cross-posted from: https://lazysoci.al/post/14891969
ANTI-CAPITALIST AFFIRMATIONS
- i am allowed to spend my time creating things, even if they are not beautiful.
- there is no such thing as a “real Job”. all forms of work are real and vlid.
- there is nothing that i need to accomplish to be worthy. i am already worthy.
- doing nothing ls good for my soul.
- i am not deflined by what I produce.
- my worth cannot be measured by my paycheck, my job title, or a list of professional or academic achievements.
- i də not need to monetize my hobbles, It is enough to spend time doing something i love.
- | will not let society decide what success looks like. I can define what successful life looks like for me.
You must log in or register to comment.
- I am allowed to spend my time creating things, even if they are not
beautifulprofitable.
- I am allowed to spend my time creating things, even if they are not
This is sort of shocking to my system seeing this written down in this format. I didn’t realize that I still held some of these beliefs.
I hate that this feels so “you shouldn’t live/act conventionally” instead of “you don’t need to live/act conventionally”. Like, I don’t sell things I make because I want the money, I sell things I make because I love things I make being out and about in the world. It helps give me a reason to make them, because I struggle to make things for myself. Doing nothing absolutely kills me, and that’s ok. Making things is one of the only things I truly like about myself, of course I’m going to heavily identify with that.
Feel that. Girlfriend made candles as a hobby. I took them to work. Coworkers tried to buy them. Skip ahead a year later and she’s got an inventory of nearly 200 candles and a bunch of scents and doing shows and making money. Still in the red overall, but seeing people’s eyes light up when they smell them is better than any profit.
Yep. And you know what? If you weren’t selling them and just doing it for fun you’d still be in red. So it’s not something to worry about.
Hm, maybe that is your own insecurity with the subject speaking? Because the affirmations clearly state that “you don’t need to” and not that you shouldn’t. Obviously it is fine to capitalize on your passion. But often when you are really interested in any topic or good at something, you get told by all sorts of people that you should make money out of it. So there is a certain societal pressure based on capitalism to do so. And these affirmations just state that you don’t need to. But it is with stay at home moms maybe. You sure can stay at home and do the household and care for the kids etc. But you definitely don’t need to and it is important to get the message out that these expectations are highly problematic. Same goes for the expectation to capitalize on your interests.
I mean clearly this is through the lens of my own experiences and feelings, that’s why I said “I don’t like that this feels like” instead of “I don’t like that this is”.
I understand “hustle culture” and the things that this is addressing, I just don’t like the… absolute? feel of it. And that’s fine, I’m not out here demanding all the memes on the internet be made specifically to my tastes. I just felt the desire to put my thoughts out there, and didn’t restrain it for once.
Oh sure, you are totally right about that. I didn’t mean for you to feel attacked or anything. I was trying to discuss if the meme actually did play into some lefty norms of its own. Since you already took up this position I just tried arguing from the opposite position. There are definitely a lot of norms in lefty culture as well, what you describe as “absolute” I guess. And imo it is crucial to keep reflecting upon this and be vary of those norms.
doing nothing is good for my soul
yessssssss
Alternative to the second point: all jobs are make-believe
There are many jobs which aren’t valid. It’s just usually not because of the worker, but the world doesn’t need active harm causing: cold calling, marketing, etc. Graeber’s Bullshit Jobs
I love this
All forms of work a valid? Even CEOs? What about landlords?
Being a landlord isn’t work, that’s being a parasite.
You put it more succinctly than I could haha.
I would go further and say that anything that people point to as a positive thing that an individual landlord might do like (like, ohh but they go around to this old widow’s house to check on her and fix things around the house) are good work, but have nothing to do with extracting rents. You could do that and just let people live on their patches unmolested.
PS Damn it I did it again. I just went on and on … I’m going to my partner’s family reunion tonight and I’m really nervous about it. Apparently they’re kind of bullies, I’m going to get eaten alive lol
You’re going to be fine. I believe in you. Remember that your partner loves you and so their family will love you too. Just be yourself and everything will fall into place.
Thanks again for this. And it actually was fine. Everyone was perfectly lovely and made me feel included.
Yay, I’m glad.
Thanks, that actually did give me a much needed boost. I hope you have a great weekend!
Question: my landlord ethically renovated and rented out a historical building. There are a lot of nuances with the upkeep that none of the tenants would necessarily be qualified to handle on their own. The landlord has educated themselves on the historical and legal needs of the building, sourced period accurate replacement parts for repairs, renovated and continually upkeeps an antique elevator, organizes cleanings and inspections for our antique windows, and a whole lot more. At times that tenants have experienced financial hardship (pandemic), they have even adjusted rent to match financial ability.
How is that not a job?
No doubt that some (maybe even most) landlords out there exploit their position to get money for nothing, but there are also those out there who are doing the job properly as a caretaker for the property.
The parts that are work are the job, but extracting rents for owning something is not work. I realise it’s not a clean break, but the idea is landlords usually get a lot more value than they put in.
Whereas most of us work jobs that take more value from our labour than they’d ever actually pay us for.
In my opinion, the work and the liability are both part of the job. If something goes terribly wrong in this place, I am not on the hook for it. I can call them at any time to report a problem, and they are now going to be the ones to have to fix it—not me.
That is a benefit I get from renting that I wouldn’t have if I owned the place. Even cooperatives, which I have lived in several times before and that eliminate the existence of a traditional landlord, are not without the need to collect additional funds to offset the liability of major repairs in the future.
It seems like the primary difference with a landlord is that a salary gets calculated into that, and people often perceive that salary as too high.
Compensation regulation seems more reasonable than cursing all landlords, in my opinion. I think there is a realistic use for people who want to be a steward of homes for other people who aren’t ready for the responsibility of ownership.
I disagree that all landlords are parasites. It used to be boarders were extremely common. It can be a go between jobs or locations or whatever, that was its original intent. Having one or two properties is fine, it’s the mega corporations buying up entire cities and then pretending to be small owners renting them as air bnb’s and such that are the problem. Slum landlords, across the board, are shit as well.
Not contributing to society yet using what others have worked for. What would you call that?
Leadership is valid when you’re elevated there by the consensus of your peers. That person might have the title of CEO or President. In a lefty organization that’s still in a society with currency, they wouldn’t have 10,000x the pay of the median worker. They might not even have 10x the pay.
I got caught up on that one too. I think it could be argued that CEO is a job, and landlord is a title. Neither of those necessarily implies work.
But there might be some things that these people do which could be considered work.
So like if you were to hypothetically divorce these from money, you could say that, I dunno: reading tech articles and going to conferences and talking about how your co-workers are implementing the tech, is work; or fixing up a house, or keeping tabs on a block of houses and making sure they’re actually maintained, is work.
Maybe it is a stretch… I do think there are “bullshit jobs” which would not exist (certainly not in the current form) without capitalism. Like there would be no demand for them outside of accruing capital for people who don’t need it
There are different types of CEO’s. I played that role for a startup once, and it was one of the more difficult jobs I’ve ever done. The responsibility takes its toll.
I’m sure there are fat cats at the top of established businesses that do nothing, but I’m not convinced that it is typical of even 50% of people who do that job.
Step 0 : don’t be poor, or you will starve to death on the street.
| will
i də notIs this a bot with bad OCR? What’s with all of the weird characters?
just looks like image upscaling to me, presumably the original text was like 5 pixels per letter.
note how most corners are smoothened out into curves, that’s typical of algorithms that try to be smart about upscaling.
I think they were referring to the text (transcription) of the post, not the image. And yes it looks like OCR.
All valid points, however the ‘real job’ one has a caveat in my book. Someone may perfectly well be happy making pretty things for their own enjoyment, but it won’t by default pay the bills. Basic services such as food, housing, and medical could well be supplied by society, but nobody should expect that entitles them to luxury and extravagances by extension.
nobody should expect that entitles them to luxury and extravagances by extension.
They’re not? I don’t know where you got that from. It has nothing to do with the point you claim to be addressing.
There is a segment that would argue the doctor and the florist should have equal accomodations in society, despite the massive disparity in training and skill required. I don’t ascribe to that logic is what I’m pointing to.
Then are you really anti-capitalists? We’re talking basic human rights, and yes that does mean money and time to have hobbies. Are you just saying that they shouldn’t be paid the same? I think that’s the difference between an anti-capitalist and a socialist.
I would argue against the functional enslavement of anyone, whether the basic laborer forced to work multiple jobs just to survive, or in taking from the accomplished skilled professional who used their time and dedication to become exceptionally skilled by not compensating them for their efforts.
Nobody should have to struggle excessively to live, but they should have the ability to excell if they choose. So you can make what you will of that for a title.
What is excelling to you? They get paid more, okay, but where do we draw the line? How much compensation is too much? And who gets to determine which jobs qualify for high compensation? Some of the worst, hardest jobs I’ve ever worked were unskilled labor, my body ached after, and the pay was awful. I now have a job that requires a BA, and I don’t go home aching every day, and they pay is much better, but only because I had the money and time to devote to getting an education. I guarantee most of the people I worked with in those unskilled labor jobs do not, and they will work until their bodies break with not a retirement savings in sight.
Let me ask you this: if you had a PhD and all the money you need to live happily, would you be angry if someone who doesn’t have a PhD was making the same amount as you?
Are you not paying for my PHD, the time and efforts put in to obtain it, and then demanding I use those skills obtained for your benefit at what price you decide appropriate? If so you are just taking of my efforts without concern for me and my well being. It’s just coerced labor of the intellectual and skilled then as much as it is to demand heavy labor without due compense. Without the expert’s guidance the laborer has nothing to labor for and so those distinctions need to be recognized. There is some reasonable cap and it falls well short of the billionaire sitting on a horde of wealth, but to demand of the accomplished while giving freely to the idle punishes innovation, ambition, and leadership.
Why do you care if you have enough money to be happy? Why look at someone else and decide you deserve more than them?
Disagree with point 4. Feel like I probably disagree with a couple more, but they are too vague to tell.
Doing nothing at all is one of the biggest sources of misery in my life. If I can fill the nothing moments with something either productive or enjoyable, then I tend to be a lot happier. True nothing (doom scrolling, pointless grinding, getting stoned enough to be in a state of twilight wakefulness, barely registering the hours go by) is one of the most damaging habits you can form, in my opinion.
Both extremes are damaging: doing too much or doing too little. From my point of view looking to achieve a flow state in daily life activities is the best way to go.
I disagree with the “doing nothing is good for the soul” one only for UBI experiments bearing out that even in a vacuum of satisfied needs people will still tend to make project work for themselves just to have something to do to not be bored.
Being able to relax at one’s own discretion and necessity is healthy, but having something to say you do for yourself is evidently somewhere in that hierarchy of needs.
It is definitely healthy to be able to take time and actually do nothing though. Like having a cup of tea in the morning, and just sitting and waking up slowly. That’s good for the soul
Yeah but that’s not “doing nothing” as much as just relaxing
To me “doing nothing” means sedentary subsistence living
I think “doing nothing [productive]” is probably what they were going for.
I believe the spirit of “doing nothing is good for the soul” in the context of the whole, is pointed more at the dissolution of the thought that you ought to be doing something productive.
I would credit you the question, can one ever “do nothing?” Sitting on a park bench is something. Listening to birds in the morning is something. Breathing is something. These things are good for the soul, they are not “productive” in a capitalistic sense and I think that is the point of the list.
Well at that point we’re stepping into the realm of the “read theory” international english dictionary.
Like you said, none of those activities are what reasonable people would consider “doing nothing”, so why should we give credence to the capitalist notion of such by quoting it?
At the same time my earlier point still stands, there are very few people in this world that are actually capable of feeling personally satisfied living in a fashion where they have nothing to fill their days with.
We can recognize the balm to the spirit a calming walk, or a day relaxing under the sun, or even just a day staying bed can be to the spirit without adopting a rhetoric that makes it seem that those are permanent states to aspire to.
I have this theory that much of the world’s conflict comes from miscommunication or misinterpreting original intent and this is a great example. Who’s right? idk! But both sides are adamant they are.
I mean I agree that what your saying does not sound like a satisfying life at all, but also I really did not interpret the op to mean this
Why are these considered anti-capitalist?
A lot of people feel guilty for being lazy instead of productive. The post is making the (in my opinion, fair) claim that in a society where we weren’t forced to work ourselves to the bone that we wouldn’t have these internalized guilts about pursuing things purely for enjoyment without monetary gain. That we might not feel the urge to work even when we could be enjoying a day off. That these things are the result of capitalist propaganda.
a list of professional or academic achievements.
i disagree with that. doing academic work for the good of the society should be considered highly valuable.
The point is it’s not a requirement to be worth smth
