24 Answers

  1. The roots of this strategy of success and well-being are found in the basic concepts of philosophy and religion. Today's reformers present only a cursory view of this view, which has captured the minds of many today. Individualism and materialism, Protestantism and Epicureanism. It is worth looking there, in search of the sources of this rich river : to be rich and successful.

  2. For the sake of power and hierarchy, not to be worse than others, for the sake of material benefits, for attention from others and people in general, access to new opportunities, the illusion of “awareness”, for the sake of realizing their super-ideas, because it is “right”, for the sake of communicating with professionals, for” status”, so that parents are not ashamed, so that girls want, etc. etc.

    Globalization and the media promise a heavenly life and everyone wants to touch it, so they run there, forgetting that there can be a lot of positive emotions here.

    “Just live and enjoy life” is not cool. And it's cool to be cool, without this they don't respect you now.

  3. It's really fun to read some of the answers here. No, seriously, giving up the joys of life for the sake of making money? And the fact that you also have to pay for joy, all with the same money? The joys will quickly end and the downshifter will turn out to be an ordinary homeless person.

  4. This is not a fashion, this is the structure of society. Careerism is a struggle for a place in the social hierarchy. If society is organized hierarchically, then there is also careerism. In a modern industrial capitalist society, a person's place in the social hierarchy depends on the amount of money. This money provides him with consumer opportunities and influence. Accordingly, it stretches in this direction, and the system catches it on this touchstone, enslaves it, subordinates it to its rhythm.

    The pursuit of money is a transitory phenomenon. In the Middle Ages, elites achieved their goals with the sword and loyalty to traditional values. There was a “fashion” for origin and knightly prowess. The peasant has a “fashion” for a good harvest. There were different criteria for prosperity and success than now. With modernization, from the initial accumulation to the modern world of global financial flows, the “fashion” for money as a universal consumer equivalent naturally came. In the future, where reproducing labor will be replaced by creativity ,the” fashion “for money will pass and will be replaced, perhaps, by the “fashion” for “likes”, for personal fame and popularity. This is already happening on the Internet. It depends on the evolution of the social structure.

  5. This is still, in my opinion, not a fashion, but a healthy state of mind.

    It's like this: I did something > I did it well >> I found a skill > > > repeated good results are satisfying >>>> I repeat it, while improving the skill, thereby becoming smarter and more capable.

    The principle of this scheme is simple, you enjoy your abilities, considering yourself a skilled master of your craft. At the same time, improving the skill is, I'm not afraid of such an assessment, an existential condition, because what does not change becomes routine, this in turn bores us, and if interest disappears, then there is no interest, and who wants to complete tasks that you don't care about?

    Now imagine eternal comfort, sports and virtual games every day, any delicacies and desserts as soon as you think of them…

    Utopian? – Yes!

    Would you like to? “naturally!

    Is it worth it? “hmm.”..

    You won't be long enough until a moment of boredom hits you…you have everything, you are surrounded by loved ones and are limited from everyday problems-all this will become a routine that you hate, you will not have desires because everything is already there. This is an aimless life (the answers to the question how to find meaning and purpose in life on this service are through the roof), but what is an aimless life worth and what is it? This is depresnyak.


  6. Since ancient furry times. People have always sought, strive and will continue to strive to increase their social status, look cooler, cooler and cooler, increase their influence and strengthen their power. In any case, those people who have ambitions. Although.. everyone has ambitions, but they are very different. And everyone strives to rise above the rest to the best of their ambitions. That is why people strive for wealth. However, in the case of your specific question-since the formation of Protestantism and the so-called “Protestant ethics”, which called for working, working and working again for the benefit of society. Because up to this historical moment, people wanted to have more money and power, but at the same time work LESS )))) Protestants, on the other hand, elevated work to the rank of the highest virtue. On the one hand, it created a modern civilization, on the other hand, it gave rise to a vast stratum of workaholics. Although the ultimate goal is still social status. And ” work/achieve results “or” rob/steal/appropriate ” – only a different approach to the path to achieving the main goal – Social Status.

  7. From the ideology of the USSR expressed in the saying: man is the blacksmith of his own happiness. People had to be forced to work, and therefore they were told that in order to be happy , they had to work hard, overcome something.�

    There is also an option that it comes from our childhood, when my mother said: collect the toys first, and then the ice cream. That is, first do what you don't like, then get what you like. Then we live like this:

    First I work for 5 days, and then I enjoy Friday.

    First I work for a year, and then I enjoy my vacation.
    First of all, I do what I don't like, and then I take a break in retirement.

    So we live)

  8. What does “fashion” mean??? Since ancient times, wealth has been a close relative of power and empowerment. Opportunities are generated not by the benefits and wealth themselves, but by the breadth of their horizons: people with different incomes are concerned about different problems.

    The fashion itself does not exist for these things. “Fashion” is generally the wrong word in this context. The social constructs of society are much more complex than a simple hierarchy: plebeians at the bottom, patricians at the top. The fact is that society is a social organism that organizes itself. For example, the standard of living of a rich person – in the context of the question-depends on the actions and coherence of many poor people. If the cashier does not come to work, the rich person will be left without the right product at a particular moment. If the janitor doesn't come to work, the rich man will walk in the mud. And if the beggar can be satisfied with this, they say, what can you do; it will cause more inconvenience to the rich. A worker's strike will cause losses to the rich, both the business owner and the buyers (economic loss). Thus, power changes the pole and even if you have wealth, you no longer have power. Society is a complex organism. Everyone in it does their own thing. Even a slacker. Well, to conclude my answer, I want to say my own phrase, said in a discussion with another businessman: if everyone is rich, then everyone will be poor.

  9. Throughout the history of mankind, people have lived in conditions of “not everyone will survive”. Like animals, humans bred in such a way that they could fill all ecological niches with a margin. With any deterioration of the situation, some (sometimes significant) people had to die.

    Building up emergency supplies is a natural reaction to this situation. Use every opportunity to create an ” airbag. A career is only one way.

    In the middle of the 20th century, the situation began to change. As Malthus predicted, conscious birth control has transformed every aspect of human life. Including the attitude to work and savings.

    Now you can lie at the bottom of society without fear for your life. And even be indignant that this bottom is insufficiently comfortably equipped. Thank God, there is an inertia of culture that makes the majority “turn the wheels of progress”, otherwise downshifters would drag humanity into the Stone Age.

  10. yes, there is no such fashion at all. definitely not with us. we really want to earn money 1-2% of the population. maybe 3. no more. the rest, in general, do not particularly strive for any money, do not have any special ambitions, do not develop particularly in any way, do not give up any joys, even the most stupid ones – and live their lives in front of televisions and on the Internet. just quietly exist and quietly fight for survival. fashion damn… there is no such fashion. not even the west really tries to earn 5-10%, the rest just enjoy the life of an average person, there is a lot of their own buzz. the motivation of people to create and earn something has been constantly falling in the world for 50 years.

  11. At all times, there were people who sought to earn a lot. It's just that the percentage of these people was much smaller. Personally, my opinion is that now people live more consciously, and hope more for their own strength. In past centuries, religion has played a major role in people's lives. �It was believed that if you live a righteous life and do not sin, then after death you are waiting for the gates of paradise with all the nishtyaks. The religion taught that this life is not so important, so be patient in this life and in the next life you will be rewarded in full. Spiritual life was a priority.

    Now people have become more aware of their lives, we live here and now, no one dreams of the gates of paradise anymore, except in third world countries. People want to get everything here and now, and this means material costs. I'll write about this below. We can also add that we live much better now than our ancestors, and the development of science has borne fruit. In past centuries, life for most people was accompanied by a constant struggle, at any moment a person could be knocked down by a virus and he could die. Constant robberies and just domestic atrocities were the norm for life. Wars were far more frequent than they are now. All this forced people to fight for life, for food, for shelter.

    Now we live under different conditions. The Internet and TV showed everyone how to live. How people live in other countries, how people with high incomes live. A peasant in the 18th century had no idea that it was possible to live differently. Among his acquaintances, there were hardly any people who earned money on tarpaulin boots or built a palace with fur sales. Yes, he had seen people who were rich-gentlemen, but he had no idea how they lived.

    You can not strive to earn money and live your whole life with an average income, not even below average. Because the average income implies all the same effort and desire to receive a large salary. �
    Here is a scenario of how you will live with a low salary and a minimum of effort on your part. We will consider a low salary of 20 thousand rubles. �Although in my opinion it is already average in the country. �

    When successful people go on vacation at the sea, for example, you and your ” PO of 20 thousand will go to the village to visit your grandmother or to the nearest recreation center. When successful people go to get a second education in Europe, you won't be able to afford it. On a low salary, you will never see the world, you will not be able to travel. while successful friends will travel from one country to another. � When successful people will have their own apartment, car, house by the sea �and some other nishtyaki. You will live in a rented apartment or in your parents ' apartment. The wife of your successful friends will go to beauty salons and play sports, and in 40 years will look like 25. Your wife in 40 years will look 40, and maybe 50. Because the beauty of a wife also requires an investment of money. The children of successful people will go to cool lyceums, universities or study abroad ,and your children with a lower-than-average salary will go to college at best. �
    I think the difference is obvious. Money won't earn itself. Of course, in everything you need to know the measure you earn well and you need to have a good rest. And it's easier to have a good rest with money than without it.

  12. Careerism and the fashion for making money is an ideology that is broadcast not only in our country and has dominated since the 80s. This is what is called liberalism. To many people, this seems like something natural, but in reality it is a product of ideological influence.�

    There is a concept that is often used — this is human capital. We ourselves, both employers and the elite perceive a person as a resource. It is valued according to its market value. This is the ideology of meritocracy, when the market requires us not only to spend eight hours at our workplace, but also to do extra effort to be the best and most positive employee of the month. The idea is driven into people's heads that only the best of the best are entitled to bonuses in society. It is clear that if the ideology that dominates society is such, then there will always be more losers in this race than these lucky ones who “made themselves”. We also see this in projects related to education reform: the best privileged schools or universities receive more funding.

    We see the same thing in the workplace. Therefore, careerism is what the capitalist system offers us as compensation for alienation. Okay, you work hard, you suffer in your workplace. But you can get ahead of others, you can become better than others, you can break into top managers. This is a rather primitive motivation: a carrot that is hung in front of the donkey's face to make it run better. This philosophy generates more losers than lucky ones. The alternative is solidarity, collective action and everything that May 1 is dedicated to.

    I hope that the values will change. And they are already partly coming. We see that there are companies that are trying to introduce more humanistic methods of motivating their employees. So-called turquoise companies— those where there is no rigid system, management structure and where they try to establish human relations between managers and subordinates. Turquoise companies try to remove this motive of competition, hierarchy, and totalitarian methods of employee motivation, because these turquoise businessmen have come to the conclusion that encouraging competition between employees negatively affects the company's results. They try to encourage a cooperative moment.

    In my opinion, such companies are still a kind of hypocrisy. There is still a profit-making owner and employees. The situation remains unchanged. The enterprise does not turn into a cooperative, where everyone has their own share of profit and everyone makes their own labor contribution. This is still a capitalist enterprise that tries to treat people in a human way, using a carrot instead of a stick.�

    I think the public will be increasingly skeptical of training courses that promote competition and corporate values. I think this is already happening. But the main question is not what kind of corporate governance ideology we will have, but how much people will defend their interests as employees.

  13. In different circles, different “fashion”, the lot of simple non-creative hard workers like me, who grew up in a lack, is to try to show that you do not just live here, working hard and thinking about success and wealth. Moreover, our system does not assume that you can not suffer if you have little money.

    But I know a lot of people who have a different compass inside. They are driven by the desire to help, to seek harmony, to create, and are not at all concerned about the financial part of the issue. So “fashionable” is only because you have defined it so-so. That's not so. Everyone has the right to choose what they want

  14. I think there is a mistake in the question itself. One issue – to work harder and achieve better results-is a global feature of the human psyche. THIS is the joy of life. Another question is to work more to earn more – this is a feature of labor relations (contracts) at the present historical stage, lasting a couple of hundred years – this will end tomorrow without changing economic relations, both under capitalism and under socialism – all the same. There is no subject for discussion.

  15. Christianity has changed the vector of morality.

    “Idleness is the enemy of the soul.” “He who does not work, let him not eat.”

    Love for one's neighbor does not mean an inner experience, but a willingness to help. To do this, you need to work so that there is a surplus in excess of what is needed.

    Antiquity does not know the moral duty to work.

    The Reformation strengthened the thesis of the morality of labor in accordance with the needs of the growing capitalism. Labor movements are prayer bows in the world. Rich people-become God-pleasing and God-chosen, which naturally reverses and distorts the spirit of the Bible.

    In the future, this creative, labor principle of a person (which makes him related to God) is translated into the ideology of Rebirth.. up to my native Marxism, which reproduces the work ethic and pathos of work, work, and creativity.

    Decaying capitalism means abandoning your original work ethic and returning to drone ideologies.

  16. And I just live and enjoy myself. I also enjoy working when I manage to solve complex professional tasks. I'm in my seventh decade, but the awareness of my own role and responsibility for the well-being of hundreds of people in the organization keeps me on my toes. I don't know how many joys I would have at home if I didn't have enough money to live on, including such simple joys as delicious food, good clothes, interesting leisure, a comfortable bed, good health and the ability to maintain it, helping loved ones, and much more.

    I jump up at 6am to be almost the first to arrive at work and start planning my workday over my morning tea, and then rush home after work: my beloved wife is waiting for me there.

  17. Whatever it was – and each
    person will have to find their own measure of things between money, interest in work, a certain freedom within it and the quality of the environment . This question in life, if not central, then something close to that .. There is no common solution ; even for the same person, but at different stages of life, it is also often solved differently .
    But globally-yes ! The main “pie” has long been divided, dashing ups “from dirt to princes” as in the 90s are now unlikely and many people somehow began to see this conditional “carrot” hanging in someone's interests in front of their nose, and if one way or another “does not rush”, they began to choose more often in favor of individually greater freedom and little monetary joys instead of spinning like a squirrel in a wheel for a little

  18. I'll explain. You are corrupted by social humanism. You are crippled by your parents ' love and charity, and you live off the kindness of others. But that wasn't always the case. Yes, people have always and in all ages helped each other, and even cared about distant relatives, but people's lives have always been hard and cruel. Illnesses and sufferings, labors and worries, for everyone. The rich lived in labor at their own level, they had their own risks. Easy only in the movies. Only in fairy tales. In the real world, over the course of one generation, a person has gone through famine and war, poverty and misery. People have always studied crafts, sciences, trade and learned to fight. Those who did not study, life threw them to the bottom. Generation after generation, people have created a winning culture and a school of knowledge. If you don't want to learn and win, the welfare state has created a system of protection for you. Prison, hospitals, psychoclinics, benefits. If you want to lie on the bottom, please. Doctors need test subjects for new drugs. And all other people are doomed to fight for a better future in the face of increasing competition. But also, where it is difficult, there are almost no competitors. People don't like to solve supertasks. People don't want to do extra effort. Therefore, the winner will always be driven to success by the desire to conquer the world. There will always be leaders and winners. But there will also be slaves and losers, weaklings and cowards. And such, without nonsense, half of the population. There have always been few people who strive for knowledge and science, and who can do something and change it. No more than 10%. The rest of the people, 90%, are performers. They have a simple life. Hourly payment. A comfortable existence. But they are just a labor force and a production resource. They can easily be replaced with machines, programs, and robots. How can we replace scientists, engineers, leaders, businessmen, doctors, and winners? These are the best people. The most valuable people. They are more expensive than gold. They are the wealth of the people, the most expensive capital of the state.

  19. The explanation is very simple-such is the nature. The lion with the largest pride is steeper. Steeper is the hermit crab, who has a larger shell. Social insects always try to build a bigger home. Birds and rodents try to make the food supply as large as possible. To do this, you need to work harder. And that's it. All these interpretations of “Consumer Society”, “liberals”, “Americans with the Fed imposed” – this is far-fetched .

  20. We have this “fashion” began to be imposed in the 90s. “You guys got what you wanted, that's what you got, the rest is in your hands. You have been given OPPORTUNITIES, go ahead if you want to live well, and good is rich! ” Everything is simple, cries a lazy person, a loser and a person with moral principles. Thus, the authorities hide themselves from possible claims – WHY, UNDER EQUAL CONDITIONS, THE MAJORITY LIVES POORLY. Yes, they are lazy because!

  21. It's hard to be happy without money! At least when you can start to be happy is if your beloved parents or a kind grandmother left you an apartment, and you have a place to live and do not have to pay rent. And so you just have to work. Well, when you work, what's the point of working badly? Someone who works well and gets paid well. In the process, it becomes interesting – new goals for work and life, other opportunities, and so on.

    And so what is there to be happy about? Your dependent status? The fact that if there is a health problem or any other where money is needed, you will not be able to solve it?

  22. Fashion came from the ancient class of merchants who put profit first. Greedy for money, they gave up on life, on the joys of life and earned and earned. Then, when they had accumulated a very large amount of money, they bribed the Western aristocracy and the Western clergy and stirred up the bourgeois revolutions that brought them to power, and began to plant their culture of greed and greed everywhere and everywhere. Today, those who despise their greed and financial lust are called beggars and downshifters ))))

  23. I will quote the answer of user Helga Pataki to the question ” What is the worst lie of this world?”.�

    Mark Fischer, essay “A Worthless Man”:

    “For a certain period of time, the most successful tactic of the ruling class was to shift responsibility. Every individual belonging to the oppressed classes is made to feel that their poverty, lack of opportunities, or lack of work is only their own fault. People start blaming themselves, rather than the social structures that they are somehow led to believe do not exist (the existence of these structures is an excuse for weaklings).

    What Smale calls “magical voluntarism” – the idea that a person can become whatever they want, that it is in their power-is the dominant ideology and unofficial religion of modern capitalist society, which is promoted by “experts” on TV shows and business gurus no less than politicians.

    Magical voluntarism is both a consequence and a cause of the poorly developed class consciousness inherent in the current historical moment. It is the flip side of depression, which is based on the belief that we all have a unique responsibility for our unhappiness, and therefore deserve it. Victims of Britain's stagnant unemployment are now caught up in a particularly vicious dilemma: people who have been told all their lives that they are good for nothing are being told that they can do whatever they want.”

  24. It all started partly in 1524, when Protestantism was officially formed as a religious idea. A solid foundation for new economic relations was needed , and it did appear. Then there was Max Weber's book “Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of capitalism”, which many adopted as an ideological work.And then there's the Great American Dream, the quintessential idea of success in the material world. (Caucasian show-offs, colorful and ringing gypsies, palaces of officials with golden toilets-etc.) A kind of universal national idea for everyone.

Leave a Reply