Andy Kusi-Appiah: Welcome to the Homo Uberitis Era 

“The Enduring Economic Malaise Disguised as Progress: Welcome to the Homo Uberitis Era.”

By

Andy (Kwaku) Kusi-Appiah.

 December 1, 2025

—–

“In every age, the powerful rename exploitation

as efficiency, and the people pay the price.”

Kusi-Appiah, A.

“The gig worker is not the future of labour; they

are the warning sign we refuse to read.”

Kusi-Appiah, A.

—–

Abstract

This article examines the historical evolution of the economic ideas shaping our present moment, from Adam Smith’s classical foundations to the rise of neoliberalism, and shows how these frameworks have produced a new, precarious figure: the Uberized human. Drawing on historical analysis, political-economic critique, and grounded insights from communities across the globe, the article argues that gig workers are emblematic of a broader crisis in late capitalism, that is, the erosion of labour protections, the intensification of exploitation, and the fragmentation of collective power. The piece contrasts Western narratives of democracy with participatory traditions from Indigenous communities around the world, such as the Oromo Gadaa system in Ethiopia, highlighting the global, non-Western roots of democratic governance. Ultimately, the article calls for a new economic and democratic vision centered on dignity, justice, and collective agency.

Keywords: neoliberalism, gig economy, classical economic theory, labour precarity, democracy, Oromo Gadaa system, economic justice

Introduction:

Economic theories shape human lives in ways most people never see. For nearly 250 years, ideas from Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, and Friedrich Hayek have been absorbed into policy frameworks, national budgets, and development agendas worldwide (Harvey, 2005; Saad-Filho & Johnson, 2005). These assumptions continue to guide the lives of billions of people. Yet, despite their longevity, these ideas have proven deeply inadequate for describing or improving the conditions of modern workers (Stiglitz, 2019; Saad-Filho & Johnson, 2005). For instance, the rise of the gig economy has exposed the fragility of market-centered ideologies more starkly than ever. App-based labour platforms hail ‘flexibility’ and ‘independence’ as virtues of a new economic age (Cant, 2020;Rosenblat & Stark, 2016; Saad-Filho & Johnson, 2005). But behind the marketing lies a reality of uncertainty, low wages, limited protections, and psychological exhaustion. In this new order, workers are increasingly isolated, burdened with risks once carried by employers, and monitored through ever-evolving technologies of digital surveillance (Woodcock & Graham, 2020; Cant, 2020; Zuboff, 2019; De Stefano, 2016).

In this article, we revisit the theoretical origins of the economic narratives that shape our present, tracing the lineage from homo economicus to today’s gig worker. Secondly, we examine how neoliberal policies have created unprecedented levels of worker vulnerability, especially in the global south where structural inequalities remain entrenched. Thirdly, we propose a reimagining of economics and democracy, one that centers human dignity, collective agency, and the well-being of labour rather than the maximization of corporate profit.

Original economic dream:

In 1776, Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations, a work that would become the bedrock of modern capitalism (Smith, 1776/1976; Winch, 1978). Adam Smith painted a compelling picture of how economies grow: free markets, specialization, and the mythical ‘invisible hand’ guiding individuals toward the public good (Kennedy, 2009; Rothschild, 1994). At the heart of his worldview was homo economicus, the rational, self-interested man who supposedly builds wealth simply by minding his own business (Saad-Filho & Johnson, 2005; Sen, 1977). It was a brilliant idea. But like many brilliant ideas, it worked better in theory than in the real world, particularly the world we live in now.

Age of the Uberized human; homo-uberitis:

Smith’s promise of the autonomous individual thriving in a ‘free market’ has been reborn in the gig economy. Today’s platforms, from uber to food delivery apps to domestic work networks, celebrate independence and flexibility. They present the worker as an entrepreneurial hero, each ride or delivery a personal triumph. But when you look closer, a different picture emerges.

The gig worker, the Uberized human, is not free. S/he is isolated, overworked, underpaid, and operates in a system that deliberately strips away labour protections in the name of ‘innovation.’ (Cant, 2020; Woodcock & Graham, 2020; De Stefano, 2016; Rosenblat & Stark, 2016). Spend a day with a domestic worker and her Uber-driver husband, working 16–18-hour shifts, and you quickly see that the ‘freedom’ of flexible labour is a mirage. The story of the couple above is not unique, it is the story of millions (Cant, 2020).

However, humankind has been sold the illusion that the uberized economy, powered by artificial intelligence, is a frictionless economy that will bring prosperity to humankind. “But hidden beneath this smooth surface lies the grim reality of a precarious global workforce of millions labouring under often appalling conditions…” (Cant, 2020). According to Callum Cant, the uberized economy is “…an extraction machine that feeds off humanity’s collective effort and intelligence…” (Cant, 2020). This dangerous, low-paid labour is connected to centuries of gendered, colonial, and neocolonial exploitation.

Myths we still do not question:

Smith’s ideas did not disappear after the 18th century. They were revived and reworked by economists like John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich Hayek. Keynes believed that governments should intervene in the economy to prevent devastating recessions and mass unemployment. Keynes’ proposals helped stabilize economies during the Great Depression and the decades that followed (Harvey, 2005; Saad-Filho & Johnson, 2005). Friedrich Hayek, on the other hand, argued that markets work best when the state stays out of the way. Hayek’s ideas, eventually labeled ‘neoliberalism’, swept across the world in the late 20th century and remain dominant today (Harvey, 2005; Saad-Filho & Johnson, 2005). Springer argues that ‘neoliberalism’ is not merely an economic doctrine but a globalized ideology that reshapes daily life, often by intensifying precarity and marginalization (Springer, 2016).

David Harvey also defines neoliberalism as:

“…a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms…within an institutional framework characterized by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade”

(Harvey, 2005: 2).

In a similar fashion, Wendy Brown emphasizes that neoliberalism restructures not just economies but human subjects, producing individuals who understand themselves as self-investing entrepreneurs (Brown, 2015). Alfredo Saad-Filho also defines neoliberalism as a class project designed to restore power to economic elites via deregulation, privatization, and weakened labour protections (Saad-Filho & Johnson, 2005).

And so, we ended up with the global economic model most of us now live under. It is a system that treats people as isolated units of productivity, rewards the wealthy, erodes public services, and insists that the ‘market’ will somehow sort everything out. Except it has not. It does not. It never did.

Conversations from the ground:

I often chat with my friend Yaw Boakye, a man who spends his life observing politics from the ground up. Yaw Boakye sees the reality that many academic theories ignore: that people are trapped not by laziness, but by systems designed to extract their labour without improving their lives. Yaw Boakye watches hardworking people struggle to keep their heads above water while multinational corporations and political elites celebrate so-called unlimited and linear ‘economic growth’ that never reaches the workers who fuel it (Harvey, 2005). Markets are not natural. They are built, shaped, and manipulated. And right now, they are built to benefit the few.

The gig worker’s dilemma:

The modern gig worker is the clearest symbol of how neoliberalism reshapes human life. They are told they are entrepreneurs, yet they have no job security, no benefits, no control over their working conditions, and no share in the wealth they help create. In essence, the worker is responsible for everything: their vehicle, fuel, insurance, health risks, long hours, and unpredictable income. Meanwhile, the platform enjoys the profits. This is not progress. It is a return to a form of labour exploitation once common in the early industrial era, work without rights, risk without reward. (Woodcock & Graham, 2020; De Stefano, 2016; Rosenblat & Stark, 2016).

What comes after neoliberalism:

If neoliberalism has failed, and it has, then tinkering with its edges will not save us. Reform is not enough. We need to imagine something entirely different (Springer, 2016). A new system must: (a) value human dignity above corporate profit; (b) ensure that labourers receive the wealth they create; (c) guarantee universal protections; (d) emphasize community over isolation; (e) build democracy from the ground up.

Above all, it must reject the lie that marginalized people are idle. Anyone who has walked through a city at dawn, seen workers rushing to open shops or board buses, knows how hard people work. The problem is not effort; it is exploitation.

Participatory democracy beyond Athens: Lessons from the Oromo Gadaa System:

Athenian democracy is often celebrated as the earliest model of direct, citizen-led governance (Ober, 2010). But the global South offers equally sophisticated, sometimes even more participatory, traditions of democratic life. Among the most remarkable is the Gadaa system of the Oromo people of Ethiopia, a socio-political institution that has governed Oromo communities for centuries (Legesse, 1973).

Under the Gadaa system, leadership cycles through structured age-grades every eight years, ensuring no group holds permanent power. Leaders are selected through long processes of community evaluation and are accountable to the public through open councils, assemblies, and ritual checks on authority. Governance is not a technical task for elites, it is a lived, collective responsibility (Jalata, 1998).

Central to Gadaa is the concept of safuu, a moral and ethical code that binds leaders and citizens to principles of justice, respect, and reciprocity. Decisions affecting the community are deliberative, inclusive, and guided by consensus-building. Crucially, the Gadaa system integrates governance into everyday life, reinforcing the idea that democracy is not an event (like an election), but a continuous practice (Pankhurst, 1997).

The spirit of Gadaa stands in sharp contrast to the distant, technocratic, and often imposed democratic frameworks that dominate contemporary politics. Like Athenian democracy, it reminds us that ordinary people, not elites, can and should shape governance directly. And like Athenian democracy, it challenges the notion that democracy is a Western invention or that its forms are culturally uniform.

This example from East Africa challenges the notion that democracy is a Western invention. It shows that participatory governance is deeply rooted in African intellectual traditions and offers a model in which citizenship is not passive but deeply engaged. More importantly, the Gadaa system embeds democracy into the rhythm of everyday life. Governance is inseparable from social responsibility, ethical conduct (safuu), and shared obligation. Leadership is not an entitlement but a duty, one that citizens prepare for throughout their lives. In this sense, the Oromo example echoes the fundamental principle that democracy must be lived, not merely legislated (Kelecha, 2025; Jalata, 1998).

Conclusion:

The above expose is not merely an economic critique, but a call for clarity: a reminder that systems built on extractive foundations cannot produce equitable outcomes. In a world increasingly defined by uberization, we must ask what kind of future we are building, and for whom.

If things are to change for gig workers, and for all workers, the movement will not come from televised debates or polished speeches. It will come from collective action. From organization. From people refusing to accept the inevitability of exploitation. The uberized worker must no longer be isolated. They must stand together. History shows that systems change only when those who sustain them stand up and say: enough!

Works Cited

Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the Demos : Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. First Edition., Zone Books, 2015.

Cant, C. (2020). Excerpt from Riding for Deliveroo: Resistance in the New Economy: Deliveroo Workers Strike in Brighton.” Social Policy, vol. 50, no. 1, 2020, pp. 47–50.

De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the ‘just-in-time workforce’: On-demand work, crowd work and labour protection in the ‘gig economy.’ Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 471-504.

Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kelecha, M. (2025). Political and Ideological Legacy of Ethiopia’s Contested Nation-Building: A Focus on Contemporary Oromo Politics. Journal of Asian and African Studies (Leiden), (60)1: 51-74, https://doi.org/10.1177/00219096231161036.

Jalata, A. (1998). Oromo Nationalism and the Ethiopian Discourse : The Search for Freedom and Democracy. Red Sea Press, 1998.

Kennedy, G. (2009). Adam Smith: A Moral Philosopher and His Political Economy. Palgrave Macmillan.

Legesse, A. (1973). Gada: Three Approaches to the Study of African Society. Free Press, 1973.

Ober, J. (2010). Democracy and Knowledge: Innovation and Learning in Classical Athens. Princeton University Press, 2010.

Pankhurst, R. (1997). The Ethiopian Borderlands: Essays in Regional History from Ancient Times to the End of the 18th Century. Red Sea Press, 1997.

Rosenblat, A., & Stark, L. (2016). Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: A case study of Uber’s drivers. International Journal of Communication, 10, 3758–3784.

Rothschild, E. (1994). Adam Smith and the Invisible Hand. American Economic Review, 84(2), 319–322.

Saad-Filho, A. & Johnston, D. (2005). Neoliberalism: A critical reader. London: Pluto Press.

Sen, A. (1977). Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6(4), 317–344.

Smith, A. (1776/1976). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (Glasgow Edition). Oxford University Press.

Springer, S. (2016). “Fuck Neoliberalism.” ACME an International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, (15)2, pp 285.

Stiglitz, J. E. (2019). People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent. Norton.

Woodcock, J., & Graham, M. (2020). The Gig Economy: A Critical Introduction. Polity Press.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs.