They were artists and musicians, so not quite laborers, but to be a part of that antiwork movement, one has to believe in a paternalistic company providing jobs

They were artists and musicians, so not quite laborers, but to be a part of that antiwork movement, one has to believe in a paternalistic company providing jobs as a reward for compliant behavior, where you've already inferiorized yourself, and that underlying belief creates a failed expectation, which creates the resentment we end up moralizing into an oppressed identity. Religious or spiritually oriented people don't have this issue as much, as their primary relationship and identity is to something greater than their circumstances, and this gives them faith in alternatives, which means leverage in that bargaining relationship with the world. They're not just tugging on a leash and calling it freedom, as for them faith itself means there is no leash. There's an underlying belief in the punk and antiwork mentality that unless someone has suffered like they have, we can't understand their truth, but this ignores that nobody would choose to suffer like they did unless they had first given up their identity as having been created by someone invested in their happiness (e.g. being actually loved). It produces some great music and culture, but it's based on a solvable problem. The whole punk ethos is predicated on an appeal for dignity by people who first believe they don't have it because it was taken from them somehow. Someone made them rage, probably with shame or humiliation. The political beliefs that flow from it are a full psychosexual orientation. I'm not saying they're wrong, but I am saying it is a distinct experience that can't always be shared, and that's what makes reconciling it with opposition almost impossible. Didn't expect to go there, but it's all pretty Freudian.