• hark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    5 hours ago

    and they have the gall to suggest that if we don’t accomplish enough outside of work then it’s a matter of time management. There’s only so much time management I can do when a giant lump of my time is gone.

  • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    It would be a lot easier to swallow if we were a part of some grand endeavor of building society and stuff for the common good. But if you try yo do that, even on your own time, they will send men with guns paid with money they stole out of your paycheck (which would maybe be tolerable if they also did, like, environmental protection or work safety or food safety or social safety nets or whatever, but it’s all just men with guns taking ypur neighbors in pre-dawn raids and shooting at your friends and threatening to murder you now).

    So fuck it. Take what you’re owed; you owe these fuckers nothing.

    And if you want to make a society, remember upull have to find out whe4e these murderous thugs live, always outside your community, and vote for them. Vote for theor families. Don’t be shy about voting for bystanders if you vote for them where they live; anyone who makes a place nice for these invaders to live deserves your vote too.

  • TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    In the ancestral environment we would still work all day to survive, and we wouldn’t have medicine or YouTube for it either. There could obviously be a more equitable system today, and the end goal is that humans don’t have to work any more, but it’s disingenuous to imply that the capitalist division of labour model is an alternative to not working and still getting stuff.

    • balderdash@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Good, we are in agreement. No one is implying that work is unnecessary. Labor has existed for as long as we have – much longer than capitalism. To equate this sentiment with the original post appears disingenuous.

      Capitalism is exploitative by necessity. The rise of machines during the industrial revolution divorced the worker from the fruits of their labor and from the tools with which to produce them. Now we, the workers, are dependent on the owners for wages to sustain the material conditions of our existence. Much like how the manorial system forced the feudal serf to cultivate the land, today’s workers are institutionally coerced: we sell ourselves by the year or by the hour. Meanwhile, the owners reap the vast profits watered by the sweat of labor while seeking to reduce the price of labor down to whatever minuscule sum allows us to continue working. There is, indeed, a more equitable system available.

    • Ecco the dolphin@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Nobody is suggesting a model in which you don’t work and still get stuff…

      Labor is entitled to all it creates.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Yeah, it used to be sunup to sundown, 6 days a week. And the seventh was hardly a day of rest. And, there was no retirement at 65. There was working until you died, or at least working until you were very feeble and hoping that your children would take care of you in your old age (which just added to the work they had to do). Work also wasn’t this thing that you had to start doing after university. It was this thing you started going before you hit puberty. You’d be feeding the animals, or helping mend the clothing as a child, and that work would continue for your entire life.

      And, even if things were distributed more equitably, work would still be necessary. In fact, if things were distributed more equitably, it wouldn’t be illegal immigrants or immigrants on short-term visas doing a lot of the agricultural work, it would be the kinds of people who complain about their 9-5 jobs.

      The sad fact is that getting enough variety on your plate, a comfortable roof over your head, and entertainment in your eyes requires a lot of work from a lot of people. It would be really nice if we lived in a post-scarcity world with replicators to provide any food anybody desired, and robots to repair everything that broke. But, we’re not there yet. Spending all day working 5 days a week feels rough, and maybe if things were more fairly distributed we’d only be working 3 days a week. But, until we invent the replicator, we’re still going to need farms, and farms will need farm workers, and farm workers will need mattresses and roofs and vehicles, and those vehicles will require tires, and those tires will need to be tested for safety, and those safety testers will need computers, and those computers will need programmers, and those programmers will need caffeine…

      • balderdash@lemmy.zipOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        Of course we have to work. We still need food, water, shelter, etc., and machines will not fulfill these needs on their own (at least not yet). However, given the recent increases in productivity and corporate wealth, do you believe it is necessary for us to work as much as we do in order to fulfill everyone’s needs?

    • Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      This depends on what ancestors your talking about. For instance, hunter and gathers rarely worked more than twenty hours a week to provide all their needs.