
On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs: A Work Rant (By David Graeber) - anarbadalov
https://www.strike.coop/bullshit-jobs/
======
burntbridge
The Pandemic has definitely shown this to be true. A huge number of people
didn't go to work and it didn't really matter. It remains a mystery as to what
is driving this. Do bullshit jobs beget more bullshit jobs? A kind of
multiplier effect?

~~~
zxcmx
From what I can tell the actual weird part of covid-19 job losses is that the
bullshit economy has continued unhindered - by going remote - and it is
actually propping up the rest of the economy.

The white collar folks are just filing their TPS reports from home and it has
tended to be the people who make or do concrete things who are impacted the
most.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
As well as bullshit jobs there is a bullshit economy. This part of the economy
is based on wants rather than needs. As soon as it became unsafe to
participate in we collectively decided it wasn't very important at all.

This is the economy based on conspicuous consumption but there isn't much
opportunity to be conspicuous right now. Nobody knows whether I'm wearing
designer clothes at home or lounging around in my pyjamas.

------
martindbp
> Yet it is the peculiar genius of our society that its rulers have figured
> out a way, as in the case of the fish-fryers, to ensure that rage is
> directed precisely against those who actually do get to do meaningful work.

His proneness to conspiracy theories casts everything he says in doubt. So
let's get this straight: the "rulers" of society feels the need to spend a ton
of money creating bullshit jobs, and then conspire to keep people unhappy and
blaming others? I did not like Debt very much for this reason.

~~~
parsadotsh
Perhaps you're reading too much into the literal meaning of that sentence.
He's saying that this is the status quo, and the "rulers" are happy with the
status quo, not that they're literally conspiring.

From the final paragraph: "... Clearly, the system was never consciously
designed. It emerged from almost a century of trial and error. But it is the
only explanation for why, despite our technological capacities, we are not all
working 3–4 hour days."

~~~
martindbp
Hopefully, but I prefer a writer who means what he writes, not leaving me to
guess what parts he means and what parts he doesn't.

------
Nasrudith
Keynes conjecture was also blatantly off in assumptions about automatability,
divisability of work across multiple people (and overhead), apitude
requirements, as nice as a 15 hour work week would be.

The complaints about "usefulness" of job in direct utility are also
shortsighted and miss part of why planned systems have a history of failure in
farms and consumer good supply. Just because you don't understand something
doesn't mean it isn't important.

Looking at an economy from either a worker's or an owner's view is ironically
blinkered - the underlying system is what gives utility and wages to both. A
pipeline between supply and demand may print money but adding in loops and
needless length (as opposed to say acceleration constraints) wouldn't serve
either interest long term.

Actual bullshit jobs certainly exist and imply a larger scale which can
support the load and either enough systemic scale efficiency to counteract the
local or just plain a lack of sufficient competitors who would gain an edge
from doing away with the bullshit and prosporing or finding out the "bullshit"
is actually important.

------
laythea
That Keynes bloke didn't figure into his calculations that one of the main
reasons we will never achieve a 15 hour working week is because of human
greed.

Along with large population of people who do not have enough income to live
decently, and are therefore subject to "the grind", there are also many many
examples where the person is making/has made lots, but still works for more.
This is human greed. I think the average greedy person would rather make 2-3
times as much in a week, rather than buying their time back.

It starts at human need for low income, and then ends up as human greed, as
income gets higher.

Although it would be nice, I'm not sure there will ever be a world where we
all kick back and relax to enjoy the benefits of past generations. Some would
call that forward progress. As you say, it seems the other way around and we
are making things worse. Perhaps our individualistic quest for an easy life is
contributing to that.

~~~
amurthy1
I mostly agree with you, but I wish we could come up with a better word than
"greed" to describe the almost universal and constant desire for humans to
improve their own lives, which has a connotation that the only way for me to
benefit is by taking from others. I think most in this community would agree
life isn't a zero sum game and there are actions I can take that improve my
life that are also net neutral-positive to the world around me.

I think we should encourage this type of activity while condemning the
negative externalities of people's actions, as opposed to blanket condemning
"human greed" as a whole.

~~~
dekervin
Machtgelüst might be the word you are looking for
[https://fnietzsche.com/will-to-power-appearance-of-the-
conce...](https://fnietzsche.com/will-to-power-appearance-of-the-concept-in-
nietzsche-s-work)

------
quacked
This 3-part article series starting with the link below is a much funnier take
on a similar concept as Graeber's:

[https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/11/hipsters_on_food_sta...](https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/11/hipsters_on_food_stamps.html)

------
maerF0x0
Should add "2013"

------
donatj
An anthropology professor ruthlessly labeling other people’s jobs pointless.

Glass houses, my friend.

> I'm not sure I've ever met a corporate lawyer who didn't think their job was
> bullshit.

I personally know several who love their jobs.

~~~
sokoloff
It seems quite possible to love having a BS job.

