3 ms·
I think you're thinking with the framework of contemporary corporations and 'employment' structures. I think many of us need to look outside of that box. I've
by Kinnard 9y ago
I think you're thinking with the framework of contemporary corporations and 'employment' structures. I think many of us need to look outside of that box.
I've found there are organizations that are actually working toward higher aspirations, I don't think this is always or even often a bait-and-switch tactic which is what your 'kool-aid' comment implies.
Where's the implication that 'work' is only one thing? My work is almost certainly TOO varied.
- creepydata 9y agoIn other words, you have hobbies.
- itamarst 9y agoIf you can start an organization with a fundamentally different power structure (and maybe cooperatives could fit the bill) that seems maybe possible. If you're working for a normal company, you're just deluding yourself. I quite like the people I work for... but it's still in part an economic relationship, they have investors, and we might run out of money. So there are circumstances where I will need to find a new job. So my current job better not be my religion however much I like its goals or my coworkers. Just because the organization works towards something meaningful doesn't mean it should consume your life. You still become distorted as a human if you don't have time just for playing, and friends, and family. It's called workaholism, and it's not a good thing.
- itamarst 9y agoOh, and you'd need a fundamentally different economic system where people don't need to work to get basics like shelter or food or social status. All for that, but until we get there you're describing a goal which only the independently wealthy can afford to think about.
- Kinnard 9y ago> until we get there you're describing a goal which only the independently wealthy can afford to think about. That sounds true.