Comment on Reddit Antiwork Goes Private After Fox News Incident
sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net 3 years agoPart of the problem of trying to choose a blanket rule for stuff like what a work week looks like is that different jobs have different requirements.
For some, if you work intensely for a short period of time, then all the stuff that needs to get done will get done.
For others, it doesn't matter how intensely you work because the work is about being there when stuff needs to be done. You can't open a store for 20 minutes, you really need someone there all day because customers will come in when they come in. If you have a factory that produces goods 24/7, your technicians and operators need to be there for when the machines need tending. The machines are doing most of the work, but you need people there to be ready to do something when it's required.
Because of the existence of the second form of job, whenever I hear people say "We'll have a 20 hour work week and we'll still pay everyone the same!" I shake my head.
squashkin@wolfballs.com 3 years ago
yeah, there is no one size fits all
yeah, some people like to work in bursts, others like to take their time, and so there are different work styles
probably the antiworkers either want automation (technology route) or getting rid of stores altogether (primitivist route) so as to make it less necessary to be there. Antiwork was influenced by Bob Black who was influenced by primitivism, so they're possibly thinking of no 24/7 factories. The primitivists have a view that technology is not giving us freedom but taking it away, which I find somewhat persuasive but not entirely. Cars were supposed to make it easier to travel, but then cities start to be built with suburban sprawl, thus then forcing people to have cars to travel - so what originally gave freedom, kind of ends up taking away freedom. There's a back and forth between technology and freedom.
mathematically it sounds like it could make sense, but from what I experience in practice people will try to work as much as they can a lot of times in order to get whatever added material gains
Some antiworkers may be of the kind that want to consciously limit their material gains to gain time / leisure, which I think can be ok ("time rich, money poor")
sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net 3 years ago
I've heard the idea "you don't need as much stuff" as well, and I find it mostly unpersuasive.
The stuff I own is stuff that I want, it's good stuff. In particular my incredibly powerful computer equipment changes my life in many positive ways. I can write music, write and publish books, make video games, make videos, I can do all kinds of creative things, and I can consume others creative works and I like that. I can spend days learning history or mathematics or art or the trades. I love that, and my life would be lessened if I couldn't.
I think with any ideology you need to ask a simple question: "can I do this without taking over the world?"
Usually, the answer is "yes, but you'll have to do the heavy lifting yourself instead of hoping someone else does it" which stops a lot of dumb ideologies in their tracks. I think this is another good example. There are ways to live that don't require long work weeks and also have few material gains, and lots of people live it right now, but it sucks and nobody wants to live like that. They want to better their lives.