301–310 of 419 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many indigenous cultures. The Iroquois native Americans might be one example. There was no notion that a minority got rich off the labor of others.
> There was no notion that a minority got rich off the labor of others. Northern Iroquois Slavery https://www.jstor.org/stable/482790
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn’t a dig against you, but isn’t this just an idealized view of a communist society?
It's communism that reduces one of the notable downsides of communism, the social loafing aspect, due to reliance on machines instead of your fellow man for productive effort(labor equivalent).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dental care. Antibiotics. Access to healthcare. Low risk surgery. Blood tests. Vision care. A zillion consumer goods and things, so many we'll be here all day to name them all. Decent toothbrushes. Electricity. Umbrellas. Flashlights. Batteries. Pens and pencils. Deodorant. Postal shipping. GPS. Near instant global news. Inexpensive razors and razor blades. Scissors. Asprin, acetaminophen, ibuprofen. Grocery stores.…
I'll argue peak humanity was 2009 before social media become mainstream.
I think it could take perhaps a few decades (~2010-2030) for a full cycle to take place of people - across multiple generations - experiencing social media across their lives over many years, to inform the next generations of social media's nature. There is still a lot yet to learn about how social media impacts us, shapes us, influences us, contorts us. That's all still being judged, regulated, pondered, debated, studied. Television and radio took decades to play out in terms of what manner they fit into society, how society would use / consume those things, what society would accept from those things, and how they would be regulated.
Um. Considering famines were common, 1/10 women died during child birth, infant mortality was absurdly high and most people stayed in the same town until they died, I prefer now. Running water is also nice .
Dental care. Antibiotics. Access to healthcare. Low risk surgery. Blood tests. Vision care. A zillion consumer goods and things, so many we'll be here all day to name them all. Decent toothbrushes. Electricity. Umbrellas. Flashlights. Batteries. Pens and pencils. Deodorant. Postal shipping. GPS. Near instant global news. Inexpensive razors and razor blades. Scissors. Asprin, acetaminophen, ibuprofen. Grocery stores.…
It's truly odd for example when women joined the work force, this massive influx of labor didn't move work hours by an inch. Likewise for all the automation that happened.
We seem to be able to dramatically improve on everything in record time except for work conditions. It's a work for work sake situation, where some 50% of our economy basically consists of keeping each other busy.
Keeping each other busy is made possible by mandatory consumption. Marketing, social status, inflation, planned obsolesce all create a strong incentive to consume.
So, that's the system. Work, regardless of purpose. Consume, regardless of purpose. Just do lots of both. Keeping velocity at proper levels requires constant stimulation, which tells us its unnatural.
Isn't it odd that our species sees consuming lots of resources as a good thing? Isn't it odd that we glorify labor even if that labor does nothing to advance mankind? Isn't it cruel how some 80% of people hate their work, yet we force them into a humiliating 50 year rate race anyway, consuming their life energy?
Is it all worth it? Are we sure we can't do better?
This feels off. Farming today is a seven day, every day work week. There is no day off with livestock, no matter what century, and what season. If the sun sets, or the weather is bad outside, there are plenty of work to be done indoors. I would presume it was even harder without all the automation and technology in the Middle Ages. Maybe they did not labour for the employer all the time, but all the 'free time' was s…
I'm sure the plots they were farming were much smaller and there were more hands per plot. Also, I believe most families wouldn't have been able to afford more than a couple of smaller animals, and if they were lucky/slightly better off a cow/goat.
Plus, if you look at the lowest figure in the article is mentions 1440 hours annually which works out to a bit under 30 hours a week, so not hugely less time.
On the flip side everything had to be build by hand from scratch so domestic labor probably accounted for at least an equal amount of time.
I'd guess that between work and home the average was probably 60 hours a week. Not too far off nowadays, just distributed differently.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not sure why you think you can compare to a rural place. One, the number of children then was far higher, and there was no school. Two, I don't think you understand that incomes were so low back then that they could not afford even basic machinery. The furniture that most people had was a few chairs, tables, and things to eat with. Even basic household machinery (for example, a mangle) that was common in pre-20t…
> Two, I don't think you understand that incomes were so low back then that they could not afford even basic machinery. The furniture that most people had was a few chairs, tables, and things to eat with. Even basic household machinery (for example, a mangle) that was common in pre-20th century rural society, didn't exist (these machines also weren't produced in large volume) I don't need to "understand". I come from…
Keith Wrightson is the basic textbook used on this subject (Omrod has written one about an earlier period). Pls, even for HN...this is wild, wild, wild levels of delusion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While true, without advancements in modern healthcare, many of the disabilities people go through life with today would result in a much earlier death. Cystic fibrosis for example is to this day incredulously expensive to treat but with a much greater life expectancy than during the heyday of the Iroquois.
I believe we can to some extent have both: a culture that supports all people and also produces high end medical equipment. The point of mentioning other cultures is to point out that human nature allows it.
Take programming: we could all easily cut down our work hours by just maintaining current systems, which do a huge amount already. There are artificial forces that make us continue to trade one-time innovations for the same living standards as yesterday. Why not automate food production etc, and share the minimal maintenance required?
I think the reason societies that stand still in this way haven't stuck around is ultimately that nations compete with each other, and will come and take everything once they advance further.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have missed the point totally. The "cohesive narrative" stands alone. History exists only on its own terms. You cannot look at something that happened in history and say: we can do this because it happened then. It is not absurd, it is the basic aspect of how histography is taught in university (and btw, if you study politics...you will find the same idea, "path dependence"...you see parallels in every social sci…
The past leads directly into the present, so how could that possibly be? When do you think it’s cut off? Does yesterday not suggest anything about today?
It is irrelevant whether yesterday is like today because history is not about yesterday. Again, if you are interested about this subject, I would read some books about historiography (EH Carr and Elton are two of the most important books of this last hundred years...but, again, I don't think you will find anyone arguing for the position you are taking because it so clearly is an attempt to justify a political position today...this isn't what history is, any political position today has to be justified in the terms of today...historical relativists do not take your line, no-one does, it makes no sense unless you have no idea what history is).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not entirely true. Visit some east asian countries and you'll see the physical work is literally what keeps the elderly so physically fit and in good shape for very long.
I know you don’t mean China, life expectancies in the villages where they have that kind of hard life is way lower than the cities. That hunched over Ayi still farming when she looks like she is 80 seems amazing, but then you’ll find out she is only 55. Actually, I don’t think this is true for any of the East Asian countries I’ve visited, it seems to be a romanticized myth of the west.