A great deal of credit and status is given to those who change the world, from robber barons to industry titans and tech billionaires of today. However, what we actually see down the road is how these individuals who shaped the world also destroyed it simultaneously. Because the games we play revolve around the accumulation of capital, it is rare to see winners who play different games. From science to the arts. We can name the best basketball players in the world. We can name the richest people. We can point to the most popular products. But we struggle to name who came up with the first vaccine.
Better how?
Better price point?
Better by spec?
Better by accuracy?
Or better in the sense of feel?
Often better is in the intangibles we have a difficult time describing.
Which makes better really difficult to capture in a boss-employee dynamic.
And so, we show better not by tangibles we can point to, but in the effort to make something “better.”
But is it actually better now or more to the taste of the one giving the assignment?
Saying goodbye to your art is indeed a difficult skill to acquire. But rejection isn’t a failure. It’s part of the process in seeking better taste. Popular work isn’t necessarily the best work. It just might be work that resonates with the population.
Picasso, as we understand him today, didn’t treat women particularly well. Once you learn it, it can change the story of how you view his work. How does one resolve this inconsistency?
When you study art, the process, and the artist behind it, you will find artists are just like anyone else. Full of curiosity and wonder, and at the same time full of mistakes and skeletons. And it is always dangerous to elevate your heroes. (There is a reason why they say you should never meet them.)
The thing is, when we elevate art into mythology, we tend also to inject our morals. Art can stand as art. Not a statement of morality, either. And I think that is an important distinction.
Part of who we are is what we have done. Our history can’t be ignored. Over time, we can find patterns.
But those patterns don’t have to continue in the future. The other part of us is the potential—who we could be. What’s important is the next move—way more than what we did yesterday.
How much do we mean what we say?
And how much do we say what we mean?
Corporations are not human. And they certainly are not your friend. With a goal to abstract, how can they be viewed as anything but a parasite? Sure, if I have a problem and need a hammer for this nail, I don’t call a corporation; I instead phone a friend.
If you understand that pro wrestling is fake, you know that it is a form of entertainment. And what we see online isn’t someone fighting a political battle or raising awareness for a specific cause. We see pro wrestlers. Optimizing the algorithm to monetize attention to make a buck. I’m stunned by how much attention these people receive, but more importantly, why people care so much about what they think. It’s certainly entertaining to see a chair thrown at the boss’s face, but I would never take them seriously when hooked up to a microphone to give a speech in the ring, either. Political theater is theater first.
One of the problems with the violent nature of capitalism is that it has left a scar so deep on us that we cannot even imagine a world without it. Add in the police state, the surveillance, and every action that can now be documented, and it’s no wonder we struggle to get past this idea: that capitalism is not determined to live forever. When the system reaches breaking points (which we have approached), we either change course or are forced to change when the system collapses.
One of my favorite prompts I like to use with AI is presenting an idea with as much detail as possible and then ask the chat box:
Are there any logical gaps in this train of thought?
What makes sense to one person may not make sense to another.
Josh Allred's Blog 