We already know the common desire to be rich and all that. Under capitalism, you can potentially become a rich business owner who lives off the work of others, rare as it may be. But even though it’s still significantly more realistic than what I am going to talk about, it’s boring and you would usually just get millions of dollars and live quietly and out of the publuc eye.
But what about the celebrities? If anything, it’s even easier to desire to be one. These people often do stuff that are actually interesting: some are business tycoons, sure, but you also see a lot of TV/internet/radio/etc. personalities, actors, artists, musicians, film directors, etc. And many of them gain even more wealth even faster than the example in the first paragraph.
Yet the majority of people who try to follow their path are broke and/or have to work a second job just to survive.
Imagine how many people dream of being able to create amazing works of art such as songs, movies, paintings, etc. and to gain at least some recognition for it, whether it is big or small, but will never (or will barely) get the opportunity. The capitalist class does not find them useful enough to be anything more than a poor wage slave, not a rich one.
It’s as if celebrities just exist as pawns of the capitalist class to convince the working class that their dreams can still be achieved under capitalism, when that is simply not a reality.
I don’t think celebrities will cease to exist under socialism, and they certainly didn’t in past/present socialist societies, but at least it will be far more meritocratic and the overall desire to become a celebrity will go down anyway.
What are your thoughts?
You must log in or register to comment.
I think the celebrity culture, or more specifically current celebrity culture is another attempt of capitalism at ganing popularity by repackaging “american dream” - that you, me and everyone else can be successful, can rise to the top, you just need to work hard.
In reality of course, there is basically no possibility to join the capitalist elite if you’re not already part of it. Therefore it was altered to become the “new elite”, a celebrity, in reality is entirely dependant on those who are already in power - capitalists. Celebrities are not the elites themselves, they rise, prosper and fall entirely on the beck and call of the capitalist class, and as such they naturally have to show 100% servilism of that class. And you can notice that this is concurrent to the real people in power slowly backing from the limelight position they used to have as “sharks of industry” more into the shadow, with few exceptions like Musk.It’s modern Cinderella show to woo the working class and deliver them copious amount of opium in the process.
This. And the problem that most celebs come from the ruling class before they begin their careers. It’s how they get a head start, how they get acting or singing classes or studio time or a role in a movie or spoken about in a newspaper or on TV.
Yeah obviously servants try to imitate the masters. We had celebrities in socialist Poland, actors, singers and so on, but there were nothing like the today. And they were recruited either from the schools and professional career (for example most actors had at least few years of theatre work behind them) or from talent discovery at amateur contests.
But when capitalism returned just 20 years passed and we had full blown showbusiness families and a lot of new celebrities are children and families of previous ones.
One thing I’ve wondered about is what role streamers would play in a socialist society. I think that there will still be people who just want to chill and watch someone prattle on while they play video games or draw or whatever, but the growing prominence of streamers seems inextricably linked to the increasing alienation and isolation caused by capitalism. I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that, for the majority of diehard streamer fans, the streamer is less an entertainer and more a surrogate friend (or even romantic partner).
A socialist society wouldn’t be a utopia, of course, but integral to its success would be layers of strong communal social structures which are incompatible with the epidemic of isolation we see today. Instead of abandoning people to have nothing but their screens for company, we would do what we can to reintegrate them with their communities and build meaningful relationships.
As for the desire to be a celebrity, I think it would definitely be lower in a socialist society. There are people who do purely want fame, but I think for most celebrity is a means to an end, as you say. One streamer that I follow is an incredible vocalist and pours immense effort into making music, which they are only able to fund and find the time for thanks to their following. In a world where this person had the free time and resources (without IP law or other artificial scarcity) to just make their art with likeminded creative folks to their hearts’ content, I really doubt they would have ever gotten into streaming or worried themselves about getting a huge audience. Out of all of the streamers I know, only a few seem like pure entertainers (the Jermas and Northernlions of this world)—the rest just stumbled into something that is a lot more rewarding than toiling away for wages and are riding the wave for as long as they can while funding their true passions.
People like gossip. They are also atomized and don’t have the social circles to gossip with or about. So we get professional celebrities to fill that niche.
I would rather a world without celebrity. I think the desire for that position has a few factors. Humans seem to have a possibly innate desire to live forever, which can be partially realized by becoming a historical figure and living in the minds of future generations. The most capitalist reason is its tie to wealth, hence people saying they want to be “rich and famous”, and of course wealth is directly tied to power and influence. The most communist reason is the desire to be accepted and appreciated by such a great number of people and feeling useful just as your own person. The grossest reason is a perpetuation of the great man myth, our indoctrination to the false belief that progress only comes from exceptional individuals, and of course if you’re not exceptional that means you’re inadequate.
Basically, I think if you make a pros and cons list of the effects of celebrity culture, the cons handily outweigh the pros. Especially because much of the not bad reasoning is satiated in a culture of cooperation and true meritocracy, that is an ideal form of communism.
They are pawns. We’re seeing that now with Taylor Swift.
