Shark Tank: Taking a Bite out of Capitalism

While home the other week, my parents and I were going through our DVR looking at previously recorded television shows that we wanted to watch. After a good 10 minute argument over what to watch, we finally agreed upon ABC’s Shark Tank. This hour long show allows aspiring businesses and individuals to approach 5 “Sharks”, wealthy entrepreneurs, in hopes of gaining an investment to help advance or save their company. 

You can watch Shark Tank on Fridays on ABC at 9/8c. 

The premise is simple; businesses need the money, advice, and connections available to them by connecting with the wealthy entrepreneurs in order to make it in our competitive capitalist market. The market present in our society today is over-saturated with companies that are willing and able to produce any type of product in order to solve any type of quandary. Thus, those starting up their own businesses will have a difficult time succeeding and many surely falter without the advice, knowledge, and connections gained by an investment from a “Shark”. 

Although many of the entrepreneurs started their own businesses without the help of others, and are often viewed as the quintessential ideals of the “American Dream”, it is visible almost immediately to the businesses and those watching at home, that the entrepreneurs are not simply investing out of the goodness of their hearts or to help propagate the success that they have achieved. Their investments do assist those businesses, but in the same token also take advantage of those who believe or who truly require an investment to survive.

One of the sharks, Kevin O’Leary, commonly referred to as “Mr. Wonderful”, often incorporates a perpetual royalty into his deals with aspiring businesses, or often requires the entirety of his investment to be repaid before a certain amount of time has elapsed. He very rarely makes investments unless he can very obviously and confidently make a significant return on his investment. Mr. Wonderful even often refers to his money as his children, who he sends out into the world in order to multiply and come back to him. 

In this case, the wealthy entrepreneurs can be seen as the bourgeoisie, and these small businesses are developed by those who could be considered the proletariat. Thus, through this example, it is easy to see the environment described by Marx and Engels in Bourgeois and Proletarians (1888) ever present in our society today. 

Marx and Engels talk about in the development of a constantly expanding market, the bourgeoisie are chased over the “whole surface of the globe”, and “establish connections everywhere” (Erickson & Murphy 22). This is noticeably seen in Shark Tank through the requirement to have many products mass produced in China in order to increase profit margins.

Additionally, Marx and Engels state that “In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal interdependence of nations” (Erickson & Murphy 22). This is often seen through those businesses who have online retailers bringing to light their number of customers from around the globe. However this is also an interesting topic in that although many companies are exporting their production and customer base to areas outside of their local communities, many have pushed against this idea and have begun to root their businesses in their local area in order to help those “proletariats” in their local communities. 

It is possible that Marx and Engels predictions will come true, and the collapse of capitalism is inevitable, but we just have not achieved the level of class antagonisms necessary for this collapse yet in our world. Or perhaps, the bourgeoisie have now attained such a high level of wealth and power that the demise predicted by Marx and Engels will never come to fruition. It is also possible that we are now seeing a rise in the ability of the proletariat to avoid the oppressive bourgeoisie by establishing their own companies and becoming a sort of pseudo bourgeoisie to others. However, shows such as Shark Tank illuminate how enculturated our society has become with conspicuous consumerism and the capitalist market and how it will not be easy for our society to separate ourselves from that which we are so closely embedded into.

David Harvey, Crisis of Capitalism, animation

Using Marx (or later theorists) to analyze this would make a great post!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0

Mr. Marx, let's rethink your plan

It is very easy, from a historical point of view, to read a viewpoint, watch it unfold (and fail) and then return and criticize it. However, such criticisms must occur in order to see progress and learn from historical mistakes.

In my opinion, one of the biggest miscues in political and historical literature was the publication of “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx, which led to the development of Marxism, a political ideology that promotes class struggles and the overthrow of the bourgeoisie (the aristocrats) by the proletarians (the working class).

Marx makes clear distinctions in support of such a revolution (even through violence) by noting that the bourgeoisie are taking advantage of the proletarians, stripping morality from society, and turning everything and everyone into economic capital. Simply put, Marx states that the working class suffers the consequences of direct exploitation at the hands of the aristocracy.

The piece of work (which it really is) greatly influenced intellectuals of the 19^th and 20^th Century, and it helped lay the groundwork for world leaders such as Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Lenin and Mao Zedong. However, after the fall of communism and the collapse of the USSR, many in the world began to believe that communism simply does not work on a national stage.

Suppose Marx’s wishes came true in which the working class, which is not accustomed to leading industries, managing business, and were not as educated as the aristocracy did create a class upheaval in which the bourgeoisie were taken out of power. Then what would happen, and how would it work?

Would the proletarians become the bourgeoisie and vice-versa? This result would be utterly disastrous due to the inexperience of the newly appointed aristocracy.

Although in a different setting, a similar example could be found in the recent political history of South Sudan, which gained its independence in 2011. Yet, in the just over two years of independence, the country has experienced a plethora of issues including mass killings, which can in part be attributed to a brand new government with no experience at governing a nation. Similarly, one can only tremor at the inadequacies of an inexperienced (and uneducated) aristocracy.

The alternative to a reversal in role play between the two classes would be a one-class system, in which everyone has equal capital and similar jobs. However, briefly speaking, this does not bode well for society either because someone must lead industry and organize the working class to achieve production. Furthermore, where is the incentive for hard work and the desire to do well if there is no mobility due to a one class system?

A factory with solely workers will not produce goods. Other jobs are needed such as supervisors, supply managers, business negotiators, among others, which develops a hierarchical status. There simply cannot be one functioning class where everyone occupies the same socioeconomic status.

While communism may sound like an idealistic point of view in which everyone should be equal, there simply is no room for the system in today’s commercial and industrial society.

Guidelines for Authors

Some guidelines for contributors to this blog (that is, members of ANT 340 in Spring 2014):  You should post at least six times over the course of the semester.  You should post when you are so moved BUT here are some deadlines to help keep you on track.   By the dates below, you should have posted at LEAST the given number of times:

February 7:    1
February 21:  2
March 7:  3
March 28:  4
April 18: 5
May 5:  6

Two of these posts should be critiques of our readings (original pieces, not the textbook).  Two of them should mobilize theory in the process of social-cultural critique.  And two of them should be responses to posts by other students.  Your goal is to be creative, thoughtful, insightful, perhaps funny, often serious, and always extremely careful in terms of your attention to the nuance of theory, the topics to which you apply it, and other students' work.

Suggestions regarding critiques of readings:  Give us the author's argument and the evidence offered in support of it.  Contextualize the author and work for us--e.g. which other thinkers have clearly influenced this work, what movement is  it a part of, how does it compare with preceding and contemporary works, etc.  What are the strengths of this work?  What are its limitations?  What can we learn from it and how can we apply it today?  Critiques of readings should be a minimum of 400 words.

Suggestions regarding social-cultural critiques:  Pick a topic or event of interest to you for which one or more theoretical approaches offer a useful framework for understanding.  Discuss the topic or event through this perspective (or these perspectives), making it clear to the reader what new insights are gained via this mobilization of theory.   Social-cultural critiques should be a minimum of 600 words.

Suggestions regarding responses to posts by other students:  Always be respectful and thoughtful. Good examples of when to offer your responses:

• the other student's post has genuinely made you think about something in a new way;
• you have a substantive disagreement with the post that you want to express;

• you want to build on the argument begun in the student's post.

Responses to posts should be a minimum of 250 words.

You will receive two grades on your blogging, one at mid-term and one at the end of the semester.  In general, posts receiving a grade of B will:

• Be clear

• Be well-written
• Reflect careful and thorough reading
• Follow the guidelines and suggestions given here.

An A post will be even more thoughtful and original than a B post, and it will present a cogent and well-supported argument.  C and D posts fall short of the criteria listed above; students who do not post at least four times in the semester will receive an automatic  F.

There are many anthropology blogs out there for you to check out, though not all are particularly oriented toward theory.  For some examples, see:

http://nodivide.wordpress.com/

http://anthropologyreport.com/anthropology-blogs-2013-list/ (lists many of the blogs out there)

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/anthropology-in-practice/

http://ethnographymatters.net/ (currently features a very graphic and upsetting but apparently faked photo on the home page)

http://backupminds.wordpress.com/about/

Also see last semester's Wake Forest Theory Blog at theoryinyourface.blogspot.com.