3 ms·

> The topic of bullshit jobs has been overhyped. I think that's true and it's a shame Graeber's choice of language basically offends. Who wants to hear that th

> The topic of bullshit jobs has been overhyped. I think that's true and it's a shame Graeber's choice of language basically offends. Who wants to hear that their job is "bullshit"? And let's face it, sometimes we feel good name-calling all those people whose work we don't understand. Unfortunately that over-hyping subtracts from real and serious questions about why we're burning resources (human and material) doing perfomative acts. Even the things you mention, like mobility and development regulation can be "perfomative", as "acting out" of things we think we ought to be seen to do but no longer have the courage to examine. This is down to the cult of "the system" as a Big Other, which must be appeased - something I'm not sure Graeber articulated well. But it was a key step in the unravelling of the Soviet system, and I think we are repeating it now in the West.

thaumasiotes 4y ago
> it's a shame Graeber's choice of language basically offends. Who wants to hear that their job is "bullshit"? A very large number of people who already believe that about their job.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Indeed, the core of the book is built on interviews with people who self-report that their jobs are bullshit. Graeber goes on to cover some systemically-bullshit jobs (largely escalating zero-sum games like advertising or the military—"we had to spend more because the other guy spent more, so the status quo is preserved") but all the stuff about ordinary jobs at ordinary companies that are bullshit come from surveys and interviews. All I can figure is people who bristle at the term or at the notion that there might indeed be a whole lot of bullshit jobs haven't had a very broad set of work experience, and run in a social circle that's very similar to them. It seems impossible not to notice, otherwise.
marcosdumay 4y ago
It's also a language that implies that entire jobs are it, and entire jobs are not. There probably exist jobs that are entirely bullshit or entirely not-bullshit, but if they exist, they are extremely rare.

thaumasiotes 4y ago

> it's a shame Graeber's choice of language basically offends. Who wants to hear that their job is "bullshit"? A very large number of people who already believe that about their job.

yamtaddle 4y ago
Indeed, the core of the book is built on interviews with people who self-report that their jobs are bullshit. Graeber goes on to cover some systemically-bullshit jobs (largely escalating zero-sum games like advertising or the military—"we had to spend more because the other guy spent more, so the status quo is preserved") but all the stuff about ordinary jobs at ordinary companies that are bullshit come from surveys and interviews. All I can figure is people who bristle at the term or at the notion that there might indeed be a whole lot of bullshit jobs haven't had a very broad set of work experience, and run in a social circle that's very similar to them. It seems impossible not to notice, otherwise.

marcosdumay 4y ago

It's also a language that implies that entire jobs are it, and entire jobs are not. There probably exist jobs that are entirely bullshit or entirely not-bullshit, but if they exist, they are extremely rare.