The rise of the anti-work movement
bbc.com
bbc.com
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_Sta...
It's like saying I traveled 1,609,344 millimeters because it sounds like more distance than saying than I traveled 1 mile.
https://twitter.com/BootstrapCook/status/1483778776697909252
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/jan/26/terry-pratchet...
Their ONS agreed to make changes.
I believe there is an additional emotional component of those who are sick of the way it FEELS when they realize how fruitless and stupid the work culture of America is. There's a quiet and desperate hopelessness that I think a log of people resonate with when they see and read about the impacts of organized labor movements. Everybody wants to feel in charge of themselves, and it's obviously natural to feel bad in some way when you realize that you don't, if you're poorer.
These days people are driven by arrogance and self perspectives so much that they can't even realize that they're harming themselves by just trying to win an argument that is intended to help everyone.
The pandemic has highlighted so many terrible truths, but the most scary thing about it is that people are in denial about fixing things for the better because, in their perspective, it always looks rosy, and they believe that money and popularity will insulate them from eventual suffering.
We're all watching fake "influencer" culture roll towards us like a giant boulder and trying to figure out how to jump on top of it (as a society)... It's a very toxic time in history.
I don't mean the already mentioned and worked over issues of personal appearance and the presentation of their room, the stereotypical autism excuses, etc etc. I mean just doing a modicum of research before agreeing to speak with Jessie Watters! Watters used to be Bill O'Reilly's guy, did a segment called 'Watter's World' where he would interview people and get them to (yes, you guessed it!) say stupid things so that he and O'Reilly could mug at the camera and say 'Kids these days!'
Just a cursory search of YouTube would have brought up video after video of this sort of thing. The only interviewer that should have raised more red flags would have been if they'd been told they'd be interviewed by Mark Dice! Instead this arrogant puffed up moron went in with no research, no plans or talking points and ultimately was a complete self-owned dagger at the heart of the movement they claimed to represent. What a joke!
I retired 16 years ago at the age of 43 for some of the anti-work reasons mentioned only to get bored so I restarted, working for myself. I now actually enjoy working taking on as little or as many projects I want without any office politics, justifications for everything or job reviews with less qualified managers. Its not all roses but I wish I had done it years earlier.
Basically if you can afford to stop work then working for yourself should be an option you should consider
This is the weird part. A mod went on fox news, the interview went sideways, and now the sub is locked.
Isn’t the point of going on the air to promote the sub? Why lock it down right when it has so much new attention?
Then it’s no shocker when the interview is completely socially inept because that’s what they set up from the start.
The Fox News guy is even mocking the moderator but the mod isn’t socially aware enough to see it.
It's the progressive millennials' equivalent of the Fox News comments section.
The new sub name is arguably better aligned with the goals of the movement, and it’s remarkable to see a replacement sub gain so much traction so quickly.
1. There are two separate movements. I’d argue that people who want reform are not remotely related to people who don’t want to work.
2. Every movement will always have extreme factions that don’t necessarily align with the primary goals of the majority.
We saw plenty of #2 with Recent social movements.
The interview was really bad but the mod reacting to criticism by deleting and locking posts and eventually locking the subreddit caused the community to lose trust in the ability of this person as a moderator.
There's a long storied tradition of that in the US, such as farmers going armed to foreclosure auctions and preventing sales or acquiring them at pennies to return to the previous owners. Railroad workers and coal miners are two other demographics that had similar labor upheavals in recent history.
Except I wouldn't say that. Plenty of things can require violence to solve. Marxism however requires violence against my neighbor just because he has work equipment to run his small business, which is "capital" and thus verboten. Come to think of it, since their kids moved out there is no way he and his wife needs 3 bedrooms, so we need to force them into more sustainable housing as well, through violence of course.
No thanks, I'll be opting out of Marxism.
Anti-work subreddit goes private after rough Fox News interview - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30095366 - Jan 2022 (117 comments)
It’s like the split between “defund the police” vs “reform the police”. People will tell you it was never about totally removing the police entirely but there are certainly people who believe the statements to their most literal meanings.
It's really about fair labour, I don't think most people want to not work. I think most people want to work in exchange for a livable resource, be it wages, work/life balance, recognition, etc. There are plenty of people who are willing to work hard to have a mundane life. A simple car, a apartment/suburban home, an annual vacation, affordable healthcare, education for their kids, nothing extravagant.
The issue is today's corp slave trade their employees and it's at a point where it's not sustainable anymore.
Hence, IMHO, it's less about antiwork, but more about fair labour.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29903457
https://trendguardian.medium.com/why-we-are-dispensable-7a57...
Instead of a discussion on the nature of capitalism and how worker exploitation is central to it, the subreddit talks about why employers ideas need to change.
Zero historical materialist analysis. If i was smarter I'd think this is another one of those 3 letter agency funded programs to control dissent.
No kibbutz, no socialist, no communist, no laissez faire, no capitalist, etc. They all need productive people to do things.
How long would these people last as bushmen or pastoralists? Do they think others in the group will put up with unproductive people who otherwise are able bodied?
The Only true change is when technology changes something.
I think it's a bit much to consider Marxism some inevitable conclusion that all who consider the problems with society eventually will arrive at. That's whig history at best.
It, first of all, requires you to identify with and accept the notion of classes as an part of an ontological category with agency.
It's perfectly reasonable to say no, classes only appear to have human-like properties in the same way a the sun or a thundercloud appeared to be a god with thoughts and wants to people of the past. That is to say, they only exist as idea, within the infinite realm of ideas, and it doesn't even make sense to say they aren't real.
Most people do not control production and even the small amount who do control production make their decisions according to their material interests (not evil or twisted morals). Those who do not control production must work for those who do in exchange of money. These two groups' economic interests as a whole contradict themselves even though they are locked into a social relationship. These relationships change based on the development of production.
This is the basis of social classes in marxism.
Its not just imagination. No other theory has explained the progression of society in such a complete way. Some just talk about ideas, others about the qualities of great men but none can profoundly explain progress on a material basis. I've seen both sides of the coin while it seems you've only imagined flipping it.
"The materialist conception of history starts from the proposition that the production of the means to support human life and, next to production, the exchange of things produced, is the basis of all social structure; that in every society that has appeared in history, the manner in which wealth is distributed and society divided into classes or orders is dependent upon what is produced, how it is produced, and how the products are exchanged. From this point of view, the final causes of all social changes and political revolutions are to be sought, not in men's brains, not in men's better insights into eternal truth and justice, but in changes in the modes of production and exchange."
The reason the sub is getting lots of coverage is because it has exploded over the last year, and because it manages to present its ideas in as poorly a light as possible.
And often times that's what some of us call the synthetic left. Groups of so called leftists lead by think tanks, NGOs or even historically by intelligence agency agents whose sole purpose is to spread disinfo, deradicalize or confuse people all while using a radical aesthetic.
https://old.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/sddx07...
The anchor asked some incredibly softball questions and the mod did their work for them.
No need. Jessie Waters basically sat back and let the person dig their own grave.
Although in this case fox didn’t have to look too hard since they literally selected the mod with the highest privilege on the sub.