252
submitted 2 months ago by mambabasa@slrpnk.net to c/antiwork@slrpnk.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

People can finally work on things that interest them! No more corporate overlords telling you what to produce.

[-] something_random_tho@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

No one WANTS to clean toilets or pick up trash every day, and yet it still needs to be done.

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Too bad we don't have any millionaire toilet cleaners or garbage collectors, even though we NEED them.

[-] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago

But that's an entirely different premise than "nobody needs to work"...

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Who said "nobody needs to work"?

The actual premise is that your labor shouldn't be exploited to produce products for the sole purpose of producing products, which make a few people rich while you get nothing. If we're working to keep necessary services functioning, thats a different story. We can all do that as a society without a business/corporation telling us to do it.

[-] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago

Who said "nobody needs to work"?

Literally the post.

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

Can you screenshot and circle that quote in the OP?

[-] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago

You can't read the title of the post?

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

"We want the zero hour work week!" Vs "nobody needs to work"

"We want the zero hour work week!" implies a desire to reduce the standard work week to zero hours. It suggests people still want to work and contribute value through their work, just with fewer required work hours.

"Nobody needs to work" is a broader statement that questions whether work itself is necessary. It could be interpreted as meaning that people should not be obligated or required to work at all, and that their basic needs should still be met without contributing labor.

Overall, the first sentence focuses more on reducing work hours while still valuing work itself. The second calls into question whether work is inherently needed for people to live and thrive. Both discuss reducing the role of work, but they have slightly different philosophical implications.

[-] null@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

You asked what was said, not what what was implied.

If everyone is entitled to a 0 hour work week, that means they are entitled to do 0 hours of work.

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yes. There are zero places in the original post where it says "nobody needs to work" It says "We want the zero hour work week!".

[-] null@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

If everyone is entitled to a 0 hour work week, that means they are entitled to do 0 hours of work.

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Thats a totally different thing than "nobody needs to work".

[-] null@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

No it isn't.

If everyone is entitled to work 0 hours, then nobody is required to work. They are equivalent.

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago
[-] null@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

You are welcome to disagree with the standard definitions of words, yes.

Its not generally advised, but you do you.

[-] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

I guess if nobody wants to do it, the market would have to price that labor much higher to make that happen due to a low supply for a high demand service.

[-] platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The problem is that companies have more leverage than individuals. How many minimum wage protests have we seen over the years, and they are still getting paid for that. A company is probably going to find someone desperate enough to fill any gap. A person needs to survive, and without an income they become desperate enough to fill any gap.

Usually people with high salaries can bargain and use leverage because they aren't desperate to get a job to survive.

[-] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

But that's what these antiwork posts are about. If people weren't desperate to survive a lot of problems would sort themselves out.

this post was submitted on 01 May 2024
252 points (88.7% liked)

Antiwork

365 readers
1 users here now

For the abolition of work. Yes really, abolish work! Not "reform work" but the destruction of work as a separate field of human activity.

To save the world, we're going to have to stop working! — David Graeber

A strange delusion possesses the working classes of the nations where capitalist civilization holds its sway. ...the love of work... Instead of opposing this mental aberration, the priests, the economists, and the moralists have cast a sacred halo over work. — Paul Lafargue

In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic. — Karl Marx

In the glorification of 'work', in the unwearied talk of the 'blessing of work', I see the same covert idea as in the praise of useful impersonal actions: that of fear of everything individual. — Friedrich Nietzsche

If hard work were such a wonderful thing, surely the rich would have kept it all to themselves. — Lane Kirkland

The bottom line is simple: all of us deserve to make the most of our potential as we see fit, to be the masters of our own destinies. Being forced to sell these things away to survive is tragic and humiliating. We don’t have to live like this. ― CrimethInc

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS