Fuck this dipshit. First, what the fuck is a disloyal weapon?
Anyhow, dum-dum only wants to read arguments as long as they exist within the context of "free market good." God, forbid Graeber (rightfully) points out capitalism is and has been rife with inefficiencies, undesirable (yet predictable) outcomes, and frankly a lot of bullshit.
The mental hoops fuckheads like this have to jump through in order to come away from reading Bullshit Jobs and conclude the book is wrong vice taking a hard look at capitalism and thinking, "hm, maybe this system isn't working so hot" - it's just beyond me.
Oh god, remember that study that got presented by news media as "debunking" Bullshit Jobs? They did it after he died so he couldn't fucking clown on them the same way he clowned on people criticziing Debt without actually having read Debt (for whatever reason there's some really dogshit reviews of Debt and watching Graber just cut loose and be a poster is a fucking delight, scroll down to the comments he's fucking gettin' in there). Just completely ignoring his definition of a bullshit job (not the fault of the study itself, as it predates Graeber's essays) and just assuming that "I believe my job provides value to the company" means anything at all like "I believe my job is socially necessary and useful." But they say shit like "oh but his book's still useful because it's important that workers feel valued" and try to recuperate it as some mindfulness and HR bullshit, as though the fundamental issue is that companies aren't communicating that they appreciate their employees enough.
“Disloyal weapon” implies that while Graeber’s rhetoric is effective, it’s ultimately what hurts his argument. Reads to me like “you don’t know what you’re really asking for”
I mean, I kind of thought that or along the same lines of reasoning - but really, that's a stretch. It's closer to word salad than some logical conjunction of two words. It's not effective, regardless.
Doesn't matter. The dude's a complete fuckhead one way or the other.
Fuck this dipshit. First, what the fuck is a disloyal weapon?
Anyhow, dum-dum only wants to read arguments as long as they exist within the context of "free market good." God, forbid Graeber (rightfully) points out capitalism is and has been rife with inefficiencies, undesirable (yet predictable) outcomes, and frankly a lot of bullshit.
The mental hoops fuckheads like this have to jump through in order to come away from reading Bullshit Jobs and conclude the book is wrong vice taking a hard look at capitalism and thinking, "hm, maybe this system isn't working so hot" - it's just beyond me.
Oh god, remember that study that got presented by news media as "debunking" Bullshit Jobs? They did it after he died so he couldn't fucking clown on them the same way he clowned on people criticziing Debt without actually having read Debt (for whatever reason there's some really dogshit reviews of Debt and watching Graber just cut loose and be a poster is a fucking delight, scroll down to the comments he's fucking gettin' in there). Just completely ignoring his definition of a bullshit job (not the fault of the study itself, as it predates Graeber's essays) and just assuming that "I believe my job provides value to the company" means anything at all like "I believe my job is socially necessary and useful." But they say shit like "oh but his book's still useful because it's important that workers feel valued" and try to recuperate it as some mindfulness and HR bullshit, as though the fundamental issue is that companies aren't communicating that they appreciate their employees enough.
“Disloyal weapon” implies that while Graeber’s rhetoric is effective, it’s ultimately what hurts his argument. Reads to me like “you don’t know what you’re really asking for”
I mean, I kind of thought that or along the same lines of reasoning - but really, that's a stretch. It's closer to word salad than some logical conjunction of two words. It's not effective, regardless.
Doesn't matter. The dude's a complete fuckhead one way or the other.