Why do capitalists hate full employment? Because it weakens their power over workers.
Anarchy and modern convenience
A major part of anarchy and socialism is the concept of anti-work. An obsession with work is a colonial, patriarchal, and capitalist construct. As such, the anti-work movement—a focus on working less overall and sharing labor more equally—is an important part of decolonization, feminism, and anti-capitalism. A common criticism of this is that reducing the amount everyone works to something like 20 hours a week instead of 40+ means we would have to give up a lot of conveniences.
What if jobs are not the solution but the problem? | Aeon Essays
Economists believe in full employment. Americans think that work builds character. But what if jobs aren’t working anymore?
What if jobs are not the solution but the problem? | Aeon Essays
Economists believe in full employment. Americans think that work builds character. But what if jobs aren’t working anymore?
Anti-work
An obsession with work is a colonial, patriarchal, and capitalist construct. As such, the anti-work movement is an important part of decolonization, feminism, and anti-capitalism. Work is a tool of oppression By anti-work, I don’t mean that no one ever works. That’s preposterous of course. There are things that need to get done, and people need to do them. But this obsession with hard work as a virtue, as a good and righteous thing to do, the glorification of toil and sweat and labor… that’s a tool the wealthy who don’t work for a living use to oppress those who do.
Will capitalism end capitalism? | Steve Loftus | The Critic Magazine
Imagine waking up one morning to discover your job still exists, but your services are no longer required. The work is being done, just not by you, not by anybody. Somewhere, a machine is doing it…
Le nouveau capitalisme (1/3)
Traduction de "New capitalism in America. Richest capitalists and richest workers are increasingly the same people" de Branko Milanovic
Distinguishing Labor from Work - Aaron Ross Powell
We should get rid of the former, if we can, but we should absolutely keep the latter.
CMV: The labor theory of value is flawed
72 votes, 407 comments. This might be an obscure topic, however, in some—largely Marxist circles— the approach seems to motivate much of the dialogue…
When Does Worker Ownership Work? ESOPs, Law Firms, Codetermination, and Economic Democracy
Preface | The World After Capital
Since publishing the previous version of The World After Capital, I have met with people across the political spectrum to discuss the ideas from the book. When I present these in person, I emphasize that the ideas are neither left nor right but forward (credit to Scott Santens who first used this phrase about Universal Basic Income). My writing, however, at times has alienated readers who identify as being more on the right. In this new edition, I am therefore making an extra effort to emphasize how both my diagnosis of where we are at and my suggestions for how to move forward do not map onto the existing political divides. Instead this is a new way of understanding our challenges and opportunities that can be the basis for movements and parties that are not trapped in Industrial Age ideology.
The Future Is Worker-Owned
It’s time for businesses to work for people, not the other way around
New Capitalism II: Compositional vs income inequality
Are all class-based societies unequal?
Denizen
What are some of the fundamental flaws of capitalism? How might we instantiate a market-based economy that is growth agnostic?
Le nouveau capitalisme (2/3) : inégalités compositionnelles versus inégalités de revenu
Traduction de "New capitalism II: Compositional vs income inequality. Are all class-based societies unequal?" de Branko Milanovic
Distinguishing Labor from Work · Aaron Ross Powell
We should get rid of the former, if we can, but we should absolutely keep the latter.
if there's one conclusion that the study of both labor history and imperialism converge on, it is that the richest people in the world are happy to burn money on control, power, impunity. and the "everything is about profit" version of anti-capitalism does not survive serious contact with either
Leonard Pierce
Adding to this thread: it’s a common mistake (I’ve made it myself, many times) to think of the motivations of the capitalist elites as essentially mercantilist: that is, that they are largely still motivated *entirely* by profit and loss, selling product, etc. This has not been true for a while.
