featured essay from:
<a href="http://www.whywork.org/">CLAWS</a>
-- Creating Livable Alternatives to Wage Slavery


       "Someday, there will be no workers, only artists."


Bob Black: Abolitionist and Archestrator of the Slack Revolution
by Steve Mizrach, aka seeker 1

       After all these years, and after reading Bob Black's The Abolition of Work, I 
have
       finally realized just what was wrong with Marxism. Oh, the Marxists talked a 
good
       game - working in the morning, fishing in the afternoon, lounging around to 
watch
       the sunset; 20-hour workweeks; month-long vacations; etc. But when you get
       down to it, they are still drawing from the same poisoned well that has parched
       Western civilization for the last 500 years: the Protestant Ethic, which freed 
Europe
       from Catholic voodoo only to feed its heads with doodoo, such as "work is the
       outward sign of moral perfection." While Luther was telling people that what
       counted was faith and the Holy Spirit, not work and deeds, Calvin helped spread
       silly ideas, like the one that people had to be at constant physical labor or 
idleness
       would tempt them to sin. Deep down, this is the root of the Puritan Ethic: why
       even today the neo-Puritans hate Hollywood with such passion: they feel that if
       we are not kept busy with mindless, rote work, then we will be seized by the
       carnal passions and led to sin.

       Marxists claim that workers are overexploited. So what is their solution? Have 
the
       workers take over the factory to "restore the dignity of work." Make everybody 
do
       manual labor, like the Pol Pot regime did in Cambodia and the Incas did in Peru 
- as
       Mao said, "let there be no separation between the work of the hands and the
       work of the mind." Our goal should be to increase production. Deep down 
Marxists,
       while despising capitalism, only want to hijack what they see as its main 
notable
       achievement, accomplished through the Industrial Revolution: mass production.
       They do not want to abolish the assembly line, only bring more of us to its 
trough.
       Let the elite fat cats sweat with the so-called "working class." Rather than 
wanting
       us to all enjoy the life of leisure led by the fat cats, the Marxists' main 
goal is
       motivated by envy - they want to force the fat cats to suffer as the "working 
class"
       has suffered.

       I finally saw through the Marxist illusion when I realized the deep-set 
opposition to
       automation of mass production. Marx could not have predicted the development of
       robots, and yet his so-called followers oppose them with tooth and nail. Why
       should we force people to do machine-like rote work? Why not have machines do
       the work of machines? Marxists fight automation because they claim it threatens
       jobs. You remember what "jobs" are, right? They are the things that society 
tells
       us we have to work 9 to 5 at and be "productive," right? Marxists deep down view
       people as units of production. They hate people who refuse to be productive, who
       will not work, the so-called "lumpenproletariat" who refuse to be a part of
       anybody's 'productive forces.' Marxists do not have a true liberatory vision. 
They
       want to "liberate" the working class from its exploitation by the finance 
class. But
       they do not want to liberate everyone. They want to turn us all into "workers."

       Bakunin, Kropotkin, Proudhon, and other anarcho-syndicalists, 
libertarian-socialists,
       and anti-technocrats at the International realized that this was the fatal flaw 
of
       Marxism. "Work" as we know it should be abolished - that is, the requirement 
that
       all of us "mass produce" things that other people need - and taken over by robot
       labor. This is the promise of post-industrial society, and yet some Marxists 
greet it
       with horror. After all, even capitalist industrialism raised the standard of 
living of
       the working class to an incredible degree. Yet, things like nanotechnology and 
the
       miniaturization revolution have abolished the fundamental assumptions of Marxism
       and of economics in general. There will be no more scarcity. More and more can 
be
       produced with less and less - of energy, capital, resources, and, yes, human 
labor
       as well. People can and always will produce the things they or those they know
       want with their own hands, or, if they are skilled artisans, the things that 
others
       want, but with time, precision, and care. But there will be no more mass
       production.

       If you understand Black, Bookchin, Fuller, Henderson, or others, then you know
       that the industrial revolution is at an end. The Modernist assumption, that the 
way
       our lives could improve was through industrialization and urbanization, is at an
       end. Industrialism is a massive roaring engine, to whom we have sacrificed so
       many human lives, and whose appetite threatens to consume and poison the
       world today. But if we "downsize" and "localize" what we make - Schumacher's
       "small is beautiful" - and do it with robots, we will not need industrialism 
anymore.
       There is nothing radical, revolutionary, or liberatory in the industrial 
vision. Putting
       more of us into the factories will not accomplish anything. No matter how 
"friendly"
       you make the factory - slow down the assembly line, improve worker safety, give
       hour-long coffee breaks, have ten people doing the job of two - the factory
       remains a factory. A place where workers' safety, health, and mental well-being 
is
       challenged each and every day.

       Marxists are still hung up on this concept of "use value." Something is only 
worth
       as much as the amount of "work" - mindless routine labor - that went into its
       making. They react with horror to the way the economists have been
       'brainwashing' us with the silly notion of "exchange value" - i.e. that 
something is
       worth as much as you or I are willing to pay for it - because it does not 
attach any
       value to the "work" of the robot-human who produced it. Marxists hate artists - 
at
       least, those who do not practice social realism - because they produce things 
that
       have no "use." You cannot "use" a painting or sculpture, any more than you can a
       smile or a rainbow. The value of art does not come from the hours of sweat the
       painter put into the canvas. No, it comes from how much someone enjoys the
       painting. Yes, you heard me right. Enjoyment. Pleasure. It doesn't fit into the 
dim,
       dingy workers' universe of the Marxists. That people might want things not so
       much that they can use them, but simply because they enjoy having them.

       An artist is sharing his creative vision with you, and you pay him as thanks 
for that.
       Someday, there will be no workers, only artists. Like the artisans of old, the 
only
       things people will make will be the things they want to. Everything else, 
especially
       the thing that everybody needs - food, clothing, shelter, and so forth - will 
be made
       by robots, who can make them more efficiently. Robots do not complain, do not
       have "health" to be insured or threatened by industrial processes, do not make
       mistakes (if programmed correctly), and do not need to be paid. The "bosses" 
have
       known this for thirty years. Only the "workers," those neo-Luddites, seem to 
want
       to protect their neat unionized niche in the assembly plant from the new
       technology of automation. They do not realize that the boss is their liberator. 
He
       has liberated them from the factory. Marxists call this "unemployment," and 
treat it
       as a tragedy, because in our society someone must somehow be "employed" in
       order to have the things they need to feed themselves and their families.

       The truly humane, post-Marxist society will be one in which no one needs to 
have a
       "job." The idea is an obsolete concept. For the so-called "middle class" the 
idea is
       an especial absurdity. These people get in their polluting cars, wait in 
traffic jams,
       and search frenetically for parking, all so they can go to an "office" where 
they do
       things that could just as easily be done at home with a computer and a modem.
       But we seem fixated on this idea, that we must go somewhere else, "work" for
       eight hours, and then come home again. The "work" of the middle class may not be
       as physically exhausting as that of the "working class," but it is as equally 
rote,
       boring, repetitive, and unoriginal, focusing on the copying and recopying of
       information. That is something that could be done much better by artificially
       intelligent computers. As one writer once put it, 95% of people move matter from
       one place on earth to another, and 5% keep track of where they put it. In our
       post-industrial society, there is no need for either "labor" or "management." 
Both
       have become equally obsolete.

       People somehow react with horror to the idea that we might be becoming a
       "leisure society." They point to the statistics which suggest that Americans 
are not
       getting enough exercise and that, as a nation, obesity is literally killing us. 
All these
       things are true. But why do we have to "work" in order to get "exercise"? It 
seems
       to me that there are many kind of "recreation" - climbing, hiking, biking, 
running,
       walking, skiing, bungee jumping, etc. - which use as many calories as "working."
       And are a helluva lot more fun. We are obese as a nation because for recreation
       we accept mass-produced "entertainment" rather than really going out and having
       fun. The Situationists understood that. We no longer have to hunt for our food 
and
       other basic necessities of life. But we still have an "economy" where we must
       accumulate "money" to "purchase" those necessities. We call this the "market."
       The hunt has been replaced by the rat race for money, but the rat race has now
       become as obsolete as the hunt. Why can't we accept that?

       For thousands of years, people have utilized various means to lessen the amount
       of work that they themselves had to do. As Marxists well know, the cleverest 
ones
       found ways to get other people to do work for them, and became things like 
kings,
       priests, scribes, mandarins, and bureaucrats. I.e., the "ruling class." In 
turn, they
       exploited the labor of animals and other human beings. In some cases, they made
       other human beings do endless amounts of work - often to the point of exhaustion
       or death - utilizing the lash, thereby creating the institution of slavery. 
Slavery has
       been abolished, although as the Marxists remind us, it has been replaced by wage
       slavery. Workers are still slaves to their paycheck. But, their true master is 
even
       more harsh and unforgiving. It is the time clock.

       In the truly liberated society, we will no longer be slaves of the clock 
either. Only
       the anarchists are bold enough to announce that programme. No more deadlines,
       no more schedules, timetables, punchclocks, 5 o'clock whistles. Machines can be
       held to those things, since they do not suffer and are incapable of 
complaining. And
       even the most "artificially intelligent" machine will ever be human enough to 
ask for
       "time off." Our technology has not freed us from the clock- not yet. 
"Time-saving"
       devices in the home (like dishwashing machines, irons, etc.) and in the office 
(like
       computers, faxes, and photocopiers) were supposed to free us from the burdens of
       the clock. But we are now more overworked than ever, for more hours, for less
       pay. The new humane society will free us from the taskmaster of the timepiece. 
It
       will enable human beings to listen to their biological clocks rather than the
       mechanical ones which are so indifferent to the natural rhythms of life.

       Ultimately, there will be opponents of the abolition of work. They are the 
Puritans
       and Calvinists who have waged war on freedom in the name of the "Protestant
       Work Ethic," because leisure allows the imagination to roam, the mind to 
question
       authority, and the self to contemplate true pleasure. These are things that the
       Puritans hate, fear, and try to destroy - such as they sought to ban dramatic
       theatre, carnivals, festivals, and holidays in Britain under their dour and 
repressive
       regime. They only want us to have one day out of seven where we can rest, and
       that day is to be filled with the requirements of "prayer" and obedience to 
their
       taskmaster deity. Why not seven out of seven? There is nothing dignified about
       work for its own sake, nothing in it that contributes to the body or to the 
spirit.
       Creation is what human existence is all about - the making of new things. Not 
the
       constant remaking of the old: the mediocrity and the bottom line and the common
       denominator of mass production.

       A recent author has told us that economic growth is effectively at an end. We
       cannot increase our standard of living beyond where it is already. Americans are
       underemployed because there simply are no more things to be done. "Job security"
       no longer has any meaning, with the average "worker" switching his job an
       average of five times in his lifetime. There are no more linear "career paths" 
to
       pursue. But the end of economic growth comes at a perfect time. It means we can
       begin concentrating on human growth, by improving human beings and human
       lives, and focusing on threats to our planet, like war and the desolation of the
       environment. It is in the nature of human existence to always want to grow. One
       cannot imagine, explore, create new ideas, improve oneself, or penetrate the
       horizons of this material world to the subtler ones beyond, if they are kept at
       "work."

       In the Garden of Eden, that Golden Age where there was no work and no death,
       the serpent whispered in Eve's ear. It said that there was a way in which she
       could be as gods - the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In punishment,
       Adam and her were told that they and their descendants would have to toil
       ceaselessly, living by the sweat of their brow. But the tree of knowledge, at 
long
       last, has yielded its boons. Adam's descendants now have a way in which they can
       lift their sentence of toil. And then concentrate on discovering the fruits of 
that
       second tree, the one which gives eternal life, guarded by the cherubim with the
       flaming sword. It is time for man to abandon the false grail of economic growth 
and
       find the true grail of human growth. We can do this if we SMI2LE (space migrate,
       exponentiate intelligemce, and extend life), use our HEAD (Hedonic Engineering 
for
       Advanced Development), and get RICH. But we cannot do these things as long as
       we waste our time doing things as useless as "work."

       In some ways, the Slack Revolution has already begun. The hyperaccelerated
       "Generation X" - call them slackers, or whatever - have discovered new ways to
       find slack. People laugh at this generation and its refusal to "work." But, 
unlike the
       hippies of the 1960s, who declined "jobs" to wander the countryside in VW
       microbuses and expand their consciousness with acid, and then joined the ranks 
of
       corporate America, this "New Edge" of cyberpunks are technologically literate. 
They
       use "hardware" (brain machines) to stimulate their "wetware" (brains.) Most
       importantly, they have declared open rebellion on the 9 to 5 world and the
       corporate establishment, but their war is information war. They want to jam the
       'signal' of corporate disinformation - "work 9 to 5 so you can enjoy our 
society's
       false mass-produced leisure" - with their 'noise.' The Slack Revolution is 
taking
       place where all rebellions occur - at the edge, where no one is looking.


            Bob Black, Abolitionist and Archestrator of the Slack Revolution, Steve 
Mizrach.


                     Home | Why work? | About CLAWS | Contact

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths,
misdirections
and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and
minor
effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said,
CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to