3 ms·
Related though not necessarily helpful section from Brave New World (1956): > of course we could give them shorter hours. Technically, it would be perfectly s
by hitekker 11y ago
Related though not necessarily helpful section from Brave New World (1956):
> of course we could give them shorter hours. Technically, it would be
perfectly simple to reduce all lower-caste working hours to three or
four a day. But would they be any the happier for that? No, they
wouldn't. The experiment was tried, more than a century and a half
ago. The whole of Ireland was put on to the four-hour day. What was
the result? Unrest and a large increase in the consumption of soma;
that was all. Those three and a half hours of extra leisure were so far
from being a source of happiness, that people felt constrained to take
a holiday from them. The Inventions Office is stuffed with plans for
labour-saving processes. Thousands of them." Mustapha Mond made a
lavish gesture. "And why don't we put them into execution? For the
sake of the labourers; it would be sheer cruelty to afflict them with ex-
cessive leisure. It's the same with agriculture. We could synthesize
every morsel of food, if we wanted to. But we don't. We prefer to keep
a third of the population on the land. For their own sakes-because it
takes longer to get food out of the land than out of a factory. Besides,
we have our stability to think of. We don't want to change. Every
change is a menace to stability. That's another reason why we're so
chary of applying new inventions. Every discovery in pure science is
potentially subversive; even science must sometimes be treated as a
possible enemy. Yes, even science."
- boxy310 11y agoI don't like it, but it's definitely relevant. In a broad sense, the shift towards a services-based economy is a type of "make-work" in the shadow of heavy automation in first agriculture then manufacturing. This is very much Parkinson's Law writ large: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law