4 ms·
A Marxist wouldn't have written a book called Bullshit Jobs, since the implication "workers don't do anything useful" isn't very Marxist.
by astrange 4y ago
A Marxist wouldn't have written a book called Bullshit Jobs, since the implication "workers don't do anything useful" isn't very Marxist.
- AlbertCory 4y agoCatchy title.
- dopidopHN 4y agoOk, so, he wrote another book with a bad name hence this other one is bad too. Nice logic. I had no idea that scott wrote « bullshit job » haha. But since he’s also the chair of agrarian studies at Yale since the 90´s… I will trust him of history of agriculture. Even he might chalenge the holy Washington consensus on economics.
- astrange 4y ago> Ok, so, he wrote another book with a bad name hence this other one is bad too. Nice logic. Did I say that…? I think generally people have useful jobs (to someone) but that doesn't stop them from complaining about it.
- dopidopHN 4y agoYeah but that chain of comments was originally talking about James C. Scott "against the grain". A historian specialized in early agricultural history and thus relevant here in that comment section about early human history. I even got confused and thought that Scott wrote "bullshit job", but it's Graeber. In regards to jobs: I think it's perfectly conceivable that one job is useful to a few, but generally pointless for society.