[vasco]

Not every place in life is a place of struggle and fight. Some people actually enjoy their work. This just sounds like "class struggle" and "proletariat and bourgeoisie" under different names. Also thinking of your colleagues and people as "elites", "losers" and the "clueless" gives me some understanding to the state of mind of who writes this.

To keep it lighter, in the companies I've worked in the architypes of people were more like:

- The "anger problem that shouts every once in a while" guy

- The "chronic nervous person that is paralyzed by impostor syndrome"

- The "i find more problems than solutions" guy

- The "i'm here to socialize, make friends, maybe get married"

- The "i gave up 10 years ago and just want my paycheck"

- The "i'm a kid learning everything I can and am just excited to be here"

- The "i'm working on my true passion outside of work while hanging out here with you guys" etc etc

People have their own lives, not everything is just a power play of losers and elites.

I'll be honest, even if the world was exactly as you described, which it isn't, I'd choose to not see it that way so that my life wouldn't be such a bleak existance. Rather be a naive happy fool than enlightned and depressed.

[j-bos]

The article uses struggly words like sociopaths and losers, but defines them very differently from common use, often the 'losers' have the most fulfilling and rounded lives, i.e. true winners

- The "chronic nervous person that is paralyzed by impostor syndrome" - clueless

- The "i find more problems than solutions" guy - clueless

- The "i'm here to socialize, make friends, maybe get married" - loser

- The "i gave up 10 years ago and just want my paycheck" - loser

- The "i'm working on my true passion outside of work while hanging out here with you guys" etc etc - loser

It's a rough model of org interactions with poorly named categories.

[krapp]

>The article uses struggly words like sociopaths and losers, but defines them very differently from common use, often the 'losers' have the most fulfilling and rounded lives, i.e. true winners

They're "losers" from the point of view of capitalism and corporate hierarchy. If you're not committing your life to ruthlessly climb the ladder to grasp at wealth and power by any means and you don't buy into the game or its rules, you're basically a defective cog, a useless part of the machine.

If you're unaware that success is a rigged lottery designed to find and promote sociopaths and actually believe that reward comes with hard work, determination and passion, you're clueless. A mark. A rube. If you're smart enough, with enough abuse you'll eventually wake up and become a loser.

[robertlagrant]

> They're "losers" from the point of view of capitalism and corporate hierarchy. If you're not committing your life to ruthlessly climb the ladder to grasp at wealth and power by any means and you don't buy into the game or its rules, you're basically a defective cog, a useless part of the machine.

You have too narrow a definition of capitalism and of corporate hierarchy. What you describe is one outworking of them, but not the outworking.

[harimau777]

It's BY FAR the most common outworking. Most people won't be lucky enough to find a job that doesn't work that way.

[robertlagrant]

Can you cite where you know this from?

[siliconstump]

This is pervasive across US corporate culture and present in 4/4 different sectors I have been employed.

Based off your statement in another thread "I've never really been to the US, other than a couple of brief work trips" - I can understand your view, but it is indeed the most common paradigm. Will happily review your sources that refute my experience.

[harimau777]

Personal experience and the experience of the developers that I've met.

[j-bos]

yes.