• nyahlathotep@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    You dont think laborers deserve ample time off and good pay?

    Yes, I’m an actual monster. /s.

    No! I was speculating about the anon’s situation, as are you. Maybe they have a job at a factory, risking life and limb every day. Maybe they just dislike their boring office position. Maybe they dig ditches and their back will give out before retirement. We don’t know. I did imply that they were unfairly compensated here:

    Maybe anon should be angry at their higher-ups

    And yes, I did read “My wife has a make-believe job and it’s kinda annoying” as them being annoyed specifically at their wife rather than their own work situation. This is because they were disparaging their wife’s job with “make-believe”, which seemed dismissive to me. It doesn’t seem like a stretch to go from “dismissive of their wife’s job” to “dismissive of their wife”. But I could see how you could interpret it the other way.

    • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      This may not be the case here, but I have noticed that there is a specific subset of embittered marxists (?) who believe that work is strictly either back-breaking and life-ruining, or “not real work”.

      The way it was explained to me once is that you’re either selling your body or your brain, and selling your brain pretty much automatically makes you “small bourgeois” (because you’re like the modern equivalent of a 19th century artisan) which is a social class supposedly directly opposed to the proletariat.

      I think it’s a fundamental mistake to try to fit a modern social class/role that didn’t exist in Marx’s time through a 19th century lens and that trying to make a hierarchy of working classes is wrong, but it’s an interesting perspective nonetheless that at least explains some of the discourse we see in threads like this.