Print this post Print this post

Woke Capital’s Free Option

Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube, a definite woke capitalist.

1,585 words

As many of you already know, YouTube has recently embarked on a campaign to purge dissident voices from its platform. As expected, the Dissident Right was the hardest hit, with such luminaries as Dr. Patrick Slattery and my fellow contributor here at Counter-Currents, Jared George, losing their channels outright. Many others have had their videos removed or demonetized. It’s all anyone’s been able to talk about on YouTube, and it is a cause for concern. YouTube gives our movement a link directly to Generation Z’s hindbrain. The kids have no time to read stodgy ol’ uncle Nick Jeelvy’s two-thousand-word diatribes on Counter-Currents, but they will faithfully glue themselves to their screens and watch the talking heads stream for hours on end.

Social media censorship is a gigantic problem which needs addressing, and indeed, bigger brains than mine have tackled this issue. But there’s a teachable moment here, and I’d like to use it to demonstrate the motivations behind the corporation’s actions.

The usual way of thinking about them is that corporations are for-profit businesses. They are what we in the continental legal tradition call legal persons – yes, Mitt Romney was right when he told the Occupy kids that “corporations are people, my friend.” Traditionally, they exist so that people may pool their resources for common business ventures, share the dividends of those ventures, and share responsibility for the business’ liabilities.” The modern corporate/legal person, specifically the limited liability company – the LLC, or its German equivalent, GmbH – and publicly traded companies (AG, Aktionengesellschaft) add a further layer of protection for the business owner, insofar as he is only liable to the extent of his investment in the company. Whereas before the invention of such entities – specifically, the GmbH in the Imperial German Reich – business owners were personally liable for any debts their enterprise might have incurred, and their personal property could be seized and auctioned off in order to cover said debts, they could now choose the extent of their involvement. Investing one hundred dollars only comes with a maximum possible loss of one hundred dollars. A pretty good deal, no?

However, in dealing with large companies, and especially in large, publicly-traded companies, we come to a serious problem. It was identified by James Burnham as the Managerial Revolution: the alienation of business owners from their capital leads to the rise of the managerial class – a class of men (and increasingly, women) who run companies without owning them. Sam Francis and Paul Gottfried expanded on this idea, demonstrating that the managerial class is broader than simply the managerial teams of large corporations, but rather permeates the state and other important areas of society.

The very existence of men of this class poses the agency problem: namely, the problem of trusting someone else to run your affairs. The agency problem is what makes a modern corporation so dangerous, economically speaking. We know that it is possible for the managerial class to prioritize short-term profit while concealing long- and mid-term fragilities which could bankrupt the company in the long run. Furthermore, modern managerial ethics prefer doing this through a combination of dishonest business practices and collusion with the government, which drain the aforementioned profit out of the smaller competitors; think of Walmart using a combination of price gouging and corruption/lobbyist clout to destroy local companies until it becomes the only option in a certain locale. This, per Nassim Taleb, accumulates fragilities in every community, as the supply chain in that particular locale has a single point of failure: Walmart. But until a catastrophic and unpredictable event – which Nassim Taleb calls a black swan event – destroys Walmart, it can run infinite profits, right? Well, it can, but it doesn’t necessarily follow that it will.

Burnham predicted that the managerial class would overrun the state and become its de facto ruling class. Sam Francis devoted his entire life to expounding the horrors that the managerial class has inflicted upon the West. But what makes this class so exceptional is the fact that they know how to run things – it’s right in the name. But this isn’t necessarily the case. Coming from the perspective of economics, Burnham failed to see that the managerial class has a common fount of ideas, a common religion that preceded it, that religion being American-style progressivism and the fount being Harvard University. For historical and status reasons, entry into the managerial class is secured by going to college (preferably Harvard) to learn the shibboleths of progressivism (which were invented by Harvard), to put on airs (as they do in Harvard), to hate Middle Americans (who didn’t go to Harvard), and to learn the latest in bullshit managerial techniques (concocted by half-mad Jewish feminists at Harvard). And then they go into business and manage the great banks and corporations, implementing the Harvard program. Enter Woke Capital.

But surely, the Right protests, working in this manner will bankrupt the companies! Go woke, go broke, as the saying goes. Yes, it will ruin them, but there’s a company can absorb a lot of ruination. That’s the first thing. The second thing is, the managerial class controls both the state and the corporations. There’s a revolving door between the regulatory apparatus of the state and the entities it is supposed to be regulating. It’s the same people on the inside as on the outside. So, naturally, they do favors for each other, and no matter how crappy or insane the latest woke management trend is, the government helps these corporations out.

The much deeper problem is that the managerial class does not share the fate of the companies it manages. They can run these things into the ground and get off lightly, as they have no skin in the game. Nassim Taleb will underscore the importance of managers not only being rewarded for success, but also punished for failure, and sharing the fate of the company, as otherwise they’ll be motivated to maximize short-term profit and hide fragilities in the far future. His analogy is that of a bridge-builder who is forced to live in a house under the bridge with his family, as happened in ancient Rome. It is interesting that Roman bridges are still standing, some two thousand years later.

No, what the managerial class does is to burn away the social and actual capital of the companies it is tasked with managing in order to signal loyalty to progressive orthodoxy. Pride Month is Woke Capital’s busy time of the year, as every megacorp tries to outdo the others in screaming loudly that they approve of sodomy. It’s not just playing along to get along; the people running these companies have Harvard’s insane ideology implanted in their brains, and they have the degrees to prove it. They’ll take their companies apart if it means positioning themselves further to the Left than their friends. And they won’t be punished for it. The company will burn while they get a cushy government or NGO job, especially if they’re fired for bankrupting the company through excessive wokeness. Can you even imagine the spectacle of some strahng independant whaman CEO whining to the world about how those mean ole shareholders expected her to put business before poopdick? In this day and age, it is wrong to assume that a corporation will act in a way most conductive to profit, because the people running those corporations are protected from the consequences of not running their corporations for profit; indeed, they are rewarded when they run a corporation according to the tenets of the progressive faith and virtue-signal. This is what is called a free option – they pay no cost for this whatsoever. They may ruin a company and put thousands out of business, but they’ll suffer no consequences.

We’ve come to a rather advanced stage of capitalism, when companies are no longer formed in order to do business, when owners have no control over the people managing their companies, and when they and the managers are insulated from loss. Those companies which, at one point, were seen as creations to maintain and cherish; which provided the livelihoods of many families; who were seen as monuments to success by the men who founded, owned, and operated them are now nothing but vehicles for personal success for the managerial class, who seek to fill their portfolios while signalling wokeness and holiness to their college friends.

Susan Wojcicki, the CEO of YouTube, is a dreadfully dull woman. She has also recently decided to signal her Leftism by purging the YouTube Right at the behest of Carlos Maza, a homosexual reporter for Vox who wanted Steven Crowder banned after Crowder imitated his effeminate way of speaking. Numerous commentators have quipped that she’ll ruin YouTube and make the highly unprofitable video-streaming service even less profitable. This is true. What’s also true is that it’s unlikely that the immigrant Brahmin in charge of Google will send her packing. More likely, she’ll be given a standing ovation at Google’s next TGIF meeting. But even if she’s forced to step down, or, God willing, YouTube crashes in flames and takes Google down with it, you can bet that Wojcicki, Pichai, Brin, and the whole stinking lot of them will be taken care of; the Left takes care of their own. In the meantime, our message will be obstructed at every juncture, and every morning, I’ll open YouTube with a sense of dread, fearing that my favorite programs have been nuked from orbit.

13 Comments

  1. Posted June 22, 2019 at 6:12 am | Permalink

    ‪Business for business’ sake. American materialism devoid of sacred organic bonds among the varying strata of a coherent folk. ‬

    ‪It was bound to end up this way. ‬

    ‪A great expose on the imbalance of the merchants (not necessarily a euphemism) being in charge. Makes one reflect on what a healthier, more naturally balanced society would be like… ‬

  2. Posted June 22, 2019 at 5:18 am | Permalink

    Thank you for the mention. I just saw now that CC lost its YouTube. They can’t and won’t stop us. I get more energy with each new hurdle.

  3. BAL
    Posted June 19, 2019 at 4:47 am | Permalink

    Youtube has been openly working with the ADL to optimize censorship for two years now.

    More than a year ago, Youtube revealed they had a hitlist comprised largely of “centrist” political channels that acted as a dialogue space between naive noobs just becoming aware that the right-wing exists outside of Bill Maher monologues and right-wingers ready to explain what’s actually going on in the world.

    The program that Youtube unveiled on June fifth, including a revised TOS, a new and unmerciful system of full editorial control rather than worrying about “strikes” and “warnings,” and the pre-ordained slow-boil progressive banning calculated to bring an end to the dissident Youtube community before its largest names are banned, is not something that gets created in a week. It’s not something a bloated corporate giant like Youtube can pull off in a month.

    It is simply not possible that Gay Wonk was the reason for Youtube’s policy change. Either Youtube was waiting for the next convenient manufactured outrage event, or Gay Wonk volunteered to provide a requested manufactured outrage event. This has been in the design process for a very long time.

  4. Posted June 14, 2019 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

    A very good piece. I have seen big management at close quarters in the UK, in the NHS and property management, and one of their self-serving functions is to manage a company or organization in such a way that more and more management becomes essential and its expansion a deliberate part of the managerial apparatus.

    • Posted June 16, 2019 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

      As the man said, the bureaucracy expands to fill the needs of the expanding bureaucracy. I’ve first hand experience with this phenomenon and it is as tiresome as it is repulsive.

  5. K
    Posted June 14, 2019 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    “The much deeper problem is that the managerial class does not share the fate of the companies it manages. They can run these things into the ground and get off lightly, as they have no skin in the game”

    So.. they just behave like the Jewish Diaspora.

  6. Ty
    Posted June 14, 2019 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    Capitalism, it’s all very tiresome.

    • nineofclubs
      Posted June 14, 2019 at 9:14 pm | Permalink

      Not just tiresome. The idea that capitalism would be ok, IF ONLY it could throw off the unwanted cultural influences of leftism (sic) is misguided, IMO.

      Capitalism today is inherently global. Even the small local trader buys goods made overseas, or borrows from banks with mainly global shareholders. There’s no unscrambling this omelette. Capitalism drives globalism.

      Capitalism is also socially liberal. ‘Exclusion’ of any kind is bad for business. Excluding one partner in a marriage from the workplace reduces the labour market and adds to wage pressure. Excluding foreign migrants slows GDP growth. Excluding newly categorised forms of gender identity from society creates division and gives consumers a complex – where’s the profit in that?

      Capitalism today is globalist and socially liberal. It can’t be redeemed, because it’s the driver – not just some hapless captive – of the forces that threaten our national survival.

      .

      • Peter
        Posted June 15, 2019 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

        Who is keeping the consumer – us – from buying… local? From buying only from a company that acts in exactly the way that we want… and we pay maybe a higher (dollar-)price for that? “Capitalism”… and people actually mean Free Market Economy when they say capitalism… is not a one-way street: there is a seller (company) and a buyer (consumer). If we don´t buy. HOW do they persist?? But the side of the consumer is NEVER mentioned ! And the side of the consumer is our ticket out of the quagmire! We, the consumers, have all the power. It is (almost) never addressed in the dissident movement.

        • nineofclubs
          Posted June 16, 2019 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

          Thanks for your reply, Peter.

          We can do all that – and most of us probably try to, most of the time. I buy locally grown eggs because I know the producer and he’s a good guy. But his chickens are raised on feed that’s mainly imported. His farm is financed by a bank that’s foreign owned. Buying from him is better than buying from a foreign owned supermarket, but he’s still caught up in the web of global capital.

          I’d think there are very few producers – of anything – behaving in exactly the way we want. And that’s not their fault necessarily; it’s the way the system favours the cheapest goods and services in a ‘free’ market.

          Most people on limited incomes will put price ahead of economic nationalism when it comes to buying. This is unfortunate, but true.

          The state could – if it chose – use tariffs, levies and subsidies to level the playing field in the market. This could correct for the externalised costs created when companies move to countries with poor labour and environmental controls – and also be used to relieve cost pressures on local producers and consumers. In a nutshell, it’d make economic nationalism feasible for everyone, not just us fanatics.

          A market would surely still exist in this situation, but it would be less of a ‘free’ market than I’d associate with traditional capitalism. It wouldn’t be the planned economy of the Soviet state either, but something like a managed market – similar to what many Western nations had in place during the early 20th century.

          .

  7. Afterthought
    Posted June 14, 2019 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    They are pushing and finding no resistance.

    Resistance is not possible within the paradigm of an intact America. Only when we move to separate will the needle start moving in our direction again.

  8. Hugo Adrian
    Posted June 14, 2019 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    They are using Steven Crowder as the fall guy because he’s one of the safe alt-lite types who can then become a martyr to impressionable conservatives. Don’t be distracted by his tiff with Carlos Maza, it is merely a smoke screen. This has been the plan all along at the Defamation League, but it was stymied when Youtube only allowed them to place edgier videos into quarantine.

    In recent weeks, prior to this “scandal” it has been quietly deleting hundreds of small channels with only a hundred or so subscribers for hosting content Jews hate, such as videos of Tony Martin’s speeches on the Jewish role in the slave trade, the Jewish attacks on him, and any revisionist material. The youtube links in my article “Neo as Jewish messiah” were deleted soon after its publication – videos that had been there for months or years prior.

  9. Oldtradesman
    Posted June 14, 2019 at 8:38 am | Permalink

    I’m not sure Tillman’s death was a typical fratricide incident. Given his public gravitas, the subsequent realization that the war was a fraud would have had a detrimental impact on the morale of peers and command, and on the credibility of USA’s Army and war effort. To what extent, if any, did this contribute to his death? In other words, was his death engineered? We’ll never know.

    Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    The World in Flames

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Reuben

    The Node

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance