this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
1387 points (98.8% liked)

196

5442 readers
1877 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin was written in 1892 and argued then that we labour far more than is actually necessary. Lots of work is work for the sake of work, not necessarily for the necessity of life and society.

Think now on how much technological improvement there has been since then. The industrial revolution continued, flight, computers and automation, even the factory line system didn't take off until Ford in the early 1900s.

We have so many machines, computers, and processes that never existed a hundred years ago.

The point isn't that we have no need for work, the point is we don't need to work anywhere near as much as we do.

A modern book that argues something similar is Bullshit Jobs by David Graeber.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conquest_of_Bread

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-conquest-of-bread

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-bullshit-jobs

[–] blarghly@lemmy.world -3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

From the wiki article you cited:

Two studies found that Graeber's claims are not supported by data: while he claims that 50% of jobs are useless, less than 20% of workers feel that way, and those who feel their jobs are useless do not correlate with whether their job is useless. (Garbage collectors, janitors, and other essential workers more often felt like their jobs were useless than people in jobs classified by Graeber as useless.) The studies found that toxic work culture and bad management were better explanations of the reasons for those feelings (as described in Marx's theory of alienation). The studies did find that the belief that one's work is useless led to lower personal wellbeing.

The reality is, almost no jobs are actually bullshit. After all, whether you are a giant corporation or a homeowner paying for a plumber to fix their toilet, no one wants to pay someone money to do nothing useful. Of course, there is slack in the system and sometimes you'll end up in a sort of sisyphean job. But most jobs exist because someone, somewhere needs or wants something done. And most of the needs and wants of the world, ultimately, come from normal people.

Of course, it is easy to make the argument that what people want is wrong. They could live in smaller houses, ride bikes instead of cars, not eat meat, and stop buying fancy watches.They could repair things instead if throwing them out, learn to be happy living in their neighborhoods rather than travelling around the world, and have fun by spending time with friends instead of going to music festivals.

But the fact is "we are going to solve malaria in Malawi by ending Bonaroo, steak, and shopping malls" is not a line that will play well with... like... anyone.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 hours ago

"Statistics show that most people have not read Graeber's argument yet and don't want to believe their time is being wasted. Therefore he is wrong."