/r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification • Hacker News Board

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#281

Post by xtracto » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:03 PM UTC

jdkjs wrote: post #85

zqfm wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to love the 4chan-style contrarian attitude until, in high school people I knew were killed in Iraq. Then I started to realize that those kinds of nihilist attitudes have real-world consequences. Since then, that attitude has become mainstream (or perhaps just my awareness of it) and following has been a constant trail of death and misery. I can't not take it seriously anymore when my friends and loved ones ar…

As far as I can tell, 4chan is vehemently against the current neoliberal wars. They laughed their asses off at the US abandoning Afghanistan and are questioning why the NATO has to be in Ukraine at all. Perhaps I misunderstood your tone.

I am not familiar at all with 4chan and its functioning, but if I remember correctly there is no "they" in 4chan, similar to the "Anonymous" group... everyone can go into 4chan, sometimes a radical leftist will go there, next day a radical rightist will post. Is there actually a "cultural leaning" in that site?

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#282

Post by zeepzeep » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:03 PM UTC

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #211

gavinray wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Universal basic income I'm going to sound like I'm being snarky here, and I promise I'm not. How exactly is this supposed to work? The government prints money and gives it away for free, nobody has to work? I don't say this from a place of privilege. I grew up lower class trailer trash and have been homeless. Maybe I don't understand the concept fully but it seems a bit absurd and unfeasible

You cut most of our bureaucratic social safety net (food stamps, disability, social security, etc) and replace it with a system where everyone gets enough for the bare basics. If you were smart, you'd fund it with a carbon tax. In all honesty I don't see UBI becoming a thing until we start automating ourselves into unemployment. People say this would increase inflation. Maybe. Let's trial it with 1% of the population…

> until we start automating ourselves into unemployment

Still waiting for steam engines to replace human labour...

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#283

Post by prepend » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #205

gavinray wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Universal basic income I'm going to sound like I'm being snarky here, and I promise I'm not. How exactly is this supposed to work? The government prints money and gives it away for free, nobody has to work? I don't say this from a place of privilege. I grew up lower class trailer trash and have been homeless. Maybe I don't understand the concept fully but it seems a bit absurd and unfeasible

> How exactly is this supposed to work? The government prints money and gives it away for free, nobody has to work? I'm not a committed supporter of UBI, so my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt (or more) but I assume the whole point is to promote wealth redistribution. Not print money. So you give everyone some amount, say 12K/year, and then support it with taxes. It sounds infeasible with the current budg…

> Not print money. So you give everyone some amount, say 12K/year, and then support it with taxes.

I’m trying to say this with utmost respect. But $12k x 330M is $4T/year.

In 2021, the US collected about $4T [0]. The US spent about $7T [1]. So it would take lots of iterations to figure this out.

I think there are some efficiencies so you can reduce some of this budget but introducing a UBI like this would up the spent to $10T and require an extra $6T in taxes every year.

It just seems so non-sensible. As the only way to reach this level would be to inflate money so it bought nothing much.

Proposing this seems less likely than just researching Star Trek replicators to reduce the need to buy food or something.

Or free housing for everyone is more feasible since that seems more achievable than increasing tax revenue by 150%.

Even if you seize every penny of US billionaires assets that’s only $4.2T [2]. At least that covers the first year but then those assets are gone.

[0] https://datalab.usaspending.gov/americas-finance-guide/reven...

[1] https://apnews.com/article/business-economy-government-spend...

[2] https://americansfortaxfairness.org/billionaires/

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#284

Post by codechad » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

zqfm wrote: post #135

jdkjs wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell, 4chan is vehemently against the current neoliberal wars. They laughed their asses off at the US abandoning Afghanistan and are questioning why the NATO has to be in Ukraine at all. Perhaps I misunderstood your tone.

That definitely wasn't the impression I got back when I frequented it but I'm glad if they're more antiwar now.

No post body was provided.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#285

Post by adamrezich » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #137

scotty79 wrote: post #34

I think this setup illustrated ridiculousness of both sides. You confront authentic (troubled) person doing what she wants with another human so meticulously styled, plucked, tanned and dressed at corporate expense, walking at extremely shot leash with every one of his words tightly controlled, with all the scripted emotions. He looks as if he was a voice box made of plastic. With this contrast you see how bad the wo…

You usually watch news as if it was normal. You look at news anchors as if they were people, not corporate half-robots. Only such contrast gives you a chance to see them for what they are. I haven't been able to watch the news in about 20 years. Pro wrestlers are more sincere than most news anchors

imagine a world where we could tune in to neutrally-moderated longform debate on policy instead of points-scoring five-minute sandwiched-by-advertising talking heads talking through a scripted (at least by the host, if not both parties) sequence of talking points and slogans. instead this is the world we get, the world we're told to accept, the world where people like my dad can watch a night's worth of "news" from each of the major cable networks and think that that's an actually balanced, nuanced information diet. the whole thing cannot implode soon enough.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#286

Post by shadowgovt » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

sol_invictus wrote: post #178

JSavageOne wrote: post #156

I remember stumbling upon /r/antiwork a few years ago and being so happy I'd stumbled upon a thriving movement that so effectively criticized one of the core principles of society that everyone takes for granted - that everyone must effectively sell their labor to someone else (unless they're rich enough to opt out, or clever enough to create some business or invest their way out). To me anti-work is the recognition…

So what exactly is the alternative for selling your labour to someone else - and more importantly, one that is scalable to the general populace?

Most anarchist philosophy starts from the idea that "general populace" is a bad idea to begin with. People should be living in small, hyper-independent communities. They sidestep the scalability question by asserting that a community of a few hundred (or even a few thousand) is already unnatural.

(Not a philosophy I agree with, but one that I observe as pretty cornerstone).

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#287

Post by wsb_mod2 » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

Dracophoenix wrote: post #278

wsb_mod2 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think most moderators don't know this option exists. It's located on a page that you only visit once to set up the subreddit, or to make large subreddit changes. (On old reddit, not sure about new reddit) To Reddit's credit, they have been adding new features over the years to help separate communities and ensure they are somewhat able to maintain their culture. E.g. Crowd Control which limits the posting / c…

>E.g. Crowd Control which limits the posting / commenting abilities of individual users based on their history or other heuristics. Aren't you of the opinion this could be misused?

How so? It's a black box algorithm owned by Reddit Admins. Moderators only have the ability to set the threshold, with very vague terms (low, moderate, high, or something similar)

If admins wanted to disappear a viewpoint, it would be a lot easier to just autosuspend the accounts, or shadowban without a trace.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#288

Post by a4isms » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

Two words: Eternal. And September.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

Every social space either withers, or grows until there is a preponderance of new people whose values no longer reflect the founders and old hands. Then there is a power struggle, and if the old hands don't regain or enforce the original cultural values, they typically depart and start all over again somewhere else.

This is the dynamic behind "tech" social media sites. HN was begat of Reddit, which was begat of Digg, which was begat of Slashdot, which was begat of Compuserve... Or is it some other order?

This story fits the same pattern. The sub grew, the new people don't share the same values as the ostensible founder, and now they are purging her because she doesn't speak for them.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#289

Post by alangibson » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

The worst thing that can happen to a community is for it to become popular. Once the spotlight hits you, the normals rush in and cooptation is inevitable. Eternal September and all that.

Does Reddit have a feature to ask to not be down in the main feed?

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#290

Post by bjourne » Mon, Feb 07, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

That's the best article I've read the whole year! I encourage you all to read it.

Regarding the topic of abolishing work, I wrote about it last time /r/antiwork came up here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30099687 What I've written is just the tip of the iceberg - hundreds of books, articles and papers have been written on the topic of humanity's relationship with work the last hundred years. After all, the phrase wage slavery from the mid 19th century and the associated idea that abolishing work is an imperative has been discussed for far longer than that. The majority has always had a hard time accepting that work freedom is possible. Probably because it is foreign similar to how someone 100 years ago would have found it completely natural that men dominated society. Don't ask me how a workfree society would work (cause you probably believe it couldn't), instead consult the literature and learn about the arguments yourself.

Regarding Doreen Ford, isn't her fate a little like Richard Stallman's? Odd and weird and now old dirt is forcing them both out of their respective communities. Does people have to be normal and non-creepy to be leaders? I think a 30-year-old dog walker working part-time is a pretty good role model for the antiwork "movement". We all work and then we all die, only some of us makes people think differently. Stallman and Ford has done just that. Also it's probably true that most online content is written by the insane ones. Like this comment!

I really like the term "sanewashing" that the author coined. But I would define it as the act of being in favor of progressive ideas but not their logical conclusion. E.g. "commitment" to < 1.5C global temperature rise but not commitment to stop using fossil fuels by 2030.