Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

marxists.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 222 posts

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#11

Post by laurentoget »

matkoniecz wrote: post #5
spacKingChamath wrote: post #3

Some additional info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Be_Lazy Definitely an interesting way to look at the world.

> According to Lafargue, wage labour is tantamount to slavery It does seem to be quite useless way to look at the world. It seems that they are unaware of what slavery actually means or deliberately mislead. Or Wikipedia is inaccurate.

considering lafargue was born in 1842 in cuba on a coffee plantation and was of mixed race he probably had a pretty good idea of what slavery was.

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#12

Post by _jal »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #7
matkoniecz wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> According to Lafargue, wage labour is tantamount to slavery It does seem to be quite useless way to look at the world. It seems that they are unaware of what slavery actually means or deliberately mislead. Or Wikipedia is inaccurate.

It's meant in the sense of "coerced into working." Eg if you don't have a viable alternative to working, did you choose work freely? Everyone using this comparison from that time period knows it's an extreme metaphor and is using it at least partially for the shock value of the comparison, to jar people into seeing the everyday pressures in a different way. They aren't comparing the conditions of slavery to the condi…

Adding to this, there are employers who do what they can to ramp up the coercive aspect. This happens mainly in low-wage jobs where there is lots of usually low-quality labor. The usual dynamic is to seek out job hunters with family or other commitments to employ, and then constantly threaten them with all the people who apply. Make them feel trapped and precarious by threatening their ability to feed kids, and that can go a long way.

Obviously, the legal system no longer supports outright slavery outside of prison, and the tactics and conditions are consequently less severe than historic chattel slavery in the US.

But the opposite conclusion - that all labor is voluntary - has to use a specific sense of the word 'voluntary', more similar to the IRS definition than the picking-from-a-menu sense.

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#14

Post by klipt »

tstrimple wrote: post #8
mjfl wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ironically privileged position, considering how much he calls out the bourgeoisie.

> Automation, which had already come a long way in Lafargue's time, could easily reduce working hours to three or four hours a day. This would leave a large part of the day for the things we really want to do, such as to spend time with friends, relax, enjoy life, and be lazy. Lafargue argues the machine is the saviour of humanity but only if the working time it frees up becomes leisure time. The time that is freed u…

> If the needs of a society can be met with 3-4 hours of work a day

That's a very subjective question. Suppose we could have maintained a 19th century standard of living for everyone with reduced work, but without the scientific and technological advancements that we got by using that time to do even more work. Would you prefer a society where everyone works 15 hr weeks but the internet was never invented?

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#15

Post by mgrthrow »

matkoniecz wrote: post #5
spacKingChamath wrote: post #3

Some additional info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Be_Lazy Definitely an interesting way to look at the world.

> According to Lafargue, wage labour is tantamount to slavery It does seem to be quite useless way to look at the world. It seems that they are unaware of what slavery actually means or deliberately mislead. Or Wikipedia is inaccurate.

Slavery means lots of things. Chattel slavery, yes, but also forced labor like in us prisons. Indentured labor, child soldiers, forced marriage, etc etc.

The concept of "wage slavery" is basically, "you are not free to not earn a wage because you will starve". It's also easy to draw parallels between the commodification of ones labor and slavery.

It's a term that is not new, is widely used, and debated plenty. The incorrect response is to say, "that's a useless way to think". Show some intellectual curiosity - why do people believe that, what values do they hold, what are their reasons, which arguments do I disagree with, etc.

I'm a socialist, I don't think capitalists have a "useless way to think about the world", I have fundamental critiques of specific policies and different values on certain social behaviors.

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#16

Post by kazinator »

mgrthrow wrote: post #15
matkoniecz wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> According to Lafargue, wage labour is tantamount to slavery It does seem to be quite useless way to look at the world. It seems that they are unaware of what slavery actually means or deliberately mislead. Or Wikipedia is inaccurate.

Slavery means lots of things. Chattel slavery, yes, but also forced labor like in us prisons. Indentured labor, child soldiers, forced marriage, etc etc. The concept of "wage slavery" is basically, "you are not free to not earn a wage because you will starve". It's also easy to draw parallels between the commodification of ones labor and slavery. It's a term that is not new, is widely used, and debated plenty. The in…

Struggle slavery; you're not free not to struggle on the face of the Earth, otherwise you will not survive. Man, how dare the universe spring forth creatures, yet foist that on them.

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#17

Post by FooBarBizBazz »

You're in debt if your liabilities exceed your assets.

Your liabilities include rent, food, and clothing.

In the assets column, include various sources of income or capital gains, like dividend stocks.

In a HCOL place like the United States, the columns balance around $1 million, which is effectively "zero". That's the point where you start being able to afford a frugal lifestyle in that built/social environment, without work. And that's not without sacrifices.

So in that sense, most people are debt-slaves for most of their lives.

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#18

Post by RobotToaster »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #9
mjfl wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ironically privileged position, considering how much he calls out the bourgeoisie.

It is consistent with the meaning of bourgeoisie then, which transposed to modern systems means more like "the owner class" than the contemporary social connotation of well-compensated professionals. Owners benefit from more/harder work, both their own and that of others, and so it (reasonably) becomes a class value for them. A non-owner worker doesn't benefit in the same way, but many still value work in the same wa…

>It is consistent with the meaning of bourgeoisie then, which transposed to modern systems means more like "the owner class" than the contemporary social connotation of well-compensated professionals.

That's still the definition used in Marxist circles today.

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#19

Post by giraffe_lady »

klipt wrote: post #14
tstrimple wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Automation, which had already come a long way in Lafargue's time, could easily reduce working hours to three or four hours a day. This would leave a large part of the day for the things we really want to do, such as to spend time with friends, relax, enjoy life, and be lazy. Lafargue argues the machine is the saviour of humanity but only if the working time it frees up becomes leisure time. The time that is freed u…

> If the needs of a society can be met with 3-4 hours of work a day That's a very subjective question. Suppose we could have maintained a 19th century standard of living for everyone with reduced work, but without the scientific and technological advancements that we got by using that time to do even more work. Would you prefer a society where everyone works 15 hr weeks but the internet was never invented?

> Would you prefer a society where everyone works 15 hr weeks but the internet was never invented?

How is that even a question have you seen the internet recently. Slamming YES so hard the button breaks.

Re: The Right to Be Lazy (1883)

#20

Post by mjfl »

tstrimple wrote: post #8
mjfl wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ironically privileged position, considering how much he calls out the bourgeoisie.

> Automation, which had already come a long way in Lafargue's time, could easily reduce working hours to three or four hours a day. This would leave a large part of the day for the things we really want to do, such as to spend time with friends, relax, enjoy life, and be lazy. Lafargue argues the machine is the saviour of humanity but only if the working time it frees up becomes leisure time. The time that is freed u…

he asserts that it can be met with 3-4 hours of work per day, he doesn't prove it or demonstrate it.
Post reply on HN