Success v. Freedom: The Constructed Rivalry of Capitalist Cultures

From a child’s perspective, success and freedom seem to be interdependent on one another, forming a symbiotic relationship. Achieve the former and the latter will follow. But, as I’ve grown older and become more immersed in higher academia and the corporate realm, I’m not entirely persuaded of this concept. This debate has taken place back and forth numerous times, however, I find myself re-engaging with it every couple of years. Each new visit comes with more corporate experience and wisdom. The most persuasive factor behind my most recent visitation is the increased exposure of highly-successful professionals lamenting on the toll, the burden, that accompanies high calibers of professional success. Whether that success manifests in white-shoe job titles, large salaries, or marble floors leading to impressive offices. The stories that feeds my, and I suspect many other’s realization, is that the former can often inhibit, not enhance, one’s freedom. This observation holds particular truth in social capitalistic economies.

I’m a 3L law student, so I will frame this within the legal career context. However, the theme itself speaks to a larger framework that touches upon every profession. The chief example for law students on the interplay between success and freedom is best exhibited among Am 100 law firms, collectively known as “Big Law”. These firms are the top 100 highest-revenue grossing law companies in the world, many having multiple offices throughout the United States. For particular law students, receiving an associate offer at these firms signifies the beacon of success. Though these offers demand the greatest time commitments, as associates are expected to factor their desk into any existing relationship they may possess upon employment. The prestige of these firms ensure no doubt as to an associate’s success, but their freedom is curtailed significantly. On the other hand, a newly minted associate at a smaller, criminal defense law firm may possess greater freedom, but who would consider them equal in success to their BigLaw colleagues? I wager a small pool. Each associate in the two scenarios has something to envy of the other. For the BigLaw associate, the criminal defense attorney’s unshackled ankle from their office. For the criminal defense attorney, the BigLaw associate’s cushier salary and resources. What the former lacks they make up for in luxuries to inure their deficits in mental health and personal relationships. What the latter is deprived, they utilize greater free time to keep close with friends, family, and themselves.

But make no mistake. This tug of war of dueling desires is no rabbit in a hat; it was not conjured from thin air. And if it was, Capitalism is its magician. This mental health trap that entices most modern day professionals is observably more present in highly capitalistic cultures. The success of the individual and the limited freedom that inhibits them, largely results in the collective success of that individual’s whole. Namely, its Capitalist benefactor.

Immediately following my university graduation, I felt the first ebb-and-flow from straddling the choices of a white-shoe career and an alternate path that promised more freedom. Ultimately, I chose a compromise. My first job after graduation was as a foreign english teacher. I spent 2 years after the Summer following my graduation living in China and Russia, teaching English at private language schools. It was truly the best two year period of my life. Every week during this period was a time of sheer wonder and exposure to various corners throughout the world. I gallivanted from country to country while based in China, backpacking through Southeast Asia and Korea. In 2019, I spent months living in the crazed Russian capitol of Moscow, taking in a whole new world entirely. However, throughout my carefree travels, I always carried that tempestuous dream of law school in the back of my mind. The small voice persistently teased me “this life despite all its freedom, can never be as impressive as being a Lawyer.” Finally, in January of 2021, that white-shoe ambition would be fulfilled. Now, I’ve begun my last semester of law school after years of endless researching, writing, and studying. Naturally, as graduation stands just months away…as I roam through law school building halls, casebooks tucked beneath my arm…I find myself reminiscing of the time before, when freedom was in much greater supply. This duality of choice seems to always be converse, subjecting the bearer a desire opposite of whatever their current reality is. Or at least it may just be me.

I take the time every now again to fantasize how I would be if I engaged in a more “freedom-centric” mindset during my undergraduate career. Back then, and to this day, words and literature were my lesser-known fancy. I had imagined myself as a real life, male version of Anastasia Steele. I even took the time to research Master degree programs in English Literature at my alum and elsewhere. In addition to George Mason, there were English MA and MFA programs at Georgetown and Brown that caught my eye. But that was a road never taken. The reason why is at times is a soul-crushing one. I adopted the conventional outlook that such degrees would yield far lesser success than a law degree. So, I held back. Told myself to be rational. However, I do genuinely have a love and interest for a career in law. Though, I’d be engaging in self deception if I didn’t differentiate these loves. My love for each subject, Law and English Literature, is much like the nature of the subject itself. My love for law is intellectual, cerebral, and analytical. All the while, my fancy for English Lit is of a more creative, expressive, and even romantic disposition. I suppose while the overarching theme of success v. freedom rings true in my struggle, it was ultimately which of the two loves I decided to commit to.

I like to think this dilemma is applicable to a much wider audience than myself, and am glad to have discovered from many that is in fact the case. Though in confirming this fact, a bitter aftertaste lingers. The fact that so many navigating careers in Capitalist cultures teeter between what appears as polar opposites is what tastes so bitter. To quote that wise, young Latina actress in that Old El Paso commercial way back when debating hard or soft tacos…“por qué no los dos?” This balance must emerge as the new quest for workplaces operating within Capitalistic cultures. I struggle to imagine a world where young and middle-aged professionals didn’t seek a greater balance than what current professional landscapes offer. Though, if there’s one benefit from the pandemic, it was remote work’s debut to the world office. Remote work was an essential breath of fresh air for professionals world-wide. It served as an additional paperweight for the worker’s benefit. Tipping the pre-pandemic scales toward a closer equilibrium. But, there is more work to be done (pun intended). As many have noticed, corporate managers, particularly those aged 50+, champion the return to 5-day work weeks on-site. This tug-of-war persists as traditionalists and modernists continue to duke it out. In addition to hybrid work models embodying both on-site and remote work, alternate measures such as: 4-day work weeks, “pop-up” offices, and “9-3” 5-day work weeks warrant experimentation. Some innovative corporations have tested the aforementioned methods, and produced surprisingly balanced results. Maintaining company profit margins, while also yielding higher levels of professional’s career satisfaction. Whether the US will ever begin to open its arms to these new corporate concepts, time will only tell. Now get back to work.