There’s something in this Kronenbourg…

It’s remarkable how quickly the memory of complete freedom dissipates. Work does that to you. It thrusts itself up against you, pins you to the wall, wraps you tightly in its skin, but with a pressure that leaves you just enough breathing room to cope, where just enough of a vacuum exists between irritation and outright despair that stops your body from bleeding itself into your soul.

And then of course, there’s the whole culture of work; bred and nurtured over the decades, refined and tweaked as part of a set of cultural ideals that operate in tandem with a consumer-driven social model. The whole operation is so seamless that to complain about work life, to the degree that most of us do, is just seen as “one of those things” that we all feel we can never change and therefore are obligated to observe. It’s a kind of acquiescence that makes the soul wilt a little I think, this feeling of helplessness over a force that so governs our life entirely, in terms of the degree of comfort that we can afford, as well as the sense of authority, social status and identity that a particular employment path can bestow. And that’s really the trick of the working life, the way it creates reward in return for individual duty, entitlement, devotion and commitment. For most, I imagine, this monetary reward is enough to keep despair at bay; the trade-off between self-sacrifice and financial comfort being sufficient to suppress any of the soul’s deep, probing reflections on the nature of work and its effect on individual enrichment. Money has such force nowadays that it doesn’t seem to just brush these inherent, human concerns aside, it scrapes them away, such that the thought of the new suit, the possibility of owning the next car, the exotic holiday, the luxury of it all, straight blows away all of the soul’s tender, delicate inquiries.

But if we were to assume that man’s modus operandi were unspecified, that each individual only operated according to a kind of “happiness maximisation”, which incorporated an understanding of the need to find balance between work that was truly beneficial, both to himself and others, and activity that would truly nourish the soul, then would we in all likelihood have invented a system such as that which exists today?

Studied objectively, it’s pretty much staggering that a 7-day week accommodates just 2 days of relaxation, but the honourable reverence that has been cultivated in relation to work, means that to object to it, or to actively take a stand against it, inspires accusations of indolence or even failure.

But there should be a way out for those of thus that reject a system (which, it seems, exists and flourishes because it marginalises those that inevitably fail to benefit from it, while those that do benefit are rewarded monetarily, as well as by virtue of their decision-making authority and overall power) for simply calling it out for what it is. An affront on the soul. An affront on a decent standard of human living (where decent is a byword not for the physical practicalities that we all need for survival, but decency of overall individual experience).

You’d think recent events could have prompted such a re-evaluation. But it hasn’t. And it probably won’t. Unless we all stub our collective toecaps into a polluted and ruthlessly self-interested form of governance that wields just enough influence to convince detractors of its moral awareness and servility towards those that were responsible for its existence. The real problem is that the whole of life’s structure has a dizzying complexity to it; purposefully so, to enable us all to be shuffled around and re-arranged without us even noticing.

So what would it take to completely re-evaluate everything we have known since birth? To question everything on its merit, rather than its place an function within an overarching structure? Is it even possible under the circumstances? What form would that re-evaluation take and where would it lead?

It’s the latter question that makes me muse on the idea of protest. The current situation makes it valid, compelling even. I’m sure I don’t need to wax lyrical on the harm that spending cuts are likely to bring on communities across the country. These effects are well-documented and the veritable hypocrisy of a system that lets grievous error float into the ether unpunished hardly needs to be elaborated. But I wonder, if protest is a response, or a rejection, to corporatism and greed and the idea that it is allowed to breed unfettered, or worse, that such activity is actually beneficial to others less fortunate, then should such a protest not equally reject the idea of ungainly profit, in whatever industry, or whatever guise that may take?

If the answer is yes, then should a process of complete societal re-evaluation not be the logical recourse? If not, what kind of model for “sustainable” capitalism exists, such that profit exists in a way that’s fair and does not diminish or restrain the level of opportunity for others? Would a greater degree of community-led governance be enough?

Or if we were to question every commonly-accepted protocol and subject it to ruthless evaluation, what alternative to the current social order might actually work for us all?