Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I'm sure the posh boys don't see themselves as predators either. But they don't need to.

Oh, some will say "I have great belief in the outcome of the market", but that's not an understanding.

No, it's not. But it is a narrative, which is the next best thing.

Narratives are like that. My pet theory is that narrative logic is an evolutionary adaptation that makes it possible for humans to invent and share ad hoc rules and tribal ethics in a simple and efficient way.

Analysis and critical thinking are relative luxuries, and are only possible through training, practice, focussed effort, and undistracted time.

The natural human state is a naive and superficial acceptance of narratives. The potential for change only exists when a narrative collides with reality through personal experience that demonstrates that it's false and unhelpful.

My guess is that for some British asians these kinds of Randian values seem like a good thing because the personal hook is self-improvement from a downbeaten and limited history.

She might change her mind if she's made unemployed and finds it impossible to find a job because her work is outsourced (to Asia?)

But that won't happen unless the system fails her personally, and she has the realisation that there is a game being played, and it isn't necessarily rigged in her favour.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Fri May 20th, 2011 at 09:44:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I won't dignify Ayn Rand with a full reading, but my understanding from reading rather too much of her apologists is that Randian actually welcome that state of affairs.

Not the case with my friend, who was more in the "I guess it'd be nice otherwise but that's the only way it works isn't it?".
Which, admittedly, takes a lack of curiosity about the world, but that's something I had come to expect (hell, she likes Orlando as a holiday destination).
Until I mentioned it she probably never gave a thought to the implications in terms of inequality of quite a few people being able to retire at 45 (without being entrepreneurs to boot).

But she also says that 500k£ is too much to spend for a house (though in Central London it's hard to go much under that), so there may be some hope yet ;-)

I agree with you that "Analysis and critical thinking are relative luxuries, and are only possible through training, practice, focussed effort, and undistracted time." (well, maybe undistracted time is not fully required, or even focussed effort, for someone whose mind is tuned in that way).
But you started with training. Is that not what education is supposed to give us? I was not trained in an English speaking system -only my last, MSc year in European Studies, but then there were very few English people in the course. Does education tend to help or hinder analysis and critical thinking here?

There may be an epochal thing to it, too. I have the impression (maybe wrong, the plural of anecdote not being data) that in France too, they are getting less common. But France is still a highly politicised country, so I would guess that there is a bit more of it.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri May 20th, 2011 at 12:22:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Until I mentioned it she probably never gave a thought to the implications in terms of inequality of quite a few people being able to retire at 45 (without being entrepreneurs to boot).

But she also says that 500k£ is too much to spend for a house (though in Central London it's hard to go much under that), so there may be some hope yet ;-)

She wants her cake and to eat it, too. Where's the hope in that?

Economics is politics by other means

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat May 21st, 2011 at 03:28:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
She might change her mind if she's made unemployed and finds it impossible to find a job because her work is outsourced (to Asia?)

what I often see among the younger people who find themselves in this predicament is not understyanding, but a sense of personal failure. They internalize the system's failings as their own. After all, that's about the only way failure can be interpreted in a system based on successful competition as the definer of worth.  

But that won't happen unless the system fails her personally, and she has the realisation that there is a game being played, and it isn't necessarily rigged in her favour.

Same result as above- I'd bet she already knows there's a multi-level game being played, but at present she sees herself as one of the winners.
Millions of people- a huge segment of market-world are victims of sixty years Edward Bernays's wonderful technology.
To lose-even in a riggeed game- means you're a loser.

It's even coded into the language by now.

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Fri May 20th, 2011 at 12:47:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
geezer in Paris:
at present she sees herself as one of the winners.

That's exactly it. You can accept this system when you're young if you believe you at least will win out. That belief being a mixture of romantic faith in the individual, and self-applied pressure ("I'm going to  make it because failure isn't an option...").

geezer in Paris:

To lose-even in a riggeed game- means you're a loser.

Bingo again. The internalised sense of individual failure.

Reminds me of this, from The Reef by Edith Wharton:

She recalled having read somewhere that in ancient Rome the slaves were not allowed to wear a distinctive dress lest they should recognize each other and learn their numbers and their power. So, in herself, she discerned for the first time instincts and desires, which, mute and unmarked, had gone to and fro in the dim passages of her mind, and now hailed each other with a cry of mutiny.

Losers of the world, unite!

Mutinous thoughts of our minds, unite!

 

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sat May 21st, 2011 at 05:53:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
TBG
My pet theory is that narrative logic is an evolutionary adaptation that makes it possible for humans to invent and share ad hoc rules and tribal ethics in a simple and efficient way.

I would think this is almost certainly true. If a behavior works >80% of the time and does not result in the death of a large number of those who employ it when it fails, it is highly likely to persist. If it persists, genetic changes that favor are more likely to emerge. Plus the narrative can always change in response to events. The neuro-physiological bases of social speech?

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat May 21st, 2011 at 10:10:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series