After reading this, it could be said that instead of work, we have abstracted it away. The capitalism of Marx dealt with the real work of productive factories. Neoliberal capitalism however outsourced work, and knowledge workers worked about work. The expertise remained for workers whose jobs were exported, making them overqualified. Instead of capitalism creating the conditions for socialism, capitalism creatively destroys the working class.
Human capital, prescribed as a solution, stops to matter. The logical conclusion is the decreasing population and falling birth rates. Perhaps, basic income could provide relief for those affected. I doubt it would be successful in the long run as capitalism adapts to maintain the exploitative framework of "work". Instead of the intent of individuals directing the flow of the economy, it is wrested back by the central business and economic planners. What happens next would be speculation.
If Covid conditions had gone on longer, decades, then output would have gone down, the treasury from which subsidies and government checks came from would have dried up. Even bullshit jobs add to GDP. Even socialist and communists had bullshit jobs to keep people busy.
That said, the jobs I’d consider non essential are things like advertising, lifestyle, gambling/gsming and the sort. They add to the economy but I’d rather not have them.
> The answer clearly isn’t economic: it’s moral and political. The ruling class has figured out that a happy and productive population with free time on their hands is a mortal danger (think of what started to happen when this even began to be approximated in the ’60s). And, on the other hand, the feeling that work is a moral value in itself, and that anyone not willing to submit themselves to some kind of intense work discipline for most of their waking hours deserves nothing, is extraordinarily convenient for them.
Isn't this sort of similar to 1984
Like they had ways to provide enough but they wouldn't because then they would lose the power or something similar
As people get older, they often come to realize that any job that puts a roof over ones head, food on the table, and allows quality time with friends and family, is meaningful work.
This really downplays why people fight against "meaningless" work, it's not because of any philosophical grounds.
The real problem with meaningless work is it tends to be incredibly stressful. Because the underlying work creates no value, even locally (existentially of course it's all nil, but again, this isn't about that level of abstraction). The trouble with "no value" is that you also have no way know how to or even if you are doing your job "well".
Your description sounds pleasant, but my real experience with meaningless work is that it results in long hours worked, very aggressive office politics, and consistent insecurity around the future of your job and income.
The essence of "meaningless work" is captured very well in Kafka's The Trial. While their are brief moments where one can laugh at the absurdity of the situation, most of the time it sits in exact confrontation to the idyllic view of work you are proposing.
Which is funny because the only meaningful work is the work that puts a roof over someone's head, food on someone's table or provides entertainment for so people can enjoy their friends and family to have quality time together.
What you're describing is making work useful, not meaningful. More people nowadays are rejecting work that has no meaning, connection to identity and makes no use of their intellect, even if that work is a means of some income.
What a great way to say to someone that their words could've had some value if they hadn't been too crude/maybe rude and said things in a different manner lol.
I don't agree with the author's standpoint but I can kinda understand it but their passive aggression on the parent comment was just not needed and this clever way of saying it was kinda cool. I learnt something new to say but I am not sure how many ways it would be viable to say this
Any other quotes like this that you might want to share?
There is some truth to this, but I think this way of thinking is overly simplistic. From a material standpoint, any job that can provide for you and your family's needs is "meaningful" since you can't really have a meaningful life without having basic needs provided for. From a spiritual standpoint, however, I think it is detrimental for someone to know that their job is largely pointless or achieves no tangible outcomes in the world. I think this same criticism applies to UBI and other "end of work" ideas, since a person with no job is likely to suffer from the same lack of purpose as someone who senses their job is BS. People are intrinsically wired to want to do work and make some kind of difference (even if that difference is just knowing that you helped manufacture 500 cars that day, dug a ditch that will be used for some useful purpose, whatever).
Attitudes like this are why the wealth gap keeps growing.
Maybe it’s an age gap thing, but I’ve come to realize this attitude is one many boomers have because they’re all doing ok. The rest of us need to course correct the mess they’ve left. The america they were born into might as well be a foreign country at this point.
You know that this is bullshit right? We can all, regardless of our age, differentiate between meaningful and meaningless work. The fact that we need money to fulfil our obligations to our family, the bank or whatever it might be is completely separate from that. We can do meaningless jobs if we have to at any age. This does not make them meaningful. If a person, at any age, can choose between a meaningless and meaningful job - which do you think they would take?
If they have to choose between a meaningless job and starvation?
Cool. Now grow up and do some meaningful with your time. And so should I.
I actually don't understand what you or the article mean by "meaningful and meaningless work", the article approaches an explanation in one paragraph, but they seem to have left a lot to interpretation by the reader. Perhaps you could enlighten me?
>"In a system where, as Gorz puts it, “we produce nothing of what we consume, and consume nothing of what we produce,” it is up to each and every one of us, connecting with others as a collective mass, to regain control over the meaning of work and over the determination of the needs that legitimize it. This is also the way for us to question the disastrous impact that the economy is having on the environment through its blind logic of profit and growth."
Human capital, prescribed as a solution, stops to matter. The logical conclusion is the decreasing population and falling birth rates. Perhaps, basic income could provide relief for those affected. I doubt it would be successful in the long run as capitalism adapts to maintain the exploitative framework of "work". Instead of the intent of individuals directing the flow of the economy, it is wrested back by the central business and economic planners. What happens next would be speculation.
That said, the jobs I’d consider non essential are things like advertising, lifestyle, gambling/gsming and the sort. They add to the economy but I’d rather not have them.
https://davidgraeber.org/articles/on-the-phenomenon-of-bulls...
Isn't this sort of similar to 1984 Like they had ways to provide enough but they wouldn't because then they would lose the power or something similar
The real problem with meaningless work is it tends to be incredibly stressful. Because the underlying work creates no value, even locally (existentially of course it's all nil, but again, this isn't about that level of abstraction). The trouble with "no value" is that you also have no way know how to or even if you are doing your job "well".
Your description sounds pleasant, but my real experience with meaningless work is that it results in long hours worked, very aggressive office politics, and consistent insecurity around the future of your job and income.
The essence of "meaningless work" is captured very well in Kafka's The Trial. While their are brief moments where one can laugh at the absurdity of the situation, most of the time it sits in exact confrontation to the idyllic view of work you are proposing.
I don't agree with the author's standpoint but I can kinda understand it but their passive aggression on the parent comment was just not needed and this clever way of saying it was kinda cool. I learnt something new to say but I am not sure how many ways it would be viable to say this
Any other quotes like this that you might want to share?
Maybe it’s an age gap thing, but I’ve come to realize this attitude is one many boomers have because they’re all doing ok. The rest of us need to course correct the mess they’ve left. The america they were born into might as well be a foreign country at this point.
If they have to choose between a meaningless job and starvation?
Cool. Now grow up and do some meaningful with your time. And so should I.
>"In a system where, as Gorz puts it, “we produce nothing of what we consume, and consume nothing of what we produce,” it is up to each and every one of us, connecting with others as a collective mass, to regain control over the meaning of work and over the determination of the needs that legitimize it. This is also the way for us to question the disastrous impact that the economy is having on the environment through its blind logic of profit and growth."
No further comment is needed.