4 ms·
You must not have read the book because Graeber was pretty clear that he wasn’t making suggestions of what ought to be, he was simply diagnosing the issue and p
by ryuhhnn 3y ago
You must not have read the book because Graeber was pretty clear that he wasn’t making suggestions of what ought to be, he was simply diagnosing the issue and providing a framework to think of something better.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y agoYou're right. It's on my list. My familiarity with Graeber comes from Debt. But is a diagnosis not a declaration of: "there should be less of this in the world"?
- ryuhhnn 3y ago> make the evolution of improved systems possible by dismantling what's in the way. I think you already answered that question for me. I’ll also add that I don’t think this book was meant to be a contribution to management theory at all, I think the broader point is that we as a society have valued jobs more than we value humanity, so we now have hundreds of thousands of people performing meaningless work just for the sake of having a job. This isn’t an issue of management, it’s an issue of values.