I have a lost a lot of friendships in my life. It was upon reflecting on one of these friendships that I came to realize something about how we understand human connections under capitalism.
When I reflected on this particular friendship that I had lost, I reflected on our shared memories and said to myself, “I miss her.” For the first time, this idea of missing someone took on a whole new meaning for me.
For most of my life, I held the subconscious belief that friendships were, at least in part, something that contributed to my worth as a person. Their skills, attributes, and social standing felt like extensions of my own. By calling someone my friend, I believed this was saying something about my worth. This time when I reflected on missing a friend, I acknowledged that I missed our connection, more than her as a person.
Humans as Commodities
Through capitalism, we are conditioned to view people as commodities. Friendship becomes valuable because of what capital it provides to us—social, cultural, or even practical. Friends can help us get into parties, navigate taxes, or appear more impressive by association. These things aren’t inherently bad. The problem is when capitalism tells us that this is the sole purpose of people – in what they provide to us.
It’s the same logic that drives us to buy a purse—not only because we like it, but because of the social boost it gives us. We begin to view people the same way: as something that can elevate our status.
The Origins from Capitalism
Eric Fromm, in his classic book The Art of Loving (1959), discusses how capitalism shapes our understanding of ourselves and of other people.
Under capitalism not only are objects bought and sold—people’s abilities are too: “both useful things and useful human energy and skill are transformed into commodities” which leads to “People themselves becoming “transformed into commodities” (pg. 78 – 80). This leads us to internalize the fact that people are similar to things — both useful for a larger gain: profit.
When we view people as a contributing piece for profit, we view them as a piece of a larger puzzle- for happiness, life satisfaction, future connections.
Additionally, when we connect to others, our character becomes “geared to exchange and receive, to barter and consume” (pg. 81). We package our personalities, skills, and traits for exchange, hoping for a fair return (pg. 81).
Cost-Benefit Analysis – Products and People
We also view ourselves as commodities with the common term “self-worth”. When we hear this term, it mirrors capitalistic language and an internalization that we are composed of qualities that add up to some numerical equivalent. And since language shapes perception, this discussion is important.
As an adjective, worth means “equivalent in value to the sum or item specified.” Capitalism uses the term worth to calculate the price of a product. A capitalist will calculate investment costs and profit margin to ultimately determine the worth of a product.
When we say “self -worth” we tend to think of ourselves as a commodity. We think of people in a similar way — commodities or things to buy on the market. Just like things are sold on the product market based on quality and price, people are, in essence, sold on the market based on traits and qualifications.
“He/She is a 10, but…” Trend
I also think of the trend: “He/she is a 10, but…” This is a TikTok trend where someone is asked the question “S/he is a 10 (in attractiveness), but, they have bad hygiene (or any other flaw).” The person responds with their new “score” of the person.
In a way, we evaluate people the same way we evaluate products. Just like in a store, if we weigh the quality, the style, and the price, of a product in order to decide to buy it, we weigh a person’s traits, deciding if they’re worth connecting to. It is the practice of viewing people as holding compartmentalized traits that can be viewed on a numerical scale of importance or value. Thus, seeing people as commodities.
The Need to Impress
Because we view connections as commodities, we view ourselves as needing to have enough valuable traits “to be bought.”
Under capitalism, we feel like the only way that we can hold a connection is through having enough desirable traits. So what do we do? We try to impress others with our qualifications, with where we have travelled. With our humor, with our skills, with our — even more — fancy house.
What We Really Want
“People aren’t longing to be impressed; they’re longing to feel like they’re home. If you create a space full of love and character and creativity and soul, they’ll take off their shoes and curl up with gratitude and rest, no matter how small, no matter how undone, no matter how odd.” ― Shauna Niequist
At the end of the day, when connecting, we want to feel love. We want to be loved for who we are and to connect authentically. We do not need to be impressed. And because we do not need to be impressed, we in turn do not need to do any impressing.
By emphasizing the connection, I am not arguing to not have standards for relationships. Having some desire to connect with someone funny, smart, and “cool” isn’t without value. But when we emphasize these traits we often convolute what we really want. Not necessarily someone with a cool car, or a fancy house. But someone who will love us.
When we list our top traits in a potential partner, for example, we are really describing a loving person. For example, we may say that we value the trait of ambition. Behind ambition is self-love, for ambition takes life’s goals seriously. Additionally, you may want to be with someone that has intelligence. Intelligence holds self-love because it is a desire for self-improvement, to feel joy at learning ,etc. People with more self-love are more likely to love others. So, in your desire for a partner with ambition or intelligence is your desire for a loving partner.
Reframing Connections
“Encouraging someone to be themselves is the loudest way to love them.” -Kalen Dion
Instead of evaluating people based on traits and capital, let us cherish the connection itself. The energetic transmission between people.
Let us ask ourselves not “How funny are they?” “How smart are they” Let us ask ourselves: “How do I feel around the person? Do we bond well, do we click? Do I feel appreciated for who I am?” In asking these questions, we resist the capitalistic notion that people are valued for their assets, and instead we value people for who they authentically are and ourselves for who we authentically are.
References
Fromm, E. (1956). The art of loving. Harper & Row.
In Common Light 
Leave a comment