains it something like this: you need a philosophy of life because, without one, there is a danger that you will mislive. Instead of spending your life pursuing something genuinely valuable, you squandered it because you allowed yourself to be distracted by the various baubles (distractions from deeper thinking) life has to offer.

But what philosophy of life is right for me and how do I get one?

It is a question of self-discovery, but that doesn't mean that you have to walk the path alone and without any guidance. Since there are no widespread philosophical schools like in ancient Greece, books and the philosophy faculties at universities are your best bet. Many philosophical schools of thought have been preserved through their books that preach the ideas of thinkers such as Marcus Aurelius, Confuscious, and everyone's favorite cynic, Diogenes. You can find out which one works for you by asking yourself a set of questions and introspecting before you move on to experimenting with those philosophies that resonate with you. One of the popular questions is "What do you wish to gain from life?" This is a question whose variants have been asked to you since childhood but have you really sat down to think about it? Remember that it is not something you are likely to figure out in one evening but you could start a journey to a better life through finding a philosophy of life. You might switch later on but it is important to start questioning what might be charitably called an enlightened form of hedonism which most just accept as the default.

Isn't it amazing that we talked about such a profound topic using a meme? I would love to get feedback on this and if you all would like me to talk about practical philosophy every now and then. An email is the easiest way for me to get the feedback!