This critique all seems completely non-sequitur to me. Graeber emphasized strongly and explicitly that he saw his Bullshit Jobs framework as a first rough atte

This critique all seems completely non-sequitur to me. Graeber emphasized strongly and explicitly that he saw his Bullshit Jobs framework as a first rough attempt that he hoped would inspire further investigation. He chose examples specifically to avoid ambiguity in order to make the concepts clear, and he says this in the book directly. He never made claims about the extent of how widespread bullshit-jobs are except to say that there's enough evidence of the phenomenon to assert that it is real and to study and consider further. I mean, zero of your quotes have any relevance to your assertion that his thesis was dubious. What do you think his thesis was??