The weekend is 100 years old | Hacker News Reader

The weekend is 100 years old

theguardian.com

223 pointslentil_soup155 comments

The lack of understanding about the change in day-to-day life over the last 200 years is truly unfathomable - I fully do not understand it but the little that I appreciate is absurdly profound in the differences

It’s like we’re living on an entirely different planet than the people who existed prior to the industrial revolution

Bertrand Russell’s grandfather was alive during napoleon’s rule and he speaks about the difference between 1950 and 1900:

https://youtu.be/xL_sMXfzzyA

It once came up whether my grandmother went to music festivals in her youth. Of course not, she said, they hadn't been invented yet! They didn't have electronic music, because they didn't have electronics. And nobody was playing guitar on stage for 12 hours. You could hold a short small concert in a hall, but you couldn't hold a big rave.

My mom was around when different races couldn’t use the same water fountain and women couldn’t have bank accounts.

I used to turn a wheel a bunch of times to call a friend.

Her grandkids have never known a world without fortnite on ipads and real life dick tracy watches.

It’s a weird world. Makes you wonder how things will look in thirty years.

That's not quite right (other than the electronic part obviously). There were traveling coach shows, dance and performance halls, and at a minimum week-long performance events (religious ones too) before anyone here on earth was alive.

There were medicine shows in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that drew insane crowds. William Kellogg (of Kellogg's fame) supposedly had legendary crowds.

Also, the week itself as a 'hard' delineator of time also appears to be fairly recent:

> Henkin treats the seven-day week as a social and cultural institution, focusing primarily on the nineteenth-century United States. Unlike years, months, and days, which have astronomical foundations, the week is an entirely historical and social construct with no scientific basis. The study argues that the early American republic was an unusually week-oriented society, in part because American colonists abandoned most of the annual feast days common in Europe, leaving the weekly Sabbath as the primary calendrical anchor. The influence of Puritan settlers, who rejected the Church of England's abundance of saints' days as redolent of Catholicism, contributed to this dominical orientation. Through industrialization, urbanization, and mass education during the nineteenth century, weekly consciousness became increasingly entrenched in American life.

> He identifies several factors that strengthened Americans' associations between specific weekdays and particular activities. Weekly wage payments, which became more common during the antebellum period, tightened the relationship between money and time; workers paid on Saturdays often spent much of their earnings quickly, creating what one passage describes as a financial hourglass pattern across the week. Standardized housework routines assigned specific tasks to particular days, with Monday widely recognized as washing day. Common schools organized curricula around weekly schedules […]

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Week:_A_History_of_the_Unn...

While Christianity's seven day period would make you think it was 'obvious', it tended to be broken up in more Catholic cultures (i.e., not Protestant, perhaps more Puritan), and so was a bit of a 'softer' delineation:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feast_day

In pre-industrial times a large portion of the population was agriculture, and you may go to church, but you still have to take care of animals and such even on the seventh day; it was only in a more 'mechanized culture' (e.g., with factories) that time itself could perhaps be treated more mechanically.

Also also:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven-day_week

while the seven day week is arbitrary, it is also worth noting that the French Revolution had experimented with a metric ten day week, which ended up being a total bust because laborers only got one week in ten of rest rather than one in seven.

We should bring that idea back. I think in modern times, a 3 day weekend and 10 day week, or a 4-1-3-2 work/rest cadence might be nice.

That seems like an implementation issue rather than a systemic one.

There's no reason you couldn't do off 2 on 8 or off 3 on 7 or off 2 on 2 off on 2 off on 2 or off on 3 off on 2 off on 2 or off on 4 X2 or...just about anything...

We see this today where people's schedule's aren't really in sync with the week where they'll do 4 on 3 off or split days off or 21 on 7 off (regardless of days in the month).

There are also a few people who do 6 28 hour days in a week claiming that it boost productivity because their days are longer.

The Soviets had a 5 day week between the two world wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_calendar

“One of the five days was randomly assigned to each worker as their day of rest; the purpose of this system was to allow factories to operate every day, always having most of its workers present to maintain production.” I can see why that didn’t last long—part of the appeal of the weekend is being able to spend one’s time off with family and friends.

But... one bad thing about everyone having the same 2 days off is that the hiking trails, shopping centers, swimming lessons, gym, amusement parks, beaches, banks, and whatnot are crowded with everyone.

If you've ever been in a position where you can do "weekend stuff" any day of the week, it can be noticeably better in many ways.

The pick of object is quite random, but the week is duration of a Moon phase.

Christianity gets its seven day period from Judaism, and it may well hearken back to Babylonian astronomy (seven planets, including the sun (Sunday) and moon (Monday)). The Romans, on the other hand, had an eight-day week with market days every eighth day (ninth counting inclusively, hence their name nundinae). In the middle ages, market towns had market days on fixed days of the week, every week, providing a commercial rhythm that had to give some rise to weekly consciousness before the twentieth century.

The week was an existing structure in Christian-based societies but not to the extent that it seems to have been the at the end of nineteenth-century versus the beginning, i.e., there is documentary evidence that people treated the 'seven day cycle' differently in 1800 versus 1899 (in the US):

> A substantial portion of the research [in the book] is based on nineteenth-century diaries, correspondence, and courtroom testimony to illustrate how ordinary Americans internalized weekly rhythms. The shift from almanacs, which organized dates by month, to preformatted diary books structured by the week reflected and reinforced changing temporal habits. The book examines diverse subjects including freed slaves, physicians, and children from elite families to demonstrate the breadth of weekly consciousness across social groups. […]

Have this professor Henkin heard of the moon?

Good question. I checked. The answer is "Yes."

Then he would know that the seven day week is just a subdivision of the astronomical month. It is a quarter of a month.

If you ignore the extra day and a half it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_month#Types

For the elders here, what are the actual ways to not live under the rule of an industrial clock?

I’m not talking about starting your own company get rich quick scheme or moving into the woods (unless..), but really, I don’t see many ways about it. You could move somewhere rural, lower expenses, but then you are socially isolated to an extent. So, move to where people are, oh but then the only way to support the lifestyle is a standard job with security. Having a family is a whole different requirement almost making it “irresponsible” to not have stable income, hence time restrictions. Then again there seem to be a small population of explorers who live radically different lives or simply try to enjoy their work or switch jobs. Really struggling with this question.

> You could move somewhere rural, lower expenses, but then you are socially isolated to an extent.

I got more social interactions the first week I moved to my house built in the middle of nowhere eastern europe than in my 10 years in a western EU capital. Small communities are much more alive than gigantic ones. You do lose some convenience, but it's not as bad is it used to be, for exemple there is a 24/7 automated supermarket 10min from my middle of nowhere village, 5g everywhere, etc.

Interesting. Do you feel constrained at all? That does sound nice and much more peaceful. I think it’s hard to imagine the change when many have been sold the story of moving to the big city becoming successful, living an exciting life in your 20s, 30s.

It really depends on what you want from life. If you value gadgets, convenience, going for an impromptu beer with friends on a thursday evening then it's a net negative. If you value peace, space, slowing down, nature then it's very nice. Less pollution, less noise, etc. I couldn't afford to buy a two bedrooms flat where I lived, now I own a 3 floor house, a garden big enough to feed my family and neighbours during peak season, life is good, can't complain

> Small communities are much more alive than gigantic ones.

My experience is that after a point it gets annoying, and then oppressive. The proximity in smaller communities can help when everything is right. Neighbours can check on you, bring your kids to school, this sort of things. But at some point personal issues arise, and then it’s impossible to get out of them. That’s how you end up with family feuds over centuries because at some point someone did not like someone else.

Also, it’s nice if you correspond to what the community expects. If you don’t and you don’t build your own niche very quickly you get typecast and then outcast. Humans can be vile and petty, even in small communities. It gets particularly hairy if your bully is somewhat popular locally. Ask me how I know.

Anyway, I much prefer larger communities. I can still make friends if I want to, and if we have a fight it’s not the end of the village.

>That’s how you end up with family feuds over centuries because at some point someone did not like someone else.

This is a take it or leave it issue that will come down to personal preference.

The small town mentality knows that this is a possibility, and give it due deference. This is why everyone smiles and nods at almost everyone, almost always. Never cut anyone off. Accept gifts graciously. Mow the elderly neighbors' lawn, put the neighbors' trash out and bring it in if they forget. Do not mention sports, politics, religion, or intimacy unless you are in familiar company, and certainly not if said familiar company holds opposing views.

It does make for a bit of stagnation in that new social trends will always be more slowly adopted, if at all, due to the desire not to offend.

Imagine driving for years on end without anyone ever cutting you off, and people letting you cut if you look to be in a hurry. People offering comfort when you look down. Relative strangers cooking for you when you're sick. All done because they know you to be the kind of person who'd do the same if the situation were flipped because you've shown yourself to be that kind of person.

It's great if you like it, but if it's not for you, it's definitely not for you.

Small communities have the nasty habit of turning incestuous- sometimes literally.

Some of the greatest works in my country's literary canon are writers dissecting the rural village life. Existential dread indeed.

Rural communities tend to be more religious and conservatives as well.

However if you're also very traditional and practice their faith, you'll fit right in. At least in Iran it's like that.

There's going to be relationship issues regardless due to human nature but those disputes are easier to solve in the local Church / Mosque / what have you.

I know because my dad retired near a rural area from Lahijan and has become much more religious sense. but at least he's at peace..

But I digress, all that so that it's just not a place for someone with "out of box" ideas.

> Small communities have the nasty habit of turning incestuous- sometimes literally.

This isn't 1926 anymore, education and the ease of movement cured these problems by large. You can go shag someone from the next village after a 10min drive, you don't need a half a day walk anymore.

> Small communities are much more alive than gigantic ones.

Jane Jacobs [1] observed that people don't live in cities, they live in neighbourhoods (e.g., [2]): it's the few blocks around you that you most interact with and get to know in urban living. The folks that live on your street and the parents/kids of the school(s) your kid(s) go to especially.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_neighbourhoods_in_Toro...

[2] https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/data-research-maps/ne...

this is true I have noticed that in rural africa too vs any surburb like city in america.

"Really struggling with this question."

Many do, but there are also many unique solutions. Work part time. Home office. Live rural, but close to a railwail station that brings you to the city quickly. Limit your expenses, check what you really need. Do freelancing, where you often can decide when you will do the work, ..

"If thou wilt make a man happy, add not unto his riches but take away from his desires" Epicurus

Society and your past decisions will put you on rails. You can get off them, but there will be sacrifices.

I will always gladly post this. Not because I think it's good advice or because I think Ran is a person to emulate, but because I think it encourages one to think differently about life, wants, needs, and responsibilities.

https://ranprieur.com/essays/dropout.html

You know all that shit you feel compelled to buy? You know that house that's about 2000 to 3,000 square feet more than you need? And all that excess food you eat that turned you into a fat ass? That car you drive that is three feet too long and 15-50k more than you need to spend?

But yes, being anti consumerist, even to a mild extent, is "radical". In particular, alas, to the vast vast vast majority of mates

You'd have to go back nearly 2000 years, at the very least, to find a time when civilizations weren't living under the tyranny of time keeping devices. Here's a poem from 195AD Rome satirizing the tyranny of the sun dial: https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/time/hacked-days

Leaving civilization is probably your only option. Other than joining a handful of remote tribes, or living as a recluse, I don't think there's anyway to completely shield oneself from the tyranny.

Run your own business that provides a service that isn't on a time clock. It's much easier to get a job making sandwiches or teaching kids or working in a factory. Doing your own thing is harder. Maybe you write books, maybe you write copy or edit books for others. Maybe you are a contract software engineer and work on your own schedule. Maybe you do some job over the internet.

Aren't these effectively the same thing? In order to get the benefits of living/working as a group/in a society, there needs to be common elements; aggregating by location/space and by time go hand in hand. If the farmers' market is in the park on Sundays, you can hardly expect to show up at a different time or place and still participate. Regularity, in time or place, is the most common and scalable way to coordinate. The way to avoid that is to remove the need to coordinate, but then, by definition, you are alone.

In a world with such strong async communication and logistics, surely this is less of a constraint than ever.

I didn’t consider that. What I maybe meant is feeling owned by time rather than existing in it. In the past time wasn’t even a concept really. You just went about your life, realized you changed and the sun moved, but nothing like we have now with days of the week, constantly knowing the minute of the day, calendars locking us in months ahead of a day arriving, etc. I believe community can definitely thrive without clocks, however I understand your point.

> You just went about your life, realized you changed and the sun moved, but nothing like we have now with days of the week, constantly knowing the minute of the day, calendars locking us in months ahead of a day arriving, etc.

If you have no other responsibilities, you can choose to treat your days off like this: do some activity (walking, hiking, camping, cycling, paddling/sailing if you're near water) where there is no 'business hours'. Start when you want, eat when you're hungry, head back in when you get tired or if it you don't want to deal with the dark.

After you're done work on a workday you can do the same thing: what does it matter when you eat, or when you go to bed (as long as you're not late the next day)? Stop wearing a watch or looking at a phone (put them in a pouch) and you can certainly lose track of time easily and 'free wheel' your evenings.

However I suspect this won't be as 'fun' as you think, at least in the longer term as a lifestyle (maybe for short bursts): I read and watch information on personal finance, and most videos about retirement recommend structure to the day, as otherwise you very quickly get blassé about the whole thing. Even communities that are isolated from larger society, like convents and monasteries, had structure to life, often centred around prayer:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liturgy_of_the_Hours

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ora_et_labora

It’s called society and it’s really hard to fight against. I’d suggest you look for a way to fit in that suits you.

Old guy checking in. This is the best reply I could find that matches my view.

You might not escape but you can breathe better air if you try.

Do you need a big house, do you need a shiny new vehicle, do you need to eat at restaurants twice a week?

Life can be more your way if you have more money to make it your way.

It was the very first lesson we had in economics in high school. The difference between a need and a want. Nowadays most people have a lot of wants far beyond any needs.

Sadly, as soon as you can conjure the concept of time and schedules, you will yourself end up under one, either self-imposed or imposed by others.

It will creep slowly on you and before you realize you will be late to do the laundry or whatnot.

Having a schedule and making so many things predictable and optimizable is just too advantageous to just not do it.

This can be done, and in major cities as well. You get a tent, and some fentanyl and just don't go to work anymore.

Have a look at ERE. Don't get fooled by the snake oil sounding url. I ignored it for years because of that, but it's a sound framework to help you answer the question you are asking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Lund_Fisker

https://earlyretirementextreme.com/

Don't live for the weekend. Why 2 out of 7 days when you have another 5. Don't put off til the weekend. Don't put off til annual vacation. Don't put off til retirement. Live life every day.

As for each day, organize around living your life. For me, that means working a schedule from the other coast so I sleep when my body craves it, and not fighting it to be productive when I simply am running on reserves

You guys get a weekend?

Rough data according to chatgpt: 165–175 countries: predominantly 5/2 15–25 countries: predominantly 6/1 ~5–15 countries: genuinely mixed / difficult to classify

> I’m not talking about starting your own company get rich quick scheme

You will be better off staying under the yoke and obeying your masters. If you think starting your own company is some "get rich quick scheme", it means they have trained you well in what are your proper limits.

There are a bunch of fairly normal activities that are not specifically M-F. Landording and contract programing for example. And a variety of specialist services, like I've got a friend who delivers race cars and specialist vehicles as a kind of taxi service which he got into because he likes that scene.

> what are the actual ways to not live under the rule of an industrial clock?

Become a farmer. Live by the Sun and the weather instead of the factory or office clock.

Spend far below your means. Don't scale your spending with your earnings.

Let's celebrate its 100th birthday by moving labor day to Friday! Every Friday.

Oh is that not how you're living already?

Oh it is, but the job won't be done until we have solidarity across sectors. I'm looking to shut services off if companies ask too much of their workers.

The two-day weekend is a 100 years old.

The one-day weekend is ancient.

Saudi Arabia changed the weekend from Thursday-Friday to Friday-Saturday about 10 years ago. The existing week only had 3 days' overlap with western businesses, and the smaller Gulf states had already changed.

The weekend discussion had been percolating quietly inside the Shura Council (royal advisors) for several years, but when the King decided, it was only announced with about 10 days advance notice!

Now UAE has now moved to Saturday-Sunday weekend, but practically it is 2.5 days, starting at noon prayers on Friday.

Interesting article. I never thought about how important it is not just how many days off you have, but also when exactly you have them. It's really bad when you have days off, but you can't see your family. I actually like the concept of a four-day workweek. I wonder if it will ultimately prove successful, and if the whole world will adopt it?

My company picks up holiday policy from one of its dev center and applies to all other engineers who live in different cities. On my "vacation" I am the only one in myfamily who has day off; and when my kids have some holiday I have to work.

It is impossible to explain this to HR team. Sic.

Just call in sick/PTO. I see that all the time with multi-timezone/country teams. Gotta have a manager/supervisor/CO that has your back though.

Ultimately, it’ll be up to individual companies. For most of them, though, a four-day workweek probably won’t make much sense if they have to pay the same salaries - it’s just not that profitable for the employer. That said, I’d personally love to have more time for the people close to me and, honestly, just live life a little more fully.

I remember seeing a calendar on my first school year, 1971 in Finland, that marked which Saturdays were school days and which were off. Around the same time, I saw a cartoon about the future labor congress, where a dissatisfied worker asks "Mr President, do we have to every Wednesday?"

From 1965 issue of Time:

> Union-shop steward, emerging from a meeting with management to face a group of workers: “Brothers, we’ve got it made. From now on, we will work only on Wednesdays.”

> Irritated voice from the crowd: “You mean EVERY Wednesday?”

I suspect it’s significantly older than that though.

Hence the dowager said "What's a weekend?"

We should just switch to the only calendar that makes sense:

    5 seasons of 73 days each (5 × 73 = 365 days)
    5 days in each week (73 ÷ 5 = exactly no remainder!)
    5 Apostle Holydays (one per season, on the 5th day)
    5 Season Holydays (one per season, on the 50th day)

Why fives? The Law of Fives states that all things happen in fives, or are divisible by or are multiples of five, or are somehow directly or indirectly related to five. “The Law of Fives is never wrong.” — Principia Discordia

I prefer the law of evens — every thing that can be counted is an even number, or one away from an even number. Ergo, each year should be two days, and however many rotations of the earth it takes to get there is the only answer that makes sense.

Other Western or global societal norms that started in America:

- female body hair removal[0]

- diamond engagement rings[1]

- to-go beverages in disposable paper cups[2]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_removal_of_leg_and_...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_ring

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_cup

Ancient Egyptian women, above a certain socioeconomic threshold, also removed their body hair. (So did the men.)

Hair traps odors (ever smell your hair after a campfire, or going to a Korean BBQ?), but it's kind of a bitch to constantly remove. People with the means and the time to remove their body hair have done it at various periods throughout history.

Women in ancient Egypt also wore makeup, could own property, could divorce men without social repercussions, etc.

Many aspects of society that we think are new are actually things that just kind of arise given a couple hundred years of peacetime and abundance, and/or things that wealthy people have been doing on and off at various periods throughout history.

From what I recall of pre-Nubian ancient Egypt, Egyptians also bathed by coating themselves in oil and then scraping it off.

I wonder if someday we’ll have a “monthend”, where most of society takes a whole week off at the end of a month. I think I’d like this better than a 4 day work week. People could come back truly rested.

With the shift to AI, it could happen.

And work all 3 weeks?

Nah, I'll keep my Friday's off.

Your Fridays.

We could all work 5 day/2day off, 4 weeks, and whatever was left at the end of the month? Time off.

The variability would be fun. Sometimes it would be a 5 day weekend even.

> With the shift to AI, it could happen.

You'll work more and they'll pocket the difference, as it's been the case for every advances in the last 50 years.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQGj_oQ...

Do they?

With AI agents, I work less, not more. The difference is it's off the books. On paper I seem to work the same but not in practice. I've gone from 40 hour work weeks to maybe 2 or 3 hours a day pushing some prompts. Someday, it might be 2 or 3 hours a week.

That only works until they realize what's going on. Then you will be expected to output so much that you will have to prompt for 40 hours a week.

Actually, I will just automate better prompts to put out 40 hours worth of prompting per week, but still working 2 or 3 hours.

Actually, if we could recursively automate things on higher levels with the same tech without ever reaching diminishing returns, we'd be finishing up the colonization of our galaxy right about now. Since that didn't happen, it's safe to say they will find that point of diminishing returns where you need to do more manual work, and make you put in full effort, like what always happened.

Not everyone is a techie working from home with chill managers. Most people still have to clock in the office every single day, llms just make them take more work. Let's see how it goes in term of burnouts

I'd be inclined to agree with you if every vacation I've ever taken hasn't left me less excited to come back to work.

A surprising amount of apparently long standing traditions are actually anglo-adjacent inventions from the last 150 years

it wasn't much more than 50 years ago before being able to go to the ER to be saved in an emergency in the us was a right without having to show proof of payment/insurance.

a lot of what we take for granted are very recent things.

Also the American Board of Medical Specialties didn’t officially approve Emergency Medicine as its own speciality until 1979. Emergency Medicine is a fairly new speciality. Many people are surprised by this but it’s true.

It, like democracy and world trade, is probably a temporary blip.

Once the "elite"realize that drones, AI, and total information awareness provide the tools for complete totalitarian rule, we will pray for 1984

“It is not just about rest, but about reclaiming autonomy from the industrial clock.”

That phrasing sounds a bit strong for temporary symptom relief.

If you enjoy learning about the history of labor and free time, I highly recommend the book Free Time by Gary Cross.

We should have a 5-days week: A, B, C, D, E.

Weekend would be E and A.

12 months of 6 weeks each, except "February" with an extra week.

A would always the 1st, 6th, 11th, 16th, 21st, 26th or 31st (in "February").

B would always be the 2nd, 7th, etc.

Leap years would have a day F inserted between E and A at the end of "February" (of which it would be the 36th), keeping this new calendar consistent with the current one.

Very curious to understand the thinking behind this, why should the weekend be E and A? My first approach would be to have the weekend on D and E which would seem to be the end of the week.

Right. WeekEND. It's the end of the week. Not one day at the start and one at the end. It's why, currently, the week starts on Monday.

In Hebrew Sunday doesn't have a name, it's simply called "Day one", this is also true in Portuguese, Arabic, Greek, Chinese, Vietnamese, and others.

So no, the week does not start on Monday, it starts on Sunday.

The name "Weekend" came long long long after Sunday was considered the first day of the week.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_week_date

ISO says Monday

That’s a late 20th century invention, and not universally followed. Consider Unix time functions, which predate the ISO standard and follow what’s common practice in America even today, that Sunday is the first day of the week. Of course, Sunday was the first day of the week in Europe for over a thousand years and that practice has not fully been extinguished.

> Right. WeekEND. It's the end of the week.

This only works in English though. The rest of us use the word "weekend" as a block.

It also works in German, Dutch, and presumably lots of other languages. In which ones does it not work?

In French. "End of week" would be "fin de semaine" but we don’t say that, we say "weekend". Which is understood as these two days when most people don’t work.

If anything, "fin de semaine" would refer to the last working days before the weekend.

> Very curious to understand the thinking behind this, why should the weekend be E and A?

So that the extra day on leap years could be inserted in a weekend while having its own unique number.

That would also just work with D E and F. Or am I missing something?

I would like F to be inserted in the middle of the weekend, not at the end of it.

You’d have to convince a lot of religious people to give up the day of rest they’ve considered a religious obligation for thousands of years.

Well, let’s rest (two days) every five days instead of seven.

That would defy the point. To Jews and Christians, the cadence is literally inscribed in stone. To quote the Ten Commandments: “Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. … For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” Exodus 20:9,11 (ESV)

Christians don’t rest on Sabbath.

Edit: I mean, we do now because of weekends. But the rest-and-worship day is supposed to be Sunday, not Saturday.

It is very common for Christians to religously rest on Sunday (e.g., Puritan Sabbatarians) and even, for some, on the Jewish Sabbath (seventh‐day Sabbatarians). There’s been plenty of theological debate on the subject. It’s absolutely not true that Christians, categorically, don’t consider themselves obligated to rest on the Sabbath. And those who treat Sunday specially as the Lord’s Day also keep it on a seven‐day cadence.

> It is very common for Christians to religously rest on Sunday

Precisely: Saturday is written in stone, yet Christians typically rest and worship on Sundays. If we changed that, why couldn’t we change the seven-day cadence? It’s not like the Church would object to more masses.

The reasoning behind that change was religious, and those who made the decision were Christians. That most Christians accept that change doesn’t imply they would accept a contradictory change made for secular reasons.

It doesn’t mean they wouldn’t accept it either, and I don’t see how that’s contradictory. As I said: more masses. I am a Christian myself, by the way.

The churches that have "masses" have them daily already.

"Ford did not invent the weekend – the idea had been bubbling under for a century, in campaigns by trade unions, religious groups and progressive employers – but by putting his considerable industrial weight behind it, the two-day chunk of freedom was born."

I have not seen a passage more ignorant of the history of class struggle in a long while

You know, "the idea was bubbling", wonder why it never got implemented until 1926? Maybe the work day was not always 8 hours too? What a marvel!

Can I have a 4 day work week?

Whenever I hear someone in a privileged job, such as a software engineer, complain about unions or collective bargaining or in fact any form of collectivism, I have to suppress my rage because every concession to the working class, such as weekends, safety standards, overtime pay, PTO, sick leave and so on was paid for in blood by your forebears.

The biggest changes came shortly after Henry Ford conceded the weekend when the ultra-wealthy wrecked the economy (ie the Great Depression) and FDR was elected and, despite being a capitalist, realized he needed to address the very real issues to stave off the perceived threat of Communism. That's where Social Security, the right to join a union and a bunch of other things came from. There was even an attempted coup by the wealthy to avoid all this (ie the Business Plot [1]).

After WW2, the US (in particular) saw this as an opportunity to claw back these concessions. The Soviet Union became the Great Enemy. Former Naxis were recruited to fight Communism, both inside and outside the US. NASA, the FBI, the CIA, NATO, etc all filled with former Nazis despite their "morale lapses" [2] under the Third Reich.

Domestically, we got the Red Scare and McCarthyism. This really went into overdrive in the 1980s when Baby Boomers, whose fears of crime were fuelled by intentional propaganda as well as CIA efforts such as the crack epidemic, voted for Reagan in record numbers. Reagan won 49 states in 1984 (all but Wyoming).

One of the things I respect about Mad Men is how it pointed to the rising cult around Ayn Rand in the 1960s [3]. The 1950s, that tends to be romanticizied by so many hyper-individualists and right-wingers, had a top marginal tax rate of 91% and the CEO to median pay gap hadn't exploded yet [4]. By the way, that idea that CEOs were underpaid came from the Patton studies at McKinsey in this time [5].

My point is that this hyper-individualism is entirely manufactured by decades of spending to undermine any form of collectivism. And as a privileged worker, you owe those less fortunate to you some form of solidarity.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

[2]: https://www.techdirt.com/2014/10/28/during-cold-war-cia-fbi-...

[3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKX8C6qKuac

[4]: https://www.reddit.com/r/charts/comments/1na8fww/the_typical...

[5]: https://ritholtz.com/2013/08/is-mckinsey-to-blame-for-skyroc...

> Wyoming

Minnesota

One of my high school teachers couldn't give a ... rat's ass about unions and strikes and teachers had it pretty bad back then; they still do today. Not everyone drinks the communist kool aid sold today by Bernie Sanders and AOC in America. Some of us have already experienced firsthand the "benefits" of communism. By the way, while the work week in the US was only 5 days long, in communist Romania it was still 6 days long. Pupils went to school Saturdays. Though during the last years of communism some weeks of the month were shorter, only 5 days.

The 7 day week is completely artificial.

Days exist, defined by the rotation of the Earth.

Months exist, defined by the orbit of the moon.

Seasons exist, defined by the solstices and equinoxes.

Years exist, defined by the orbit of the Earth.

Pretty much everything else is an invention of man.

May I refer you to timecube?

https://www.timecube.net/

If we are being even more pedantically correct about this:

1. The statement about months is kinda wrong. Solar months just happen because of the earths orbit around the sun, too, and the division by 12 is how many knuckles you can count on one hand by using your thumb.

Moon months exist, and there are 13 of them, from January to Undecember [Footnote: 1], or whatever you want to call them. But by happenstance if we talk about having a moon-month, we will probably be in a culture that uses a calendar that does not have a two-day weekend.

2. Seasons could be argued to be more complex than just sun-based on fixed yearly cycle. Whether four seasons for everyday life exist seems to depend on latitude, and is a bit counter-intuitive at the equator:

Based on solstices you would expect warm/cold/warm/cold, so twice as many seasons, per year, not half that many. Yet Quito or other cities seem to have rain dependent on yearly circulation effects, but constant temperatures. El Niño/La Niña would probably have at least as much of an effect and are of course not on strictest schedules in such areas, and perhaps make more sense for crop or disaster planning than solar years might.

But Southern Hemisphere does not use a reverse "Christmas is in summer" calendar[2]

---------------

Footnotes:

1: 11th month by name, but some Pope's birthdays reforms happened until we ended up with February at 28 days and no spring's start is the new year, etc.

2: Even if that was Christmas before the popes changed it and/or Christians like to feast when heathens brethren/converts did, simultaneously. And historically more plausible for a time of travel to do a census.

>The statement about months is kinda wrong.

No it isn't.

>Moon months exist, and there are 13 of them

I said the months are defined by the moon. You said it was wrong, then agreed with me. Note that I never said there are 12 months. I said:

>Months exist, defined by the orbit of the moon.

>1: 11th month by name, but some Pope's birthdays reforms happened until we ended up with February at 28 days and no spring's start is the new year, etc.

This refers to calendars, which are an inventions by man.

>2: Even if that was Christmas before the popes changed it and/or Christians like to feast when heathens brethren/converts did, simultaneously. And historically more plausible for a time of travel to do a census.

This is more calendar stuff. I'm not talking about calendars, but periods defined in nature by things that exist independent of mankind. The ones I listed are all very clearly defined by mostly celestial events. Weeks are an arbitrary invention and so are calendars.

> The 7 day week is completely artificial.

Actually it's 1/4 of a month, which is defined by the moon.

>1/4 of a month

Where does the 4 come from? Human artifice.

4 Earth Quadrants simultaneously rotate inside 4 Time Cube Quarters to create 4 - 24 hour days within one Earth rotation.

>4 Earth Quadrants

Another arbitrary invention. Why not divide by 3? Or 5? Or any other magic number?

Just as the clock face has 4 quarter corners, an Earth hemisphere has 4 quadrant corners. Those 4 different corners equate to 4 different Worlds, with each having its own separate day, own separate year and a separate human race.

Moon phases as time keeping are as old as any of the others (ie prehistoric)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase

Does not line up perfectly with days, so different cultures handled that differently, but pretty much all cultures had something like a week.

No, he's 36. /s

Other things that are surprisingly less than 100 years old include electronic music, Germany, Croatia, capitalism, the end of slavery, worker's rights, fiat currency, central banks, stock markets as more than a niche thing, and so on.

What year do you think it is

2026

While there was legal slavery in some countries well into the second half of the 20th century, capitalism and workers' rights movements are definitely older than 100 years.

Didn't the Dutch East India Company go public in 1602?

Also, in ancient Rome, coinage with Caesar's face on it was traded above its bullion value. They'd kill 1/10th of your population repeatedly until you agreed to this (such was the origins of the word "decimation"), and then they'd buy their dinner from you with caesar-face coin and move on to the next village tomorrow. Now that you have some caesar-face coin, you have some incentive to continue upholding its inflated value, and the tax collectors will show up later and re-apply threats of violence to ensure that you continue to do so. That sounds like fiat currency to me.

Also, the federal reserve was established in 1913.

Dude, I'm all for framing the status quo as mutable, but maybe do a bit of research.

>Also, in ancient Rome, coinage with Caesar's face on it was traded above its bullion value. They'd kill 1/10th of your population repeatedly until you agreed to this (such was the origins of the word "decimation")

Decimation has it's origin in a military punishment for insubordination or cowardice. Where did you get the fiat currency idea from?

I learned it in latin class. It looks like I may have gotten it a bit wrong.

It's not that they killed every tenth member of whatever village they were adding to the roman empire that day, but rather than they conscripted some of them as soldiers and then killed every tenth of those who didn't obey.

I think the currency point stands though: value the money our soldiers carry, tax collectors will be along for it shortly, welcome to the Roman Empire.

>I think the currency point stands though: value the money our soldiers carry, tax collectors will be along for it shortly, welcome to the Roman Empire.

Well OK but a decimation was no small thing, it was documented to have happened just a few times in Roman recorded history.

I'd hesitate to think they employed such measures just to push the ur-Euro, especially since it doesn't seem like it would be a very effective incentive compared to the utility of the currency itself.

"I fished for a few weeks and got these coins that last forever and are easy to carry and now I can buy a horse at the horse market!"

So the currency decimation thing smells like a myth/exaggeration to me, but I admit it's just a hunch.

> Germany

The HRE for several hundred years could probably seen as a proto-Germany.

Depends on what you mean by “end of slavery”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century

does the guardian ever actually write anything worth reading?

Thank you for the submission. I have long wondered if in the old days we had weekend off, and did we just work continuously 365 days?

It is not that working 365 days is hard. It is the job in today's world are very different, Muti tasking, context switching and anything but simple even in the lowest rank.

This is mentally tiring and I have also wondered if it is a recent thing. My argument is that cutting cost over the past 20 - 30 years meant what used to be a 5 person's job is now a 1 to 2 person job.

Jewish, Christian, and Islam have a Sabbath.

Not sure what anyone else did.

Not really a day of rest since you have to go to <place of worship>

Considering what work looked like in even the 18th century it was indeed rest in comparison.

Going to church is equivalent to watching tv, its not work.

Having to keep up social appearances within an accepted range and suppressing ideas and behavior that conflict with rules imposed by a religious organization does not sound relaxing to me like watching TV does. My white collar labor is less stressful to me than religious strictures would be.

People didn’t have much more to do back then. There was no TV.

Lots of holidays, especially in places with multiple calendars (lunar/solar/etc).

> Lots of holidays, especially in places with multiple calendars (lunar/solar/etc).

And in Catholic cultures (historically):

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feast_day

The English word "holiday" comes from "holy day" after all.

Because Moses asked Pharaoh for a day off and Pharaoh said no, get back to work.

In the past, a professional job might mean extended periods of travel by rail etc with little work to do. A small acreage farmer has to wait for plants to grow.

The advent of factories with limitless and constant demand for labor is a new development of the industrial revolution.

Even on a small farm there is always work to do.

That doesn't mean that there isn't any downtime though. Most activity would be confined to daylight hours if nothing else. You'd probably do less on rainy days, and avoid hard work during the peak heat hours in the summer.

On a farm there's always work, and most were farming or similar back then.

An old farmer I know let me in on his trick: don't work so hard. He said young and inexperienced folks would work way too hard, ie put in too much effort, and get exhausted quickly. Instead lower the effort so it's sustainable. Move slower, don't lift near your max and so on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com