#LazyGirls Are Ruining Spirits and Economies. Here's a Pagan Alternative.

The pursuit of feeling good now is one of the quickest ways to hell. Unfortunately, it’s also paved with gold, bedecked in flowers and spa days, and promoted by rebel TikTokers offering the keys to a life that’s felt out of reach for too long. The advice they peddle sounds sensible:

• Cut out toxic people.
• Focus on yourself.
• The economic system’s broken - don’t let it break you.
• Big greedy corporations don’t care about you, so you must protect yourself.
• Don’t apologize for your weakness.
• A bigger paycheck isn't worth your soul.

It sounds nice. Sticking it to the man. Standing up for yourself. Giving yourself all the care and love you need. Putting personal well-being before profits. Who could be against that? That’s the point. Cults offer anodyne phrases that resonate with people’s deepest longings. The problem is that the marketing doesn’t match the product. The result of the #LazyGirl cult isn’t more safety, healing, or love; it’s a brittle, selfish, miserable life.

Read on, and I’ll explain:

1. What the #LazyGirlJobs phenomenon is.
2. Its historical roots and international allies.
3. The ruinous assumptions behind it
4. A classical, virtue-based rebuttal of those assumptions.
5. A way forward that's win-win.

What is #LazyGirlJobs?

Ostensibly, the #LazyGirlJobs movement rejects the Western ethos of ambition, hard work, and sacrifice to further your career and live the American dream. In their view, this ethos reduces humans to cogs whose purpose is to produce for the exploitative capitalist machine before being discarded like dirty rags. Depression, stress, and burnout are all consequences of this unhealthy obsession with work, advancement, and wealth. What’s truly on offer isn’t a successful life but a miserable slavery to the elites. Wake up, they plead, realize you’re being used, and rebel.

Their solution to this rigged set-up is rejection. They reject grinding away at work for a career advancement that might never come. They reject pushy bosses who demand far more than the pay justifies. They reject being good, honest, and fair employees for a machine that is anything but. In practice, what this looks like is working low-tier jobs where #LazyGirls can push papers, collect a modest paycheck, and avoid the politics and stressors of corporate life.

Instead of allowing the predatory capitalist system to abuse them, they abuse the system. The tactics they advocate include:

• Lying on job applications.
• Writing revenge reviews of businesses they hate.
• Negotiating by leveraging fake job offers.
• Deceiving managers to make it seem like you’re doing more work than you are.
• Pursuing low-effort and low-stress positions.
• Sneaking days off without taking holiday leave.
• Using productivity hacks to maximize speed and then coasting.

One of the thought leaders of the movement is a TikToker called Gabrielle Judge. You can watch her explain her philosophy below:

Instead of pouring your life into a job that offers little hope for furthering yourself and will dispose of you without a second thought, they suggest investing that time into worthier things. Write. Hang out with friends. Travel. Sleep in. Study what you love. Have long conversations with your parents. All without feeling the pinch of time or guilt about not doing enough to advance your career. In short: enjoy yourself now.

#LazyGirls Historically and Globally

While the press has been exploding, such as at the Young Turks and Fox over this new social phenomenon and wringing their hands about the moral decrepitude of Gen-Z, this ethos has ancient roots. One ancient tradition that shares some similarities with the #LazyGirlJobs movement is the Cynics. This philosophical school emerged in ancient Greece around the 4th century BCE, with Diogenes of Sinope being its most famous representative. The Cynics advocated for a simple life free from social expectations, norms, and material desires, challenging the conventional understanding of work and social participation.

The Cynics sought freedom through self-sufficiency (autarkeia) and aimed to live in a way that followed nature. They rejected conventional desires for wealth, power, health, or fame, and the types of work that were aimed solely at acquiring these things. They believed that such pursuits were artificial and did not lead to true happiness.

This philosophy, though, was more than just not working; it was about living a life of imperturbable serenity, realizing your highest spiritual potential, and acting in accord with nature rather than the artificial mores of man. To achieve that, Cynics endured heat and cold with equanimity, fornicated and defecated publicly, lived on the streets with but a cloak to shield them from the elements, and constantly purified their mind of the dross of ignorance and craving. A far cry from the whiny, “I don’t like my job and don’t want to do this anymore!” shared over TikTok.

The Transcendentalists of the 19th century advocated for a simpler life closer to nature and distanced from the pressures and materialism of society. Henry David Thoreau's experiment at Walden Pond, where he lived simply in a cabin for two years, was a direct critique of the overwork and overconsumption he saw in society. Like the Cynics, it was also informed by a religious impulse that rejected the prospects of material success to bring happiness. As with the Cynics, much more depth here than in the “anti-work girl boss” TikTok program.

In modern times, many similar trends have taken root throughout the world, although, notably, they lack the philosophical and religious gravitas of these older forms. In Japan, there’s the hikikomori movement, which refers to young people who withdraw from society and spend most of their time at home, often relying on their parents for financial support. This phenomenon has become a significant social issue in Japan, where it's estimated that there could be hundreds of thousands, if not over a million, hikikomori.

In China, there's a growing social phenomenon similar to the hikikomori movement, known as the "lying flat" movement or Tangping. The term originated from an internet post and has since been adopted by many young Chinese who opt out of the social pressure to work long hours and instead adopt a minimalist, low-effort lifestyle.

The "lying flat" movement, like the #LazyGirls, is a form of passive resistance to the social pressures of China's highly competitive and often stressful work culture, which is known as "996" (referring to working from 9 am to 9 pm, six days a week). It promotes refusing excessive work, reducing consumption, and living a more relaxed and slower-paced life.

Frankly, I see a lazy, unimaginative, entitled reaction to life. Is work life today really less fulfilling and meaningful than that of a peasant in ancient Greece or as a miner Victorian England? No. And notably, there are no Diogenes or Thoreau’s leading the charge. It’s goblincore garbed girls complaining to their iPhones about how hard their life is, with little sophistication, courage, or perspective. It’s weak and sad.

What are the assumptions behind #LazyGirlJobs?

Before explaining the assumptions behind this movement, I want to point out that while its contemporary advocates might lack religious or philosophical depth, that doesn’t mean they’re not tapping a deep and ancient vein that ought to be treated with the respect it deserves. Look, I support mocking its proponents for their vapid, whiny screeds, but the questions they ask, the problems they point to, and the solutions they propose should be given serious treatment.

In this section, I will define and explain the three main assumptions behind the #LazyGirls movement:

1. The purpose of life is to experience pleasure and avoid the unpleasant now.
2. Material success and high social status aren’t worth the trouble.
3. The corporate economy is corrupt, exploitative, and dehumanizing. Therefore, you must fight against it by exploiting and undermining it instead.

In the section after this, I will critique these assumptions and offer an alternative based on the development and application of virtues.

1. The purpose of life is to experience pleasure and avoid the unpleasant now.

The ethical axiom here is short-sighted individualistic hedonism: my pleasure now is the highest purpose of my existence. Sure, it’s not explicitly stated, but it is implicit in their rhetoric. The yardstick used in many of these conversations boils down to one question: does this make me feel good now or not?

While that question might seem harmless, there are many assumptions at play there. First, the focus is on me. If you look at #LazyGirl media, you’ll find almost no mention of service, kindness, generosity, political activism, or giving back to your local community. It’s about me. My happiness. My vacation. My dog. My meal. My boundaries. My needs. Occasionally, a partner or four-legged friend’s thrown in there, but 98% of the content obsesses over individual satisfaction now.

Another assumption buried in this content is the time frame. The questions about pleasure and pain often only venture into the future a few years off, if that. There’s almost no discussion of life in 20 years and retirement, and good luck finding a reference of future generations.

Viewed over the short-term, difficult, demanding, or boring jobs are not seen as an opportunity to temper their spirits but as a burden to be avoided at all costs. They frequently claim that their rebellion is a form of self-preservation because the stress they feel from working a job they hate for a boss and company they hate is too overbearing. The solution: run away or quiet quit.

2. Material success and high social status aren’t worth the trouble.

While some #LazyGirl advocates explicitly make this point, most assume that their audience already agrees that enduring the years of grinding to get to the top or even a few rungs ahead on the corporate ladder isn’t worth it. None of the videos I’ve seen address this directly rather, they sprinkle it here and there with the same comfort of a Catholic mentioning God and Mother Mary to fellow devotees. What need for justification among the choir?

As proof of how low on the list of topics happiness is, I searched several keywords of Gabrielle Judge’s Twitter to find at least an argument or hint of one and came up with nothing. Other keywords, like “joy,” were duds. Her TikTok is similarly barren.

Since it’s not treated explicitly, it’s difficult to accurately represent what their view of wealth, status, and happiness are. I’ll try, instead, to offer as accurate of a reflection as I can.

The main argument is that enjoyment is the purpose of life. Work, then, is merely a means to get money so that you can enjoy life. Money’s necessary to go to nice restaurants, take a two-week trip to Finland, have a Netflix subscription, afford health insurance, buy beautiful artwork for your flat, go out clubbing with friends, take yoga classes, collect books, etc. Money, therefore, is important.

Their calculus is that the current job market demands that you perform soul-crushing tasks, endure pressure and politics, and put up with manipulative bosses to just skate by. At the end of that grind is a few jumps up the ladder (although likely barely enough to cover for inflation) and the remote hope that you’ll save and invest well enough to take your foot off the gas in your 50s or 60s when you might be able to enjoy your wealth without the oppression of work. The #LazyGirls reject this path because there are high costs and risks for a sliver of reward. It’s also, as I’ll explore later, wrong to fuel such a corrupt, exploitative system. It shouldn’t be this hard to make a decent wage and live a decent life.

Opting out of the career-wealth path, they focus on simpler, more frugal joys that don’t demand a grind to afford: appreciating what you have, good friends, hanging out drinking at home rather than hitting the club, and living modestly. All with a tinge of bitterness at their lot.

3. The corporate economy is corrupt, exploitative, and dehumanizing. Therefore, you must fight against it by exploiting and undermining it.

This view is a palatable reworking of Marxist theory. Capitalists steal their workers’ labor without providing anything of value. Capitalism’s incentive structure demands a profit-before-people ethos in the culture and financial system. These incentives place undue power in the hands of cadre of super-wealthy who are invested in keeping their wealth, influence, and the status quo.

Because of this need for control and power, capitalists take every opportunity to squeeze employees and customers of as much money as they can with as little cost to themselves. They don’t care about their workers or customers. They care about their profits and will readily replace anyone without batting an eyelash. You are but a replaceable cog in their money-making machine.

Since the capitalists are corrupt thieves of the working class’s labor, they and their organizations should be hamstrung, cheated, and drained of all money and resources as much as possible. To do otherwise is not only naive but wrong.

Another aspect of this Marxist-lite philosophy is a feeling of apathy and despair. The idea that hard work and ambition will pay big is a myth pushed by the elites to drain your spirit and energy for their profit machines. It doesn’t. The wealthy are wealthy. The poor are poor. And there’s little you and your “just work hard” motto can do to change that. Therefore, not only is it evil to participate in this rigged economic system, but it’s also foolish.

Their solution: play the system as you rot it from the inside. Deceive your managers. Take what you can. Drag your feet. Be difficult - but don’t get fired. Although the #LazyGirls don’t articulate a clear end-game, it’s in the subtext when they reference late-stage capitalism: a communist state where wealth’s more equally distributed, and work is more satisfying. Sounds nice.

What are the responses and alternatives to the #LazyGirls?

In this section, I’ll rebut the views promoted by #LazyGirls, breaking it down into four points:

1. Happiness comes from developing the four virtues, not pursuing pleasure and avoiding discomfort now.
2. You do not exist merely as an individual body-mind; your life includes your community and future generations.
3. Capitalism is a better economic system than Marxism.
4. Extravagance is a social evil worthy of being shamed, but accumulating capital is a net good.

1. Dismantling the system won’t create more equity; it will create more poverty and misery.

Happiness comes from developing the four virtues, not pursuing pleasure and avoiding discomfort now.

In the Classical view of Plato and Aristotle, virtue creates happiness, not pleasure or pain. Pleasurable experiences can destroy you, such as in the case of alcohol or cocaine. All the worries and troubles evaporate from your life when you're drunk. Yet when you sober up, your head is throbbing, and your demons have returned emboldened by your failed escape. Repeat this enough times, and you’ll find yourself in a cycle that will ruin your spirit. Pleasure, in and of itself, doesn’t cause long-term happiness.

Pain is also not intrinsically bad. Enduring the challenge of training for a marathon might be uncomfortable, but overcoming that discomfort can make you a stronger person whose well-being isn’t entangled with fleeting emotions or sensations. The same applies to stressful work assignments.

The critical factors which determine whether pain or pleasure will lead to happiness are the four virtues:

Wisdom: The ability to properly analyze and discern what’s right and wrong in a situation. It also includes a recognition of the unity of creation. Examples include knowing when and how you should speak to a friend about the relationship problems they’ve been having, understanding what the purpose of your life is, or determining whether #LazyGirls is garbage or not (it is).

Fortitude: The ability to act courageously in the face of adversity and to endure pain and stress with composure. Examples include speaking your mind in front of your peers even though you know it’s an unpopular opinion, getting little sleep for weeks to look after your ailing brother, or taking on a challenging work assignment.

Temperance: The ability to moderate different areas of life and avoid excess. Examples include not drinking excessively, spending an inordinate amount of time studying politics while neglecting your duties, or working 20 hours when you’re being paid for 40.

Justice: The ability to act fairly and in harmony with others. Examples include fulfilling your duties to your employers to ensure that you’re upholding your promises, punishing a friend for their betrayal, or not making more work for your co-workers because you’re a #LazyGirl.

The implicit question of the #LazyGirlJobs is “Does this make me feel good?” whereas the Classical pagan question is “Does this develop virtues in me over the long term?” Pleasure and pain are only meaningful in relationship to the development or detriment of the virtues, and it's the virtues that lead to a beautiful life for yourself and others.

Also, pay special attention to the virtue of Fortitude. Fortitude requires pursuing difficult and uncomfortable endeavors for it to grow strong. By avoiding difficult situations, they undermine their own happiness by allowing their resilience to atrophy. They become fragile, weak, and miserable.

There’s one legitimate point of criticism that the #LazyGirls accuse employers of violating: temperance and justice by demanding too much from their employees, leading to stress and burnout. In some cases, there can be truth to this. Demanding an employee work overtime without paying them. Pressuring them to answer their emails on the weekends, even after you agreed that this wasn’t part of the job. But much of their criticism is the whimpering of sad, weak girls who can’t cope with the fact that reality isn't an endless series of entertaining TikTok videos.

Consider this. In the 19th century, most workers worked 6 days a week, 12-14 hours a day, and in far more stressful, unsafe environments. This was the norm. When they returned home from work, they came home to this:

Crazy wooden galleries ... with holes from which to look upon the slime beneath; windows, broken and patched ... rooms so small, so filthy, so confined, that the air would seem too tainted even for the dirt and squalor which they shelter ... dirt-besmeared walls and decaying foundations.¹

They dealt with food scarcity, rampant disease, and living together upwards of ten to a cell. Compare this to any set-up with the #LazyGirlJob and then laugh at their weakness and entitlement. Most of these girls have nice lighting set-ups, spacious rooms, and art hanging from their immaculate walls. Give me a break. Their great misfortune is working “8-hour” days 5 days a week for $60-80k a year at a mildly stressful and boring job. I don't pity them for their work circumstances, I pity them for their self-obsessed, brittle spirits that can be broken amidst such easy circumstances.

If their suffering was caused by inhumane working conditions, why wasn’t there an epidemic of suicides throughout periods of serfdom, slavery, or at the turn of the industrial revolution when people’s financial circumstances were objectively far worse? For a more precise quantitative comparison, compare the 1950s to today. Despite greater purchasing power and wealth, the suicide rate has remained relatively steady.

The problem isn’t financial, it’s cultural. Entitlement, unchecked craving, fragmented communities, a lack of religious roots, unrealistic and ignorant comparisons to a utopian world, and widely available distractions have sapped the spirit of Gen-Z and any others captivated by the #LazyGirl ideology.

Being able to go to nicer restaurants, worry less about your bills, or take the trips you’ve always wanted to go on will not make a substantial difference in your well-being. It will make some dent, as a recent study showed, but this pales in comparison to the composure, serenity, and sharpness that the four virtues offer. Pursue virtue, not pleasure.

2. You do not exist merely as an individual body-mind; your life includes your community and future generations.

A widespread assumption in the happiness calculus is that the primary measurement is my individual well-being. It sounds harmless, but consider this thought experiment: imagine that I have a machine that makes people feel unceasing bliss and a complete absence of negative mental states when they’re hooked up. I will permanently hook you up to this machine if you detonate a nuclear bomb in the center of Paris, killing millions instantly and millions more from the fallout over the next few years. If you say no, you will have a normal life, and I will not bomb Paris.

If you support the maximum individual happiness claim, implicit in the #LazyGirls rhetoric, then the correct option would be to nuke Paris. But would you really agree to that? Would the #LazyGirls? All but the most twisted humans would revolt at even considering such an action, and none would agree to it.

Don’t get hung up on the details. It’s a thought experiment, but it does pose a significant problem to the maximum individual happiness position and highlights how humans actually morally calculate: as a vague mixture of personal and collective happiness.

Celtic paganism rejects the #LazyGirl brand of hard individual hedonism. Instead, it sees the self as porous and includes previous and future generations, their local community, nation, globe, and the natural world.

The argument for an expansive self is simple: the individual's existence depends upon a vast network of relations. You depended upon your parents to raise you. You depend on your community to protect and provide for you. You depend on the natural world for the resources essential for life, such as food, water, and air. Without these, you could not exist. Just as you can’t live without a heart or liver, you can’t live without the water cycle or your ancestors. Therefore, these are a part of you and must be calculated when considering an action’s consequences.

3. Capitalism is a far better economic system than Marxism.

Communism is responsible for far more deaths than the Nazis. In fact, the numbers aren’t even close. According to the classic The Black Book of Communism, the numbers break down like this:

• 65 million in the People's Republic of China
• 20 million in the Soviet Union
• 2 million in Cambodia
• 2 million in North Korea
• 1.7 million in Africa
• 1.5 million in Afghanistan
• 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
• 1 million in Vietnam
• 150,000 in Latin America
• Total: 94 million.

The Nazis killed roughly 10 million. Granted, that was in a shorter span of time and space, but make no mistake: Communism is one of the world's greatest evils coupled with one of its most intoxicating ideologies.

To understand these figures and why they alone should be sufficient to dismiss entertaining any ideas of a communist paradise, it’s worth breaking them down. Some of these deaths were from the imprisonment and execution of dissidents, but much of the figures here are from boring financial mismanagement. Mao’s Great Leap Forward starved millions to death, not to mention those that died because they didn’t have access to medical services or committed suicide due to the extreme duress they were under. Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge killed or displaced almost 1/4 of Cambodia’s population through ideological purges, war, and economic collapse. Like in North Korea, China, and the USSR, the Cambodian move towards a self-sufficient economy built on the backs of centrally controlled industry and agriculture led to widespread famine that took countless lives. Communism not only doesn’t work, it kills.

While the USSR suffered from every shortage imaginable, America, a capitalist country, thrived. To show this, compare a few graphs to see which economic system performed better.

The USA’s economy has consistently outperformed the USSR’s by nearly 200%. Notably, the US has done this with 30% fewer people. Why? Capitalism. Capitalism allows the market to distribute resources with alternative uses effectively. In Soviet Russia, the economy was centrally controlled, creating huge inefficiencies, supply-demand gaps, and prices that were out of touch with real value.

To show you how inefficient it was, consider this: Russian automobile manufacturers kept inventories for the entire year in their warehouses. Ford, on the other hand, kept little inventory. Once the cars were completed, they moved them straight onto the market to be sold. The high turnover and low inventory meant that Ford was much more effective at producing and selling cars than their Soviet counterparts, who suffered from poor logistics and high overhead.

Communists might protest that Russia might have produced less, but there was more parity, which is also only partially true. The average American was richer, had more spending power, and had access to better infrastructure and services than the average Russian did by a wide margin. A testament to the improved conditions in America is that millions of Russians migrated to America and Europe during the USSR’s reign, yet very few made the trip the other way around. Another metric to compare the differences in well-being is life expectancy, shown below.

Americans lived longer for a variety of reasons, such as better medical services, more advanced technology, more money to spend on treatments, and access to better foods. This largesse was a product of a more efficient capitalist financial system

The reason capitalism works is because it relies on a decentralized distribution system. Instead of having a few bureaucrats manage the complexities of millions of different goods, services, and resources being exchanged on a daily basis, businesses, workers, and consumers determine it through their choices and mutual competition. The result is a far more efficient economic system incentivizing innovation and development rather than relying on government guidance and protection.

Under Communism, everyone gets poorer, the economy is inefficient, and people often die as a direct result of foolish policies by bureaucrats. Under capitalism, everyone gets richer because an economy with better incentives and management of resources produces more. This isn’t to ignore capitalism’s faults. There is inequality, corruption, and negligence, but it pales in comparison to that found in communist and other economic systems.

Extravagance is a social evil worthy of being shamed, but accumulating capital is a net good.

Whenever you see a CEO announce lay-offs and claim that they can’t afford to keep these 100 employees because of increased competition, get ready for the barrage of tweets citing the CEOs astronomical pay as if to say, “Why not just take a cut in your pay instead of firing these workers?” But consider this: how much does LeBron James make compared to the lady who sweeps the stands after a match?

In 2023, LeBron will make $47 million just from his contract with the Lakers. That figure doesn’t include promotion deals, media appearances, or his other investments. A starting salary for Housekeepers from the Crypto.com Arena is $23k/year. Le Bron makes 2,000% more than the lowest-paid employee.

You can say that this is unfair, but price is simply the evaluation of a limited resource with alternative uses by the market. You can easily find someone to sweep the floors and empty the trash cans. You can’t easily find a player of LeBron’s caliber. In fact, there’s just one person in the world that can do what LeBron does, and that’s him. It helps that millions tune in to watch him display those skills.

CEOs garner similarly high salaries because they’re in limited supply and produce value for the company. With Steve Jobs at the helm, Apple emerged from the doldrums and became one of the world's largest and most powerful tech companies. The same can be said for Microsoft, nVidia, or Huawei. Nokia shows what can happen when a company's under poor leadership. It was once one of the world's largest companies in the 90s, but it failed to adapt fast enough to smartphones and began seriously struggling in the 00s. Microsoft eventually bought the company.

Price is the sorting mechanism. You want the best people you can get leading the biggest companies, essentially masses resources, to ensure that those resources are used in the best way possible. It’s true that these companies also depend on the work of hundreds, if not thousands, of employees, but the cost of a cashier making a mistake vs. a CEO is dramatically different. It’s good that CEOs make so much money.

However, a distinction should be made between acquiring large amounts of capital and extravagance. People and families that manage capital wisely should be rewarded with more capital. By giving those capable of managing it properly, you ensure that an economy continues to grow due to investing in things that are worthy of investing. Warren Buffet, for example, is one of the richest men in the world because he invests his money wisely. Give him money, and he’ll make it grow. Give someone with poor money management skills (and I’m sure you know a few), and it’ll go straight down the toilet.

Extravagance, however, is a vice and should be called out and shamed. Extravagance is excessively spending on sensual pleasures rather than meeting needs and helping others. An example of extravagance is owning a fleet of yachts, 100 collectible cars, or dozens of large personal properties the world over that you’ll only visit once or twice. This is greedy, harmful, and against the virtues of temperance and justice. Condemning such extravagance is good and necessary. However, being wealthy through acquiring capital is not evil. It's based on individual and intergenerational competence, and rewarding the competent means a better future for everyone.

4. Dismantling the system won’t create more equity, it will create more poverty and misery.

With #LazyGirls dragging their feet and rebelling against the system (in unsurprisingly cowardly and self-serving ways) via undeserved paychecks, cheating their bosses, and lying to companies that they apply for, the end result will be a slower, less productive economy and, in turn, poorer people with less money for education, health care, and all the other necessities that improve quality of life.

Essentially, they’re saying that my own happiness now is more important than that of myself 20 years from now. This is foolish. First, if many act this way, things will get very ugly when the economy starts to crumble and the benefits and support systems they depend on collapse. Roads, plumbing, electricity, drinking water, technical training, police, courts. These systems require money to continue functioning, and money comes from producing stuff. If enough people refuse to participate while sucking as many resources as possible, the result will be a weaker economy with worse services. It’s not going to bring in a communist revolution; it will just bring everyone down.

#LazyGirls are also saying that the future generations that will inherit this broken system aren’t worth the trouble, as it’s going to be the upcoming generations that will have to fix the economic mess that they left by deceiving employers and focusing on getting what they can from the economy rather than what they can give back.

This is a lose-lose proposition.

The Way Forward: Virtue and a Robust Economy

The #LazyGirls philosophy results in more misery for everyone. More misery for the #LazyGirls because they aren’t ennobling themselves, and more misery for others, like resentful co-workers who have to pick up the slack, employers who feel cheated, and future generations who have to suffer the consequences of a less efficient economy drained by a bunch of ignorant, whiny, entitled brats. Done on a large enough scale, such seemingly innocuous actions could spell life or death for many, as they lack the financial resources to pay for medicine, nutritious food, or the psychological help they so desperately need.

The way forward, though, is simple: don’t be a #LazyGirl. It’s a short-sighted, entitled, ignorant, and miserable way of being in the world. Instead, rely upon the four virtues as your guide and refuge.

The first virtue to develop is wisdom. Spend less time listening to TikTokers and more time engaging with great thinkers and artists. Read Marx, Chomsky, or Wolff. Read John Stuart Mill, Sowell, and Barro. Think deeply about your values and see whether your life accords with them. Spend time learning about the problems you’re facing and find well-informed solutions. Consider the nature of the self and what your ethical axioms are. Live an examined life.

The second virtue to develop is fortitude. Seek out challenging situations. Take jobs that are difficult and demanding. Find work that’s unfamiliar and fascinating. Learn to enjoy monotony and boredom. Find meaning in the “meaningless.” Work hard every day, even when it’s difficult. Toughen your spirit daily through physical and mental hardship.

The third virtue to develop is temperance. Carefully apportion your life. Don’t over-invest in your career at the expense of everything else, but also don’t over-invest in having fun, hanging out, or a self-absorbed self-improvement project. Drink moderately. Sleep well. Eat well. Exercise regularly. Find time to be still and serene. Live a balanced life in harmony with nature and society.

The fourth virtue is justice. Don’t lie to your employers. Don’t kick problems down the road to your future self or generations. Do what you say you’ll do. Don’t take advantage of people; stand up for yourself and friends when you’ve been wronged. Make beautiful things rather than whine and be resentful.

If you behave in this way (and it’s the way that Americans have generally behaved for centuries), you’ll not only live a far happier, healthier life, but you’ll also be passing on a legacy of virtue and wealth to future generations. Don’t be a #Lazy, be beautiful, noble, virtuous, courageous.

References

1. Dickens, Charles. Oliver Twist. London: Wordsworthh Editions Ltd, 1997.