Comment by smugglerFlynn
4 years ago
I disagree with the definition of “real” here. If we fully automate the production, would that suddenly make all the work “abstract”? Or would developers working on automation be the only ones doing “real” work?
If yes, then modern jobs of US-based policy makers who write organizational scripts are also “real”, because they basically define exact same thing, only for people-based systems overseas instead of fully automated systems.
The reason I put "real" in scare quotes was to appeal to the colloquial meaning of "real job", which is basically to be close to the production of actual materials and goods.
If everything were automated then labour would no longer be necessary at all. If we were still working at that time it would not only be abstract, but completely pointless.
“Everything is automated” world would still require maintenance, but all the maintenance jobs would be “bullshit” by Graeber’s definition, as they help to maintain some technological system. Which means any kind of technologically developed society will have these “bullshit” jobs, even anarchist one.
OK so getting down into the nitty gritty, we have to distinguish between the types of work that are not directly productive - there's jobs that are indirectly productive, and thus contribute to the productive process (like machine maintainence), and there's jobs that do not. The latter are the "bullshit jobs" - they just exist to protect and maintain power structures, they're not contributing to production in any meaningful sense.