Exit Interview

Anti-Capitalist Samizdat Number 4

He was a stout … man with an exaggerated bottom and a face that looked as though it never needed a razor.—Graham Greene

We deem ordinary people competent enough to select mayors, governors, even presidents. We regard them as capable of selecting legislators who will decide their taxes, who will make laws that, if violated, consign them to prison, and who can send them off, the younger ones, to kill and die in war. Should we really ask if ordinary people are competent enough to elect their bosses?--David Schweickart, After Capitalism


Last week I was visited by the local Task-Master, a man with an exaggerated bottom. As I had recently written him, informing him that I was ending my relationship with Inequality Schools, this was expected. His first question was whether I would complete what I was working on. Maybe he used the phrase “wrap things up”. I’m not sure, but he does seem to like clichés.

In one way, that is exactly what a Manager should know. In another way, it’s an odd question. It’s a question which no sane person can answer with a “no”.

Mr. Manager: Before you leave I would like you to finish
that painting you are working on….that one over
there in the corner…. What’s it called anyway?
Worker: Yes, I’ll finish it. It’s called the Mona Lisa.

Just asking the question is, actually, insulting. As if the person being asked couldn’t figure out what to do next without the Supervisor Task-Master’s help. As if when I told Big Bottom I was quitting, I could not understand the consequences of my decision without his help.

My remarks presuppose a certain norm of decency and respect. How foolish of me to do so. Capitalism is a system which is inherently disrespectful to human dignity; and Inequality Schools is nothing if not capitalistic.

In my message to Thames Wilson and Mr. Big Bottom, I had explained that my values were completely opposed to the values of Inequality Schools. I believe in things like democracy. They don’t. They confuse responsibility with obedience.


Since I referred to a clash of values in my message, another of Mr. Big Bottom’s questions has a funny ring.

BB: Well what will we tell the kids?
I mean I don’t want to step on your toes.

Funny phrase that. Step on my toes? Step on MY toes? By telling people that I think Inequality Schools are undemocratic? By telling people that I think Inequality Schools are anti-free thought?


What kind of mind can use this clichéd expression in so convoluted a way? As if he would be doing me a favor by concealing what I think?
The really interesting thing is that I told Mr. Big Bottom:
Tell them the truth…
And he said, “That you resigned?”

Now, after thinking about it, I think there is a more sinister interpretation of those words. I now think that what Mr. Big Bottom really meant was

That you resigned . . . . and nothing more, nothing
about your reasons, nothing about how you say
Inequality Schools are not democractic….

If I am right, that would be an incredibly self-serving, and, in a way, subtle use of language. It would also be deceptive.
However, Mr. Big Bottom is well capable of being less than fully candid and truthful during social interchange.
Just before leaving for the most recent vacation, I spoke with Mr. Big Bottom about the possibility of leaving a day early. The look on his face told me he was uncomfortable, and there was a lengthy pause in the conversation while he tried to find something to say. During that lengthy pause, I recalled having heard that the school was not finding it easy to find substitutes lately, and I guessed that Mr. Big Bottom was uncomfortable as he thought about the difficulty of finding a substitute, and it was that which I read on his face.
The words which came out of his mouth when he finally spoke were, however, very different. He spoke about how I would lose money because he’d have do dock me a day’s pay. As if he were concerned about me.

I mentioned this earlier conversation to him during our exit interview.

He said something like, “Oh, that was just a casual conversation….”

Well, it was casual in one sense. We hadn’t agreed to meet in advance. I had approached Mr. Big Bottom without any prior warning.

However, there was nothing casual or spontaneous about Mr. Big Bottom’s reply. He had plainly paused to think about what he would say to me. There was a noticeable gap in the flow of the conversation. His response was planned, designed to fit the situation. So why would he describe it as the opposite?

The consistent picture is a lack of sincerity.

In the message where I gave notice, I wrote that Inequality Schools confuse responsibility with obedience. Interestingly enough, Mr. Big Bottom made precisely that confusion during our brief conversation. He said something like, “I assume you’ll be responsible during the time left …” Here “responsible” means “follow the rules”. Of course, that interpretation is a Nazi interpretation, worthy of the likes of Adolf Eichmann. And, it is also true that people whose notion of responsibility stopped at following the boss’s orders were hung at Nuremberg.


Then too, there’s a little matter of research by a famous psychologist, Kohlberg, and his idea that the highest form of moral development involves breaking rules.....possibly something Mr. Big Bottom never heard about or (more likely) heard about in school, and quickly forgot.

It is also worth pointing out that Mr. Big Bottom drives to work every day, even though he is a short distance away by public transport. Is that responsible behavior? I think not, but evidently Mr. Big Bottom disagrees. Perhaps, if that is responsible behavior, it might not be a bad thing to be irresponsible.

My answer to his question about whether I’d be “responsible” must have disappointed him. I told him I would not attend faculty meetings—or “staff” meetings as they like to say. I explained that he had shown an inability to use my time wisely, by such outlandish behavior as the fish propaganda (discussed in Samizdat 1) and that I felt no obligation to have my time wasted by him. He made no reply to my remark.

Who chose this man to be my boss? And, on what basis? And what are the qualifications of the man who chose Mr. Big Bottom?

Good questions. But I don’t expect that I will ever know the answer. (More freedom of information at a democracy-loving American school…)


It is a striking anomaly of modern capitalist societies
that ordinary people are deemed competent enough
to select their political leaders—but not their bosses.
Contemporary capitalism celebrates democracy, yet denies
us our democratic rights at precisely the point where we
spend most of the active and alert hours of our adult lives.
--David Reickart, After Capitalism