I hate to be the downer, but this "fuck 'em" attitude doesn't work for most people. Sure, society is mean-spirited, limiting, imbecilic, and cutthroat. The ratrace literally serves no purpose (it's a sterilized, time-consuming social-climbing circus that has almost nothing to do with work, and is not necessary to get done the work society actually needs, more often getting in the way of actual work) but one cannot just take 5 years out of it and get back into the game with the same status. Ageism is huge in the business world (you lose opportunities as you get older and less "shiny") and even one year is a massive, often intolerable loss.
The "fuck 'em" attitude would be great if it were sustainable, but it's not. You can't keep living like a teenager when you're in your 40s. Want to have kids? Then, you need to own your house (it's good for their self-esteem and has measurable effects on their social and academic success to own the house they live in) and get them into good schools and make sure they have the opportunities (intellectual, athletic, creative, occupational) that will socialize them well and provide them with the connections to have a decent shot of actually achieving something instead of just being some entitled guy's pawn. Otherwise, you're just generating middle-grade meat for society to munch on. So kids are super-expensive, but you can't really have them at age 60, and you better have laid your groundwork (career-wise) for many years before you make that decision.
It makes me sick to read this bad advice that tells people they can just do what they want and that society will accept them for being unique, wonderful snowflakes. Or "do what you love and the money will follow". It's total bullshit. People generally suck and are mean-spirited and vindictive, and this idea that society will catch and nurture those who indulge themselves in a gap or two is ridiculous. You know what happens (if you're not rich and well-connected) to your career if you travel for 2 years after school? People resent the fuck out of you (because they didn't have or take that opportunity) and ding you for that alone. Six months of leisure travel when young is, for this reason, somewhat more of a liability than that amount of regular unemployment (which, post-2008, makes you look more unlucky than incompetent).
What you actually need to do is figure out what matters, what to care about, and how much. For example, you should care about your job well enough to do it well and get promotions. You should not care about it so much that you get into conflicts that damage your career. You should care about your success in the company (and in your career) but not about big-picture company-wide issues over which you have no influence. (Pay attention to these, because they may be relevant to your career, but don't get emotionally involved or take stupid risks, even when those risks benefit the company, because you won't give a shit about "good for the company" if you get fired.) You can't take a "fuck 'em" attitude or get a chip on your shoulder, but blind obedience to managerial authority is going to lead to mediocrity and misery and, in the long run, anomie. Somewhere between "yes, sir" douchebaggery and "fuck 'em" is the right attitude-- the "middle path".
You managed to, in more words than the original article, completely miss the point of the original article...
None of what you assume a "fuck 'em" mentality means is suggested in this article. It doesn't say that you should go out and walk across the country, it simply asks "what if?". It tells you to consider other options, to do much of what you suggest in the last paragraph of your response, except in your response you still have the assumption that to be successful in life, one must "care about your success in the company (and in your career)".
This article to me is a reminder that I don't need to do what everyone else is doing, or expects me to do, in order to be happy. I need to do what makes me happy, in order to be happy. Sometimes those values align, sometimes they don't. And in the instances that they don't, if someone else has a problem with that - Fuck 'em!
I think he's just telling to feel the liberty in your heart first and wake up to possibilities/options you never would have thought. What might look unreasonable to many people may start look like a real possibility for you and that's the point. But again it's not about suspending your judgement for doing reasonable things but not limiting your options by others' standards.
Agree the article is naive (and a bit trite too); of course that's the attraction. Rebellion is the attitude of youth. It's not only harder to keep it up later in life, but with the addition of perspective it all seems far less necessary or even meaningful. If you think about it carefully, you'll probably find that you (like myself) are the establishment, to a fair degree ;)
But there's no reason one can't keep taking measured risks. Speaking for myself, some of my goals and dreams involve an element of risk.
What really frightens me is spending the next 10 or 20 years being a slave to convention, toeing the line so I can be 100% sure of meeting all my obligations, all the while dying on the inside and letting down myself - and those I love - in a different way.
I have always seen this as a powerful but dangerous pill that you take occasionally when you are in a rut or need to take a scary but important jump.
I think the simplicity of the "fuck 'em all" message has its power and purpose. But the irony is that once you do embrace the message, you realize applying the phrase literally won't necessarily win you wealth, nor friends, nor happiness.
The "fuck 'em" attitude would be great if it were sustainable, but it's not. You can't keep living like a teenager when you're in your 40s. Want to have kids? Then, you need to own your house (it's good for their self-esteem and has measurable effects on their social and academic success to own the house they live in) and get them into good schools and make sure they have the opportunities (intellectual, athletic, creative, occupational) that will socialize them well and provide them with the connections to have a decent shot of actually achieving something instead of just being some entitled guy's pawn. Otherwise, you're just generating middle-grade meat for society to munch on. So kids are super-expensive, but you can't really have them at age 60, and you better have laid your groundwork (career-wise) for many years before you make that decision.
It makes me sick to read this bad advice that tells people they can just do what they want and that society will accept them for being unique, wonderful snowflakes. Or "do what you love and the money will follow". It's total bullshit. People generally suck and are mean-spirited and vindictive, and this idea that society will catch and nurture those who indulge themselves in a gap or two is ridiculous. You know what happens (if you're not rich and well-connected) to your career if you travel for 2 years after school? People resent the fuck out of you (because they didn't have or take that opportunity) and ding you for that alone. Six months of leisure travel when young is, for this reason, somewhat more of a liability than that amount of regular unemployment (which, post-2008, makes you look more unlucky than incompetent).
What you actually need to do is figure out what matters, what to care about, and how much. For example, you should care about your job well enough to do it well and get promotions. You should not care about it so much that you get into conflicts that damage your career. You should care about your success in the company (and in your career) but not about big-picture company-wide issues over which you have no influence. (Pay attention to these, because they may be relevant to your career, but don't get emotionally involved or take stupid risks, even when those risks benefit the company, because you won't give a shit about "good for the company" if you get fired.) You can't take a "fuck 'em" attitude or get a chip on your shoulder, but blind obedience to managerial authority is going to lead to mediocrity and misery and, in the long run, anomie. Somewhere between "yes, sir" douchebaggery and "fuck 'em" is the right attitude-- the "middle path".