I am reading Capitalist Realism, by Mark Fisher. It's a very short work, sitting around 80 pages for my paperback copy. It's highly regarded, and highly rated. I am not enjoying it. I agree with it. I think the point that it's easier to imagine the end of the world that the end of capitalism is powerful and true. Thus, I pick it up and read a few pages every day or so, but have not felt it pull me in. In a sense, I am glad I am not liking something I agree with. It helps me explore nuance. It helps me explore my own frameworks and biases. I learn about myself in asking, “why?”

Why do I not like Capitalist Realism? Why am I wary of beloved thinkers like Rebecca Solnit, Margaret Atwood, and Mark Fisher himself? Why do I viscerally feel an aversion to Gloria Steinem? I know that my feelings aren't perfectly consistent, but I do feel there are factors that will predict whether I feel closer to the work and where I contradict myself.

I think there are a few dimensions to this. One, I only realize because of the hours I spent in Island 24 as I played Paradise Killer. Paradise Killer is a murder mystery, but the best part of the game is not solely the gameplay, story, visual language, etc. It's that it forces you to complete a bureaucratic script in service of a corrupt system that you, as Lady Love Dies, wallows in elbow deep. There is no outcome to fix the corruption. You can excise what part you ethically feel is the best tradeoff. Which mirrors the sentiment, it is easier to imagine the world ending than the demise of a corrupt system. What makes the game effective is Love Dies' awareness of where she sits in the corruption. What about her makes her sit in a privileged position to benefit from it. A lot of thinkers that engage in social critique do not engage in this self awareness, and if they do, it's at a surface level. How can I trust The Artist's Way when the sister of a famed Hollywood director made the framework during a luxury retreat at a resort? Julia Cameron exploits people trying to improve their lives, when many of the world's ills are not because we're not journaling enough. We suffer because doing our best in a bad system doesn't even grant us a nice, boring life where one can thrive.

So yeah, a lack of addressing where one's privilege stands matters. I try to be aware of what parts of my life have been easier as a cis woman, but where my gender, neurodivergence, etc hinders it. For me, I cannot look at my life without a holistic view of both angles.

The other thing that bothers me is that many works are both preachy, and diagnostic. I read works about social critique not only to label and validate things I notice, but also as a call to action. But many works of social observation simply boils down to [insert social framework or political party] suck. YES, I GET THAT! But what can I do? What can we do? How can we alleviate it? It's like the macro version of trauma. There is a phase in treatment that articulating is a boon. Naming and processing is essential. But all this needs to eventually transition to the next phase. Switching from a top-down approach of using words, to a bottom-up approach of healing the very musculature and nerves that makes our bodies betray our psyches.

Last, but not least. I will preface this with saying... I adore words and writing. I love learning. I do not fear hard work. But a lot of the social critique comes from people who are from academia, or write in an academic style. Their bloated writing, intersped with large words, obscure thoughts with no context, and an elitist POV erodes trust. You cannot move the needle padding your words in academic jargon. Change is grounded. Because it is rooted in the needs of everyone, not the people who live and work in exalted settings and misquote Marx, because they sound “cool”.

Ok, ok, I'm done! lol </rant>

List of works that resonate with me

Thinkers and artists I want to learn more of

We are not a totalitarian state; we continue to be a democracy in more than name—but a capitalist, corporate democracy. Our form of censorship rises from the nature of our institutions. Our censors are the idols of the marketplace. For this reason our form of censorship is unusually fluid and changeable; one should never feel sure one has defined it. Suppressions occur before one is aware of them; they occur behind one’s eyes.
– Ursula K. Le Guin (Stalin in the Soul)