Is there a room for care in the capitalist system

In the panel discussion “Radical Care” at the London Art Fair 2026, host Victoria asked a question: Is there space for care in a capitalist system? This is a poignant question. Because there is an intrinsic tension between the two. 

Capitalism excels at productivity, scale, and competition, but struggles with relationships and activities that require time and attention, things that cannot be easily scaled or capitalized. (Unfortunately, you can’t monetize a hug, though therapy bills suggest someone’s trying.)

Care is fundamentally relational. It requires seeing people as whole beings, not “economic units” (a term coined by Logan Roy in Succession, a man who treated his children like quarterly earnings report, or gladiators at Colosseum). Care demands presence, patience, and mutual dependence, qualities capitalism often deems inefficient. Hence the tension.

The question isn’t really whether care can exist under capitalism; it does and must. Care can exist in the margins: in underpaid care work, in personal relationship carved out after work hours, squeezed between emails and existential dread. 

Rather, it’s whether capitalism allows care to flourish in the ways human dignity and wellbeing require. For care to truly flourish, we could create spaces that renegotiate capitalism’s value and logic: valuing slowness over productivity, connection over profit, and shared experience over individual achievement.

The next question is how? 

Film director Chloé Zhao observes that “people draw strength from interdependence, not dominance.” 

This interdependence begins with meaningful connection, which demands vulnerability. 

Allowing your vulnerability to be seen is honesty and a form of quiet strength, more importantly, it’s how that connection actually forms.

(Though vulnerability remains notoriously challenging to include in a LinkedIn profile.)

Anna, Feburary 9, 2026