Hacker News Reader

Comment by boppo1 | Hacker News Reader

I enjoyed squid game, but it bugs me that everyone says it's a critique of capitalism. They're literally participating in a centrally planned system.

View on HN

I don't really see the game itself as a societal criticism, but more how desperation from an unfair society can drive people to participate, and how extremely wealthy individuals can abuse this desperation for fun and games.

Out of desperation and lack of options, yes. Then they are shown the horrible nature of it and still decide it's the least bad thing for them.

Lol absolutely not. They participate out of free choice.

Its a warning that people could choose to participate in a centralized, communist totalitarian system if they are encouraged to do so. It reminds us of the communist revolutions from the early 1900s and a lot of the leftist rhetoric from today.

> Why did Hwang create a horrifyingly brutal contest that holds human life so cheap? “Because the show is motivated by a simple idea,” he says. “We are fighting for our lives in very unequal circumstances.”

Are you making a profound point about capitalism? “It’s not profound! It’s very simple! I do believe that the overall global economic order is unequal and that around 90% of the people believe that it’s unfair. During the pandemic, poorer countries can’t get their people vaccinated. They’re contracting viruses on the streets and even dying. So I did try to convey a message about modern capitalism. As I said, it’s not profound.”[1]

The director begs to differ.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/oct/26/squid-g...

It's unfortunate that these sort of meditations on "capitalism" are without any sort of recognition of interest rate intervention policy. It's the very mechanic by which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

And why do they participate? Because its their only chance to get away from being poor. That's exactly the point of capitalism - people do things they don't want to do every day so they don't have to be poor.

But what’s the alternative to freely trading your labor for goods and services? Taking them through government decree?

You can't freely trade your labor. The market is rigged.

If you give people rights, capital will emigrate to other countries. Just look at outsourcing.

See, it is human nature that is flawed. There are always people on top and people below.

How so?

Those two words don't convey enough clarity. Assuming good faith and that you are refering to "You can't freely trade your labor. The market is rigged."

Immigration is allowed (both legaly and illegaly) because payment for some activities isn't a honest wage for an honest job. Why? Because the game is rigged. *

Not everybody can apply for venture capital investment. Being white helps. Being male helps. Having the correct background helps. Having a good idea helps. Making a good pitch helps a lot. Why? Because the game is rigged.

Those two generalizations should be enough.

*Why do border exists, again? To keep away the slave labor reserve until it is needed. Why can people from any country trade their labor? Because the game is rigged

If you think having a good idea and making a good pitch are part of rigging the game, I'm pretty sure you're not making a good faith argument. But you give it away when you say the only reason borders exist is to keep away slave labor. The UK didn't just split from the EU to keep away slave labor, they split because there was massive discontent with what the government should do. How receptive would Afghanistan be to US culture and government? (a rhetorical question because we know the answer is 'not very') Not everyone believes in the same things or wants the same rules, a core tenant of the US's federated system of government.

A good idea helps. A good pitch helps more than a good idea.

For me, a fair game is when players win based on abilities and effort. However, the life game depends less on that than, which is not fair; furthermore, there is no rule manual and rules are rewritten while playing.

I am not picking a fight. If you want to say that poor people get what they deserve, this is an ongoing discussion.

More on borders. You can have catholics, jews and muslims inside the US, without then openly murdering each other. I applaud how they get that done in there. Your take on borders is called Xenophobia ("islamites will be terrorists" take), which is human nature, too.

Edit: for fairness' sake. I do have a perimetral wall around my property. I learned through life that most people can't be helped, but I still think you can help some. I draw my line to allow people a chance to prove their worth, which is still difficult as people around and above us can be racist or have their kin preferred.

Has a better system been tried or proposed?

A daily lottery for who has to clean toilets and do underwater welding?

Isn't inequality or competition for basic needs, and how those can lead to terrible outcomes, a better starting point if you want to come up with an ancap interpretation?

I don't think the series says much about central vs local planning, and even if it did that'd only be tangentially related to capitalism or anti-capitalism.

Just read the interview with the author: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/oct/26/squid-g...

It is 100% a critique on capitalism and he states it clearly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com