← Back to Library

Living in History - Conclusion Part II: Late Capitalism a Survival Guide

{"title": "Living in History - Conclusion Part II: Late Capitalism a Survival Guide", "author": "Wes Cecil", "body": "## The System We're In

We are always imsheden in history. We don't get to choose our historical moment — we simply find ourselves within it.

Consider housing. It's a basic human need, yet today in the United States, the minimum wage would need to reach between $30 and $60 just to afford house prices where they stood in 1970. The current federal minimum wage? $7.20. Housing costs have fundamentally restructured the relationship between work and shelter.

This isn't a distant problem from another century. It's fifty years ago. Our lives are markedly more challenging than our parents' generation, and this creates knock-on effects across everything — employment, community, health, future planning.

The Consumer Problem

The worst model in modern society is how we conceptualize the individual: as a consumer.

This framing is dangerous. It poisons how we understand ourselves. We're constantly told we're consumers first — "consumer choice," "consumer rights," "consumer society." Even advocacy groups fight for "consumer rights" rather than human rights.

But you are not a consumer. You should never think of yourself as a consumer. This isn't about whether you buy things; it's about how you understand your own existence.

The problem becomes clear when examining corporate behavior. Some of the largest, most profitable companies in history derive their wealth from marketing and advertising — hundreds of billions of dollars spent annually shaping what you want, need, and believe you must have. The idea that you're a "free consumer making choices" runs counter to this reality. Your choice isn't freely formed in a vacuum; it's heavily shaped by systems designed to persuade you.

The Hustle Environment

We're told we must work harder, hustle more, grind constantly. The culture celebrates busyness — early mornings, attack days, side hustles, relentless drive. This message is everywhere.

And here's what happens: you can only afford rent when it's tripled from what it used to be. You work two jobs just to make ends meet. You're exhausted, running on little sleep, rushing through commutes because if you're late, you're screwed. You need coffee — fast — so you buy a machine that makes it for you instantly.

The environment isn't neutral. It's designed to make certain behaviors necessary and others attractive. When someone argues that millions choose Keurig machines freely, ask: how free is this choice when the entire social and economic structure encourages exactly this behavior? You're not choosing in a vacuum — you're drowning in systems that reward consumption and punish rest.

Reconceptualizing Yourself

So what do you do?

Start by resisting the conceptualization of yourself as an individual consumer. This doesn't mean denying money exists. It means delaying those questions: "What can I buy?" "How do I get more money?"

Instead, reframe your self-understanding. You're not a consumer. You're a citizen. A neighbor. A friend. A gardener or a painter or someone who loves literature.

This shifts everything. When you ask "what rights should a citizen have?" rather than "what rights should a consumer have," you've already changed the question. It's no longer about purchasing power — it's about participation, belonging, and dignity.

The Enlightenment ideals that founded modern humanism — all men are created equal — have been slowly eroded by market forces until buying things becomes what makes you valuable. Those who can't participate in markets become invisible.

"If you don't have money or resources to participate in the market, you're invisible."

This is why reconceptualizing yourself matters. It's not about individual choices between products. It's about refusing to let purchasing power define your humanity.

A Path Forward

The author suggests this isn't about fixing consumption — it's about changing what you fundamentally are. You can choose different parts of this approach as fits your situation, like a buffet where you take what works and leave the rest.

Critics might note that resisting consumer identity feels abstract when housing costs remain crushing and wages remain stagnant. Individual consciousness-raising won't fix structural problems in housing policy or labor law. Yet the two aren't mutually exclusive — shifting how we understand ourselves can shape what we demand from political systems.

Bottom Line

Cecil's strongest contribution is exposing how deeply the consumer model has colonized our self-understanding. The argument that "you're not a consumer" isn't mere wordplay — it's a fundamental rethinking of where dignity comes from. His vulnerability: this philosophical reframing, while powerful, must connect to material demands about wages, housing, and worker protections. Otherwise it risks becoming an individual attitude adjustment disconnected from structural change. }

Thanks to our Patreon members for helping to make this episode possible and we're now available on all the major podcasting platforms. You can find more information at the links below. Good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to late capitalism a survival guide conclusion part two. So in conclusion part one I looked at some of the bigger broader issues sort of the socioeconomic financial global complex in which we find ourselves inshed.

And so tonight what I wanted to do is look at the more personal level, the more individual philosophical level like what happens when your Cheerios double or triple in cost, right? That that sort of question. And so to begin with, I want to first say we are within a system. We're always in history, right?

We don't get history just as we want to have history. We don't get to choose our history. We are imshed in history. And just as a factoid to give you a sense of this is people want housing.

Um it's a normal natural historical necessary thing that people like and need. And in the United States for comparison um the for the minimum wage today to be where it was in 1970 relative to house prices. So you 1970 we had a minimum wage. It was about $160.

Relative to house prices. Um, how affordable was it? Well, it's very much more affordable than it is today. So, relative to house prices, the minimum wage today would need to be between 30 and $60 depending on what part of the country you live in.

Now, the minimum wage today in the United States is $7.20. So, when I talked before about the concept of deflation, the word that must not not be spoken, this is what I'm talking about. There is no coherent plan at least that I've heard articulated that suggests that a we should raise the minimum wage to 30 40 50 $60. Um probably huge financial problems of that and there is no uh plan that I've heard of articulated to deflate housing prices by you know 75% or so to bring them back into balance to where they were in 1970 when people could afford very much more easily houses.

And so again, that's all the big stuff that we've talked about. But what this means for [clears throat] the individual and not just ...