The rule to self-destruct businesses
We all know that in business, one must maximize profits and reduce costs. And this includes labor. Minimize how much you pay workers and maximize their productivity. Laborers will work more and things become cheaper. Businesses, therefore, tend to stress workers as part of their motto, in the sense that they must do as much as is legal and ethical. Without worker unions or any of those pressures that explicitly threaten profit and therefore make worker exploitation costly, businesses have no problem making you work weekends if you don’t say anything. Sure, you stress out, burn out, naturally. You may sacrifice the time of your children or your other contributing hobbies, but still, as long as you’re still there being productive to them, they’re “ethical.” However, when you stress out or burn out, they are internal, so the company doesn’t care about them. But, when that burnout starts becoming explicit in the work you do, maybe you fall sick, or you quit, or you are not productive anymore, or you are tired of management and you sue them, or you create a revolutionary culture in the company against management: That’s when management thinks it must do to change it, but by that point, it’s too late. This is the mistake of business and capitalism: Blindness. One misses that implicit will become explicit, or at least some of it. That’s the principle of self-destruct-revolution in businesses. Companies want to spend the least amount of money, but they need to find the balance. Companies want to keep it tight on workers, as much as possible. But not all workers are the same. That’s the art of the science in managing businesses. People can withstand only long enough, people have different boundaries. You want to care for your kids but your job is getting in the way? You’ll have to quit, and management will find someone who is willing to deal with more pressure: as tight as possible.
Businesses want to squeeze out of their material as much as possible, that’s efficiency culture, and you are part of it, the worker. And it’s not about overtime work and the number of tasks, even the whole business model.
Businesses don’t care for implicit, even though implicit is the most important of everything. Implicit is what we feel, and what we feel is our whole lives, moods, way of being, forever.
For example, think about Dr. Phil. Dr. Phil is supposed to be a therapist that fixes the problems of families or individuals for free in exchange that they are on T.V.. That’s the business model: We get drama from you, you get treatment from us. But a lot of the time, people who go on Dr. Phil are responded to with MEAN, offensive, and triggering treatment for entertainment and the Dr. Phil Personality brand: Being tough and confident, a man who is qualified and knows his job. (Which, actually, is far from the truth, no one is even close to understanding the human mind, even the biggest psychologists don’t know a dime about the psyche.)
The story of Bayley, the little girl.
One time, a little girl who was delusional about an imaginary girl lover, was obviously nervous when Dr. Phil asks her about the fact that she has a lover but she never met her imaginary girlfriend. The little girl, Bayley, says: “Yes,” and a big silence stands afoot and a few audience members laugh. She nervously looks at the audience and says: “And you all can laugh at me, it’s fine. I will be your spectacle, I will be your laughing, laughing spectacle.” And starts to tear up. Then Dr. Phil says: “You know what, I think we’re going to shut this down because I’m into this melodrama and you playing the victim. You’re saying the audience is making a spectacle out of you. That’s not what I’m about, that’s not what I do […] I’m sorry […] This is just gone in a really bad direction. I'm going to talk to Jasmine and your mother and let you head on home.”
Dr. Phil also told her: “Nobody tells me who to put on my show including you,” when she said that the producer told her her mother won’t be here and she is, and “You may live in fantasy land, I do not.” The girl was obviously on edge and did not feel comfortable. She apologized. He told her to leave. This is not actual therapy, this is not real treatment, but Dr. Phil goes on, you know why? Because for the Dr. Phil brand and company, the implicit cost did not become explicit, and he wanted to show his power as long as it doesn’t hurt him. Ironically enough for a therapy show, it hurt the girl.
Probably later after the show, Dr. Phil might go to her room backstage, knock, and gently come in and tell her: “Hey, I'm sorry, I didn’t mean to be mean, I thought that’d be the best way to handle you. How about this, the show will give you a free ticket to the trauma center, where people will take care of you, free of charge, and get you free from hurt.”
Sobbing, the girl might say: “Yes, okay. But the episode won’t air, right?”
“No, we have to air the episode, it’s not on me, it’s on management. But I think that’s fine since you’ll be going with a free treatment and you’ll feel better.”
Disappointed, but a bit nihilistically angry, and with a look of giving up, the girl says: “yeah, I guess so.” and she wipes off her tear.
Dr. Phil takes her to drink a juice box.
What happened here? The implicit stays implicit. The show needs to air the episode, it will create lots of fuss on Youtube showing Dr. Phil as a powerful brand that wouldn’t let a mean and hostile teenager with dyed hair show him who’s boss. A satisfying thing to watch for unholy parents everywhere.
But the whole point of the show is to make people get treatment, but that gets boring over time. The business wants to take this to the next level: make more profit, at the least amount of costs. In here, the cost should’ve been the outrage of the girl who would go on social media and give negative P.R. to Dr. Phil, maybe talk to others and badmouth the show so people don’t come there again, or talk about it with family, friends, loved ones, and have enough people help sue the show. But with that fictional backstage talk, Dr. Phil minimized those costs and made it so the costs stay implicit for the girl to manage, in the form of fears, insecurities, mistrust in the world, and hurt. That’s the blindness of businesses. And this applies everywhere. As long as businesses keep costs implicit, they can get away with anything.
Amazon can pay its workers less, give horrible working conditions during the pandemic, and get away with it as long as they make sure it is implicit. The result? The costs either go somewhere else, in a culture of mistrust and bitterness, then crime. Or workers unite and self-destruction occurs. A revolution happens.
The revolution is when the implicit was implicit for so long, people get tired, and they explode. People have different boundaries. Some can take in more than others. Others simply cannot. There’s a delicate balance that management needs to keep and to minimize costs and maximize profit. If enough people are out of their boundaries and management was not successful in creating a culture where implicit stays implicit. People will erupt. The business will self-destruct.
A culture where implicit stays implicit: As a vision statement.
The goal of business is a culture where exploitation occurs, but implicit stays implicit. And the best way for implicit to be implicit is when not even the workers themselves understand why they feel bad or even that they feel that way (Much like what Dr. Phil did in the fictional talk with Bayley backstage.)
It does not have to be manipulation. We see all the times now, about the ideal form of leadership: The transformative leader. The principle of Transformational leadership: How to maximize productivity? Make it that you, the worker, extending your whole self to the company is an act of religion: Committing to something bigger than one-self, like a cult: Committing to the “noble” company vision. Having affordable food everywhere in the world? Eradicate poverty as Amazon? Microsoft defeating world hunger? That will surely get your workers to keep suffering implicitly and to stress them out most as possible and get the most productivity as possible and therefore maximize profit, minimize costs. Sure, we love principles like defeating world hunger and eradicating poverty, but the truth is: It’s the persons who own the company that ought to be brainwashed most for these visions, not the workers doing more work for them. We should not expect workers to be brainwashed into deleting their boundaries for a cult-like carefully crafted vision statement in order to exploit them and keep their suffering inside them. Workers keep their suffering implicit, just because there’s a made-up “higher cause” at hand. Like religion does about going to heaven.
Why Men rebel? A Political theory.
The self-destruct revolution principle is not only in businesses, it’s in countries too. Countries that live in poverty and are continually stressed and have too many things kept implicit will revolt.
Medical staff working in a poorly funded hospital who are expected to work overtime, and somehow make up for unavailable oxygen, surgery tools, and technological material with their traditional hands, will erupt. Just like people who are paid less than a living wage and are beat up by policemen in the streets for going out to protest will erupt. Policemen can keep the implicit suffering implicit only for a while, and the state and the police department will think that they got it under control, but the costs will remain and are expressed somewhere else. The implicit cost will become explicit: Office theft, domestic violence, giving up on their own human capital and bitterness, rudeness, unproductivity, and armed rebellion.
What are hobbies then? Are they under threat?
Hobbies are things you do that are not based on a maximizing profit formula because there’s no management or business behind them. This means your hobbies are under threat to go extinct as if it’s a company of itself. Your hobbies cannot compete with your full-time job that’s taking your full-life.
So it’s time to protect our hobbies, just because they don’t follow the business formula does not mean they have any less of a right to not exist or be competed to extinction, now that we know the business formula counts on hurt and the implicit being swallowed and shut down for their own survival interest. But we are human beings, we want to feel okay, and not hurt and stressed out, because the pain inevitably goes elsewhere. So let’s protect our hobbies.
The system obviously doesn’t work, the implicit exploitation and hurt will go somewhere else, no doubt about it, you can’t eradicate it. The real competition is the competition on who takes your precious time, and that doesn’t mean the winner of that competition makes your life meaningful. A meaningful life is something only you can define. But as long as you know that the competition for your time and attention and effort does not mean it is correct, you need to fight corporations to give time to your hobbies if you find meaning in them. However, if you happen to find meaning in your work (Job, in the literal sense), then you are lucky to play in this system, by all means, keep being there until something else is better at competing at your time that doesn’t involve work… Like right now: Social media, which is more about consumption.