Why do we live to work rather than work to live?

I heard that back in the days, people used to just go when their work was done on the farms and there was no concept of 9-5 (these days seem 24 hours work). There used to be a lot of holidays. Is that true? If it is, then given the abundance in technology, why our work hours increased and why do we have such weird lives that we live to work?

131 points · 146 comments · view on lemmy.world

146 Comments

Vanth@reddthat.com · 110 pts · 2d (14 replies)

Capitalism

Naive@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 2d

the biggest evil

CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · -2 pts · 1d (6 replies)

A handy word that means so little it's never wrong.

Vanth@reddthat.com · 2 pts · 1d (1 reply)

Bingo. Sort of. It includes a lot, to go with the massive breadth that the question entails.

CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 5h

An interesting response, thank you.

So you feel like it's worth pointing out, even if it's that massively broad? You could have used a few more words, if you wanted.

zbyte64@awful.systems · 1 pts · 1d (1 reply)

You could say the same of history if you know nothing about it

CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 5h

That suggests the problem is people don't have any experience with capitalism, doesn't it? Whatever it means to the person using the word, it's always a system live in, or somewhat live in.

jtrek@startrek.website · 1 pts · 1d (1 reply)

The people who do work don't keep the profits of work. People who "own" stuff do.

You have a guy who "owns" a factory. He pays some dudes to make widgets, market widgets, sell widgets. They all get $10 a day. They sell $200 of widgets a day. The guy who owns the operation, who's probably just sitting at home, keeps all those profits. Capitalism.

The workers decide they want more rights. Get paid in real money. Sick time. 8 hour days. Owner says nah. Workers go on strike. Owner gets the police or the army to break the strike with violence. Arrest any leaders they survive. Historical context of capitalism.

Also the guy who owns the factory, maybe he just got it because his grand dad was friends with the king or something. Maybe they killed some natives and the state said the land is yours now.

CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 6h

Okay, so the classical Marxist definition. If we could be sure that's what's implied, there'd be more to talk about.

The problem being, there's tons of other definitions with just as much currency. Big corporations (but not small businesses), having free markets, having anyone control a factory in any way, and just the act of thinking about things as commodities are all senses that it's used in, as well.

Lots of working also applies, in some/many cases, to periods Marx would have called pre-capitalist, so the Marxist definition isn't what OP meant.

blackn1ght@feddit.uk · -4 pts · 2d (5 replies)

Are there any other systems, or point in history, where a country's population could live without working?

Vanth@reddthat.com · 14 pts · 2d (3 replies)

I don't know whether to assume this question is in good faith or not. Can you restate what you think the OP is asking? It's not about whether there was ever a time when no work was needed.

I'm not interested in wasting my time against a sealion debating capitalism.

blackn1ght@feddit.uk · 8 pts · 2d (2 replies)

I'm not coming from a defence of capitalism. I'm just pointing out that people have had to work in some capacity to live all throughout history. People would still need to work to live under any system.

valar@lemmy.ca · 18 pts · 2d

That's true, but the point is in the current system we're working a lot harder than necessary in order to benefit a few people at the top

vapordays@leminal.space · 12 pts · 2d

I’m just pointing out that people have had to work in some capacity to live all throughout history. People would still need to work to live under any system.

Nobody said otherwise.

.... the title in OP asked, "why do we live to work, rather than work to live?"

The response was "capitalism."

So: precisely under (not-capitalism)... we could "work to live," rather than "live to work."

the_q@piefed.social · 2 pts · 2d

Working in what context? There are native peoples all over the globe that work to live and not to enrich a single sociopath.

justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io · 66 pts · 2d (9 replies)

The concept of 9-5, 5 days a week is exclusively from Unions and organized labour.

As are the ideas of workers rights, any kind of safety regulation, minimum wages, paid days off(holidays and vacation).

These ideas are going away because we forgot that Unions are critical to the idea of a middle class.

Naive@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d (8 replies)

Even the one who are not identified as labors like IT guys, xyz engineers, they have a lot of pressure and the shitty corporate culture.

thethrilloftime69@feddit.online · 12 pts · 2d (2 replies)

We need to fix this definition because it is wrong. Labor is anyone who gets paid to work. As opposed to Capital who makes money off of owning stuff.

IT guys, engineers, doctors are labor unless they literally own the company.

davad@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d

unless they literally own the company

And even then, most of them are still labor. It's shocking how many companies outsource to people who 'own their own company' to avoid labor laws. For example, Uber.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d

I agree. The legal definition of a labor must be encompassing of these people too.

justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io · 8 pts · 2d (4 replies)

IT is a fairly new concept and companies have rigorously resisted the creation of either a union of IT workers or a society of one like doctors and engineers enjoy

TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 2d (3 replies)

Why would companies have a say in this? Lol

Companies never like unions, it's the workers who create them to protect ourselves

justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io · 8 pts · 2d (2 replies)

Because they intimidate people trying to organize, either subtly or with overt violence.

They will also go after fundraising to block it, they will shut down locations where it is getting traction, they will outsource until the issue is dead, they will encourage the 1-2 year employment cycle silicon valley employs to prevent the kind of bonds that lend themselves to organizing.

Edit: they will also just bribe the leaders and organizers. Everyone has a price.

GuayaKO@piefed.social · 1 pts · 1d (1 reply)

I believe that for IT it was more the result of how the technology had increasing productivity and revenue that empowered IT employees to negotiate good contracts for themselves. Because of this they saw no need to organize and considered themselves in par with the owners of the company. Now LLMs are used to undermine IT work and that is partly why tables are turning.

justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io · 1 pts · 1d

The tables were already turning.

Silicon Valley pushed a completely insane concept of free overtime for pizza and beer. They normalized the industry working 3-4 hours a day extra for free.

disregardable@lemmy.zip · 33 pts · 2d (1 reply)

Farms had a lot more work than just 9-5. Labor unions fought very hard, and many paid with their lives, to get work hours restricted to 9-5.

novibe@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d

Not true. For most of human existence we worked on average like 4h a day. More on harvest and sowing season, practically nothing during the rest of the year.

And before agriculture, we didn’t really work like that. You did stuff all day, mixed in with a lot of socializing and resting. But no one had a job and people didn’t need to spend x amount of time doing y.

So not sure what you mean by this. The idea that humans live to work is exclusively a product of the Industrial Revolution.

thejml@sh.itjust.works · 20 pts · 2d (3 replies)

Companies need to make line go up. You could increase productivity by using more tech (computers, tools, etc), but you can also do it by working longer. So the people in charge said "why not both?!" And here we are.

I feel like some of it also is "work until you're done" still. Hourly jobs pay per hour. But salary jobs typically pay you for work accomplishments, not time. Unfortunately I feel like a lot of tech improvements and processes have oversold their productivity improvements... example: AI will make you go code 10x as fast! So managers hear that (typically upper management, not middle/lower management who actually see it) and thus expect people to instantly do 10x the work. So you now have to bust your ass off working longer hours to meet that expectation. Good middle management will push back and reset expectations, but often the damage is done when they can half their work force with the assumption that they're going to be so much more productive now that this new magical tool is in place.

Naive@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d

The corporate culture is also quite insane and dehumanizing. This motivates me to be poor than to earn these fellows.

kboos1@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d

A group of about 30 middle managers pushed back on policies and processes that were killing the business, hurting employee moral and eroding customer confidence. They were told "no and that they were the problem and needed to do better". Next meeting was, hey look at this new AI chatbot that will make everything much faster, like AI is going to fix everything.

schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 2d

I feel like looking at work at merely profit maximization is missing a big part of the picture.

There's a big part of it that's social positioning within an organization. I've worked more than a few jobs that could have been part time or been eliminated entirely, thereby saving the company money, but there is social value of being a manager that employs +1 people, so those jobs stayed.

There is a massive amount of weirdness going on at companies that is entirely unrelated to the balance sheet and wouldn't be out of a place in a Byzantine Court.

merdaverse@lemmy.zip · 18 pts · 2d

Compared to pre-WW2 era, the work week and day has decreased from 12 hours/day, 6 days per week, thanks to the more militant labor movement.

In more recent decades, productivity has increased significantly, so we should be able to produce the same amount as before, with less labor: https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

But I'll let you guess who is cashing in the extra profit from your work. Tip: it's not you.

Triumph@fedia.io · 15 pts · 2d

Subsistence farming is a lot of work. Apart from that, the wealthy have always acquired their wealth by theft, usually from the less wealthy. So we've always been living to work, because the ruling class needs us to steal from.

lightnsfw@reddthat.com · 13 pts · 2d (11 replies)

Because the people who own everything aren't being slaughtered in the streets.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d (10 replies)

Are you South Asian? This extreme mentality I only found in South Asians being a South Asian myself.

whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 1d (8 replies)

eat the rich? I think it's getting fame all around the world

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d (7 replies)

Not that but the way you are eating rich. The slaughter thing is quite brutal and against human rights.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 1d (6 replies)

The daily systemic violence of capitalism and imperialism is far worse than the revolutionary means to end it.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d (5 replies)

But it will never happen cuz you know whenever a country tries to be a socialist economy, Uncle Sam buys people from that country and always make sure to not let that happen. As long as there is Uncle Sam, world can never have a socialist economy.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d (4 replies)

There are several socialist countries already. The US's time as the unipolar hegemon are quickly fading, the US cannot even win against Iran. As the global south develops economically and gains its own footing, and the US gradually decays, we see more openings for additional socialist countries. No system is ever static, no empire lasts forever.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d

for example? USSR is no more China is state capitalist Scandinavian countries are welfare states?

CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 2 pts · 1d

Lemmy people are their own very specific kind of person.

ICastFist@programming.dev · 10 pts · 2d (3 replies)

We "live to work" because our corporate overlords demand that we be productive for production's sake.

Regarding work before industrialization, it's more complicated than that. Slavery was abolished in the 19th century, so a lot of people, especially enslaved Africans, were literally worked to the death and received severe physical punishment if they didn't work properly. For free people, they didn't have to do the amount of work we do in order to afford food safety, though "worker rights" didn't exist for them, either. Abusive boss? Shut up and fuck off. Stolen pay? Too bad.

One of the biggest differences, however, is that people tended to socialize a lot more, and having friends to watch your back when things get hard is one of the best survival mechanisms. Out of food? Good thing my neighbor is willing to spare some of his while I fix some boards on his home. Maybe he's not asking for anything in return this time because he feels like this is paying back for a favor I did 3 months ago.

Interesting fact: the first indigenous tribes that the Spanish enslaved once they started colonizing Central America were completely unprepared to the European work brutality forced upon them and would often kill themselves if being captured for slave labor was inevitable. Before that, they had never needed to work so hard to sustain themselves.

Wakko@hell.cloud · 6 pts · 2d (1 reply)

Slavery was abolished in the 19th century,

Cute that you think that. Try reading the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution sometime. You'll find that the USA did not abolish slavery. We just institutionalized it into the penal system. Look up some of the jobs performed by the inmates of the Louisiana state correctional system and then tell me slavery has been abolished.

Maeve@kbin.earth · 2 pts · 2d

This guy has tons of good videos about actual chattel slavery,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AhHedVRe3IY

for instance. And there's a reason so many are being criminalized, right now, and mega-wealthy and mega-corps don't want to pay their fair share, let alone without loopholes and offshore accounts.

Naive@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d

Some people say that we are slaves too in modern day and age. And even when British came to colonize India, they came under the name of East India Company. And for old day and age, I don't know if that was a thing in west, but here we still have shrines where food and drink is distributed for free regardless of who you are (on some occasions or all day, I am not exactly sure). Charity was encouraged a lot.

AnarchistArtificer@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d (2 replies)

A lot of it is cultural. Capitalism continues to exploit people not just because of the machinations of a few people at the top, but also because there are many people who have so deeply internalised the logic of capitalism that they are reinforce and perpetuate their own oppression.

A phrase that I've found really useful in understanding this is "cultural hegemony". This theory was originally developed in the early 1900s by the Marxist philosopher, Antonio Gramsci. It's a pretty dense bit of political theory that I don't feel like I understand well enough to explain well, but I'll attempt to give the gist of it

The key thing about cultural hegemony is that it makes the dominant political ideology seem like it's natural and inevitable. We see this when people recognise the awfulness of their working or living conditions, but then shrug it off by saying "that's just life". They can't imagine any alternative. I see it a lot in my daily life when people see the crafts I make and say "wow, that's so good, you should sell those" — people are conditioned to only see value in terms of monetary value.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d

To sum up hegemony, the latent ideas of society, or "common sense," is ruling class ideology. Ideology is presented and maintained through bourgeois intellectuals, such as the education system, media, etc. Gramsci's counter is the development of a proletarian party, which creates proletarian intellectuals that can disseminate proletarian ideology, Marxism-Leninism (Gramsci was ML).

To expand, the greater idea is that we are all philosophers, whether we understand our own philosophy, or world outlook, or not. Common sense is a world outlook, and living in capitalism without consciously understanding that how we live in it shapes what we actually believe leads to upholding capitalism. This is the importance of dialectical materialism, it eliminates the bourgeois-friendly idealism and mechanical materialism that plague modern thought, and logically leads to proletarian emancipation.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d

I am South Asian and that "that's just life or fate" attitude is common where I live.

Talaraine@fedia.io · 8 pts · 2d (6 replies)

Man, I get where you're coming from, it all seems endless and stupid.

I was just thinking about this the other day in fact, but then imagined what life was like as a hunter gatherer. The search never stops for food, there is rarely an abundance, and nothing to keep that abundance from rotting away when you have it.

Every creation we've ever made is to simplify our lives and/or to protect them. Building those things increase abundance and leisure time for awhile, but then the birth rate goes up and we need to build more. Building better communication (to simplify our lives) meant that more people from farther away need stuff, so we need to increase production, so more workers are required. It's a feedback loop.

Some world events pause or reverse this loop for awhile, but it never stops. If you want these things that help around the house so you don't have to do them, that costs money, so you work.

I've seen stories of people who just move out to the woods for decades, but though they are 'independent' from the man, they're still struggling day to day and often end up stealing stuff that others bought so they can get by, or relying on common taxpayer services when things go awry.

I think it's simply a part of the universe. I learned once that life isn't the opposite of entropy, it's a small opposing force that itself decays. Something something rage against the dying of the light. Anyway, /rantoff

Naive@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d (3 replies)

Awesome insight but I think the way that I have heard people being demanding in corporates in the name of "work ethics", the recessions, the unofficial denial in hiring new people in some companies, the toxic behavior done by managers and those on upper levels to their juniors, is not the part of the universe. It is something artificially imposed to suck the marrow out of our lives. People who are supposed to be retired are still working in some places. I think the work conditions should be better. Or if they say that AI can do our jobs, then let AI do our jobs and let us chill. (Pretty naive take I think)

Talaraine@fedia.io · 2 pts · 2d (2 replies)

Oh I definitely agree that the ethics involved are problematic, no question. And I also agree with the premise that we need strong unions for our own protection against that predatory behavior!

But working for the man is, in fact, optional. You can start your own business, be a gig worker, or just be an under-the table helping hand for cash. Having done those things myself, though, has taught me they are often feast or famine arrangements.. so in the end I too am working for the man, simply because it's steady pay.

Edit to add that AI is obviously an unknown factor in this equation. It's good at its niche tasks but terrible at others, and if you want one that actually has all the capabilities of a regular worker, it's going to be expensive. Several companies are just finding out after they fucked around. I wouldn't count us out yet.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (1 reply)

what is under-the table helping hand? Where I live though, we do not have individualistic values so families and society will consider it a shame if you are not working a high paying corporate job (mostly engineers), freelancer (either trading or coding or graphic designing or video editing), government job. Business is very rare and mostly it is generational. I personally think I will take a mediocre job after I graduate and once I become free (when my parents will die and my sis will be married or I don't know if she will get financial independent), I will be a poor or maybe will try to do "that thing" with my life.

Talaraine@fedia.io · 2 pts · 2d

It's doing things like handywork around other people's houses, babysitting, errand-running, walking dogs, driving people to appointments, all paid in cash at the time of service. It's hard to make that work steady enough to live on, but it can be done!

The funny part is how romantic it seems..all the free time you'll have, right? Then when you start you realize that every other breathing moment is you trying to find more of that work to do because you need more money.

And sure, culture is a thing that is just as crushing as your boss. We all answer to someone, eventually.

Maeve@kbin.earth · 3 pts · 2d

I was corrected on that. Hunter-gatherers apparently had more leisure time.

ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 2d

There is a difference between doing what is necessary to live and performing nonsense jobs and constant microtasks. We don't have employment, we have an unnecessary and forced means of constant torture and forced compliance with ridiculous norms. I hate every job I've ever had. It's not because I'm lazy, it's because it is forced, invisible prison bullshit and I want to be free.

CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 8 pts · 1d

I heard that back in the days, people used to just go when their work was done on the farms and there was no concept of 9-5 (these days seem 24 hours work).

Yup. In the ancient world, ascetics and monks would practice "having daily schedules" alongside various other harsh forms of penitence, like self-flagellation. One of the ancient Greek authors (Plato?) spoke about it unfavourably even in that context.

The flip side of that, is that if your animals or crops need something now, they need it now. There's no maximum hours or work-life balance, either. Still, it's fair to say most people that have experienced that much prefer it, if you put aside how uncomfortable the work itself is.

Because it's kind of crazy, it's also worth mentioning that people slept twice in a day, with some time spent up during the night.

There used to be a lot of holidays. Is that true?

Kind of.

Confining ourselves to Europe, there were a lot of public holidays in ancient Rome, and to a lesser extent lots of religious days and festivals in medieval Europe. The medieval holy days were more about fasting or similar than time off of work, though. And, in Rome, there were no weekends yet, so holidays basically served the same role.

Plus, most holidays were optional in both, so a deeply poor person or a slave with a tough master might work fairly continuously.

If it is, then given the abundance in technology, why our work hours increased and why do we have such weird lives that we live to work?

When industialisation came in, 12 hour days were fairly standard. Arguably, working hours have gone down.

As to why we work on schedules now, you basically just have to in a complex, highly specialised society. If you're using tools you made and maybe a couple your friend the blacksmith made, and using them to produce food and housing from "your own" land, sure, it just all has to get done sometime. If you're having a formal meeting or vote and show up 2 days late, like is recorded becoming a problem in medieval republics, it's a bit disruptive.

Iconoclast@feddit.uk · 8 pts · 2d (10 replies)

Being self employed helps. My workday doesn't end at set time - it ends when I'm done. Sometimes that's 10am, sometimes 7pm. Then if I feel like I've worked too much and could use a vacation I just don't schedule any work for the rest of the week/next few weeks.

Now don't get me wrong, I do work a lot but it doesn't feel like work really because I have total control of everything I do and I'm doing exactly what I want to be doing. What also helps is that I manipulate the physical world - not bits on a computer. When I'm done I can see what I've built and on top of all that I get genuine gratitude for it. Lots of it actually - people are awesome.

a4ng3l@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d (7 replies)

Aren’t you slave to your customers instead of your boss though ? Can you really afford to just close the door and go sunny side of your want to?

Iconoclast@feddit.uk · 4 pts · 2d (3 replies)

I do small- to medium-sized renovations jobs. Ofcourse I can't just leave while a project is still ongoing but next time the phone rings, there's nothing stopping me from saying the next available time is a month from now. Also, I have over a hundred individual customers, so I can afford losing some. If working for one starts feeling like being a slave, I can just not take future jobs from them.

a4ng3l@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (2 replies)

That sounds like a nice situation. Broad market, customers by the bucket. That’s quite nice! I admire your line of work. I could never to it following my personal attempts to renovate my own home. You must have acquired a whole lotta skills to get where you are .

Iconoclast@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 2d (1 reply)

I'm mostly self-taught. These things aren't that hard if you just know what you're doing, and internet is full of instructions. Looking at my own home, nobody would believe I do this for living as it's where my every first attempt at something is located and much of it is what I'd now consider sub-standard quality.

a4ng3l@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d

Well yeah but that’s the thing; knowing what you should be doing riiiiiigh before the concrete dries on you last mistake xD

And getting « the hand » for everything. Like applying plaster; from my first wall to my last it tell quite the story. And that’s if there’s no shit luck like « ho what’s this sus beam embedded in the wall doing and how do si deal with it no that I have a very large opening to do for this news door frame ».

No really fuck all that anxiety. Even with the all Internet cheering ;-)

Griffus@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 2d (2 replies)

Yes, in a way, but on the other hand, time invested benefits them, not their boss. They own their means of production.

a4ng3l@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (1 reply)

Yeah true that. Well possibly at least. They do own their skills at least. The rest is possibly rentals :-/

Iconoclast@feddit.uk · 3 pts · 2d

The rest is possibly rentals :-/

Nope. Even the truck's paid off.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d (1 reply)

Interesting as most of self employed I met online are coders or virtual assistants.

Iconoclast@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 1d

As a trades person I'm definitely in the small minority here.

HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club · 7 pts · 2d (5 replies)

Yeah, but the trade off was that you were bound to the land and social hierarchy was much more rigidly enforced. Your pay was mostly in food and accommodations unless you were in a trade, nobility, or the clergy.

Why do people work more? Because in an industrial setting, the methods of compensation and employer responsibilities are vastly different. Employers are incentivized to treat labor as any other good and will try to lower that cost where possible. In contrast, if you're a form of bondage, your employer is more likely to treat you like capital.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (4 replies)

what is the bondage example?

HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club · 3 pts · 2d

Various forms of serfdom.

Maeve@kbin.earth · 2 pts · 2d (2 replies)

Slavery, wage slavery, tying private, ever-less-and-worse healthcare to private middlemen like employers, insurance companies, PBMs, petrolroducts, SaaS, no ownership, overpriced, shoddy housing, car culture, both overpriced, both dependent on private middlemen insurance companies, extractive exploitation of global South and Asia, that's also brutal, endless war, abolishing slavery in name but not in practice, 🐂 💩 jobs, inability to wfh when practical, degrading and privatising education, AI to take over creativity and fun rather than back-breaking labor and mind-numbing paper-shuffling,...

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d (1 reply)

what is wfh?

Maeve@kbin.earth · 1 pts · 1d

👄🥄

Vespair@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 2d (6 replies)

Because our entire world and every system in it was designed not for us, but for the sole benefit of like 100-1000 people.

We work so that they can live.

The question is what do we do about it?

Cowbee@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 2d

There are existing socialist countries, don't discount the efforts of the global working classes. We can learn from their examples.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (4 replies)

What about East Berlin before the wall broke down?

Vespair@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 2d (3 replies)

I guess I'm not historically or politically savvy enough or something to understand what you're saying with this comment. Can you simplify in layman's terms for me?

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (2 replies)

So after the Hitler regime got ended, there became two parts of Berlin. West Berlin was controlled by capitalists (I forgot the countries name, I guess it was England, France, and US) and East part was under USSR. There was a wall between these two parts. In West Berlin, the capitalism was practiced and in the East part, socialism.

Vespair@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 2d (1 reply)

That much I know, I guess I just don't understand the relevance in terms of my comment or this discussion. Did East Berlin's economy policy succeed and become the defacto western status quo? If not, isn't this a non-sequitur to the conversation about the ills of capitalism and the loss of true freedom and agency. Unless I guess the point was "we've tried making other systems but they get torn down?"

I promise I'm not trying to be difficult or argumentative or a reddit pedant, I'm just confused about the relevancy and throughline here.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d

It was pretty much the point that you guessed.

kboos1@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d

Because we have always worked to live, living isn't easy or cheap, but there's also no reason to make it any harder than it has to be, well except to keep those with more in power. The farm was literally 24hrs of work. When you went home, which was still on the farm, was because you couldn't see anymore because the sun went down or because you were too tired to keep going. Summer break from school was created so that kids and teachers could work the farms during summer.

No matter what your boss says, you are only required to work the hours that you're contractually obligated to work. Your boss and peers might not like you very much and maybe resent you for it, but that's your call to make. When you start a job you are signing a contract, it can be as simple as a single sentence or a full on novel. You and they are only required to fulfill the minimum requirements of the contract.

There's more time off today and 8hr work days because of unions and farm life sucks, it's straightforward and simple but it still sucks. Before unions there were no paid holidays, only the rich got time off.

Seems like someone is feeding you propaganda and glorifying the bad old days. It's not great now but it beats what it was 100 years ago, which is not that far away.

nitrolife@hikki.team · 6 pts · 1d (6 replies)

own only what is available to a farmer from the past (a piece of land and a couple of barns), desire only what is available to a farmer from the past (a hearty dinner and strong tobacco, not a new iPhone), and then you can live like a farmer from the past today.

whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 1d (4 replies)

can you tho? land/barn/... are not free

nitrolife@hikki.team · 0 pts · 1d (2 replies)

I still don't understand what the cons are. Maybe there are some arguments? In my country, a hectare of fertile black soil costs $1,000. Is this an unbearable amount? I'm sure the world is full of such countries.

And yes, buildings can be built independently. If you buy absolutely everything, then you are not a farmer, but a farm owner. The same capitalsit that half of the comments are against. =)

whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 1d (1 reply)

In France it's not legal to build anything on agricultural land, and the lands you can build on are much more expensive, and you'll need permits and to pay taxes. So I really don't see how one could really isolated himself like you said

Einskjaldi@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d

You can usually build agricultural buildings just not houses.

nitrolife@hikki.team · -4 pts · 1d

Why is that? there are places in the world where a land costs almost nothing, and you can build a barn yourself. Like... a farmer from the past. =)

By the way, there are really a lot of holidays, but do you know what a harvest is? When the wheat ripens, you can't tell it, "Wait, wait, my shift is over." You collect it around the clock. And if we're talking about the present past, then you assemble it with your hands, without automation.

UPD: And then, after standing with a sickle for 9 hours, you get to the house (which you also built yourself), take care of the livestock, have a hearty dinner, smoke a pipe to ease the pain in your whole body, lie down on the bed and instantly fall asleep from fatigue. Then you sleep without dreams, wake up and return to the field. My grandfather led this way of life until his death. I'm sure you wouldn't like it very much. But in general, as already mentioned, he really did not use the money, except in rare cases. Usually.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d

I am kinda like this except that I care about my skincare and Internet. So without my sunscreen and laptop with Internet connection, I am not happy. If I have access to these things plus fruits(or any other cheap vegan alternate), water, and a room to shit and sleep, I want nothing else.

7uWqKj@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d (2 replies)

Because we’re Germans, not Italians

Naive@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d (1 reply)

I am neither. I am from Asia.

7uWqKj@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2d

OMG, Asians = Germans on steroids.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 2d

Because production is increasingly socialized while appropriation is increasingly private. This is the law of capitalist expansion.

Archimedes@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 2d (2 replies)

Back then all you had was the clothes on your back an half a sack of grain at the store. There's more free time if you don't produce anything.

moondoggie@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (1 reply)

And an onion tied to your belt, which was the fashion at the time

Archimedes@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 1d

I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was. Now what I'm with ain't it and what it is scares me.

It will happen to you too.

Quexotic@infosec.pub · 4 pts · 1d (1 reply)

I don't know about you, but for me, work is the side-quest.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d

I did not get any work yet but yeah, my main quest is knowledge to prove myself wrong

AskewLord@piefed.social · 4 pts · 2d

No, its not true.

The question you are asking ins a personality thing. Most folks work to live.

It's just the ones who are really loud are the workaholics.

dewey_mcbrewster@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d

I would suspect entropy. Second Law of Thermodynamics states that total disorder is always increasing over time.

remon@ani.social · 4 pts · 2d (2 replies)

Not quite sure what you're taking about. The number of vacation days has been increasing over the last few decades while work hours have gone down. At least in most developed countries. Hell, even having the weekend off has only been around for a hundred years or so. I sure as shit wouldn't want to go back to work on some medieval farm ...

Naive@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d

I am not in a developed country. It is a luxury that I think you have.

valar@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 2d

That medieval peasants worked around 150 days a year is still largely accepted as a valid estimate by academic economic historians

tomi000@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d
  1. Because living is more expensive now than before. In medieval times, you had a 30m² wooden house on your farm that you probably built yourself, no heater, no car, no brand clothes, no washing machine, no electricity at all, no water pipes, etc.

  2. Because when you work on a farm for yourself, you keep 100% of your work. When you work for a company, it keeps most of your work for itself and gives you some compensation in return that depends on a combination of "how much do you need for living" and "how easily could you find another job".

the_q@piefed.social · 3 pts · 2d (5 replies)

Because we allow things to be this way.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (4 replies)

Do we have any solution for this?

the_q@piefed.social · 2 pts · 2d (3 replies)

Yes, but the solutions aren't easy.

Naive@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2d (2 replies)

And I don't expect humans to follow those solutions. Humans want miserableness in their life.

the_q@piefed.social · 3 pts · 2d (1 reply)

I think they don't want miserableness and that's the problem. We've become slaves to our comforts and the idea of losing them even if a better outcome is possible is too big an ask for people who suck at long view thinking.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d

But still they complain. No matter what happens, they will never be happy. Humans have always chased happiness and rarely anyone had ever found happiness.

_haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 2d (1 reply)

Because people stopped standing up for themselves.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d

Well, they are amusing themselves to death.

the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d

After I hit 40 hours I'm gone. I acknowledge there is a certain amount of privlege required to do that. It took me 20 years to get to that point but Im proud of it and I wanted to brag.

HubertManne@piefed.social · 2 pts · 2d

I work to live and everyone I know does. No one controls their work gig outside of finding it.

daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 2d (2 replies)

I work 8 to 15. All the afternoon for me, with about 30 vacation days a year. Once I ticket out I can completely forgot about work. You need stronger unions.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (1 reply)

EU members?

daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 2d

Yes. But not everyone here gets those hourtimes. It needs to be a place with very strong unions. If not you are still doing 9 to 17

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 2d

Those are true, it's the shift to capitalism. Before excess wealth could be gained through colonization. Once that was done it became about squeezing out as much as you can from your workers. However the good businessman would have squeezed everything they could out of their workers while colonizing. (Like the US in the Middle East since WW2 or more recently Venezuela)

piyuv@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (1 reply)

It’s not like that everywhere in the world, but certainly heading in that direction

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d

Where I live, the corporate culture is very weird. Many people here took inspiration from Americans and we have corporate system kinda similar to US.

zxqwas@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (3 replies)

The more productive we have become the greater the opportunity cost of not working has become.

People generally tend to choose to work the same hours to afford more stuff.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (2 replies)

I personally don't like the productivity idea. We are not machines. We make ourselves great by our imperfections.

zxqwas@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (1 reply)

That is not what productivity means. It means we make more stuff per hour worked, usually by letting machines do the repetitive or heavy work for us.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d

but why does it feel that people are more working than in past and the exhaustion and tiredness that I feel in people who do corporate jobs? I am not doing job yet but I may have to do it after I get graduated, so this thing is very concerning for me.

Nemo@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 2d (1 reply)

speak for yourself

Naive@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d

I am just a student, mate. I have asked about what I feel I observed.

fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 1d

We? Sucks to be you but that doesn't apply everywhere.

IWW4@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 2d (1 reply)

Money.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d

I think it is money worship

Crackhappy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 22h

I'm so glad I work at a place where there are no late night calls, no overtime, and no time tracking. It's all about the results you bring to the table while you're working.

FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (1 reply)

What other choice is there?

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d

Let all our work given to AI and we be sitting like rulers on it. When bored, make some music or skit and put it online or just watch AI cartoons. (A pretty naive take which I think many of the "tech-bros" have)

Ozzy@piefeed.com · 1 pts · 2d

Sir David Attenborough has some answers

Danika7@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2d (9 replies)

Many societies need a massive overhaul. I have no doubt that the younger generations will create new ways of living that will systematically transform the '9 to 5' drudgery. AI will merely be an asset in all communities, not a director of times to come.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (7 replies)

I don't have hope for younger generation even though I am Gen Z myself. They are addicted to entertainment and the way they are bombarded with data have did something to them. I was also watching Times magazine where they were saying that the massive CO2 emissions can be the reason why humans appear so sad and demotivated now.

Danika7@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (6 replies)

I have full confidence in your generation! Things are quite difficult in some ways right now, but I sense that in a few more years, your generation will make some very beneficial changes to the ways societies are set up. Many changes for the much better are coming ✅

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (5 replies)

Very few people I met who do not mock our generation. Otherwise everyone older than us seems to look down on our generation.

Danika7@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d (3 replies)

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Honestly, there's so much chatbot crap floating around, it's hard for some people to know the truth. In the depth of your heart, I'm sure that you can sense that what you've said isn't true. Gen Z is dearly loved, and deeply appreciated, that's the truth.

Naive@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (2 replies)

I have faced these types of comments from my teachers in university who will say to us that your generation is lazy, not respecting, AI dependent, and often confuse us with Gen Alpha.

Danika7@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d (1 reply)

Not all teachers are cool. When you want to know the truth, take the time to sense it within yourself. Despite all of the negativity in this world, your generation is full of light, and will continually add their light in many beautiful ways to the future that we'll all share.

Naive@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d

thanks mate.

Talaraine@fedia.io · 1 pts · 2d

The weak-minded often punch things that they don't understand. There's nothing wrong with Gen-Z that life experience won't eventually fix...

Just like it was with every single human of every single generation in history.

Maeve@kbin.earth · 1 pts · 2d

That's what our grandparents thought, too.