:same-picture: "quiet quitting" is just wildcat slowdowns. if that, maybe something as simple as minimum-wage-minimum-effort. why does 'the discourse' need a fucking neologism for a millennia old tradition of the working class?
getting a big mallet labelled 'there's nothing new under the sun' and beating columnists to death with it
Is it even that much? Or is it simply the consequence of an aging, burned out populace with fewer and fewer people contributing to the material benefit of society? Is it that nobody wants to work, or are we underpaying service/retail/manufacturing/shipping such that the preponderance of people have moved over to the FIRE sector to facilitate speculation?
It would be nice if we had some subliminal labor action going on. But I think a lot of this really is just The Invisible Hand ushering everyone over to where the money's actually at. I know more than a few people who quit otherwise-lucrative STEM careers to becoming real estate agents and they're rolling in it now. I know a few people who made their nut when their companies went public and retired in their 30s, thanks to the magic of the financial sector. By comparison, the folks who went the trade school route still aren't outpacing inflation, despite demand for plumbers and electricians and class A truckers being at an all-time high.
why does ‘the discourse’ need a fucking neologism for a millennia old tradition of the working class?
Because its easier to blame The Help for an economic downturn than to acknowledge that there's no fucking money in Helping and everyone knows it.
“Wildcat slowdowns” would be an organized action by a collective of workers. This is just bourgeois idealism and getting the workers to quit voluntarily and create a reserve army of labor because unemployment was too low (or to act in such a way they can easily be fired). Quitting without any organized mass action is the opposite of a working class action, it’s voluntarily assisting the bourgeois class interests instead of your own and replacing working class mass organizing with individual purity seeking.
Just doing less work at your job is fine, but don’t pretend it’s revolutionary activity unless it’s organized and coordinated as a tactic. If you get fired for “time theft”, they don’t have to pay you severance or unemployment. If you quit, they don’t have to pay you severance or unemployment.
This is why union organizers always tell those unionizers to keep working and do a good job at their work while they are organizing, because the corporation is looking for any excuse to fire you and you need to be unimpeachable.
So instead of being lazy and then getting fired, which is an ideal situation for bourgeoise that want to cool down the labor market without having to do lay-offs - instead do your job competently and organize your coworkers to fight for better wages
its just my impression of what it is by its use in a few articles i skimmed. the columnist class makes it out like its some kid of 'movement', but a) it probably isn't and b) they're not encouraging it, they're condemning it.
well, and worse than that they're inserting it into every possible subject to fan engagement & 'discourse'. starting to get quite :stop-posting-amogus: even though i only bothered to investigate the term today lol
It isn’t a real “movement” but they are trying to make it one, a fad anyway.
They are “condemning it” like they “condemned” anti-work, because the columnist class knows they are reviled by working class people and they know that some can be tricked with reverse psychology if they create a narrative that “oh no don’t get fired on purpose, the bourgeois would really hate that if you did that”. It’s currently just an intriguing peculiarity to columnists right now because it isn’t a legitimately threatening mass labor movement.
Once a legitimately threatening mass labor movement happens you will see what it really looks like when the media hates something, and it won’t be trying to will it into existence - it will be ignoring it, slandering it & spinning it into an evil Russian/Chinese fifth column
this is a very minor disagreement i shouldn't have used 'wildcat' so you didn't get the impression i thought quiet quitting was a form of activism. i was trying to inflect the less organized nature of wildcat than unadjectived slowdown, which also implies a level of organization . maybe 'disorganized' or 'individual' would've been better. point was that we have existing labor vocabulary for things being trotted out as new, pathologized and propagandized
Eh, I think it’s an active effort to muddy the water for what the population considers labor activism, in an attempt to pre-empt labor activism they know might be coming and steer it down a harmless route. I don’t think this type of individualist “activism” should be encouraged at all, and any workers participating in this type of strategy should change tactics to the tried and true proven methods of militant labor organization.
I know, and that’s based and good. That’s militant labor organization right there, and what I am saying is the actual path forward.
I’m criticizing anyone who thinks “anti-work” or “quiet quitting” movements have any value whatsoever. These are oppositional to militant organizing. You can’t organize and strike if you just quit alone.
Communists are not opposed to “work”. We instead support the interests of workers, which includes continued employment.
Oh of course. I sorta have some nostalgia for the /r/antiwork subreddit because when I saw it like in 2016 because it was more ideologically leftist and a super niche subreddit which sorta helped me in my radicalization but back when that mod went and did that interview I remember going to the subreddit once again to find people upset that their "movement" had been destroyed when it was a place a bunch of people went to complain about their shitty work conditions and other people would try to get them to buy into crypto to "stop working."
I wanted to become a nurse because I wanted to put good into the world, in reality I"m just lining the pockets of the executive suites while they exploit my desire to try to help people and overwork me. In a just society I would have a safe patient load and be able to provide the highest quality care possible because it's not about profits but instead about just improving health and helping people.
been reading this term and going :jesse-wtf:
:same-picture: "quiet quitting" is just wildcat slowdowns. if that, maybe something as simple as minimum-wage-minimum-effort. why does 'the discourse' need a fucking neologism for a millennia old tradition of the working class?
getting a big mallet labelled 'there's nothing new under the sun' and beating columnists to death with it
100%, and I'm flexible on bothering to label the mallet
deleted by creator
Is it even that much? Or is it simply the consequence of an aging, burned out populace with fewer and fewer people contributing to the material benefit of society? Is it that nobody wants to work, or are we underpaying service/retail/manufacturing/shipping such that the preponderance of people have moved over to the FIRE sector to facilitate speculation?
It would be nice if we had some subliminal labor action going on. But I think a lot of this really is just The Invisible Hand ushering everyone over to where the money's actually at. I know more than a few people who quit otherwise-lucrative STEM careers to becoming real estate agents and they're rolling in it now. I know a few people who made their nut when their companies went public and retired in their 30s, thanks to the magic of the financial sector. By comparison, the folks who went the trade school route still aren't outpacing inflation, despite demand for plumbers and electricians and class A truckers being at an all-time high.
Because its easier to blame The Help for an economic downturn than to acknowledge that there's no fucking money in Helping and everyone knows it.
“Wildcat slowdowns” would be an organized action by a collective of workers. This is just bourgeois idealism and getting the workers to quit voluntarily and create a reserve army of labor because unemployment was too low (or to act in such a way they can easily be fired). Quitting without any organized mass action is the opposite of a working class action, it’s voluntarily assisting the bourgeois class interests instead of your own and replacing working class mass organizing with individual purity seeking.
Just doing less work at your job is fine, but don’t pretend it’s revolutionary activity unless it’s organized and coordinated as a tactic. If you get fired for “time theft”, they don’t have to pay you severance or unemployment. If you quit, they don’t have to pay you severance or unemployment.
This is why union organizers always tell those unionizers to keep working and do a good job at their work while they are organizing, because the corporation is looking for any excuse to fire you and you need to be unimpeachable.
So instead of being lazy and then getting fired, which is an ideal situation for bourgeoise that want to cool down the labor market without having to do lay-offs - instead do your job competently and organize your coworkers to fight for better wages
its just my impression of what it is by its use in a few articles i skimmed. the columnist class makes it out like its some kid of 'movement', but a) it probably isn't and b) they're not encouraging it, they're condemning it.
well, and worse than that they're inserting it into every possible subject to fan engagement & 'discourse'. starting to get quite :stop-posting-amogus: even though i only bothered to investigate the term today lol
It isn’t a real “movement” but they are trying to make it one, a fad anyway.
They are “condemning it” like they “condemned” anti-work, because the columnist class knows they are reviled by working class people and they know that some can be tricked with reverse psychology if they create a narrative that “oh no don’t get fired on purpose, the bourgeois would really hate that if you did that”. It’s currently just an intriguing peculiarity to columnists right now because it isn’t a legitimately threatening mass labor movement.
Once a legitimately threatening mass labor movement happens you will see what it really looks like when the media hates something, and it won’t be trying to will it into existence - it will be ignoring it, slandering it & spinning it into an evil Russian/Chinese fifth column
this is a very minor disagreement i shouldn't have used 'wildcat' so you didn't get the impression i thought quiet quitting was a form of activism. i was trying to inflect the less organized nature of wildcat than unadjectived slowdown, which also implies a level of organization . maybe 'disorganized' or 'individual' would've been better. point was that we have existing labor vocabulary for things being trotted out as new, pathologized and propagandized
Eh, I think it’s an active effort to muddy the water for what the population considers labor activism, in an attempt to pre-empt labor activism they know might be coming and steer it down a harmless route. I don’t think this type of individualist “activism” should be encouraged at all, and any workers participating in this type of strategy should change tactics to the tried and true proven methods of militant labor organization.
"Such a lot of devils, that's what the papers say. They go on strike for shorter hours, and a raise in pay. They left the camps, the lazy tramps, they all walked out as one. They say they'll win the strike or put the bosses on the bum."
Looking back to around 50 years ago and you can see an example in some labor folk music about how the papers will sell anything as bad.
Individualist “anti-work” attitudes and disorganized quitting actually is bad. It’s idealist and leads nowhere.
...It's a song about 50000 lumberjacks going on strike?
I know, and that’s based and good. That’s militant labor organization right there, and what I am saying is the actual path forward.
I’m criticizing anyone who thinks “anti-work” or “quiet quitting” movements have any value whatsoever. These are oppositional to militant organizing. You can’t organize and strike if you just quit alone.
Communists are not opposed to “work”. We instead support the interests of workers, which includes continued employment.
Oh of course. I sorta have some nostalgia for the /r/antiwork subreddit because when I saw it like in 2016 because it was more ideologically leftist and a super niche subreddit which sorta helped me in my radicalization but back when that mod went and did that interview I remember going to the subreddit once again to find people upset that their "movement" had been destroyed when it was a place a bunch of people went to complain about their shitty work conditions and other people would try to get them to buy into crypto to "stop working."
I wanted to become a nurse because I wanted to put good into the world, in reality I"m just lining the pockets of the executive suites while they exploit my desire to try to help people and overwork me. In a just society I would have a safe patient load and be able to provide the highest quality care possible because it's not about profits but instead about just improving health and helping people.
Because gig companies are actually needing to support themselves of labor surplus of their workers now.